Kings and free agency - part 4
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
I felt the same way bajaden did on this one ... some of the names you were throwing out there as evidence of a strong third playmaker being a necessity for the playoffs were comical. Houston didn't have Lawson or Beverly in the playoffs last year and they made it to the Western Conference Finals. Lawson and Harden playing together could be a trainwreck this season unless both of them can check their ego and drastically cut their usage rates. Dallas has four mediocre PGs none of which would start over Rondo or Collison on our team. Rivers and Prigioni are lucky to be on an NBA roster and it's an open question whether Stephenson and Crawford can actually share the court together because both are so ball dominant. Cameron Payne hasn't played a single game in the NBA yet. We had Ray McCallum the last two years and other than summer league, I don't know that he impacted the team enough to win or lose even one game for us. Your implication that these teams are way ahead of us from a playmaking point of view just doesn't ring true.
While I would agree that our roster isn't perfect by any means, if I were to sit down and make a list of what we still needed, a strong #3 PG wouldn't even make the top 5. It's just such a non-issue that it's surprising how much effort you're expending on it. If Rondo comes back healthy, he's one of the top 5 playmakers in the league when he's allowed to initiate the offense. Darren Collison showed us this season that he could run a team at a high level. He's nearly on the same level as Jrue Holiday and he's our backup. If these guys play up to their potential, no other team in the league will be getting as many quality PG minutes as we are. The reason Andre Miller isn't coming back is that there's no room for another non-shooting playmaker PG on this roster. He'd be a nice luxury to have in case of injury, but I can also see how a scorer like Seth Curry might ultimately have more of an impact. We have three players in our starting lineup (Rondo, Gay and Cousins) who project to be among the league leaders in assists at their positions and then you have Collison coming off the bench who averaged 5.6 assists per game last season. Putting players around them who can knock down shots (McLemore, Belinelli, Casspi, Butler, Curry) was a necessity and Vlade has done that.
In the event disaster strikes and we do lose one of our PGs for a large chunk of the season, I don't think George Karl is going to be throwing Seth Curry out there and asking him to play Rondo. It'll be more of a PG by committee approach where the offense is initiated more on the wings and the PG becomes a spot-up shooter. A lot of teams have had success with that style of offense as well. And don't forget, we also have a huge advantage in half-court sets that most teams don't have -- two bruising bigs who can create offense in the paint.
While I would agree that our roster isn't perfect by any means, if I were to sit down and make a list of what we still needed, a strong #3 PG wouldn't even make the top 5. It's just such a non-issue that it's surprising how much effort you're expending on it. If Rondo comes back healthy, he's one of the top 5 playmakers in the league when he's allowed to initiate the offense. Darren Collison showed us this season that he could run a team at a high level. He's nearly on the same level as Jrue Holiday and he's our backup. If these guys play up to their potential, no other team in the league will be getting as many quality PG minutes as we are. The reason Andre Miller isn't coming back is that there's no room for another non-shooting playmaker PG on this roster. He'd be a nice luxury to have in case of injury, but I can also see how a scorer like Seth Curry might ultimately have more of an impact. We have three players in our starting lineup (Rondo, Gay and Cousins) who project to be among the league leaders in assists at their positions and then you have Collison coming off the bench who averaged 5.6 assists per game last season. Putting players around them who can knock down shots (McLemore, Belinelli, Casspi, Butler, Curry) was a necessity and Vlade has done that.
In the event disaster strikes and we do lose one of our PGs for a large chunk of the season, I don't think George Karl is going to be throwing Seth Curry out there and asking him to play Rondo. It'll be more of a PG by committee approach where the offense is initiated more on the wings and the PG becomes a spot-up shooter. A lot of teams have had success with that style of offense as well. And don't forget, we also have a huge advantage in half-court sets that most teams don't have -- two bruising bigs who can create offense in the paint.
Again, you're still misunderstanding, so let me try one more time...
Vlade is doing a great job as a GM!
Is that clear enough? Are you still with me? Okay, great!
Just because he is doing a great job as a GM does not mean he is immune to making poor decisions. People can be so absolute sometimes. It's either all good moves or all bad moves. If we don't go into the season with a 3rd player who we know can run the offense, that is a poor decision on his part. Now, is it as bad as trading back 3 spots to swap Beno with Salmons? Not even close. Is it as bad as signing Landry to 6.5 mil per year? Not even close. Is it bad enough to negate all the great things he's done so far? Absolutely not. But it's still a poor decision.
It's not nearly as significant as other moves, but it's such an easy move to make which helps protect this team in case of an injury.
Vlade is doing a great job as a GM!
Is that clear enough? Are you still with me? Okay, great!
Just because he is doing a great job as a GM does not mean he is immune to making poor decisions. People can be so absolute sometimes. It's either all good moves or all bad moves. If we don't go into the season with a 3rd player who we know can run the offense, that is a poor decision on his part. Now, is it as bad as trading back 3 spots to swap Beno with Salmons? Not even close. Is it as bad as signing Landry to 6.5 mil per year? Not even close. Is it bad enough to negate all the great things he's done so far? Absolutely not. But it's still a poor decision.
It's not nearly as significant as other moves, but it's such an easy move to make which helps protect this team in case of an injury.
I'm just waiting to see what happens, but I don't entirely understand why we withdrew the offer in the first place if we're still interested. If he's getting a minimum deal you can allow him to heal up on the inactive list until he's ready to play and he's not costing you anything because there's nobody better available for 1.5 million right now, and if something does come up you can always cut him then. Maybe the issue is the number of guaranteed years. In any case, unless the injury is career threatening, I don't see the harm in keeping him on the roster. If Cauley-Stein and Moreland impress, he becomes redundant regardless. If they struggle early on, it would be nice to have a veteran option waiting in the wings. If there's any chance of that shoulder being game ready by say mid-January or so, I'd rather sign him than not sign him.
You're missing the point. A GM with no flexibility to make moves and with a bunch of holes on his roster will probably not be able to fix the team. You can't hold him accountable. But when you have flexibility to fix the roster, you better do it and I think vlade has for the most part. But this move we're talking about is such an easy move to make (plenty of options, only costs a veteran minimum or room exception). You can't play the "there's too many holes to fix" card when I could easily fix this problem today. Vlade can too.
The only really complaint I have about Vlade's work this off-season (and it's a very small one) is that he took a little bit too long to get started and as a result most of the "depth options" we could have used our last chunk of cap space on were already snapped up by the time we resolved the Rondo/Belinelli/Koufos signings. It's hard to fault him for that though when this is his first off-season in charge, he also had a lottery pick to worry about, and by all accounts the free agency period moved surprisingly quickly this year compared to most past years. Without the appeal of a major market or a proven playoff contender, it's hard to pull in top-level vets with minimum deals late in the free agency period. If we weren't so focused on getting the bigger moves right, we maybe could have targeted some of those under-appreciated assets and breakout candidate players who just wanted to feel like their skills were valued by somebody. But the main takeaway here is that Vlade did get the big moves right and that's the important part. It's unrealistic to expect a team to go from 29 wins to the top half of the Western Conference in one off-season. The goal this season is just to make the playoffs, than you can reassess and focus in more detail on what else needs tweaking.
Well if you we're reading along, you would know we are talking about rosters for this year. Having said that, you're missing the point. Beverley being hurt is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If Houston didn't have a third player who could bring the ball up and run the offense, they would have been in trouble. Thank you for bringing up such a great example in support of my point.
This isn't the topic at hand. The topic is having a 3rd guy who can bring the ball up and run the offense. Houston has that.
Again, you're not staying focused. This isn't about comparing our starter and bench PG to other teams. It's about recognizing that a lot of these teams have a 3rd ballhandler in case one of their main guys gets hit with an injury.
So players who were played 17-18 mpg during the playoffs for two of the best teams in the league are lucky to be in the NBA? To me, that at least qualifies them as established ball handlers.
Again, you're off topic. I'm not talking about the fit of the players on any of these teams. I'm talking about them having players who can bring the ball up and run the offense.
Very true, but the 14th pick in the draft who is a natural PG is a lot safer than relying on a guy who was an undrafted player who hasn't been able to stick at the NBA level and is a SG trying to convert to a PG.
Well aware that we had McCallum, and he's exactly the type of player I would be fine with as our 3rd PG. As a 3rd PG, the fact that he didn't impact enough to win or lose a game is a good thing. If he doesn't lose us a game, he's done his job filling in for an injured PG. That's the point! We don't want to be in a position where we are playing someone who is losing us games.
As you can see, I beg to differ.
I might not either, but that's not the point. We don't have a lot of flexibility to improve on the roster in more important ways. We do have the ability to acquire an established 3rd PG.
Not seeing how this relates to a 3rd PG. The point of a 3rd player who can bring the ball up and run the offense is if one of Rondo or Collison go down due to injury.
I'm not necessarily saying this isn't true, but you need to post a link to a source if you're going to make claims like that.
They key word here is "might." We don't know how Curry will perform and adjust at the NBA level, and that's the point.
Assists is not the only thing you should be looking at. You need someone who can bring the ball up effectively; otherwise, he's going to face full court pressure the whole game and turn the ball over or give his team 12 seconds left in the shot clock to run a play. You need someone who's not going to lose you the game.
I'm not saying Karl would utilize Curry the same way he does Rondo. I'm saying Curry is an unknown commodity. We shouldn't risk having to play a guy who is an undrafted SG who is trying to convert to PG who has only played 21 NBA minutes 2 years after leaving college when it's very easy to acquire the player I'm talking about who can fill this role.
This isn't the topic at hand. The topic is having a 3rd guy who can bring the ball up and run the offense. Houston has that.
Again, you're not staying focused. This isn't about comparing our starter and bench PG to other teams. It's about recognizing that a lot of these teams have a 3rd ballhandler in case one of their main guys gets hit with an injury.
So players who were played 17-18 mpg during the playoffs for two of the best teams in the league are lucky to be in the NBA? To me, that at least qualifies them as established ball handlers.
Again, you're off topic. I'm not talking about the fit of the players on any of these teams. I'm talking about them having players who can bring the ball up and run the offense.
Very true, but the 14th pick in the draft who is a natural PG is a lot safer than relying on a guy who was an undrafted player who hasn't been able to stick at the NBA level and is a SG trying to convert to a PG.
Well aware that we had McCallum, and he's exactly the type of player I would be fine with as our 3rd PG. As a 3rd PG, the fact that he didn't impact enough to win or lose a game is a good thing. If he doesn't lose us a game, he's done his job filling in for an injured PG. That's the point! We don't want to be in a position where we are playing someone who is losing us games.
As you can see, I beg to differ.
I might not either, but that's not the point. We don't have a lot of flexibility to improve on the roster in more important ways. We do have the ability to acquire an established 3rd PG.
Not seeing how this relates to a 3rd PG. The point of a 3rd player who can bring the ball up and run the offense is if one of Rondo or Collison go down due to injury.
I'm not necessarily saying this isn't true, but you need to post a link to a source if you're going to make claims like that.
They key word here is "might." We don't know how Curry will perform and adjust at the NBA level, and that's the point.
Assists is not the only thing you should be looking at. You need someone who can bring the ball up effectively; otherwise, he's going to face full court pressure the whole game and turn the ball over or give his team 12 seconds left in the shot clock to run a play. You need someone who's not going to lose you the game.
I'm not saying Karl would utilize Curry the same way he does Rondo. I'm saying Curry is an unknown commodity. We shouldn't risk having to play a guy who is an undrafted SG who is trying to convert to PG who has only played 21 NBA minutes 2 years after leaving college when it's very easy to acquire the player I'm talking about who can fill this role.
I just listed 3 others in a matter of minutes (Ridnour, Smith, Lucas).
How about I'll give you indications that they will take the vet minimum with the Kings when you give me indications that they won't take the vet minimum with the Kings. I don't need a source that a player is interested in us to prove my point. There are players out there to be had. That's the point.
Besides, you're forgetting about the room exception...
How about I'll give you indications that they will take the vet minimum with the Kings when you give me indications that they won't take the vet minimum with the Kings. I don't need a source that a player is interested in us to prove my point. There are players out there to be had. That's the point.
Besides, you're forgetting about the room exception...
Excuse me? Who are you to decide whether or not his comments (or those of anyone else for that matter) are "adding to the discussion"? Bajaden is a well-respected member of this forum and I, for one, appreciate what he brings to the table. If you don't, you could easily just drop it instead of utilizing passive-aggressive comments.
Wasn't Ridnoour contemplating retirement? Why should the Kings wait around for him to decide so they can finalize their roster? Ish Smith is a horrible shooter, like awful. If you play him with the 2nd unit, they still wouldn't have much shooting. Lucas is a decent option, but players of his caliber will be available all season long, so you can assess whether there is a need for his type later in the year.
I'm not going to go line by line, but addressing some of your points -- Houston didn't even have a #2 ballhandler in the playoffs last year. They had James Harden and a couple of guys you would only rely on in emergency situations. Jason Terry and Pablo Prigioni are not running the offense, they're bringing the ball up the court and dumping it off to James Harden. And they only picked up Prigioni at the trade deadline so there's no reason we couldn't add a deep bench guard mid-season too if the need is there.
As for trusting Payne more than Curry, Seth has played 81 games in the D-League the past two years during which time he's shot 600 three pointers and made 42% of them. Last year he averaged 24 points, 4 assists, 4 rebounds, and shooting splits of 48% from the field, 46% from three, and 92% from the line. These are not small sample sizes either. 717 shots total, 334 threes, 188 free throws. We could go back and fourth about what the value of d-league numbers are, but the reality is that neither player has proven anything in the NBA yet. Curry is ready for a shot. He's proven everything he can without getting NBA minutes. You don't think a d-league callup is a better deep bench option than a mid first round rookie or a late career vet. That doesn't make Vlade wrong though. There are arguments to be made for the value of all three types of players, it's ultimately just a judgement call on where to invest your money. Vlade made his choice, we'll see if it works out or not.
The overall impression I get from your comments is that you don't trust Seth Curry to dribble the ball up the court without turning it over. Or at least it seems to me that is your main concern - that we have no room for a mistake prone rookie in such an important position. That has nothing to do with PG skills though, that's just straight ball-handling ability. I can't prove you wrong, but I just don't see this being the glaring hole that you think it is. He's going to be facing deep bench guards 90% of the time he's on the floor if he plays at all. If the other team is going to pick up full-court press in the playoffs or try to trap in the backcourt I think the rest of the team is capable enough that we'll get the ball to an open player and punish the defense for spreading themselves thin. But I think we'll know way before then if Curry is up to the task or not.
Seth Curry wasn't my first choice for that roster spot either, but I can see the logic in signing him instead of the guys you mentioned. When you're talking about a deep deep bench spot (he'll probably spend half the season on the inactive list) it makes sense to roll the dice on a player with some upside. And Seth Curry does have more upside than either McCallum or the veterans you mentioned -- or at least I think he does. Not to mention, he projects as the best shooter out of all of them which was clearly a big consideration for our front office this year. In a perfect world I'd love to have a tough-minded defender like Patrick Beverly as the third PG behind Rondo and Collison, but I can also accept that quality players deserve to get paid for their talent and they deserve the right to choose the situation which is best for them. If we do make the playoffs this year, our odds of picking up a quality veteran PG on a minimum contract who cares more about a shot at a ring than playing time go way way up. This is one area where I (personally) think a little more patience is warranted.
As for trusting Payne more than Curry, Seth has played 81 games in the D-League the past two years during which time he's shot 600 three pointers and made 42% of them. Last year he averaged 24 points, 4 assists, 4 rebounds, and shooting splits of 48% from the field, 46% from three, and 92% from the line. These are not small sample sizes either. 717 shots total, 334 threes, 188 free throws. We could go back and fourth about what the value of d-league numbers are, but the reality is that neither player has proven anything in the NBA yet. Curry is ready for a shot. He's proven everything he can without getting NBA minutes. You don't think a d-league callup is a better deep bench option than a mid first round rookie or a late career vet. That doesn't make Vlade wrong though. There are arguments to be made for the value of all three types of players, it's ultimately just a judgement call on where to invest your money. Vlade made his choice, we'll see if it works out or not.
The overall impression I get from your comments is that you don't trust Seth Curry to dribble the ball up the court without turning it over. Or at least it seems to me that is your main concern - that we have no room for a mistake prone rookie in such an important position. That has nothing to do with PG skills though, that's just straight ball-handling ability. I can't prove you wrong, but I just don't see this being the glaring hole that you think it is. He's going to be facing deep bench guards 90% of the time he's on the floor if he plays at all. If the other team is going to pick up full-court press in the playoffs or try to trap in the backcourt I think the rest of the team is capable enough that we'll get the ball to an open player and punish the defense for spreading themselves thin. But I think we'll know way before then if Curry is up to the task or not.
Seth Curry wasn't my first choice for that roster spot either, but I can see the logic in signing him instead of the guys you mentioned. When you're talking about a deep deep bench spot (he'll probably spend half the season on the inactive list) it makes sense to roll the dice on a player with some upside. And Seth Curry does have more upside than either McCallum or the veterans you mentioned -- or at least I think he does. Not to mention, he projects as the best shooter out of all of them which was clearly a big consideration for our front office this year. In a perfect world I'd love to have a tough-minded defender like Patrick Beverly as the third PG behind Rondo and Collison, but I can also accept that quality players deserve to get paid for their talent and they deserve the right to choose the situation which is best for them. If we do make the playoffs this year, our odds of picking up a quality veteran PG on a minimum contract who cares more about a shot at a ring than playing time go way way up. This is one area where I (personally) think a little more patience is warranted.
Vlade's All Access interview on the recent signings was telling, imo. He was asked directly if it was Seth's impressive scoring in the summer league that prompted interest from the Kings and Vlade's response was that what really attracted him was his ability to 'play the game the right way'' I think this is Serbian for high basketball IQ. I think this is something that is not being talked about or thought about much, as it is lost in the chatter of changing the 'culture' and each individual players abilities. Vlade has purposefully sought out players who can not only play well, but understand the game (some of them are even more valuable for their off court influence) If we had a team Basketball IQ meter, this years team is staggeringly smarter than last years squad (some of whom, much as we loved them, were riding the short bus to games)
IMO good luck getting Dre or Luke to accept the minimum as the 3rd PG on the Kings. I don't think Ish and JL III are better than Seth Curry. They are just at a different point in their basketball career.
And now for something completely different:
http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2015/7/22/9012733/how-did-seth-curry-catch-vlade-divacs-eye
And now for something completely different:
http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2015/7/22/9012733/how-did-seth-curry-catch-vlade-divacs-eye
I really like what I see from Seth.
Crafty guy, jumpshot, pumpfakes, left hand, right hand, floater, uses screens well to create for himself, shields the ball with his body against shot blockers.
You see all kinds of similarities to Steph.
Of course he is on a very different talent level and his ball handling doesnt look all too natural.
But all he needs to do is to bring the ball up the court with the help of his teammates. And he doesnt look like Jimmer in terms of ballhandling.
Im not worried at all and I like it, that we have 3 Pg's with 3 different skillsets and approaches - a pass first type, a balanced type and a score first type.
This is some awesome versatility.
Crafty guy, jumpshot, pumpfakes, left hand, right hand, floater, uses screens well to create for himself, shields the ball with his body against shot blockers.
You see all kinds of similarities to Steph.
Of course he is on a very different talent level and his ball handling doesnt look all too natural.
But all he needs to do is to bring the ball up the court with the help of his teammates. And he doesnt look like Jimmer in terms of ballhandling.
Im not worried at all and I like it, that we have 3 Pg's with 3 different skillsets and approaches - a pass first type, a balanced type and a score first type.
This is some awesome versatility.
Last edited:
I think the point twslam07 is trying to make is not that any of this guys can contribute to the 2nd unit... a 3rd PG (or lead ball-handler) is more like insurance, you don't need it... until you do and then you wish you had it.
As mentioned before this is much more crucial when it comes to the PG spot since all other positions can be more easily filled, Casspi and Gay are bad options in that regard, they are good playmakers for their position- as the good assist rate for their position indicates- but they are far from good enough as lead ball handlers, there is a difference between the two.
Collison played 45 games last year and Rondo hasn't played over 68 games the last 5 seasons- is there a chance they won't miss games and this all conversation is redundant? sure there is, the question is should you take that chance.
By the estimation of most people on this site (as opposed to the national media and Vegas) we are a border-line playoff team- and that is key here.
Contenders can take chances because their place in the playoffs is near guaranteed and even if they bet wrong they have all the time they need to fix it.
Lottery teams can take chances because they have nothing to lose.
But teams fighting for the playoffs in the west have a small margin for error, and so even if one of your guys get hurt and you can get a new guy within 5 games- that might be the difference between making it and not.
At the end of the day this all discussion is about a small issue, but this issue can turn out to be important down the road. the question here is about risk/reward- and I think that this is an unnecessary risk taken in return for an extremely low reward...
even if Dukan proves to be as good as a shooter as he was on summer league (and not the way he was in college) he will still remain behind a ton of SF/PF we have in the rotation- we just signed Acy that should be almost out of the rotation himself.
And Curry for that matter sees 5 guards ahead of him... he (like most 3rd PG's suggested) probably wouldn't play as long as players are healthy, but unlike 3rd PG's suggested- as a player who's natural position is SG, doesnn't hold NBA experience and haven't proven his abilities can translate to the NBA- he doesn't give you the "insurance" those other players gives you.
As mentioned before this is much more crucial when it comes to the PG spot since all other positions can be more easily filled, Casspi and Gay are bad options in that regard, they are good playmakers for their position- as the good assist rate for their position indicates- but they are far from good enough as lead ball handlers, there is a difference between the two.
Collison played 45 games last year and Rondo hasn't played over 68 games the last 5 seasons- is there a chance they won't miss games and this all conversation is redundant? sure there is, the question is should you take that chance.
By the estimation of most people on this site (as opposed to the national media and Vegas) we are a border-line playoff team- and that is key here.
Contenders can take chances because their place in the playoffs is near guaranteed and even if they bet wrong they have all the time they need to fix it.
Lottery teams can take chances because they have nothing to lose.
But teams fighting for the playoffs in the west have a small margin for error, and so even if one of your guys get hurt and you can get a new guy within 5 games- that might be the difference between making it and not.
At the end of the day this all discussion is about a small issue, but this issue can turn out to be important down the road. the question here is about risk/reward- and I think that this is an unnecessary risk taken in return for an extremely low reward...
even if Dukan proves to be as good as a shooter as he was on summer league (and not the way he was in college) he will still remain behind a ton of SF/PF we have in the rotation- we just signed Acy that should be almost out of the rotation himself.
And Curry for that matter sees 5 guards ahead of him... he (like most 3rd PG's suggested) probably wouldn't play as long as players are healthy, but unlike 3rd PG's suggested- as a player who's natural position is SG, doesnn't hold NBA experience and haven't proven his abilities can translate to the NBA- he doesn't give you the "insurance" those other players gives you.
I don't think there is a Kings fan anywhere that would not want Andre Miller on the Kings. I suspect Vlade has talked to him. There may even be an agreement.
If Dre is unhappy with the minutes he is playing how is that going to help? Would you want Dre or the other Kings to have to deal with that?
There is a lot of time between now and training camp. If there is one thing you can count on.......Crap happens.........and you can count on changes coming.
If Dre is unhappy with the minutes he is playing how is that going to help? Would you want Dre or the other Kings to have to deal with that?
There is a lot of time between now and training camp. If there is one thing you can count on.......Crap happens.........and you can count on changes coming.