Hmm ... well the obvious solution would be to support the Pacers 
Kings active in trade talks?
- Thread starter The_Jamal
- Start date
- Status
well, that too. however, that is pretty much my long term wish list for the team. another PG that would fit the mold of what I think the Kings PG should be able to do that is going to be available next offseason is Mario Chalmers. he's a punk and I can't really stand him, but if the Kings were to get a second option type talent for the SF, a guy like Chalmers should work brilliantly.
keep in mind, this scenario would have the Kings acquiring a second option type player for the wings. when you've got that, as of yet imaginary, guy and Cuz gobbling up possessions and, hopefully, McLemore doing stuff as well, then all you really need is a guy to bring the ball across, hit open shots and play competitive defence. it's those kinds of guys that start for championship teams more often than not and he has proven to be able to perform that role on a championship team. this all is, of course, academic, as long as our second option is not in place, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable with a guy like Chalmers starting for my team, than I do now with Vasquez.
My point is some of you keep saying we need to see this we need to see that about Ray. We have an NBA coaching staff here. Lets not get ahead of ourselves here. They see everything. I am not worried about what WE need to see if Ray was good enough to take a pg spot on this team he would have done it. He needs to work on a lot of things. He isn't ready.
I think I'm just about ready to call the Vasquez experiment quits. He can't stay in front of his man and it jeopardizes the entire defense. With the league being so talent heavy at the pg position it's critical to at least be able to stay in front. It's as if we're going into every game asking to get beat be the opposing point guard.
This is a discussion forum where we talk about what's going on with our team, the players, potential prospects, situations, plays, and last but not least...our opinions and what we like and don't like.
That's part of the fun in following a team. Otherwise, we could never comment on anything, "since we've got a front office and coaching staff who takes care of all this"
That's part of the fun in following a team. Otherwise, we could never comment on anything, "since we've got a front office and coaching staff who takes care of all this"
This is all quite amusing. He's been in plenty of practices and a few d league games. They'd play him if he could play, right? He hasn't played a second yet! I'm not one to fully trust a rook owner, rook coach, and rook gm blindly like some, but I have to think he'll play only when he's ready, or when mins open up. I think there's little chance he's better than GV or IT at this point. I wouldn't want to deal with the locker room if GV or IT start getting dnp-CDs.
Someone has to go. Or two someone's.
Someone has to go. Or two someone's.
How much Chalmers have you seen? Not trying to rag on you or anything but I have a totally different view of him. He plays good defense, and he does what he's supposed to do. He knows his role on a team with two other ball handler and plays within the confides of what's given to him offensively. I think he does well and keeps his FG% and 3pt% pretty high in order to assist when needed with open shots.
I was hoping we would have bought that late first round pick that got him but the Maloofs were too cheap even with De'Andre Jordan and Chalmers still available in the late first/early second round.
I was hoping we would have bought that late first round pick that got him but the Maloofs were too cheap even with De'Andre Jordan and Chalmers still available in the late first/early second round.
So should we assume that Jimmer's trade value is zero? Otherwise an aggressive Pete would have moved him by now. What about USA Today's Sam Amick's report from a while back that 6 teams had interest with 2 of those having serious interest in Jimmer? Just wish the Kings and Jimmer could part ways sooner rather than later.
- Status