Who do we draft?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Looking at today's lottery projections....if things shake out that way, do you think BOS would do a 6+8 for 1 (or 2)? The top 2 seem to be PGs, and BOS does not appear to need that, nor do they need SG and SF with Bradley and Brown, so Jackson would out. If they wanted to beef up other front line positions they could trade back and still get 2 good players to help at other positions of need
 
Looking at today's lottery projections....if things shake out that way, do you think BOS would do a 6+8 for 1 (or 2)? The top 2 seem to be PGs, and BOS does not appear to need that, nor do they need SG and SF with Bradley and Brown, so Jackson would out. If they wanted to beef up other front line positions they could trade back and still get 2 good players to help at other positions of need
Probably not. We'd need to give Malachi, Papagiannis, and maybe Philly's 2nd round pick for them to consider a deal like that.

#1 is going to give Boston a franchise player for the next 10 years. So can #6 and 8, but #1 has a much higher chance of panning out. I could see why they would want to trade down, but if we held the #1 pick, and someone offered us 6 and 8, would you trade down? Probably not..unless it was a great deal that included 2 young rookies and a high 2nd rounder.
 
Looking at today's lottery projections....if things shake out that way, do you think BOS would do a 6+8 for 1 (or 2)? The top 2 seem to be PGs, and BOS does not appear to need that, nor do they need SG and SF with Bradley and Brown, so Jackson would out. If they wanted to beef up other front line positions they could trade back and still get 2 good players to help at other positions of need
My guess is that Boston would either draft a guard as a hedge against IT's free agency (his eminently reasonable contract expires after next season, and Avery Bradley will also be a free agent then), or they'd rather trade the pick for an all-star level vet. I'd be surprised if they trade down, but you never know!
 
D. Ainge is going to the draft every year those picks are not getting traded imo. Now time will tell if that's even the right strategy if they get owned on the boards and IT gets shut down by a bigger pg come PO time.
 
Looking at today's lottery projections....if things shake out that way, do you think BOS would do a 6+8 for 1 (or 2)? The top 2 seem to be PGs, and BOS does not appear to need that, nor do they need SG and SF with Bradley and Brown, so Jackson would out. If they wanted to beef up other front line positions they could trade back and still get 2 good players to help at other positions of need
I have thought about this as well, but then figured in this draft I am fine with the 6 +8 over the 1 or 2. More depth and we could hit gold top 8 easily. Rather or not Boston would do it I don't think so, as you said they are already loaded with promising youth even though it's mostly PG -SF, and this is not a great bigman draft so a trade for a vet might make more sense.

Lost in all this is how fuuccked it most be to be a Nets fan. Worst record in a great draft and if my memory serves me right this is not the only draft they sacrificed picks for Bostons over the hill gang.
 
Last edited:
I have thought about this as well, but then figured in this draft I am fine with the 6 +8 over the 1 or 2. More depth and we could hit gold top 8 easily. Rather or not Boston would do it I don't think so, as you said they are already loaded with promising youth even though it's mostly PG -SF, and this is not a great bigman draft so a trade for a vet might make more sense.

Lost in all this is how fuuccked it most be to be a Nets fan. Worst record in a great draft and if my memory serves me right this is not the only draft they sacrificed picks for Bostons over the hill gang.
Yea that trade was worse then our Sixers trade. They gave up their 2014 2016 and 2018 picks plus swapped their 3rd pick last year. They are almost out of hell.
 
Disagree with you. Bridges and Tatum are not similar players. Tatum is more talented on offense, and he's more of an iso post scorer. Tatum is probably around 6'8 or 6'9 at 210lbs. He's only an average athlete, comparable to 30yearold Rudy(Rudy was very athletic when he was young). He's actually a really good rebounder too. Last night was not his best game though. He can handle the ball comfortably.

Bridges is more of a 3pt shooter and attacker. He's only 6'7, and weighs somewhere around 225lbs. Very good athlete and explosive, but has average lat quickness. Very good rebounder, and he can also handle the ball.

They're not similar at all imo. 2 very very different players.
Definitely agree

Tatum is about the smoothest ISO scorer I've seen on the college level in a very long time. Long enough that I'm not sure who to compare him to. He's the opposite of most SFs taken in the lottery who have tantalizing physical tools and have a long way to go in terms of skill. He's very highly skilled and while he doesn't have bad tools, he's not a speed freak, jump out of the gym type player. My biggest questions with Tatum are whether he is a black hole and whether he could extend his range out to the NBA three. Late in the season he seemed to show good passing skills and a willingness to move the ball and his outside shooting continued to improve. My concern all along with Tatum was that he'd be a Glenn Robinson or Jabari Parker type (and I was NOT high on Parker coming out) where he gives you scoring but little else and is a relatively inefficient, midrange and ISO focused scorer. I think Tatum is more than that. I'm not sure who a good comp for him is now. I'll also be very curious to see his official measurements.

I like Bridges a lot. Where Tatum is skilled but not an explosive athlete, Bridges is an explosive athlete who still needs to develop skill, especially wing skills. He has no midrange game and either wants to shoot from three or dunk the ball with little in between. And other than dunks, he doesn't finish all that well around the hoop for such a powerful player.

The Kings would have to have some huge lottery luck to land the 2nd or 3rd pick and nab Ball or Jackson. I'd love for that to happen but it's much more likely that they are picking 6th and 10th. Fortunately there are 12 players that I think would normally be top 5 or 6 players in a standard draft.

Hopefully for once the Kings won't find themselves with the n+1th pick in a draft with n first & second tier prospects.
 
Anybody in the 2nd round look like an intriguing prospect? Does the depth of this draft bleed all the way through, or is it just front loaded with boom or bust guys?
There are guys I like in the 2nd but it's as much of a crapshoot as most 2nd rounds.

This draft is strong up top but IMO it's average outside of the lottery.
 
Tatum is about the smoothest ISO scorer I've seen on the college level in a very long time. Long enough that I'm not sure who to compare him to.
A young Rudy Gay is comparison for me. Tatum is a baller no doubt. Great footwork and length. I share some of same concerns as you. Is he going to do more than score? Tatum would be fine addition to any team but not sure if he is ideal for ours. We need more of dynamic player than Tatum offers with defensive upside and why Josh Jackson and Isaac jumps off my YouTube. Isaac in particular can be defender rebounder and passer. This is situation where I think teams are going to engage in misdirection and talk up Tatum when the guy they want is Isaac. Vlade seems to lack this savvy but we'll see if it matters. Its early but I would expect Isaac to go very high (before Tatum).
 
A young Rudy Gay is comparison for me. Tatum is a baller no doubt. Great footwork and length. I share some of same concerns as you. Is he going to do more than score? Tatum would be fine addition to any team but not sure if he is ideal for ours. We need more of dynamic player than Tatum offers with defensive upside and why Josh Jackson and Isaac jumps off my YouTube. Isaac in particular can be defender rebounder and passer. This is situation where I think teams are going to engage in misdirection and talk up Tatum when the guy they want is Isaac. Vlade seems to lack this savvy but we'll see if it matters. Its early but I would expect Isaac to go very high (before Tatum).
It will be interesting to follow this draft class and see who become difference makers on the NBA level. Tatum is a bit more skilled than Gay was at UConn (even as a sophomore) but he also isn't the freak athlete that Rudy was. Really the only concern with Gay coming out was that he was passive at times - something that has proven to make him a good player instead of a great one.

I like Isaac a lot. He and Ntilikina are my guys right now assuming the Kings don't magically end up at 2 or 3 with a chance at Fultz, Ball or Jackson. I don't see Isaac as much of a passer. He's willing, but hasn't shown a ton in terms of playmaking. Tatum and especially Jackson are far ahead of him in that regard IMO.

With Isaac I think he has a pretty high floor as a 3&D SF who could play some PF when he puts on a bit of weight. Dean Demakis compared him to present day Marvin Williams and I could see that. Not a great result for a lottery pick, but not a horrible return either. Where Isaac can be something more is if he can be a go-to guy on offense, something he hasn't really shown so far. Is he deferring to his teammates right now because that's what is being asked of him or because he's a passive player? That's a big question in determining his ceiling.
 
Tatum reminds me of Worthy. He'll move the ball on a team with that kind of system/culture, or become a ball stopper if allowed. He's a really good, but not a freak, athlete. And, he's a plus defender/rebounder though not great at either. He'll definitely go above Isaac, and might go before Jackson.
 
Anybody in the 2nd round look like an intriguing prospect? Does the depth of this draft bleed all the way through, or is it just front loaded with boom or bust guys?
I really like Arnoldas Kulboka. 6'9 SF 200lbs. Very skinny, and raw, but has a high potential. He can handle the ball and shoot the 3. He'll need 2 years to develop in Europe, but he's really young.
 
I don't get why Bridges is projected so low? He seems like hes that Glue guy that every team needs to win.. So far I like Bridges and Fox.. If Fox isn't there then Nikiltina.

It would be nice to have a bigger defensive PG beside Hield.

I feel like we already have two main scoring threats on this team (Skal & Buddy).. So we need to look to add some Defense/Rebounding/Intangibles to round out this squad.
 
I have been on Tatum bandwagon for a long time now but I don't think he will be available at King's first pick. IMHO, Magic should be all over him if he is available at their pick. He would instantly give them a scorer from the SF spot which is something that they are really lacking.

In ideal world, Kings would walk away with Tatum and Fox but that is highly unlikely. One thing is for certain, Kings need to walk away with at least one franchise level guy from this draft. Tatum and Fix have been moving up the draft boards lately and I suspect neither will be available at Kings pick.
 
I don't get why Bridges is projected so low? He seems like hes that Glue guy that every team needs to win.. So far I like Bridges and Fox.. If Fox isn't there then Nikiltina.

It would be nice to have a bigger defensive PG beside Hield.

I feel like we already have two main scoring threats on this team (Skal & Buddy).. So we need to look to add some Defense/Rebounding/Intangibles to round out this squad.
You tend to get in trouble when you draft to "round out your squad". The Kings are a bad team despite hope provided by Buddy and Skal. This is a 20 to 25 team as constructed. The objective should be target prospects with all-star potential. Simple. This is not a team that can draft for need if it means passing the better player. For example the Kings should not pass on MARKKANEN who projects as a PF just to take a PG if they deem the kid as next Dirk. If star potential is comparable then you draft position of need. But the luxury of drafting for need is not one the Kings can afford. They bled talent when they traded Cousins for peanuts. That talent base needs to be restored and improved upon.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Disagree with you. Bridges and Tatum are not similar players. Tatum is more talented on offense, and he's more of an iso post scorer. Tatum is probably around 6'8 or 6'9 at 210lbs. He's only an average athlete, comparable to 30yearold Rudy(Rudy was very athletic when he was young). He's actually a really good rebounder too. Last night was not his best game though. He can handle the ball comfortably.

Bridges is more of a 3pt shooter and attacker. He's only 6'7, and weighs somewhere around 225lbs. Very good athlete and explosive, but has average lat quickness. Very good rebounder, and he can also handle the ball.

They're not similar at all imo. 2 very very different players.
I don't agree on everything, but I agree that their nothing alike. Bridges is a very aggressive attack the basket player, whose three point shot has improved since the beginning of the year. I believe that he was shooting around 34% from the three early in the year and now he shooting almost 39%. Tatum has also imporoved, but he started from a lower point and is not up around 35%. Bridges, despite being a little shorter is a little better rebounder than Tatum, but that goes along with his attack mode.

But the point is, their style of play is totally different. Bridges has been growing on me lately. One of his main attributes is his motor. He never turns off the hustle.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Probably not. We'd need to give Malachi, Papagiannis, and maybe Philly's 2nd round pick for them to consider a deal like that.

#1 is going to give Boston a franchise player for the next 10 years. So can #6 and 8, but #1 has a much higher chance of panning out. I could see why they would want to trade down, but if we held the #1 pick, and someone offered us 6 and 8, would you trade down? Probably not..unless it was a great deal that included 2 young rookies and a high 2nd rounder.
I doubt that Boston would want to trade that pick if they end up number one. They don't have a lot of spots to fill, and Fultz is the best player in the draft. Now if the Net's end up with number one, their a team that would likely do a deal for two lower lottery picks. They have a lot of holes in their roster so they need a lot of help. Buts that all I would offer them. I wouldn't throw in any of our young players.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Tatum reminds me of Worthy. He'll move the ball on a team with that kind of system/culture, or become a ball stopper if allowed. He's a really good, but not a freak, athlete. And, he's a plus defender/rebounder though not great at either. He'll definitely go above Isaac, and might go before Jackson.
I think he'll go before Isaac, but not before Jackson..
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
It will be interesting to follow this draft class and see who become difference makers on the NBA level. Tatum is a bit more skilled than Gay was at UConn (even as a sophomore) but he also isn't the freak athlete that Rudy was. Really the only concern with Gay coming out was that he was passive at times - something that has proven to make him a good player instead of a great one.

I like Isaac a lot. He and Ntilikina are my guys right now assuming the Kings don't magically end up at 2 or 3 with a chance at Fultz, Ball or Jackson. I don't see Isaac as much of a passer. He's willing, but hasn't shown a ton in terms of playmaking. Tatum and especially Jackson are far ahead of him in that regard IMO.

With Isaac I think he has a pretty high floor as a 3&D SF who could play some PF when he puts on a bit of weight. Dean Demakis compared him to present day Marvin Williams and I could see that. Not a great result for a lottery pick, but not a horrible return either. Where Isaac can be something more is if he can be a go-to guy on offense, something he hasn't really shown so far. Is he deferring to his teammates right now because that's what is being asked of him or because he's a passive player? That's a big question in determining his ceiling.
My guess is that it's by design. They run a strange system at Florida St. Rotating players in and out of the lineup every two or three minutes. I don't know how anyone gets into a rhythm. I found it hard to watch their games at times. It seemed like every time a player got something going, he was sitting on the bench a moment later.
 
You tend to get in trouble when you draft to "round out your squad". The Kings are a bad team despite hope provided by Buddy and Skal. This is a 20 to 25 team as constructed. The objective should be target prospects with all-star potential. Simple. This is not a team that can draft for need if it means passing the better player. For example the Kings should not pass on MARKKANEN who projects as a PF just to take a PG if they deem the kid as next Dirk. If star potential is comparable then you draft position of need. But the luxury of drafting for need is not one the Kings can afford. They bled talent when they traded Cousins for peanuts. That talent base needs to be restored and improved upon.
The beauty of this draft is you CAN go need because outside the top 3 guys, 4-12 can go in pretty much any order. Like Markanen is my guy in this draft and one of my favorite prospects, but how do you differiante him over Fox or Tatum or Isaac or a handful of other guys? You cant.
 
A guy I like but don't know if he's going to enter the draft is Malik Pope out of SD State....a local guy.....6'11" SF with handles and really good length. Watched him up close at Golden 1 when they played Cal. If he were to come out, he's a guy possibly with that early 2nd. I actually liked him way more than Ivan Rabb of Cal as a prospect.
 
Definitely agree

Tatum is about the smoothest ISO scorer I've seen on the college level in a very long time. Long enough that I'm not sure who to compare him to. He's the opposite of most SFs taken in the lottery who have tantalizing physical tools and have a long way to go in terms of skill. He's very highly skilled and while he doesn't have bad tools, he's not a speed freak, jump out of the gym type player. My biggest questions with Tatum are whether he is a black hole and whether he could extend his range out to the NBA three. Late in the season he seemed to show good passing skills and a willingness to move the ball and his outside shooting continued to improve. My concern all along with Tatum was that he'd be a Glenn Robinson or Jabari Parker type (and I was NOT high on Parker coming out) where he gives you scoring but little else and is a relatively inefficient, midrange and ISO focused scorer. I think Tatum is more than that. I'm not sure who a good comp for him is now. I'll also be very curious to see his official measurements.

I like Bridges a lot. Where Tatum is skilled but not an explosive athlete, Bridges is an explosive athlete who still needs to develop skill, especially wing skills. He has no midrange game and either wants to shoot from three or dunk the ball with little in between. And other than dunks, he doesn't finish all that well around the hoop for such a powerful player.

The Kings would have to have some huge lottery luck to land the 2nd or 3rd pick and nab Ball or Jackson. I'd love for that to happen but it's much more likely that they are picking 6th and 10th. Fortunately there are 12 players that I think would normally be top 5 or 6 players in a standard draft.

Hopefully for once the Kings won't find themselves with the n+1th pick in a draft with n first & second tier prospects.
That's funny. I don't see any fluidity to Tatum's game at all. The guy that is fluid is Jackson. Another guy that is fluid is Devin Robinson. And of course Ball. (The guy on the Kings that is fluid is Skal). With Tatum I do see more of a mechanical type of player, who does have some explosiveness to his game. By the way, it's not like it can't possibly work if a player isn't fluid. I think Blake Griffin isn't fluid in the least, much more of a herky-jerky explosive muscular player, and he does great until he's out with injury. I'm just have a biased toward players who do have fluidity to their game. Unfortunately, no more Duke and so no more Tatum observations until the summer.
 
My guess is that it's by design. They run a strange system at Florida St. Rotating players in and out of the lineup every two or three minutes. I don't know how anyone gets into a rhythm. I found it hard to watch their games at times. It seemed like every time a player got something going, he was sitting on the bench a moment later.
Do you think that drives down Isaac's draft stock somewhat, or at least makes it a little bit more difficult to evaluate him?
 
The beauty of this draft is you CAN go need because outside the top 3 guys, 4-12 can go in pretty much any order. Like Markanen is my guy in this draft and one of my favorite prospects, but how do you differiante him over Fox or Tatum or Isaac or a handful of other guys? You cant.
I differentiate Markkanen over those other guys by asking this question: Who is going to develop into an NBA player the fastest? My answer is Markkanen. I think he's least project-type player of the bunch. Fox has talent, but man, it's going to several years for him to get it as an NBA point guard. You can look to Wall as an example: very talented in terms of speed and quickness, not as talented in terms of BBIQ, shot making, vision, and creativity. Another question I ask: Who is the least riskiest player to take out of the group that you mention. Again, I come up with Markkanen. It's hard to see a 7' footer with his footwork, body build and shot making ability not being a very good player in the NBA. Unfortunately, I've been to this rodeo before and it's not going to surprise me if you hear that during the rookie evaluations that Markkanen has moved into the top 5 and he is no longer within Kings' reach.
 
That's funny. I don't see any fluidity to Tatum's game at all. The guy that is fluid is Jackson. Another guy that is fluid is Devin Robinson. And of course Ball. (The guy on the Kings that is fluid is Skal). With Tatum I do see more of a mechanical type of player, who does have some explosiveness to his game. By the way, it's not like it can't possibly work if a player isn't fluid. I think Blake Griffin isn't fluid in the least, much more of a herky-jerky explosive muscular player, and he does great until he's out with injury. I'm just have a biased toward players who do have fluidity to their game. Unfortunately, no more Duke and so no more Tatum observations until the summer.
What about the rest of his game? Defense, rebounding and intangibles?
 
I doubt that Boston would want to trade that pick if they end up number one. They don't have a lot of spots to fill, and Fultz is the best player in the draft. Now if the Net's end up with number one, their a team that would likely do a deal for two lower lottery picks. They have a lot of holes in their roster so they need a lot of help. Buts that all I would offer them. I wouldn't throw in any of our young players.
Remember that the Nets pick is going to be swapped with Boston. Brooklyn will be picking in the mid 20's.

I struggle to see a team in the lottery that would trade the #1 and the chance to take Fultz (or Ball) for the Kings' two picks. Maybe Portland if they beat the odds and won the lottery?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.