This Looks Like A Job For Captain Qualuude

by section214 on Feb 28, 2009 8:32 PM PST in Commentary

It’s debunking time! As the hyperbole continues to run rampant across our land in regards to the dearth of talent in this year’s NBA draft, our local ~~idiot~~ hero attempts to bring hope and sanity back to his fair city.

Debunk #1: Blake Griffin’s stock will drop when he goes to the pre-draft camp and measures out at 6’8”. A funny thing happened to last year’s prospects on their way to the NBA – they shrunk, and then they grew again. O.J. Mayo was 6’5” going into the camp, and he measured out at a little over 6’3”. But guess what? By the time he got to Memphis, he was 6’5” again. Brook Lopez went from 7”0” to 6’11” to 7’0”. Michael Beasley went from 6’10” to 6’7” to 6’9”.

So, every NBA player is not as tall as he is listed (show of hands – who thinks that Jason Thompson is really 6’11”?). If Blake Griffin is actually 6’8”, and every NBA player listed at 6’10” is 6’7” or 6’8”, then there is no problem, right? Players can play, posers can’t. That’s why lack of height did not deter Charles Barkley. That’s why 6’9” David Lee (which means he’s actually 6’7” or 6’8”) is currently 3^rd in the NBA in rebounding at nearly 12rpg.

Debunk #2: Someone other than Blake Griffin may go #1. I suppose this could happen – it’s still almost four months until the draft. But unlike last year, where some liked Beasley and some liked Derrick Rose, the unanimous consensus amongst the “experts” this year is Griffin. There is no one predicting that Harden, Thabeet, Rubio, or anyone else will go #1. Needs, shmeeds. The team that winds up with the #1 team drafts Blake Griffin or they trade the pick to a team that drafts Blake Griffin.

Debunk #3: This is a very weak draft. Let’s look at the top ten picks from last year and compare them to a top ten list from this year based on 20 current mock drafts:

2008 2009

Derrick Rose Blake Griffin

Michael Beasley James Harden

O.J Mayo Hasheem Thabeet

Russell Westbrook Ricky Rubio

Kevin Love Greg Monroe

Danilo Gallinari Jordan Hill

Eric Gordon Al-Farouq Aminu

Joe Alexander Brandon Jennings

D.J. Augustin Jeff Teague

Brook Lopez Jrue Holiday

Rose and Beasley were labeled as can’t miss prospects (though Rose needed a better shot and Beasley was too small to be a PF and perhaps not quick enough to be a SF), Mayo and Westbrook had great potential but were seen as ‘tweeners, Love was supposedly a little un-athletic, Gallinari was a mystery, Gordon was a little small for a two guard, Alexander needed a consistent jumps shot, Augustin was small, Lopez was slow and earth bound.

The truth is, eight of these ten picks have been somewhat to very productive. This year’s crop could prove to be the same. At this moment, the Kings could still pick as low as seven (if everything went wrong). That could still give them the opportunity to look at a Brandon Jennings or a Jeff Teague. That doesn’t fix this team, but can you say beyond a reasonable doubt that Jennings or Teague couldn’t be someday be better than fellow #7 pick Jason Williams?

Debunk #3A: This draft also lacks depth. In assembling the averages from these 20 mocks, the averages produced 38 players that would be selected before Tyler Hansbrough. That may or may not happen, but let’s list the 11 players that surround the #24 pick (the current location of our pick from Houston: Gani Lawal, Chase Budinger, Patrick Patterson, Ty Lawson, Evan Turner, Craig Brackins, Kyle Singler, Eric Maynor, DeJuan Blair, Austin Daye, DaJuan Summers. There may not be any all stars there, but there are definitely guys with enough talent to stick and contribute to an NBA club. Let’s throw out another few names that chart out to be available at the start of the 2^nd round: Patrick Mills, Damion James, James Johnson, Darren Collison…and the list goes on. Again, no franchise turning talent. But you could land a legitimate bench player for cheap.

The fact of the matter is that this draft may lack star power, but it does not lack talent. This draft could very well yield three roster players for the Kings.

And some of the usual crapola from yours truly. I always throw in the qualifier as it pertains to mock drafts that “nobody knows nothing,” and that numbers compiled from such are a very loose guide and not a rule. That said, my research shows that there are only three players that are unanimous top 5 picks: Griffin (unanimous #1), Harden and Thabeet. Rubio and Monroe are unanimous top 10 picks (on those mocks that list Rubio). Brandon Jennings goes somewhere between 2 and 15, Gerald Henderson between 8 and 27. For a lot of these players, there is a wide path of opinion. And that has led to a bit of a phenomenon – the perceived need to dog one player out in order to promote another. It is as though you have to choose Rubio or Jennings – you are not allowed to like both. Thabeet either has to be Mutombo or Saer Sene – he can’t fall somewhere in between. Monroe is either pre-injury C-Webb or post-injury C-Webb.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, don’t pass judgment too early on these guys. We all would have selected Joe Alexander over Jason (who?) Thompson on draft day 2008 had we been given a choice, and we were all secretly (or not so secretly) relieved when New Jersey took Lopez off the board before we picked. The guy that you dog out today could be holding up a Kings jersey come June, so tread reasonably.

And 1 – As you begin (or continue) to follow these players, recognize them for what they are and not what we need them to be. For example, Griffin might bring low post scoring and perhaps even rebounding, but he probably is not the interior defensive presence that we also need. That’s does not mean that we should not select him. Thabeet might bring some interior defense, but he is going to be an offensive liability, at least in the short term. But if he is the best player on the board when it is our turn to pick, grab him. This is all part of a building process. The Kings need talent…everywhere! We need to take the best player, and then sort out the needs later. Needs change, but talent is talent. And we need talent. Talent, talent, talent.

Talent.

Tweet Comment 84 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Excellent take S214

I agree. Take the best player available. Griffin, Rubio, Thabeet, whomever. We’ll still be bad next season anyway and have the opportunity to make trades at the deadline or in next season’s draft to start solidifying our “run for the title” core.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 28, 2009 8:40 PM PST reply actions

I like your take

I like your points, but I disagree about Thabeet & Griffin. One reason I don’t think Rubio has been listed as a potential 1st overall pick was the numerous questions about getting out of his contract with DKG Joventut. If those hadn’t existed (along with the big buyout), then perhaps it was the single reason Rubio wasn’t mentioned.

I will point out that I’m sure many mock drafts that are covering the 2010 draft would have Rubio listed in the top 2 (I Haven’t checked but I know DX has him first on the 2010 mock).

I also think the bigger point here is that the team does need talent, but at some point, what does that mean for the young players already here?

I think Donte Greene is not a player you pass up for say, DeJuan Blair. Blair is a quality F at the college level because when you’re 6’7 you can dominate the inside if you’ve got that type of ability. (Read Williamson, Corliss) By the same token, size means everything in the NBA, but only if it’s quality. My personal opinion is that the Kings would be better off going small in this draft if only because there are so many quality G’s that could make a real difference to this team. Obviously my preference is Rubio, but that’s jumping way too far ahead.

One thing I totally agree with is that this draft needs to give the Kings 2 quality rotation players at a bare minimum. Bare fucking minimum. I repeat: Bare Minimum. 3 rotation players would make me giddy. In a draft where having 3 picks (and 2 within 10 picks of each other) is not the time to swing and miss on a pick. There isn’t a team in the league that needs a top pick/impact player worse than Sacramento. Of course, I’m also happy with the young talent on this team that’s already here and under contract for next season as well.

My gut is telling me Drew Gooden shouldn’t be re-signed next season. He doesn’t fit in the long term, and it’s better to roll the dice on a young player next season, than try to inundate this team with veterans who don’t really have the same abilities they once did to be meaningful contributors. That’s why the Houston pick is so important, and I think people are sleeping on it, but 1 of those 2 picks would be a great opportunity to pick up a player in Europe, and stash him over there for awhile.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....

by pookeyguru on Feb 28, 2009 8:58 PM PST reply actions

Thanks, pookey

Rubio showed up on 8 of the 20 mocks, going anywhere between 2 and 6. When looking only at those 8 mocks, he averaged out to 4th, behind Griffin, Harden, Thabeet.

I wasn’t giving my opinion of the 2009 top 10 – just analysis of some shaky statistical data. I would personally take Rubio over Thabeet today, and I like Teague and maybe even Jennings a little higher. I like Willie Warren more than the average showed (he was at 15) and I don’t like Cole Aldrich or B.J . Mullens at 11 and 14, respectively (though I would take either one at 24).

What was your disagreement as it pertained to Griffin?

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Feb 28, 2009 9:39 PM PST up reply actions

That he is a player the KIngs need

I think if he’s the guy whom you take, then you’re in trouble. I would much rather the Kings trade Griffin than keep him. Personal opinion.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 28, 2009 9:41 PM PST up reply actions

Got it

But I still think that if we wind up with the #1 pick and if he is the #1 player, we either draft him or trade the pick.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Feb 28, 2009 9:48 PM PST up reply actions

Sounds like a GM talking there, Section!

I think what we so often see in the NBA these days is that no GM wants to be the guy who defies the “expert” opinion.

This obviously is not to say that there aren’t surprise picks, but rarely at the very top of the draft. Every GM is afraid of drafting Bowie over Jordan (even though Bowie was considered the smarter pick for the Blazers at that time).

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on Feb 28, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions

Had Bowie actually played

The Blazers wouldn’t be so vilified over the whole thing.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 28, 2009 9:56 PM PST up reply actions

Exactly

And maybe then there wouldn’t be such a terrible fear of looking foolish in the draft.

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on Feb 28, 2009 10:00 PM PST up reply actions

I think GM's worry a lot less about being second guessed

What they don’t like is reporters who second guess them and then have those same reporters ask them for their opinion/comment later on down the line.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 28, 2009 10:01 PM PST up reply actions

There's no GM

worried less about looking foolish at the draft than GP; witness last year’s pick of Mr. Thompson.

He’s going to pick who he thinks is the best player, or pick someone more valuable and make sure he gets the guy he actually wants on draft night via trade.

by ForThree on Mar 1, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions

Trading down

What do we trade down for, exactly?

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Feb 28, 2009 10:40 PM PST up reply actions

Lebron, of course.

by passionforPERPS on Mar 1, 2009 12:38 AM PST up reply actions

No but maybe,

Jeff Green and the Thuders pick for our two first rounders. OKC would have to interested in a Westbrook, Durant, Griffin pairing but maybe their needs at center and two are too pressing.

Maybe Conely and the Mem #1 for our 2 firsts but why do we do this? Get conley and get rid of the pick so that we can presumably take Rubio (is that a bad presumption) but we’d be loaded with pgs, unless someone came begging for Beno.

Not sure if this is possible or at all beneficial for us but a sign and trade of Ramone Sessions and their pick 15th-ish for the number 1?

But the #1 pick is never traded so better hope we like who is projected to go there or hope that we get the number two, where last year Riley showed through his last second workouts that even someone as hyped as Beasley can be further ignored if not taken first. A real example of that happening would be in the NFL with Aaron Rodgers going #1 or #22 it couldve gone either way.

by passionforPERPS on Mar 1, 2009 12:53 AM PST up reply actions

My first thought

is that if we land the #1 and OKC owner is wetting himself over local kid Blake Griffin. OKC has what could be the 2-7 pick in this draft, as well as two late picks, their 1st round pick for next year, and Jeff Green would be expendable, as OKC would have Griffin/Durant at the forward positions.

So, let’s just start with a swap of picks and OKC’s #1 next year, not protected. OKC will not be making the leap to playoff team next year, so we would still get a top prospect in this draft, and we would have two lottery picks the following year, which could be nice inventory for any potential 2010 sign and trades.

I’m not saying that any of this is feasible, but if you can add more net assets by swapping picks, it is worth considering.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 1, 2009 9:08 AM PST up reply actions

I'd ask for Green first

before settling for their 2010 pick.

by LPKingsFan on Mar 1, 2009 9:59 AM PST up reply actions

I'm beginning to wonder if the Thunder

Would consider moving Green to the SG to play him there defensively, and leave Durant at the SF defensively along with Blake Griffin.

I really don’t think the Kings could get more than an extra pick out of Sam Presti. The guy has played it very close to the vest so far. I doubt that will change regardless of what happens in any trade scenario.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 1, 2009 10:12 AM PST up reply actions

If I were the Thunder

I’d play Green at the 4 with his solid size and rebounding ability. They actually in my mind have a solid set of 2 guards in Thabo and Kyle Weaver. Rant.

I’d like one of their other 1st rounders as well, it could save us some cash and potentially get us a nice solid player.

by jstnblke41 on Mar 1, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions

Big gamble for both teams, but I like our chances.

I don’t know if OK does it though. OK gives up 2 draft picks to upgrade the PF from Green to Griffin. I suppose if they didn’t want to take a chance on Thabeet, and they thought that Griffin puts them almost out of the lottery next year, they’d probably do it.

I’m torn, about trading. I think Griffin will turn out to be a superior player to JT. He’s a power guy with incredable hops. He’ll be a superior rebounder and just as dynamic around the rim as JT. With a good mid range jumper, Griffin is going to be one of the top PF’s for years to come. If Rubio doesn’t enter this year, I’d keep Griffin for a year, and then decide on wether to trade Griffin, JT, or Hawes to improve our position in next years draft.

Rubio is the best pure ball handler, and with our asst/TO ratio we need a floor general. So, if he enters this years draft, I’d we willing to trade if I was assured we could get him. How about this trade? Kings draft Griffin, OK drafts Rubio, Kings trade Griffin & Nocioni to OK for Rubio, Green & a 1st round draft choice in 2009.

OK gets Griffin and Nocioni who can backup Griffin and Durant. The Kings get a starting PG in Rubio, a starting SF in Green, another late 1st rounder, and clear another $4M in cap space.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 1, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions

there's no way

we get rid of Nocioni that easy.

by ForThree on Mar 1, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions

The original premise from Sections

was

OKC owner is wetting himself over local kid Blake Griffin
and that

Jeff Green would be expendable

So, getting Griffin with the added $4M from Noc’s contract, when Noc can backup the 3 & 4, isn’t that expensive especially since his contract goes down with time.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 1, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions

Sorry but

it seems doubtful to me we’d be able to:

1) Get Jeff Green
2) get a low #1
and
3) get rid on Nocioni

for the difference between Griffin and Rubio. If we could get 2 of those things done it would be great, getting all three seems unlikely.

by ForThree on Mar 1, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions

Gotta agree 4 3 here

I think the only way to get something out of a Griffin/Rubio trade is to get a low #1.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 1, 2009 8:10 PM PST up reply actions

It was a fantasy deal guys,

Section’s started it by suggesting that OK would give us 2 draft picks including next years unprotected #1.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 2, 2009 12:06 AM PST up reply actions

Umm -

I also said that it may not be feasible, not that OKC “would give us 2 draft picks.”

They have assets, and they may have a desire for Griffin – no more, no less.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 2, 2009 8:23 AM PST up reply actions

HT I'm all for fantasy

But we can agree this is the real world right?

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 2, 2009 9:44 AM PST up reply actions

I thought this was the Internet, the real world is 30ft from an electrical outlet

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 2, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions

Or in my case

Three. No pun intended.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 2, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions

I am afraid

That this year’s draft does not bring any European prospect worthy of a late first or early second round pick, such as let’s say two years ago with Fernandez/Belinelli/Gasol/Splitter… Which is why I would argue for trying to trade them for a higher first-rounder unless two college players that might make the young roster next year can be found.

by KingsFanfromCentralEurope on Mar 1, 2009 7:52 AM PST up reply actions

Draft big, draft little

I agree with 214, with the caveat that I don’t think we need any more 6’5"-6’7" swing men. I don’t think there’s anyone in this current draft of that size who would qualify as unpass-upable, even if that was actually a word. And who would you rather have assessing talent than Geoff Petrie?

We need a point guard, or a big man with talent if available. I can live with either.

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.

by andy sims on Feb 28, 2009 9:07 PM PST reply actions

Getting both would be

“Unpass-upable”

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 28, 2009 9:17 PM PST up reply actions

I'm with Andy

No more skinny 6’5" guys. We still need size in a (pun) Big way.
+ A PG prospect in the draft or via trade goes without saying.

I think we’ll all be suprised when Monroe’s height is measured as well. I’ve watched a few games carefully and he doesn’t look 6’10" to me (though it always hard to tell).

If you get the #1 you pick BG, period. You pick him and keep him – or parlay him into some serious bank by dropping just a pick or two and picking up a likely early 1 next yr or a developing 2nd / 3rd yr guy.

If you get 2 or 3 and Rubio is not in this draft, well, everyone knows what I would do. Come on home Big fella!

So imitate the action of the tiger!
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favoured rage.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,

Now set the teeth - and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 1, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions

Boo skinny white guys!

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Mar 1, 2009 2:27 PM PST up reply actions

Very fine post Section

we will start to know a lot more about these guys after the NCAA tournament and draft positions will change. I totally agree you always draft best player available rather than for need. Right now with Houston’s pick I would be happy with Darren Collison or DuJuan Blair 6-7 but with a 7-3 wingspan who totally demolished Thabeeeeeeeet!!!!!!!!! a couple of weeks ago. I love Griffin’s heart and Rubio’s smarts and potential, either could be a good fit here. I’m still hoping for a 1st or 2nd pick.

"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley

by Bluejohn on Feb 28, 2009 9:32 PM PST reply actions

Agreed

On your 09’ list versus the 08’. 09’ doesn’t look that darn bad to me and could produce. I like what someone already said about,if we do get #1 pick..Trade down alittle to get Da-Beat and trade up to get Jennings. Would fill 2 big holes(mayby). Throw those two in with what we have and a new coach, I’d pay to see that!

by hectic on Feb 28, 2009 10:27 PM PST reply actions

Quick question

How much more willing would be people have been if the JT/Hawes, pick + Salmons for Stat id the pick was a 4th pick as averse to a first?

Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'

by iashwash on Feb 28, 2009 11:10 PM PST reply actions

Soooo much to disagree with here

I’ll start with everyone wanted Joe Alexander (voted him most likely to bust) and scared of Brook Lopez (praying he’d fall).

I know that everyone wants this draft to turn out well, but it’s not good. Wishful thinking is an art. You, my friend, are Van Gogh.

by nbrans on Feb 28, 2009 11:11 PM PST reply actions

Another thing to disagree with

You are citing OJ Mayo, Brook Lopez… all those measurements are without shoes. Typically the “official” listings are without shoes plus 1.25 inches. That’s how they “magically” gained an inch. Don’t ask me why they add 1.25 inches, but comparing without shoes measurements to official measurements is apples to oranges.

by nbrans on Feb 28, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions

11 minutes have passed, already feel like both of these comments are stupid

The best conversations I have myself.

Anyway, 214, I hope things turn out as well as you hope. Last year’s draft looked like a crapshoot where there was lots of talent 1-30, you just never knew whether you were going to pick the right one. This year just looks scary. But I agree with you on Griffin, I hope I’m wrong about some of the other guys, and I know one thing: I’d rather be picking #1-3 in this draft than #12 in the last one, even if last year’s was better.

by nbrans on Feb 28, 2009 11:25 PM PST up reply actions

I didn't quite hear that

You have to speak on my “ear” side. :)

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 1, 2009 9:43 AM PST up reply actions

There's a snippet they always play on Dan Patrick that's hilarious

Some b-ball commentator was a guest and mentions how people always say “Well, he’s 6’ 10” in shoes, but 6’ 9" without. But he’ll be playing in shoes, so he’s 6’ 10"!"

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 1, 2009 9:38 AM PST up reply actions

I like Reynold's comment,

He’s never seen a player shot with the top of his head.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 1, 2009 12:34 PM PST up reply actions

Great piece Section

I really like the notion that the draft doesn’t like talent, as that is very important for this particular team. We need as much help as we can get and the Rox pick and second round could end up helping as much as our own first rounder.

The more I think about it the more I’m convinced that there’s always going to be a risk when it comes to the draft (big discovery I know) No matter where you pick, there’s always risk of a bust and that you are wasting a pick. Maybe for that reason, I lean towards the “draft for need” approachwhich is dangerous, ex. Hawks missing out on CP3 and D-Will), at least in this draft. I just can’t seem to convince myself that we should pick Griffin, for example, when we already have a very promising power forward and an even younger center. Blake is very impressive and would (should?) be the starting PF of a team in this league next year but it’s not something the Kings REALLY need.

I see this team, and I see the turnovers, the low assist ratio, and the fact that Kevin and others have to create their own shot many times and all I think about is freaking Ricky Rubio. TZ made great point in the recap after the Hornets game (I think), we work way too hard for our offense. We hear so much about players making their teammates better, and a point guard is in the best position to this. We already have scorers but we don’t have a PG who will find those scorers in high percentage places. Rubio may not be able to shoot that well, but this team does not need another scorer, right?

The cool thing about this whole thing is that I have no problem being wrong because I’m not the one making the decisions. I will still defend my point as much as I can and will have some while at it. Say what you want about this team, but it just seems like we always gives us something to talk about and dream about.

"Let's stop arguing and get together and agree on who really is the problem: PEACHES" - HighTops

by eduardo_m7 on Feb 28, 2009 11:12 PM PST reply actions

Way to start your post idiot

IT should say “lack” instead of "like: in the first sentence.

"Let's stop arguing and get together and agree on who really is the problem: PEACHES" - HighTops

by eduardo_m7 on Feb 28, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions

Listen, internet tough guy

I think your more than mildy obsessed w/me. It doesn’t surprise me that you would be calling me names from behind that computer screen .Your I.Q. is starting to show.However i can see why your still mad,after being roasted so hard. Feel sorry for you Erckle7. But,before you ruin this post also,why don’t you give it a rest .Jeeze man..Your like the hemorrhoid on Otis’s arse,the one that never goes away

by hectic on Feb 28, 2009 11:53 PM PST up reply actions

LOL LOL LOL

Oops ,my bad. Do over

by hectic on Mar 1, 2009 12:20 AM PST up reply actions

Uh yeah

I believe you were a bit premature. I’m guessing it’s not the first time.

Mambo King

by otis29 on Mar 1, 2009 5:18 AM PST up reply actions

You're not the masculine feminist are you?

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 1, 2009 10:14 AM PST up reply actions

Who would you guys draft with Houston's pick?

I’m hoping Houston tanks a bit and ends up with the 19th-22nd pick.

With Houston’s pick, I believe we’d need either a big man to back up Shock & Hawes or a backup SG to put behind Martin, in the case we draft Rubio or another PG.

My list of players in that scenario:
Demar ReRozan (SG)- Insane athleticism and dunking ability. I see him as an excellent slasher in the NBA.
Tyler Hansbrough (PF)- He’d be able to provide some instant help, since he’s a bit older and has an excellent offensive post game.
Chase Budinger (SG)- Was projected about 15th in last year’s draft…not much else to say. He also has high BBall IQ.

In the case we end up drafting Griffin or another big:
Tyreke Evans (PG/SG)- Not really a PG…moreso a combo guard, but can give us some much needed perimeter D.
Darren Collison (PG) – UCLA’s secret weapon playing behind Westbrook last year. Can also provide nice perimeter D and is more of a pure PG.
Ty Lawson (PG) – Yeah, he’s been a bit underwhelming, but he still does have potential. Was projected about 12th last year before he dropped to 25.

by CloudyEyes on Feb 28, 2009 11:20 PM PST reply actions

Budinger is a guy I can see Petrie getting a hard-on over (sorry). I remember at the beginning of his freshman year Mocks all had him like top 5. His Athleticism and shot mechanics are off the charts, but he has dropped on mocks more and more every year. If he’s around for Houston’s pick I could definitely see Petrie taking him, high IQ and skill = Petrie Wet Dream (sorry again)

I wanted to adopt, but all the good looking babies were taken

by joeytothelimit on Feb 28, 2009 11:28 PM PST up reply actions

Budinger

I think would be a fine player in the league, but not for the Kings. He has great athleticism and shot making ability, but he totally lets the game come to him and would not be an impact player who creates for himself. The Hornets would be a great place for him to land. Rant.

by jstnblke41 on Feb 28, 2009 11:59 PM PST up reply actions

If we go big early

I’m hoping Willie Warren falls – and what about Maynor?

So imitate the action of the tiger!
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favoured rage.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,

Now set the teeth - and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 1, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions

I think Warren only comes out if he knows that he's lottery bound

But Maynor could possibly be around…he would be an interesting use of Houston’s pick.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 1, 2009 1:08 PM PST up reply actions

I should add

that’s my gut talking – I have seen nothing from Warren that would confirm or deny my statement.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 1, 2009 1:09 PM PST up reply actions

I think your closer then further away on Warren

If hes still around why not Cole Aldrich? Hes skilled, he can rebound and he can defend, I at least really like the look of him.

by jstnblke41 on Mar 1, 2009 1:14 PM PST up reply actions

If we go big early though

I’d be down with Eric Maynor, I really like Wayne Ellington but he looks like a 2nd rounder right now so don’t want to go wasting the pick.

by jstnblke41 on Mar 1, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions

This time every year the story goes that the draft lacks talent. Than after the NCAA tournament everyone is claiming for the top 10 talent.

by bignerd on Feb 28, 2009 11:27 PM PST reply actions

I agree

the draft always seems better than everyone fears in February.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 1, 2009 3:34 AM PST up reply actions

Well written

The team certainly needs a lot of things, and to do anything but get the most out of every pick is what we need to do. I wouldn’t touch Thabeet because he is a project offensively and like it or not he won’t exactly be playing a great deal if he can’t at least be a threat on offense.

I also think there are some great value picks at the tail end of the draft, maybe not a whole lot of potential all-stars in this draft but there should be players who can play for a long time.

by jstnblke41 on Mar 1, 2009 12:03 AM PST reply actions

Thoughts

Draft for ability, not for need.
Focus the team’s efforts on young players; cheap, decent vets; and a few top impact players.
If you get the No. 1, trade it if possible for a star and/or more picks.
I agree with your points about it being a better draft than people say.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Mar 1, 2009 1:38 AM PST reply actions

I agree sort of...

Draft for ability, not for need.

As long as the player isn’t a small forward because the Kings already have 3. This shouldn’t be an issue because there are not any 3’s hiding in the top 5 or 6.

If you get the No. 1, trade it if possible for a star and/or more picks.

Star yes, picks no. The Kings already have 3 picks in this draft and a lot of young players already on the roster. Trading this pick to move down a pick or two and picking up a talent like Jeff Green is acceptable for me. Even if the second round pick doesn’t make the roster (which is a stretch due to how close he will be to a first rounder) the Kings will have Hawes and Greene @ age 20, Thompson @ 23- and two other young players from their first rounders. If the Kings keep Simmons (23 yrs old) and/or McCants (24 yrs old) this is going to be a very young team with a possible 8 players 24 years of age or younger.

I agree with your points about it being a better draft than people say.

+1- this might not be a draft of super stars but any draft with a dozen point guards projected can’t be that bad.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Mar 1, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions

I agree; IMO there are only two times you draft for need and neither apply to our 2009 lottery pick

You draft for need when (a) you are a contender drafting at the end of the first round and you just need to add a role player to strengthen your bench; or (b) you are drafting middle-first rounder and all of your options are future role players at best so you go for need.

When you are not a contender and you are drafting a top-five pick, you are looking for a future all-star, not a role player. So, if there is a difference in ability, you have to draft the better player, regardless of whether you’ve already got a decent player at his spot.

There is no way that down the road anybody would say: “They used the top pick on Rod Strickland rather than Karl Malone because they already liked the 4 they had (Tyrone Hill) and badly needed a PG, and boy, what a smart move that was, because Strickland really stepped into their existing lineup well, and Malone, while a Hall of Famer, would have required them to trade some fan-favorites and shuffle things.” No way. If Griffin is clearly a level of talent better than Rubio, you’ve got to pick Griffin, ten times out of ten, JT be damned. Who cares if it means you shake up the roster. Unless you are one role player away from contending, then that roster is going to get shuffled like a Rubik’s Cube.

Life is every mammal's journey from very very wet to very very dry.

by Holmdel on Mar 1, 2009 4:02 PM PST up reply actions

Word

I never understood the word "Qualuude"

Why the two u’s next to each other? Wouldn’t it sound the same with one u?

Mambo King

by otis29 on Mar 1, 2009 5:25 AM PST reply actions

vacuum?

I blame the Brits. Theatre, colour, grey, aluminium, centre, etc. For the creators of the language they sure fucked up the spelling of a lot of the words.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 1, 2009 5:47 AM PST up reply actions

Rendezvous

’Nuff said, though it did win me a 3rd grade spelling bee.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 1, 2009 9:21 AM PST up reply actions

Rendezvous= French word

No?

by AnotherStupidSN on Mar 1, 2009 9:48 AM PST up reply actions

Oui

Stupid Tony Parker.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 1, 2009 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

What if I don't want to try your thick creamy French shakes?

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 1, 2009 10:17 AM PST up reply actions

after you took one it seemed to make perfect sene

"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley

by Bluejohn on Mar 1, 2009 3:20 PM PST up reply actions

Like the Cap'n Q reference

Can we change your name from Section214 to Lemon714 ?

Ahhhh, the 70’s and early 80’s.

by betweentheeyes on Mar 1, 2009 10:48 AM PST reply actions

On a separate note: Size Matters

just ask the guy on that damn BoweFlex commercial they play every damn break.

So, every NBA player is not as tall as he is listed (show of hands – who thinks that Jason Thompson is really 6’11"?). If Blake Griffin is actually 6’8", and every NBA player listed at 6’10" is 6’7" or 6’8", then there is no problem, right? Players can play, posers can’t. That’s why lack of height did not deter Charles Barkley. That’s why 6’9" David Lee (which means he’s actually 6’7" or 6’8") is currently 3rd in the NBA in rebounding at nearly 12rpg

Arm length can make up for height, vertical as well and none of it compares to skill and BB IQ. Really depends on the position. Yao doesn’t jump, but he needn’t do so. Nate Robinson is pretty damn short – he scored 41 the other night.

as long as my wife tells me I am huge I am happy – the point is: size is what you make of it.

by betweentheeyes on Mar 1, 2009 10:59 AM PST reply actions

Can I take this one??

That’s what she said

"Let's stop arguing and get together and agree on who really is the problem: PEACHES" - HighTops

by eduardo_m7 on Mar 1, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions

and keeps saying?

by betweentheeyes on Mar 1, 2009 11:13 AM PST up reply actions

Some players overcome thier size disadvantage

and suceed. Some.

So imitate the action of the tiger!
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favoured rage.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,

Now set the teeth - and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 1, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions

Height doesn't matter as much if you have strenght and great vertical leaping ability

A 6’10" guy doesn’t have a big advantage over a 6’8" who can jump and is strong enough not to be pushed around. Yes, he might be able to get his jumper off over the smaller guy, but you want the other teams bigs to be shooting contested jumpers and not dunks.

I don’t know how tall Griffin will measure out to be, but when he goes up, he gets his elbow above the rim. To me that makes him a foot taller, than a 6’10" guy who can barely dunk directly under the rim (MM, BM…).

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 1, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions

c'mon now

did you actually say Mikki Moore could barely dunk? His ferocious dunks off Jason Kidd passes are what kept him in the league.

by ForThree on Mar 1, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions

I thought it was his girlish frame.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Mar 1, 2009 2:30 PM PST up reply actions

I'm gonna tell you right now

Terrence Williams. He does what James Harden does, but better.

by bartenpa on Mar 1, 2009 2:39 PM PST reply actions

Eh

I like him, but God is he inconsistent. And you can’t convince me he is a better scorer, no chance at all. Having said that I wouldn’t mind the Kings taking him late in the first.

by jstnblke41 on Mar 1, 2009 3:51 PM PST up reply actions

Griffin is fire and brawn

Two things the Kings lack in spades. He’s Nocioni with game. Even if he’s 6’8’’, he’s still a legit PF because he’s definitely 240+. If Nocioni can change the team makeup, imagine how someone young and hungry can do. By all accounts, he worked his behind off to get better to be in position to be #1 and have skills beyond brawn. He is quick for his size as well. I really think he’s going to be Dwight Howard, Stoudamire someday soon and Boozer at worst. I think that means JT or Hawes goes if we get the pick. JT, I think his natural position will eventually be center.

I worry about Rubio playing defense – not sure he’s not Beno there. Teague I love but he’s a shoot-first PG.

by bringbackbuddytrees on Mar 1, 2009 4:32 PM PST reply actions

Patrick Mills would be a fantastic pick later on.

He was absolutely tremendous in the Olympics.

There can only be one Noce!

by NoceOne on Mar 2, 2009 2:38 AM PST reply actions

There's a guy on Kingsfans named Larry Legend

He would totally agree with you. Alot of scouts would disagree.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 2, 2009 9:44 AM PST up reply actions

As a 2nd rounder? I think he could be awesome

I see best case being Jason Terry, which would be pretty damn good in my opinion. Of course he could struggle with his size but the man can score and can play point, although the WAC hasn’t had a good track record lately of producing NBA caliber players.

by jstnblke41 on Mar 2, 2009 11:33 AM PST up reply actions