Page 8 of 33 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 660

Thread: 2013 Draft Prospects

  1. #141
    Senior Member MassachusettsKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    7,383
    Kentavious Caldwell-Pope is an incredible name.

    Also - it seems like Otto Porter should be getting a little more national love. Great length for an SF, he's only 19 (with 2 years of college ball under his belt) and is shooting almost .500 from 3. Great rebounding numbers. He seems to be the total package for an SF these days... theoretically able to defend the Durant/James type.

    Is there something I'm missing with him? I mean, if you take the SG's off the board (Muhammed/McLemore) ... is there a better fit for this team in this draft than Otto Porter? outside of Noel, of course.

    I always consider the makeup of the Kings when it comes draft time. I'm not a BPA guy. Never have been, unless its a drastic drop off, because if you're drafting someone at a position where they will get no playing time, chances are they won't develop. Or they will develop for a different team that will give them playing time. Noel fits my BPA mold. He's the #1 guy, you have to take him. After that ... We would be foolish to draft another SG, unless we plan on losing Tyreke Evans, which would also be foolish. I think this team could still use a PG, SF, and a BIG big. Someone taller than Hayes or Robinson. And I don't love any of the top PG options this year. With that being said, I like ..

    1) Noel
    2) Porter
    3) Cauley-Stein

    And unless we win the lottery, Noel will be off the board, but I think we'd fall right in line for either Porter or Cauley-Stein.
    Last edited by MassachusettsKingsFan; 02-11-2013 at 10:35 AM.
    Every Time You Touch The Ice, Remember That It Was Hans Who Taught Us To Fly.


    Twitter.

  2. #142
    Senᴉor Member Contributor Capt. Factorial's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingster View Post
    Jordan Williams not even on baja's board, but #4 in Arby's. Reason?
    I think you meant Jordan Adams at #3.

    I can't speak for Baja/Arby's but I'm not 100% sold on Jordan Adams. He came out with a really hot start to the season but has cooled off considerably. He's really not very athletic and came into the season a bit tubby/flabby. He's supposed to be losing some weight but I don't know if he's going to have the speed to be a SG in the NBA. I would point out that Arby's is probably in the minority here - Adams seems to be a lock to return at least for his sophomore year and isn't listed on even the 2014 draft for either DraftExpress or NBADraft.net. Listing him at #3 overall is definitely going out on a limb relative to the current consensus.

  3. #143
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingster View Post
    Arby's,

    No Shabazz in top 10?
    His system is most likely based on stats and advanced statistics is not 'Bazz's biggest friend, unless we're talking shooting percentages.
    This gives me opportunity to post this

  4. #144
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilles View Post
    His system is most likely based on stats and advanced statistics is not 'Bazz's biggest friend, unless we're talking shooting percentages.
    This gives me opportunity to post this
    Did anyone see this from a little while ago?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDRljyUORuo

    His team win yet he's unhappy because he didn't get the last shot. Not sure thats the type of character id want to be drafting. Especially on our team.

  5. #145
    Senior Member bajaden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    baja, mexico
    Posts
    13,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingster View Post
    Jordan Williams not even on baja's board, but #4 in Arby's. Reason?

    Interesting how different the opinion of both of you on Michael Carter Williams, with Arby's at #4 and baja's at #9
    Probably not quite fair when it comes to players this young, but I place a little more emphasis on the ability to shoot the ball from the outside for perimeter players than Arby does. I keep waiting for Carter-Williams to start hitting his shot more consistently, and so far he hasn't. However, last season he shot the ball very well from the outside. I can only guess that the added responsibilities of playing the point, and the added minutes, is affecting his outside shot.

    I like Jordan Adams, but once again, inconsistent outside shot. Now you could turn around and say, well, you have Marcus Smart ranked high, and his outside shot isn't very good either. And you'd be right. But Smart is a freak athlete that can totally disrupt the other teams offense on the defensive side of the ball. He leads college in steals per 40 minutes, barely edging out Oladipo, and guess who comes in third in that dept? None other than Michael Carter-Williams. Some of my judgement just comes from the eyeball test. Putting all the stats aside, and just watching someone play, can make a big difference with me. Seldom do I watch Smart play, when he doesn't do something in a game that impresses me. He may go 4 for 14 from the floor, but he'll still have an impact on the game.

    In the end, Arby may be right and I may be wrong. You have your hits and misses. For example, I didn't think that Durant would be as good as he's turned out to be. At Texas he was mostly a chucker, and an inconsistent one at that. But what you can never account for is how hard someone will work on his game. But I also predicted that Harden would be a very good player. Others that I really liked were Chandler Parsons, MarShon Brooks, Grievous Vasquez. This year, a player in the Vasquez mold that I like is Nate Wolters, from South Dakota St. The best way I can describe him is Tough, tough, and tougher! He's like a pitt bull on both ends of the court. And Mathew Dellavedova from St. Marys. He just doesn't look like a basketball player until he steps on the court.

    But lets go back to Jordan Adams for a moment. I like him, but do I like him better than Tim Hardaway Jr. from Michigan? No! I don't. The only thing Williams has going for him is youth. Hardaway Jr. is a junior, but right now, he's a better basketball player, and he's also shooting 43.8% from the three, and 48.4% overall. And at 6'6", he's capable of playing both SG and SF. The only edge I give Williams, is that he's a little better defensive player. The fact is, shooting guards are a dime a dozen, unless their very special. I know everyone was excited about Thornton when he arrived, but I'd bet you that if we were to trade for Jeremy Lamb, he could step in and easily replace Thornton, and improve our defense at the same time. It might take him a year, but overall, I believe he has more talent than Thornton. Of course, thats just my opinion! And just for the record, I predicted that Mike Bibby would be a much better PG than Steve Nash. You just never know for sure!
    Last edited by bajaden; 02-11-2013 at 06:31 PM.
    Its hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

    Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

  6. #146
    Senior Member bajaden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    baja, mexico
    Posts
    13,491
    Quote Originally Posted by MassachusettsKingsFan View Post
    Kentavious Caldwell-Pope is an incredible name.

    Also - it seems like Otto Porter should be getting a little more national love. Great length for an SF, he's only 19 (with 2 years of college ball under his belt) and is shooting almost .500 from 3. Great rebounding numbers. He seems to be the total package for an SF these days... theoretically able to defend the Durant/James type.

    Is there something I'm missing with him? I mean, if you take the SG's off the board (Muhammed/McLemore) ... is there a better fit for this team in this draft than Otto Porter? outside of Noel, of course.

    I always consider the makeup of the Kings when it comes draft time. I'm not a BPA guy. Never have been, unless its a drastic drop off, because if you're drafting someone at a position where they will get no playing time, chances are they won't develop. Or they will develop for a different team that will give them playing time. Noel fits my BPA mold. He's the #1 guy, you have to take him. After that ... We would be foolish to draft another SG, unless we plan on losing Tyreke Evans, which would also be foolish. I think this team could still use a PG, SF, and a BIG big. Someone taller than Hayes or Robinson. And I don't love any of the top PG options this year. With that being said, I like ..

    1) Noel
    2) Porter
    3) Cauley-Stein

    And unless we win the lottery, Noel will be off the board, but I think we'd fall right in line for either Porter or Cauley-Stein.
    Great minds think alike. You have them in the precise order that I do. My first choice for the Kings would be Noel. No brainer there! But I really like Porter. About the only knock that I've heard about him is that he's not an elite athlete, and I'll give them that. But as far as skills, and BBIQ go, he's at the head of the class, and he can play on my team any day. And, I'm also a big fan of Willie Cauley-Stein, who is a little raw, but seems to be learning quickly, and might be ahead of Noel as far as BBIQ goes. Not only is he a legit 7 footer in shoes, with a nice wingspan, he's athletic enough to guard PF's. So he can play both center or PF.

    If I had to choose a PG from this class right now, it would be Trey Burke from Michigan. He's only 6 foot, but he has a big wingspan, and he can play the position extremely well, and on both ends of the court. Long range, both Marcus Smart and Michael Carter-Williams might prove to be better, but Burke is good right now, and he can shoot the rock.
    Its hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

    Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

  7. #147
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilles View Post
    His system is most likely based on stats and advanced statistics is not 'Bazz's biggest friend, unless we're talking shooting percentages.
    This gives me opportunity to post this
    Shabazz is incredibly skilled offensively, but I'm wondering if his long ball can sustain for the NBA. He mostly operates from the mid-range in, doesn't take too many college three point shots, and I've seen a fair share of misses from the stripe to make me think he could be a slightly above shooter for the next level. He's skilled, and maybe I'm just being picky here, but I'd like to see him slash even more rather settle for all these mid-range J's. That's a big reason. But the bigger reason is what Gilles mentioned: the passing. I haven't seen any wing lottery pick in the past several drafts post such bad assist numbers, and he's by and large having the green light to score for himself. In the NBA, that makes him easy to exploit: teams will load up on him and force him to pass, and early returns say he may not be up to that challenge. Defensively, he's strong, but is not a playmaking presence at all. Rebounding is also very underwhelming. There's a ton of reasons for me to not like Shabazz, from the overrated offense/shooting to the lack of passing to the lack of rebounding to concerns about his defensive activity. I have so many questions to the point where even if he corrects a few, he might only be a 4th-5th man in teams, at best. But hey, I realize I'm in the minority with this opinion, but as you can tell I'm just not liking gunner scorers (MarShon Brooks also ranked poorly with me). Shabazz has a great frame, but I keep thinking of Gerald Henderson/DeMar DeRozan/Nick Young/MarShon Brooks when people bring up comparisons.
    I hope my username evokes hunger every time you post

  8. #148
    By the way, my mock draft/big boards have always went against popular opinion on many players--I don't look for who strikes me as an awesome player, I look at what specific set of skills are easily translatable to the league. It's a crapshoot that has uncovered some gems, but that have also overlooked some players (particularly some 3rd/4th year players, although it has also identified many of these as busts as well).

    Jordan Adams kind of reminds me of James Harden without the passing. Now, I realize James Harden without the passing might not be much of anything, since it is precisely Harden's threat of passing that opens up all his driving lanes and allows him to draw fouls at will. But Harden wasn't that great a passer at college either. Adams, for all we know, might uncover some passing ability in the more spread-out NBA, because, like Harden, he loves to spot up from deep and get to the hole--that's an excellent trait to have in college, especially when you're 6'5" and not 6'1". The other thing I like about Adams is he's got really quick hands and makes a ton of defensive plays. And he's doing all this as a freshman, so he has a ton of room to improve--there's a lot of 2-way potential with him. I look at the overall picture with a guy like Adams and there's a lot to work with.

    Baja brought up Tim Hardaway Jr. Excellent question. There's similarities. Hardaway Jr is also another guy who has a diverse offensive game--he's more of a jumpshooter than Adams is, but for someone who takes so many jumpers he does a reasonable job at slashing and drawing fouls as well. I just wonder, for a inclined jumpshooter, whether he's that good a shooter at the NBA level. I've seen enough misses at the stripe, and enough misses from deep in his three years, to believe that he's really an average jumpshooter. Adams is also cold from outside, but he's more money from the stripe and to me that lends greater hope about his jumper. Hardaway Jr is a junior (no pun intended) and has been doing this for three years, so this may be who he is. The other major difference is that Hardaway Jr isn't much of an entity defensively--he's just a body, not one to really put pressure and make plays. He also appears to be a worse passer than Adams. So the overall picture is an inclined jumpshooter who's average, not much of a defensive playmaker. To be honest, I see him as a Jarvis Hayes type, and that's a stark difference from my expectations of Adams. But, opinion and stuff, and of course I'm open to counterarguments.
    I hope my username evokes hunger every time you post

  9. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by MassachusettsKingsFan View Post
    Kentavious Caldwell-Pope is an incredible name.

    Also - it seems like Otto Porter should be getting a little more national love. Great length for an SF, he's only 19 (with 2 years of college ball under his belt) and is shooting almost .500 from 3. Great rebounding numbers. He seems to be the total package for an SF these days... theoretically able to defend the Durant/James type.

    Is there something I'm missing with him? I mean, if you take the SG's off the board (Muhammed/McLemore) ... is there a better fit for this team in this draft than Otto Porter? outside of Noel, of course.

    I always consider the makeup of the Kings when it comes draft time. I'm not a BPA guy. Never have been, unless its a drastic drop off, because if you're drafting someone at a position where they will get no playing time, chances are they won't develop. Or they will develop for a different team that will give them playing time. Noel fits my BPA mold. He's the #1 guy, you have to take him. After that ... We would be foolish to draft another SG, unless we plan on losing Tyreke Evans, which would also be foolish. I think this team could still use a PG, SF, and a BIG big. Someone taller than Hayes or Robinson. And I don't love any of the top PG options this year. With that being said, I like ..

    1) Noel
    2) Porter
    3) Cauley-Stein

    And unless we win the lottery, Noel will be off the board, but I think we'd fall right in line for either Porter or Cauley-Stein.
    FWIW, I've seen Porter play a couple of times. He's not all that athletic. He's a smart, skilled player, but not someone that I see as above average athletically in the NBA, and therefore probably not an above average defender, though he could be a pretty good rebounder.

  10. #150
    Senior Member bajaden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    baja, mexico
    Posts
    13,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingster View Post
    FWIW, I've seen Porter play a couple of times. He's not all that athletic. He's a smart, skilled player, but not someone that I see as above average athletically in the NBA, and therefore probably not an above average defender, though he could be a pretty good rebounder.
    As I stated, Porter isn't an above average athlete, but then, neither was Larry Bird. But like Bird, his BBIQ is off the charts, and he may have the best BBIQ in all of college. While his athleticism is a little suspect, I think to overlook what he does on the floor is foolish. He gets his share of steals, and is a good weakside shotblocker for a SF. He's a very good rebounder, averaging just under 8 boards a game, and he's an excellent passer. As I said earlier, he might be the most skilled SF in college.

    I know we get caught up in this defensive stuff, and as a result pass on players that end up killing us down the road, and we wonder why we passed on that player. It always amazes me how we don't want this player or that player because their not good enough for our lousy team, but then they end up on a team contending for a championship. How is it that they're good enough for a good team, but not us. And I'm speaking in general here, and not about you Kingster.

    Arby brought up freethrow shooting as a parameter in his analysis. I used too, but gave it up because too many times, it just didn't bear any fruit. For instance, Tyreke is a good freethrow shooter, but isn't a good jumpshooter, recent stats aside. I will admit, that in general, most good jumpshooters are also good freethrow shooters. Jimmer being an example of that. But I've seen quite a few players that were good freethrow shooters that never became good jumpshooters, and generally the reason is form. For instance, if you watch T. Robb take a jumpshot, he has very good motion and form, and thats why I think its only a matter of time and practice before he becomes consistent with his jumpshot. However, when he goes to the freethrow line, his form is terrible and very mechanical. As a result, at least so far, he's not a good freethrow shooter.

    Now in the case of a player like Jordan, its very possible that his jumpshot will come later. The old rule, the more I practice, the luckier I get, is a correct one. But its alway a crapshoot to some extent. Will the player put in the work? You just never know. Donte Greene didn't. Nice guy that everybody liked, and wanted to succeed. But he was lazy, and you just never know what someone will do when that first big paycheck arrives. Thats why I like to get as much info on a player in highschool and college as I can. I try and go to the college website and read what the coach or others locally are saying about a player. For instance, I was reading an article about an interview with Victor Oladipo's coach. In the article, he said Victor spent the entire offseason working on his jumpshot. That Victor is always in the gym before anyone else arrives for practice, and has a key to get into the Gym late at night so he can get in extra practice. When I read stuff like that, it moves that player up a few notches on my board.

    By the way, Harden was a very good passer in college, and basicly played the Point. He brought up the ball, and started the offense. I had people tell me he wasn't a good athlete. He wasn't a good ballhandler, and wasn't a good passer. I watched the guy play, counting the tournament, over 20 some odd times. All those people were wrong! They found out when he got to the combine that he was a terrific athlete with explosive leaping ability. But then these were the same people that told me that Blake Griffin was undersized, and not athletic. I sometimes wonder what these people are watching, or if they watch at all.
    Last edited by bajaden; 02-12-2013 at 12:54 PM.
    Its hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

    Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

  11. #151
    Senior Member bajaden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    baja, mexico
    Posts
    13,491
    Here are the stats for Porter's last two games. And I would say that they reflect most games.

    19 pt's on 7 of 14 shooting. 1 of 3 from beyond the arc. 4 of 4 from the freethrow line. 14 rebounds, 4 assists, and 1 steal.

    21 pt's on 6 of 15 shooting. 2 of 6 from beyond the arc. 7 of 7 from the freethrow line. 7 rebounds, 3 assists, and 3 blocked shots.

    Bear in mind that he's shooting over 50% overall for the year and over 40% from the three.


    Ben McLemore had himself quite a night last night. 30 points on 9 of 13 shooting. 6 of 10 from the three, and 6 of 6 from the freethrow line. He also added 7 rebounds and 3 steals. His running mate Jeff Withey had 17 pt's on 5 of 10 shooting, and 7 of 8 from the freethrow line. He added 10 rebounds and 5 blocked shots.

    On saturday McAdoo didn't fair very well. 6 pts on 3 of 12 shooting, 3 rebounds, no assists and 3 turnovers. This is precisely why he sliding down the draft boards. I do think there's some talent there, but so far, he's getting out played way too often. Right now, the best player on the North Carolina team is probably Reggie Bullock who went for 14 pt's on 5 of 8 shooting, only 1 of 4 from the three, and 3 of 4 from the freethrow line. He added 7 boards as well.

    One of my favorites, Kelly Olynyk, the 7 foot center from Gonzaga had a nice game on saturday. 20 pts on 7 of 8 shooting and 6 of 6 from the freethrow line. He also had 6 boards, 4 assists, and 2 blocked shots. Another center thats starting to get some attention by the media is Alex Kirk, who is partly responsible for New Mexico's good play this year. On saturday the 7 footer had 17 pts on 7 of 11 shooting along with 16 rebounds and 2 blocked shots.

    Finally, Anthony Bennett seems to be adjusting to his new found defensive attention he's been getting and he's starting to figure out how to get his points again. He had 17 pt's on 8 of 14 shooting, 12 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals and 3 blocked shot.
    Its hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

    Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

  12. #152
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by Arby's Roast Beef View Post
    Shabazz is incredibly skilled offensively, but I'm wondering if his long ball can sustain for the NBA. He mostly operates from the mid-range in, doesn't take too many college three point shots, and I've seen a fair share of misses from the stripe to make me think he could be a slightly above shooter for the next level. He's skilled, and maybe I'm just being picky here, but I'd like to see him slash even more rather settle for all these mid-range J's. That's a big reason. But the bigger reason is what Gilles mentioned: the passing. I haven't seen any wing lottery pick in the past several drafts post such bad assist numbers, and he's by and large having the green light to score for himself. In the NBA, that makes him easy to exploit: teams will load up on him and force him to pass, and early returns say he may not be up to that challenge. Defensively, he's strong, but is not a playmaking presence at all. Rebounding is also very underwhelming. There's a ton of reasons for me to not like Shabazz, from the overrated offense/shooting to the lack of passing to the lack of rebounding to concerns about his defensive activity. I have so many questions to the point where even if he corrects a few, he might only be a 4th-5th man in teams, at best. But hey, I realize I'm in the minority with this opinion, but as you can tell I'm just not liking gunner scorers (MarShon Brooks also ranked poorly with me). Shabazz has a great frame, but I keep thinking of Gerald Henderson/DeMar DeRozan/Nick Young/MarShon Brooks when people bring up comparisons.
    Speaking of former lottery picks Harrison Barnes had asst.pct. of 7.2% his sophomore year, but 6,2% that Shabazz has is really underwhelming. Also rebounding: he's a very good offensive rebounder, while being pretty bad defensive one on par with most PGs, not SFs.

  13. #153
    Yeah, I wasn't too high on Harrison Barnes either. Early 20s. But I was higher on Barnes than I was on Shabazz.
    I hope my username evokes hunger every time you post

  14. #154
    Senior Member Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by Arby's Roast Beef View Post
    Yeah, I wasn't too high on Harrison Barnes either. Early 20s. But I was higher on Barnes than I was on Shabazz.
    Well, how do you feel about Barnes now? I think 90% of the world was high on Thomas Robinson, and I would love to have that one back if that meant we got Barnes.

    I'm high on Shabazz just because I think he has potential. I feel like just from a Kings fan's perspective, drafting for talent has gotten us farther (DeMarcus) than drafting a "sure thing" (everyone else).
    Opinions. Opinions are like...

  15. #155
    Senior Member MassachusettsKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    7,383
    Quote Originally Posted by bajaden View Post
    As I stated, Porter isn't an above average athlete, but then, neither was Larry Bird. But like Bird, his BBIQ is off the charts, and he may have the best BBIQ in all of college. While his athleticism is a little suspect, I think to overlook what he does on the floor is foolish. He gets his share of steals, and is a good weakside shotblocker for a SF. He's a very good rebounder, averaging just under 8 boards a game, and he's an excellent passer. As I said earlier, he might be the most skilled SF in college.

    I know we get caught up in this defensive stuff, and as a result pass on players that end up killing us down the road, and we wonder why we passed on that player. It always amazes me how we don't want this player or that player because their not good enough for our lousy team, but then they end up on a team contending for a championship. How is it that they're good enough for a good team, but not us. And I'm speaking in general here, and not about you Kingster.

    Arby brought up freethrow shooting as a parameter in his analysis. I used too, but gave it up because too many times, it just didn't bear any fruit. For instance, Tyreke is a good freethrow shooter, but isn't a good jumpshooter, recent stats aside. I will admit, that in general, most good jumpshooters are also good freethrow shooters. Jimmer being an example of that. But I've seen quite a few players that were good freethrow shooters that never became good jumpshooters, and generally the reason is form. For instance, if you watch T. Robb take a jumpshot, he has very good motion and form, and thats why I think its only a matter of time and practice before he becomes consistent with his jumpshot. However, when he goes to the freethrow line, his form is terrible and very mechanical. As a result, at least so far, he's not a good freethrow shooter.

    Now in the case of a player like Jordan, its very possible that his jumpshot will come later. The old rule, the more I practice, the luckier I get, is a correct one. But its alway a crapshoot to some extent. Will the player put in the work? You just never know. Donte Greene didn't. Nice guy that everybody liked, and wanted to succeed. But he was lazy, and you just never know what someone will do when that first big paycheck arrives. Thats why I like to get as much info on a player in highschool and college as I can. I try and go to the college website and read what the coach or others locally are saying about a player. For instance, I was reading an article about an interview with Victor Oladipo's coach. In the article, he said Victor spent the entire offseason working on his jumpshot. That Victor is always in the gym before anyone else arrives for practice, and has a key to get into the Gym late at night so he can get in extra practice. When I read stuff like that, it moves that player up a few notches on my board.

    By the way, Harden was a very good passer in college, and basicly played the Point. He brought up the ball, and started the offense. I had people tell me he wasn't a good athlete. He wasn't a good ballhandler, and wasn't a good passer. I watched the guy play, counting the tournament, over 20 some odd times. All those people were wrong! They found out when he got to the combine that he was a terrific athlete with explosive leaping ability. But then these were the same people that told me that Blake Griffin was undersized, and not athletic. I sometimes wonder what these people are watching, or if they watch at all.
    I like the way you describe porter, which falls in line with how I think of him, and with you having watched him way more than I have .. it's a little reassuring.

    I can't help but compare him to Harrison Barnes, not in how they play, but in how they are slotted in the draft. Meaning - we could have drafted Barnes last year, we needed an SF and still do, but I'd be much happier with Porter this year than Barnes last year.

    Any News on Noel? His injury last night wasn't pretty. I hope he's fine, obviously, but for now it's possible Cal will finally let Cauley-Stein loose.
    Every Time You Touch The Ice, Remember That It Was Hans Who Taught Us To Fly.


    Twitter.

  16. #156
    Senior Member MassachusettsKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    7,383
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    Well, how do you feel about Barnes now? I think 90% of the world was high on Thomas Robinson, and I would love to have that one back if that meant we got Barnes.

    I'm high on Shabazz just because I think he has potential. I feel like just from a Kings fan's perspective, drafting for talent has gotten us farther (DeMarcus) than drafting a "sure thing" (everyone else).
    If I could go back I wouldn't take Barnes over Robinson, even knowing what we know now. Barnes isn't putting up great numbers, either, he's just getting the minutes for GSW. Robinson is stuck on the bench here. Per36, Robinsons numbers are actually better than Barnes, in my opinion. I wanted Drummond last year until Robinson dropped the way he did. If I could go back in time would I take Drummond or Lillard over Robinson? yea, Barnes though? I don't think I would.

    One guy I was incredibly high on last season is John Henson. I would take him over Thomas Robinson.

    And I have to disagree a little bit with your last point. Cousins wasn't just a 'talent' pick, he also filled a need. He filled everything, really, because the talent gap was so far between him and the players after him that it was a no brainer. I don't think Shabazz's talents are drastically higher than his peers.
    Every Time You Touch The Ice, Remember That It Was Hans Who Taught Us To Fly.


    Twitter.

  17. #157
    Senior Member bajaden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    baja, mexico
    Posts
    13,491
    Quote Originally Posted by MassachusettsKingsFan View Post
    If I could go back I wouldn't take Barnes over Robinson, even knowing what we know now. Barnes isn't putting up great numbers, either, he's just getting the minutes for GSW. Robinson is stuck on the bench here. Per36, Robinsons numbers are actually better than Barnes, in my opinion. I wanted Drummond last year until Robinson dropped the way he did. If I could go back in time would I take Drummond or Lillard over Robinson? yea, Barnes though? I don't think I would.

    One guy I was incredibly high on last season is John Henson. I would take him over Thomas Robinson.

    And I have to disagree a little bit with your last point. Cousins wasn't just a 'talent' pick, he also filled a need. He filled everything, really, because the talent gap was so far between him and the players after him that it was a no brainer. I don't think Shabazz's talents are drastically higher than his peers.
    I wasn't a big fan of Henson. Not that I didn't like him, I just didn't like him where we were drafting. Oddly enough, Robinson and Henson are putting up similar numbers and minutes. But to compare what either of them, including Barnes, is doing now, is fools gold. I still see Robinson as an eventual SF, or at worse, a combo PF/SF player. Robinson is a better athlete than Henson, and thats not a knock on Henson's athleticism, its just that Robinson borders on being a freak athlete. Lets have this conversation again in two years. Lilliard is another story, and if the draft was done over, its likely he'd be right up there in the top three.

    As for Muhammad. My problem is that he touches the ball as much, or maybe more than anyone on the UCLA team, and yet he doesn't even average one assist a game. The dude is black hole. I'm just not fond of those kind of players. Just a personal preference for me. There's no doubt that he's very talented offensively, but he's just so so defensively. Thats not to say the under the right coach, he can't be turned into a more complete player. Lets not forget that he's a half a year removed from highschool.

    Its interesting how you pointed out that Barnes and Porter are slotted very similarly in the draft. What I find interesting is that Barnes, even right up to the draft, was still living off his potential he arrived with. Whereas Porter is actually putting up the numbers that Barnes was susposed to put up, but never did on a consistent basis. There's no doubt that Barnes is a better athlete than Porter. But Porter is a lot smarter and just knows how to play the game. He always seems to be in the right place at the right time. Just a good basketball player.
    Its hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

    Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

  18. #158
    Senior Member MassachusettsKingsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    7,383
    Its official, Noel out for the year with a torn ACL.

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...acl-for-season

    Major bummer. Get well soon.
    Every Time You Touch The Ice, Remember That It Was Hans Who Taught Us To Fly.


    Twitter.

  19. #159
    I didn't like Barnes in college, and I still don't like him. I'd still take Robinson over him. We'll see how it turns out in a couple of years. I could easily see Robinson smoothing out the rough edges and being very productive. But there are no guarantees. Just have to wait and see.

    I agree with baja in his comparison of Porter and Barnes. If they were both in this upcoming draft it wouldn't be close in my mind - I'd take Porter.

  20. #160
    Senior Member bajaden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    baja, mexico
    Posts
    13,491
    Quote Originally Posted by MassachusettsKingsFan View Post
    Its official, Noel out for the year with a torn ACL.

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...acl-for-season

    Major bummer. Get well soon.
    Horrible news! What a bad break for Noel. Makes me wonder if he'll declare now, or return for another year of college. Cauley-Stein's minutes are going to go up, and I expect that Poythress will play more at the PF position. Kentucky didn't have a lot of depth to start with, so they could ill afford to lose Noel.
    Its hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

    Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •