Rubio or Griffin?

[bajaden]

Can't the same be said about any player?

Well, maybe the same could be said about some players, but not any player. Besides, I think you know what I meant. Interesting that your only comment was on a throw away line and not really the content of my post. However redundant it may have been.

 

[bajaden]

Okay, so now we're going to have yet another thread revolving around the same thing? ...sigh...

I will be so glad when the draft is over. It seems like no matter how the thread starts out, it inevitably ends up another discussion of the merits/flaws of the same players over and over and over again...

Well, I was going to submit my post on another thread, but you closed it while I was writing it. Sorry!

 

[bigbadred00]

I think the issue with this draft is there are only a couple of impact bigmen while PG is much deeper. Are these other PGs as good as Rubio, no, but the difference between them and Rubio is much smaller than the difference between Griffin and the other bigs (prob. after Thabeet who will be selected early). I know we have 2 big men already, but the way the draft lines up it makes more sense to go Griffin early and PG late than Rubio early and then big later.

 

[bajaden]

I think the issue with this draft is there are only a couple of impact bigmen while PG is much deeper. Are these other PGs as good as Rubio, no, but the difference between them and Rubio is much smaller than the difference between Griffin and the other bigs (prob. after Thabeet who will be selected early). I know we have 2 big men already, but the way the draft lines up it makes more sense to go Griffin early and PG late than Rubio early and then big later.

Logicaly what you say makes sense. Unless you believe that the point guard is one of a kind special. Which of course, some on this fourm do.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I think the issue with this draft is there are only a couple of impact bigmen while PG is much deeper. Are these other PGs as good as Rubio, no, but the difference between them and Rubio is much smaller than the difference between Griffin and the other bigs (prob. after Thabeet who will be selected early). I know we have 2 big men already, but the way the draft lines up it makes more sense to go Griffin early and PG late than Rubio early and then big later.

The later pick should have absolutely no barring on our first pick. You ALWAYS pick the BPA, if that means taking a PG with both picks then you do it.

 

[Kingster]

I think that it should be noted that when Petrie was on Grants show, Grant asked about the possibility of drafting a european player, without mentioning Rubio by name, and the trouble teams have had in the past with buyouts. Petrie was crystal clear in his answer. He said that the Kings would not draft anyone that they didn't know in advance couldn't be signed. He said there is no way the Kings would draft someone that couldn't play on the team next year.

If you take him at his word, that tells me that if there's even the slightest chance that there would be a problem signing Rubio, he would scratched off the list. I've sort of gotten caught up in the Rubio movement myself. But he's not the be all, end all of points guards. At least not yet. We could draft him and four years later be kicking ourselves for not trading down and drafting Teague who ended up being an all star.

I think Petrie wants, needs, and impact player. Someone that can come in and play now and make a difference. So when you look down that list of players available, who would you take. Take into account that Petrie likes players with a certain level of skill. Setting Griffin and Rubio aside as obvious choices, who else? Not necessarilly at the 1 or the 2, because you can always trade down if need be.

My opinion is, Thabeet, a thin maybe. Not Petrie's type of player because of lack of skills, but could, maybe, please be an impact player next year. Hill, nope! Could end up being an impact player in a couple of years, but I doubt next year. Hardin, I don't think so. I really like him, and he has all the skills, but I don't see him as an impact player. Jennings, could be. I don't really know enough about his game, other than he's quick and athletic. Again, I doubt it because he's just not ready now. Teague, I have to say yes on this one. Like him or not, he has the ability to impact a game, and right now. Curry, another yes, maybe for the wrong reasons sometimes, but there's no doubt that he can have an impact. Henderson, sort of a dark horse. Certainly skilled enough. Athletic enough, but not a super athlete. Kind of a maybe guy, who may be flying under the radar, and be better in the pro's than he was in college. Clark, nope! Lawson, yeah, maybe. He's verticaly challenged, but really quick. Certainly skilled enough. Williams, I doubt it.

That brings me to my dark horse. He's been slotted all over the boards from 12 to 22. Tyreke Evans. There are times I just wanted to take him aside and shake sense into him. But this kid is really talented, and I think could be an impact player. He'll drive you nuts at times taking ill advised shots, but I think he can be really good. Now if we get the first pick in the draft, then disregard everything I've written. But if were unlucky and end up fourth, then we enter the gray zone. I've probably just given Bricky an ulcer. I apologize in advance.

Wow. Great minds do think alike! I'll just go one step further. If we get the first pick in the draft and Rubio is off Petrie's board because he can't get him next year, my prediction is Tyreke Evans will be the next member of the Sacramento Kings.

PS. I take everything Petrie says with a grain of salt, including his statement on not signing someone that can't play next year. That statement could definitely be a bargaining posture on his part.

 

[bigbadred00]

The later pick should have absolutely no barring on our first pick. You ALWAYS pick the BPA, if that means taking a PG with both picks then you do it.

You don't always pick BPA, our team hasn't done that for a long time. It's nice in theory but it doesn't happen. Let's say your team had LBJ, Kobe and there was the next MJ or Duncan sitting there. MJ is obviously the BPA but if you had let's say Darko as your starting C, you definitely take Duncan even though MJ would be the BPA. This is an extreme example. But if you have huge needs at certain positions especially when the differences between the players are minimal, you don't always draft exactly at BPA. A lot of people here are saying Griffin is BPA, but want to draft Rubio because he's a better fit, I guess most Kingsfans are wrong then..............

 

[bigbadred00]

Wow. Great minds do think alike! I'll just go one step further. If we get the first pick in the draft and Rubio is off Petrie's board because he can't get him next year, my prediction is Tyreke Evans will be the next member of the Sacramento Kings.

PS. I take everything Petrie says with a grain of salt, including his statement on not signing someone that can't play next year. That statement could definitely be a bargaining posture on his part.

If Petrie took Tyreke Evans with the first pick this year he should be shot.

His basketball IQ sucks and for a wing his shot is almost the worst I've ever seen. His D has a lot to be desired. He has a monster wing span and he tore up a ton of bad teams. It would be embarrasing if some how the Kings ended up with the 1st pick and they chose Evans over Griffin. If they really want Evans they could trade down and get a ton of value from some other teams but to take him 1st overall is GM suicide.

I live in Memphis and watched a ton of Memphis games (had to), have you guys really watched him play that much? I guess he has some upside but to me he has huge downside. He also had some off the field issues (He was in the car of a drive by shooting in HS). He has definitely cleaned up his act the last year. And has done some good things on the court--I just wouldn't take some one with a lot of huge question marks in a position we really don't need that badly. We need a Ron Artest type player or some sort of defensive wing ala Bowen, I don't think Tyreke fits this although he does penetrate well. His court vision is also overrated. As a PG for Memphis--it's really a joint PG situation--and if you look at his assist/TO; it's prettty terrible. He is no Derrick Rose, he is nowhere near the same player. And I don't think most GMs think he's the next Rose or something of that sort.

 

[Vlade4GM]

You don't always pick BPA, our team hasn't done that for a long time. It's nice in theory but it doesn't happen. Let's say your team had LBJ, Kobe and there was the next MJ or Duncan sitting there. MJ is obviously the BPA but if you had let's say Darko as your starting C, you definitely take Duncan even though MJ would be the BPA. This is an extreme example. But if you have huge needs at certain positions especially when the differences between the players are minimal, you don't always draft exactly at BPA. A lot of people here are saying Griffin is BPA, but want to draft Rubio because he's a better fit, I guess most Kingsfans are wrong then..............

If you're loaded at a position and the difference in projected impact isn't great then yeah, you lean towards the need because the movement that would need to be made would eventually lead to selling off your players and not getting great value for them. However if it's the next MJ and the next Okafor, you pick the next MJ and work it all out later.

"Need" said that the Bulls should've picked Beasley, but they didn't because they thought Rose would make the greater impact and at this point he has greatly impacted that team, and it wasn't initially thought by many that the talent difference between the two was that great.

I should have put an exception in there like I normally do, I think it's okay if you believe the difference is marginal, but if we're talking Paul/D. Williams vs. Bogut then I think the answer is obvious.

We're not loaded at the guard position so we can take on a couple of guards. My main point is that It's a measly 23rd pick in a poor draft, chances are it ends up being a decent role player at best, the depth at that position should not affect an extremely important top 4 pick. You take the player that's going to help your franchise the most at top 4, then you worry about 23 when it comes up, and perhaps you get a nice trade offer from a team that needs a guard. You're always looking to get the best value for your pick possible, so when it comes to later in the draft you're just trying to find a quality guy period because the later in the draft you get the chances of finding one is harder and harder so you don't have as much luxury of being picky.

Are they wrong? It depends on how much of a difference in impact level they think there is between Griffin and Rubio. Personally, I think Rubio will be an overall more valuable player than Griffin although I concede that he has a lower floor than Griffin. So the whole personal need thing is just nice extra to have, but it's definitely not the basis of my viewpoint of Rubio over Griffin.

 

[Kingster]

If Petrie took Tyreke Evans with the first pick this year he should be shot.

His basketball IQ sucks and for a wing his shot is almost the worst I've ever seen. His D has a lot to be desired. He has a monster wing span and he tore up a ton of bad teams. It would be embarrasing if some how the Kings ended up with the 1st pick and they chose Evans over Griffin. If they really want Evans they could trade down and get a ton of value from some other teams but to take him 1st overall is GM suicide.

I live in Memphis and watched a ton of Memphis games (had to), have you guys really watched him play that much? I guess he has some upside but to me he has huge downside. He also had some off the field issues (He was in the car of a drive by shooting in HS). He has definitely cleaned up his act the last year. And has done some good things on the court--I just wouldn't take some one with a lot of huge question marks in a position we really don't need that badly. We need a Ron Artest type player or some sort of defensive wing ala Bowen, I don't think Tyreke fits this although he does penetrate well. His court vision is also overrated. As a PG for Memphis--it's really a joint PG situation--and if you look at his assist/TO; it's prettty terrible. He is no Derrick Rose, he is nowhere near the same player. And I don't think most GMs think he's the next Rose or something of that sort.

Evans is high risk/high gain. I watched him at the beginning of the season. Looked terrible, primarily because of his shot. Coach left him there to sink or swim and he looked good by the end of the season. He has great athletic ability. I agree, he's not a Rose, but there are no players in this draft of that quality, so the point is moot. I haven't seen Rubio, but of the players I've seen Teague and Evans have the highest ceilings of anyone in the draft. So it depends on how safe you want to play it - safe, or not. As for a Ron Artest player, there is none in this draft, at least that is project for the first round.

 

[bigbadred00]

Evans is high risk/high gain. I watched him at the beginning of the season. Looked terrible, primarily because of his shot. Coach left him there to sink or swim and he looked good by the end of the season. He has great athletic ability. I agree, he's not a Rose, but there are no players in this draft of that quality, so the point is moot. I haven't seen Rubio, but of the players I've seen Teague and Evans have the highest ceilings of anyone in the draft. So it depends on how safe you want to play it - safe, or not. As for a Ron Artest player, there is none in this draft, at least that is project for the first round.

He also beat up on a lot of bad teams other than the Zags and Missouri, two teams which aren't that known for stellar D although neither is bad. IDK, if we were to trade down to the 7-10 range and get something big in return if we had the 1-3 picks I'd understand but taking him that early in this draft is pretty bad imo. I don't find him that much better than either of the L-ville swing players who aren't nearly as high on most boards and they played in a much tougher conference.

Teague is interesting. Wake beat up on a bunch of cup cakes then played well vs UNC and beat them at home after that they struggled. I think it coincided with Teague's move to the 2 from the 1 where teams just zoned him up. I'm not sure of his position in the pros but if it's sharing minutes with Martin at the 2 or the 3, our wing D is going to be weak and undersized. As the 23rd pick he'd be sick value but I doubt he makes it there.

 

[bajaden]

He also beat up on a lot of bad teams other than the Zags and Missouri, two teams which aren't that known for stellar D although neither is bad. IDK, if we were to trade down to the 7-10 range and get something big in return if we had the 1-3 picks I'd understand but taking him that early in this draft is pretty bad imo. I don't find him that much better than either of the L-ville swing players who aren't nearly as high on most boards and they played in a much tougher conference.

Teague is interesting. Wake beat up on a bunch of cup cakes then played well vs UNC and beat them at home after that they struggled. I think it coincided with Teague's move to the 2 from the 1 where teams just zoned him up. I'm not sure of his position in the pros but if it's sharing minutes with Martin at the 2 or the 3, our wing D is going to be weak and undersized. As the 23rd pick he'd be sick value but I doubt he makes it there.

If you go back and read my premise, it was based on not getting the first or second pick in the draft. What if we pick fourth? From there I proposed the theory that Petrie needs to draft an impact player. There are only a few players in the draft after Griffin and Rubio that appear to have impact talent. My dark horse was Evans. I beleive I pointed out that he had flaws that could drive you crazy. After he was switched from shooting guard to point guard I thought the whole team started playing better. He played pt guard in grade school and highschool, so it wasn't new to him.

On the BPA verses a player that we need. If they happen to be one and the same, simple. If you have 2, 3, or 5 players all with similar talent, then you take the best fit for your team. But if you need a center, and the BPA is a powerforward, then you take the PF, even if you already have a very good PF. In other words, you don't pass up Karl Malone again and draft Joe Kleine again.. Thats how you stay at the bottom of the Cesspool..

 

[bigbadred00]

If you go back and read my premise, it was based on not getting the first or second pick in the draft. What if we pick fourth? From there I proposed the theory that Petrie needs to draft an impact player. There are only a few players in the draft after Griffin and Rubio that appear to have impact talent. My dark horse was Evans. I beleive I pointed out that he had flaws that could drive you crazy. After he was switched from shooting guard to point guard I thought the whole team started playing better. He played pt guard in grade school and highschool, so it wasn't new to him.

On the BPA verses a player that we need. If they happen to be one and the same, simple. If you have 2, 3, or 5 players all with similar talent, then you take the best fit for your team. But if you need a center, and the BPA is a powerforward, then you take the PF, even if you already have a very good PF. In other words, you don't pass up Karl Malone again and draft Joe Kleine again.. Thats how you stay at the bottom of the Cesspool..

Evans got better but the schedule always was pretty much cupcake CUSA for most of the season.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Evans = Larry Hughes BCS

 

[Kingzrool]

if the ping pong balls do go our way and we get the 1st overall selection

Kings have a 75% chance of not getting the first pick + Kings have crappy luck = Kings do not get first pick.

 

[RIP miyagi]

i have a question, to pay off the european team to get rubio, where does the money come from? the owner's pocket or some team financial thing?

 

[Vlade4GM]

i have a question, to pay off the european team to get rubio, where does the money come from? the owner's pocket or some team financial thing?

The team that drafts him can contribute up to 500k, the rest has to be paid by the player.

 

[boffacheerios]

Evans = Larry Hughes BCS

except Evans still has knees and is more athletic naturally and can finish at the rim better.

 

[bajaden]

Evans = Larry Hughes BCS

You couldn't have used a sharper dagger. And he's from my home town...

 

[bajaden]

except Evans still has knees and is more athletic naturally and can finish at the rim better.

Whew! There, now I feel better.....

 

[Vlade4GM]

except Evans still has knees and is more athletic naturally and can finish at the rim better.

Hughes was pretty athletic coming out of college as well.

 

[bajaden]

Hughes was pretty athletic coming out of college as well.

I had such high hopes for Hughes coming out of college. He was a tremendous athlete. He had only one problem in college. He loved to shoot the ball, and he was a terrible shooter. He also had an identity crisis. He didn't know who he was as a player. People thought he could be a pt guard, and I don't think he really wanted to be a pt.

I went to McBride highschool in St Louis. It doesn't exist anymore, but when it did, our biggest competitors were Christian Brothers highschool and Jesuit highschool. McBride was run by the Marynoll brothers. There are a lot of highschools in St. Louis. Public and Catholic. But at the end of the day, the city championship was always won by one of the big three. My school dominated in football. Christian Brothers was a basketball dynasty. Hughes went to Christian Brothers. Then he went to St. Louis University. Great medical school, with a decent to good basketball program. Not the powerhouse it was when Easy Ed McCauley went there.

I went to a lot of games at St. Louis U. Great atmosphere and a lot of fun. They have a band that moves through the arena playing " When the saints come marching in " constantly. There were some things that I learned about Hughes that raised red flags, but I wrote them off to immaturity. I thought he would outgrow them. I'll stop here, and just say that he had the talent to be much better than he is. I think he merely improved through osmosis, instead of commitment and hard work.

Perhaps because he's from my hometown I vicariously identified with him, and my expectations were unjust. But, he remains a disappointment to me.

 

[fnordius]

Perhaps because he's from my hometown I vicariously identified with him, and my expectations were unjust. But, he remains a disappointment to me.

It could be worse. My wife went to school with KT.

 

[CruzDude]

Rubio was my early favorite for all the positives and strengths written about him. Griffin is odds on the #1 but is he the best choice for the Kings, a 6-7/6-8 PF who does everything? Sounds a bit like Ike to me.

Then I read or rather scrolled down the "nbadraft.net" page on Ricky and read the repeated weaknesses when 2 statements by Joshua Motenko a year ago hit home:

Rubio will have trouble guarding point guards in the NBA. His lateral quickness is decent but not great.

He is a big star at a young age, and already shows signs of having a big ego. He often creates contact and then expects LeBron James-type calls from the referees, and can get frustrated when he doesnt receive them.

That second comment is not a GP type of player. Sure he is great in Euro ball and will do well in the NBA but that may take 3-years AND learning to be a true "team" player in both play and attitude.

So how did I vote? With a really good teaching type coach I'd go with Ricky. With a more traditional coach it would be Blake. And I still think there will be a draft day trade for the Kings if they get the #1 pick. So I didn't vote and am right on the fence.

 

[KF8]

Rubio was my early favorite for all the positives and strengths written about him. Griffin is odds on the #1 but is he the best choice for the Kings, a 6-7/6-8 PF who does everything? Sounds a bit like Ike to me.

Then I read or rather scrolled down the "nbadraft.net" page on Ricky and read the repeated weaknesses when 2 statements by Joshua Motenko a year ago hit home:

Rubio will have trouble guarding point guards in the NBA. His lateral quickness is decent but not great.

He is a big star at a young age, and already shows signs of having a big ego. He often creates contact and then expects LeBron James-type calls from the referees, and can get frustrated when he doesnt receive them.

That second comment is not a GP type of player. Sure he is great in Euro ball and will do well in the NBA but that may take 3-years AND learning to be a true "team" player in both play and attitude.

So how did I vote? With a really good teaching type coach I'd go with Ricky. With a more traditional coach it would be Blake. And I still think there will be a draft day trade for the Kings if they get the #1 pick. So I didn't vote and am right on the fence.

I don't think we should assume that Griffin is 6'7" until the measurements come out. The weakness of a player expecting calls is pretty much irrelevant to how he does on the court. You see big time stars expecting calls all the time. Having a big ego isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially for a distributing point guard like Rubio. He is one of the more pure point guards in this draft who should be able to play team ball right off the bat and being from Europe in all they also play more of a team game. I remember Geoff Petrie saying "It's never going to come down to a lack of information. It's about determining what information is most important, what's most relevant." I don't think Petrie will look in that ego stuff too much if at all.

I agree that he will take Rubio some time though. A lot of people will be disappointed with him at first because of the high expectations. I don't think Rubio will ever be the type of point guard who could dominate games like the Chris Pauls, Deron Williams, and jason kidds. I could see Rubio having more of a Rajon Rondo type impact on games where he will make the team better, but will also be a liability himself on offense. Rubio isn't the type of point guard you could give the ball to when you need a last second basket, but he'll do a fine job at distributing the ball. He will be one of the better second tier point guards in the NBA along the line of Rajon Rondo, Jose Calderon, Andre Miller, etc.. talent wise when all said and done. Hopefully more of a Jason Kidd, if we indeed draft him, though I'm not keeping my hopes too high because it is the one of a kind Jason Kidd we are talking about.

 

[beb0p]

Evans = Larry Hughes BCS

You're being kind, Vlade. I was thinking Javaris Crittenton.

.

 

[rainmaker]

Then I read or rather scrolled down the "nbadraft.net" page on Ricky and read the repeated weaknesses when 2 statements by Joshua Motenko a year ago hit home:

Rubio will have trouble guarding point guards in the NBA. His lateral quickness is decent but not great.

He is a big star at a young age, and already shows signs of having a big ego. He often creates contact and then expects LeBron James-type calls from the referees, and can get frustrated when he doesnt receive them.

.

At such a young age all you can ask of players is to improve on their weaknesses. At age 18 Rubio went out and was just awarded defensive player of the year. I know its ACB League, and not the nba, but it does show he has imporved in that area.

I expect someone of Rubio's stature to have an ego. No one that will be a top 3 pick in an nba draft doesn't have an ego. Rubio's ego is part of what allows him to play with men 5-10 yrs older than him, and to dominate them. He also doesn't seem to get intimidated, even on the worlds biggest stage(olympics).

 

[Dime Dropper]

Rubio was my early favorite for all the positives and strengths written about him. Griffin is odds on the #1 but is he the best choice for the Kings, a 6-7/6-8 PF who does everything? Sounds a bit like Ike to me.

Then I read or rather scrolled down the "nbadraft.net" page on Ricky and read the repeated weaknesses when 2 statements by Joshua Motenko a year ago hit home:

Rubio will have trouble guarding point guards in the NBA. His lateral quickness is decent but not great.

He is a big star at a young age, and already shows signs of having a big ego. He often creates contact and then expects LeBron James-type calls from the referees, and can get frustrated when he doesnt receive them.

That second comment is not a GP type of player. Sure he is great in Euro ball and will do well in the NBA but that may take 3-years AND learning to be a true "team" player in both play and attitude.

So how did I vote? With a really good teaching type coach I'd go with Ricky. With a more traditional coach it would be Blake. And I still think there will be a draft day trade for the Kings if they get the #1 pick. So I didn't vote and am right on the fence.

The first bolded part is probably to do with his youth. He whines occasionally, but certainly nothing to be worried about, and definitely not an issue that will/should stop a team drafting him. Besides, GP drafted Thompson who done his fair share of whining this year, so that won't be a problem.

The second part is just wrong. If there's one thing Rubio is, it's a team player. His attitude is as good as it gets. He's always focusing on his weak points, and he never praises himself. He wants to be as good as he can be. Listen to his coaches, team-mates etc., he is extremely coachable, a great leader, and works very hard to improve. BTW, he doesn't take alot of shots, if that's what you got from the LeBron comment. Rubio is a pure PG, plain and simple.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Rubio was my early favorite for all the positives and strengths written about him. Griffin is odds on the #1 but is he the best choice for the Kings, a 6-7/6-8 PF who does everything? Sounds a bit like Ike to me.

Then I read or rather scrolled down the "nbadraft.net" page on Ricky and read the repeated weaknesses when 2 statements by Joshua Motenko a year ago hit home:

Rubio will have trouble guarding point guards in the NBA. His lateral quickness is decent but not great.

He is a big star at a young age, and already shows signs of having a big ego. He often creates contact and then expects LeBron James-type calls from the referees, and can get frustrated when he doesnt receive them.

That second comment is not a GP type of player. Sure he is great in Euro ball and will do well in the NBA but that may take 3-years AND learning to be a true "team" player in both play and attitude.

So how did I vote? With a really good teaching type coach I'd go with Ricky. With a more traditional coach it would be Blake. And I still think there will be a draft day trade for the Kings if they get the #1 pick. So I didn't vote and am right on the fence.

If you're going to go off strictly from reports, consider more than just one source. Read articles about him, go on different message boards and ask questions to people who watch him and are more privy to news about him. Just a suggestion.

I've seen Rubio player about 7-8 games and I can assure you that Rubio is a team player, he's as unselfish as it gets, to a fault at times. He knows how to be a team player and he knows how to run an offense.

 

[Vlade4GM]

You're being kind, Vlade. I was thinking Javaris Crittenton.

.

Javaris can play a much more controlled game than Evans IMO. I think it's due to being experienced in the triangle offense. Also, I think he has better potential with his jump shot. I don't think Crittenton is as strong of an athlete or can break down defenses as well.

I thought Crittenton really lost out when he got traded from the Lakers, he would have flourished in that system, and as we see now Farmar's style of play is getting him a one-way ticket out of town soon enough. Ironically, Memphis probably would've been better off with Farmar.