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

[Eisenheart]

why all Kings fans want Fox? a PG who can not shoot. i don't know weather he can develope a solid shot or not, but there are more example of guards who couldn't like Rondo, MCW, Payton etc. in modern history you need a PG who can make some 3's. why is everybody so sure that he can make this important developement? i like this guy but i have really big concerns

[benchmobbin02]

why all Kings fans want Fox? a PG who can not shoot. i don't know weather he can develope a solid shot or not, but there are more example of guards who couldn't like Rondo, MCW, Payton etc. in modern history you need a PG who can make some 3's. why is everybody so sure that he can make this important developement? i like this guy but i have really big concerns

There are concerns with every pick we could make. Many have weighed the pros and cons and they like Fox's weighted argument over others in the range. No prospect is perfect.

[Eisenheart]

but a non shooting guard should be the biggest concern of all. Fox has so much bust potential, more than any other top prospect. sometimes i believe, we love him, because he "loves" the Kings.

[rpa]

but a non shooting guard should be the biggest concern of all. Fox has so much bust potential, more than any other top prospect. sometimes i believe, we love him, because he "loves" the Kings.

Westbrook and Wall say 'hi'.

I'm a big fan of Fox for 3 reasons:
1) Passion
2) Work ethic
3) Elite quickness combined with above average athleticism

The shooting definitely worries me, but his work ethic and form make it less of an issue.

[benchmobbin02]

but a non shooting guard should be the biggest concern of all. Fox has so much bust potential, more than any other top prospect. sometimes i believe, we love him, because he "loves" the Kings.

In your opinion.

Also, he has stated that he had a bad shooting year last year which he attributed to spending more time working on defense and his distribution and penetration skills. This is backed up by his high school stats. Over 4 years he avg 34% from 3.

[Eisenheart]

i wouldn't say, it's only my opinion, it's statistics and history. look at Mudiay, Payton, Rubio, MCW. there are so many guards, who couldn't improve there shot. for one who could like Conley or maybe Lowry there are 10, who failed. and shooting is soo important these days. and Fox isn't an great passer, who could compensate his bad shot with elite playmaking. Westbrook shot 35% on college. so i don't say, we shouldn't take Fox, i understand the point of his good looking mechanics, his character an athleticism, but i don't get the hype. he is a big risk, high reward pick, not a "safe" one

[benchmobbin02]

i wouldn't say, it's only my opinion. look at Mudiay, Payton, Rubio, MCW. there are so many guards, who couldn't improve there shot. for one who could like Conley or maybe Lowry there are 10, who failed. and shooting is soo important these days. and Fox isn't an great passer, who could compensate his bad shot with elite playmaking. Westbrook shot 35% on college. so i don't say, we shouldn't take Fox, i understand the point of his good looking mechanics, his character an athleticism, but i don't get the hype. he is a big risk, high reward pick, not a "safe" one

I didn't say that either. But I told you what others on the boards opinion was. I told you he has shot well in the past but you still seem to doubt he has a legit chance to improve his % from last year. And now you're trying to compare him to guards that haven't improved their shot when there are just as many that have. Whatever man. He just as big a risk as DSJ's knees and defense, Tatum's struggles playing team offense and defense and Isaac's ability to reach his potential physically. They all have serious questions. Many here like Fox more in terms of who will be available. It's been debated for months now. If you don't understand that, then go back and read the treads.

[SacKingZZZ]

but a non shooting guard should be the biggest concern of all. Fox has so much bust potential, more than any other top prospect. sometimes i believe, we love him, because he "loves" the Kings.

That is true. He's got two major knocks on him with this his shooting and his physical makeup, but, the ceiling is high as well. I think the Kings have a nice crop of young talent to fall back on even if he busts and they already have a built in spot for him so I think his chances of succeeding are by far the best with Sacramento. The Lakers or Suns could take him, but I think they would be making a mistake. The Suns have their PG spot filled, Fox doesn't want to fight through that. Also, the Suns might have totally whiffed last years draft so they would be much better off taking one of the more bullet proof guys like Isaac or Tatum IMO.

[SacKingZZZ]

but a non shooting guard should be the biggest concern of all. Fox has so much bust potential, more than any other top prospect. sometimes i believe, we love him, because he "loves" the Kings.

Westbrook and Wall say 'hi'.

I'm a big fan of Fox for 3 reasons:
1) Passion
2) Work ethic
3) Elite quickness combined with above average athleticism

The shooting definitely worries me, but his work ethic and form make it less of an issue.

I agree that Fox plays the same type of basketball, but those two probably carry 20-25 pounds on him with ease. If you take Fox you're taking a risk that, even though he's a wiry guy, he might not hold up physically. I'd still take him for Sac because what he brings is exactly what the Kings need but it's always something to think about.

[City of Trees]

Fox is one of a handful of players I'd be ok with the Kings drafting at 5. Jackson, DSJ, Fox, Tatum, and Isaac. There is a case for all of these players. Yes Fox has a shooting issue but you have an all star on your hands if he gets it going. No one ever said there was no risk, because all of these players come with risk. Go ahead and tell us who you'd prefer at 5 and I'll slam that idea just as you did with Fox.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

[nolimit0820]

I'm all for Fox unless we trade up for Jackson. Love Fultz but my preference is to trade up for Jackson. I think he'll be elite on both ends.

I'm also a big Fox believer and if we stay at 5 he's our guy. Anyone watching him head to head with ball saw his drive, tenacity, and ability to make winning plays. Those are just as much of a "skill" as shooting a basketball.

[nolimit0820]

So with the Celtics and 76ers trade finalized, who do you think the Celtics are choosing at 3? Is there a chance they continue to trade down collecting more assets along the way. I'd love to see the kings get that 3rd pick to get Jackson.

[VeganKingsFan]

At some point you overwhelm your coaching staff. I don't know where that line is for Joergers staff, but the line does exist

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Then you hire more coaching staff. There's plenty of good coaching talent out there. Those players can be coached somewhere else, or we can get coaches to coach them here. I say we get that young talent and coach them here instead of letting them be coached by another team who keeps them. If a coaching staff is overwhelmed, it's not because there are too many young players, it would be because we didn't prepare well enough for all the young players. If we know we'll have that many young players, it's the job of management and coaching to prepare to coach that many young players. That includes more hires.

It's not always just about coaching, it's about having a chance to play and see some success on the floor. Perpetually young teams seems always end up on the bottom of the pack and tend to play some very poor basketball fundamentally which can absolutely effect the mental aspects for all involved.

I will say this though. The Kings may have an advantage over some really young teams, you know, the teams chalk full of 19 and 20 year olds. A few of their main pieces moving forward are already in that 24-25 range which means they are already more developed both physically and life experience wise. In theory there should be a lot less hands on necessities with those players so that could ease the burden and also put to bed any issues that typically occur on super young teams. You will sometimes see tensions between those young players as they attempt to assert their dominance over their teammates which causes other issues. When you have guys like Buddy and Willie they should be able to temper that a bit because they should have that seniority.

If it's about having them play, then having vets take their playing time isn't a good thing. The vets aren't going to be all too happy when the youngsters take their minutes. We had good vets, but even they wouldn't want to ride the bench more than we already had them do near the end of the season. When people are unhappy, whether they say it or not, it makes the team less cohesive. When there's enough young competition where the best player gets the minutes, and there's good coaching and high character youth, I don't see any problems with their growth being stunted. Like you were talking about, we have young players who can take on more of the heavy lifting anyways, like WCS, Skal, Hield, Bogdanovic, and Temple (who I think may be the only vet we keep), and Galloway if we keep him. I don't see it as a plus to have players like Koufos either taking the minutes of WCS, Papa and a draftee or to see Koufos riding the bench. Same goes for a Darren Collison type, who I know wouldn't be happy riding the pine.

[dozencousins]

So with the Celtics and 76ers trade finalized, who do you think the Celtics are choosing at 3? Is there a chance they continue to trade down collecting more assets along the way. I'd love to see the kings get that 3rd pick to get Jackson.

IMO 76ers got took . If I had been a 76er fan which I am not I would have been able to live with the swapping of picks + the laker pick but to add another future 1st on top of that ? I would have passed if I was the 76ers .
IMO Ainge once again did another great trade .

I do feel Ainge may try and use these picks to get Butler from Chicago . I can now see the Bulls doing this and going full rebuild letting all vets go and having 2-3 1sts in this draft if they trade with Boston plus getting a 2018 or 2019 future 1st round pick from Boston as well . I think the writing is now on the wall for Butler to be a Celtic .

IMO the biggest draft swerve knock on wood would be if the Celtics or Bulls if they traded for Butler took Fox at 3 and say Fultz and Ball still went 1 & 2 .

I do agree that it is a real possibility Ainge may try and trade down again another 1-3 spots .

[City of Trees]

76ers were taken to the woodshed. They better pray those picks are top 8 protected. With that said I love adding Fultz to that roster. Could be special in 3 years.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

[dozencousins]

76ers were taken to the woodshed. They better pray those picks are top 8 protected. With that said I love adding Fultz to that roster. Could be special in 3 years.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

The Laker pick is unprotected for sure

[dozencousins]

The Boston Celtics are about to complete a deal sending the No. 1 pick in the 2017 NBA Draft to the Philadelphia 76ers for the No. 3 pick, the Los Angeles Lakers unprotected 2018 first round pick and a protected Sacramento Kings first round pick, according to Adrian Wojnarowski of the Vertical.

[209Kings]

The Boston Celtics are about to complete a deal sending the No. 1 pick in the 2017 NBA Draft to the Philadelphia 76ers for the No. 3 pick, the Los Angeles Lakers unprotected 2018 first round pick and a protected Sacramento Kings first round pick, according to Adrian Wojnarowski of the Vertical.

WOW!!!

Just for two spots in the draft. Severely lop sided. Boston made out big time. I could understand the 3rd plus one future first, but 2? And those 2 picks being from franchises that will be lottery picks next year? WOW

[dozencousins]

The Boston Celtics are about to complete a deal sending the No. 1 pick in the 2017 NBA Draft to the Philadelphia 76ers for the No. 3 pick, the Los Angeles Lakers unprotected 2018 first round pick and a protected Sacramento Kings first round pick, according to Adrian Wojnarowski of the Vertical.

WOW!!!

Just for two spots in the draft. Severely lop sided. Boston made out big time. I could understand the 3rd plus one future first, but 2? And those 2 picks being from franchises that will be lottery picks next year? WOW

Yah Boston owns a ton of sweet 2018 picks Nets , Lakers & Kings plus they own a lot of 2019 1sts as well . I see no way that won't be able to get Butler or Hayward now . They might be able to swap all their picks owned in trades for 2 stars if they wanted to cash in all their chips .

Boston now has

2017 PHI 1st
2018 BOS 1st
2018 LAL 1st
2018 BKN 1st
2019 BOS 1st
2019 LAC 1st
2019 SAC 1st
2019 MEM 1st

[SacKingZZZ]

Then you hire more coaching staff. There's plenty of good coaching talent out there. Those players can be coached somewhere else, or we can get coaches to coach them here. I say we get that young talent and coach them here instead of letting them be coached by another team who keeps them. If a coaching staff is overwhelmed, it's not because there are too many young players, it would be because we didn't prepare well enough for all the young players. If we know we'll have that many young players, it's the job of management and coaching to prepare to coach that many young players. That includes more hires.

It's not always just about coaching, it's about having a chance to play and see some success on the floor. Perpetually young teams seems always end up on the bottom of the pack and tend to play some very poor basketball fundamentally which can absolutely effect the mental aspects for all involved.

I will say this though. The Kings may have an advantage over some really young teams, you know, the teams chalk full of 19 and 20 year olds. A few of their main pieces moving forward are already in that 24-25 range which means they are already more developed both physically and life experience wise. In theory there should be a lot less hands on necessities with those players so that could ease the burden and also put to bed any issues that typically occur on super young teams. You will sometimes see tensions between those young players as they attempt to assert their dominance over their teammates which causes other issues. When you have guys like Buddy and Willie they should be able to temper that a bit because they should have that seniority.

If it's about having them play, then having vets take their playing time isn't a good thing. The vets aren't going to be all too happy when the youngsters take their minutes. We had good vets, but even they wouldn't want to ride the bench more than we already had them do near the end of the season. When people are unhappy, whether they say it or not, it makes the team less cohesive. When there's enough young competition where the best player gets the minutes, and there's good coaching and high character youth, I don't see any problems with their growth being stunted. Like you were talking about, we have young players who can take on more of the heavy lifting anyways, like WCS, Skal, Hield, Bogdanovic, and Temple (who I think may be the only vet we keep), and Galloway if we keep him. I don't see it as a plus to have players like Koufos either taking the minutes of WCS, Papa and a draftee or to see Koufos riding the bench. Same goes for a Darren Collison type, who I know wouldn't be happy riding the pine.

I totally agree. I think the young guys should get most of the minutes, but being flanked by experienced players isn't a bad thing. I'm strictly talking about having too much of a youth overload.