Thoughts on McCallum

Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#61
#61
Section 101 said:
Whiteside got 3 years. It's a great deal if he's a rotation guy. It's only a bad dead if he's out of the league next year.
Click to expand...
That's the whole point. Its a 2nd round pick. You don't take that chance, nor need to. And the "new" front office continuing to do things like the old front office is in no way a credit. IT has 2 and an option year. That contract was post lockout, so it must be possible under the CBA.

You give out three guaranteed years that basically means you just gave the 38th pick more guaranteed years than you gave the 7th pick.
 
S

spudfan

Starter
#62
#62
Bricklayer said:
That's the whole point. Its a 2nd round pick. You don't take that chance, nor need to. And the "new" front office continuing to do things like the old front office is in no way a credit. IT has 2 and an option year. That contract was post lockout, so it must be possible under the CBA.

You give out three guaranteed years that basically means you just gave the 38th pick more guaranteed years than you gave the 7th pick.
Click to expand...
I had read somewhere the Landry's contract was a player option in the fourth year. Was looking around to see if I can find it again but couldn't so not 100% sure of the accuracy. This signing is along those same lines though, locking in players for than you need to and giving them the control.
 
steelevt

steelevt

All-Star
#63
#63
i really dont understand a move like this if true. a second rounder with 3 years guaranteed??? protect yourself and make the last years non guaranteed or team option. yes it doesnt seem like alot of money but when you are trying to get free agents, adding an extra million a year might influence them. id prefer to use that money that way. and like others have said, a 2nd rounder will just be happy hes getting an nba contract. the length of landry's contract and this, if true, doesnt make sense for the cap "flexibility" that has been mentioned.
 
S

spudfan

Starter
#64
#64
Well, now that I think more about it they could be taking Brick's approach and giving everyone awesome contracts to demonstrate belief in them. Cousins should be next... right?
 
Fear the Putin

Fear the Putin

Starter
#65
#65
steelevt said:
i really dont understand a move like this if true. a second rounder with 3 years guaranteed??? protect yourself and make the last years non guaranteed or team option. yes it doesnt seem like alot of money but when you are trying to get free agents, adding an extra million a year might influence them. id prefer to use that money that way. and like others have said, a 2nd rounder will just be happy hes getting an nba contract. the length of landry's contract and this, if true, doesnt make sense for the cap "flexibility" that has been mentioned.
Click to expand...
they see him more than a project ala Whiteside. Moreso of a hidden gem, which might just happen. And that's the thing. You lock up a hidden gem for three dirt cheap years and suddenly you have valuable pieces. Who knew that Parsons would be the player he is today who was instrumental in bringing Howard to Houston? Did you think so when he was drafted?

McCallum is a great change of pace guy off the bench who can play some sticky D and just be dynamic on the floor. It may very well translate well into the NBA.
 
M

mac

All-Star
#66
#66
Fear the Putin said:
they see him more than a project ala Whiteside. Moreso of a hidden gem, which might just happen. And that's the thing. You lock up a hidden gem for three dirt cheap years and suddenly you have valuable pieces. Who knew that Parsons would be the player he is today who was instrumental in bringing Howard to Houston? Did you think so when he was drafted?

McCallum is a great change of pace guy off the bench who can play some sticky D and just be dynamic on the floor. It may very well translate well into the NBA.
Click to expand...

But why not typical 2 years guaranteed + team option for 3rd?
 
R

Rug King

Bench
#68
#68
I think it's a good move. PDA has had his eye on him for a while now and is comfortable that he'll become a good pg in the league. They likely signed him to a pretty low figure so what's the harm? They might place him in Reno and have him starting there for a year.

I see a positive here because he looks like he belongs and would probably be easy to trade if need be because of the low salary. If he turns out to be a keeper, you got him locked up for 3 on the cheap.
 
HndsmCelt

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#69
#69
Bricklayer said:
That's the whole point. Its a 2nd round pick. You don't take that chance, nor need to. And the "new" front office continuing to do things like the old front office is in no way a credit. IT has 2 and an option year. That contract was post lockout, so it must be possible under the CBA.

You give out three guaranteed years that basically means you just gave the 38th pick more guaranteed years than you gave the 7th pick.
Click to expand...
A couple of things here. First do we know for sure that the 3rd year is NOT a team option? Even so thus far the 38th pick has out performed the 7th pick... too early to draw any conclusions sure, but still true. Finely I would like to point out that a lot of folks had McCallum going in the first round and the consensus was that he was a no-brainer in the second round. Just sayin if you want to harp on dumb moves there are a lot dumber ones to look at.
 
Kingster

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#70
#70
Three year contract for McCallum? A million bucks a year? I guess it's supposed to send a message that they like him. But there are better ways to do it than that. I just haven't seen anything that really stands out about him, other than he looks better than McLemore. Hopefully, we'll see it in the preseason.
 
ParniValjak

ParniValjak

All-Star
#71
#71
I actually don't mind this. I think the kid will be a solid player in the NBA who will improve and it's not a huge contract. It would be about $2.6 million over 3 years. That's vet minimum type money.
 
S

spudfan

Starter
#72
#72
Čarolija said:
I actually don't mind this. I think the kid will be a solid player in the NBA who will improve and it's not a huge contract. It would be about $2.6 million over 3 years. That's vet minimum type money.
Click to expand...
I don't mind the actual contract as I think he will be a good fit but I do mind the mindset that goes with giving a player something when you don't have to. I try to min/max out every little detail when it's in my control, PDA doesn't seem to think that way and in the end it probably won't matter one tiny bit but it just feels better when you play it safe. At least to me.
 
ParniValjak

ParniValjak

All-Star
#73
#73
spudfan said:
I don't mind the actual contract as I think he will be a good fit but I do mind the mindset that goes with giving a player something when you don't have to. I try to min/max out every little detail when it's in my control, PDA doesn't seem to think that way and in the end it probably won't matter one tiny bit but it just feels better when you play it safe. At least to me.
Click to expand...
But if you are very confident that you have a very good value for money, why not?! Really his $800k odd a season is not going to be a difference maker to the salary cap either way. I am not against locking in good young talent if you believe you have a good one. It also gives the player more belief and confidence knowing he has the backing of his front office!
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#75
#75
Not quite sure what everyone saw when they watched McCallum, but I'll tell you this, he's far more impressive in person than he is on TV. But that aside, I guess its a matter of personal taste. In my humble opinion, McCallum comes the closest to being a pass first PG than any other PG, not named Vasquez on the team. He's an excellent ballhandler, and a very good athlete. In at least two of the games he made nice passes that should have resulted in assists, but no one could convert a damm basket. I understand why they're high on him. He has very good size for the position. He's athletic, and has very good court vision, and he's a solid passer.

So here's the question? If he's what your looking for, then what difference does it make if he was taken in the second round or not. Is that some sort of brand you get if you slide out of the first round. Whats wrong with signing him for three years, especially at chump change if you really believe he's the real deal. Vasquez is a restricted free agent after this year. If McCallum is what they think he is, then he's insurance against losing Vasquez. And if he is the real deal, you've got him for peanuts for three years. After watching him up close and personal, I believe in all likely hood, and given the time, He'll be the best defensive PG on the team.

And if not, then what have you really lost? Very little money wise, and he'll at worse, be a nice throw in, in a trade. He's the least of my concerns with this team.
 
S

spudfan

Starter
#76
#76
Čarolija said:
But if you are very confident that you have a very good value for money, why not?! Really his $800k odd a season is not going to be a difference maker to the salary cap either way. I am not against locking in good young talent if you believe you have a good one. It also gives the player more belief and confidence knowing he has the backing of his front office!
Click to expand...
Because although it is unlikely his contract will change anything in the future, it still is a possibility no matter how small. And it is a bit worrisome that the management of the team isn't taking any possible advantage they can get. Giving something away when you don't have to isn't a habit you want to start. This is all speculation though as news seems to point to a third option but it could be different than we think which would makes more sense.
 
L

Livinthedream

All-Star
#77
#77
bajaden said:
Not quite sure what everyone saw when they watched McCallum, but I'll tell you this, he's far more impressive in person than he is on TV. But that aside, I guess its a matter of personal taste. In my humble opinion, McCallum comes the closest to being a pass first PG than any other PG, not named Vasquez on the team. He's an excellent ballhandler, and a very good athlete. In at least two of the games he made nice passes that should have resulted in assists, but no one could convert a damm basket. I understand why they're high on him. He has very good size for the position. He's athletic, and has very good court vision, and he's a solid passer.

So here's the question? If he's what your looking for, then what difference does it make if he was taken in the second round or not. Is that some sort of brand you get if you slide out of the first round. Whats wrong with signing him for three years, especially at chump change if you really believe he's the real deal. Vasquez is a restricted free agent after this year. If McCallum is what they think he is, then he's insurance against losing Vasquez. And if he is the real deal, you've got him for peanuts for three years. After watching him up close and personal, I believe in all likely hood, and given the time, He'll be the best defensive PG on the team.

And if not, then what have you really lost? Very little money wise, and he'll at worse, be a nice throw in, in a trade. He's the least of my concerns with this team.
Click to expand...
I agree. We now have 2 point guards on the team that have size and are at their true position. This is what we've been asking for and now we have it. We were not going to be able to address all of our issues in one draft, but we took a stab at one thing that we have complained about for years. That one things is the fact that we have guards that are either undersized or don't have a true position, or both. The drafting of our two players this year ended the trend of getting those other types of players.
 
T

The_Jamal

Hall of Famer
#79
#79
I'd feel very comfortable letting McCallum getting back-up PG minutes from the get-go. The guy showcased everything the scouting reports said he was: Good floor leader, good ball-handler, good passer, great athlete, can create his own shot, and very intelligent on the court. You also just saw a comfort level from him that is pretty rare among rookies, much less 2nd round picks. He's got a great foundation to build upon and work with.

Also, as someone said, we got 2 players who know how and what their position is and have great size at that position.
 
Last edited:
King Baller

King Baller

All-Star
#80
#80
bajaden said:
Not quite sure what everyone saw when they watched McCallum, but I'll tell you this, he's far more impressive in person than he is on TV. But that aside, I guess its a matter of personal taste. In my humble opinion, McCallum comes the closest to being a pass first PG than any other PG, not named Vasquez on the team. He's an excellent ballhandler, and a very good athlete. In at least two of the games he made nice passes that should have resulted in assists, but no one could convert a damm basket. I understand why they're high on him. He has very good size for the position. He's athletic, and has very good court vision, and he's a solid passer.

So here's the question? If he's what your looking for, then what difference does it make if he was taken in the second round or not. Is that some sort of brand you get if you slide out of the first round. Whats wrong with signing him for three years, especially at chump change if you really believe he's the real deal. Vasquez is a restricted free agent after this year. If McCallum is what they think he is, then he's insurance against losing Vasquez. And if he is the real deal, you've got him for peanuts for three years. After watching him up close and personal, I believe in all likely hood, and given the time, He'll be the best defensive PG on the team.

And if not, then what have you really lost? Very little money wise, and he'll at worse, be a nice throw in, in a trade. He's the least of my concerns with this team.
Click to expand...
Baja I have to agree with your assessment of McCallum and his 3 year deal. I think this is an example of Vivek saying Pete is 4 moves ahead. They think McCallum is going to be a good NBA player, so they signed him to a 3 year deal. I also think McCallum matches up defensively with a majority of NBA PG's. Sure he will get schooled as a rookie, but I think he will be in the rotation by mid-season.

KB
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#82
#82
MassachusettsKingsFan said:
Has anyone actually said the third year wasn't an option?
Click to expand...
Only Jason Jones to start.

And should note, the option makes all the difference here. Maybe in practical terms, but certainly in philosophical ones. You can't run around talking about salary cap flexibility and then turn around and throw Petrie contracts at Carl Landry and Ray McCallum.
 
Padrino

Padrino

All-Star
#85
#85
Entity said:
its not like Ray's contract is as big as landry's what is it like 800k a year?
Click to expand...
it doesn't matter so much that ray's contract represents peanuts in the grand scheme of the salary cap. it's the fact that, in an emerging era with extremely harsh luxury tax penalties, a franchise must manage each and every contract with the future in mind. i've said it repeatedly: you overpay for young, all-star level (or all-star potential) talent when you're in an undesirable small market, and you do your absolute best not to overpay roleplayers. signing carl landry to a four-year deal is simply not prudent when he very well could have been had on a two- or three-year contract. and signing ray mccallum to three guaranteed years is simply not prudent when you can option the final year. every dollar counts when it comes time to consider whether or not you want to push your franchise into luxury tax territory...

of course, i'm still waiting on official word of mccallum's contract terms. it may very well be that the third year is a team option, in which case the kings' front office did the right thing. and it may be that competing offers from other front offices forced the kings to offer carl landry a four-year contract, in which case the kings' front office did not do the right thing. again, you do your best not to overpay roleplayers, and the very first act of the new regime's very first free agency period was to overpay a roleplayer in carl landry. mccallum's contract certainly doesn't stack up by comparison, but if that third year is guaranteed, it represents a fault of philosophy in the new front office. either that or it's just plain inexperience. in either case, it's not good news for kings fans. i'm just hoping that they're working out their own rookie jitters, and won't continue making the kinds of personnel mistakes they've already made in year one...
 
Last edited:
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#86
#86
i don't understand the problem. I mean did we not think we were going to sign the guy? terms of contract are

500k 800k 900k with qulifiying offer for 4th year at 1.2 mil. none of the years are guaranteed NONE of them. so 2.2 mil over 3 years and none of the guaranteed. I don't understand the sentiment that this is a John Salmons type contract? its nothing. I don't see were this is a mistake. especially when our #1 and #2 pg's will be free agents next year. this is a 3rd pg type contract

its along the same lines as IT's contract was but Ray was a higher draft pick.
 
Padrino

Padrino

All-Star
#87
#87
Entity said:
i don't understand the problem. I mean did we not think we were going to sign the guy? terms of contract are

500k 800k 900k with qulifiying offer for 4th year at 1.2 mil. none of the years are guaranteed NONE of them. so 2.2 mil over 3 years and none of the guaranteed. I don't understand the sentiment that this is a John Salmons type contract? its nothing. I don't see were this is a mistake. especially when our #1 and #2 pg's will be free agents next year. this is a 3rd pg type contract

its along the same lines as IT's contract was but Ray was a higher draft pick.
Click to expand...
source?

and if those are the terms, then i'm satisfied. however, the carl landry signing remains a debacle, in my opinion.
 
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#88
#88
Padrino said:
source?

and if those are the terms, then i'm satisfied. however, the carl landry signing remains a debacle, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
well this thread isn't about Landry. state what you want about that contract in that. but it has nothing to do with Ray's.

Source? so you guys didn't know this? Actually bitching about something you didn't know about? LOL were you expecting 3 years 21 mil or something HAHA. Anyway http://www.hoopsworld.com/sacramento-kings-team-salary#
 
You must log in or register to reply here.