Post draft reactions

[lwc]

I wasn't quite sure where to put this but I thought it was so good that needed its own thread. Feel free to post all of post draft reactions you find here.

The article that got me thinking about this was from theringer.com by far the best part of the article came towards the end when the writer said this:

But if we had a laugh at the Kings’ expense over the last few years, it’s only right to give them credit where it’s due.

Did you ever think you would find this written in a credible source? If nothing else last night's draft and Vlade Divac's last two years I have begun to completely turn the PR tide.

 

[Tetsujin]

I wasn't quite sure where to put this but I thought it was so good that needed its own thread. Feel free to post all of post draft reactions you find here.

The article that got me thinking about this was from theringer.com by far the best part of the article came towards the end when the writer said this:



Did you ever think you would find this written in a credible source? If nothing else last night's draft and Vlade Divac's last two years I have begun to completely turn the PR tide.

It's nice that the Ringer said that but they also spent a good minute or so on their post-draft podcast ridiculing Vlade for picking Papa in last year's draft for some reason.

 

[lwc]

It's nice that the Ringer said that but they also spent a good minute or so on their post-draft podcast ridiculing Vlade for picking Papa in last year's draft for some reason.

Was it different people or they just talking out of both sides of their mouth?

 

[King-Biscuit-Time]

Was excited but listened to Bill Simmons draft podcast, and he thought Sac made a huge mistake of not taking Monk at 10, and gambling on Jackson/Giles. Monk would've been nice, especially since he played w/ Fox. When I checked out his highlight reel, he looked smooth and athletic, and like someone we could really use. Oh well. Not too hyped about Jackson, but Fox is great and Giles has a lot of upside.

 

[Tetsujin]

Was excited but listened to Bill Simmons draft podcast, and he thought Sac made a huge mistake of not taking Monk at 10, and gambling on Jackson/Giles. Monk would've been nice, especially since he played w/ Fox. When I checked out his highlight reel, he looked smooth and athletic, and like someone we could really use. Oh well. Not too hyped about Jackson, but Fox is great and Giles has a lot of upside.

Bill's still just sour because we would give the Celtics Boogie for anything less than Terry Rozier. Do we really need Monk when there are already three other shooting guards on the depth chart and another probably moving from Europe this summer? Plus Fox/Monk is really small defensively in the NBA (works in college though).

 

[CruzDude]

Baja and I were genuinely excited over all 4 selections. Fox is a gem and immediate help, Jackson at 15 was great and fills a need, Giles can be the diamond in the rough and if he gets stronger can be a star, and Mason has that chip on his shoulder and was national player of the year. Fast breaks will become the norm with this group and our yearlings.

Seeing the newbies and the core group will make for an extra exciting summer league. Can't wait.

 

[sidney]

Like was already mentioned, Monk was noticeably shorter than Adam Silver who is 6'3". He's definitely smaller than Fox. He's very talented, but A 6'2" shooting guard is going to have an uphill battle.

 

[PurpleHaze]

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I was initially excited that Monk was there but really, how could we properly evaluate all of our options at 2 if we made that selection? We couldn't and then we'd be at risk of needing to make a premature trade and being in the exact same spot we are with Jackson and Giles. At least we committed. All the kids are going to get an opportunity to shine. It's theirs for the taking.

 

[Tetsujin]

The positive-ish articles continue...

The Sacramento Kings are No Longer a Laughingstock (VICE)

 

[King-Biscuit-Time]

View attachment 6755

This makes me feel better on passing on Monk.

 

[ppine]

It occurs to me that the new Kings have the potential to be a fast breaking team. Fox is a speedster leading the break. The Kings's WCS and Skal get up and down the floor. Jackson is pretty fast. They have the potential to break on other teams. They will be a better shooting team. Run and gun seems to be the wave of the future.

 

[roasthawg]

Glad to see pr trending in the right direction... I really think that three years from now the conversion will be about how Vlade and joeger have rebuilt this team.

I want excited about Jackson at first but have come around... He should be a great fit. Doesn't stop the ball on offense and can get his shot off. Should compete on defense. Starting level small forward I believe and just as important a great fit.

Hate the Giles pick but this is why Vlade makes the big money... Hoping he proves me wrong again.

Love Fox obviously, from my vantage point we drafted John Wall with a better locker room vibe possibly.

Stoked on Mason too... Between him and Jackson we have possibly college basketball's two best players from last season.

Seven 1st round picks over the last two years plus wcs and hopefully Bogdan. This is how you rebuild!! My home glasses stay on tight but i can't quit thinking we'll win 50+ in 2019. Give these guys a couple years to develop together. Unbelievable character which should translate to team chemistry. A bunch of die hard gym rats. No thugs, no flashy lifestyle guys. Just good kids that love basketball and happen to be extremely talented. Can't wait to watch the growth!

 

[ockingsfan]

Like was already mentioned, Monk was noticeably shorter than Adam Silver who is 6'3". He's definitely smaller than Fox. He's very talented, but A 6'2" shooting guard is going to have an uphill battle.

Offensively, Monk will be fine. Defensively, he is going to get killed in the NBA.

 

[funkykingston]

Offensively, Monk will be fine. Defensively, he is going to get killed in the NBA.

Monk should be viewed more as an Eddie House or Lou Williams player.

A backup PG whose role is to come in and put points on the board. I think he'd do well in that role.

If he's asked to start at SG against guys much bigger than him I think he'll struggle.

 

[twslam07]

I would have liked us to take Collins rather than trading for 15/20. I'm not confident in their ability to become star players. I think Collins has that type of potential. I also would have rather taken Jawun Evans at #34 instead of Mason.

Staying at #10
Fox / Evans
Hield / Bogdan / Richardson
???
Labissiere / Cauley-Stein
Collins / Papagiannis

If having to make choices at #15 & #20, I would have taken Jackson & Anunoby. I'm not very confident in Giles' health and how long he can be a contributor in this league. Bigs with knee issues is never a good combo.

Trading #10 for #15/#20
Fox / Evans
Hield / Bogdan / Richardson
Jackson / Anunoby
Labissiere
Cauley-Stein / Papagiannis

It's hard for me to believe that an Afflalo for Turner & #20 wasn't at least an option. I would have much rather seen that trade go down. Then it would have been Fox at #5, Collins at #10, Anunoby at #20, & Evans at #34. That would have been close to a perfect draft for me.

Trading Afflalo for Turner & #20
Fox / Evans
Hield / Bogdan / Richardson
Anunoby
Labissiere / Cauley-Stein
Collins / Papagiannis

Overall, I'm still happy with the draft. I would probably give it a B.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

It's hard for me to believe that an Afflalo for Turner & #20 wasn't at least an option. I would have much rather seen that trade go down.

I feel like the actual (negative) financial value of Turner's contract gets overlooked when people talk about adding something like one late pick for it. For the moment I'll ignore the fact that I don't think we could have made an Afflalo/Turner swap work under the cap (I think we would have needed Galloway to opt in and to send him also) and just assume it could happen, then list the assets we have either doing the trade for #10, or doing the trade for Turner.

Trade for #10:
#15 (Jackson)
#20
-$1.5M (cutting Afflalo)

Trade for Turner:
#10 (Collins)
#20
-$55M (Turner)

The #20 pick evens out. So you're basically saying that you'd be OK trading Jackson and $53.5M (and the cap space associated with it) to get Collins. I have a hard time believing that you really mean that.

 

[twslam07]

I feel like the actual (negative) financial value of Turner's contract gets overlooked when people talk about adding something like one late pick for it. For the moment I'll ignore the fact that I don't think we could have made an Afflalo/Turner swap work under the cap (I think we would have needed Galloway to opt in and to send him also) and just assume it could happen, then list the assets we have either doing the trade for #10, or doing the trade for Turner.

Trade for #10:
#15 (Jackson)
#20
-$1.5M (cutting Afflalo)

Trade for Turner:
#10 (Collins)
#20
-$55M (Turner)

The #20 pick evens out. So you're basically saying that you'd be OK trading Jackson and $53.5M (and the cap space associated with it) to get Collins. I have a hard time believing that you really mean that.

But that is what I mean.

I would rather have #10, #20, & Turner vs. #15 & #20. We're in the business of collecting the best young assets possible. Our massive cap space should be used as a tool to acquire more young talent whether that is through free agent signings (not likely you're going to get anyone worth mentioning with this method) or trade (like the one above). Turner's contract will be off the books before Hield, Labissiere, Richardson, Papagiannis, Fox, Collins (#10), Anunoby (#20), & Evans (#34) would need to be resigned, so I don't see his contract as being absolutely awful for our situation.