Donovan Mitchell: Pick Him at #10?

Discussion in 'Personnel moves' started by Blob, May 20, 2017.

  1. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    Even if we are fortunate enough to draft De'Aaron Fox at #5, I would not mind us drafting this kid at #10.

    He reminds me of Damian Lillard. :)

    He's flying up the draft boards! He measures at 6"1 he has a 6'10 wingspan and solid 201 pounds!

    I will take this guy 8 day a week over Dennis Smith Jr and his T-Rex arms any day! I also might prefer him over Frank N due to culture shock and age. Donovan may be more ready to contribute from Day 1.

    As far as I can tell Donovan is not a pure PG but he has that Lillard-attack mentality and nice range and mechanics on his shot. Lillard is not a defender. This kid is.

    The praise at Draft Express is effusive:

    Mitchell's ascension continued at the NBA Draft Combine, where his stellar measurements, athletic testing numbers, 3-point shooting (in drills), and interviews propelled him into top-20 draft pick and potentially even lottery status.

    I think you will see he is a combination of Lillard and Smith Jr with his beast mode mindset. But when you have a 6'10 wingspan you are going to be able to provide much more defensive resistance and finishing ability among the tall trees!

    Finally this passage from Draft Express is exciting: a multi-positional defender. I have a feeling Joerger would like this guy. Someone to keep your eyes on.

    Perhaps the most appealing part of Mitchell's profile, particularly early on in his career, lies on the defensive end. Two years under Rick Pitino has benefited him greatly in this regard, as he's emerged as a multi-positional stopper who a coach can sic on point guards, shooting guards and even some small forwards and expect results. Mitchell has outstanding physical tools to get the job done, with his elite length, chiseled frame and quick feet, but also the mentality, as he's a highly competitive guy who is willing to pick up full court, get on the floor for loose balls, and generally make life difficult for opposing players.
  2. lwc

    lwc Well-Known Member

    I remember him having a surprisingly great game against Kentucky this year. He really jumped off my screen in that game
    Blob likes this.
  3. kingsboi

    kingsboi Well-Known Member

    I'll take Harry Giles at 10 if he passes medical procedures
  4. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    IMO Mitchell is somewhere between Avery Bradley and Marcus Smart rather than like Damien Lillard.

    He's more than not a pure PG. He's not a PG at all. He's a poor ballhandler and isn't a bad passer but I wouldn't want him as the primary playmaker. He's a SG with PG height but a freakish wingspan. That said, I like him a lot. He's explosive and has improved as a shooter.

    I've seen the Dwayne Wade comp thrown out too and in terms of style that's not bad but he's not the same level if prospect. For one thing he struggles to convert at the rim - something Wade excelled at. But a poor man's Wade can still be a very useful player.

    FWIW, I think Malik Monk actually has a better shot of converting to PG full time.
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  5. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    I want no part of Giles. Great tools but a low skill level and injury concerns with two torn ACLs.

    Smith Jr tore his ACL a couple months before Giles and had very good production this year. Giles had several opportunities and never really showed anything this season.
    kingsfan1984 likes this.
  6. kingsboi

    kingsboi Well-Known Member

    It's a high risk high reward type of draft pick. Which is why I would like to see the Kings at the very least bring him in for a workout and see how he moves and what kind of skillset he presents that the team can work with.
  7. Kingsfan23

    Kingsfan23 Well-Known Member

    With the 10? If we aren't busy taking salary from the Lakers to move up to two, I could see taking one of the Blazers contracts for one of their later picks and taking a long look at Giles. 10 is too high
    kingsfan1984 likes this.
  8. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    I am trying to come up with a contingency plan if Fox goes Top 4. Even if we do get Fox at #5, we are looking at guys like Lauri, Zach Collins, Smith Jr or even Frank N, OG with our second pick.....MEH. I think these guys are talented but Lauri and Smith do not address our defensive woes, Frank N is a baby who will have to adapt to new country away from home first time, OG has busted knee and Collins plays a position we are loaded at (KK, Willie Papa G). None of these guys jump out and say let's get him!

    I disagree with your assessment Monk can convert to PG more so than Donovan, but say you are right about comparison to Bradley or Smart. This is exactly the type of player the Kings could use! Even with Fox. A guy who can defend multiple positions and in the case of Bradley knock down open looks. Of course, you still want to draft for STAR potential at Top 10 and this kid has star potential. His skills jump off the screen. He can drive and finish, drive and lob, or drive and dish. I see a guy who attacks the rim, keeps his balance and focus on rim under duress. That's what Lillard does. And he has Lillard range.
    roasthawg likes this.
  9. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    I'm also not thrilled with the guys projected to be there at #10.

    My ideal draft would be Fox at # and Isaac at #10. There's a decent chance at Fox at 5 but a very tiny chance at Isaac at 10.

    I think Collins will be a serviceable big in the NBA but I'm not seeing any elite level skills. He should be a pretty good rebounder but his foul rate and tendency to get upset and lose focus bothers me.

    Markkanen DOES have an elite NBA skill but doesn't offer anything else. I'm trying to talk myself into liking him because I think he'll be there at 10 and if the Kings get Fox at #5 he'll be another guy to space the floor and not down 3's off kick outs but I'm just not excited by the idea of a one dimensional, off-the-bench stretch 4.

    Anunoby is kind of my ersatz Isaac. He's not the shotblocker Isaac is and his shot needs more work but he's much stronger and the same sort of Swiss Army knife defender. Of course he has to have zero medical red flags.

    Justin Jackson wouldn't be exciting but he fills a need if his improved shooting this year is for real.

    I like Ntilikina. If Fox goes top 4 I'm hoping Frank is there at 10. I might even take him at 10 if Fox is the #5 pick. I think he's going to be a better, more versatile defender than Mitchell. But I'm not sure he's ever going to be a high level offensive PG because of his lack of burst/inability to turn the corner and attack the basket. I think he'll be more of a 3&D PG who is solid to good in the pick & roll.

    I do like Mitchell. As a natural SG he'd be the fourth one on the roster if Bogdanovic comes over. But I think he could be groomed to be a backup PG. And if Bogdanovic or Temple are on the court with him as the SG they can help out with a bit of the ballhandling and playmaking. I don't know that I'd say he can guard multiple positions - he can likely guard PGs and most SGs. Not the same as Anunoby who can guard 2-5 on most nights but a useful piece off the bench as a defender and streaky scorer.

    I wouldn't be upset if Mitchell was the pick if Isaac is off the board.
  10. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    This is another impressive highlight video. The kid has a few nice dimes but what I noticed most of his three bombs are 2-3 feet behind the college line. He should have no problem knocking down the NBA 3.

    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  11. upinsmoke

    upinsmoke Well-Known Member

    Me too. If there's a D. Lillard comp in this draft it's Monk except Monk is a better athlete.
  12. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    I would agree. Lillard had the dual benefits of being a PG/primary ballhandler and playing four years which made it easier for him to transition to the NBA but in terms of physical tools and skill sets Monk is close. Lillard has a bigger wingspan but Monk is more explosive.

    Monk will never be a true PG but then Lillard isn't really either. But as a dynamic scorer with good ballhandling and decent passing vision he could be a solid lead guard.
  13. kingsboi

    kingsboi Well-Known Member

    I agree it's high, which is precisely why I want to see how he checks out medically and from there bring him in for a workout to see how he is progressing. Then if the Kings don't like their pick of the litter at 10, move back a bit and get more assets while drafting Giles if they believe he is worth it.
  14. Hoovtrain

    Hoovtrain Well-Known Member

    Who the **** is Donovan Mitchell?? I don't care take him
  15. Gary

    Gary Well-Known Member

    No.. Why? Because we traded for a Buddy.... He's our SG. He seems to be pretty good too!

    We need a SF/F at #10 and a PG at #5.
    206Fan and pshn80 like this.
  16. Kingsroots

    Kingsroots Active Member

    I like what someone else mentioned in another thread earlier. We trade down with the Blazers to receive all 3 of their picks plus Mo Harkless in exchange for our #10 and Afflalo or something similar. Seems like a win win. I've watched enough of Harkless to see that he has decent two way potential at the 3. He's young too.
    kingsfan1984 likes this.
  17. kingsfan1984

    kingsfan1984 Well-Known Member

    I agree with this. If a pick we want that dits our roster isnt there at 10 i would love to see Vlade trade back for multiple picks. This draft is loaded with talent and it would ne great to have a few more picks.
  18. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    I don't think the Blazers would want to trade all three of their picks. For a cash strapped team it's a way to add talent.

    I think it's likely that they'd trade ONE of their picks for the chance to dump salary. Maybe #20 or #26 plus Leonard or Turner for Afflalo. Something like that.
  19. pshn80

    pshn80 Well-Known Member

    Great and then Joerger will be faced with the task of running a Boy Scout camp.
  20. kingsfan1984

    kingsfan1984 Well-Known Member

    So you want to trade for a Vet? Exchanging the 1 rookie at 10 for 2 other rookies doesn't turn us to a "boy scout team" if we are already a boy scout team. You are aware of the current roster in addition to us having 2 additional picks this year? Hardly think 1 or 2 additional young guys changes the face of what are team already is.
  21. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    Maybe we can trade down for John Salmons too? :rolleyes:
  22. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    The same thing was said about Giannis. :p
  23. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    Honestly if there's not a guy they love at 10 I wouldn't mind a trade for a 2019 draft pick.
  24. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    Disagree. Lillard is more power than finesse when he drives to the hole. Donovan is more power. Monk is more finesse. Also consider:
    • Lillard (6'3") has a 6'7 3/4 wingspan
    • Monk (6"3) has a 6'3 wingspan with 42 inch vertical!
    • Donovan (6'3") has an 6'10 wingspan with 40 inch vertical!
    • Dennis Smith Jr (6'1") has only a 6'3" wingspan
    • De'Aaron Fox (6'3) with 6'6 wingspan with 39 inch vertical!
    These numbers rank Donovan #1 , Fox and Lillard in middle, Monk and Smith at the bottom, in regards to wingspan. The relevancy of these numbers must be taken in proper context. You can be long and have no game, or vice versa. Lillard can make plays at MVP level due to (1) attack mode for 48 minutes (2) superior guard skills and (2) he has length to finish, i.e. wingspan. In order for Monk and Smith Jr to justify their draft status and have great careers, they have to be extraordinary with shooting accuracy, range, space creating one-on-one and off the ball moves to offset their neutral to negative wingspan advantage on most nights. In other words, they have to be Isaiah Thomas-like!

    They also have to be better than Lillard as a shot maker and creator due to wingspan disadvantage. By contrast, if your skills are good but not great, you can be effective because you have length and physicality to compete. This is what is appealing about Donovan. He enters the league with dominant physical profile. If skills catch up with regards to ball handling and vision, he's a diamond in the rough. When the Bucks drafted Giannis, this is the sort of analysis they did and projection they made. You could also say the same thing about Malachi. He did not have a good freshman season, but the Kings saw a guy who had basketball skill set that could catch up to the physical profile.
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
  25. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member


    Smith and Monk having less than ideal wingspans will hurt them on the defensive end, not necessarily on offense. Having a shorter wingspan generally only hurts post players on offense. Both Smith and Monk have no trouble finishing, even in traffic because they are explosive athletes.

    Of course Lillard DOES have a very solid wingspan for a PG and is still a poor defender.

    I'm a Mitchell fan but it's also worth keeping in mind that Wade Baldwin had a dominant physical profile that is very, very similar to Mitchell's. I'm on record for wanting Baldwin but he's another guy with great tools who came in needing to work on his ballhandling and passing and who really struggled.

    They are different players but a lot goes into being a successful player beyond physical tools. Especially when asking a guy who has always played SG to make the transition to PG. I mean, Baldwin DID play most of his last season at PG and still looked lost.
  26. Blob

    Blob Well-Known Member

    That's an impressive dunk but he had an open runway for takeoff. I consider that display of athleticism and 40 inch vertical more than power. A power guard in my mind absorbs contact and sheds defenders without losing his lane. I see Donovan as this type of player more than Monk although I was surprised Monk checked in at 197 since he looks more slight of build. You make good point on Baldwin. His development remains to be seen. I know Dunn had impressive physical profile and he looked mostly awful in Minnesota. Of course this only helps me to reaffirm my point to have the requisite or superior vitals (including wingspan) only matters when you have game. When vitals are average or subpar it means that your skill set needs to be that much more polished and refined.

    The pros regarding Donovan in terms of game are:
    • defensive instincts (2.1 steals per game)
    • shooting range
    • shooting release (quick!)
    • solid FTs (81%) which bodes fairly well for NBA shooting
    Donovan looks to have a better shot to Baldwin, Mudiay and Dunn with regards to mechanics and release. And who could NOT love this:
    • Mitchell also posted the fastest 3/4 sprint time at just 3.01 seconds, which is the quickest time since Sonny Weems ran a 2.96 at the 2008
    Wow! He's faster than every player over the last 8 years. That's impressive! Sign me up! In this context I have always contended the one skill that is hard to pick up on tape is quickness. You either have burst of speed to get an edge or you don't. It can be deceiving because you can draw a false positive based on level of competition. This was case with regards to Mudiay, and possibly Dunn. And this is the challenge with Frank N so anyone who thinks they can slot him accurately at #6 or #13 is guessing, the degree to which depends on more data and video we may gain access to. I think Frank may lack the blow by speed.... but I am (educated) guessing! The quickness variable or lack thereof may have been one reason Baldwin was excluded by the Kings. Quickness comes into play with first step gaining separation with and without ball and anticipating defensively. That 1/4 to 1/2 step is the difference between making plays or whiffing! Anyways, this is depth of analysis that comes into play with these guys not conclusive based on consensus mock or pre-draft hype. And it is the difference between a baller or a bust.
  27. Jimbob

    Jimbob Well-Known Member

    Iv'e thought of that, and even entertained Philli as the trade partner just to keep our pick. However, we know this is a good draft, and unless we are in a two more year lottery mode, that pick may not be high. There are other teams to trade with but who's going to be bad enough thus yielding a high pick in 2019?
  28. kingsboi

    kingsboi Well-Known Member

    Make fun all you want, you have players you like, I have mine. Nothing wrong with bringing him in for a workout.
  29. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    I'd be fine with the Kings bringing Giles in. And he's worth a gamble in a trade down situation for sure. But to take him at 10 when the Kings already have Papagiannis, Cauley-Stein and Labissiere he'd have to (a) check out as clean as possible medically for a guy who has torn both ACLs plus an MCL and meniscus and (2) really wow in a workout.
  30. funkykingston

    funkykingston Well-Known Member

    The question for me with Mitchell is the same question I have of Monk - can he play PG? If Monk can't play PG more or less full time then I don't hav much interest.

    If Mitchell can't play PG - at least some of the time - then I'd still have interest but not as much. As a SG he's undersized and relying on his wingspan and strength/atleticism to match up with opposing 2's. As a PG he is potentially physically dominant and able to switch on to SGs as well.

Share This Page