Mock Draft Kings #2 lists

[CelticsFan]

It's a little circular, don't you think? Normally you work out for a team with the hope of getting picked, not the promise of getting picked.

I agree otherwise the teams with the top picks would only be able to work out one top player in the draft. Ayton has been expected to go #1 but Bagley still worked out for them without a promise.

 

[funkykingston]

Nba.net mock draft has Bagley for the Kings' choice, and they are very good at predictions close to the draft day:

http://www.nbadraft.net/2018mock_draft

Bagley may well be the pick but I have never seen NBAdraft.net as being very accurate in predicting the draft even close to draft day.

The most consistentlh accurate site was probably Draft Express, largely because I think they had reliable NBA front office sources.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

The most consistentlh accurate site was probably Draft Express, largely because I think they had reliable NBA front office sources.

Agreed, but even then, they were really only solid on the obvious picks (Anthony Davis at #1) and on general draft ranges until say the morning of the draft. That was when their updates usually started to reflect something resembling what actually happened. I know it's only two days away, but we're still a bit far out to expect solid intel to come out of the front offices. And frankly, we've been more or less definitively tied to three different players in just the last week. Depending on who you ask, we're either totally taking Doncic or totally taking Bagley or totally taking Porter. My read is: NOBODY OUTSIDE OUR FRONT OFFICE KNOWS. NOBODY.

 

[206Fan]

Here's this year's Sports Illustrated article with quotes from anonymous scouts about the top prospects.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.si.c...-scouts-trae-young-luka-doncic-michael-porter

Just like with fans, there's a pretty big variance in opinions around some of these guys.

And some offhand comments about the Kings being an organization/environment that isn't conducive to player development. It's frustrating but I don't blame agents for trying to steer guys away from Sacramento.

Winning will be the only thing that repairs the franchise's reputation.

It's a narrative that's warranted. Have people quickly forgotten that we spent the #13 and #22 pick in 2016, just to cut them 1 1/2 years later? What message does this send out to agents? Draft prospects? It's just not a good outlook. Before that, we had no problem shipping out T-Rob half way through, and Stauskas after 1 year. If you're drafted in the 1st round, you shouldn't have to worry about stability. Most young players stay on the same team until their rookie contract expires.

 

[funkykingston]

It's a narrative that's warranted. Have people quickly forgotten that we spent the #13 and #22 pick in 2016, just to cut them 1 1/2 years later? What message does this send out to agents? Draft prospects? It's just not a good outlook. Before that, we had no problem shipping out T-Rob half way through, and Stauskas after 1 year. If you're drafted in the 1st round, you shouldn't have to worry about stability. Most young players stay on the same team until their rookie contract expires.

I'm not arguing that it's not warranted. It certainly is.

As a Kings fan it's really frustrating though and I hope it changes soon though I fear it won't.

 

[funkykingston]

Agreed, but even then, they were really only solid on the obvious picks (Anthony Davis at #1) and on general draft ranges until say the morning of the draft. That was when their updates usually started to reflect something resembling what actually happened. I know it's only two days away, but we're still a bit far out to expect solid intel to come out of the front offices. And frankly, we've been more or less definitively tied to three different players in just the last week. Depending on who you ask, we're either totally taking Doncic or totally taking Bagley or totally taking Porter. My read is: NOBODY OUTSIDE OUR FRONT OFFICE KNOWS. NOBODY.

Certainly could be. I started hearing that Bagley was a "lock" at #2. It was in a bunch of twitter posts and two different articles. And then I realized it was all coming from a single source. So, hard to take that as gospel.

Two more days.

 

[Kingster]

Bagley may well be the pick but I have never seen NBAdraft.net as being very accurate in predicting the draft even close to draft day.

The most consistentlh accurate site was probably Draft Express, largely because I think they had reliable NBA front office sources.

I looked up nba draft net mock drafts going back to 2006. I think they were wrong two times in their pick for #2.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

It's a narrative that's warranted. Have people quickly forgotten that we spent the #13 and #22 pick in 2016, just to cut them 1 1/2 years later? What message does this send out to agents? Draft prospects? It's just not a good outlook. Before that, we had no problem shipping out T-Rob half way through, and Stauskas after 1 year. If you're drafted in the 1st round, you shouldn't have to worry about stability. Most young players stay on the same team until their rookie contract expires.

This turns out to be not true.

I looked back at five drafts: 2009-2013, chosen to be the most recent five drafts which are at least four years out, so everybody in those drafts has had an opportunity to play through their rookie contract. I looked at players drafted between 11-30, because obviously top-10 picks are more likely to stay in one place, and you are talking about players at #13 and #22, which fits nicely in that range. That gave me 100 players to look at.

Of those 100 players, 1 has not set foot on an NBA court (Livio Jean-Charles) so let's forget about him. Of the other 99 players, 65 - that's almost two-thirds - did NOT play a full four years for the team that drafted them. Technically, if I wanted a true two-thirds I could have included Festus Ezeli, but he actually was under contract for his fourth year and did not play due to injury, so I did not count him.

 

[jcassio]

Did you intend to post this earlier? I'm confused.

You're reading too much into my 2 week old post. I didn't quote Doug or imply that "hiding" were his words. The draft discussion is fluid and new information comes out every day about the draftees. At the time, the information was exactly what I said. Chicago medical staff were going to examine Porter and release the results and that would be the extent of the medica records l teams would see.

Yes, your post sounded like you were responding to Monday's show (of this week). I obviously didn't notice the date on your post. My bad. But I'd still like to know who decided Porter was "hiding" his medical records, regardless of whether that was yesterday or last week?

 

[VF21]

Yes, your post sounded like you were responding to Monday's show (of this week). I obviously didn't notice the date on your post. My bad. But I'd still like to know who decided Porter was "hiding" his medical records, regardless of whether that was yesterday or last week?

https://community.kingsfans.com/thr...atus-i-think-the-teams-are-comfortable.69647/

I don't like his comment that there's "no chance of reinjury" because that's simply not true. There's just something about this whole thing that sits the wrong way with me.

 

[Livinthedream]

Yes, your post sounded like you were responding to Monday's show (of this week). I obviously didn't notice the date on your post. My bad. But I'd still like to know who decided Porter was "hiding" his medical records, regardless of whether that was yesterday or last week?

Treat it like Madlibs and pick your favorite verb. I'm not particularly attached to the word "hiding." Concealing, withholding.... I dunno. My words have had no impact on his draft status.

Porter has had imaging reviewed and medical professionals look at him. I can only assume he's done enough in the eyes of his agent and the lottery teams.

 

[Turgenev]

https://community.kingsfans.com/thr...atus-i-think-the-teams-are-comfortable.69647/

I don't like his comment that there's "no chance of reinjury" because that's simply not true. There's just something about this whole thing that sits the wrong way with me.

Yes all players in the nba are at risk for injury and can never have 'no chance' of recurrence. Players with the greatest risk are those that have been previously injured. MPJ missed close to his entire freshman season because of an injury. Prior to that, he played his HS ball with ongoing back pain. Also incredibly recurrent. He couldn't get out of bed the other day because of pain and spasms.

This doesn't mean he will get injured. Rather, if he stays healthy it will be against the odds. It doesn't mean he won't have a reasonable career. T-mac had a good one despite back issues. Others, including lottery, picks have not.

If I'm advising the kings on MPJ the answer at 2 is no. Not ahead of a young Euro wonder kid who has proven durable across however many Euro seasons, not ahead of two good Duke freshman that project as good pros, not ahead of JJJ who improved throughout his single college year.

 

[Turgenev]

Porter has had imaging reviewed and medical professionals look at him. I can only assume he's done enough in the eyes of his agent and the lottery teams.

Imaging correlates poorly with pain outcomes. Especially for the low back. Odds are against him.

 

[Turgenev]

But I'd still like to know who decided Porter was "hiding" his medical records, regardless of whether that was yesterday or last week?

Can't hide from a missed season or workout absenteeism.