What do we do with McLemore?

[Bricklayer]

Would you pull the trigger? Milwaukee keeps their bigs fully stocked with Udoh expiring and Sacra gets a much needed paint protector.

JT/Ben/Ndiaye in exchange for L. Sanders(ppp) and L. Ridnour(expiring)

You know what, that's tempting.

then again that Sanders contract is terrifying. I keep on going back to a year ago at this time when Milwaulkee was considering whether or not to just let Sanders walk. Then he has a big half season, get's a contract like some kind of star for 4 months work, and proceeds to be an idiot in a bar.

Promise me he'd be the mythological Sanders of Milwaulkee legend, the DPOY and all that junk and yeah. Except then you hit the next snag: OKC syndrome. How the hell do you pay IT as well as Cuz, Gay, and Sanders next year? Its why we might need a cheaper solution for that role. Bucks idiot GM ****ed it up for everybody.

 

[upinsmoke]

You know what, that's tempting.

then again that Sanders contract is terrifying. I keep on going back to a year ago at this time when Milwaulkee was considering whether or not to just let Sanders walk. Then he has a big half season, get's a contract like some kind of star for 4 months work, and proceeds to be an idiot in a bar.

Promise me he'd be the mythological Sanders of Milwaulkee legend, the DPOY and all that junk and yeah. Except then you hit the next snag: OKC syndrome. How the hell do you pay IT as well as Cuz, Gay, and Sanders next year? Its why we might need a cheaper solution for that role. Bucks idiot GM ****ed it up for everybody.

Thats the dilemma for sure because Embiid could very well be there draft night for us.

 

[pshn80]

Trade for a SG of average quality and start him and bring Ben off the bench. Do this in the next two weeks.

 

[bajaden]

There's also the issue that we "gave up" Evans because the FO was confident in McLemore. That's what really matters to me. You let go of a guy who would be the best SG on our team now because you drafted McLemore (who you tout as a future star) and want him to develop. There's an expectation that he's supposed to come in and have an immediate impact. Is it fair to Ben? Maybe not, but it also isn't fair to fans for the FO to now go back and say "oh actually we need you to be patient teehee. Oopsies we left the team without a legitimate SG!"

Actually there is no evidence that drafting McLemore had anything to do with the decision to retain Evans. Personally, I still think that the Kings had an amount in mind that they were willing to pay, and what Evans was offered by New Orleans exceeded that. I don't think its any more complicated than that. This entire conversation is based on the present, and that's understandable to some extent. But to think were going to give up on McLemore is ridiculous. I'm really tired of going over old ground, and bringing up the stats of players, many all star players that didn't do much their rookie year.

I haven't looked it up, but I suspect that there are as many players that came out of the gate with all guns blazzing that ended up being failures, as there are players that looked terrible their rookie year, that ended up being stars. Dirk Nowitzki was almost tared and feathered his first year in Dallas. Would you have wanted to give up on him? I'm so sick and tired of these knee jerk reactions that are based on the emotion of the moment. McLemore has a lot going for him, but at the moment he has some holes in his game, and is probably trying too hard to fill the role he's been given. Yes, I would prefer him coming off the bench, but that's not my decision. If Thornton had played better, perhaps Ben would be coming off the bench.

Don't get me wrong, if someone makes an offer I can't refuse, I'd certainly trade Ben, but until that happens, I'm more than willing to hang in there with him and see what develops.

 

[Bricklayer]

FWIW, MLM is a rookie with one year of college ball. His upside is a whole level above what TRob showed. He is a rookie. A 6-5 SG rookie who. has hops, speed and is slowly improving. The entire Kings team rebuild is a SLOW process that will take a year and a half to get to a point of breaking onto the playoffs. Starting a rookie in a slow rebuild process makes some sense especially one with MLM abilities. MT is likely not in Kings longer term plan. MLM is.

People say this, but is it true? This "slow" rebuild process abruptly has us with a core ready to win right now. You go teleport Cuz/Gay/IT onto the Spurs in place of Duncan/Parker and Manu, and see what happens. And if that's true, then what we are talking about in our rebuild now is getting the right pieces around those guys. not stars anymore. Certainly not braindead kids. Just build a team of the right support players. That's not a slow sit around and let the kiddies develop sort of process. Ben would have fit right in in 2009. now he's well behind the times. Now he needed to be precocious.

 

[FaStRmAn]

Keep playing McLemore. Before you disagree, count to three and remember in vivid detail how it was when Thornton was starting. Now ask yourself: What the ceiling is for McLemore? For Thornton? Now you should feel at peace, knowing that McLemore should be the starter.

The only reason to not start McLemore is if Malone thinks it would be better for his confidence coming off the bench rather than starting.

Well, I agree with this UNLESS a better 2 Guard can be acquired by trade. This team is not the one we will see at the end of the season. Im pretty certain that this FO has proven they are not afraid to make moves to improve the team and the ownership isnt afraid to spend good money to acquire good talent. All those factors lead me to believe that B-Mac will most likely NOT be your starting 2 guard at years end. However If you move him to the bench for Thorton, that is a net negative. If you move him to the bench for a proven veteran who is playing better, it is a learning experience. I will reserve judgement on the future of a rookie in his first 30 games. Sure he looks lost, but he has time to find his game. Whether that is from the bench or from the starting lineup, who is to say but the coach. At the end of the season the coaching staff will make the determination whether he has potential or was a wasted draft pick. Problem is this franchise has wasted FAR too many draft picks. Lets hope that eventually B-Mac proves us all wrong and starts playing like a viable 2 guard. He doesnt have to be an allstar, just a productive player at this point.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

FWIW, MLM is a rookie with one year of college ball. His upside is a whole level above what TRob showed. He is a rookie. A 6-5 SG rookie who. has hops, speed and is slowly improving. The entire Kings team rebuild is a SLOW process that will take a year and a half to get to a point of breaking onto the playoffs. Starting a rookie in a slow rebuild process makes some sense especially one with MLM abilities. MT is likely not in Kings longer term plan. MLM is.

Why would he be in the long term plans at this point?

 

[Entity]

People say this, but is it true? This "slow" rebuild process abruptly has us with a core ready to win right now. You go teleport Cuz/Gay/IT onto the Spurs in place of Duncan/Parker and Manu, and see what happens. And if that's true, then what we are talking about in our rebuild now is getting the right pieces around those guys. not stars anymore. Certainly not braindead kids. Just build a team of the right support players. That's not a slow sit around and let the kiddies develop sort of process. Ben would have fit right in in 2009. now he's well behind the times. Now he needed to be precocious.

we need to find our doug christie.

 

[Glenn]

Does anyone wonder why the entire draft day Kings war room exploded in excitement when we were able to draft McLemore? I suspect whatever that thinking was is what will keep McLemore in the starting lineup. Well, that and the fact that MT is not doing well either. It all seems very odd at the moment.

 

[jcwkings]

Ideally you try and trade him for a SG ready to produce now and one who is a good perimeter defender that can hit an open shot. As of now I say start Thornton again until a fix is made. McLemore has potential but its going to take 3 or 4 years to truly see what you have. We hope he can become a 20 ppg SG but we already have 3 players that can do that every night. We just need the right role players now.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Does anyone wonder why the entire draft day Kings war room exploded in excitement when we were able to draft McLemore? I suspect whatever that thinking was is what will keep McLemore in the starting lineup. Well, that and the fact that MT is not doing well either. It all seems very odd at the moment.

Yes, very strange. What has he proven at any level to earn being in any NBA team's long term plans at this point?

All we know is that he can run and jump and has a good looking jump shot. That's it

 

[Glenn]

Yes, very strange. What has he proven at any level to earn being in any NBA team's long term plans at this point?

All we know is that he can run and jump and has a good looking jump shot. That's it

Perhaps it is the athleticism and his reputation as a shooter. Hasn't shown up yet but we don't know if it will or won't. Just doesn't look good right now. I voted to keep starting him as I am not sure what there is to lose. The team is not battling for anything and if Ben's spirits are still OK, we won't lose him either. I am not an alarmist about this team. I am thrilled that we have three scorers because finding them is more difficult than finding the role players and in this case that mean DEFENSE. How many teams would like to have Gay and Cuz? Seems like Ben has the physical attributes to defend but not the experience. Anyway, keep starting him.

 

[chief bromden]

Ben is 20 years old. I'd keep him, and keep starting him. He is on a rookie contract, doesn't demand the ball, gives effort, seems to listen to coaching and works on his game - all for a cap hit of 3 mil the next two years... oh, and again, he is 20 years old.... Some are asking for Waiters ... you think he'd be happy with Cousins, Gay, and IT taking all the shots? He can't even handle one guy chucking and ball hogging. I'm sure that'd turn out great, because he will change into an undemanding role players once he joins the Kings, right?

It's true that Manu made him look stupid at the end of the game, and he had that terrible inbound pass to Cousins, but I am not willing to write him off because of that. Manu has made many look stupid, and the Spurs team is elite. I have confidence that McLemore will learn and work to improve his game. Keep starting him, please.

 

[Chubbs]

There's no point in trading for a decent sg who will make 4 of 7 shots instead of 2. And unless you think that'll make us a playoff team, which the math makes extraordinarily unlikely, it'll only hurt the team in the long run. For now, you hope Ben develops. He's in a down stretch. He may have a down month even. Maybe he never comes around. They're going to keep playing him to find out.

The way they celebrated I think giving up on him now is unlikely. Only Petrie does that. I know it just happened with this team, but that's the exception. Ben isn't going anywhere, unless our FO and owner are without egos. You don't do a victory dance then give up before his rookie year is even over in some short sighted attempt to get the 8 seed. Anyone think there is any player in the league that'll send us on a 40-12 run? Cause that's what it would take.

 

[VF21]

...Anyone think there is any player in the league WE CAN GET that'll send us on a 40-12 run? Cause that's what it would take.

Fixed for you.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

There's no point in trading for a decent sg who will make 4 of 7 shots instead of 2. And unless you think that'll make us a playoff team, which the math makes extraordinarily unlikely, it'll only hurt the team in the long run. For now, you hope Ben develops. He's in a down stretch. He may have a down month even. Maybe he never comes around. They're going to keep playing him to find out.

The way they celebrated I think giving up on him now is unlikely. Only Petrie does that. I know it just happened with this team, but that's the exception. Ben isn't going anywhere, unless our FO and owner are without egos. You don't do a victory dance then give up before his rookie year is even over in some short sighted attempt to get the 8 seed. Anyone think there is any player in the league that'll send us on a 40-12 run? Cause that's what it would take.

The question is not this year's potential for 'success'. It's the possibility of next season

 

[Entity]

People say this, but is it true? This "slow" rebuild process abruptly has us with a core ready to win right now. You go teleport Cuz/Gay/IT onto the Spurs in place of Duncan/Parker and Manu, and see what happens. And if that's true, then what we are talking about in our rebuild now is getting the right pieces around those guys. not stars anymore. Certainly not braindead kids. Just build a team of the right support players. That's not a slow sit around and let the kiddies develop sort of process. Ben would have fit right in in 2009. now he's well behind the times. Now he needed to be precocious.

basically 4 years ago Ben starting would not be a problem we had no vision of an end in sight. But starting him now is essientially the same as starting Kevin Martin in 2003 and bringing Doug off the bench. Only problem is we don't have a Doug. At this point though I think Thornton maybe just enough of an upgrade to make a difference but we need to get THAT guy in here. Our sefalosha, or Bowen, or like i said before our Christie. I know where we can get that player for very very cheap. Terrance Williams

 

[jcwkings]

The only thing I worry about McLemore in the future is his overall basketball IQ. Will he be able to follow a scouting report, understand and play good team defense and just make the right basketball play in general? Right now he just seems like a kid in a mans league in every sense. You see flashes of what is there(athleticism, off ball movement, shooting mechanics) but its too early to see if some of his bonehead plays are from rookie struggles or if there is truly more to it.

 

[jcwkings]

Theres a reason Terrence Williams is not in the league, the guy is really talented, but there must be off court issues that keep franchises away.

 

[Chubbs]

The question is not this year's potential for 'success'. It's the possibility of next season

It isn't? Then why wouldn't we keep,playing Ben? People want it both ways. If it's about next season, then address it in the offseason. What's the rush?

The big 3 that we have now may not even be the same big 3 at the trade deadline.

Ben needs to play for future success. The only way to get experience is to play in the tough moments against the tough teams. And he wasn't the only one who fell apart last night. Far from it. Our game winning shot taker in Rudy that we are paying huge bucks to do that very thing didn't even get a shot from the 6:26 mark until there were 6 seconds left. What the heck is that about?

 

[Chubbs]

Fixed for you.

Yes, that is key. Good players do come with a price. Although based on some trade proposals I see around here, the belief that something can be had for nothing is strong.

 

[The_Jamal]

Also, even if you completely ignore the fact that we're 30 games in and write him off (stupid, but some do), you simply cannot give up on a player with his 1. Size 2. Athleticism, 3. Shot form 4. Hustle. I cannot remember a time i've seen Ben dogging it on the court or not going 1000 miles/hour (most of the time to his detriment).

He's not in a Jimmer situation where his size and athletic ability will always hold him back. If IT hadn't come out blazing his rookie year like he did, I doubt he ever would have gotten another opportunity to be an NBA player, because of his size. You live and accept Ben's rookie struggles because if he hits his potential, he's got a chance to be a special player on both ends of the court.

Also, I think we're in a great position now to put him in totally stress-free situations. When our starting 5 was GV-Ben-Mbah-JT-Cousins, we needed him to be a 2nd option. Now, he can be 6th or 7th on the pecking order.

 

[HereWeBoogie]

The biggest problem here is that Marcus Thornton is the alternative right now. so i say we keep starting him but play him less minutes if he cannot pick up his production and defense

 

[kupman]

I say we keep BMac as he could be very good in the future. However, right now he belongs on the bench and should play 10min/game max.

He is a shining example of why I think the 1 and done college scenerio is bad for the players, bad for teams and bad for the NBA as a whole. BMac is simply to young to play effectively in this league. He should be maturing in Kansas right now under a very good coach. Very few players are ready for the NBA before the age of 22. It is the reason why looking to the draft for a player that will have a big impact for us next year is a dicely proposition to say the least.

FWIW, I think this team is really on track right now. We have a very good foundation and are missing 1-2 parts to becoming a play-off quality team. The primary missing part is a #2 that can shoot and defend.

 

[The_Jamal]

Also, another point to the people who want to trade Ben:

Say we trade Ben for a Thabo type player this season.What happens if Rudy opts out, signs elsewhere, and IT get a lucrative 4/36 or 4/40 deal from somebody? We'd be stuck with absolutely nothing but Cousins moving forward.

Before we make any Ben deals we need to first make sure we 1. Want to move forward with IT-Gay-Cousins and 2. Get them locked up long-term. It makes 0 sense to start building a team around those 3 when we only have one of them locked up beyond this season.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

There's no point in trading for a decent sg who will make 4 of 7 shots instead of 2. And unless you think that'll make us a playoff team, which the math makes extraordinarily unlikely, it'll only hurt the team in the long run. For now, you hope Ben develops. He's in a down stretch. He may have a down month even. Maybe he never comes around. They're going to keep playing him to find out.

The way they celebrated I think giving up on him now is unlikely. Only Petrie does that. I know it just happened with this team, but that's the exception. Ben isn't going anywhere, unless our FO and owner are without egos. You don't do a victory dance then give up before his rookie year is even over in some short sighted attempt to get the 8 seed. Anyone think there is any player in the league that'll send us on a 40-12 run? Cause that's what it would take.

Its not even about this season anymore. At this point, it may be worth it to make a win-now move and use this season as a launchpad to make a playoff run next year.

 

[Bricklayer]

Also, even if you completely ignore the fact that we're 30 games in and write him off (stupid, but some do), you simply cannot give up on a player with his 1. Size 2. Athleticism, 3. Shot form 4. Hustle. I cannot remember a time i've seen Ben dogging it on the court or not going 1000 miles/hour (most of the time to his detriment).

Every athlete does not a defender make. In fact I don't think that being a great run/jump athlete is actually very highly correlated with defense at all, at least on the perimeter. Tony Allen, Shane Battier, Tayshaun Prince, Bruce Bowen, Rajon Rondo, Thabo Sefalosha, Avery Bradley and the list goes on. Length for your position matters. Smarts, toughness, lateral quickness. But run jump? When is that really going to come in play except occasionally defending the break?

And of course the other thing is we have seen Ben defend. Even if run/jump gave you the potential to be a good defender, Ben is quite obviously YEARS away from that, and much closer to Gerald Green, Kevin Martin, Nick Young etc. as a highly athletic guy who just gets torched.

 

[Bricklayer]

Also, another point to the people who want to trade Ben:

Say we trade Ben for a Thabo type player this season.What happens if Rudy opts out, signs elsewhere, and IT get a lucrative 4/36 or 4/40 deal from somebody? We'd be stuck with absolutely nothing but Cousins moving forward.

Before we make any Ben deals we need to first make sure we 1. Want to move forward with IT-Gay-Cousins and 2. Get them locked up long-term. It makes 0 sense to start building a team around those 3 when we only have one of them locked up beyond this season.

And using Rudy opting out is just the most unlikely of scare tactics. So he opts out. Does ANYBODY think or dream or even fantacize that a few months after we got him for a pile of junk there is a Rudy Gay market out there so virulent that we somehow could not match or beat the deal? We after all would be the team who suddenly had $18-$20mil to spend when Rudy magically left his deal. Any team, ANY team can always have its players leave. Luol Deng COULD leave the Bulls. Melo COULD leave the Knicks. Love COULD leave the Wolves. You take your chances.

 

[Glenn]

There's no point in trading for a decent sg who will make 4 of 7 shots instead of 2. And unless you think that'll make us a playoff team, which the math makes extraordinarily unlikely, it'll only hurt the team in the long run. For now, you hope Ben develops. He's in a down stretch. He may have a down month even. Maybe he never comes around. They're going to keep playing him to find out.

The way they celebrated I think giving up on him now is unlikely. Only Petrie does that. I know it just happened with this team, but that's the exception. Ben isn't going anywhere, unless our FO and owner are without egos. You don't do a victory dance then give up before his rookie year is even over in some short sighted attempt to get the 8 seed. Anyone think there is any player in the league that'll send us on a 40-12 run? Cause that's what it would take.

I think our FO is relatively egoless but I think they saw something in Ben and will keep him. No way of proving this either way.

 

[rainmaker]

I guess where some disagree, at least me, is that I don't think IT/Gay/Cuz is our big 3 going forward. I'm not jumping the gun on making moves to surround those three with role players. Two of them, yes, but not around IT. My preference is still to get a better defensive PG, a better match-up against the top 10 PG's and who has a better understanding of running the offense and is more willing to step back and be the #3 or #4 option.

I don't think IT is good enough to consider him part of a big 3 and I don't think an IT/Gay/Cuz big 3 has a high enough ceiling to surround them with defensive role players and then sit back and say, we're set. Here's our big 3 and we surrounded them with defensive role players, now let's go out there and grab a playoff spot and let these three lead us over the next few seasons.

Where Ben fits in is trickier. He's hurting us now. Yet, we also don't know what he'll be in 2-3 years. We know the type of player he'd be, just don't know how successful he'll be at it. But if we were to go out and get a Rondo or a Dragic or Lowry, then the potential of Ben means more next to them. If you'd rather have IT be our PG of the future and turn the keys over the him as part of our future big 3, then there's obviously not as much room for Ben.

I'm just not at all convinced that even if we've jumped into "win now" mode that we should be building around this big 3. Yes, get the correct role playing defenders and we're better and challenging for a playoff spot and likely a playoff team next year but the ceiling of the proposed big 3 of IT/Gay/Cuz just isn't high enough for me. I simply don't see IT as a starting PG on a decent playoff team. I don't see him being the most effective type of PG to run out next to Gay/Cuz. And I personally see labeling IT as part of our big 3 going forward, while if we surrounded those three with the right defensive role players we will win more, also limiting our ceiling 2-3 years down the road. IT sets us up to win now while also lowering our potential ceiling. And if you're like me and want IT as the 6th man, then whoever's our next starting PG plays into how Ben potentially fits and what his value might be. He was better next to Vasquez. Get a Rondo/Lowry/Dragic type who aren't the shoot first PG types like IT is, then Ben's fit/role and the potential there does weigh more into this as he likely fits better next to those types.

There's two discussion going on here. I don't think Ben is ready to start and I would move him in a deal to improve this team. At the same time, I'm not anointing IT/Gay/Cuz our big 3 in regards to a future big 3 and gutting our roster to build around them with defensive role players. Gay/Cuz yes, but I'm looking for a big 3 with a higher ceiling and won't intentionally lower our ceiling in 2-3 years simply to make a run at the 8 seed this year and I don't see an IT/Gay/Cuz trio surrounded by role players being that serious a threat in this conference in 2-3 years. When you name your big 3 and build around them for the future, imo they need to have a higher ceiling. Whether we're "win now" or not, I'm not handing over the keys of our starting PG spot to IT for the next few years as part of our designated big 3 going forward.

Labeling IT as part of our big 3 and moving Ben for a role player effectively limits our ceiling at two positions. You'd better be damn sure Ben doesn't break out over the next couple years like Klay/Beal/Peja/Hedo, among others did and have. You're also passing on what I see as the potential for a better PG to run out there next to Gay/Cuz. If you go with a hypothetical IT/Thabo or Shumpert type backcourt, you better be damn sure their ceiling is high than the former, which is upgrading the PG position and Ben finding his feet in this league. I'm not making that bet at this point.