# DraftExpess Labels Korolev Him As A Disappointment



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

> http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1058



They say that the reason that his not dominate or just a little consistency becuase of that the PRESSURE.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

The #59 pick in the draft, Cenk Akyol, has led his team in the final four, and Korolev and most of the CSKA Moscow junior team are in the losers bracket.

I said it on the other Clips board I go to, I'll say it here, we could have got Korolev at 32.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

arenas809 said:


> The #59 pick in the draft, Cenk Akyol, has led his team in the final four, and Korolev and most of the CSKA Moscow junior team are in the losers bracket.
> 
> I said it on the other Clips board I go to, I'll say it here, we could have got Korolev at 32.


"que sera sera...."

the kid is 18, nobody knows a thing about rookies 'til they play in the NBA.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I think I said this in the draft board, but you have to wonder about guys who just appear and are huge talk around draft time. Compare Korolev with Marty Andriuskevicius. Marty popped up long before last seasons draft and ended up going 42 this year. Korolev appears on the scene about five months before the draft and ends up going twelve. I'm not sure how that could not raise some questions about him.

He could end being good, but I don't think he'll be better than several of the players behind him and with Green falling, Korolev would have fallen past the Celtics at 18 and probably would have been sitting at 32, as the Celtics and Clippers appeared to be the only two teams that were seriously linked to him.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

One sites opinion, sorry but until I see Korolev in action in the NBA I cannot see how others degrade him. Dunleavy made the pick, he is no fool. The kid has talent, you really think Dunleavy is out to ruin the team? It is true that there was other good talent that could have been picked up but the Clippers stayed with their choice. Also notice how it said this wasn't the same guy they saw last time. What does that mean? He had a bad tourny.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

Reason we chose Korolev @ 12 was because Jersey was going to take him @ 13, alot of teams were interested in this kid, Nuggs would have take him, so don't say some bull**** about how we could've gotten him @ 32


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

I agree, I did hear humors about other possibilties. Clippers wren't the only ones interested in him in the 1st round & of all the draft sites, Draft Express has been trashing Korolev since he had been drafted by the Clips last month.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

and nbadraft calls him great in the tourney. Its all perspective, but guess what, it doesnt matter much what either of them say, or what hes doing now. Just like it doesnt matter what sofo does in greece the last few years. What matters is what korolev will/wont do as a part of this team. He could score 50 points a game in that tourney but doesnt mean anything to us unless he can contribute as a member of the clippers in the future


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

draftexpress is a bias site, couple days before the draft, they rated the top internation players and yaro was #3 behind Martynas and Vasquez(Bogut wasnt considered this) and now they trashing him because we made a smart choice for once


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

That is not what they are going to say 4 years from now... This guy has mad skills and a mullet... Its great! :clap:


----------



## AussieWarriorFan! (May 30, 2005)

Knocking an 18yo is like shooting fish in a barrel, its easy but ****ing pointless!


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

I'm gona go with facts as opposed to what I'd like to believe that I know in the back of my mind isn't true...

First off, I've had some issues with some of draft express's content which I've told them directly about, but I applaud their work because they are AT these events.

It's getting a little annoying going to Clipper boards and seeing the homerism in full red, white, and blue over a kid that 99% of Clips fans have never seen on the basketball court, and yes that includes me (I have seen clips, highlights, etc.)

Based off the little I've seen and a lot that I've read, I'm not going to say Yaro wasn't worthy of being a first round choice, I believe he was, but definitely not at 12.

NO NBA teams were taking unproven, potential based international players in the lotto this year, and it's my belief that trend is going to continue for some time. These kids that are being touted as the next Peja's, Dirk's, etc. are just not panning out, whereas the American high school kids are doing so at a better clip, that's why it makes sense to me to take a Gerald Green in the lotto, but hold off on Korolev until later.

Korolev wasn't that big of a secret, a lot of teams knew about him, but let's get real, even Dunleavy and Baylor have said so themselves, and DE (the guys who are in the know more so than we are), that the junior level he's been playing in is equivalent to high school basketball, it may be a little better, and I wouldn't doubt it, but this is not a 18 year old who was averaging 16 and 6 on a Euroleague senior team like a kid like Rudy Fernandez.

Look at Roko Ukic, he has been on the NBA radar for some time, and had an outstanding year last year in the Adriatic League, what did it get him, #41 in the draft?

Johan Petro has been touted as a lotto talent for the last 2 years, where does he go, 25? I think you can justify that pick at 25 just based on potential, but if that pick were made at 10 or 15? No you couldn't, and IMO those days are OVER where a kid like Petro gets taken that high (solely off potential and no production).

I said it on another Clips board, that my belief is Dunleavy wanted to hit a homerun this summer. He wanted to get guys in free agency who were proven, productive NBA players that could help us get to the playoffs, and he wanted to use the draft to stock up for the future, not a bad plan, but it wasn't executed right.

I still say I would have taken Gerald Green at 12, then I would have hoped Korolev fell to 32, and I believe based off how the draft actually played out, he would have. Now you can sit here and say oh the Nets liked him, the Celtics liked him, yes there were reports out there linking his name to a few teams, for all we know these were nothing but mere smokescreens so that the Clips would take him (since we were the rumored team from JUMP), and the guys they REALLY wanted would fall to them.

Let's say that Korolev doesn't fall to 32, ok fine, then at 32 I take Ersan Ilyasova. Here's a kid who actually has been reported as BETTER than Korolev (along with Nemanja Aleksandrov in their age group), so I walk away with Green and Ilyasova, I would have been a lot more happy with that than Korolev and Ewing, just by taking Korolev, taking a kid like Ilyasova wouldn't have made any sense (they play the same position), the Ewing selection really sucked, but I read Dun wanted either David Lee, Salim, or Ewing, and Ewing was the only one left.

Damn.


----------



## Derelict (Apr 1, 2004)

The thing with taking Korolev at 32 is we wouldn't know when he would be available. He or someone said that his buyout is around a million dollars. With the money you make in the second round how would he be able to buyout his contract?

The other difference between Korolev and the other "great potential" Euro's is that Korolev has skills and fundamentals to go with is potential. A lot of Euro's and high schoolers have unlimited potential but some of that potential is based on the fact that they're doing well without skills or fundamentals and boy how good they would be if they had some. Darius Miles has it all, but if he could learn to shoot a jumpshot consistently he would be great. If so and so would develop some court vision, learn to pass the ball and get his teammates involved then he would be a great point guard. This Euro is a pure shooter, if he would gain some weight, learn to play defense, learn to dribble, learn to play in the post, learn to rebound, get some basketball IQ and get a little quicker then he could be great.

Draftexpress is upset that he didn't dominate the tournament, but what does that mean? When he was drafted his description was as a point forward. He was not listed as a tremendous scorer or a ballhog. He's shooting at a nice percentage, getting rebounds and steals, getting a handful of assists and keeping his turnovers relatively low then how is he disappointing by playing exactly how his scouting report is described?

They have a video of the game vs Spain, and as you can see the refs call ticky-tack fouls on clean blocks and in general and that Korolev's point guards and team don't specialize in letting everyone or more than 2 people touch the ball everytime down the court.
http://www.fibaeurope.com/Default.a...B03C-54B460890F45}&season=2005&roundID=3779&  (look under U!8, semi-finals, I got fooled watching the U20 for a good 10min. Korolev is #10)


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

I fixed your link so it wouldn't strech out the page. Thanks for the info.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

*This Euro is a pure shooter, if he would gain some weight, learn to play defense, learn to dribble, learn to play in the post, learn to rebound, get some basketball IQ and get a little quicker then he could be great.*

Wow, that's a lot of ifs you've got there, couldn't some of those same things be said for Gerald Green, Andray Blatche, etc.?

As far as DE saying he's a disappointment, well like I said, the #59 pick in the draft has LED, keyword being LED, his team into the final four, and Korolev, a lotto selection, and his team are playing in the loser's bracket does that not mean anything to anyone?

As far as taking Korolev at 32, well they're considering him leaving him over there anyway, so buyout, no buyout, or whatever the circumstances are, does it really matter where we drafted him?

I don't have a problem with taking a kid like this in the 2nd round and saying ok we're gona leave him in Russia for the next year or 2 at the most, I think as fans we can buy into that, but it's a different story when you take this kid at 12 and there are IMO better prospects on the board, it's hard to sell me on making that selection, there are guys who can step in right away read: Danny Granger, and you take a kid that's not going to be ready for 2 years and for 2 years you're not going to have any say so in his development.

BTW, RIF, those clips you are watching are from last year (2004).


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

We know there were at least 2 better players on the board in granger and wright, and another player possibly with more trade value, but remember, the Clippers supposedly even offered wright a guarantee, and he was the "worst" of granger and green who were supposed to go top 5-7. Thus if wright thought he was going to go higher and rejected the promise (almost all mocks had him going top 10), the Clippers figured that there was no chance for those guys, and no one else with the upside of korolev, so they stupidly promised him. 

According to my sources, the main reason he was invited to the green room was this promise. Other clippersdaily sources told me during the summer league that when green, granger, etc. started to drop, the agent of korolev started to raise hell with the clippers telling them they had better keep true to their promise. I dont remember any promises being broken before...that would kill your reputation as a team in future drafts, free agency, etc. 

So the error of the Clippers was not in drafting him there, they had no choice. The error was making a promise early in the game. But can we really blame them? No one on this board, no mock draft in the whole world had all three of those guys dropping, almost none had granger or green dropping. With the hype surrounding korolev, it was unlikely he dropped to 32, even I wouldnt have taken that chance. I would have done a trade of 12 for denvers two picks. 

This tournament does not say the turkey guys is definately better than korolev, or that he is the single handed reason of their sucess. His numbers arent that different than korolev. Korolev did better than him in the season, but we dont base our judgement only on that, just as we cant judge off of a 8 game tournament, and how the entire team does. Shaq didnt lead his team to the finals. Ben wallace was an integral part of his team in the finals, does that mean hes better than shaq?

Anyway, as i said, we cand judge korolev this early. We can judge SOFO until now, NOT based on his poor euro play, but the basis of him doing ZERO for the clippers in 2 years. If two years from now korolev hasnt done anything for the clippers, then we can call this a complete failure.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Few more things to note:

Korolev is 4 inches taller than the turkish guy, yet with the ability to play the same positions. 

Akyol in the tournament: 18.7 points, 3.1 rebounds, 4.1 assists 3 steals 3 TO
Korolev in the tournament: 16.6 points, 8 rebounds, 2.6 assists 2 steals 3TO 

Akyol % - 2p FG 39% 3p FG 27.1% FT% 89.5%
Korolev % 2p FG 52.5% 3P FG: 39.5% 79.3%


Akyol's best game: vs croatia 29 points, 3st, 3rebounds, 2 assists
korolev's best game: vs latvia 22 points, 1st, 8rebounds, 3 assists 1 block

akyol's worst game: vs serbia 7 points, 1 rebound, 2 steals, 4TO, 3 assists
korolev's worst game: vs. lithuania: 7 points, 6 rebounds, 3 steals, 0TO, 2 assists

I dont see much of a different of the two players performance in the tournament? If theyre putting up the same numbers, its hard to say that one player is the sole reason that the team is doing well in the tourney. Its a team game, akyol is not putting up numbers to warrant giving him all the credit for his team's sucess. It can even be argued that over all, korolevs numbers are better considering the rebounding and FG%'s. 

Is the difference between them worth a 12th pick as opposed to 59th pick? Not on stats, but remember the height difference, and that dunleavvy saw this guy in person and liked him, so he must see something he likes.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Why are you comparing their size?

Cenk is a 6'5 PG and Yaro is a 6'9 SF, what is your point?

Akyol has NBA size for a PG.

Also if what you say is true Yama, well I'm disappointed, this is business, and the reports were we gave Korolev a "soft promise" meaning if other guys weren't there we'd take him.

Damn shame, no one else would have taken this kid in the 1st round, I'm standing by that just based off how the draft played out.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> Why are you comparing their size?


Because they can play the same positions. naturally, korolev is a SF, but has the abillity to play SG and point. Naturally according to scouts the turk is a SG, but can play PG and SF. If korolev was 6'5", do you think dunleavvy would have picked him at 12? If the turk was 6'9" with the same skills, would he have fallen to the next to last pick?

I too thought it was a "soft promise." But i talked to people at the summerleague (amazing how many important people, media, players, agents, websites, etc. were there...it was a humbling experience), and asked them, if it was a soft promise, who in the world could it have been a soft promise for if the three guys were there at 12, that the clippers wanted. They said it was not a soft promise as originally reported, again, also why the nba put korolev in the green room. 

Also, despite the hard/soft promise rumors, still half of the mock drafts out there didnt have korolev going to the clippers. But they almost all had him going top 20-25. 

I MIGHT have taken a chance, if it was a soft promise, and traded down to get him, but not passed 20.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

Let's not confuse skills with position.

I think it's ridiculous to tout this kid as a PG, he may have good ball handling and passing skills, but that hardly makes him a PG especially in the NBA.

He will be a SF, so you've compared the size of a 6'9 SF to a 6'5 PG, a pointless comparison. Both have NBA size, and NBA skill sets, at the end of the day one went 12 and is playing for nothing in the U18 championships and one went 59 is the main reason his team is in the final four.

Anyway, I think we've learned a lesson here, don't promise anyone.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Same thing as with the turk, its ridiculous to consider him a PG as well. Most "PURE," tall, PG's from europe such as jaric, do not have their game translate well to the states, as far as being a PG here. however, they still are valuable because of their ball handling ability. No one is saying korolev will be a pure PG here. He can play the position though, which already gives him the ability that people like simmons, ross, maggette, and most other SG/SF's in the league do not have. 

The turk is not a pure PG even in europe, hes considered a SG there, so even less will his PG game be able to translate to the NBA game. But he still has ball handling abilities which is definately valuable. So again, since their positions are similar, and games are similar, you go with the taller player. Look at livingston and telfair. Very flashy with their passes, not much outside game at this point, both have potential superstar qualities to them, yet livingston was rated WAY higher than telfair, and part of that was of course his height. 

How the players team is doing, unless theyre putting up superstar numbers, is hard to say that its only the result of one player. If you say that, then you could say that the only reason russia had a chance to get 5th place was because of korolev. 

Dunelavvy should not have promised so early, and if he did want to, he should have made it known it was a STRONG SOFT promise.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Odd in their newest review of Korolev, draftexpress points out some of the good.

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1062


----------

