According to an earlier post Vlade is in Europe now. Guess he should get a pretty quick read on rather or not Donic plans to come over.
The kids coming
According to an earlier post Vlade is in Europe now. Guess he should get a pretty quick read on rather or not Donic plans to come over.
As for trading people away I don't think we have to do anything unless we get fair value offers. Willie fan start with Bagley, JJJ, Ayton with them being a PF/C combination. Skal can come off the bench with Koufos. Admittedly we don't want to lose anyone for nothing, but we are in a rebuilding phase and we need to have all the talent we can muster and hope a few of them become franchise cornerstones.
What makes sense for the Kings existing roster can't be a consideration for the draft. If you already have a superstar player, then yes, you draft in part based on how that kid will fit with your star. But for a perennial losing team struggling to find an identity you just take the best player and figure it out later.
Kosta's contract is $8 M for this season which is definitely reasonable but not a bargain. He, Z-Bo, Temple (if he opts in), and Shumpert (who WILL opt in) are all ending contracts this season which could make them useful trade pieces at the deadline.
The only time I'm finding minutes for ZBo and Kosta is if I think they offer us a better chance to win since we aren't tanking next year - and - we can land a suitable deal for two from Giles, Skal and Willie. However if Skal/Giles coming off the bench and new player/Willie offers us better production on the court I'm happy to let the veterans value dwindle if needs must since both are out of contract after next season. Kosta is a role player and ZBo is nearly at the end of his career, as harsh as it sounds they aren't my priority nor is their trade value. The priority needs to be with the best players to help us win games now, but also help us in the future as they develop.
Not sure I agree with the approach. Unless there is a generational type of player there ala LeBron, Duncan, Davis etc.. the draft should be all about getting the player with the highest upside and backing in your franchise's ability to develop the player.I love Bagley. In a weaker draft, he's the clear cut #1 pick. However, Ayton absolutely dominated college. 20pts 11rebs 1.9blks on 61.2/34.3/73.3. He's the most dominant big man we've seen in the last decade. Meanwhile, Doncic is doing things absolutely unheard of in Euroleague. Arguably the best prospect to ever come out of Europe.
So yeah, it's easy to see why Bagley gets pushed to the back burner. I love Bagley and I have him as my #3. His game reminds me a lot of a younger AD, but he's nowhere near the same defensive prospect. I do think there's risk in Bagley just because he's so raw. I'm confident he'll be able to extend his range to the 3pt line by year 4, but it's still all a gamble. He's not a sure thing, and when you're picking up as high as #2, I don't think you have room to gamble as if you were picking at #5.
I feel like 2009 was considered fairly deep and a lot of people thought Rubio would fall to us at 4 because there were questions about whether he would play right away. Maybe I am wrong.
That's not what I remember. We had most of the Griffin/Rubio debates when before the lottery, when we had the worst record and thought we'd have the choice. If I recall correctly, a poll between the two either here or Sactown Royalty was tied with hundreds of votes (until I voted for Griffin). I don't recall folks thinking Rubio would slide to the Kings at 4 -- leading to the double shock that he was available to the Kings, and that they passed on him.
The Kings still have extremely questionable player development.Not sure I agree with the approach. Unless there is a generational type of player there ala LeBron, Duncan, Davis etc.. the draft should be all about getting the player with the highest upside and backing in your franchise's ability to develop the player.
Over the last couple of seasons, Kings have placed an enormous amount of resources into player development. We basically have a development coach per player. If you are a team like the Kings in need of a star player, you pick the player that you believe has the highest ceiling at your pick because you back in your development team to get the most out of that player. It doesn't matter where you are picking, your approach should not change. If you start picking for safer picks its how you end up with Joe Smith instead of KG or how you end up with Mike Bibby or Antawn Jamison instead of Vince Carter or how you end up with Otto Porter instead of the Greek Freak! You still have a good player but there is a clear difference between a future hall of famer or a perennial all-star and a player who has a pretty good career in his own right.
Picking safe is what you do if you are a contender and picking someone who can come in and play the role for you straight away where you know that in a particular role, they are going to be contributing players in the rotation. With picks inside lottery, you pick the players with most upside provided that you believe that there are no other factors that will affect them reaching that potential (i.e. ack of hunger to improve, no competitive spirit, health issues, off court issues etc...)
Since Joerger has become a coach there is a clear improvement in most of the players. Bogdan is a developer player with scope for improvement but if you compared WCS before Joerger and at the end of the season, ther eis a clear improvement. Fox, Buddy, JJ at the start of the season and end of it. Clear improvement.The Kings still have extremely questionable player development.
1) WCS: isn't as good as you'd hope him to be by year 3 and already 24yearsold. He's still a work-in-progress, we've seen jumpshot and passing improvements, but stagnation on defense. I'd rate this as a C in terms of player development.
2) Papagiannis: result of a poor draft pick, no good coaching can save him...and anyone who thought he could be Marc Gasol 2.0....good for you.
3) Richardson: bad luck of injuries, but he hasn't been able to develop into a NBA player in year 2. SF was wide open for him all year to take it..and he couldn't even beat out Justin Jackson of all people..
4) Labissiere: always been more of a project, has severely regressed in year 2, although it's looking like his 20 game stretch vs. NBA benches was more of a fluke than anything. haven't seen any real growth in his overall game from college. still lacks IQ, which is something coaching can't fix
We have very little sample size, but from previous history, player development has been extremely poor. Doncic and Ayton are not low-ceiling players. Yes they are "safe", but their ceilings are still all-star and +. Ayton has one of the highest ceilings in this draft, so I don't feel like we'd be settling in anyway by picking those 2. We don't have a draft pick in 2019. This is year 2 of rebuild. We really can't afford to screw up by missing on a franchise corner stone. I think Ayton and Doncic can be one of those.
I have just been reading a Suns forum and only see support for Ayton as their pick.
I'm pretty convinced Luka will be a King. Not being sold on any of our bigs, and no pick next year I'm increasingly interested in the FA market.
That's not what I remember. We had most of the Griffin/Rubio debates when before the lottery, when we had the worst record and thought we'd have the choice. If I recall correctly, a poll between the two either here or Sactown Royalty was tied with hundreds of votes (until I voted for Griffin). I don't recall folks thinking Rubio would slide to the Kings at 4 -- leading to the double shock that he was available to the Kings, and that they passed on him.
Setting aside how many people might misapprehend the lottery mechanics, I don't think that's why people argue we lost the coin toss. They argue we lost the coin toss because they (like I) see it as independent of the lottery process. It seems that for you, the "coin toss" is not over until the lotto balls are selected. But if that's the case, why stop there? What if the player we take at #2 turns out to get injured and have essentially no career, while the player taken at #6 becomes a multiple-time All-Star? Do we go back to losing the coin toss? I don't see why not.
Ya but it looks up in the air but man if we get Doncic I’ll be the happiest man and so will Giles
That's how I remember it too. That it was a two man draft and the Kings falling to four took them out of the running for Griffin or Rubio.
Rubio had apparently told the Kings that he would come over immediately if they drafted him which made it even crazier when we passed at #4 and took Evans. Apparently part of him not coming over until 2011 was due in part to him not understanding (just as no basketball fan seemed to understand) what David Khan was doing with the Wolves roster.
Doncic has beautiful shot mechanics.
His form is compact, smooth and he gets good backspin.
His range is fairly unlimited.
I think he can be a 40% + three point shooter. However....
...he only made 87 out of 281 3s for 31%.![]()
Actually it's an interesting point - while there's obviously a big difference between #7 and #2, there may not be any difference at all between #6 and #7 (or #12 and #14, etc.)
Here are Doncic's shooting statistics: https://www.basketball-reference.com/euro/players/luka-doncic-1.html
For 2 point field goals it's 60%, which is good, for free throws it's 80%, which is good, but like you say, the 3 point % is only 31%. I'd like to know how many of those made 2 point field goals are layups, and then be able to exclude those from the 2 pt. % to get a better idea of what his mid-range field goal percentage is. That would give you a better idea of his future potential for 3 pt field goal percentage. Also, his shooting percentage in the playoffs isn't anything to write home about and I wonder if european playoff compeition is more like NBA competition during th regular season. If this kid is everything and a bag of chips then he's got to hold out the promise of being an excellent shooter, not just a playmaker.
I still can’t belive we went from debating Mikal Bridges/Carter to Ayton/Doncic man o man
The thing is I trust his mechanics more than the sample size. So I am not too worried about it, though the sample size is larger than I would like to see given that his % is so low. 31% is really a range where you tell the player to cut back on your attempts and try to get to the rim more and draw fouls.
I think as Luka gets stronger and has more of a foundation under him the % will go up. And I think if he were to play with other playmakers like Boggy and Fox his % will go up as he is able to catch and shoot wide open off drive and kicks and transition.
Still even factoring out these variables if he were a "great" shooter I would expect to see his % at least 35% from deep given a sample size over 200 shots. There may be an issue with confidence or mechanics that I am overlooking. I heard someone say his motion was too slow but I cannot attest that.
Anyway it is NOT something that would stop me from picking him #2, but I would have more confidence in taking him #2 if more long balls were going in. I think Luka has the potential to be a GREAT shooter, but the stats simply don't support this. This is something Vlade or whoever takes him will have to reconcile.
take a brief break from the serious bussiness of figuring out what to do with our #2 pick, drop down to celebration mode, and take a look at the short video showing how it all happened:
The Kings still have extremely questionable player development.