NBA 2017 Draft thread. 5th pick and 10th pick.

[PetrieUnderstudy]

I think Vlade may not be looking to sign veterans in free agency. He was asked during his interview what kind of veterans he was looking to sign in free agency and he dodged the question and said he just wanted to celebrate what they did in the draft. If he was looking to sign veterans he would have given some broad statement like, "ones who fit our culture and can help the young players," etc. While the question was being asked, I guessed he would dodge the question because he didn't plan on bringing Collison or Lawson back and didn't want to air his decision to the public.

Or he just didn't want the anyone to have any idea what the team is thinking in the area.

I think he just wanted to keep the press conference focused on the draft. When you're 50 plus million under the cap you have to spend some money. Guaranteed we'll be signing a minimum of 3 vets. I've said it in previous posts. We need a vet PG. I'd be fine with Collison or Lawson for continuity of what Joerger wants from the team and either would help Fox and Mason. I'm leaning towards Collison because of his shooting. We need a vet SF. I like Joe Ingles because of his 3pt shooting, passing, ball handling, and defense. We need a PF. I like JaMychal Green. He played for Joerger, is a good rebounder, defender, and can hit some 3's. All three guys are vets but not really old (29, 29 & 27). All 3 also can start initially and very easily move to back ups because they've all started and backed up in the NBA. Make it happen Vlade.

[209Kings]

We are really gonna regret not drafting Monk. Book it.

So we draft him and then who doesnt play? BB? Buddy? Richardson? Temple?

Who cares if he ends up being much better than BB (probably), Richardson (probably), Temple (long-term most probably).

If you had a 3 guard rotation that ate up all the minutes - so what!

I agree. A Fox - Hield - Monk trio would have been deadly. Plus, I am sure Fox and Monk have great chemistry together. It's not like the old days where your starting 5 played majority of the game. There's a lot more rotation and platooning these days.

[RIPskaterdude]

So if you draft monk, maybe BB doesn't come over. You want to miss out on maybe the best shooter in Europe?

[jeffjtk1234]

I wanted monk, I'm not going to worry about monk for a few reasons. He's a hornet, eastern conference, and the players we got at 15 and 20 are nice. I'd rather have Jackson who has a very high floor and imo can be a starting SF in the NBA, and Giles who could possibly be the biggest steal in the draft.

Whys the narrative always "we're going to regret this or that." We just got a starting pg, potential starting SF, a super high upside PF/C, and a long term backup pg to fox in Mason. I literally have 0 complaints


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[209Kings]

I wanted monk, I'm not going to worry about monk for a few reasons. He's a hornet, eastern conference, and the players we got at 15 and 20 are nice. I'd rather have Jackson who has a very high floor and imo can be a starting SF in the NBA, and Giles who could possibly be the biggest steal in the draft.

Whys the narrative always "we're going to regret this or that." We just got a starting pg, potential starting SF, a super high upside PF/C, and a long term backup pg to fox in Mason. I literally have 0 complaints


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Even though I think it would have been awesome to get Monk, I am not disappointed that we didn't get him. Justin Jackson may not turn into that star SF, but his character and IQ can take him far. I think he can be a very good contributor for the Kings for years to come. He patches a hole until we find that stud SF (maybe in next years draft?) And then if and when we do get that stud, Jackson could still contribute a lot coming off the bench and being part of a rotation. I also love the Giles pick. He has very high upside, and the great thing is, we don't need to rush him. He can take his time and we can take our time with him. Frank Mason is going to be an extraordinary compliment to Fox in a couple years. The guy has drive and great character. We drafted great character guys which is very important, especially if they are guys that may have to be on the bench a while.

[kingjawn100]

I wouldn't mind if Giles doesn't play 1 game for the Kings this year. Let this be a confidence building/evaluation year. I honestly think if he went to a smaller school and not Duke last year he would have been much further along in his development/confidence at this point. It's tough to get confidence back in your repaired knees when you're not seeing the court. Essentially why he should play exclusively in Reno for a year.

On that rate we would have a lot of big man decisions to make going into the following season. Is Giles ready to contribute/healthy enough to contribute on NBA level? Has WCS developed enough to be considered a long term starter at center? Is PapaG an NBA player or not? And most importantly...should we draft a center with our (likely) high lottery pick in a draft full of centers.

I'm not too distraught about passing on Monk. Sure he could turn into a great shooter but make no mistake about it...he's a 1 trick pony. Not a passer, not a rebounder, not a driver, not a defender...if he struggles at all with his shot he's a below average NBA player.

[benchmobbin02]

Getting some love from Reggie Miller on the Dan Patrick Show. Starts at 1:15

Watch on YouTube

[benchmobbin02]

More love...

Watch on YouTube

[benchmobbin02]

From Vlade's mouth at 5:28 he says they will be active in Free Agency. I don't think you read anything into it besides just taking him at his word.

Watch on YouTube

[Sactowndog]

So we draft him and then who doesnt play? BB? Buddy? Richardson? Temple?

Who cares if he ends up being much better than BB (probably), Richardson (probably), Temple (long-term most probably).

If you had a 3 guard rotation that ate up all the minutes - so what!

I agree. A Fox - Hield - Monk trio would have been deadly. Plus, I am sure Fox and Monk have great chemistry together. It's not like the old days where your starting 5 played majority of the game. There's a lot more rotation and platooning these days.

Unless you think Bogdan is a better player and drafting Monk can cost you Bogdan.

The kid wants to play and he doesn't have to come to the US. He could stay in Europe and play. Serbs can be damm stubborn and Vlade knows that fact.

Bogdan is significantly longer than Monk. 6' 5" with a 6' 11" wingspan. 6' 3" with a 6" 6' wingspan. He wants to have a clear path to play and not be caught in a log jam. Drafting Monk could well have caused Bogdan to stay home.

[rpa]

IMO Collins was the better player. A defensive big who is quick, strong, and can shoot inside and out. Solid mechanics. Monk fits todays game but he is undersized and a bad defender.

I think Collins is a bit of a project and I think it's really hard to extrapolate based on college. I mean, consider that he didn't play heavy minutes (only 17 per game), played as a reserve against reserves, and played in a conference that (overall) had far less talent than the majors. Contrast that with Monk. Monk has a FAR longer and more polished resume and brings a far more useful (and developed) skill to the table (shooting).

Also, I wouldn't necessarily call Monk a "bad" defender. I think he's willing, but that, in the NBA at least, his size would make it tough to ever be much more than average. But I think his ability to score sets him apart.

So you would take on Turner for 20 and 26? I would rather have done the deal we did and leave us open to facilitating a different deal getting additional assets back later. Still lots of big names and bad contracts out there to be moved and I think getting a 2019 pick or addl picks next year would be huge.

Why not both? The Kings had the cap space to take on Turner now and someone else later. Turner also fits a team need (ballhandling/SF).

Given hindsight (and assuming that trade was on the table) I'd have taken Monk at 10 and Giles at 20. Given what Vlade said about Frank I think they may have taken him at 26, but that means at 34 I'm taking Bell.

So the real question to me is, which is better:
Jackson + 17m in cap space

vs.

Monk + Turner + Bell

I take the latter 11 times out of 10.

[dckingsfan]

Who cares if he ends up being much better than BB (probably), Richardson (probably), Temple (long-term most probably).

If you had a 3 guard rotation that ate up all the minutes - so what!

I agree. A Fox - Hield - Monk trio would have been deadly. Plus, I am sure Fox and Monk have great chemistry together. It's not like the old days where your starting 5 played majority of the game. There's a lot more rotation and platooning these days.

Unless you think Bogdan is a better player and drafting Monk can cost you Bogdan.

The kid wants to play and he doesn't have to come to the US. He could stay in Europe and play. Serbs can be damm stubborn and Vlade knows that fact.

Bogdan is significantly longer than Monk. 6' 5" with a 6' 11" wingspan. 6' 3" with a 6" 6' wingspan. He wants to have a clear path to play and not be caught in a log jam. Drafting Monk could well have caused Bogdan to stay home.

They are two different players... Monk is much faster and has much better handles at this point. I would think he could work into a backup PG. Vlade would need to explain that to him - I am sure he could have done that job - especially when he waives Afflalo.

[rpa]

So we draft him and then who doesnt play? BB? Buddy? Richardson? Temple?

Everyone but Buddy.

Richardson can spend some time at the 3, but it's also unlikely that he's going to be a good player. Temple's old and is more of a coach than a full time player--and he can spend time at the 3. BB? He can play some 3 I think as well.

But here's the thing. At the end of the day this team needs talent. High. Quality. Talent. Monk was arguably the best scorer in college basketball last year and he was a freshman. You just can't pass up that kind of talent if you're the Kings. You just can't--especially when you may very well have been able to acquire Giles via taking on salary.

[City of Trees]

After sleeping on it im cool passing on Monk. Kings drafted their Franchise player and traded down for two team building picks.

Buddy, Bogdonavic, Monk and Richardson doesn't make sense. Why overload one position with so many other needs?

Fill out your roster with youth, talent, IQ, and intangibles. All of these guys could bust but I like the plan Vlade has.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

[RIPskaterdude]

So we draft him and then who doesnt play? BB? Buddy? Richardson? Temple?

Everyone but Buddy.

Richardson can spend some time at the 3, but it's also unlikely that he's going to be a good player. Temple's old and is more of a coach than a full time player--and he can spend time at the 3. BB? He can play some 3 I think as well.

But here's the thing. At the end of the day this team needs talent. High. Quality. Talent. Monk was arguably the best scorer in college basketball last year and he was a freshman. You just can't pass up that kind of talent if you're the Kings. You just can't--especially when you may very well have been able to acquire Giles via taking on salary.

High volumn scorer in college who played SG but we would convert to PG? Hmmm that sounds familiar...

[nolimit0820]

busts are more likely to occur when the culture is built on the wrong things. I believe in all of our prospects coming because culture trumps mission. Look at the Spurs. Many of their prospects could have busted if put in a toxic culture. We can't underestimate the importance of doing things the right way and how that is the catalyst to growth and development for young players. These guys will thrive because Vlade is not allowing the kings to be toxic at any level. just my two cents

[rpa]

High volumn scorer in college who played SG but we would convert to PG? Hmmm that sounds familiar...

Who played PG in high school and probably would have in college if he hadn't gone to a team with Fox and Briscoe.

[Sactowndog]

I agree. A Fox - Hield - Monk trio would have been deadly. Plus, I am sure Fox and Monk have great chemistry together. It's not like the old days where your starting 5 played majority of the game. There's a lot more rotation and platooning these days.

Unless you think Bogdan is a better player and drafting Monk can cost you Bogdan.

The kid wants to play and he doesn't have to come to the US. He could stay in Europe and play. Serbs can be damm stubborn and Vlade knows that fact.

Bogdan is significantly longer than Monk. 6' 5" with a 6' 11" wingspan. 6' 3" with a 6" 6' wingspan. He wants to have a clear path to play and not be caught in a log jam. Drafting Monk could well have caused Bogdan to stay home.

They are two different players... Monk is much faster and has much better handles at this point. I would think he could work into a backup PG. Vlade would need to explain that to him - I am sure he could have done that job - especially when he waives Afflalo.

What makes you think he has better handles? Watched Bogdan as the primary ball handler during Championship so that comment surprises me.

[KF10]

YES SIR!

[SacKingZZZ]

We are really gonna regret not drafting Monk. Book it.

So we draft him and then who doesnt play? BB? Buddy? Richardson? Temple?

You could start Monk as a backup combo G. You'd lose value on him as an asset but if he flourished you're scoring off the bench is secure. As it is right now, one of those wings aren't getting consistent minutes unless one of them spends time at PF anyway. I think the smart play is see if BB, Malachi, and Jackson can work at SF. If it costs the Kings games then goodie. That's probably the idea anyway.

If Jackson can play some at PF like some see him doing then it could help. I still see more of a G/F combo in the vein of Francisco Garcia if anything. Although who knows, if Cisco were drafted today he might spend some time at PF with the way some teams play. If it proves to be true that Jackson spills over to SG and not PF then someone gets crunched for sure.