Maxime Raynaud

sactowndog said:
Curious if you take Boozer or Wilson?
Click to expand...
Honestly don't know yet. Wouldn't want to be under the gun for that decision right now. I haven't seen enough of either. YouTubeTV is taping every game though, so I'll have a lot more under my belt by late May.

I've seen enough to agree with the general consensus on both players, just not enough to rank them just yet. I do have trouble seeing a Boozer/Sabonis combo working, so taking Boozer would probably cut off any with-Sabonis rebuild route. (I know very few on this board would mind that.) I can imagine Wilson/Sabonis working, because Wilson could clean up the defensive end.

That said, Dybantsa might be the best guy to build around (again, preliminary judgment). I can't speak for Peterson, as his early games came while ESPN/YouTubeTV were in a contract dispute and so they didn't air for me and I'm going to wait for the Big-12 games to start before really checking him out.

Everybody else is probably a tier down. We'll see how Ament develops. Flemings has some potential, and at the very least he's dynamic with the ball in his hands and tries on D, but I am concerned he's seriously overlisted at 6'4" and from what I've seen he's a bit mistake-prone. Could still have a Maxey-type ceiling though. Peat seems like more of an Aaron Gordon type, probably not a guy to build around. Currently unimpressed by Brown. We'll see if anybody else rises up to challenge the top four.
 
I really don’t see the hype with Wilson besides “defense” if you’re not a Wemby defender then there’s no reason to take him over a lead guard like flemming at 4. We don’t have a lead guard on the team defensive role players can be found another time
 
I just want high IQ basketball. And Max has that. Take a rook with the biggest bball IQ and athleticism. To me it’s AJ that’s the clear winner (Darryn is an incomplete but I may take him 2nd) then Cam.
 
Joshyjosh31 said:
If it’s Lavine and seconds sure thing
Click to expand...

The problem there is still contract length. It's the same thing with Kuminga even if they're getting them for 10 cents on the dollar. The turn around time in having to commit long term money to them is too short. The rebuild at that point is essentially... Trae Young. If it doesn't work, they'll likely end up in an even worse spot for a rebuild launch if necessary. Trading Fox for what they did was the only go for it move they can afford to take and we've seen how great it's working out, haha.
 
Jdbraver137 said:
Max already better than Queta
Click to expand...
Yeah, i think some people may have confused “The Kings shouldn’t have let Queta go to sign 35-year-old Javale McGee” for “The Kings shouldn’t have let Queta go because he’s really good”. I mean, the dudes a solid big, which is a credit to him and his development but he’s also only starting for the Celtics because the only other options are Luka Garza and Xavier Tillman.

Max has already shown more of an innate feelfor the game than Queta probably has in his entire career put together
 
Last edited:
Tetsujin said:
Yeah, i think some people may have confused “The Kings shouldn’t have let Queta go to sign 35-year-old Javale McGee” for “The Kings shouldn’t have let Queta go because he’s really good”. I mean, the dudes a solid big, which is a credit to him and his development but he’s also only starting for the Celtics because the only other options are Luka Garza and Xavier Tillman.

Max has already shown more of an innate feelfor the game than Queta probably has in his entire career put together
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's simply another example in the laundry list of examples of the Kings being a place where development rarely if ever happens. And for no real reason since interim success isn't even much of a factor. This is obviously how the bad remain bad and soil the only assets they potentially could have in the process. The Kings will always go for the overpaid known over the cheap unknown not realizing that the overpaid known (Schroder, Lyles, etc.) is eventually a stumbling block to going anywhere.
 
SacTownKid said:
Yeah, it's simply another example in the laundry list of examples of the Kings being a place where development rarely if ever happens. And for no real reason since interim success isn't even much of a factor. This is obviously how the bad remain bad and soil the only assets they potentially could have in the process. The Kings will always go for the overpaid known over the cheap unknown not realizing that the overpaid known (Schroder, Lyles, etc.) is eventually a stumbling block to going anywhere.
Click to expand...
baffles me that we have members here who claim to not believe that the Kings are one of the worst at developing players
 
I was questioning why Doug even put in Russ at that point in the game anyway. The game was over. Just dumb on all fronts. Luckily he avoided anything serious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top