Free Agency Open Thread (NBA and Kings!)
- Thread starter Blob
- Start date
You just described the perfect reason for getting Vince Carter. His skills may decline just in time for one of the kids to step into his shoes. Isn't that what we've been begging for? He's Vince Freaking Carter. Even if he never plays a game minute again, his knowledge of the game cannot be denied. I can honestly think of few other players so well equipped to act as mentor. If you watched him thus far in summer league, I think it's pretty clear it's a role he truly relishes.
I see your point but Vince and KCP are in very different situations. Vince isn't trying to prove anything at this point so situation doesn't matter as much. KCP is playing for his future earnings so the situation would matter more. KCP is a more productive and proven player than any of the Kings SGs but Hield's second half numbers last year were better than KCPs and he's only one year into a rookie deal. I'm not trying to argue that Hield is better than KCP because he definitely isn't at this point, but he's a heck of a lot cheaper and does do some things better. He would have to weigh if the competition for minutes here could cost him any more than 1M per year on that next contract. I think it could very easily cost him that.
KCP shoots less than 40% from the field. That's what you get for his salary.
Yet McLemore outshot him....I get that stats are not the whole story but....how many young SG's can we actually play good minutes? How does that work? And I've watched KCP. You can't honestly say he's better than Hield right now. As good? That is a reasonable argument. Better? That contract doesn't make him better.
Yet McLemore outshot him....I get that stats are not the whole story but....how many young SG's can we actually play good minutes? How does that work? And I've watched KCP. You can't honestly say he's better than Hield right now. As good? That is a reasonable argument. Better? That contract doesn't make him better.
Without commenting on should've we signed Kcp or not, he is one of the best point guard defenders in the whole league, can guard twos well and can do some switching and can play without ball as a catch and shooter. That has tons of value in a winning team. At the moment he is more valuable player to a winning team than Hield by a mile. Buddy is a below average one position defender and he wouldnt be even a second option on offence in a winning team. And off the top of my head arent they the same age. Comparing KCP to Mclemore at all just shows again that you either have no intention to contribute in a conversatiom other than praising how perfect our every move as a franchise is or you just dont know what you are talking about. If you have watched Kings play at all you should have pretty good idea what kind of player Mclemore is. He shoots what he shoots when he is open but he has no other contributions to the game. Kcp is a stud defender, they ran a lot of offence where he shot threes coming off screens ect.
Hield played great after the trade but the next year shows how much it affected that he got to play a lot when our opponents were tanking and how well can he maintain that level of play. Watching the summer league it seems like his game is very much dependent on how well his contested three pointers are going in. Hopefully he cements himself as a player who hits them at high clip, then he is very valuable as 2nd/3rd option (assuming we ditch this 80's no spacing system we've ran at summer league) even if he is bad at defending. And again I am not giving any opinion on if we shoud have signed Kcp or not. Just correcting a biased opinion.
E: quick opinion on signing KCP, no in our current situation. Only way it would've made sence is that we would've passed on those vets to maintain flexibility for next year and managed to oversell one of our shooting guards in exchange of good asset(s). And no way with one year contract. That would mean he wasnt goint to be part of our win now core in 1-2 years so it woulve been pointles to pay him anything fo a year.
Hield played great after the trade but the next year shows how much it affected that he got to play a lot when our opponents were tanking and how well can he maintain that level of play. Watching the summer league it seems like his game is very much dependent on how well his contested three pointers are going in. Hopefully he cements himself as a player who hits them at high clip, then he is very valuable as 2nd/3rd option (assuming we ditch this 80's no spacing system we've ran at summer league) even if he is bad at defending. And again I am not giving any opinion on if we shoud have signed Kcp or not. Just correcting a biased opinion.
E: quick opinion on signing KCP, no in our current situation. Only way it would've made sence is that we would've passed on those vets to maintain flexibility for next year and managed to oversell one of our shooting guards in exchange of good asset(s). And no way with one year contract. That would mean he wasnt goint to be part of our win now core in 1-2 years so it woulve been pointles to pay him anything fo a year.
Last edited:
Your saying KCP is not better than Heild right now? Are we factoring in both sides of the ball or just shooting percentages? KCP is an all around better player than Buddy at this stage of their careers in my opinion you disagree and thats fine,
I put less weight on Buddy's second half as a lot of it was vs teams competing to out tank each other.
Maclamore outshot him? not even going to entertain this arguement. Luke Babbit outshot Klay Thompson so Luke>Klay.
No one is promised minutes, you earn your minutes we have 9 1st and 2nd year guys who ever plays best or coach feels is earning the minutes gets to play. Creating competition on a bad team is a good thing.
I put less weight on Buddy's second half as a lot of it was vs teams competing to out tank each other.
Maclamore outshot him? not even going to entertain this arguement. Luke Babbit outshot Klay Thompson so Luke>Klay.
No one is promised minutes, you earn your minutes we have 9 1st and 2nd year guys who ever plays best or coach feels is earning the minutes gets to play. Creating competition on a bad team is a good thing.
KCP's impact goes far beyond the numbers, as mentioned his defensive abilty is his strong point along with being able to hit contested or open 3s.
Buddy did alot of his work vs bad opponents who were tanking last year and there should be legit concern that he might not live up to the expectations that kings fans have set him up for.
Buddy did alot of his work vs bad opponents who were tanking last year and there should be legit concern that he might not live up to the expectations that kings fans have set him up for.
At some point?! How about always! You should always be focusing on the assets you have and working to develop their game. Teams don't just say "Screw it. We're going to acquire as many assets as we can and not worry about development for awhile." Successful teams develop the young players they have while also continuing to collect assets. Sure, there are times to cash in on those assets and go all in for a championship but we aren't even close.
The only FA signing I have been against was Hill. I'm fine with Carter & Randolph. I can see them being good mentors while not moving the needle much. Hill I see as being a good mentor but he's also a really good player who jeopardizes how high we pick next year. I would have rather brought in another veteran PG who can be a good mentor and not move the needle much.
I'm not denying that, but having a 50% chance at a star player is better than a 40% chance at a star player. Those are completely arbitrary numbers but the stats show that the higher you pick, the better chance you have at finding a star.
Now a lot of people read what I said above and immediately think I want us to tank, only play the kids, throw games on purpose, etc. but that couldn't be further from the truth. I want our coach to play to win every game. I want our coach to play the best players no matter their age or where they were drafted. I want no easy handouts for our young guys. That is how you build a good culture and a culture that know you have to put in the work and effort to get the minutes you want. With that culture should come the development rewards.
The difference that I have from many on this forum is that many think that competitiveness or that culture can't happen unless you bring in guys like Millsap, Gallinari, Hill, etc. that can help you win ball games. I don't buy that at all. You need a coach who makes his young guys earn their playing time. You need high character, hard working NBA caliber veterans who can help mentor the young kids while not moving the needle too much in the win column.
2 year plan? See it's these sort of deadlines that you place on yourself that can get you into trouble. If a team is working against a countdown, they will get impatient. If they get impatient, then they can't act against the franchises best interest. How about we start competing when we have guys on our team that are young stars? Not young guys who have the potential to be stars but young stars.
And as I have mentioned over and over again on this forum, I like those two signings, and I am happy we have them to mentor our current assets. But again, let's not let the development of our current assets distract us from making our team even better. We can do both at the same time!
The only FA signing I have been against was Hill. I'm fine with Carter & Randolph. I can see them being good mentors while not moving the needle much. Hill I see as being a good mentor but he's also a really good player who jeopardizes how high we pick next year. I would have rather brought in another veteran PG who can be a good mentor and not move the needle much.
I'm not denying that, but having a 50% chance at a star player is better than a 40% chance at a star player. Those are completely arbitrary numbers but the stats show that the higher you pick, the better chance you have at finding a star.
Now a lot of people read what I said above and immediately think I want us to tank, only play the kids, throw games on purpose, etc. but that couldn't be further from the truth. I want our coach to play to win every game. I want our coach to play the best players no matter their age or where they were drafted. I want no easy handouts for our young guys. That is how you build a good culture and a culture that know you have to put in the work and effort to get the minutes you want. With that culture should come the development rewards.
The difference that I have from many on this forum is that many think that competitiveness or that culture can't happen unless you bring in guys like Millsap, Gallinari, Hill, etc. that can help you win ball games. I don't buy that at all. You need a coach who makes his young guys earn their playing time. You need high character, hard working NBA caliber veterans who can help mentor the young kids while not moving the needle too much in the win column.
2 year plan? See it's these sort of deadlines that you place on yourself that can get you into trouble. If a team is working against a countdown, they will get impatient. If they get impatient, then they can't act against the franchises best interest. How about we start competing when we have guys on our team that are young stars? Not young guys who have the potential to be stars but young stars.
And as I have mentioned over and over again on this forum, I like those two signings, and I am happy we have them to mentor our current assets. But again, let's not let the development of our current assets distract us from making our team even better. We can do both at the same time!
Last edited:
You have the 100% the right idea in the fact that we should be taking chances on guys like KCP, but in this case, I think it was correct for us to look elsewhere. He fits the youth movement and he was actually a quality 3 and D guy last year as you pointed out, but he loses value for us specifically when we have so much capital invested in the position already. You're right in the fact that literally nobody but Fox has a long-term job locked down, but we need to see what we can get out of Malachi/Bogdan/Buddy going forward. KCP is better than all of them, but just his presence on the team reduces the value of the 3 prospects we already have.
KCP has been seen as an asset his entire career, he was really close to not even seeing free agency and by the time he was renounced his options were limited as many of the capspace teams already tied there space up, thats why I was advocating leaving our cap room open. You never know when a team is going to get desperate and offer you assets for your cap space or in situations like this where a good young prospect becomes available somehow.
We should be renting the space out for future picks first and foremost, but a close second should be using the space for intriguing young reletively proven assets like KCP.
"Mentoring" can be had for much cheaper than 20 million and we can wait until very late in the offseason to pick up mentors. I feel like we jumped the gun in many ways and did not utilize our cap space correctly. Hopefully it doesnt bite us but history has shown that Vlades free agencies have been a mess.
Adrian Wojnarowski: ESPN Sources: Terms of Jonathon Simmons’ three-year Orlando deal: $6.3M, $6M and $5.7M — with partial guarantee of $1M in final season.
– via Twitter wojespn
not bad moneywise considering how much teams are overpaying and last year only partially guaranteed
also rondo reuniting with DMC in New Orleans
– via Twitter wojespn
not bad moneywise considering how much teams are overpaying and last year only partially guaranteed
also rondo reuniting with DMC in New Orleans
Kentavious Caldwell Pope is a guard recently signed by the Lakers.KCP is just the abbreviation.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/caldwke01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/caldwke01.html
