At the beginning of last season IT was playing like the best 6th man in the league, constantly dug us out of holes Vasquez and the starting unit dug. IT didnt beg or politic for a starting job, we were just a better team with him starting and Malone made the move. If he somehow stays and is asked to be a 6th man he will do his job to his best ability and give it 100 percent like the pro he is. It isnt his fault if guys playing ahead of him arent doing the job(though im confident Collison will be solid).
IT = Rumor of 3/24 offer from Pistons
- Thread starter John Galt
- Start date
- Status
If we made it, and made it after the Collison signing, no it still wouldn't invalidate the point because:
1) if that offer was really made, It would fly in the face of the otherwise seemingly overwhelming evidence that we don't want him back and are actively trying to avoid taking him. A 4 yr offer indicates a plan for him. His ego would still rankle at the money, but he would be part of the plan.
2) for the simple reason that's its entirely possible, indeed quite probable that the front office for the worstest losingest most patheticest franchise in the NBA over the past decade or so, could do it absolutely wrong. In fact there isn't much we haven't done absolutely wrong for a long time. Throwing your hat on their rack because they are "authority" is a bit like unquestioningly supporting Polish military doctrine in 1939 because hey, they are generals and must know stuff.
1) if that offer was really made, It would fly in the face of the otherwise seemingly overwhelming evidence that we don't want him back and are actively trying to avoid taking him. A 4 yr offer indicates a plan for him. His ego would still rankle at the money, but he would be part of the plan.
2) for the simple reason that's its entirely possible, indeed quite probable that the front office for the worstest losingest most patheticest franchise in the NBA over the past decade or so, could do it absolutely wrong. In fact there isn't much we haven't done absolutely wrong for a long time. Throwing your hat on their rack because they are "authority" is a bit like unquestioningly supporting Polish military doctrine in 1939 because hey, they are generals and must know stuff.
I think $22 million over four years would be a solid deal had IT been supplanted by a quality starting PG and adapted to the sixth man role. But after being a starter once again and putting up very solid offensive numbers I suspected he'd get bigger offers. But that's the thing - other than the rumored deal from Detroit (who subsequently signed Meeks possibly eliminating that deal) I haven't heard of big money offers for IT.
I figured the Kings' best chance to resign IT at a reasonable/bargain contract was to give him an offer that slightly exceeded the MLE and hope that no teams under the cap were willing to offer more. Assuming the MLE is $5.3 million and assuming 10% raises that deal works out to around $24.5 million. So I'm surprised that the Kings would not go with 4 years $25 million. Still, maybe it's an indication that the market for Thomas will be softer than expected.
We'll see.
I figured the Kings' best chance to resign IT at a reasonable/bargain contract was to give him an offer that slightly exceeded the MLE and hope that no teams under the cap were willing to offer more. Assuming the MLE is $5.3 million and assuming 10% raises that deal works out to around $24.5 million. So I'm surprised that the Kings would not go with 4 years $25 million. Still, maybe it's an indication that the market for Thomas will be softer than expected.
We'll see.
In regards to your points.....
1.) What evidence? All we have are assumptions. We don't know that Collison wasn't signed to be the backup or even the starter with the plan of making IT the backup again. It doesn't make as much sense to have both of them on the team but without a press conference or any word from PDA (since they can't officially sign Collison yet) we don't know what the plan is.
1. B.) You constantly talk about IT's ego as if you know for a fact that he has this massive ego and is unwilling or incapable of being a 6th man. Once again the truth is we don't really know what he is willing to accept. Ultimately we'll find out soon enough what he will and won't accept. I'll say this, all of this talk about his supposedly "massive ego" seems to be a lot more talk than substance. Yes he plays with a chip on his shoulder, yes he's tried to prove people wrong, and yes he's confident in himself but NO he's not this raging narcissist that nobody can stand to be around.
2.) Different front office from 90% of the past decade. You can't attibute the failures of the past regime unto the new regime. You also can't judge the success/fail rate of a new regime after just one season of on court play. The new regime has already turned over most of the roster and has continued to make moves (some of them bold) and is seemingly still in the process of trying to make some bold moves. The rule of thumb when a new front office takes over is generally to "give them three years". If PDA is making the right moves we should see some progress this year with substantial progress next year (3rd year).
Considering how much change was made to the roster last year and how early we are into this offseason it's completely asinine to already assume this season will be a failure with no progress.
1.) What evidence? All we have are assumptions. We don't know that Collison wasn't signed to be the backup or even the starter with the plan of making IT the backup again. It doesn't make as much sense to have both of them on the team but without a press conference or any word from PDA (since they can't officially sign Collison yet) we don't know what the plan is.
1. B.) You constantly talk about IT's ego as if you know for a fact that he has this massive ego and is unwilling or incapable of being a 6th man. Once again the truth is we don't really know what he is willing to accept. Ultimately we'll find out soon enough what he will and won't accept. I'll say this, all of this talk about his supposedly "massive ego" seems to be a lot more talk than substance. Yes he plays with a chip on his shoulder, yes he's tried to prove people wrong, and yes he's confident in himself but NO he's not this raging narcissist that nobody can stand to be around.
2.) Different front office from 90% of the past decade. You can't attibute the failures of the past regime unto the new regime. You also can't judge the success/fail rate of a new regime after just one season of on court play. The new regime has already turned over most of the roster and has continued to make moves (some of them bold) and is seemingly still in the process of trying to make some bold moves. The rule of thumb when a new front office takes over is generally to "give them three years". If PDA is making the right moves we should see some progress this year with substantial progress next year (3rd year).
Considering how much change was made to the roster last year and how early we are into this offseason it's completely asinine to already assume this season will be a failure with no progress.
Very true.
I think IT should be used only in short burst or on special circumstances when the team needs a quick 2 or 3 points. On this way you prevent him from freezing other players and you prevent defensive mismatch for longer periods of time.
Teams should be using him the way they used EARL BOYKINS.
I think IT should be used only in short burst or on special circumstances when the team needs a quick 2 or 3 points. On this way you prevent him from freezing other players and you prevent defensive mismatch for longer periods of time.
Teams should be using him the way they used EARL BOYKINS.
Even without "Elite team discount", I'm sure the Kings could sign Farmar for, say, 7M over 3 years (which is significantly better than the 4.2M over 2 years he got from the Clippers). It would still be a far better deal than Collison for 15M over 3 years. With all due respect to Collison, he is not twice the player Farmar is. It's debatable if, other than slightly higher durability, he is overall a better player at all.
O
No.
That was not a joke.
I think that will be the trajectory of IT's career. It will be very similar to Earl Boykins or Nate Robinson. They are so deceptively good and gives you a circus-like entertainment at first, (especially true on bad team like ours), then you will realized later you're not really going to win more with the midgets as one of your main guys.
Have you ever wondered why IT is not getting "real and solid" offers despite all his prowess in scoring and with all those stats he piled up?
No.
That was not a joke.
I think that will be the trajectory of IT's career. It will be very similar to Earl Boykins or Nate Robinson. They are so deceptively good and gives you a circus-like entertainment at first, (especially true on bad team like ours), then you will realized later you're not really going to win more with the midgets as one of your main guys.
Have you ever wondered why IT is not getting "real and solid" offers despite all his prowess in scoring and with all those stats he piled up?
Last edited:
Right. I think the Kings have a feeling that IT won't be offered more than the MLE. For that price, the FO is willing to keep him. It smooths it over a little if the team can say to IT, we DO want you. We made an offer. Rather than giving off any perception that we only took him back because he didn't get a good offer.
Farmar is al
Earl Boykins was 5'5 132 lbs a full 4 to 5 inches shorter than IT and 50 LBS lighter(thats like comparing Iverson to Dwyan Wade, not only is Wade taller but MUCH stronger). Nate Robinson would be a more fair comparison, although IT is a rich mans Nate Robinson(and to me he is a hybrid of a guy like Robinson and Ty Lawson). IT is 185 Lbs and plays it(the guy who is replacing it who's supposed to be average sized is a full 20-25 lbs lighter than IT). IT is built like a pitbull, quick and strong as heck.
No one is saying IT is going to be one of your main guys, if you can get him for $6-$7 million thats the same price you paid for guys like Carl Landry, JT(who are supposed to be your role players). If you can bring IT off your bench, thats one heck of a weapon to have, and if Collison gets hurt IT is one heck of a replacement to have as your starter. IT has proven he can produce in this league, would you really feel comfortable with a backcourt of Collison(who has already failed as a starter in this league), McCallum(who has less than a quarter of a season under his belt as far a playing time), McLemore(don't even have to say anything), Stauskas(rookie, looks promising but who was the last rookie to make a huge impact for us, ALL rookies hit a wall at some point). IT is literally the only PROVEN player in the backcourt if he comes back, has proven he can come off the bench and produce at a high level and has proven he can start, play 40 plus minutes and compete with the best of the best as far as PG's go in this league.
Earl Boykins was 5'5 132 lbs a full 4 to 5 inches shorter than IT and 50 LBS lighter(thats like comparing Iverson to Dwyan Wade, not only is Wade taller but MUCH stronger). Nate Robinson would be a more fair comparison, although IT is a rich mans Nate Robinson(and to me he is a hybrid of a guy like Robinson and Ty Lawson). IT is 185 Lbs and plays it(the guy who is replacing it who's supposed to be average sized is a full 20-25 lbs lighter than IT). IT is built like a pitbull, quick and strong as heck.
No one is saying IT is going to be one of your main guys, if you can get him for $6-$7 million thats the same price you paid for guys like Carl Landry, JT(who are supposed to be your role players). If you can bring IT off your bench, thats one heck of a weapon to have, and if Collison gets hurt IT is one heck of a replacement to have as your starter. IT has proven he can produce in this league, would you really feel comfortable with a backcourt of Collison(who has already failed as a starter in this league), McCallum(who has less than a quarter of a season under his belt as far a playing time), McLemore(don't even have to say anything), Stauskas(rookie, looks promising but who was the last rookie to make a huge impact for us, ALL rookies hit a wall at some point). IT is literally the only PROVEN player in the backcourt if he comes back, has proven he can come off the bench and produce at a high level and has proven he can start, play 40 plus minutes and compete with the best of the best as far as PG's go in this league.
Oh I don't think many people at all put them on the same plane no matter what the numbers say.
People keep on trying to talk this down, but what we did here was sign a STARTING PG on the cheap. That's the deal there, he is a relatively proven starter, at least a guy that has been in and out on the borderline for years. That made him different from Livingston, or Farmar, or whoever else. Its not a reach to start Collison. You have a pretty decent idea what you are going to get.
Its also not a triumph of course, but it may tell you something about just how highly we value PG play in our system. We have an intended starter who will just kind of hold down the fort, and if Ray is the backup, the same there. Hold down the fort, at least try to play some defense, all we ask. We will try to win the game elsewhere.
People keep on trying to talk this down, but what we did here was sign a STARTING PG on the cheap. That's the deal there, he is a relatively proven starter, at least a guy that has been in and out on the borderline for years. That made him different from Livingston, or Farmar, or whoever else. Its not a reach to start Collison. You have a pretty decent idea what you are going to get.
Its also not a triumph of course, but it may tell you something about just how highly we value PG play in our system. We have an intended starter who will just kind of hold down the fort, and if Ray is the backup, the same there. Hold down the fort, at least try to play some defense, all we ask. We will try to win the game elsewhere.
Last edited:
That might be true but he also started majority of the games in his career and some of those on play off teams! He is no all-star thats for sure but he is far from a scubs that some are trying to paint him as!
Brick is 100% correct! Collison is a known commodity and a starter on the cheap who will hold down the position until we get exactly the type of player we are after!
On paper he fits well of what we expect him to do in that role! He will be a 12-14ppg, 5-6apg starter who will pick his spots offensively playing off the stars and playing some solid perimeter defence. Once we get our PG, he becomes a valuable reserve! Its really not a bad signing!
Brick is 100% correct! Collison is a known commodity and a starter on the cheap who will hold down the position until we get exactly the type of player we are after!
On paper he fits well of what we expect him to do in that role! He will be a 12-14ppg, 5-6apg starter who will pick his spots offensively playing off the stars and playing some solid perimeter defence. Once we get our PG, he becomes a valuable reserve! Its really not a bad signing!
Collison is not a "proven starter" He's actually never stuck anywhere as a "starter" since he's been in the league. He's a good player, but there's been issues with his lack of consistent play throughout his career. Dude got bounced for Mike James for pete's sake.
Where Collison excells is he has value at both the 1 and 2 guard spot, he's a good consistent 3pt shooter, and he can D up a bit.. He played a ton with Chris Paul last season and he was in the Clippers closing line-up at the 2 guard when they went Cp3-Collison-Crawford-BG-Jordan. 23% of his minutes last year were at the SG spot. I think he makes a ton of sense there next season too in which we don't have to rely on Stauskas or Ben to close out games.
Fact is, our team gets a lot worse if IT isn't resigned, especially at the $5-$7mil valuation he's going to get. Collison-Mac-Ben-Stauskas is a disaster heading into the season. It lacks consistent ball-handling, playmaking and non-dependable scoring. IT-Collison-Stauskas-Ben-Ray turns the backcourt from a huge weakness into something that looks like an NBA backcourt. In theory, there's scoring, defense, playmaking, and shooting throughout that line-up. We'll never be stuck playing Outlaw at the back-up 2 guard, nor be stuck playing Ben 30+MPG.
Where Collison excells is he has value at both the 1 and 2 guard spot, he's a good consistent 3pt shooter, and he can D up a bit.. He played a ton with Chris Paul last season and he was in the Clippers closing line-up at the 2 guard when they went Cp3-Collison-Crawford-BG-Jordan. 23% of his minutes last year were at the SG spot. I think he makes a ton of sense there next season too in which we don't have to rely on Stauskas or Ben to close out games.
Fact is, our team gets a lot worse if IT isn't resigned, especially at the $5-$7mil valuation he's going to get. Collison-Mac-Ben-Stauskas is a disaster heading into the season. It lacks consistent ball-handling, playmaking and non-dependable scoring. IT-Collison-Stauskas-Ben-Ray turns the backcourt from a huge weakness into something that looks like an NBA backcourt. In theory, there's scoring, defense, playmaking, and shooting throughout that line-up. We'll never be stuck playing Outlaw at the back-up 2 guard, nor be stuck playing Ben 30+MPG.
Might also be that they expect nobody to go above MLE (±) and are baiting someone to offer it to him and him to accept because it is slightly higher than ours (I still don't think there are any $7-8 million offers for him out there). Then we just wait as long as we can and match it.
Or, could just be a serious warning to others that we will match an MLE offer and scare off other teams from making it, saving a few bucks in the process.
Lots of possibilities and no real answer right now.
But I agree that this lets him know we want him back, which is more than the feeling he gets with a QO and a "go find an offer you like" stance. Like Brick said, he may not like the amount, but the long term offer has to be a good thing for him to have on the table at this stage. And for what he brings I think it is not unreasonable.
Or, could just be a serious warning to others that we will match an MLE offer and scare off other teams from making it, saving a few bucks in the process.
Lots of possibilities and no real answer right now.
But I agree that this lets him know we want him back, which is more than the feeling he gets with a QO and a "go find an offer you like" stance. Like Brick said, he may not like the amount, but the long term offer has to be a good thing for him to have on the table at this stage. And for what he brings I think it is not unreasonable.
- Status