Josh Smith?
- Thread starter Schmoe
- Start date
- Status
I obviously have my concerns with bringing Smith here, but if we're able to shed Landry in the trade, I would be more on board. I really do not want to trot out a frontline of Cousins, Smith, & Landry. We need Thompson's size in the lineup.
If we bring him here, he has to revert back to a 12 FGA player who doesn't even consider shooting threes unless there is .4 seconds left on the shot clock. I want him to play defense, crash the boards, get out and run on the break, get some garbage/hustle buckets, and knock down open jumpers. He shot 41% when he took catch and shoot 2 pointers last season. I'm completely fine if he wants to take that type of shot on our team.
If we do bring him in, we would potentially have solid passers at all five starting positions (Collison, Stauskas, Gay, Smith, Cousins). If we can get everyone to buy into ball movement, that starting 5 could be very fun to watch and very difficult to defend.
If we bring him here, he has to revert back to a 12 FGA player who doesn't even consider shooting threes unless there is .4 seconds left on the shot clock. I want him to play defense, crash the boards, get out and run on the break, get some garbage/hustle buckets, and knock down open jumpers. He shot 41% when he took catch and shoot 2 pointers last season. I'm completely fine if he wants to take that type of shot on our team.
If we do bring him in, we would potentially have solid passers at all five starting positions (Collison, Stauskas, Gay, Smith, Cousins). If we can get everyone to buy into ball movement, that starting 5 could be very fun to watch and very difficult to defend.
Last edited:
If anything, it's time to hit the phones now. The last game showed the potential of both players - even if it was an aberration, there are GMs and coaches out there who might be willing to pull the trigger on a deal given the potential. We've seen DWill quite a bit. He has moments where he's shown what he can deliver, but those moments are usually surrounded by duds. With McLemore, people will wonder if he's finally turned the corner, or if he too, will end up being an inconsistent pro for the next 3 years. This last game may have helped us move them for someone of value.
Had the 2 of them continued to stink things up during SL, well, then it would have been hard to push their potential. Now, had we not been pushing into "win now" mode, I would be more than content to see if they develop or not. Unfortunately, it seems that we've shrunken the window quite a bit, in an effort to show both Cousins and Gay that we mean business, and we mean it soon.
Had the 2 of them continued to stink things up during SL, well, then it would have been hard to push their potential. Now, had we not been pushing into "win now" mode, I would be more than content to see if they develop or not. Unfortunately, it seems that we've shrunken the window quite a bit, in an effort to show both Cousins and Gay that we mean business, and we mean it soon.
Collect as many long term assets as possible, don't overpay to get guys that aren't among your 3 best guys (those you have to over pay for and move the franchise forward), don't make draft picks for short term needs if a better long term asset is available, try to win as many games as you can with those limited options, and then, once you've got a bunch of good assets and a gamble that has a good chance at playing off ... then push in. (I think Landry, Collison and passing on Payton fail the test. Gay trade did not. Gay extension has a good chance, because we'd be playing a non-all star player franchise money.)
It's not sexy. But it's how smart teams do it.
The team and fans are ready to strike out and make a push now because we're tired of the losing. I get that. This team does not have enough talent or assets to roll the dice with long term commitments that Rudy and Smith both remake their careers late in the game and Collison becomes a very good starter. That's almost like hoping to draw a royal flush by taking two more cards. They have to realize the are at about square two and slowly build out.
I'm tired of missing the playoffs. I'd rather not be reading how we're going to start again in 2-3 years if we can get some of PDA's contracts off the books.
It's not sexy. But it's how smart teams do it.
The team and fans are ready to strike out and make a push now because we're tired of the losing. I get that. This team does not have enough talent or assets to roll the dice with long term commitments that Rudy and Smith both remake their careers late in the game and Collison becomes a very good starter. That's almost like hoping to draw a royal flush by taking two more cards. They have to realize the are at about square two and slowly build out.
I'm tired of missing the playoffs. I'd rather not be reading how we're going to start again in 2-3 years if we can get some of PDA's contracts off the books.
J
just because you want something doesn't mean it's easy to get. The only questionable move to me is Landry. But if he is healthy and back to form does anyone complain? His contract while not small isn't crippling compared to other players of his healthy caliber. Other than that how is are things head scratching?
Yeah, the move was denounced when it happened. And that was with Landry completely healthy. His contract is the worst kind; long, big enough to mess with your cap, not big enough to be a good expiring. Over the last few years Petrie dealt exclusively in these crappy contracts, and PDA followed suit.
Couple that with the fact that Landry brings none of the things we need from a big (defense, shotblocking) and all of the things we already have (jumpshooting, post play, NOT PASSING), yeah, you have some people complaining. This was a bad move when it happened, it was a bad move when he went down, it's a bad move even when he's healthy. It's a bad move.
Couple that with the fact that Landry brings none of the things we need from a big (defense, shotblocking) and all of the things we already have (jumpshooting, post play, NOT PASSING), yeah, you have some people complaining. This was a bad move when it happened, it was a bad move when he went down, it's a bad move even when he's healthy. It's a bad move.
it should be pretty easy to at least put forth a plan, or a semblance of a plan and follow it. .
1. Let Tyreke go for Vasquez. Had the opportunity to take back a defensive big in Lopez in the deal, but decided to re route him to POR.
2. Preaching defense and ball movement, then proceed to trade their best defender in Moute and their best passer in Vasquez. And their big FA signing was an undersized PF that who is not known as a defender, but rather a scorer.
3. Drafting a SG known for scoring with a high lottery pick 2 years in a row. I like Stauskas, but this reminds me of Millen drafting WR's every year.
4. Letting one of their only trade assets in IT walk for what amounts to nothing.
5. Saying they want a shot blocking big man to pair with Cuz, but the guy they are linked to is a tweener SF/PF who is not what we would consider a true shot blocking presence, a la Dalembert, etc.
So basically, what I have seen so far is a FO that in 2 years has let 2 of their most talented players leave without getting much value in return, not to mention they were RFA and the contracts both guys got were fairly reasonable(and I do not care that Vasquez was later flipped for Gay. Gay could have been had even without Vasquez, that's how desperate TOR was to dump him). And a FO that has preached ball movement and defense, yet every one of their moves contradicts mentality.
1. Let Tyreke go for Vasquez. Had the opportunity to take back a defensive big in Lopez in the deal, but decided to re route him to POR.
2. Preaching defense and ball movement, then proceed to trade their best defender in Moute and their best passer in Vasquez. And their big FA signing was an undersized PF that who is not known as a defender, but rather a scorer.
3. Drafting a SG known for scoring with a high lottery pick 2 years in a row. I like Stauskas, but this reminds me of Millen drafting WR's every year.
4. Letting one of their only trade assets in IT walk for what amounts to nothing.
5. Saying they want a shot blocking big man to pair with Cuz, but the guy they are linked to is a tweener SF/PF who is not what we would consider a true shot blocking presence, a la Dalembert, etc.
So basically, what I have seen so far is a FO that in 2 years has let 2 of their most talented players leave without getting much value in return, not to mention they were RFA and the contracts both guys got were fairly reasonable(and I do not care that Vasquez was later flipped for Gay. Gay could have been had even without Vasquez, that's how desperate TOR was to dump him). And a FO that has preached ball movement and defense, yet every one of their moves contradicts mentality.
It's not all about how much he makes. It's about what he brings to the team. We have a dominant low post center who we need to keep out of foul trouble as much as possible. Do you know how we do that? We surround him with versatile big men who can defend. Landry does not fit the bill.
Ideally, you want a player who defends the post, gaurds 4s and 5s, blocks shots, rebounds well, knocks down open jumpers, and stays out of the way on offense. Does this at all sound like Landry? Not to me. Since Cousins is the best center in the game, he should be getting as many minutes as he can (34-37 mpg). That only leaves 11-14 mpg when Cousins is off the floor. Should we be paying a player 6+ mil to play 11-14 mpg? I don't think so. That means there will be times when he is on the floor with Cousins which will not maximize the potential of our frontcourt play. If there was a defensive presence next to him, there would be
Landry's skillset is redundant (a much worse redundant) with Cousins. We need players who hide his weaknesses and keep him out of foul trouble. Landry is not that guy. That is why I took and still take exception to the signing of Landry.
Ideally, you want a player who defends the post, gaurds 4s and 5s, blocks shots, rebounds well, knocks down open jumpers, and stays out of the way on offense. Does this at all sound like Landry? Not to me. Since Cousins is the best center in the game, he should be getting as many minutes as he can (34-37 mpg). That only leaves 11-14 mpg when Cousins is off the floor. Should we be paying a player 6+ mil to play 11-14 mpg? I don't think so. That means there will be times when he is on the floor with Cousins which will not maximize the potential of our frontcourt play. If there was a defensive presence next to him, there would be
Landry's skillset is redundant (a much worse redundant) with Cousins. We need players who hide his weaknesses and keep him out of foul trouble. Landry is not that guy. That is why I took and still take exception to the signing of Landry.
Last edited:
it should be pretty easy to at least put forth a plan, or a semblance of a plan and follow it. .
1. Let Tyreke go for Vasquez. Had the opportunity to take back a defensive big in Lopez in the deal, but decided to re route him to POR.
2. Preaching defense and ball movement, then proceed to trade their best defender in Moute and their best passer in Vasquez. And their big FA signing was an undersized PF that who is not known as a defender, but rather a scorer.
3. Drafting a SG known for scoring with a high lottery pick 2 years in a row. I like Stauskas, but this reminds me of Millen drafting WR's every year.
4. Letting one of their only trade assets in IT walk for what amounts to nothing.
5. Saying they want a shot blocking big man to pair with Cuz, but the guy they are linked to is a tweener SF/PF who is not what we would consider a true shot blocking presence, a la Dalembert, etc.
So basically, what I have seen so far is a FO that in 2 years has let 2 of their most talented players leave without getting much value in return, not to mention they were RFA and the contracts both guys got were fairly reasonable(and I do not care that Vasquez was later flipped for Gay. Gay could have been had even without Vasquez, that's how desperate TOR was to dump him). And a FO that has preached ball movement and defense, yet every one of their moves contradicts that mentality.
1. Let Tyreke go for Vasquez. Had the opportunity to take back a defensive big in Lopez in the deal, but decided to re route him to POR.
2. Preaching defense and ball movement, then proceed to trade their best defender in Moute and their best passer in Vasquez. And their big FA signing was an undersized PF that who is not known as a defender, but rather a scorer.
3. Drafting a SG known for scoring with a high lottery pick 2 years in a row. I like Stauskas, but this reminds me of Millen drafting WR's every year.
4. Letting one of their only trade assets in IT walk for what amounts to nothing.
5. Saying they want a shot blocking big man to pair with Cuz, but the guy they are linked to is a tweener SF/PF who is not what we would consider a true shot blocking presence, a la Dalembert, etc.
So basically, what I have seen so far is a FO that in 2 years has let 2 of their most talented players leave without getting much value in return, not to mention they were RFA and the contracts both guys got were fairly reasonable(and I do not care that Vasquez was later flipped for Gay. Gay could have been had even without Vasquez, that's how desperate TOR was to dump him). And a FO that has preached ball movement and defense, yet every one of their moves contradicts that mentality.
Last edited:
Let's assume that Josh Smith comes on board. Then, if the rumored contracts out involve DWill and JT, where does that leave us on the front court?
Cousins
Smith
Acy
Evans
Landry
In that scenario, the only value Evans Landry brings is scoring. Nothing defensive. Then who would we place at the 5? Evans?
That is why the Landry signing doesn't make sense. It isn't that the money is relative to his peers (which, yeah, is still an issue when you think about the Kings, not just his contract relative to the NBA)...seems like twslam beat me to it:
Cousins
Smith
Acy
Evans
Landry
In that scenario, the only value Evans Landry brings is scoring. Nothing defensive. Then who would we place at the 5? Evans?
That is why the Landry signing doesn't make sense. It isn't that the money is relative to his peers (which, yeah, is still an issue when you think about the Kings, not just his contract relative to the NBA)...seems like twslam beat me to it:
J
Were you in the room when these trades were made? Tyreke and it would have killed our cap room for years. We would not have improved. Is Lopez a better fit w cuz than smith? I don't think do. Are you sure Vazquez and Luc should have been here long term? Stauskas is gonna be a bad m*ther...gotta take bpa.
The problem with Josh Smith in Detroit was he was forced to play out of position. He was playing Small Forward with Drummond at Center and Monroe at Power Forward.
He was forced to play the wing and therefore in that offense and defense he was on the perimeter. In Atlanta, he was playing his natural position at Power Forward and he was a shot blocking and rebounding big.
If traded to the Kings, he would be back at his natural position at Power Forward, DMC at Center and Gay at Small Forward. At power forward, he will be positioned much closer to the basket on defense and offense, hopefully bring back the 15-16ppg 8-9 rpg 2 blks Josh Smith to the Kings.
I say Josh Smith is the BEST realistic option for the Kings to improve and make the playoffs.
PDA and Vivek, lets get it done, and if you can send Landry instead of JT in the trade, you could be GM of the year!
He was forced to play the wing and therefore in that offense and defense he was on the perimeter. In Atlanta, he was playing his natural position at Power Forward and he was a shot blocking and rebounding big.
If traded to the Kings, he would be back at his natural position at Power Forward, DMC at Center and Gay at Small Forward. At power forward, he will be positioned much closer to the basket on defense and offense, hopefully bring back the 15-16ppg 8-9 rpg 2 blks Josh Smith to the Kings.
I say Josh Smith is the BEST realistic option for the Kings to improve and make the playoffs.
PDA and Vivek, lets get it done, and if you can send Landry instead of JT in the trade, you could be GM of the year!
I think the issue is that we're trying to accelerate the process, and if Ben grows, we will certainly lose out. From a long term standpoint, however, I think the FO is ultimately more interested in keeping Cousins around over watching Ben grow, if that's what it comes down to. I too, like seeing kids mature and grow as players, but I think he may end up being a casualty.
The hope is that these moves will help the team emerge from the cellar. We'll see.
The hope is that these moves will help the team emerge from the cellar. We'll see.
- Status