Markelle Fultz
- Thread starter sidney
- Start date
I agree on the 5 and 10 part, but not on the Willie part. The Kings are rebuilding, and the one thing they want to do is build chemistry, and consistency. The last thing you do is throw in a player that's part of that to acquire a talent that's totally unproven at the NBA level. The Kings have two years invested in Willie right now, and to throw that away when it appears that he's about to take a leap forward doesn't make any sense to me. To me it would be like one step forward, and a half a step backward. I want to see what the core of Willie, Skal, and Buddy can do together. Lets add to it. If you want to trade the 5th, 10th and throw in Temple, I'm on board. But not one of our young core players.
By the way, all three of those players are in sacramento working out together every day. Can we stop with the revolving door for a while?
By the way, all three of those players are in sacramento working out together every day. Can we stop with the revolving door for a while?
I remember these exact same comments being made about James Harden. Fultz is a very graceful athlete that makes the game look a lot easier than it should. As a result, sometimes it almost looks like he's not even trying, except for the result. Fultz has a very good work ethic, and if anything throughout the year, he was too unselfish. He made a lot of passes to players that were incapable of finishing. Fultz is sneaky athletic. He turns it on when he needs to, but other wise, you don't always see it. But non the less, he always plays hard, at least on the offensive side of the ball. I think Fultz could have scored 40 pt's a game if he had wanted to.
A little UCLA bias creeping in? 
Looking forward to duking this one out in Vegas! Should I bring some boxing gloves or do you want to go bare-knuckle?
Ah, to be fair, I've looked back to '04 (which is as far back as I've really closely followed the draft) and I'm not sure I've severely overrated any UCLA players at the time of the draft. Sure, I was excited about Shabazz Muhammad coming into college, but by the end of his year I was not overly impressed. My biggest miss was Westbrook, who I did not see as a top-ten player. I probably would have taken Kyle Anderson 10 slots higher than he went, but I understood his limitations. I was certainly a bit overoptimistic on Tyler Honeycutt's transition, but I don't remember calling for him to be a first rounder.
Looking forward to duking this one out in Vegas! Should I bring some boxing gloves or do you want to go bare-knuckle?
Looking forward to duking this one out in Vegas! Should I bring some boxing gloves or do you want to go bare-knuckle?
if 5 and 10 gets you the number one pick, then I pull the trigger on that trade and I'd look to make a trade with another team to acquire another first round pick. If we are including any one of Trill, Buddy or Skal...then that would be a tough pill to swallow. I wouldn't do that. It is encouraging to see the potential number one pick coming to workout for the Kings though, since I've been a fan I haven't seen that happen. This means that Vlade and company are aggressively testing the market and seeing what they can receive because the 5 and 10 is a hot commodity right now and the rumor mill will start swirling within the next two weeks leading up to the draft.
I agree 5 and 10 for the #1 pick, which likely wont get it done, but also not interested in giving up any of our young talent. Fox finds the Kings an attractive destination because we have some good young players that's just missing a PG, so don't trade away the core.
Regardless at 5 and 10 we can add to that core... and I too hope we resign Lawson.
Regardless at 5 and 10 we can add to that core... and I too hope we resign Lawson.
@Kingsfan23
As I posted in the other thread, it could be a visit from Fultz may just be to show that our FO has legitimacy now. As of May 31st at least Fultz had not hired an agent so unlikely there is a Perry tie in there. By all accounts, prospects came away impressed with our FO in CHI.
Not to mention, I have seen some absolutely stunningly ridiculous trade suggestions elsewhere. 5,10,WCS AND Buddy for #1 and they still thought we wouldn't be giving enough. (Boston fan for ya)
This helps put the idea of 5 and 10 for #1 is a conversation, which makes 5 and 10 for #3 for example seem more of an overpay.
TL,DR - This could end up P.R. for our FO and realistic alignment of our 2 picks' value.
As I posted in the other thread, it could be a visit from Fultz may just be to show that our FO has legitimacy now. As of May 31st at least Fultz had not hired an agent so unlikely there is a Perry tie in there. By all accounts, prospects came away impressed with our FO in CHI.
Not to mention, I have seen some absolutely stunningly ridiculous trade suggestions elsewhere. 5,10,WCS AND Buddy for #1 and they still thought we wouldn't be giving enough. (Boston fan for ya)
This helps put the idea of 5 and 10 for #1 is a conversation, which makes 5 and 10 for #3 for example seem more of an overpay.
TL,DR - This could end up P.R. for our FO and realistic alignment of our 2 picks' value.
The more I think about this, the more confidant I feel in not moving the 5 and 10 picks for the 1. We know we are locked into a top level talent at pick 5.....as unproven as Fultz is going to be. There are 4 PGs to choose from in Fultz, Fox, Ball and Smith and 3 SF's to choose from in Jackson, Tatum and Isaac. And then there's a Markannen and Frank N and Collins or even Mitchell if he has PG skills. This draft is 10 deep for sure......easily 5 deep of upper tier guys.
Trust your coaching staff to develop the guys at 5 and 10....... I believe in this staff to do that
Trust your coaching staff to develop the guys at 5 and 10....... I believe in this staff to do that
Ah, to be fair, I've looked back to '04 (which is as far back as I've really closely followed the draft) and I'm not sure I've severely overrated any UCLA players at the time of the draft. Sure, I was excited about Shabazz Muhammad coming into college, but by the end of his year I was not overly impressed. My biggest miss was Westbrook, who I did not see as a top-ten player. I probably would have taken Kyle Anderson 10 slots higher than he went, but I understood his limitations. I was certainly a bit overoptimistic on Tyler Honeycutt's transition, but I don't remember calling for him to be a first rounder.
Looking forward to duking this one out in Vegas! Should I bring some boxing gloves or do you want to go bare-knuckle?
Looking forward to duking this one out in Vegas! Should I bring some boxing gloves or do you want to go bare-knuckle?
Of USC players I would definitely say that I overrated OJ Mayo. I thought he was going to be a two-way player and he didn't bother playing much defense in the NBA (also, lay off the hard drugs man!) Taj is about as good as I thought he would be. But some of these guys I think I actually underrated. I didn't think Nick Young was going to have a 10 year NBA career. I liked DeRozan but I didn't think he'd be a 27 point per game scorer. He was only at SC for a year and he struggled initially so there wasn't much to go off of but the athleticism was always there and credit to him he's really worked on his game since then. And Nikola Vucevic surprised the hell out of me when he averaged 19 and 11 for Orlando a couple years ago. I thought he was going to be a solid bench guy at best not a borderline All Star (though he has regressed a bit since).
The only way 5 and 10 turn into the first pick is if it's a 3 way trade with an all star going to Boston. They would be trading out of the #1 pick because they don't want a young guy who will need time to develop so they certainly aren't going to trade that for two guys that need development. At that point we just have to wait and see what happens because the trade gets so complicated that the odds of us being able to guess what happens is slim and none.
I wouldn't be against the trade, although it would be a take-it or leave-it type. Fultz looks very smooth with both his dribbling and shooting. There's not alot of wasted movement when he has the ball. His shooting touch is superior to most everyone else in the draft, and his passing is much above average looking. Is he worth 2 picks AND Papa G?.....yeah, I think so - PapaG may has some untapped potential, but the Kings are getting an immediate contributor with little question.....you get immediate scoring and confidence from both guard positions. Hield and Fultz on a good shooting night could erase alot of team mistakes or miscues on offense. Fultz doesn't look to be a stellar defender, but he looks so in control on offense, you'd be hard-pressed not to trade both picks. He might be the only player in the draft I'd consider it a worthy player for trade-up for other high-level picks. Have a feeling this is just rumor-mill stuff.
Would I trade #5 & #10 for #3 to get Fox?
As much as I love Fox, no.
Would I trade #5, #10 & Papagiannis for #1 to get Fultz?
Yeah, I would.
Fultz is ridiculously talented and fills a position of need.
To me Fultz and Ball are potentially transformative talents.
Jackson and Fox make up the next tier for me.
As much as I love Fox, no.
Would I trade #5, #10 & Papagiannis for #1 to get Fultz?
Yeah, I would.
Fultz is ridiculously talented and fills a position of need.
To me Fultz and Ball are potentially transformative talents.
Jackson and Fox make up the next tier for me.
Funny how it comes down to fans thinking that we need to add talent to the team, with others thinking that we need to find a star.
The problem I have in putting all our eggs in one basket and choosing a "star" is that history doesn't show that to be very likely. No, I don't think the draft is a total crapshoot. The higher rated players, as a group, perform better than the lower rated players. But setting your sights on one draft pick who you think is going to be your savior is a fool's errand. Especially when you decide that "savior" is worth giving up three talents who have considerable potential themselves. It's an extremely high risk gamble IMO.
The problem I have in putting all our eggs in one basket and choosing a "star" is that history doesn't show that to be very likely. No, I don't think the draft is a total crapshoot. The higher rated players, as a group, perform better than the lower rated players. But setting your sights on one draft pick who you think is going to be your savior is a fool's errand. Especially when you decide that "savior" is worth giving up three talents who have considerable potential themselves. It's an extremely high risk gamble IMO.
Yeah, part of it with Fultz is that he doesn't always play hard on defense. I don't worry too much about that because he has elite tools for a PG and has shown the ability to defend at a high level at times.
The other knock on his effort level comes on offense and it's just a byproduct of his game. For a young player he is incredibly patient, has the ball on a string and changes speeds really well. This gives the effect that he's playing at half speed when really he's just super efficient at getting where he needs to go. He's also athletic but he doesn't move at warp speed like Fox or consistently show explosiveness like Dennis Smith. He picks and chooses his spots and then surprises by turning on the jets or attacking the rim.
In short, offensively Fultz doesn't always look like he's playing with max effort just because he's able to make the game look so easy.
The other knock on his effort level comes on offense and it's just a byproduct of his game. For a young player he is incredibly patient, has the ball on a string and changes speeds really well. This gives the effect that he's playing at half speed when really he's just super efficient at getting where he needs to go. He's also athletic but he doesn't move at warp speed like Fox or consistently show explosiveness like Dennis Smith. He picks and chooses his spots and then surprises by turning on the jets or attacking the rim.
In short, offensively Fultz doesn't always look like he's playing with max effort just because he's able to make the game look so easy.
I don't see Boston trading Fultz unless at the end they are getting back a upper tier established player. You don't land first seed and make the ECF's and decide what you need to beat CLE and challenge GS is more rookies. If you do add a rookie, might as well be the consensus #1 prospect.
Following this logic,I feel the only likely scenario where we land Fultz is with a three team trade. If that's the case who is a feasible established player to aquire if your Boston where the team might trade them for 5 and 10?
Indiana would like the picks but PG would be a rental. I think he is bound for LA so he might be risky betting he would re-sign.
Jimmy Butler maybe? I know he has been in trade rumors before.
Boston is also rumored to be courting G. Hayward. Just trying to figure out if there is anything under the smoke regarding Fultz and the Kings.
Following this logic,I feel the only likely scenario where we land Fultz is with a three team trade. If that's the case who is a feasible established player to aquire if your Boston where the team might trade them for 5 and 10?
Indiana would like the picks but PG would be a rental. I think he is bound for LA so he might be risky betting he would re-sign.
Jimmy Butler maybe? I know he has been in trade rumors before.
Boston is also rumored to be courting G. Hayward. Just trying to figure out if there is anything under the smoke regarding Fultz and the Kings.
I look at it the other way. Collecting young guys that are "good" until you're two deep at every position just creates a mediocre team that has to face tough decisions when all these nice players finish their rookie contracts. It's how guys like Faried or Crabbe end up very overpaid relative to their production while not helping their teams get to the next level.
I think Fultz is the best player in this draft. Period. The draft is an uncertain thing so of course he could end up disappointing or destroyed by injuries and yeah, somebody taken at 10 or 14 could end up being better. But history shows that the guy at the top of the draft (in a decent draft) is a good one to bank on.
My draft board keeps moving around. At this point my top 5 are Fultz, Ball, Fox, Isaac and Jackson.
Would I be happy with who is left at #5 (likely Fox or Isaac) and the BPA at #10? Sure. It's more talent for a team that needs it. And Fox or Isaac have some potential to be stars (slight in Isaac's case IMO) though I'm not sure who at #10 would have star potential unless Monk or Smith fall. But the Kings should add two contributors for sure.
But would I rather have Fultz and bank on him being our James Harden/Westbrook? Yeah, I definitively would.
I think Fultz is the best player in this draft. Period. The draft is an uncertain thing so of course he could end up disappointing or destroyed by injuries and yeah, somebody taken at 10 or 14 could end up being better. But history shows that the guy at the top of the draft (in a decent draft) is a good one to bank on.
My draft board keeps moving around. At this point my top 5 are Fultz, Ball, Fox, Isaac and Jackson.
Would I be happy with who is left at #5 (likely Fox or Isaac) and the BPA at #10? Sure. It's more talent for a team that needs it. And Fox or Isaac have some potential to be stars (slight in Isaac's case IMO) though I'm not sure who at #10 would have star potential unless Monk or Smith fall. But the Kings should add two contributors for sure.
But would I rather have Fultz and bank on him being our James Harden/Westbrook? Yeah, I definitively would.
I just can't get on board with giving up three young players with upside for the one. Especially not when two of them are coming from this loaded draft. From my perspective, dsj could just as easily end up the better player than Fultz... And we could probably trade down and get him. Fultz might be Harden, he might be Lillard, he might struggle to translate like DeAngelo Russell.
He's far from a perfect prospect with a bad free throw percentage, a bit of a tweener/combo guard, and coming from a bad program. Matched up against dsj Fultz comes out ahead for sure but it's not crazy to think dsj might be the better pro. Reminds me of Rose vs Westbrook.
I know the #10 pick doesn't look super exciting this year but recent history shows McCollum, Paul George, Joe Johnson, and Paul Perce were all picked at ten. In a loaded draft I'd like to see what vlade can do with that pick.
Throwing in wcs, who might just be scratching his upside, is crazy. Let's add talent and see if we can do a Boston Celtics impersonation. Maybe one or two of our guys will shock everyone along the way and we'll end up with our superstar anyways.
He's far from a perfect prospect with a bad free throw percentage, a bit of a tweener/combo guard, and coming from a bad program. Matched up against dsj Fultz comes out ahead for sure but it's not crazy to think dsj might be the better pro. Reminds me of Rose vs Westbrook.
I know the #10 pick doesn't look super exciting this year but recent history shows McCollum, Paul George, Joe Johnson, and Paul Perce were all picked at ten. In a loaded draft I'd like to see what vlade can do with that pick.
Throwing in wcs, who might just be scratching his upside, is crazy. Let's add talent and see if we can do a Boston Celtics impersonation. Maybe one or two of our guys will shock everyone along the way and we'll end up with our superstar anyways.
Its an interesting debate, how much is too much to give up for Fultz. I'm on the fence. I would not hesitate the 5 and 10 for Fultz but adding Willi or Papa not sure at all.
As someone said somewhere, that is the type of haul you would expect for a proven allstar, not a highly thought of rookie who has not played a single NBA game. There's a lot we can do including address two major holes with 5 and 10.
With Fultz we could have a dominate back court set for years. Add Skal and our other remaining big become an attractive FA destination just missing a piece or two from the puzzle.
Its probably all a moot point but however it plays out I'm excited about the prospects for the first time in a long time.
As someone said somewhere, that is the type of haul you would expect for a proven allstar, not a highly thought of rookie who has not played a single NBA game. There's a lot we can do including address two major holes with 5 and 10.
With Fultz we could have a dominate back court set for years. Add Skal and our other remaining big become an attractive FA destination just missing a piece or two from the puzzle.
Its probably all a moot point but however it plays out I'm excited about the prospects for the first time in a long time.
Well, the counterpoint to acquiring Fultz and having a dominate backcourt is that with 5 and 10 we could have a dominate backcourt and fill or SF hole or add depth to our frontline with a 7'0 big who is an elite 3 point shooter. Or maybe Isaac falls. Or maybe we land our SF for the next decade and a young upside
PG in Frank or some other big contributor.
There are 4 PGs in this draft that could be our guy for the next decade and play at a high level
PG in Frank or some other big contributor.
There are 4 PGs in this draft that could be our guy for the next decade and play at a high level