Mock Draft Kings #2 lists

hrdboild said:
I think it's some combination of (A) Old habits die hard and (B) All of them look like they're at least on the way to developing a 3pt shot.

It's a good question though, especially in the context of a season in which Anthony Davis and DeMarcus Cousins on the same team looked good but hardly dominant and the other splashy new pairing in the West of Chris Paul and James Harden had the best record in the league. And both of those big guys are already knockdown shooters at that. What's more, none of the top 4 teams (Golden State, Houston, Boston, Cleveland) featured a dominant big man but all of them had very good guards and wings -- or at least one ultra elite wing in the case of Cleveland and adequate guards. This is probably where all the Michael Porter at #2 speculation comes from and I could understand it if I bought into the idea that he's an elite wing in the making.

I don't think having an elite big guy is a detriment though so much as not having elite guards and wings has become untenable. I like our guards already. We need to upgrade our wings but I still take Ayton after Doncic if that's the way Phoenix chooses to go. I know it's against the grain but the talent is too good for me to pass on and I would hope that we can trade some of our excess bigs for a wing or develop a young player or two or try to get one in free agency by selling them on the idea that Fox/Hield/Bogdanovic/Giles/Ayton looks like a team that's one player away from being very good.
Click to expand...

Yes, the majority of the best players in the league are guards at this time. So it requires having players who can defend those guards. I think the idea that there are a lot of good players in the backcourt at this point in time is being confused with the thought that the game is all about 3 pointers. Playing the 3pt analytics games is a way of leveling the playing field when you don't have the actual superstars to handle the heavy lifting. Even then, it's hard to find enough shooters to pull it off at a high level. When the playoffs come, the game is about having the best players, regardless of position.

Lillard and McCollum were no match with New Orleans, whose best player is Anthony Davis, who is a better player than Portland's best players. Toronto's best players are guards. Doesn't matter when facing a better player in Lebron. I would argue the Cleveland is in the finals with such a weak team because they have the best player in the NBA and they are also using the 3 point game to make up for the blemishes. It doesn't work against a team like the Warriors, who not only have a couple of great players, but they play a complete game. No smoke and mirrors. If the Warriors struggle a little from the 3pt line, they are still in it. Teams like Houston and Cleveland are done without it when facing a good team. They have no backup plan.

I'm not arguing the validity of guard play, 3pt analytics or the importance of it. I'm just saying, it's a way to mask deficiencies. If there are a couple more drafts in the future like this years where there are a lot of good big men, the game will even out more. Teams have to use the talent they're given to work with. Lately the talent has been with the wings/guards.
 
Livinthedream said:
Yes, the majority of the best players in the league are guards at this time. So it requires having players who can defend those guards. I think the idea that there are a lot of good players in the backcourt at this point in time is being confused with the thought that the game is all about 3 pointers. Playing the 3pt analytics games is a way of leveling the playing field when you don't have the actual superstars to handle the heavy lifting. Even then, it's hard to find enough shooters to pull it off at a high level. When the playoffs come, the game is about having the best players, regardless of position.

Lillard and McCollum were no match with New Orleans, whose best player is Anthony Davis, who is a better player than Portland's best players. Toronto's best players are guards. Doesn't matter when facing a better player in Lebron. I would argue the Cleveland is in the finals with such a weak team because they have the best player in the NBA and they are also using the 3 point game to make up for the blemishes. It doesn't work against a team like the Warriors, who not only have a couple of great players, but they play a complete game. No smoke and mirrors. If the Warriors struggle a little from the 3pt line, they are still in it. Teams like Houston and Cleveland are done without it when facing a good team. They have no backup plan.

I'm not arguing the validity of guard play, 3pt analytics or the importance of it. I'm just saying, it's a way to mask deficiencies. If there are a couple more drafts in the future like this years where there are a lot of good big men, the game will even out more. Teams have to use the talent they're given to work with. Lately the talent has been with the wings/guards.
Click to expand...
The problem is even when a dominant big man has entered the league there hasn't been a ton of team success. Cuz, ad, Kat. Until guys like that start winning (maybe Embid will) it's a one thru three league.
 
roasthawg said:
The problem is even when a dominant big man has entered the league there hasn't been a ton of team success. Cuz, ad, Kat. Until guys like that start winning (maybe Embid will) it's a one thru three league.
Click to expand...

I see it as a GSW and Lebron league.

Cuz, KAT put up good numbers, but can they lead a team? Are they all-stars or superstars? I think superstars is what it takes. Finding that superstar regardless of position is why there are so many bigs being looked at as top picks. If it was simply about 3pt shooting as the key, why are the bigs in the discussion. I mean all teams have their number crunchers. Their analytics experts.

Time will tell i'm sure.
 
Livinthedream said:
I see it as a GSW and Lebron league.

Cuz, KAT put up good numbers, but can they lead a team? Are they all-stars or superstars? I think superstars is what it takes. Finding that superstar regardless of position is why there are so many bigs being looked at as top picks. If it was simply about 3pt shooting as the key, why are the bigs in the discussion. I mean all teams have their number crunchers. Their analytics experts.

Time will tell i'm sure.
Click to expand...
For the same reason a QB isn't always the top pick in the NFL draft. Sometimes the prospects at the other positions are just a lot better. Wings in the NBA aren't comparable to QBs in the NFL when it comes to positional value but the point still remains that even though one position is valued over another doesn't mean the prospects are going to be close enough to always go with the more valuable position.

Also, kat and cousins might not fit the superstar bill just yet but ad definitely does. He's a generational big yet his teams haven't done anything yet.
 
roasthawg said:
For the same reason a QB isn't always the top pick in the NFL draft. Sometimes the prospects at the other positions are just a lot better. Wings in the NBA aren't comparable to QBs in the NFL when it comes to positional value but the point still remains that even though one position is valued over another doesn't mean the prospects are going to be close enough to always go with the more valuable position.

Also, kat and cousins might not fit the superstar bill just yet but ad definitely does. He's a generational big yet his teams haven't done anything yet.
Click to expand...

AD is a generational big with no other all stars with him headed into playoffs. Still need a team to lead.

I know you don't mean to get into football vs basketball, but I think it's important to note that with 5 players on the court with bball and players playing offense and defense, a single basketball players impact can be significant. No matter what position.

All this is to say, I don't think the Kings should be focused on MPJ or even Doncic with the hope of keeping pace with the Warriors. Take the BPA. I prefer Bagley over those two and think he will have a bigger impact. I suspect others are seeing it to as Doncic is starting to slip in mock drafts. Kings can still play uptempo with Bagley. Fill in the missing pieces accordingly. Find a defensive wing through trade.
 
Livinthedream said:
AD is a generational big with no other all stars with him headed into playoffs. Still need a team to lead.

I know you don't mean to get into football vs basketball, but I think it's important to note that with 5 players on the court with bball and players playing offense and defense, a single basketball players impact can be significant. No matter what position.

All this is to say, I don't think the Kings should be focused on MPJ or even Doncic with the hope of keeping pace with the Warriors. Take the BPA. I prefer Bagley over those two and think he will have a bigger impact. I suspect others are seeing it to as Doncic is starting to slip in mock drafts. Kings can still play uptempo with Bagley. Fill in the missing pieces accordingly. Find a defensive wing through trade.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more with you on this statement. By the time the Kings are ready to compete for the West crown, the Warriors dynasty will be over so it's moot anyway. The Kings shouldn't be trying to emulate any team or style of play that's in the fad. They need to continue to accumulate as much talent as possible and hope that one or two of them pans out so they can start building a proper team around the strengths and weaknesses of the player(s).
 
Analytics say the way the Warriors/Rockets play is the best way to play offensively. It's not just a flash in the pan thing that's going to be here today and then gone tomorrow. This style of play is here to stay until the rules get changed in some manner. Something as simple as taking away the corner 3s could completely change the game but I doubt the NBA has any interest.

You aren't going to all the sudden start winning by playing old school basketball in the post. You need a monster in the post to equal the production of what a ton of players are doing on the outside, thanks to the 3 point shot. Kevin Durant has a higher true shooting percentage than Steven Adams and Steven Adams shoots 62% from the field! The 3 point shot has allowed smaller players to equal the efficiency of the most efficient bigs. These bigs that are this efficient usually score somewhere around 12ppg or so because if they shot more, their efficiency would go down. These wings are matching that efficiency to the tune of 25ppg. It's nearly impossible to compete with that by going at them with big men.
 
I completely understand how analytics works. No one is advocating for old school basketball. What is being failed to be acknowledged is that you need a Steph Curry, a KD or a James Harden to make it work. All of these guys would still be good without the 3 point line.

I mean, it's almost funny that we just saw the Rockets lose a series because they "efficiently" missed 24 3pt shots in a row. The Rockets may have been better served with a touch of balance. Or at least the ability to balance when the situation dictated.

It's a star driven league. Not system driven. That's why teams can't ignore the star potential of the big men in this draft.
 
funkykingston said:
Grant was saying that he really believes that the Kings are high on Porter. I don't think he's pulling that out of thin air.

Again, if you want to pump up the value of the #2 pick you leak that you love all the top guys so teams feel they'd have to trade with the Kings to make sure they get their guy.

Instead all we've heard rumored is that the Kings are likely to pass on Doncic and that they really like Porter Jr. I sure hope those are both smokescreens but I'm starting to fear that they aren't.
Click to expand...

Christie has been talking up Porter for months now. Why he's doing that, I just don't know. He seems to know so little about all these top-ranked players, so it doesn't seem very likely that he's talking about Porter because of his vast knowledge of him. It could be he's talking about him because he sees Porter as the guy to fit the #1 need on the Kings, or it could be that he's getting some info from his buddies in the front office.
 
roasthawg said:
You don't know that, that's an arm chair observstion. If Porter is regarded as the biggest talent in the draft and if he's crushing in his workouts then he may very well be #2 on a lot of teams boards. I get people wanting nothing to do with him. First off he's coming off a major injury and looked pretty bad in the two games he played. Secondly he's a score first guy... Those guys are never fan favorites. It's all about efficiency though with a scorer... Could be Rudy Gay, could be Paul George, or could be KD. No one liked Tatum last year because he was a scorer and now he'd be in everyone's top two.
Click to expand...

In the interest of patting myself on the back:), I definitely liked Tatum as my #1 in last year's draft. I do agree though that he was ripped by many as solely an iso-scorer.

P.S. FWIW, I have absolutely no opinion on Porter other than it would take major guts by Divac to take him at #2.
 
Livinthedream said:
I completely understand how analytics works. No one is advocating for old school basketball. What is being failed to be acknowledged is that you need a Steph Curry, a KD or a James Harden to make it work. All of these guys would still be good without the 3 point line.

I mean, it's almost funny that we just saw the Rockets lose a series because they "efficiently" missed 24 3pt shots in a row. The Rockets may have been better served with a touch of balance. Or at least the ability to balance when the situation dictated.

It's a star driven league. Not system driven. That's why teams can't ignore the star potential of the big men in this draft.
Click to expand...

I think I read that the odds of them missing 28 in a row or whatever was 72,000 to 1. Basically the Warriors got lucky as hell in game 7. Analytics don't tell you that playing a certain way is going to win every time but they tell you that you're going to win the majority of the time playing that way. If the Rockets go 3 for 28, they win the game. It's incredibly difficult to even go 3 for 28. Probably has odds of 10,000 to 1 or something crazy like that. In hindsight it's easy to say that the Rockets should have done this or that but at the time, taking wide open 3s was the best shot for them. They just had a crazy string of bad luck.

The league is star driven but you have to put that star in a system to succeed. You can't just emulate it with any run of the mill players but you are also going to have a tough road to hoe if you're trying to combat it with less efficient shots. Anthony Davis is the only big equipped to take on the system right now. Bamba and JJJ would have to become 25ppg scorers and be as advertised defensively to combat the analytics. Bagley and Ayton would have to be as advertised offensively and transform into elite defenders to combat it. I don't see any of these guys being able to do that because Davis not only scores efficiently and scores a lot, but he also defends the rim and is capable of switching onto smaller players. None of the bigs in this draft are the complete package like that.

Doesn't mean they can't be good players but they probably wont be able to take you deep into the playoffs as long as you have star players driving and kicking out to wide open 3 point shooters.
 
ParniValjak said:
As much as the Kings apparently like Michael Porter Jr (and I can certainly see why), I find it hard to believe that they would overlook Ayton. IMHO, he is a franchise level talent.

But I would not be surprised if Kings drafted Michael Porter Jr. at #2 especially if they genuinely believe that they struck gold with Harry Giles.
Click to expand...
Where does the bulk of the idea that the kings like Porter Jr. come from? Im being serious.
 
Chupacabra said:
Where does the bulk of the idea that the kings like Porter Jr. come from? Im being serious.
Click to expand...
Jonathan Giovny (DraftExpress, now works for ESPN) reported that the Kings were very high on MPJ at #7 before they moved up. James Ham also said the talk about MPJ inside the FO was real too.
 
Kingster said:
I can identify. I'm on the Capt. Factorial - Funky rollercoaster. Zen one moment, anxiety the next.
Click to expand...

I hate rollercoasters. I, as I'm sure is totally predictable, am confident the front office will do the right thing. I'd rather live in my happy some-would-say delusional world and maybe end up being disappointed than always look at the glass as not only half-empty but chipped with the potential to cut my lip and give me blood poisoning. :p
 
ESP47 said:
I think I read that the odds of them missing 28 in a row or whatever was 72,000 to 1. Basically the Warriors got lucky as hell in game 7. Analytics don't tell you that playing a certain way is going to win every time but they tell you that you're going to win the majority of the time playing that way. If the Rockets go 3 for 28, they win the game. It's incredibly difficult to even go 3 for 28. Probably has odds of 10,000 to 1 or something crazy like that. In hindsight it's easy to say that the Rockets should have done this or that but at the time, taking wide open 3s was the best shot for them. They just had a crazy string of bad luck.
Click to expand...

I read that, as well... and it's a load of nonsense. Sure, in a vacuum, it seems near-impossible that the Rockets would miss so many three-pointers in a row, especially when many were wide open. But they weren't playing in a vacuum. They were playing in the Western Conference Finals, in a game 7. They no doubt had tired legs and more than a few nerves going up against the defending champs in a win-or-go-home environment. But of course, analytics can't factor in exhaustion and playoff pressure, from a numbers standpoint, so somebody concocts a ridiculous measurement to excuse the Rockets absolute choke-job from beyond the arc.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the three-point revolution is a boon for the regular season but a mighty big gamble for the playoffs. The Rockets and Celtics both fell victim to the belief that their three-point shooting would rise to the mean in their respective game 7's. Cleveland's been suffering from the same difficulties in the Finals, as well. These teams just keep shooting three's, and they just keep missing, and it's not some kind of mad mathematical mystery. It's the playoffs. The pressure is enormous. The players are exhausted. Outside shooting becomes less accurate under those circumstances. It's not a new phenomenon. When you need one game in the playoffs... or hell, when you need four in a series, the odds don't tell you "that you're going to win the majority of the time playing that way." Across an 82-game season? Sure. But the playoffs are always a different story.

That said, the Warriors are the exception to the rule, because they have the greatest shooter of all time in Steph Curry. I like their chances to win playing the game the way they always do. When you have a transcendent shooter in Curry, and another transcendent scorer in Kevin Durant, as well as extremely capable threats from outside like Klay Thompson, then you're going to trample all over my argument. But there's no other team in the league that I trust to play to the median from beyond the arc as the playoffs grind on and the players get worn down and the pressure gets increasingly magnified.
 
Padrino said:
...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the three-point revolution is a boon for the regular season but a mighty big gamble for the playoffs. The Rockets and Celtics both fell victim to the belief that their three-point shooting would rise to the mean in their respective game 7's. Cleveland's been suffering from the same difficulties in the Finals, as well. These teams just keep shooting three's, and they just keep missing, and it's not some kind of mad mathematical mystery. It's the playoffs. The pressure is enormous. The players are exhausted. Outside shooting becomes less accurate under those circumstances. It's not a new phenomenon. When you need one game in the playoffs... or hell, when you need four in a series, the odds don't tell you "that you're going to win the majority of the time playing that way." Across an 82-game season? Sure. But the playoffs are always a different story.

That said, the Warriors are the exception to the rule, because they have the greatest shooter of all time in Steph Curry. I like their chances to win playing the game the way they always do. When you have a transcendent shooter in Curry, and another transcendent scorer in Kevin Durant, as well as extremely capable threats from outside like Klay Thompson, then you're going to trample all over my argument. But there's no other team in the league that I trust to play to the median from beyond the arc as the playoffs grind on and the players get worn down and the pressure gets increasingly magnified.
Click to expand...

Words to be chiseled in stone somewhere - or written across the California skies!
 
Padrino said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the three-point revolution is a boon for the regular season but a mighty big gamble for the playoffs. The Rockets and Celtics both fell victim to the belief that their three-point shooting would rise to the mean in their respective game 7's. Cleveland's been suffering from the same difficulties in the Finals, as well. These teams just keep shooting three's, and they just keep missing, and it's not some kind of mad mathematical mystery. It's the playoffs. The pressure is enormous. The players are exhausted. Outside shooting becomes less accurate under those circumstances. It's not a new phenomenon. When you need one game in the playoffs... or hell, when you need four in a series, the odds don't tell you "that you're going to win the majority of the time playing that way." Across an 82-game season? Sure. But the playoffs are always a different story.
Click to expand...

Especially when rotations get tightened and players get increased minutes.
 
Padrino said:
I read that, as well... and it's a load of nonsense. Sure, in a vacuum, it seems near-impossible that the Rockets would miss so many three-pointers in a row, especially when many were wide open. But they weren't playing in a vacuum. They were playing in the Western Conference Finals, in a game 7. They no doubt had tired legs and more than a few nerves going up against the defending champs in a win-or-go-home environment. But of course, analytics can't factor in exhaustion and playoff pressure, from a numbers standpoint, so somebody concocts a ridiculous measurement to excuse the Rockets absolute choke-job from beyond the arc.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the three-point revolution is a boon for the regular season but a mighty big gamble for the playoffs. The Rockets and Celtics both fell victim to the belief that their three-point shooting would rise to the mean in their respective game 7's. Cleveland's been suffering from the same difficulties in the Finals, as well. These teams just keep shooting three's, and they just keep missing, and it's not some kind of mad mathematical mystery. It's the playoffs. The pressure is enormous. The players are exhausted. Outside shooting becomes less accurate under those circumstances. It's not a new phenomenon. When you need one game in the playoffs... or hell, when you need four in a series, the odds don't tell you "that you're going to win the majority of the time playing that way." Across an 82-game season? Sure. But the playoffs are always a different story.

That said, the Warriors are the exception to the rule, because they have the greatest shooter of all time in Steph Curry. I like their chances to win playing the game the way they always do. When you have a transcendent shooter in Curry, and another transcendent scorer in Kevin Durant, as well as extremely capable threats from outside like Klay Thompson, then you're going to trample all over my argument. But there's no other team in the league that I trust to play to the median from beyond the arc as the playoffs grind on and the players get worn down and the pressure gets increasingly magnified.
Click to expand...

I guess my response would be two things. One, if you were exhausted, wouldn't it be easier to shoot a wide open 3 rather than making backdoor cuts and trying to take guys off the dribble? Two, the Rockets were up 3-2 and were well on their way to out Warrior the Warriors before Chris Paul got hurt. Their system works and I think they only lost due to extraordinary circumstances.
 
I don't believe that 3 point shooting is a risky proposition for the playoffs. As long as you have seven-game series it's a picnic for good 3 point shooting teams compared to good 2 point shooting teams. The law of numbers - 3 is bigger than 2 - works in favor of the former over the latter. The longer the series, the more it works in their favor because the cold 3 point shooting performance is averaged out over many games in which there are hot shooting performances. If this was an NCAA type situation in which you lose one game and you're out, then it's an entirely different story, not just because just one cold-shooting 3 point performance kills the chance for a potential championship, but also because the high pressure situation makes those long 3 pointers get longer and longer and longer. Which is why I think the only time the 2-point inside shots get their just desserts is in the final 7th game of a playoff series. That's not much consolation for teams with bigs that have a post up game.
 
ESP47 said:
I guess my response would be two things. One, if you were exhausted, wouldn't it be easier to shoot a wide open 3 rather than making backdoor cuts and trying to take guys off the dribble? Two, the Rockets were up 3-2 and were well on their way to out Warrior the Warriors before Chris Paul got hurt. Their system works and I think they only lost due to extraordinary circumstances.
Click to expand...

No. Shooting long distance shots are not easier when you're tired. Even shooting free throws at the end of the game is much more difficult, even if the playoff pressure isn't there. For those who played a lot of organized basketball, this is why we practiced free throw shooting at the end of practice. A lot of times after running conditioning drills or with the threat of running more if you miss the free throw.

Last night Cleveland posted up Curry and Klay Thompson all night. Leaned on them and made the guards play defense in the paint. continuously forced the switch to a Lebron vs. Curry matchup. Curry and Thompson didn't have the energy to shoot from 3 consistently.

The 3 point shooters were negated and it took a superstars monumental effort by KD to get the Warriors the win. Which again brings it back to, find the superstar in the draft, regardless of position. If that superstar is deemed to be Luka, that's great. But I'm not passing on big men who may be great because they don't have a 3pt shot.
 
Kingster said:
Christie has been talking up Porter for months now. Why he's doing that, I just don't know. He seems to know so little about all these top-ranked players, so it doesn't seem very likely that he's talking about Porter because of his vast knowledge of him. It could be he's talking about him because he sees Porter as the guy to fit the #1 need on the Kings, or it could be that he's getting some info from his buddies in the front office.
Click to expand...

Christie backed off the Porter thing yesterday after it came out that Porter hasn't released medical records. None of the mock drafts have moved Porter up either. It is confusing what the talk is all about from the Kings organization.

If Kings were picking at #7, it's a no brainer. They would go with Porter because he has Superstar potential and they're clearly enamored with him. The risk being his back and we haven't seen him play college ball. You might be able to justify the risk at 7. But with the #2 Vlade has to be 100% sure of Porter now, even if we traded back. Because if he's wrong, it's sets the franchise back tremendously and Vlade loses his job. Might be that any GM of a lottery team could lose their job if they pick Porter and his back is bad. Which may explain why Woj predicts Porter could fall back to as low as 15. Not sure what Porter's agent is thinking with hiding his medical records.
 
Livinthedream said:
Christie backed off the Porter thing yesterday after it came out that Porter hasn't released medical records. None of the mock drafts have moved Porter up either. It is confusing what the talk is all about from the Kings organization.

If Kings were picking at #7, it's a no brainer. They would go with Porter because he has Superstar potential and they're clearly enamored with him. The risk being his back and we haven't seen him play college ball. You might be able to justify the risk at 7. But with the #2 Vlade has to be 100% sure of Porter now, even if we traded back. Because if he's wrong, it's sets the franchise back tremendously and Vlade loses his job. Might be that any GM of a lottery team could lose their job if they pick Porter and his back is bad. Which may explain why Woj predicts Porter could fall back to as low as 15. Not sure what Porter's agent is thinking with hiding his medical records.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I didn't know Porter isn't releasing his medical info. That should cross him off the list entirely. The only reason for not releasing his medical records is that they just aren't good.
 
Livinthedream said:
No. Shooting long distance shots are not easier when you're tired. Even shooting free throws at the end of the game is much more difficult, even if the playoff pressure isn't there. For those who played a lot of organized basketball, this is why we practiced free throw shooting at the end of practice. A lot of times after running conditioning drills or with the threat of running more if you miss the free throw.

Last night Cleveland posted up Curry and Klay Thompson all night. Leaned on them and made the guards play defense in the paint. continuously forced the switch to a Lebron vs. Curry matchup. Curry and Thompson didn't have the energy to shoot from 3 consistently.

The 3 point shooters were negated and it took a superstars monumental effort by KD to get the Warriors the win. Which again brings it back to, find the superstar in the draft, regardless of position. If that superstar is deemed to be Luka, that's great. But I'm not passing on big men who may be great because they don't have a 3pt shot.
Click to expand...

We're just going to have to agree to disagree then. I used to play rec league as well and spot shooting was way less exhausting than cutting and 1 on 1 play. If all you had to do was get these guys tired and they'd become awful shooters, teams would be doing it to them every game. They both just had off nights from the very beginning.
 
Here is what I'm starting to think is going to be the draft order on this day....June 9.... Based on what I'm reading and trying to read between the lines. Smoke screens be damned.
And this is what I think the order is going to be, not who I want...

Ayton
Porter
Bagley to Hawks. Yep, that means Doncic drops
Doncic to the Grizz
Bamba to Mavericks
Trae Young Magic.....been saying this for weeks
Bulls take JJJ....BPA
Cavs Colin Sexton....starting to get fuzzy here, not confidant with this slot
NY takes BPA in Carter
76ers with Mikal Bridges
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
[Rumor] Mock Trade Swaps 2 Kings' Stars for Pelicans' $261 Million Duo in Bold Offseason Shakeup
Replies
1
Views
178
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
S
[Rumor] Kings Predicted to Take 7-foot-1 Phenom in 2025 NBA Draft
Replies
5
Views
493
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
A
Booker and Durant each score 22 points as Suns beat Kings 122-106
Replies
0
Views
180
Associated Press
A
A
Suns coach Mike Budenholzer says Kings firing Mike Brown 'very unfair'
Replies
4
Views
344
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
Y
Ex-Kings GM Vlade Divac: 'Time will tell' if drafting Marvin Bagley over Luka Dončić was right decision
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
PurpleHaze
PurpleHaze
Back
Top