Jimmer Fredette
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
- Status
Did he specifically say that? I heard him say he was going to get more time for the rookies, but I may have missed where he said that Jimmer was out of the rotation.
I wouldn't disagree with him if he did put Jimmer out to pasture. Just don't want to read anything into what he said that isn't there.
I wouldn't disagree with him if he did put Jimmer out to pasture. Just don't want to read anything into what he said that isn't there.
It's strange to me that he would sit Jimmer and play Ray. I just don't see anything in Ray that says he is going to be good in the NBA. He isn't faster than Jimmer and will never be a better shooter and its not like Jimmer is old. I don't get it.
I understand why they have to play Ben, high first round pick and have money invested but Ray is really nothing but D-league material.
I understand why they have to play Ben, high first round pick and have money invested but Ray is really nothing but D-league material.
Ray is under contract after this season, Jimmer is not. Ray has also shown more defensive ability. Ray is also a better athlete. You may have not seen it in his play with the Kings but Ray was jumping out of the gym in Summer League.
I think many coaches in the NBA including Malone have a primary rule for players in the rotation. "Who can they guard?" If a player cannot guard the player he is matched up against it matters little how much he scores. This is the main issue with Jimmer.
I think many coaches in the NBA including Malone have a primary rule for players in the rotation. "Who can they guard?" If a player cannot guard the player he is matched up against it matters little how much he scores. This is the main issue with Jimmer.
You can say that about half of the Kings team, though.
There's a role for scorers who don't defend well, otherwise Kevin Martin, Marcus Thornton, Isaiah Thomas, Jamal Crawford, Nate Robinson, & etc. wouldn't be playing in the league. Usually it's a bench role, but not everyone on a team has to be a lockdown defender to play winning basketball. It's a problem when nobody on a team is a lockdown defender.
There's a role for scorers who don't defend well, otherwise Kevin Martin, Marcus Thornton, Isaiah Thomas, Jamal Crawford, Nate Robinson, & etc. wouldn't be playing in the league. Usually it's a bench role, but not everyone on a team has to be a lockdown defender to play winning basketball. It's a problem when nobody on a team is a lockdown defender.
The jimmer fans just have to give it up. He's not going to be here. They don't need to see anything from him. It's just over guys.
Whether he is better or worse than Ray just doesn't matter. Ray is here. He will be here. Jimmer is done as a King. It ended yesterday. No more showcase. No more minutes unless someone gets hurt. I really think that's where we are at.
It's not a conspiracy. It's just reality.
Whether he is better or worse than Ray just doesn't matter. Ray is here. He will be here. Jimmer is done as a King. It ended yesterday. No more showcase. No more minutes unless someone gets hurt. I really think that's where we are at.
It's not a conspiracy. It's just reality.
I don't think anyone here disagree with you Chubbs... unless I'm missing posts that you are reading. Point out a post where someone suggests it's a conspiracy or that the Kings are idiots not to play him? If you think that's what you are reading, you are missing both the tone and content of the thread. The point has been pretty clear and reiterated over and over:
- Jimmer may not play any more meaningful minutes on the Kings
- It sucks because his potential/progress/play as of late warrant more
- But we get the situation he is in and why the Kings need to do what they will most likely do
Sometimes you have to hit people over the head to get their attention. 
We have 4 players with a PER over average and Jimmer is one of them. I find it odd that we can't find a use for him. And, no, I don't understand it. Yes, we need to play IT and Ray at the pg. Why now and not earlier? Jimmer is a sg in a pg's body but isn't the worst pg in the world. I guess I am wrong but he seems to have triple the BBIQ as IT and I think IT hurts the team and Ben specifically. Jimmer may not add much but he doesn't hurt us.
We have 4 players with a PER over average and Jimmer is one of them. I find it odd that we can't find a use for him. And, no, I don't understand it. Yes, we need to play IT and Ray at the pg. Why now and not earlier? Jimmer is a sg in a pg's body but isn't the worst pg in the world. I guess I am wrong but he seems to have triple the BBIQ as IT and I think IT hurts the team and Ben specifically. Jimmer may not add much but he doesn't hurt us.
Sometimes you have to hit people over the head to get their attention. We have 4 players with a PER over average and Jimmer is one of them. I find it odd that we can't find a use for him. And, no, I don't understand it. Yes, we need to play IT and Ray at the pg. Why now and not earlier? Jimmer is a sg in a pg's body but isn't the worst pg in the world. I guess I am wrong but he seems to have triple the BBIQ as IT and I think IT hurts the team and Ben specifically. Jimmer may not add much but he doesn't hurt us.
We have 4 players with a PER over average and Jimmer is one of them. I find it odd that we can't find a use for him. And, no, I don't understand it. Yes, we need to play IT and Ray at the pg. Why now and not earlier? Jimmer is a sg in a pg's body but isn't the worst pg in the world. I guess I am wrong but he seems to have triple the BBIQ as IT and I think IT hurts the team and Ben specifically. Jimmer may not add much but he doesn't hurt us.
1) Would he be getting playtime over Ray during this tanking stretch?
2) Would he have been able to get at least a second rounder in return on the trade market?
3) Would he have been getting more playtime during the year based on his offensive skillset?
What tanking stretch? If they had plans for Jimmer, he would have gotten more minutes from day one. He is improving but maybe I am the only one to notice. I don't understand question 2. #3 Yes. Answered as part of answer to #1.
Who cares? He's gone. I am not clear as to Malone's goals or the FO's goals. It's like they want to remove the Maloof stink and are throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Who cares? He's gone. I am not clear as to Malone's goals or the FO's goals. It's like they want to remove the Maloof stink and are throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Allow me to clarify.
1) From here to the end of the year, Malone has said that the team will be playing the rooks at every opportunity which is a polite way of saying that we're tanking. If Jimmer still had another year on his contract, followed by RFA status, would McCallum have jumped him in the pecking order?
2) The team openly offered Jimmer to any team willing to part with a second rounder. Would there have been a buyer if Jimmer had another year at 3.3 million?
3) Jimmer was out of the rotation entirely at the beginning of the year and has played very limited minutes in the games where he does play. Would there have been more pressure from the front office to find minutes for him in the rotation based on his play if he had been seen as part of the team's future beyond the trade deadline?
1) From here to the end of the year, Malone has said that the team will be playing the rooks at every opportunity which is a polite way of saying that we're tanking. If Jimmer still had another year on his contract, followed by RFA status, would McCallum have jumped him in the pecking order?
2) The team openly offered Jimmer to any team willing to part with a second rounder. Would there have been a buyer if Jimmer had another year at 3.3 million?
3) Jimmer was out of the rotation entirely at the beginning of the year and has played very limited minutes in the games where he does play. Would there have been more pressure from the front office to find minutes for him in the rotation based on his play if he had been seen as part of the team's future beyond the trade deadline?
That's what's somewhat confusing. They're making it sound like the first part of the year was an effort to actually do something more than just evaluate different players on this roster. I thought that's what this whole season was about? Not just the last 29 games
I never understood them not playing Ray McCallum at all in the beginning. They obviously needed to get an idea of what he can do, why wait so long? IMO, as soon as Vasquez was gone, Ray should have been getting a meaningful look right away
Actually, its the same thing with Jimmer. We needed to see what he could do in a new system. When they finally gave him some playing time beyond scrap time, he came up with some plays and production that nobody else gives us
I never understood them not playing Ray McCallum at all in the beginning. They obviously needed to get an idea of what he can do, why wait so long? IMO, as soon as Vasquez was gone, Ray should have been getting a meaningful look right away
Actually, its the same thing with Jimmer. We needed to see what he could do in a new system. When they finally gave him some playing time beyond scrap time, he came up with some plays and production that nobody else gives us
Quite possibly yes on all three. When they declined his option, they had not been owners too long. There were some questionable calls made early on and this in hindsight may have been wrong. The book isn't done being written and only time will tell. He is IMHO a serviceable back-up/specialist and that isn't a bad thing.
It is what it is but I wouldn't mind seeing him on the Kings next year depending on the make-up of the team then.
It is what it is but I wouldn't mind seeing him on the Kings next year depending on the make-up of the team then.
Jimmer is no distraction. He will contentedly sit at the end of the bench until the season is over. I never thought he had a career until this year. The irony to me is that the people ahead of him suck whether it is at pg or sg unless he is the backup sg. Maybe it's early in the morning for me but who is the backup sg? I lost track. Maybe Outlaw.
Malone talked about the difficult decision re: Jimmer's option at the start of the season, and I got the sense that he was sincere... It was a tough call then as it was becoming apparent that he had improved in the off-season and had a few shining pre-season moments. But you still had IT, you had a huge MT contract (and MT was still good back then). Jimmer has since shown that he has improved, all though he still has a lot of holes --- his turnover tendency the most glaring. Having said that, the option decision was the start of the end, and I'm with Glenn that 1 & 3 are a yes. Also not sure about 2, but I would think so.
I agree with all of this. It did seem that they were "closed minded" to the idea that he may turn things around and improve. It's as if they're mind was made up, right after the preseason games. That's a mistake IMO, especially for a guy who has it within him to go absolutely bonkers in the scoring column on any given night,...and at a high shooting percentage, not "volume" shooting
I think Jimmer should become our Sacre and do the Jimmer on the sidelines after we actually do something well. I think it will be much more interesting than what is going on on the court and it might help him stick with another team for about 10 years
Sorry you took it that way as talking down. I like that you responded by doing the same to me. You are right though, there aren't any conspiratorial notes lately. But there certainly have been throughout my time here. Why he's still being discussed is a bit of a mystery. No 12th man in NBA history has been discussed more. Yet here I am doing the same.
The real question is what on earth were we doing the first 50 games. We had already decided Jimmer was gone in the offseason. Yet we kept playing him over Ray. I think losing GV so early in the year hadn't been part of the plan. Jimmer may not have seen the court at all this year if the GV/little man rotation had stayed intact. Jimmer is pretty lucky he got any minutes this year, as limited as they were. He may have salvaged his career with his nice shooting numbers. Someone may see that and take a chance.
Would we be worse playing Ray over Jimmer? Hard to see how. I think they were fully planning on little man or GV being gone by the deadline (they couldn't sign both), and it was always the plan for Ray to get the end of season minutes at the backup. Jimmer showing signs of competence surprised everyone.
I think Outlaw is the #2 SG at this point. Yikes.
As to waiving Jimmer, someone with better knowledge of the rules may be able to help out, but I don't think that's really ever an option in the NBA.
You are right though, there aren't any conspiratorial notes lately. But there certainly have been throughout my time here. Why he's still being discussed is a bit of a mystery. No 12th man in NBA history has been discussed more. Yet here I am doing the same. The real question is what on earth were we doing the first 50 games. We had already decided Jimmer was gone in the offseason. Yet we kept playing him over Ray. I think losing GV so early in the year hadn't been part of the plan. Jimmer may not have seen the court at all this year if the GV/little man rotation had stayed intact. Jimmer is pretty lucky he got any minutes this year, as limited as they were. He may have salvaged his career with his nice shooting numbers. Someone may see that and take a chance.
Would we be worse playing Ray over Jimmer? Hard to see how. I think they were fully planning on little man or GV being gone by the deadline (they couldn't sign both), and it was always the plan for Ray to get the end of season minutes at the backup. Jimmer showing signs of competence surprised everyone.
I think Outlaw is the #2 SG at this point. Yikes.
As to waiving Jimmer, someone with better knowledge of the rules may be able to help out, but I don't think that's really ever an option in the NBA.
Kings can waive anyone, until there's still a game to play. It just doesn't make sense after a deadline in March, when teams can no longer sign players in time for PO. If FO indeed see no place for him next season, might as well waive him, and pick up a try out from D-League in case of injury or foul trouble.
But why? It does the team no good. They still have his birds rights, just in case and you might as well leave all options open that you can. They have fourteen players on the roster (unless I missed someone) leaving a spot open. If there is an injury, he would be available, why get someone else? And if you waive him, you still have to pay him. If your going to pay him, might as well have him at the end of the bench.
You don't need Bird rights, if your target fits into Bi-annual exception, let alone MLE. Main argument: FO and Malone make it look like he's done in Sacramento. If it's true, no need for him to be here. And getting someone else allows to take a look at another player with potential, who will come on the cheap and might have a role. Again it all come back to how FO views Jimmer's future in Sacramento.
Kings have 28 games to play, and only 3 guards with future here. Try out a guy or two from D-League, no need to develop Outlaw.
Kings have 28 games to play, and only 3 guards with future here. Try out a guy or two from D-League, no need to develop Outlaw.
By appearances, I will agree with you. However, he HAS improved from the start of the season. We don't truly know what management thinks, do they think he may worth being a reserve but not at 3 mil? I don't think they do, but I don't know. I personally think he is worthy of being a reserve on this team and I'm assuming that there will be structural changes between now and the start of next season. (now whether or not he is willing if offered is another whole story) If the team goes for a big in the draft, their going to need a guard or two. So who knows.
- Status