What about Monk?

P

Pizzaguy93

G-League
#1
#1
Is Monk too small to play the 3? Malachi too for that matter? (Isn't his wingspan like 7'0??)
If we could get up somehow for fox and maybe have to trade down a little and find monk there he could really fit nicely. Peace out collision, Mclemore afflalo maybe Lawson and Galloway and I likey

At the 1:
Fox, temple, reke, sign shooter

At the 2:
Hield, Richardson, monk/bogdan,

3:
Rudy, Malachi? Monk? Temple tolliver? or signing
4:
Skal, WCS, rudy, tolliver

5: koufos, wcs, papa G

Leaves us with a poop load of offensive firepower and some freakish big potential. If Rudy can produce, this gives us the chance to find a diamond out of hield, Richardson, bogdan, and monk, all of whom have a lot of upside. I would not want to face a starting lineup of
Fox
Hield
Gay
skal
Koufos
Give fox the keys and with jaergers arsenal of length, scoring and athleticism off the bench and a defensive mindset brought by quality vet leadership from guys like temple tolliver and koufos (rudy and reek even?) the kings are beginning to look like a matchup nightmare
 
upinsmoke

upinsmoke

All-Star
#3
#3
Telemachus said:
Monk is 6'3, so he will struggle to guard bigger SGs. Malachi has the length to play the 3 some of the time, but will struggle against the bigger and stronger 3s.
Click to expand...
We don't know that. I want to try to see if he can before we rule him out of that wing spot. If he can it opens up alot of options. And to the OP no Monk cant play SF there is questions about him being able to play SG as it is.
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#4
#4
Monk is going to struggle to guard 2's, he definitely can't guard threes. If he can't play the point then he'll likely either have to find the right scenario (Philly with Simmons assuming PG duties or NYK with the triangle?) or face being relegated to a sixth man type.
 
Kingsfan23

Kingsfan23

All-Star
#5
#5
To those who support Monk do you see Buddy/Monk co-existing? At times I think Buddy has it in him to develop as a serious playmaker and ball handler, at times
 
Big Cuz 15

Big Cuz 15

All-Star
#7
#7
totally. we could have him run off screens to wear down opposing 3's. it would provide proof of concept for position-less basketball. monk vs kd, bron, melo, kawhi. let's do it!
 
upinsmoke

upinsmoke

All-Star
#11
#11
Joshoua said:
No absolutely not
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that clear cut. Now that we are at #5 I think drafting Monk should be on the table. No he's not the next coming of J. Stockton

but we don't need him to be that. What he could do is put so much pressure on opposing defenses that it would open up the floor for everyone. He's got a good frame at 6'4 and approaching 200lbs at 19 years old he can fill up plenty. To much is being made of his perceived poor handle that's not a problem IMO. Coach Cal has a way of underutilizing a players complete skill set I think this kid has as much talent as anyone in the draft. With the 5th pick in the 2017 NBA draft the Sacramento Kings select Malik Monk.
 
Last edited:
J

Jimbob

Bench
#14
#14
Have to bring Monk in for a workout and check out his playmaking potential. Not making a comparison other than both have similar size and questions regarding their ability to play the point entering the NBA, only Monk is two years younger coming into the NBA than Stephen Curry.
 
ElRey

ElRey

Starter
#15
#15
From what I've seen of him, Monk lacks the ability to create a shot off the dribble. He can shoot and is uber athletic, but doesn't have good handles or penetration skills. His highlights are either dunks or 3 pointers. The inability to create a shot and his small size will make it difficult to get his shot off in the NBA. I think he'll turn into a combo scoring guard off the bench.
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#16
#16
If I'm the Kings I'd set up a workout with Monk that is entirely focused on seeing whether he could make the conversion to point guard.

Ballhandling against pressure, running the pick & roll, penetrating, running an offense etc.

Monk will never be a pure PG but if he could play a Dame Lillard type game then he could be an option at five if Fultz, Ball, Jackson & Fox are gone.
 
kingsfan1984

kingsfan1984

Starter
#17
#17
If things work out where we end up with say Tatum at 5 and then Monk slides to the 10th, then i think we take him and run an offensive scheme that isnt based around a PG playmaker. As long as we have multiple handlers able tobdeal with pressure and get the offense moving we should be fine. I would imagine that even if Monk currently has work to do on his handles that he can improve greatly. He appears to have good vision.
 
kingsfan1984

kingsfan1984

Starter
#18
#18
I can envision playing an offensive style similar to Spurs with Monk and Buddy/Bogdan and Tatum/Isaac. Team ball movement over a dribble penetration offense. Even if Monks handles are not yet at elite PG level they dont really need to be. And they should improve also. What i think is more important is does he have the ability to score against top level NBA defenders? If he can punish a team for defensing him 1v1 tjen that is all thatvis needed. Need that player that "bends the other teams defense." Then its simple attack and swing the ball once defense is off balance until a high percentage attempt is opened. And as long as his handlea are decent he should be able to learn the PnR too in time.
 
kingsfan1984

kingsfan1984

Starter
#19
#19
If during workouts with teams Monk doesn't display a decent handle where he could play the lead gaurd spot and its clear he can only play off ball, then why would they select him over other prospects who won't be undersized for their position? Other than Philly, what other team wants an undersized SG with poor handles that is going to struggle on the defensive side of ball? If that is what he shows then he could slip to 10.
 
roasthawg

roasthawg

Starter
#20
#20
As everyone has already pointed out the only question with Monk is whether or not he can play the point. If Vlade thinks he can then I'm sure he'll be talked about at #5. If not I doubt they even think much about him at #10.
 
S

Sactown ExPat

Starter
#22
#22
If Fox is gone, then Monk would be my pick. First, I think he can play point, particularly because I project Bogdan as our primary playmaker for the next 2-3 years from the SF spot. Second, he fits the Vlade/Joerger profile. Much is made of our affinity for UK kids, but there is a reason to that. Those kids self-select as players who want to go to a basketball finishing school where they will be forced to share the ball and not get coddled on the court. They just come in ready to be pros. Contrast to Duke players, for instance, who have to be de-programmed their first coupke years in the league.

Lastly, the shooting is just too good to pass on. Monk is going to be really, really good at NBA basketball.
 
Ozymandias

Ozymandias

All-Star
#23
#23
Monk at #10 would work. I can't co-sign him at #5, final answer. I've followed him for a long time. He's the most explosive CG entering the league since LaVine.

My player comp is some fusion of LaVine/Lou Williams and Jerryd Bayless.
 
P

Pizzaguy93

G-League
#24
#24
Really hoping fox falls to 5 but if not I'm just fine with monk. If we're going to rebuild, in today's NBA, he's a shooter we can't pass on. I don't care how many shooting guards we have on the roster next year, our chances of getting a real, potential all star out of hield, bogdan monk or possibly even Malachi look pretty damn good. Obvious need is a point guard, if Josh Jacksons there boom, but I think monk is BPA outside that top 4. The potential scoring from that position gets Portland-esque. Not sure why some free agent pg wouldn't want to come pass to those shooters. Maybe even take markanen at the 10 too, go full out Houston Chuckits
 
E

ESP47

All-Star
#25
#25
Sactown ExPat said:
If Fox is gone, then Monk would be my pick. First, I think he can play point, particularly because I project Bogdan as our primary playmaker for the next 2-3 years from the SF spot. Second, he fits the Vlade/Joerger profile. Much is made of our affinity for UK kids, but there is a reason to that. Those kids self-select as players who want to go to a basketball finishing school where they will be forced to share the ball and not get coddled on the court. They just come in ready to be pros. Contrast to Duke players, for instance, who have to be de-programmed their first coupke years in the league.

Lastly, the shooting is just too good to pass on. Monk is going to be really, really good at NBA basketball.
Click to expand...
Bogdan has a 1.5 assist to turnover ratio in Europe. That's bad and would probably be the worst for any team's primary ball handler. To make Monk the secondary ball handler in that situation, who has an even worse ratio, would probably mean we would have a fair share of games where our turnovers equal our assists. I just don't see how we could ever run a successful offense with either one of those guys as the primary ball handler. That's not even taking in to account how bad the defense would most likely be. I think both guys are going to have to be paired with a real PG in order for the Kings to be a winning team.
 
D

dude12

Hall of Famer
#26
#26
ESP47 said:
Bogdan has a 1.5 assist to turnover ratio in Europe. That's bad and would probably be the worst for any team's primary ball handler. To make Monk the secondary ball handler in that situation, who has an even worse ratio, would probably mean we would have a fair share of games where our turnovers equal our assists. I just don't see how we could ever run a successful offense with either one of those guys as the primary ball handler. That's not even taking in to account how bad the defense would most likely be. I think both guys are going to have to be paired with a real PG in order for the Kings to be a winning team.
Click to expand...
Agreed...really don't think Monk is an option for us.
 
Blob

Blob

Starter
#27
#27
The only thing to say about Monk is let's hope he goes Top 4 so we have better choice of prospects at #5. He'll definitely go no later than between #6 to #9 to push back to us a more desired player at #10. Monk is NOT a PG. I don't even want to hear about those wanting to entertain this notion! And he's too small to play SF. So there's NO reason the Kings should have any interest in him....unless he slips to #34. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.