Posted by: Kingsguru21 | March 30, 2010

The kind of mistakes that happen during draft time (and why John Wall is not the right pick)

Bill Simmons had an interesting point a few days ago about Tyreke Evans:

A great example from last year’s draft that I blew at the time: Memphis’ Tyreke Evans could get to any spot he wanted. This was obvious in college, and it’s painfully obvious now. I got caught up in dueling issues with him — “Is he a point guard or a shooting guard?” and “Why was he the driver in the getaway car of a shooting?” — and missed the basic reality of the Tyreke Evans Era. Namely, that none of the other crap mattered. The dude gets to the rim whenever he wants. I am still kicking myself.

If you’ve followed any of my conversations at StR, you’re probably aware I’ve dueled with Section214 over the idea of BPA over a talented player who fits a need. Needless to say I suggest reading through this thread and this thread in particular. It doesn’t cover any real new ground, but it will give you background to why this is being discussed yet again.

First what Bill Simmons said. I pretty much addressed why I was angry on draft day, and why I changed my mind the next day already.

The reasons were simple: What I thought the facts were on draft day was very different from the facts presented afterwards. It was clear that the Kings thought throughout the draft process that Tyreke Evans was a franchise level player. And, I can’t blame Geoff Petrie (or anybody else on the basketball staff) for holding those reasons secret until you draft the player.

Now it seems simple that you would take Tyreke Evans if you had the 1st or 2nd pick. I still disagree the Kings would have taken Blake Griffin over the Tyreke Evans if they had the 1st overall pick. They might have traded down or tried to move a contract like an Andres Nocioni, but I doubt they would have ended up with Blake Griffin. Looking back, and this is ignoring Griffin’s injury, the problem is that from a defensive standpoint he’s very similar to Jon Brockman in that he has to hold his ground to be effective defensively because he won’t alter many shots at the rim. He’s athletic and can fly, but so can a lot of players in this league. If LeBron James has shots that get blocked, so will Blake Griiffin. And by the same token players who block shots at a young age will block them as they get older. Griffin is not a shot blocker. This is just a side point to the whole thing.

Tyreke Evans in the backcourt forces a lot of things in a lot of different ways that is easy to take for granted. Even though at the time it was assumed that Evans and Martin would work as a backcourt (I believed it was possible), it essentially became luck that a player like Beno Udrih fit so well with Tyreke instead. Sometimes having enough players at one position gives you a chance to see what works and what doesn’t. Beno & Tyreke work much better as a tandem simply because Beno has the mid range game that is so critical to play with Tyreke. Reke’s game is all about getting to the basket and using his size mismatches to create defenses to play bigger players. This creates a lesser matchup for Beno because most of the opponents defense is geared Tyreke. Because Beno is a great mid range player, and is efficient shooting the 3 too, it actually complements Tyreke’s game better than Kevin’s could.

Simply put, despite the fact that the mid-range game is so “in-efficient” (I call bullshit on this–not necessarily because of JT/Landry but on the idea of the mid range game being in-efficient), it’s one of Beno’s real strengths. Kevin Martin is not an effective mid-range player. (That’s where Martin & Rip Hamilton so greatly differ. Hamilton over his career has had an incredible mid-range game where Martin was better from deep and getting to the line.) But that’s that just the issue with Martin vs Evans was the line. Both players essentially made their living doing that. Only if Kevin Martin’s 3’s were going down was the mix worth matching.

Still, the point is generally that Beno & Tyreke’s games compliment each from a compatibility standpoint. Both can handle the ball well (something Kevin can’t do), Tyreke’s game consistents of getting to the basket and taking advantage of bigger defenders with his quickness and ball control or taking advantage of smaller defenders with his ridiculous size. Mis-match.

And as the BS report said, he missed it. So did we. (And I feel bad on that one. That’s what caught my eye in Reke’s final college game. Mizzou geared their entire defense to stop him and still couldn’t. But, I was worried about other things. It turned out I was right, but not about Tyreke. Such is life.)

So the question is: Why do the Kings need another G? With John Wall I can refute any thought process easier than I can Evan Turner. With Wall it’s rather simple: You’re talking about the need for hype.

But umm, why? This Kings team has hype already. Tyreke Evans is ROTY unless the voters get badly confused on what Rookie of the Year really means.

I get why John Wall is an amazing talent. I get why people love him. And I get why people would think it’s the right decision to draft Wall if you were to get the 1st pick and keep him. But it’s not. John Wall and Tyreke Evans do many of the same things already. Their games consist of getting to the basket and using their incredible physical assets (Reke’s are length, strength and size with quickness; Walls is his unstoppable quickness and athleticism combined with his own size–Wall is 6’4). Neither guy is a proficient outside shooter, or, actually, a mid range shooter. Their games don’t really complement each other if either can learn to play off the ball (not either guys strength at this point). But that’s besides the point.

Would either want to play with each other and play off the ball? I understand the counter-argument already being formed: It’s not the Kings problem. You take the BPA and you make them understand how to work together. But, it will feel forced and difficult to do so. Kevin Martin and Tyreke Evans at least had games that in theory would have worked well had a few things gone differently. Because they didn’t, and namely because Martin’s ball handling and mid-range game was never quite what it needed to be for it to work in the Kings system (I’m not assigning blame here), it makes me wonder how wise any effort to put John Wall, or Evan Turner for that matter, in the same backcourt and make it work from a chemistry standpoint is wise. You need stars, but you also need players who support that stars and their weaknesses. Evan Turner does that better IMO than Wall does, but again if you have a top 3 pick you have other glaring needs that are far greater than taking the BPA at the moment.

This, of course, always assumes that the Kings pick high enough to be in the top 2 spots.

There are of course options. You could take Wall or Turner and trade down to get a player like Derrick Favors or DeMarcus Cousins. You could easily see the Kings try to move Andres Nocioni on whatever team has the 3rd pick in order to secure (I’d prefer Favors but Petrie might prefer Cousins–I hope not but how right am I really?).

But other than particular trading option, I don’t really see how putting Evans and Wall/Turner in the same backcourt for a year to see how it works out is the best available option. Just because you can trade Evans, Wall/Turner at that point doesn’t mean it’s the best available option. What team out there would care that the Kings would make a player like Turner or Wall (most likely) available and return a big of substance to make the Kings better? Chances are it’s already a flawed player that the Kings couldn’t get otherwise unless they’re giving up a stud like Wall/Evans. (Example would be John Wall/Tyreke Evans for Amare Stoudemore/Carlos Boozer.)

That’s the biggest problem I have with Wall/Turner coming in. There is a far smaller guarantee that getting something of high quality for any of the 2 players you pair up in the Kings backcourt at a later date increases because teams value size, and especially Greg Oden types, more than any other position. Big players who make impacts on the NBA game are not necessarily the best players in the NBA (especially with the new rules that essentially makes the perimeter players the dominant commodities), but they are the highest valued commodities because there is a significantly smaller pool of high impact big players than high impact small players. The odds are just smaller. There are less 7 foot people than 6 foot 3 people. I realize that’s stating the obvious, but it’s also why Andrew Bogut, Andrea Bargnani and Greg Oden go 1st overall 3 consecutive drafts running. Bogut may end up being the best of the 3, and currently is helping make Milwaukee a better team. He is a quality player even if he is not the caliber of player Deron Williams and Chris Paul are.

But there are still more problems inherent with assuming that John Wall makes your team better because he’s the best talent available. When I look at the most valuable players on the Kings roster I look at it like this:

1) Tyreke Evans
2) Donte Greene & Omri Casspi (both are tied because both bring significant things to the table and neither have shown enough to differentiate themselves yet)
3) Carl Landry
4) Beno Udrih
5) Jason Thompson & Spencer Hawes (same reasons as Donte/Omri)

I mean, that’s the bottom line at this point. The strength of this team is it’s offense and it’s perimeter scoring. The reason I put Beno higher than both JT/Spence is simple: He helps Tyreke operate at a higher level because his game complements Tyreke’s so well at this point. Players who fit in well with your superstar franchise players are sometimes quite a bit more valuable than more talented individual players. As much as some may disagree, this is still a team game. As important as one individual is, it’s also equally important to complement that same individuals with players who complement your best player(s).

No matter how anyone argues this, it still doesn’t change the fact that you have to get players who complement your best players.

******

Another point that I’d like to address in this argument is the overall level of talent. The argument is that the Kings total level of talent is too low to ignore talent that’s the best in the draft. In a sense, I agree. The problem though is I’m not sure the Kings current situation is applicable to that current line of thinking. Simply put, it’s easy to announce that the Kings don’t have enough talent because they’ve lost 50+ games. I disagree with that for a number of reasons.

One major reason is because of Tyreke Evans. I think next year this team will be at least a 30+ win team with Tyreke at the helm (and healthy) for 75 games. He is just that good and that much of an impact player already.

Another reason is that the Kings start a young team with a core of young players who are still figuring a lot of where they fit and do best in the NBA. There is still a lot of potential growth for Donte Greene, Omri Casspi, Jason Thompson and Spencer Hawes as individuals. Their improvement will help this team win more games too.

Another factor is that as Paul Westphal learns more about these players, and as they develop, it’s going to make it easier for coach and players to become comfortable with the systems the Kings are trying to run on both ends of the court. Familiarity can often lead to ease in certain things (especially cutting sets) where the Kings are absolutely in dire need of improvement.

Either way the point is, if nothing else, to short-change real possible improvement from a number of talented and capable young players is, well, short-sighted. I’m not saying Omri or Donte will turn out to be studs. I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying it’s possible that one (I doubt both) will not continue to develop at all and that the Kings still need to shore their issue’s up front if they are to ever make noise on a consistent basis.

This team has no real impact difference maker on either end. Carl Landry for everything he does offensively scoring the ball inside gives much of that difference away on the defensive end and rebounding. I wish Jason Thompson and Spencer Hawes were that good right now. And it’s not for a lack of effort or attitude. Both players have worked on their games and it’s showed. Sometimes both have gotten in their way in terms of progress (that happens with young players and especially with young bigs in this league) but there is hardly reason to be completely disappointed with both. (I am disappointed with Spence’s season as a whole. I expected more.)

Again, I don’t discount the potential impact of a John Wall or Evan Turner. I even recognize that Turner could play the 3 (although I’m skeptical of that) consistently just as I’m skeptical that Tyreke could match up against most 3’s without losing something.

******

There is even another set of factors here. I talked about this with my Chapu post (I realize this is like quadruple posting in one day, but both of these were long overdue), but the value of your role players like Udrih, Garcia and Nocioni go WAYYYYY down because you no longer play the same amount of minutes or you don’t play them in the same roles or fashions due to you’re trying to make a Wall/Evans combination work.

It’s always easy to have delusions of grandeur work. It’s sort of like the Michael Jordan/Clyde Drexler combinations people always bring up when talking about Portland passing up MJ in the ’84 draft. Nevermind that Jordan was a ballhog who tried to get players traded in his 7TH season. He was an asshole to the Nth degree who ended up players that complemented him perfectly. He was a truly dominate player in the Chicago system, but his power was unquestioned. In Portland, that was not the case. He would have had to share that power with Drexler, and as it was Jordan never wanted to share that power. Even when he was 28 years old. That’s not exactly youth.

Tyreke Evans and John Wall are superstar level of players. They will want the ball, glory and everything else that comes with that. Asking 2 young men who turn 21 years old to share all of that because you take the BPA is a huge stretch that would go down with one of the biggest miracles in NBA history. If it worked, though, one would have to ask how the Kings would improve on the front line given that Wall and Evans are both G’s and can’t necessarily make up for their front line.

John Wall has no real concept of defense. He has the athleticism and the ability to play it for sure. But he still has no concept of how to play it. When you let a guy like Joe Mazzulla beat you multiple times to the rack and allow West Virginia to open up the lead (which is what happened to UK on Saturday), than that’s not clear defense. Wall is not a shut down defender, and frankly much of his effort seemed lazy and unaware. It was one thing if it happened once. But when it happens 5 & 6 times in a row, there is an issue. Wall is very incomplete on that end. People complain about Tyreke Evans’ off the ball defense, but some may find that John Wall is worse in this area.

The funny thing is that this is very easily correctable. Had that been the NBA and not John Calipari (who didn’t want to blast Wall for it), Wall would have been bombed for it. You can’t turn your head and get beaten for layups all game. Mental mistakes are not excused in the NBA. Frankly, Kentucky had an off-shooting night against WVU and still should have beaten them by 10 points. But Wall and his teammates (Wall doesn’t deserve all the blame for laziness–he wasn’t alone on that front), dropped the ball and didn’t recognize how to get things done. I picked UK to win it all because I figured their talent would allow them to override a less talented high seed if they had an off night. What I hadn’t figured was that John Wall didn’t know how to lead through adversity. One night leadership doesn’t make or break IMO, but Wall suffered from a huge lag of leadership. Best player or not, Wall has many area’s he’s going to have to work on to become a truly impact phenomenal player on the NBA level. It is hardly a guarantee for him (like any young player). Having said that, I will be greatly shocked if John Wall doesn’t take a game like that personally and set out to figure out how to correct his flaws quickly in the pro’s. Wall doesn’t lack competitiveness and isn’t a lazy player. He simply hasn’t figured out how to use all his tools yet to his best advantage. And this is a problem when you’re taking 2 21 year old kids, and asking them to form the nucleus of a championship team. You’re asking 2 21 year old kids to form the basis for a championship team based on the need to take the best player. And you’re asking both to give up their ego, and possibly some of their best attributes as players to boot, to do it. The odds are far lower that Wall/Evans would succeed before Evans/Favors would succeed. (I won’t bore you with my Derrick Favors love.)

Because of this I have a hard time accepting that John Wall because he’s a magnificent talent makes the Kings a ridiculously better team because they aren’t talented enough to win 41 games. Drafting for need is generally not wise, but drafting talented players who have less hype and less gaudy stats is not the same thing. This is the same concept that essentially saw the OKC Thunder pass on Tyreke Evans for James Harden. (Do you really think that Sam Presti thought James Harden would turn out to be a better player than Ricky Rubio or Tyreke Evans?) Chemistry matters, and how guys fit together as players matter.

Whether or not the Kings take John Wall on draft night (again if they’re lucky) is besides the point. The question at that point is whether they keep Tyreke Evans. Because at that point trading one or the other seems the most feasible and reasonable option. And doing so would also, as I said, simultaneously decrease the values of Beno Udrih and Francisco Garcia. That isn’t a reason to not take John Wall. But that is a consequence you have to consider when you take John Wall.

******

I recognize the idea and importance of BPA. I recognize and understand (and agree with) the point that you take BPA. As it turned out, that very idea was partly why (even though I don’t really think the issues with Martin/Evans caused K-Mart being traded specifically) Kevin Martin is now wearing the Rockets uniform. As much as I like Kevin Martin, and he’s one of my favorite players, he was traded for cap space and Carl Landry. Not exactly a fantastic return for a scorer of Martin’s caliber and efficiency. And I’m not a guy who has once complained about Carl Landry since he was traded here either. But if you’re looking for apples to apples comparison, a star of higher caliber than Landry could have been had for Martin. You would think. But sometimes it’s not that simple, and in this case that’s certainly true.

My feeling always has been, though, that this team if they ever want to contend (or win for that matter) will need a presence up front. I could be wrong and definitely could be missing a valuable portion of the Free-Agent/Trade portion of this picture. But I think the best way to get an impact player up front is through the draft. I prefer Derrick Favors, but I understand why many like DeMarcus Cousins. (I think he really benefited playing with 2 ridiculously talented perimeter players like Wall and Eric Bledsoe. In of itself, this Kentucky team may have 5 guys taken in the lottery the next 2 years: Wall, Cousins, Patrick Patterson, Bledsoe and Daniel Orton.)

******

One more set of points before the last paragraph. It’s easy to say and see the spot up of flaws in my logic in saying John Wall isn’t the answer for the Kings team at this time. You can point out that Wall is a brilliant creator with his passing. You can point out that with Wall and Evans the Kings could merciless in the open court with 2 dominate players sharing the ball and enough possessions. You could even go so far as to say that my flaw in Wall is choosing a small selection of samples to choose from. (I’ll admit that I thought Wall was a top shelf talent but I spotted flaws in Wall’s game I really didn’t think should be there for a player of his caliber.) Essentially, this argument will be about the flaws of the argument of putting the BPA together with Tyreke Evans (which most would agree is John Wall) vs the “need” argument. It’s easy to get wrapped up in that.

I look at this differently because I feel I know what Evans flaws are, and I know he has to improve on them. But Wall has serious flaws too, and he has to improve on those as well. People often complain about how Tyreke isn’t a great passer at this level. They also complain about how Tyreke really doesn’t pass inside in for layups. (That’s for you HT.) Quite honestly, who is there to pass inside to GET layups? That isn’t Spence or JT’s strength at this point. That is Carl Landry’s strength, and I’m not surprised to see Reke get more assists with Landry around. Simply put, Landry is so awesome in catching passes that Reke doesn’t have to make a perfect entry pass to get Landry the ball or in position to score. A flip side to the argument for Wall is that even though he’s a great passer at the collegiate level, he also plays with a tremendous amount of talent that he should be comfortable sharing the ball with. When you play with a potential NBA starting 5, I’d hope you were comfortable passing the ball around. Especially when you play with a big like DeMarcus Cousins and talented players flanking you in Patrick Patterson and Eric Bledsoe.

Neither Derrick Rose or Tyreke Evans has played with a high caliber of player that ranks anywhere near any of the players I named for Kentucky. Rose pretty much willed his team to the championship game and very nearly won a championship. Evans willed a weaker version of the same Memphis to the sweet 16. Kentucky outlasted vastly inferior opponents because of their high talent level. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong. But to say that John Wall has truly separated himself due to how he carried his team or not seems stretching that particular argument a lot. I would agree that Wall’s teammates have benefitted from him, and he from them. That’s my point.

I look at the flaws of the argument with Wall/Evans vs the flaws of Evans/Favors and I go hmmm. A young kid whose learning post moves (because players don’t get better at those as they get older right?), turnover prone (oh yeah Shaq never turned the ball over either), has the body, length, and athleticism that is top shelf, and is young himself.

I’ll take the flaws and upside of a Favors over a better talent like Wall every day of the week. Not because the flaws of Favors aren’t noticeable and wouldn’t need work. Regardless of what happens, John Wall will need to improve his flaws too. Young players have flaws. It’s why they’re not veterans. Hell, Lebron James has flaws. Ain’t he like the best player around at the moment? This argument is about the flaws you prefer vs the flaws I prefer. With all due respect to the BPA’ers, the argument that this team lacks talent and you can’t afford to skip the best talent is somewhat hollow because of the absolute dire need for a difference maker up front. If that player isn’t there when the Kings draft, that’s fine. I can accept that.

What I can’t accept at this point is that John Wall adds more to the team in the short and long term than a young big with a ton of upside. I just don’t get it. It’s not even about need. At this point, it’s about being able to compete for a championship. Maybe that player is up front in this draft; maybe not. It’s hard to say. But that argument can be had for John Wall too no matter how you wish to argue it. You could argue that Wall has a harder time passing to teammates in the pro’s because he isn’t playing with a much higher caliber of player with his pro team the way he was at UK. There are a number of angles and possibilities that play out with young players. John Wall is an amazing talent, but so is Tyreke Evans. I will always think that the gamble for a big that helps you on 2 ends with athleticism, defense, rebounding, and shot blocking is a far safer bet to get you anywhere near a championship rather than a G who knows how to run the Pick & Roll (with no guys who set picks real well under than Jon Brockman and Carl Landry) and is a “pure” PG (whatever the hell that really means).

Sometimes bucking the odds and the media wags is what has made Geoff Petrie the GM he has been. He left better players on the board in Dirk Nowitzki and Paul Pierce in 1998. (Pierce was surely considered better at the time. Nowitzki? Probably not.) He left a better big on the board in David Lee in 2005 to take Francisco Garcia. (Probably because he thought Shareef Abdur Rahim would be better over the long haul than Lee. Whoops.) Geoff Petrie is not infallible. He’s not the giant on the hillside eating the Jolly Green Giant. He’s a high quality GM who has made some mistakes, had some major success, and a lot of stuff somewhere in between. Some of his greatest strengths has been adjusting to mistakes as they’ve come along. (Draft picks in particular come to mind as well as waiving Mikki Moore last year. little stuff goes a long way in recognizing your mistakes.) Geoff Petrie isn’t stupid. Right?

Assuming that a big man can help you greatly (and I think it would), you have to make that gamble that leaving a higher touted player like Turner or Wall in exchange for a big like Cousins or Favors has to be Petrie’s play. It’s not because this team doesn’t lack talent or because they’ve only won 25 games. If that was the case, than you could have made the same argument about Kevin Martin, Donte Greene, or Omri Casspi given where they were drafted. Players drafted in the 20’s have lower success rate because the odds of success are typically lower in that part of the draft. I don’t think anybody within Kings management is delusional about the win total. But when you take a young team and put them in the NBA, and you feed them to the dogs, and they still live to tell you about it, it’s a hell of a head start on rebuilding. At any rate, if you don’t have any faith in Omri Casspi or Donte Greene to develop, why keep them? Why would Paul Westphal give them both minutes? You need to find players who fit your greatest needs who are the best talents. I would argue that PF or C doesn’t matter; simply the best big player who does the most things for you on 2 ends matter most. So in that end, that’s where I side with the BPA argument. If the Kings were in desperate need of a franchise talent, which I contend with Tyreke Evans they do not, than I would agree the BPA on the board regardless of position, particularly a franchise player, needs to be taken. But the game changes when you have a franchise player. It changes even more when you’re most dire needs are often the dire needs that every team over-values to a fault simply because game changing size is not available at the same quantities that game changing perimeter talent is.

It’s probably all moot anyway. The Kings will likely finish 6th or 7th. And, I don’t think anyone would disagree that regardless of who the Kings ended up from the draft, if they got the 1st pick it would be a great thing for the franchise.

******

At the end of the day, this isn’t about proving myself right or anyone else wrong. Geoff Petrie and his basketball staff will choose the player they want at the pick they get regardless of what any fans think. I’m not doing this because I have an ax to grind with any particular person or group. I’m not doing this because of a person or group who think I’m a stuck up asshole self serving pompous twat know it all. I do it because it because the Kings are my religion, and the writing is cathartic. It helps me track my thoughts and everything else. If for nothing else, I want my piece of mind and thoughts on this matter to exist on this piece of cyberspace and not in my head. I have too many cluttered unanswered thoughts ringing around my noggin as it is. The Favors/Wall argument is just one of them.

I suppose a lot of this centers around the fact that I don’t suffer all that much from delusions of grandeur or “what if” syndrome in this regard. (I hate that game.)

So, umm, Derrick Favors for the 2010 pick, yeah?

Advertisements

Responses

  1. The Draft comes around so quickly. Or at least that is what my wife just told me when I mentioned that I was reading your piece about the upcoming Draft.

    I haven’t done all my homework for this Draft yet, but promise to do so as summer begins to creep closer. I am familiar with all the major players in the Draft, what their strengths and weaknesses are, and where they are projected to go. I think this is enough to weigh in on what you have written here.

    Best Player Available vs. Filling the Most Glaring Team Need

    I think you go with the BPA, unless there is no clear winner. John Wall is considered by pretty much everyone to be the best player in the draft. If you get a shot at him, I say take him. Even if you take him to trade him, you take him. Do you think that Wall, without playing a game in the NBA, can fetch a better big man than say, Lamarcus Aldridge or Al Horford? I think that he may. While I have nothing concrete I think of the Nets who need to put butts in seats. John Wall will put butts in seats…Brooks Lopez would make the Kings a contender at some point in the next 8 years with Tyreke. Not saying the Nets would or should do this, but they might. I know that they wouldn’t let Lopez go for Cousins or Favors. Yes, I think that the Nets would show a lack of understandomg of the value of a big man if they let him go but you know who else has been traded? Kareem, Shaq and Wilt.

    I don’t think this is an issue either, however. We most likely will not be picking high enough o consider Wall or Turner. This is where you begin to make a lot of sense to me, Pookey.

    If you are picking at the 4-6 range, it becomes less clear who is better than the next player. At this point, I think that if there is ANYONE left on the board that completely blew GP out of the water in workouts, you take that player. If not, you take the best available big. Pookey, you think that is Favors. The numbers say it is Cousins. I would be surprised if GP didn’t have both of these guys in for workouts and have a clear picture of who the better player is by Draft day. If they are both still on the board, I trust the GP will know who to pick. I can’t pretend today to know who is better, but Cousins’ numbers really impress me. I know that he has some issues. I know that his temper, maturity and work ethic are suspect. I also know that he is only 19. If you have harsh judgments of Cousins at age 19, you are too far removed from 19. Who is to say that he can’t grow up? Who is to say he can’t stay hot headed and be an NBA success? Rasheed Wallace did it.

    Now that I have established 1) I don’t know enough about the prospects to make any truly informed decisions at this point 2) I would take John Wall if available with no idea what to do with him 3) I am willing to waffle on the BPA vs. Team Needs debate, I can say with conviction that Wall excites me, Favors intrigues me, Cousins impresses me and Turner bores me a bit.

    All this debate so GP can take Greg Monroe #1 overall and make me punch myself in the balls on Draft day again. Good grief.

    • Well Quick thanks as always for stopping by. Glad to see you’re back home.

      This debate is a difficult one for anyone to discern and that’s how mistakes often happen. Anyone who says that you can draft for need is stupid. You have to draft the best player that you think will help you most.

      Sometimes that’s the best player regardless of position. That’s exactly what ultimately happened with Tyreke Evans and Kevin Martin.

      I don’t think the Kings are in dire need of a true C or true PF. I think they are in DIRE, ABSOLUTE DIRE, need of an impact player on that front line. I don’t care if that guy is a “pure” PF or C, it really doesn’t matter.

      Chris Webber played PF for most of his career, and most consider him a PF. Yet, he defended Shaquille O’Neal. Was he a PF except when he defended Shaq? Is Tim Duncan a C or PF? Most contend he’s a C who plays PF. Really though it makes little difference as Duncan is a great player who is unique and few compare.

      You can bet that Greg Monroe is not being taken by the Kings. If the Kings take Monroe, maybe you & I can punch each other in the balls. I don’t think I’ll ever be happy with that pick.

      I think the guy, if the Kings are not at the top of the draft to take Favors, is Epke Udoh of Baylor. I think he’s the guy who fits needs for the Kings in every fashion and will likely be the best player around where the Kings select at 6, 7 or 8.

      • Cousins looks like a big ass version of Mo Williams.

        That’s all I got.

        • LOL @ that Quick. He very much does.

  2. […] of Turner. Rather going into detail again, and again, on this point, I’d rather stop here. I’ve made it clear why I disagree with this line of thinking. I only bring it up to highlight that it’s one area […]


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: