Possible lottery picks in the 2022 draft:

[Kingster]

I'm surprised to hear you say this. 27, 4 and 7 stood out to me. Take away free throw time at the end and he winds up with 23pts on 14 shots.

I can see what you're saying about McLemore but BMac wasn't technically a bad pick in the same way Jimmer or Stauskas were. He was by many accounts the BPA when the Kings picked. Just didn't pan out.

Mathurin's 3pt shot is the same or as good as any of the other prospects in the 5-10 range. AJ Griffin's is the only one that looks to be better at it but his overall skills are much more limited in comparison.

I think you're making my point for me with McLemore and Mathurin. Don't base your opinion on a player because he is bpa by "many accounts". Otherwise, it might not "pan out."

Given the high importance of shooting the 3 for an NBA 2-guard, I'd rather take a Griffin who can really shoot the rock. I feel pretty confident his buttery outside shot is going to translate into an NBA shooting guard. I don't think Mathurin has nearly the visibility on how he will make a contribution to his future NBA team. Do you think he's going to be the answer for the Kings outside shooting woes? I don't. Do you think he's going to be a slasher like an Ivey that breaks down the defense of the opposing team? I don't. Is he going to be a defensive stopper? Highly doubtful because of his stature. So how exactly is he going to earn minutes next year as a King? The "all around" athletic moniker gets you a spot on the bench in the NBA.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Mathurin does not give me a McLemore vibe. The big difference is their aggression level/involvement on court. At Kansas, Ben spent a ton of time just parked in the corner waiting for something to happen. Mathurin makes things happen almost every possession. I never quite got Ben at Kansas, but everybody said he was #1 so when he dropped to #7 I was like, "I guess..." but I would not have any qualms with Mathurin in the 5-7 range in this draft.

I agree at Kansas Univ McLemore had problem getting his own shot and Scot Pollard said as much in advising Kings against drafting him. Offense of KU routinely set up with a double screen at the high post for BenMac to work off of, shoot deep or drive. Less drive more shoot deep. Mathurin arguably better off the drive than shooting deep but is looking like clearly better overall than McLemore. But how good?

 

[Kingster]

Mathurin does not give me a McLemore vibe. The big difference is their aggression level/involvement on court. At Kansas, Ben spent a ton of time just parked in the corner waiting for something to happen. Mathurin makes things happen almost every possession. I never quite got Ben at Kansas, but everybody said he was #1 so when he dropped to #7 I was like, "I guess..." but I would not have any qualms with Mathurin in the 5-7 range in this draft.

No he doesn't.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Exactly, it seems as if Kingster has got the McLemore comparison in his head and is stuck on it. They are nothing alike as prospects. There isn't really anything Mathurin doesn't do well, and he has an excellent physical profile for a guard/wing. Add his personality to the mix and he is a big-time prospect IMO, and being overlooked by many.

He is easily 6'6 and he is really filling out. He might not be a flashy passer but I've seen him make some really impressive reads and passes. And his handle is developing nicely, he is showing the ability to get to the rim and get to the foul line, two big predictors of success.

 

[Dime Dropper]

No he doesn't.

Rivetting argument.

 

[kb02]

Bennedict Richard Felder Mathurin is his name but everyone calls him simply "Ben." Like that other Ben. And like that other Ben his initials the same, "BM." I don't know if Mathurin is the same kind of "talent" for better or worse as BenMac but I do know that coming out of Kansas University listed 6'3." All the UofA talk I hear is Mathurin while shown 6'7" is 6'5" in his bare feet and one place I saw said 6'5 1/4." Of course, for what it's worth Michael Jordan always shown as 6'6."

I have him at 6’5 and a lil less physically developed that I assumed. As I mentioned above, Jaylen Clark is listed an inch shorter and the same weight as Mathurin. Clark looked slightly taller (at shoulder height) and was noticeably bigger than Mathurin.

I have him currently #4 on my board, but I fully expect my board to change.

 

[Kingster]

Rivetting argument.

It's a factually incorrect statement. What is there more to say?

 

[Kingster]

I have him at 6’5 and a lil less physically developed that I assumed. As I mentioned above, Jaylen Clark is listed an inch shorter and the same weight as Mathurin. Clark looked slightly taller (at shoulder height) and was noticeably bigger than Mathurin.

I have him currently #4 on my board, but I fully expect my board to change.

I would agree with this.

 

[kb02]

Exactly, it seems as if Kingster has got the McLemore comparison in his head and is stuck on it. They are nothing alike as prospects. There isn't really anything Mathurin doesn't do well, and he has an excellent physical profile for a guard/wing. Add his personality to the mix and he is a big-time prospect IMO, and being overlooked by many.

He is easily 6'6 and he is really filling out. He might not be a flashy passer but I've seen him make some really impressive reads and passes. And his handle is developing nicely, he is showing the ability to get to the rim and get to the foul line, two big predictors of success.

I’m not as sold on his ability to drive and score/create from day one. I think he has the upside to get there, but a lot of his drives come off of screens (usually one screener is a legit 7 footer—enormous at the college level; few college guys can fight through that) or cuts where the dribbler dribbles directly at Mathurin’s defender, freezing that defender, and Mathurin cutting back door for a score (and foul). Good college level coaching.

 

[ESP47]

I think you're making my point for me with McLemore and Mathurin. Don't base your opinion on a player because he is bpa by "many accounts". Otherwise, it might not "pan out."

Given the high importance of shooting the 3 for an NBA 2-guard, I'd rather take a Griffin who can really shoot the rock. I feel pretty confident his buttery outside shot is going to translate into an NBA shooting guard. I don't think Mathurin has nearly the visibility on how he will make a contribution to his future NBA team. Do you think he's going to be the answer for the Kings outside shooting woes? I don't. Do you think he's going to be a slasher like an Ivey that breaks down the defense of the opposing team? I don't. Is he going to be a defensive stopper? Highly doubtful because of his stature. So how exactly is he going to earn minutes next year as a King? The "all around" athletic moniker gets you a spot on the bench in the NBA.

Mathurin has a higher 2 year 3pt% and FT% than Murray and that's with Ben averaging more 3s. Mathurin's release is faster and higher than Murray's. Their shooting stats are pretty similar with Mathurin having more consistency in his 2 years. I don't even know how you could make a real argument that one guy will be a shooter while the other wont. If anything, the argument would be against Murray since his shot is lower and slower.

Mathurin has shown some really good defensive ability and lateral quickness. Unless a player has a ridiculously small build, I don't see how you can judge them on their college build. I think it would take him a couple years to figure it out but he has the tools to be a very good perimeter defender. He should have a plus shot, he can pass the ball and he has shown good ability to draw fouls.

If this was Mario Kart, he would be Mario or Luigi. Not elite at anything but very good at everything.

 

[SacTownKid]

The only concern I have about Mathurin is the last time Arizona had a big, strong, bulky G/F that actually played like one his name was Stanley Johnson. Johnson has finally found a niche but it's hard to completely trust that program after that. haha.

 

[Tetsujin]

The only concern I have about Mathurin is the last time Arizona had a big, strong, bulky G/F that actually played like one his name was Stanley Johnson. Johnson has finally found a niche but it's hard to completely trust that program after that. haha.

Mathurin is a much more natural shooter than Stanley Johnson was at least.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Mathurin is a much more natural shooter than Stanley Johnson was at least.

I will second that and say that I like Mathurin quite a bit more than I ever liked Stanley Johnson.

I mean, hey, I could be wrong and as Kingster pointed out so concisely above I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I'm willing to throw out my best guesses.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Benn with two Ns.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

The only concern I have about Mathurin is the last time Arizona had a big, strong, bulky G/F that actually played like one his name was Stanley Johnson. Johnson has finally found a niche but it's hard to completely trust that program after that. haha.

Not sure if you noticed but they have a different coach who plays something resembling modern basketball.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Not sure if you noticed but they have a different coach who plays something resembling modern basketball.

UofA best coach since the late great Lute Olson for sure.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

UofA best coach since the late great Lute Olson for sure.

The interim bozos don't count but the difference between Sean Miller who was very love/hate and Tommy is something. I guess it does remain to be answered how Tommy will recruit but I think anyone who was on the fence would prefer to play the attractive brand of basketball he is bringing. CSM could recruit but his on-court product was just brutally ugly. I don't think he did any of his players any favors when it came to getting into the league. A lot of five star types failed to develop properly big time and dudes like Trier who came in as one and dones spent three years in the program.

How CTL develops players into future pros will definitely be something to keep an eye on. Lute was great with point guards. Miller, a PG himself, did next to nothing with the PGU he inherited.

 

[Kingster]

Mathurin has a higher 2 year 3pt% and FT% than Murray and that's with Ben averaging more 3s. Mathurin's release is faster and higher than Murray's. Their shooting stats are pretty similar with Mathurin having more consistency in his 2 years. I don't even know how you could make a real argument that one guy will be a shooter while the other wont. If anything, the argument would be against Murray since his shot is lower and slower.

Mathurin has shown some really good defensive ability and lateral quickness. Unless a player has a ridiculously small build, I don't see how you can judge them on their college build. I think it would take him a couple years to figure it out but he has the tools to be a very good perimeter defender. He should have a plus shot, he can pass the ball and he has shown good ability to draw fouls.

If this was Mario Kart, he would be Mario or Luigi. Not elite at anything but very good at everything.

Did I compare Mathurin to Murray???

 

[ESP47]

Did I compare Mathurin to Murray???

Oops I read that as Murray, not Griffin.

 

[206Fan]

Is 37.6% from three "excellent"? A college 3? I'm looking at the top 50 college players in 3 point percentage and the 50th ranked player has 38.7% 3 pt average, and of course it goes up from there to the mid 40s. (https://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-men/d1/current/individual/143). Sorry, there is no reason to pull the trigger on Mathurin as the Kings next shooting guard because of his outside shooting.

I'm skeptical of what Mathurin is listed at and what he actually is. I'm not looking at his size relative to his team mates at the center position. I'm looking at his size relative to the players he was playing against - Juzang and Jaquez. Mathurin is absolutely not going to be a physical presence in the NBA next season. I can see him getting bounced around like a rubber ball. Will he get run outs on the fast break? Yes. Will he be successful on some back-door cuts like what we saw against UCLA? Yes. Will he be a feared outside 3 point shooter? Highly doubtful, imo. Will he make plays for others? Not so much. So what does he hang his hat on as an NBA 2-guard? His "upside potential"? Sorry, I'll pass.

And be totally honest, baja, doesn't Mathurin give you a McLemore vibe? Ben McLemore shot 42% from 3 in college as a freshman. He was very athletic. If the Kings would pick Mathurin wouldn't you be praying he's not a Ben McLemore? Come on, isn't there be a gnawing doubt in the back of your mind about Mathurin's bust potential?

You're not alone... I also get some "McLemore" vibes with Mathurin. Both were athletic wings who could shoot the ball, but lacked advanced handles. Mathurin has average bball IQ, nowhere near as bad as Ben's, but he suffers lapses on the defensive end. Despite his 6'6 210lb frame, screens almost neutralize him way too often.

In all honesty, I'm more concerned about his defense than offense. Yes he's young, and yes most guards struggle.. but he lacks the instincts and awareness. He should be a much better defender than what he is, but he's not. That's what I'm worried about.

 

[bajaden]

Exactly, it seems as if Kingster has got the McLemore comparison in his head and is stuck on it. They are nothing alike as prospects. There isn't really anything Mathurin doesn't do well, and he has an excellent physical profile for a guard/wing. Add his personality to the mix and he is a big-time prospect IMO, and being overlooked by many.

He is easily 6'6 and he is really filling out. He might not be a flashy passer but I've seen him make some really impressive reads and passes. And his handle is developing nicely, he is showing the ability to get to the rim and get to the foul line, two big predictors of success.

I have a friend that saw Mathurin play in person, and he said he's more impressive in person than on TV, which doesn't surprise me. He also said that what surprised him the most, was how ripped he was. He said that he doesn't look it on TV, but he's very muscular in person. I certainly don't get the comparison to McLemore. Different kind of player entirely. And, I might add, Mathurin has great basketball IQ, which was one of McLemore's problems. He had all the tools, he simply didn't know how to utilize them. He didn't know how to play the game.

If were going to pick players at random for comps, then why not pick Kawhi Leonard. He comes closer in style of play and body type than McLemore. Oh it's easy to say now, please, there's no way he's Leonard. Maybe not now, but does anyone remember his appraisal prior to his draft. Couldn't shoot the three, decent athlete, good midrange game, and good defender. He was known more for his projected defensive abilities than his offense. There were some critics that thought he wasn't big enough to play SF. Others criticized his ability to create his own shot. So whose to say that Mathurin isn't the next coming of Leonard?

I don't know how high Mathurin's ceiling is, but he has a very high floor. He's already very skilled, and by all accounts he's a very hard worker. I think he'll find playing in the NBA easier than college with the floor spacing, and where centers can't grow roots in the post. The Kings could do a whole lot worse than walking away with him on draft day.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

obviously a lot hinges on the next 3 games but if the Wildcats are a FF team I think Benn cracks the top 6.
Especially if he has to do it without Kerr.

 

[Tetsujin]

https://twitter.com/statuses/1505665995964178452

 

[SacTownKid]

https://twitter.com/statuses/1505665995964178452

I still think he'd fit Detroit like a glove. Cade/Banchero/Stewart could be scary physically.

 

[The_Jamal]

I still think he'd fit Detroit like a glove. Cade/Banchero/Stewart could be scary physically.

Bey-Banchero as your 3/4 is real real spicy. All the versatility/switchability in the world with some (potentially) great spacing and creation.

I'm not totally sold on Stew being an upper-tier starter yet, especially with his regression this season, but he is a great option to put next to any of those top 3 draft bigs.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

ok but they already have MB3 don't sleep on that guy.

 

[sactowndog]

Mathurin is a ****ing stud. I would be happy as hell to draft a kid with that heart! If we draft at 8 he may not be there.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Mathurin is a ****ing stud. I would be happy as hell to draft a kid with that heart! If we draft at 8 he may not be there.

Mathurin being available at 8 has about the same chance as Haliburton at 12. Then again, the latter somehow happened.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Mathurin being available at 8 has about the same chance as Haliburton at 12. Then again, the latter somehow happened.

I think he's 5/6 with some room if they secure a FF berth or medicals/combine cause one of the consensus 4 to fall ahead of the draft.

 

[Tetsujin]

Mathurin is a ****ing stud. I would be happy as hell to draft a kid with that heart! If we draft at 8 he may not be there.

The beauty of this current draft class and the Kings current roster situation is that there is going to be a good player to draft regardless of where the Kings ultimately end up in the top half of the lotto.

Jabari
Chet
Paolo
---
Ivey
Murray
Benn
Davis
*Sharpe*
Griffin

That's nine good players (eight if you think Sharpe ultimately won't declare) that all could help the Kings immediately in the top 8. Even if something crazy happens and the Kings somehow are picking 10th, there are still good wing/forward prospects like Ochai or Tari Eason who could really help the team and I'm not totally opposed to drafting Jalen Duren there if he's available at that slot (I am a Duren apologist though).

Benn might be rising into the top 4/5 range with a strong tourney but that also mean than Ivey and Keegan would potentially be falling, which could also be good news for us.

The simple answer is that the top two tiers have a good nine players or so solidly in them so if we're at eight, we just need to take whoever's left.