Dime Dropper
All-Star
Rondo was always known as a PG (I think). It's debatable whether Westbrook will turn into one. Westbrook has bigger potential, but Rondo is a true PG.
Russell Westbrook
- Thread starter Kingster
- Start date
Rondo was always known as a PG (I think). It's debatable whether Westbrook will turn into one. Westbrook has bigger potential, but Rondo is a true PG.
Arby's Roast Beef
Starter
That's true; Rondo definitely was a true PG coming out of the draft, and thus was less of a risk for the Celts--he also had extreme rebounding ability in college too, so in the case that he struggles in a particular area in the NBA, he has many other attributes to fall back upon. I definitely love Rondo more than Westbrook, but considering we lost out on Rondo, it seems like Westbrook is the next closest thing in this year's draft.
Why I'm comparing Westbrook with Rondo in terms of frame and defensive mentality--not to mention Westbrook arguably may be more athletic than Rondo and has the height advantage at 6'3". Of course he may really be a tweener, may struggle to find his shots, and really struggle in a slow paced half court type game--but again, I think his elite attributes with regards to athleticism and defense may cover it up initially until he hones that part of his game. There's definitely a greater chance of him being a "bust" than Rondo, but then again there's a greater chance of him being a star. This is a draft--it's all crapshoot, and I'm willing to roll the dice on Westbrook.
CruzDude
Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
In all the Russel emotion don't forget "he did not even start for UCLA most of the season"!!!!! He was Defensive Player of the Year in the Pac-10 and happened to be a 6-3 PG. He is potentially an excellent back up to Beno or some other experienced PG. The Kings in this transition period DO NOT NEED a rookie PG to start this year or next. They do need a good backup to get 15 min/gm this year and when they go "small ball" with Kevin moving over to the 3, he might fit. But then again he might fit in a year.
Westbrook has essentially fallen down to the #12 slot on half the Mock Boards. A good defending-rebounding BIG is a big need right now. If they sign Beno then a backup PG might not be as tough as getting the middle clogged up right now. Heck, if Reggie is forced to play Shelden more we might find out he is that solution, then we need scoring off the bench.
Westbrook has essentially fallen down to the #12 slot on half the Mock Boards. A good defending-rebounding BIG is a big need right now. If they sign Beno then a backup PG might not be as tough as getting the middle clogged up right now. Heck, if Reggie is forced to play Shelden more we might find out he is that solution, then we need scoring off the bench.
Dime Dropper
All-Star
Personally, I think our needs at the current moment are irrelevant.
gunks
Hall of Famer
You know, if the kid devolopes handles and a shot, we wont really need him to be that huge a playmaker...We got Salmons, Garcia, and Miller. Not to mention the great passing of Hawes.
Steller D at the 1 is going to be huge with Paul, Williams, Nash, Parker, and now Rose out there.
Westbrook will probably never be the type of player that elevates the play of his teammates...But if he can shut down apposing PGs, that will simply cause havok for whoever we're playing against.
Steller D at the 1 is going to be huge with Paul, Williams, Nash, Parker, and now Rose out there.
Westbrook will probably never be the type of player that elevates the play of his teammates...But if he can shut down apposing PGs, that will simply cause havok for whoever we're playing against.
Arby's Roast Beef
Starter
Exactly. I honestly don't think passing is a pressing need, despite the fact that we resorted to one-on-one play a lot and were among the bottom feeders in assists this season--but many of our players, individually, have or had reputations of passing, and Salmons, Garcia and Artest have already or have shown the potential to average 4+ assists seemingly. I think the passing will straighten itself out once these players have it figured out, although I do think we may need a stabilizer pass-first point guard, but I think that's more easily attainable through free agency. I have issues with DJ Augustin's height/lack of athleticism, and although I like Ty Lawson, I see the odds of us getting him as slim because he doesn't fall within any of our pick range.
That's not true. Westbrook started 34 of 39 games and played 34 minutes per game. Since Collison only started 32 (due to injury) it would appear that 7 of those starts were at point guard and the rest at shooting guard but it's a fairly moot point.
Westbrook was a regular starter who got regular minutes at both PG and SG and led a Final Four team in assists/game despite playing alongside a "dedicated" PG who got slightly more minutes.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Couldn't disagree more on the passing. Just about any time the Kings had 20 plus assists in a game they won the game. The problem is that they didn't do it enough. They were at the bottom of the league in assists and in rebounding. Those are the teams two greatest needs. If you want a guy who can handle the ball and be a good shooter and passer, then draft someone who can do all those things. If that player is not available then take the best player you can get, preferably at the next position of need.
Don't misunderstand me. I like Westbrook, and I think he would be an instant sucess on the defensive end. After listening to people at the Pre-draft camp, its up in the air just how tall he is. Some have said they don't think he's any taller than 6'1''. If he never develops into a pt guard, he's going to have trouble playing the two at that size. Not impossible, but tough.
Arby's Roast Beef
Starter
My bad for saying that passing was not a pressing need--I take it back, in retrospect. My point initially was to state that we have several versatile players on their team, and while I do know that Salmons, Garcia and Artest actually have some latent passing ability and court vision, all three tend to get caught up in one-on-one play. That's precisely the predicament here, and as I stated in the Beno Udrih thread, that's why I thought that Beno wasn't exactly "great" enough to suffice long term--we DO need a floor general, a true playmaker, that can get us organized. But seeing this draft, I just don't think we can really find one--I'm not a fan of Augustin, Lawson's out of our area(s), and ultimately, it's way easier to find a true established PG via free agency instead of grooming one for our own.
The draft is about gauging team priorities and team needs, but perhaps more importantly, comparing it to what we can attain through hypothetical trades and/or free agency. I've stated in threads above how much I've adored Westbrook's built in defense and physical tools, as they're quite rare, and how a true playmaker can be attained rather easily (hopefully TJ Ford).
Link?
Vlade4GM
All-Star
Well, he wasn't the main ball handler in UCLA's offense, they don't really have a primary ball handler. So he wasn't exactly tested like say Rose, Bayless, Mayo, or Augustin. Drafting on potential for PG is a different monster than the 2-5 positions, you need to have the fundamental basics like ball handling, passing, vision, and certain intangibles that can't be taught. These things are all very hard to learn and some would say other than dribbling they're impossible to learn; you either have it or you don't.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
I don't think anyone would deny his great defensive ability against 1's, but you're only talking about a specialist then. He doesn't have the ball handling ability of Rondo, and Rondo is a better passer/facilitator than Westbrook too IMO.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I have no link. I was watching the games at the pre-draft camp in Orlando and listening to the interviews. Sorry, I'm a little brain dead right now. I stayed up till 3 in the morning last night watching the games and then again today. I have some notes I'll post tomorrow..
I haven't checked yet, but I know that draftexpress usually has pretty good coverage of the games, so I would check there.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
So jealous. I don't have nba tv anymore. Please post any kind of recap.
Arby's Roast Beef
Starter
Westbrook is much more "one-dimensional" than Rondo, certainly. I do agree that he may initially be a project because he's only a sure thing at one particular area in this stage, in terms of skills (defense) but if he lands on the right team, such as an up-and-down, run-and-gun team, he can definitely shine in transition game with the aid of his speed and athleticism. While we're not exactly that sort of "run and gun" team, admittedly, his skill set actually fills some holes in certain areas (such as perimeter defense/freak athleticism) and I can imagine him even becoming a crowd favorite with his flair for the dramatic. More importantly, he has the capacity to develop areas of his game (shooting, ballhandling) over time, as those are easily correctable.
Simply put, we need that infusion of youth, potential and energy after drafting more accomplished college players with lesser degrees of potential throughout the past 3-4 years, and Westbrook brings that.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
I don't see how athleticism alone makes him have potential as a PG. Ball handling is not easily correctable, I'd still love to hear some examples where players improved their ball handling that dramatically to PG levels. I do agree he'll be good in a transition game, but not as a PG/ball handler. Unless you're talking about us running the triangle I don't see how we can survive with a PG with avg ball handlling.
beb0p
Starter
I just don't think a team that ranks dead last in TOs and next to last in assists is going to put Westbrook next to Kevin Martin in the backcourt. Talk about adding fuel to fire. We need a PG who takes care of the ball (that means he can actaully dribble at a PG level!!) and can run a team. You can get away with Westbrook at PG if you have an all-around SG/SF like Kobe or Lebron on your team. On our team, it won't work. Westbrook will end up fighting with Douby for the same role.
My guess is if DJ Augustin is gone, then we're going to pick a big man.
My guess is if DJ Augustin is gone, then we're going to pick a big man.
beb0p
Starter
I agree, using the #12 pick on a PG who can't handle like a PG is like a baseball team using the #12 pick on a pitcher who can't throw like a pitcher. It doesn't make sense.
OptimusRhyme
Jive Turkey
Dribbling can be learned... if it couldnt no one in the nba would be good at dribbling. Westbrooks upside is huge , Augustins isnt just because of his size limitations. & we do have all around SG/SF's on our team in Garcia and Salmons.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
That's really bad reasoning. Of course it can be learned, but does that mean it can continuously be significantly improved upon? No, it doesn't.
PurpleHaze
All-Star
I said it before, but I'll add more. I don't like Russell Westbrook at #12 for the Kings. He was nowhere to be found on any pre-season 1st round draft boards and very few 2nd rounders. He basically came out of nowhere this season to rise up and get noticed. Not that he's not a fine player and presumably lots of upside. He should not be pick #12 IMO - a prospect at best at PG - at worst a miserable project PG. Lots is made about his great defensive presence at guard, but we already have that in Francisco Garcia and he's around 4-5 inches taller than Westbrook. If the Kings are dead set on a PG at #12 then grab little Augustin if he's there. If not, look for the best available big man. Then go out into the free agent market and sign a PG to back up Beno, assuming he's back with the Kings.
beb0p
Starter
In that case, why don't we draft Nicolas Batum and make him a PG? He's bigger and has a better jumpshot than Westbrook. Or how about JaVale McGee? A 7'1" PG who can rebound and block shots. How bada$$ is that?
If knowing how to dribble makes you a PG then Quincy Douby and John Salmons would have been our PG.
Sptsjunkie
Starter
My 2 cents as a UCLA fan
I went to UCLA (class of '04) and watched Westbrook a lot this year. I really would not mind getting Westbrook, but I think we need to understand what we would be getting. To me, Westbrook's upside is a taller, stronger version of Bobby Jackson.
I don't fully agree with Vlade4GM, as I think players can significantly improve their ball handling at the NBA level. Base skills like handles, shot, etc. all can be improved upon with hard work. As it is, I think Westbrook's handles are better than they are getting credit for here. He did have a fair amount of turnovers, but part of that was a function of the UCLA offense, which involves us throwing the ball around the peremiter a lot and then giving it to Westbrook to bail us out with a few seconds left on the shot clock.
However, I fully agree with V4GM that PG fundamentals are something that are very hard to learn at the pro level. For all the "PG conversion projects," I have a very hard time naming a player who came out of college with a "score first" mentality and became a true PG. Far more often they turn into Ben Gordon, Jamal Crawford-esque guards.
I went to UCLA (class of '04) and watched Westbrook a lot this year. I really would not mind getting Westbrook, but I think we need to understand what we would be getting. To me, Westbrook's upside is a taller, stronger version of Bobby Jackson.
I don't fully agree with Vlade4GM, as I think players can significantly improve their ball handling at the NBA level. Base skills like handles, shot, etc. all can be improved upon with hard work. As it is, I think Westbrook's handles are better than they are getting credit for here. He did have a fair amount of turnovers, but part of that was a function of the UCLA offense, which involves us throwing the ball around the peremiter a lot and then giving it to Westbrook to bail us out with a few seconds left on the shot clock.
However, I fully agree with V4GM that PG fundamentals are something that are very hard to learn at the pro level. For all the "PG conversion projects," I have a very hard time naming a player who came out of college with a "score first" mentality and became a true PG. Far more often they turn into Ben Gordon, Jamal Crawford-esque guards.
Gary
All-Star
He played well when Collison was out at the beginning of the year, and watching him play I think he will do well as a PG.
As for the 6'1 comment.. Was that in re: to Westbrook? No way he's that short.. Maybe 6'2.5 w/o shoes... Can't see him as 6'1 w/o shoes tho.
Sptsjunkie
Starter
Yeah, he was good with Collison out, but I still think his first instinct is too score first.
I don't know if the 6'1'' comment was directed towards me, but I never mentioned that. I said he would be a bigger, stronger Bobby Jackson.
If he's a bigger/stronger Bobby Jackson (from his prime) then that's a steal of at #12. Bobby Jackson in his prime was AS good as Bibby(in his prime) and sometimes better. I'd have ZERO qualms drafting Westbrook at 12.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
Ball handling is nowhere near as improvable as shooting is. There are tons of examples of players who have dramatically improved their shooting, where are the examples of players who have dramatically improved their ball handling?
SacKings7
Starter
Paul Pierce for sure. One of the announcers even said it during the game last night (JVG? Can't remember)
Vlade4GM
All-Star
He didn't make a dramatic improvement. He went from average to slightly above average. He's still not that great of a ball handler.
Sptsjunkie
Starter
Well, that's going to be the problem with this debate. With shooting, we can point to players and their increase in percentages. With ball handling, we can subjectively say a player got better, but there is no proof. Even turnovers can be more a measure of poor decision making as opposed to have the ball taken from you while dribbling.
