No to your last sentence......just no
Who do we draft?
- Thread starter Folsomkingsfan
- Start date
- Status
That's my first thought as well.
Richardson makes a lot of sense. If Bogdanovic comes over the Kings will have four SGs - Temple, Hield, Richardson and Bogdanovic. Temple is signed for two more seasons, is an ideal veteran for a young team and is worth more on the Kings than the little he'd return in trade. Bogdanovic seems like a key piece for Vlade and Hield has looked at the very least like a very solid starting SG who can put up points.
But I don't think Richardson is enough to move up in this draft.
I don't like the idea of trading Hield but I also don't like the idea of three young SGs who all need minutes, especially when (depending on Bogdanovic's deal) they are likely to hit free agency at the same time.
That's part of the issue with the Kings having four rookies last year. Hield, Richardson, Labissiere and Papagiannis are all going to hit free agency at the same time. That's not a good thing and part of the issue with stocking up with too many rookies at once. It's great while they are on their rookie deals and it makes them very good trade pieces, but if you hold on to them then down the road it hurts when it's time to pay the piper. Either you bleed talent when they walk for nothing or you have to overpay to keep a lot of guys at once.
The question isn't whether or not we want to trade Buddy Hield. I don't think anyone wants to. The question is whether the dropoff from Hield to Malachi or Bogdan is bigger than the gain the team would get in moving from 10 to 7 to get the rookie they want.
Fox vs Markkanen? Smith Jr. vs Jarrett Allen? Isaac vs Collins?
Vlade has hard decisions to make if he wants to actually build a winning team.
Telemachus
Starter
When younger, Rondo was a good athlete with good quickness. Fox is a freak athlete with quickness and speed to rival Wall.
kingsfan1984
Starter
What if instead of it being Frank, Smith and Isaac left when kings pick, it is Fox Smith and Isaac? Who would you pick?
From reading through the Mavs fan sites theyseem to not value isaac much and almost unanimously want a PG. So most likely they dont take Isaac but certainly a gamble.
Who would you pick at 8 in this scenario? No trades allowed
From reading through the Mavs fan sites theyseem to not value isaac much and almost unanimously want a PG. So most likely they dont take Isaac but certainly a gamble.
Who would you pick at 8 in this scenario? No trades allowed
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Where did I say Fox had a low BBIQ?
In that case I'd take Fox. If Isaac goes 9 to the Mavs then I'd take Smith and let them duke it out and likely trade one of them down the road.
But Fox & Isaac to the Kings would essentially be my dream scenario.
Are all of you sold on 100% taking any one of the Pgs if they're available? Like are you passing on a guy you think is a superior talent just to lock in a PG slot? Because for me, my current big board for us looks like this (assuming somone like Tatum or Ball don't freefall):
1.Fox
2. Collins
3. Isaac
4 Ntilkina
5. Monk
6. DSJ
Starting to warm up to the idea of grabbing Collins and Isaac if Fox isn't available. We have a ridiculously young team who would greatly benefit from a veteran PG to keep things calm and teach the kids how to play. Especially in this PG FA class, there are guys like Patty Mills, Shaun Livingston, Ty Lawson or even making a run at Milos Teodosic who I'd feel very comfortable letting control the show with a young cast around them.
1.Fox
2. Collins
3. Isaac
4 Ntilkina
5. Monk
6. DSJ
Starting to warm up to the idea of grabbing Collins and Isaac if Fox isn't available. We have a ridiculously young team who would greatly benefit from a veteran PG to keep things calm and teach the kids how to play. Especially in this PG FA class, there are guys like Patty Mills, Shaun Livingston, Ty Lawson or even making a run at Milos Teodosic who I'd feel very comfortable letting control the show with a young cast around them.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
"His basketball IQ is middling, so he's going to take longer,"
This came right after you praised Ball's IQ. In the context in which it was written, it appears that you saying Fox has low BBIQ. Middling certainly isn't high!
I think Rondo is a "good" athlete right now, and that his athleticism was outstanding; he was a big part of the Celtics championship tries. I don't think the difference would be too appreciable (in athleticism). In fact Rondo had a 44" vertical - quite a bit better than Fox's 40". Anyway, I'd be happy if the Kings drafted Fox, but no way he falls to 8.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
If the choice is Fox, Smith, and Isaac, then yes, I'd take Fox. But it the choice is Ntilikina, Smith, and Isaac, then I'd take Isaac knowing that at 10 I would still get a PG. I have Isaac ranked higher than either Smith or Ntilikina, so I couldn't pass on him at that point. In the other scenario, I have Fox ranked higher than any of them, thus the Fox selection. The order in which I have them ranked now, and not the order I think they'll be drafted is:
1. Fultz
2. Fox
3. Ball
4. Jackson
5. Isaac
6. Tatum
7. Smith
8. Collins
9. Monk
10. Ntilikina
I have them ranked on both talent and need. But if the talent is greater than the need, I drop them down a bit. The one thing, well two things that bother me about Ntilikina, is one, I haven't had the chance to watch him play on a regular basis, and two, his free throw shooting percentage. It doesn't bode well for his jumpshot. Doesn't mean he can't be a good shooter, just that it bothers me. To some extent, Ball and Fox are interchangable at 2 and 3, depending on what your needs are. Both are extremely talented players, just different. Same sort of thing with Tatum and Isaac at 5 and 6.
I pretty much agree though I'd switch Collins and Ntilikina.
Personally I like Fox more than Ball but for the Kings I'd take Ball. They've got bigs who can get out and run and I think he'd be a very good fit, warts and all.
There are issues I have with Ball's game and I worry that he won't be able to defend or get his shot off on the next level but I keep coming back to how he transformed UCLA's offense. I think the ball movement he brings is infectious.
Suicide King
Starter
Does anyone think Vivek might have starry eyes for Ball, and if we orchestrated a move up to grab him would you be disappointed ?
Say we moved to 2nd somehow and Fultz is gone. We take Ball. Happy? Disappointed?
Say we moved to 2nd somehow and Fultz is gone. We take Ball. Happy? Disappointed?
Don't know about Vivek, but would not be too happy....I'd say only Fultz is worth both picks. If one of the 2 picks turns into something, that's a win for the Kings (keeping both). Ball seems to be more of a gamble. He could become a great player, but imo not worth 2 picks to find out. Issac with Smith or Fox would be #1/#2 in my book.
Kings need a good long SF prospect with Gay injured #1, and a PG#2. They have the option to resign Collison or Lawson, but Gay is a much bigger position question-mark. Everything was looking good before Bridges left. Bridges not in the draft limits things more - would've been happy with Bridges or Issac for SF. Now there's a fairly good chance Issac could be taken earlier. In this case though it could be a trade-off meaning that more PGs are at 8 when available to give the Kings more choices.
My Top 10 Pick Combos (right now):
1. Issac and Smith
2. Issac and Fox
3. Issac and Monk
4. Issac and Ntilikina
5. Smith and Markennen
6. Fox and Markennen
7. Ntilikina and Markennen
8. Smith and Collins
9. Fox and Collins
10. Monk and Collins
Kingsfan23
All-Star
You wouldn't trade Hield straight up, let alone swap. Buddy is a winner and proven to have game at this level.
4-11 is about the same tier for me.
Tatum/Fox/Isaac/Markannen/Smith/Collins/Monk/Nkitlina
One PG/SF will be there, and you can do lots of things with the other
If the first 7 players off the board were:
Fultz
Jackson
Ball
Tatum
Fox
Isaac
Smith Jr
Then there would be almost no PGs or SFs left on the board.
Monk/Ntilikina and Markkanen/Collins to me would be a disaster of a draft.
I'm a big Buddy Hield fan but if the Kings end up with 4 (or possibly 5) SGs and no impact players from this draft the future won't be looking very bright.
Fultz
Jackson
Ball
Tatum
Fox
Isaac
Smith Jr
Then there would be almost no PGs or SFs left on the board.
Monk/Ntilikina and Markkanen/Collins to me would be a disaster of a draft.
I'm a big Buddy Hield fan but if the Kings end up with 4 (or possibly 5) SGs and no impact players from this draft the future won't be looking very bright.
Suicide King
Starter
Today I agree. If Fox ain't there at 8 but Isaac is I would take him even it means the last of the top 5 PG's is gone at 9.
As you pointed out there are other options filling the PG need. I like both Ty and Patty plus we have SG's that have some facilitating skills. Maybe Jawun Evans is still around at 34.
If we left the 1st round with Isaac and Zach Collins I would be OK. Ideally we fill the PG and SF need out of this draft, but hey, we would have a team in place that should become an attractive FA destination for a PG and there's always 2018, though its shaping up as more of a big man draft.
Suicide King
Starter
I really hope we get some luck and come away with Isaac and a lottery PG. Or move up to nab a top tier player. Who knows, Vlade may envision Bog and either Ty or Darren manning PG for now anyway.
I don't believe that Markannen will last til 8th......for me at least, I think that Fox, Tatum and Markannen are the guys at 4, 5, 6 in some type of order. The Knicks I can see taking Monk or Isaac. If Smith is there at 8, I absolutely take DSJ....wouldn't pass on him if Isaac was there. Isaac might be there at 10 as I don't think Orlando,will take Isaac. Otherwise, I'd take Ntilikina too at 10......or the Collins kid.
ockingsfan
Starter
First off, I think there is no way you trade Buddy. He is going to be a legitimate 20 ppg shooting guard in the league.
Secondly, Malichi trade value is virtually nothing right now, so it is best to try and develop him and see what we got.
As far the rookie contracts all coming up at the same time, this is true, but we have another 3 years before we have to worry about that, and things like that will sort itself out in 2 years, when we know what we have in the players we drafted.
I say, let all the young Kids play and let the best man get the playing time and the big contract, once their rookie contract ends.
Last edited:
In what world would getting Monk/Collins or any of those combos not be getting impact players?
The biggest mistake bad teams make, regardless of the sport, is that draft the best player in their position of need rather draft the best overall prospect. We don't have a KAT/Wiggins or a Booker or an Embiid type of player right now where we can cross that position off the list. I know i've flip-flopped on this, but what our team needs most is TALENT not just a PG and a SF to be good again. I liked what we saw from the young guys, but they were also playing with fresh legs against a lot of teams that flat out gave up at the end of the year.
If the PG's are higher on your board, then cool, go after it and get him. But I hope we aren't just taking a PG because that's the "need" of the current core.
I really want to see Joerger use a 10-man rotation minimum - 12 would be even better. Really run the paces.
I really don't think all 4 of these guys are pure SG's. Temple certainly can swing 1-3, Malachi has the size to play the 2 or the 3, I think Buddy can run some 1 and small-ball 3. Bogdan will likely play all 3 spots. The only detriment I see to them getting the minutes they need is if Rudy comes back to his starting role and eats 30-34 MPG.
As far as the rookie deals, it's highly unlikely all 4 pan out to the point where we have to pay them all massive money. It's highly unlikely all 4 of them even become quality rotational players; we saw such a limited sample of good play, that we have no idea how the league will adjust. And even if we are lucky enough for that to happen, we have the RFA rights to flip them for assets.
Funky, what's your big board regardless of team? Just purely based on talent?
I agree that "disaster" is an overblown description. But I think the Kings do have Hield, and so getting Monk is more or less a redundancy, but Monk arguably could become a better player than Hield, so who knows - it would be a good problem. Markennan brings a possible lighst-out long-range shooter of which the Kings have no-one right now. Collins has good defensive upside that would be valuable, and Ntilikina likewise would be good for defense immediately. Its difficult to forecast talent, very difficult.
I like Collins but I'm not as high on him as many. He feels like a classic college big who doesn't translate as well to the next level. Measuring out well is the first big step to easing my concerns with him. I do need to watch more tape on him. I watched Gonzaga play 4 or 5 times this year but not focusing specifically on Collins.
And I'm just flat out not big on Markkanen. He's the best big man shooter I've ever watched on the NCAA level but he's less well rounded than Ryan Anderson or even Channing Frye coming out of college. For him to be a weapon in the NBA I think he has to play alongside a real first option/star player. Right now the Kings don't have one.
I like Monk but if he can't play PG then he's a backup SG on a team that already has three backup SGs.
I don't think it's overly dramatic to say that missing on these draft picks would be a disaster. The Kings dealt away Cousins for this draft. They owe Philly their 2019 pick. There's the chance that Vivek gets rid of Vlade & Joerger if things don't turn around or at least show signs of turning around. A lot is riding on this.
It's hard for me to say because (1) I've spent all this time thinking about prospects and the Kings and (2) there are a few guys whose success is very dependent on either the team they go to or being able to translate to the next level. For instance, what happens to Ball if he goes to the Knicks and Phil continues to insist on running the triangle. Or can Fox fix his jumper and can Tatum score as efficiently on the next level against small forwards instead of PFs.
But for me I'd say:
Fultz
Jackson
Ball
Fox
Isaac
Smith Jr
Tatum
Monk
Ntilikina
Collins
Anunoby (if cleared)
Patton
Markkanen would likely be in the next tier with Allen, John Collins, Evans, Ferguson etc.
I need to find more tape on Hartenstein though. He seems intriguing.
CelticsFan
Bench
I feel bad for Buddy when people have these expectations. The guy has played one season of ok hoops and people now have expectations of the guy being a star. That would put him right under Booker for PPG and right above Wade in reference to 20 ppg scoring SG's this season.
If Buddy becomes a legitimate 20ppg SG that would make him one of the best in the league and a max contract type player. IMO Buddy isn't a number one scorer on a good playoff team or even a number 2. Maybe he develops into one but from what he's shown I don't think its a guarantee. When watching the Kings young players you have to remember that they are a bad team. Someone has to take shots, someone has to score. Get Buddy on a playoff team and there just won't be enough opportunities for him to average 20 ppg IMO.
Dime Dropper
All-Star
Agreed. Some people have far too lofty expectations for Buddy going by what he's shown so far. I've seen people compare him to Harden (lite) which is crazy, he doesn't display even close to the same amount of skills as Harden. Buddy is also a pretty old rookie so his upside is going to be limited. He's shown he can score and shoot so far, and has shown promise, but I'd be hesitant to claim he'll be one of the league's best SGs based on what we've seen. I'll happily eat my words if he does indeed break out in the next few years.
- Status
