MIN-SAC .. need draft Guru's input

[Krapinsky]

For what it's worth, Jon G has Wes Johnson rated as the 8th best prospect in the draft based on his rankings.

[jballer_13]

Aldrich or Monroe would seem to fit nicely in a three-man rotation with Hawes and JT and both should be available at #7 so it would make sense for them to trade back and grab an extra pick. Also, the draft is so muddled after the top 4 that they could have guys like George/Henry rated high enough that they take one of them at #7 and still grab a defensive big like Alibi/Sanders/Seraphin/Whiteside (if he slides) at #23, which would be a pretty sick draft for SAC in my opinion. So it really comes down to the Kings view of Wes Johnson. If they have him as THE guy to play opposite Tyreke for the next 10 years then they take him otherwise I think they do this trade.

[shangrila]

OK, I understand. Personally, I don't really see a seperate tier for #5, but there are far better draft minds on the board than me.

I think the difference in the tiers is small (between Johnson and the guys directly after him) but I still feel like Johnson is hands down the BPA at that point and in a group of his own value wise--whereas I'd lump guys like Udoh, Aldrich, Monroe, & Aminu into a tier by themselves.

I guess it would depend who'd be available for Sacramento at 23. If you can get a big at 7 and a better version of Udrih later on and improve your overall team, would that be worth it?

[rpa]

I guess it would depend who'd be available for Sacramento at 23. If you can get a big at 7 and a better version of Udrih later on and improve your overall team, would that be worth it?

The Kings need top-line talent more than they need upgrades to role players, though. So an upgrade on Udrih is all well and good (though I'm hesitant to say you find one in this draft--it being so weak on PGs) but it doesn't really do the trick. It all really comes down to how the Kings order the prospects and what kind of value difference they see vs. the 5th best guy and the 7th best guy. If they're like me and value Johnson highly (doubtful since last year I cursed them for not taking Rubio--then looked like a dumbass as the season progressed) and place a far lower value on the next tier of guys then it's going to cost a lot for them to trade 5 (and in that scenario it would probably make more sense for the Kings to just trade the 5th pick altogether instead of just moving down).

Again, a lot of what I'm saying stems from me holding Johnson in very high regard (and not liking ANY of the guys that are slated to closely follow him).

[shangrila]

The Kings need top-line talent more than they need upgrades to role players, though. So an upgrade on Udrih is all well and good (though I'm hesitant to say you find one in this draft--it being so weak on PGs) but it doesn't really do the trick. It all really comes down to how the Kings order the prospects and what kind of value difference they see vs. the 5th best guy and the 7th best guy. If they're like me and value Johnson highly (doubtful since last year I cursed them for not taking Rubio--then looked like a dumbass as the season progressed) and place a far lower value on the next tier of guys then it's going to cost a lot for them to trade 5 (and in that scenario it would probably make more sense for the Kings to just trade the 5th pick altogether instead of just moving down).

Again, a lot of what I'm saying stems from me holding Johnson in very high regard (and not liking ANY of the guys that are slated to closely follow him).

This is fair enough. I just thought that, as a fan of another team looking in, that Sacramento's needs were more about finding height and someone that can play with Evans in the backcourt which I'd imagine they can do in a scenario like this, with guys like Warren and Jones looking like they'll be around later on. But I guess it does come down to individual opinions and I'll take yours over mine when talking about your team.

[Breakdown777]

So does SAC think of Tyreke has a PG or SG? (none of that combo-gaurd funny business either, pick ONE spot).

I always though SAC had a good big man setup with Thompson, Hawes, and now Landry. I didn't think they had much of a need for another big unless they are giving up on Hawes and looking to go in a different direction. If that's the case, SAC could still take Wes Johnson if willing to have Casspi on the bench. If not, a trade-down does make sense. SAC doesn't seem like its going to be that great without some assets, so gaining some by trading down (especially if no one entices them at the 5 spot) seems like a logical way to go.

Of course, if the majority of SAC fans / brass like Johnson, they'll just take him and that's the end of that.

[rpa]

This is fair enough. I just thought that, as a fan of another team looking in, that Sacramento's needs were more about finding height and someone that can play with Evans in the backcourt which I'd imagine they can do in a scenario like this, with guys like Warren and Jones looking like they'll be around later on. But I guess it does come down to individual opinions and I'll take yours over mine when talking about your team.

Well it's alot like the TWolves situation. The Kings (Twolves) were put in a spot where the BPA will be a swingman (post-up center) and they already have a handful of young swingmen (post-up bigs) on their roster. So, just like your fans are deciding, Kings fans are trying to decide the same thing: do we take the BPA (Johnson)? What's the talent difference between Johnson and the next best bigs (Aldrich, Monroe, Udoh)? It's a very similar situation as Minnesota is in at this point when you guys talk about Cousins vs. Johnson.

My personal opinion is that (as I said) the best bigs available at 5 are pretty crappy and that Johnson is basically everything the Kings want from a swingman next to Evans. So, even though the Kings have 2 young swingmen that are developing, I'd rather take Johnson because I believe he's far and away BPA and his skillset fits great.

So does SAC think of Tyreke has a PG or SG? (none of that combo-gaurd funny business either, pick ONE spot).

PG with a caveat: you need to play him next to a guard that can handle the ball from time to time (the Kings did this last year with Udrih).

I always though SAC had a good big man setup with Thompson, Hawes, and now Landry.

They're serviceable but not special. Landry and Hawes are both poor defensive players AND rebounders which really hurts the team. JT was very inconsistent last year (great to start the year, crappy in the middle, great at the end) but if he ever becomes consistent he's a decent defender and good rebounder. What the Kings REALLY need is a guy who can rebound and play defense--basically an anchor. Ideally the Kings could get someone like Cousins to fill that role and start him alongside Thompson. Then you bring in Landry off the bench where he can focus on scoring (which he excelled at with the Rockets).

[Esohny]

Shrug. Not really. The talent drop off from 4 to 5 is major. There's very little drop off from 5 to 8.