Lottery Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Capt. Factorial
- Start date
Just put out all my candles at the altar of the basketball god. Not sure they helped or not. Sort of like taking vitamin C and never catching a cold. Not sure what to give credit to. Anyway, as pointed out, it could be worse. At five we'll get a good player, and if someone above us gets a case of stupid, we might get a great player. One thing I'll predict is that the draft won't go the way most think it will. There will be what appears to be reaches, that will prove later not to be.
As far just trading the pick away. This is the deepest draft in that last 10 years. This is not the year to trade the pick away unless its a very good deal, and not as a throw in. You want a veteran player, then sign one in freeagency or trade someone off our roster for one. When you have guys like Terrence Jones projected down at 18th or 20th, and he would have been picked probably top ten last year, that shows you there are some very talented players in this draft.
As far just trading the pick away. This is the deepest draft in that last 10 years. This is not the year to trade the pick away unless its a very good deal, and not as a throw in. You want a veteran player, then sign one in freeagency or trade someone off our roster for one. When you have guys like Terrence Jones projected down at 18th or 20th, and he would have been picked probably top ten last year, that shows you there are some very talented players in this draft.
Last edited:
As for the fifth pick, its kind of nowhere land for the Kings. I guess Barnes is the best fit, but he's underwhelmed so much in his college career that it's tough to be positive about him. Tar heels normally fare pretty well in the league. At least there's that.
As for "conspiracy" stuff, the word conspiracy is very ill fitting. It's ill fitting for the league's officiating issues as well. If it was revealed that the league has had officials influences important games or worked out a top pick for a certain team, would it truly shock everyone? This isn't like 9/11 stuff or Ancient Aliens theories that asks people to make a huge leap of faith to believe a harder to rationalize explanation of the past. The suspected hidden things here make business sense and aren't a huge leap, and in many ways make more sense than the official explanation or lack thereof. It's not like the steroids issue and coverup within MLB really shocked me or anyone who had been paying attention to the league. The world is full of suspected wrongdoings that people can deny up until real proof slips out. Hell, this is the team ran by the beloved and devoted to Sacramento Maloof family.
Whether it's true or not, I can't tell, but that doesn't make the questions surrounding the issue a conspiracy. It doesn't currently concern me because I've long since accepted that the league is completely messed up thanks to Stern's rule. I just don't like the hyperbolic use of the word conspiracy. Save the term for the truly outrageous. Don't use it to discredit legit suspicions.
As for "conspiracy" stuff, the word conspiracy is very ill fitting. It's ill fitting for the league's officiating issues as well. If it was revealed that the league has had officials influences important games or worked out a top pick for a certain team, would it truly shock everyone? This isn't like 9/11 stuff or Ancient Aliens theories that asks people to make a huge leap of faith to believe a harder to rationalize explanation of the past. The suspected hidden things here make business sense and aren't a huge leap, and in many ways make more sense than the official explanation or lack thereof. It's not like the steroids issue and coverup within MLB really shocked me or anyone who had been paying attention to the league. The world is full of suspected wrongdoings that people can deny up until real proof slips out. Hell, this is the team ran by the beloved and devoted to Sacramento Maloof family.
Whether it's true or not, I can't tell, but that doesn't make the questions surrounding the issue a conspiracy. It doesn't currently concern me because I've long since accepted that the league is completely messed up thanks to Stern's rule. I just don't like the hyperbolic use of the word conspiracy. Save the term for the truly outrageous. Don't use it to discredit legit suspicions.
Fortunately, history shows that the bottom feeders tend to make surprising draft picks leaving some real gems for Mr. Petrie. I'm always happy for his picks especially this year with such a deep draft. And 3 teams have two picks in the first round which surely breeds some draft day trades. At 5 there should be a number of players who can be immediate help to the Kings such as Gilcrist, Barnes, Jones. Heck even in second round there can be some good players available at 35.
You are going to have to come with a solution to get a shot blocker because we have heard it before. If one isn't avaiable, what is you solutuion? There are only so many notes you can write that Robinson doesn't solve our problems but none will make him into a 7 foot shot blocker? So we do the best we can.
Technically yes. Lol. Trading one lottery pick for another one three picks later and using it on the same guy we were probably going to take with our original pick, along with a swap of a couple role players...technically yes. But, trading a high lottery pick straight up for some sort of impact player like we did when we stole The Rock from the Warriors, that's more of 'trading a lottery pick' IMO than what we did last year.
I wonder if Charlotte might go with Beal.
With Cho being the GM, since he just arrived from Portland, he might think that bringing in a potential star guard, ala Brandon Roy, would be the easiest way to get the franchise moving forward.
They got to see Gerald Henderson play and if they don't think he has what it takes to be a star guard, I could see them taking a chance on Beal.
It's doubtful that's their thinking, but if they are looking for a player who can put up points and turn into a star player, then MKG isn't that type of player. I could see them going for Beal or Robinson if they are looking for a point producer.
With Cho being the GM, since he just arrived from Portland, he might think that bringing in a potential star guard, ala Brandon Roy, would be the easiest way to get the franchise moving forward.
They got to see Gerald Henderson play and if they don't think he has what it takes to be a star guard, I could see them taking a chance on Beal.
It's doubtful that's their thinking, but if they are looking for a player who can put up points and turn into a star player, then MKG isn't that type of player. I could see them going for Beal or Robinson if they are looking for a point producer.
right so i just got up and mangaded to watch it on youtube without finding out where we are drafting before..... im sorry but it has to be rigged
but im gutted 5th pick what are we going to do with that??? we need to trade up to get a big hitter or were back down there again next year....
what do you think
1.hornets AD
2.bobcats MKG/Beal
3.Wizards Drummond/MKG
4.Cleavland Thomas Robinson
5.Sacramento
no idea who we will get but is that about right???
but im gutted 5th pick what are we going to do with that??? we need to trade up to get a big hitter or were back down there again next year....
what do you think
1.hornets AD
2.bobcats MKG/Beal
3.Wizards Drummond/MKG
4.Cleavland Thomas Robinson
5.Sacramento
no idea who we will get but is that about right???
Have never seen Drummond play, but based on what I've read, and our needs, I would pick him if available.
Yes, he's a project, and might be a bust. Plus, we need an upgrade at 3. All valid points. But, if he develops, we would have the most dominant front court in the league for the next decade. I would rather roll the dice than go with the other names mentioned at 5.
Yes, he's a project, and might be a bust. Plus, we need an upgrade at 3. All valid points. But, if he develops, we would have the most dominant front court in the league for the next decade. I would rather roll the dice than go with the other names mentioned at 5.
