Kings Select in the 2008 NBA DRAFT??

[bajaden]

Why not just take the PF from Cal, Ryan Anderson? He has a college career double double averaging over 21 points.

Plus he's a local kid from Oakridge (El Dorado Hills) who won a regional championship there.

Wow, you pulled out an old quote of mine. I've backed off of Hardin lately. Not that I don't think he can play in the NBA, I just don't think he's going to be as good as I originaly thought. I do like Anderson. More athletic than people think and very skilled.

I think the perfect PF of the future for the Kings is a player that can play the high low game. Hawes is capable of playing the high post and low post. Put him along side a PF that can do the same thing and you can run a lot of different offensive sets.

 

[Cal-Kings]

Wow, you pulled out an old quote of mine. I've backed off of Hardin lately. Not that I don't think he can play in the NBA, I just don't think he's going to be as good as I originaly thought. I do like Anderson. More athletic than people think and very skilled.

I think the perfect PF of the future for the Kings is a player that can play the high low game. Hawes is capable of playing the high post and low post. Put him along side a PF that can do the same thing and you can run a lot of different offensive sets.

Sorry to come late to the thread and just saw you mentioned a Cal Player so I jumped in with my pick.

 

[Vlade4GM]

After watching Spencer Hawes tonight, I'm really glad we didn't get Joakim Noah.

For sure, but I would have loved to have Wright over either of them.

 

['89 Kings Fan]

Looking at our roster for next season we don't have a PG. Hopefully Beno will take the MLE from us for the guaranteed starting job. The teams with significant Cap Space next season:

Charlotte - Felton and resign Okafor
Chicago - Kirk Hinrich and Deng/Gordon Extentions
Golden State - Baron + Monta
Memphis - 3 young PG
Philadelphia - Andre Miller and Iguodala Extention
Seattle - Distinct Possibility

The team I most afraid of stealing Beno is Seattle since they are satisfied with Luke Ridnour and Earl Watson. Question is would they be willing to sink 20+ million into the PG position when they are trying to move the team.

Even if we do resign Beno though we have been without a quality backup PG since Bobby left. The PG's around our draft position: DJ Augustin, Ty Lawson, or Darren Collison. I think Ryan Anderson would also be a good pickup if we could get a draft pick in the mid-20's for Douby or Artest.

 

[SacKings7]

We'll be fine if we take Thabeet or McGee. Obviously Thabeet is preferred, but he might not fall to us.

I still think we should work a trade with Phoenix. Give them Salmons like they want and take their (Atlanta's) draft pick and turn it into someone like Tyler Smith.

Re-sign Beno for 3 yrs and AJ for 1.

Beno/AJ
Martin/Douby
Garcia/Smith
Moore/Hawes
Miller/Thabeet

I doubt Phoenix is that desperate for Salmons

 

[Gary]

we should sign kevin love for much needed help in the PF region

beno/crap
kmart/cisco
salmons/cisco
love/moore
hawes/second rounder?

Couldn't agree more..

 

[BMiller52]

Couldn't agree more..

I couldn't disagree more. Love is simply not tall enough or long enough and he doesn't have the athleticism to make up for it. I know Hawes looks like he may turn into a good shotblocker, but we still need a post defender. Love reminds me of a shorter Webber after the knee surgery. I don't think he's a good answer at PF for us, and I think if we go after a PF we need an ATHLETE, post defender, and rebounder. Otherwise we will never be able to defend the Amare's, Duncan's, etc. We need a guy like Darrel Arthur who has great athleticism, can jump out of the gym, extremely long arms, and he can be a great scorer(nice 18 footer and good post game). Or we could use a guy like Anthony Randolph who is 6'11'' and reminds me maybe of a left handed KG from when I saw him play(of course he probably won't be on the same level, but similar type of player). Or if we get a lower 1st we could take a chance on Jason Thompson who reminds me of a more aggressive Sheed or JO to be honest after watching him play.

Just please no Love. He doesn't compliment our guys at all.

 

[BawLa]

I doubt Phoenix is that desperate for Salmons

I doubt Phoenix is that desperate to take on rookies when they are clearly built to win now. Nothing they will get at that range will come without some sort of extended timetable attached to them so it is a perfect way for a championship caliber team to grab some veteran depth.

 

[BMiller52]

I doubt Phoenix is that desperate to take on rookies when they are clearly built to win now. Nothing they will get at that range will come without some sort of extended timetable attached to them so it is a perfect way for a championship caliber team to grab some veteran depth.

Salmons isn't the difference between a chip or no chip for them though. He's not going to keep Hill or Nash in their prime any longer than they will be, or stop Shaq from declining. They might as well keep the pick and TE to get some young guys who will be around after Nash when Amare's in his prime.

 

[BawLa]

Salmons isn't the difference between a chip or no chip for them though. He's not going to keep Hill or Nash in their prime any longer than they will be, or stop Shaq from declining. They might as well keep the pick and TE to get some young guys who will be around after Nash when Amare's in his prime.

I don't disagree with your logic...there is a good chance Phoenix will want to keep Atlanta's pick. But Salmons as a starting 2 guard would be very valuable for the Suns both now and into the future.

Salmons as a starter is averaging: 17.6/4.9/3.5/1.5 stl in 38.1 min
Raja Bell as a starter: 11.9/3.6/2.5/.73 stl in 35.8 min

Clearly Salmons would give them more as a starter. Salmons would give them another ball handler for when Nash is on the bench. Salmons has a palatable contract that would keep him there for 4 years. That runs right through Amare's "prime" years, and also the Nash-Shaq-Amare-Hill-Salmons starting crew would be together for at least the next 2 years while they are "contending".

IMO, it makes good sense for us to get rid of Salmons and it makes good sense for Phoenix to trade their draft pick away. The only real problem is that of dealing with a division rival.

 

[bajaden]

I don't disagree with your logic...there is a good chance Phoenix will want to keep Atlanta's pick. But Salmons as a starting 2 guard would be very valuable for the Suns both now and into the future.

Salmons as a starter is averaging: 17.6/4.9/3.5/1.5 stl in 38.1 min
Raja Bell as a starter: 11.9/3.6/2.5/.73 stl in 35.8 min

Clearly Salmons would give them more as a starter. Salmons would give them another ball handler for when Nash is on the bench. Salmons has a palatable contract that would keep him there for 4 years. That runs right through Amare's "prime" years, and also the Nash-Shaq-Amare-Hill-Salmons starting crew would be together for at least the next 2 years while they are "contending".

IMO, it makes good sense for us to get rid of Salmons and it makes good sense for Phoenix to trade their draft pick away. The only real problem is that of dealing with a division rival.

I agree with a lot of what you say. No doubt Salmons would be a good addition to their team and he would fit their style of play. My problem is that we don't know for sure the future of Artest. If the team has plans to trade him in the off season, then we would be losing our starting SF in Salmons. Leaving only Cisco at the position. Of course if we trade Artest for another SF then its a moot pt. Also, remember that defense is one of the things that the Kings have been preaching this year, and Salmons is a very good defender. He just doesn't get the credit for it the way Artest does.

 

[BawLa]

I agree with a lot of what you say. No doubt Salmons would be a good addition to their team and he would fit their style of play. My problem is that we don't know for sure the future of Artest. If the team has plans to trade him in the off season, then we would be losing our starting SF in Salmons. Leaving only Cisco at the position. Of course if we trade Artest for another SF then its a moot pt. Also, remember that defense is one of the things that the Kings have been preaching this year, and Salmons is a very good defender. He just doesn't get the credit for it the way Artest does.

You make good points, I can't really disagree with any of them. But I don't think we need to be too tied into Salmons as our future SF. I've personally always seen John as a starting 2 guard anyway, so seeing that I think Martin should be here in the future, Salmons becomes expendable. Cisco is showing this year that he can be just as good of a defender, and he can really knock down the outside shot. Cisco seems to be calming down too and finding his niche. The point being that Cisco is ready for more minutes and he is ready for the starting job. Plus I think we have better team chemistry with Cisco next to Martin.

Anyway, even if we trade Artest, I would still move Salmons. If there is one position I have no fear that GP can adequately fill, it is SF...followed closely by SG. Plus with Martin and Garcia starting, it wouldn't be too hard to find a viable backup. Douby can be backup SG like he should be and all you need is 10-12 minutes/game by a backup SF. Free agency, the 2nd round of the draft, or a trade could accomplish that.

 

[Dime Dropper]

You are fooling yourself if you think Phoenix will move the Atlanta pick for Salmons. They wouldn't even relatively consider it.

 

[hammystyle]

I couldn't disagree more. Love is simply not tall enough or long enough and he doesn't have the athleticism to make up for it. I know Hawes looks like he may turn into a good shotblocker, but we still need a post defender. Love reminds me of a shorter Webber after the knee surgery. I don't think he's a good answer at PF for us, and I think if we go after a PF we need an ATHLETE, post defender, and rebounder. Otherwise we will never be able to defend the Amare's, Duncan's, etc. We need a guy like Darrel Arthur who has great athleticism, can jump out of the gym, extremely long arms, and he can be a great scorer(nice 18 footer and good post game). Or we could use a guy like Anthony Randolph who is 6'11'' and reminds me maybe of a left handed KG from when I saw him play(of course he probably won't be on the same level, but similar type of player). Or if we get a lower 1st we could take a chance on Jason Thompson who reminds me of a more aggressive Sheed or JO to be honest after watching him play.

Just please no Love. He doesn't compliment our guys at all.

Take the best player, worry about the fit later. Its too early to know what the next good Kings team will look like and what its weaknesses will be.

Kevin Love may not be a perfect mesh with Hawes, but I am pretty sure he is already a better player than Spencer is so you'd be putting the cart before the horse. Love, to me, could be in Boozer's mold, or Zach Randolph with passing and without being a headcase. He's a dominant player.

I'd take Anthony Randolph over him, no doubt though. Arthur and Thompson are good possiblities too, but I don't think they're nearly the players Love is. Either way, I think Love is definitely someone we should consider at that spot.

 

[hrdboild]

You are fooling yourself if you think Phoenix will move the Atlanta pick for Salmons. They wouldn't even relatively consider it.

What if Atlanta manages to stay in the playoffs and that pick is only the 15th pick? Phoenix hasn't been shy about giving up draft picks the past couple years and they seem to have put all their eggs in the Shaq basket which is expiring very soon. Maybe it's not that crazy of an idea.

 

[BMiller52]

Take the best player, worry about the fit later. Its too early to know what the next good Kings team will look like and what its weaknesses will be.

Kevin Love may not be a perfect mesh with Hawes, but I am pretty sure he is already a better player than Spencer is so you'd be putting the cart before the horse. Love, to me, could be in Boozer's mold, or Zach Randolph with passing and without being a headcase. He's a dominant player.

I'd take Anthony Randolph over him, no doubt though. Arthur and Thompson are good possiblities too, but I don't think they're nearly the players Love is. Either way, I think Love is definitely someone we should consider at that spot.

I don't think he's a dominant player though. He's too short, he doesn't seem to have that much athleticism. Like I said before he reminds me of C-Webb after the knee surgery, except a lot smaller. I don't even think he has the same skills Webber had. I don't think he's better than Hawes either, considering Spencer's had some decent games in the NBA. Love isn't close to proven.

After watching Thompson play I think he might be a top 10 pick if he was on a team like UNC or UCLA or Texas. He doesn't seem to play with any good guards, the only other talented person on his team is his brother who got injured. He averages 20/12/3blks. He has way more tools at his disposal then Love ever will have also. He has a lot more height, length, athleticism, and lateral quickness. He's really a pretty good defender, seems to have a decent mid range J, and a nice post game. Pretty athletic. Now Love has a post game and can pass but he's too small IMO to post people up a lot at the NBA level so I don't see how he'll score so much. I don't see him getting as many rebounds as he does now either.

Arthur has way more potential than Love. He's a better scorer and defender. I would trust Arthur with my franchise WAY before I'd trust Love. I can believe Arthur will have the skillset complimenting Hawes. I think they'd be a good fit.

 

[SacKings7]

I doubt Phoenix is that desperate to take on rookies when they are clearly built to win now. Nothing they will get at that range will come without some sort of extended timetable attached to them so it is a perfect way for a championship caliber team to grab some veteran depth.

Good points, but I just don't see Phoenix willing to do it. They've seemed pretty cheap the past few years, so we could probably buy the pick from them, but I doubt they'd want to add any salary, unless it was for a difference maker. Plus, they can probably get a better player than Salmons for that pick

 

[hammystyle]

I don't think he's a dominant player though. He's too short, he doesn't seem to have that much athleticism. Like I said before he reminds me of C-Webb after the knee surgery, except a lot smaller. I don't even think he has the same skills Webber had. I don't think he's better than Hawes either, considering Spencer's had some decent games in the NBA. Love isn't close to proven.

After watching Thompson play I think he might be a top 10 pick if he was on a team like UNC or UCLA or Texas. He doesn't seem to play with any good guards, the only other talented person on his team is his brother who got injured. He averages 20/12/3blks. He has way more tools at his disposal then Love ever will have also. He has a lot more height, length, athleticism, and lateral quickness. He's really a pretty good defender, seems to have a decent mid range J, and a nice post game. Pretty athletic. Now Love has a post game and can pass but he's too small IMO to post people up a lot at the NBA level so I don't see how he'll score so much. I don't see him getting as many rebounds as he does now either.

Arthur has way more potential than Love. He's a better scorer and defender. I would trust Arthur with my franchise WAY before I'd trust Love. I can believe Arthur will have the skillset complimenting Hawes. I think they'd be a good fit.

I thinking you're discounting his athleticism because he's white and pudgy. I'm not saying he's Amare, but he's averaging 11 boards a game in 30 minutes in the Pac-10. That's awesome. You HAVE to be a good athlete to do that. Also he's listed at 6-10, he's probly at least the same height as my comps Boozer and Randolph, so I don't know why you say he's too short.

Love vs. Hawes: Their Freshman stats aren't even close. Love beats him soundly in EVERY category and I highly doubt Hawes would have been able to match them even if he were playing at Washington this year. Hawes isn't even close to proven either so whether Love is is irrelevant.

Love vs Thompson: Thompson's having a monster year, but per minute Love is equivalent him in every category but blocks. Love is a Freshman and Thompson is a Senior. Thompson plays in a weak conference, Love plays in the Pac-10. I do like Thompson though.

Love vs Arthur: Better scorer??? How? Arthur averages less PPG on a lower shooting percentages. Love almost doubles his rebounding. Arthur averages .4 more blocks in 5 less minutes (Why does he only play 24 mpg?), that's his only edge. Every time I watch UCLA Love makes a huge impact and a number of impressive plays. I can't say the same about Arthur and I've seen a lot of games both sides.

I think you're too worried about what Love can't do and ignoring his elite-level skills It'd be nice if he were a little taller, a little thinner and averaged over three blocks a game, but if that were the case he'd be the first pick in the draft. The fact that he's pudgy white kid who may be a little short is exactly the reason the Kings may be in a position to get a player who's game is so dominant.

Examples: Boozer (too short, not athletic enough), Randolph (too fat, head case)

 

[BMiller52]

I thinking you're discounting his athleticism because he's white and pudgy. I'm not saying he's Amare, but he's averaging 11 boards a game in 30 minutes in the Pac-10. That's awesome. You HAVE to be a good athlete to do that. Also he's listed at 6-10, he's probly at least the same height as my comps Boozer and Randolph, so I don't know why you say he's too short.

Love vs. Hawes: Their Freshman stats aren't even close. Love beats him soundly in EVERY category and I highly doubt Hawes would have been able to match them even if he were playing at Washington this year. Hawes isn't even close to proven either so whether Love is is irrelevant.

Love vs Thompson: Thompson's having a monster year, but per minute Love is equivalent him in every category but blocks. Love is a Freshman and Thompson is a Senior. Thompson plays in a weak conference, Love plays in the Pac-10. I do like Thompson though.

Love vs Arthur: Better scorer??? How? Arthur averages less PPG on a lower shooting percentages. Love almost doubles his rebounding. Arthur averages .4 more blocks in 5 less minutes (Why does he only play 24 mpg?), that's his only edge. Every time I watch UCLA Love makes a huge impact and a number of impressive plays. I can't say the same about Arthur and I've seen a lot of games both sides.

I think you're too worried about what Love can't do and ignoring his elite-level skills It'd be nice if he were a little taller, a little thinner and averaged over three blocks a game, but if that were the case he'd be the first pick in the draft. The fact that he's pudgy white kid who may be a little short is exactly the reason the Kings may be in a position to get a player who's game is so dominant.

Examples: Boozer (too short, not athletic enough), Randolph (too fat, head case)

Boozer is actually pretty athletic. Arthur only plays 24 MPG because KU is so loaded. I mean he can play either PF or C and he shares the frontcourt with Darnell, Jackson, Sasha Kaun, and even Cole Aldrich has been playing a bit lately. Love plays next to Lorenzo Matta Real. Love also has a better PG and doesn't compete for as many shots as Arthur does. UCLA kinda relies on Love to dominate while DA could have 5 points, 5 boards, and his team could still beat a good team. Collison is better than Chalmers, but KU has a bunch of guys who could see the NBA in the next few years. Kaun probably won't be an NBAer but he was on mock drafts the last couple years, Darnell Jackson is a 2nd rounder, Chalmers is a 2nd whenever he decides to come out, Sherron Collins is talented, Brandon Rush would've been a 15-20 pick if he would've come out last year but he tore his ACL. Love plays with Collison and Westbrook but I don't see too many other NBA players on UCLA(to be honest I haven't watched them THAT much though). Also Love has a better coach. Arthur is more athletic, longer, and IMO he simply has more NBA potential.

Thompson doesn't have anyone who can get him the ball.

 

[hammystyle]

Boozer is actually pretty athletic. Arthur only plays 24 MPG because KU is so loaded. I mean he can play either PF or C and he shares the frontcourt with Darnell, Jackson, Sasha Kaun, and even Cole Aldrich has been playing a bit lately. Love plays next to Lorenzo Matta Real. Love also has a better PG and doesn't compete for as many shots as Arthur does. UCLA kinda relies on Love to dominate while DA could have 5 points, 5 boards, and his team could still beat a good team. Collison is better than Chalmers, but KU has a bunch of guys who could see the NBA in the next few years. Kaun probably won't be an NBAer but he was on mock drafts the last couple years, Darnell Jackson is a 2nd rounder, Chalmers is a 2nd whenever he decides to come out, Sherron Collins is talented, Brandon Rush would've been a 15-20 pick if he would've come out last year but he tore his ACL. Love plays with Collison and Westbrook but I don't see too many other NBA players on UCLA(to be honest I haven't watched them THAT much though). Also Love has a better coach. Arthur is more athletic, longer, and IMO he simply has more NBA potential.

Thompson doesn't have anyone who can get him the ball.

That's all excuse-making IMO, but whatever. If you think Arthur and Thompson are better prospects thats fine, I disagree, but I can see where the athleticism argument comes into play. My main argument is that you seem to be totally discounting Love as a prospect which to me is crazy.

The list of guys who were 6' 9-10" who averaged 17 and 11 as Freshmen in the Pac-10 (or SEC, ACC, Big 10, etc) can not be very long. And I'm willing to bet that everyone on it turned out to be a good NBA player.

 

[Gary]

I couldn't disagree more. Love is simply not tall enough or long enough and he doesn't have the athleticism to make up for it. I know Hawes looks like he may turn into a good shotblocker, but we still need a post defender. Love reminds me of a shorter Webber after the knee surgery. I don't think he's a good answer at PF for us, and I think if we go after a PF we need an ATHLETE, post defender, and rebounder. Otherwise we will never be able to defend the Amare's, Duncan's, etc. We need a guy like Darrel Arthur who has great athleticism, can jump out of the gym, extremely long arms, and he can be a great scorer(nice 18 footer and good post game). Or we could use a guy like Anthony Randolph who is 6'11'' and reminds me maybe of a left handed KG from when I saw him play(of course he probably won't be on the same level, but similar type of player). Or if we get a lower 1st we could take a chance on Jason Thompson who reminds me of a more aggressive Sheed or JO to be honest after watching him play.

Just please no Love. He doesn't compliment our guys at all.

It's funny that a lot of people can't see past his athleticism, or lack thereof. It's not as bad as people think, although he could stand lose about 20lbs. He is deceptively quick for how he lumbers around. He is a legit 6'9 now and can still grow another inch (people had him listed at 6'8.25 w/o shoes before he signed with UCLA), he has Webber like passing ability, and Webber like soft hands. If you don't believe me watch some tournament games. He is a damn fine passer. He isn't the fastest person on the floor, but he has learned to play with the best in college, and has excelled. I don't think there will be issues with him excelling in the NBA if given the chance. We need a PF, and I would prefer him over these other guys named like Randolph (who is the definition of "project").

Love is a Petrie pick, and I feel that might be our PF come June. Randolph has too many shortcomings to be considered with our pick.

Randolph, Thabeet, and others mentioned have high ceilings, but the majority of guys who are REAL raw just don't work out.. Guys who have a multiple skillset (guys listed with passing/rebounding/ball handeling/jumphot abilities) like Love generally do, and generally thrive in the NBA.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I know this post has been responded to, but I have a few more points.

I don't think he's better than Hawes either, considering Spencer's had some decent games in the NBA. Love isn't close to proven.

By this criterion, there a lot of players who aren't better than Hawes. Greg Oden, for one. Michael Beasley and Derrick Rose, the presumptive 1/2 this year? Not better than Spencer Hawes. Basically, there's no weight behind this argument.

After watching Thompson play I think he might be a top 10 pick if he was on a team like UNC or UCLA or Texas. He doesn't seem to play with any good guards, the only other talented person on his team is his brother who got injured. He averages 20/12/3blks. He has way more tools at his disposal then Love ever will have also. He has a lot more height, length, athleticism, and lateral quickness. He's really a pretty good defender, seems to have a decent mid range J, and a nice post game. Pretty athletic. Now Love has a post game and can pass but he's too small IMO to post people up a lot at the NBA level so I don't see how he'll score so much. I don't see him getting as many rebounds as he does now either.

I haven't seen Thompson play, so I can't make any assessment of him, but the numbers quoted here aren't that impressive in comparison to Love. Love goes for 17/11/1 on a very talented team - a team poised to make a Final Four run - in a very talented conference. As a freshman. Thompson averages three more points and two more rebounds, but does it on a team where he's the main offensive option, and in a conference where he is the proverbial 'man among boys'. As a senior. I think given the context, Love's numbers are more impressive.

As far as being too small for the NBA, aside from Boozer and Randolph already mentioned, Elton Brand is 6'8". I mean, LISTED at 6'8". He hasn't had a lot of trouble rebounding or playing in the post. Now does Brand do what he does based on outstanding athleticism, or based on outstanding skill? I'd say that the latter outweighs the former. In the recent Stanford game, Love held the 7'0", athletic, probable top-4 pick Brook Lopez to 2 offensive rebounds while grabbing 5 offensive boards himself. I have faith that it will translate.

Arthur has way more potential than Love. He's a better scorer and defender. I would trust Arthur with my franchise WAY before I'd trust Love. I can believe Arthur will have the skillset complimenting Hawes. I think they'd be a good fit.

This, I don't understand. Arthur is listed (and from the looks of it, certainly is) an inch shorter and 50 pounds lighter than Love. Arthur is Ron Artest size, not big-time NBA post player size, and will probably end up a tweener. He's more athletic, I'll give him that, but I don't think he's anybody's answer at the 4 anymore than a Julian Wright, a Thaddeus Young, or an Al Thornton. He'll be a 3 and slot down when a team goes small. But of the potential franchise guys in this draft, I put Love way higher than Arthur. Love's probably not a franchise player, but he's got a better shot at it than Arthur.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

Dominating college is not always translate into the NBA. Love is just too short and too unathletic to impact the NBA game the way he dominates the college game. The reason Hawes is more likely to succeed is because he's seven feet tall. If we select Love, then you can count on swiss cheese like interior defense for the next ten years.

 

[Gary]

Dominating college is not always translate into the NBA. Love is just too short and too unathletic to impact the NBA game the way he dominates the college game. The reason Hawes is more likely to succeed is because he's seven feet tall. If we select Love, then you can count on swiss cheese like interior defense for the next ten years.

Short how? 6'9 bare footed and still growing is not too short. He might top out at 6'10 or he might now grow another 1/8th inch. Who knows..

You have no idea whether his game will translate to the NBA..

Bottom line people... I give Love's chances just as good as (if not better) than a guy like Randolph who is listed as a project, but happens to have more athleticism, or is a couple inches taller to make it in the NBA.

And dominating in college translates to the NBA A LOT more than a guy that does so-so who is labeled a project that is athletic, and 6'11.. That's just stupid to say things like that when it happens (NBA bust) to those athletic projects 10x more than the college stud.

 

[rfdong]

Love

Love may not be the most athletically gifted, but he obviously has learned to play through/over/around that "deficiency". You either can play the game or not, but just cause you can't run like a gazelle doesn't translate to can't play either. Barkley was only 6'6ish and he was one of the best rebounders of his day. Some guys can just flat out play the game. Bird was "unathletic". NBA is littered with "upside" "athletically gifted" guys like Petro, Sene, Olowokandi, Diop...etc. Just cause you're freakishly tall (Bradley/Bol) doesn't mean you can play BASKETBALL and neither does athleticism mean you're a sure thing. It's not a perfect science, but skills are skills. I would argue that Love is doing his thing as a freshman in the best conf in the country, that his upside is as high as any of the guys named. Look at the most recent, Tyrus Thomas, while I wouldn't give up on him, look at what he has or hasn't done. None of the guys will turn into a superstar overnight if ever, but the one thing NO one can tell is a guys inner desire to practice, improve and hatred of losing. That's what made/makes the great players great....desire. Just my thoughts.

Another observation.....anyone notice that there haven't been many easy hoops lately? No touch fouls for "and one". Theus has them playing tougher and I love it. The old Kings, even in our best years gave up so many "and 1's" it was frustrating and silly.

 

[BMiller52]

I know this post has been responded to, but I have a few more points.



By this criterion, there a lot of players who aren't better than Hawes. Greg Oden, for one. Michael Beasley and Derrick Rose, the presumptive 1/2 this year? Not better than Spencer Hawes. Basically, there's no weight behind this argument.

Yeah but Beasley is a flat out beast, and Rose does what he's supposed to do with his position. He's also extremely athletic and tall for his position. My point was, Love plays a similar game as Spencer except he's shorter, doesn't have as much length, and fatter.

I haven't seen Thompson play, so I can't make any assessment of him, but the numbers quoted here aren't that impressive in comparison to Love. Love goes for 17/11/1 on a very talented team - a team poised to make a Final Four run - in a very talented conference. As a freshman. Thompson averages three more points and two more rebounds, but does it on a team where he's the main offensive option, and in a conference where he is the proverbial 'man among boys'. As a senior. I think given the context, Love's numbers are more impressive.

Thompson would be a top 5 pick if he actually was on a bigger team with some more talented players. 1st it would be nice if the guy had a PG who can get him the ball like Love does(Collison and Westbrook both get close to 5 APG). I just see that he has more tools than Love has. 2-3 inches taller, a lot more athletic, longer, quicker laterally, and he puts up slightly better numbers. Sure he's a senior but he's only 21, so there's only like 2 years difference. I think Thompson could develop into a Sheed or JO type of player.

As far as being too small for the NBA, aside from Boozer and Randolph already mentioned, Elton Brand is 6'8". I mean, LISTED at 6'8". He hasn't had a lot of trouble rebounding or playing in the post. Now does Brand do what he does based on outstanding athleticism, or based on outstanding skill? I'd say that the latter outweighs the former. In the recent Stanford game, Love held the 7'0", athletic, probable top-4 pick Brook Lopez to 2 offensive rebounds while grabbing 5 offensive boards himself. I have faith that it will translate.

Brand gets his blocks using his length and his long arms make his turnaround J a lot more effective. Love doesn't have the same length. I don't like that comparison. A Zach Randolph that can pass is a better comparison. You know who has similar numbers to Love? Ty Hansbrough. You think he'll be that good in the NBA? No freakin way. College numbers don't always translate to the NBA.

This, I don't understand. Arthur is listed (and from the looks of it, certainly is) an inch shorter and 50 pounds lighter than Love. Arthur is Ron Artest size, not big-time NBA post player size, and will probably end up a tweener. He's more athletic, I'll give him that, but I don't think he's anybody's answer at the 4 anymore than a Julian Wright, a Thaddeus Young, or an Al Thornton. He'll be a 3 and slot down when a team goes small. But of the potential franchise guys in this draft, I put Love way higher than Arthur. Love's probably not a franchise player, but he's got a better shot at it than Arthur.

Now see saying Arthur is a Thornton or Young or Wright is flat out ignorant. He 's way taller than those guys. He has a decent mid range J but his main offensive game is in the post and in transition. Sorry but comparing Arthur to Ron Artest or Julian Wright is ignorant. It just shows you don't watch him play. I've caught nearly every televised KU game this year and I know his game extremely well. He has a nice hook shot, he loves to jump for alley oops, he's a decent face up player, he has range OUT to 18 feet but that DOES NOT MEAN ALL HE DOES IS SHOOT J'S. He's not a perimeter orientated player. There's a reason people compare him to pre injury McDyess. The guy's a freak athletically, he has a nice J, he's a legit 6'9''-6'10''(which I've seen him listed at on different sites), he has great post moves, he wants to score, he's a SHOTBLOCKER(something Love isn't and DEFINITELY won't be in the NBA), and he plays good post D. The only area Love is better is rebounding and Arthur plays in a loaded frontcourt. He plays with 2 or 3 other guys who could potentially make the NBA. Love plays next to freakin Lorenzo Matta Real. If Arthur gets a foul early in the game, Self pulls him because their bench is deep and they have tremendous frontcourt depth. Sorry but pretty much nothing you've said about DA is true, your comparisons are terrible and just stuff you've heard on this board(which were just conclusions people came to once they heard he could hit a jumpshot). A GOOD comparison for him is prime McDyess, or maybe Chris Bosh -1 inch of height(still a legit 6'9'').

My responses in bold.

 

[BawLa]

You can talk it up about Love all day long, but there is one point that cannot be ignored. Love next to Hawes would be the worst defensive pairing in the history of the NBA. I don't want to see that. Drafting Love makes no sense unless we are trying to give up on Hawes. I don't want to see that either.

So unless if you want to try and convince me that a Love/Hawes tandem would be tremendously better offensively to the point where they could overcompensate for their lack of defense, then I just don't care to hear it.

That is why I am looking at defensive bigs in our range of picks.

And drafting for BPA only makes sense if your organization is great at free agent signings and contract control.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Now see saying Arthur is a Thornton or Young or Wright is flat out ignorant. He 's way taller than those guys.

Well, at Orlando last year those guys measured out as follows, in shoes:
Thornton: 6'7" (I'm surprised - I thought he was taller)
Young: 6'7.5"
Wright: 6'8.5"

My distinct impression from watching Kansas last year is that Wright was taller than Arthur. I could be wrong, but I would expect to see Arthur come in at Orlando somewhere between 6'7.5" and 6'8.5", probably closer to the latter.

But hey, I always like being called ignorant, so the whole exchange will be worth it even if Arthur grades out an inch taller than that.

Sorry but comparing Arthur to Ron Artest or Julian Wright is ignorant. It just shows you don't watch him play.

A couple of times, yes, but apparently not as often as you. He may be taller than Artest, and he's definitely athletic, but I still think his frame is too small to cut it as a PF in the NBA. It's just an opinion.

your comparisons are terrible and just stuff you've heard on this board(which were just conclusions people came to once they heard he could hit a jumpshot).

No, I formed my conclusions on my own. And if I had come to them because Arthur can hit a jump shot, then I'd have to have come to the same conclusions about Love, who can also hit a jump shot, right?

Anyhow, I will bow out in my ignorance and leave the Darrell Arthur chat to those who are more qualified.

 

[venom_7]

Why not just take the PF from Cal, Ryan Anderson? He has a college career double double averaging over 21 points.

Plus he's a local kid from Oakridge (El Dorado Hills) who won a regional championship there.

Oh wow I forgot that guy was playing at Cal. I know that guy, and to me, he screams Troy Murphy or Al Harrington. We dont want Troy Murphy.

 

[rfdong]

Love

I didn't even mean to suggest we should draft him, but I don't think he deserves the bashing he's getting. The guy can ball, will he be a star? I don't know, but I do think he'll be really solid. As for the "defensive-minded" picks, why settle for that? Most of those super athletic guys are really built on the thin side, and those guys normally just get pushed around. Still takes a guy with real desire to be that defensive/reb/shot blocker and that's the key to the draft. Can be done, look at Rodman, not particularly tall and not that big but great at what he did. BUT, he also played with two of the greatest 50 and therefore wasn't needed to do ANYTHING else. Not sure we're in that category where we can take that kind of "specialist" with a lottery pick.