Kings trade rumor SZN 2023-2024 edition!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
Good job of moving the goalposts, as you completely avoided my point - that this forum (at least, among Kings fandom) has settled upon Barnes as the "problem" or "weak link" and are attempting to henpeck him to death. This pattern, which repeats time and again, is an unfortunate aspect of human behavior, but I do believe we are stuck with it. That means, of course, that once Barnes has been henpecked to death somebody else will be the weakest link and receive the same treatment. As I said (and as I have said when we have seen this before), we've seen this before.
I'm not surprised you didn't address that point, as you're one of the henpeckers. It's uncomfortable to come face to face with the darker side of our own nature.
But, to answer your non-sequitur: I do not believe Barnes is a "scrub". I do believe that Barnes is perfectly capable of being a starter and the 4th or 5th scoring option on a team that has serious playoff aspirations. As you almost pointed out, Barnes did win a championship in 2015 as a starter and a 4th/5th (regular season/finals series) scoring option.
I'm sure your next move will be to point out that Barnes is now 9 years older (while ignoring that he is undoubtedly more experienced and skilled now, and that his shooting percentages are across the board better then when he was younger), and to ignore your own henpecking. Your move, I guess.
I'm not surprised you didn't address that point, as you're one of the henpeckers. It's uncomfortable to come face to face with the darker side of our own nature.
But, to answer your non-sequitur: I do not believe Barnes is a "scrub". I do believe that Barnes is perfectly capable of being a starter and the 4th or 5th scoring option on a team that has serious playoff aspirations. As you almost pointed out, Barnes did win a championship in 2015 as a starter and a 4th/5th (regular season/finals series) scoring option.
I'm sure your next move will be to point out that Barnes is now 9 years older (while ignoring that he is undoubtedly more experienced and skilled now, and that his shooting percentages are across the board better then when he was younger), and to ignore your own henpecking. Your move, I guess.
1) Please point out what is "disingenuous" in my observation that Barnes is being henpecked by this forum.
2) Please provide a rationale for characterizing an opposition to henpecking as "homerism".
3) Please define "non-factor of a basketball player" in objective terms. (I will be disappointed if the definition is "not top-four scoring option")
4) Please find any statement of mine, made at any time, wherein I suggest that Barnes should be kept around (capital letters) FOREVER.
And, for the record, I will state here: I am open to trading Barnes if the trade makes sense. It is not my position that the Kings must keep Barnes, even this season. But I am, hopefully obviously, opposed to the idea that we should minimize Barnes' contributions to the team because he is not a superstar. No team starts five superstars.
No, the unfortunate human tendency to identify a weakest link and henpeck it to death is starting to become a cancer around these parts.
Thanks for making my point.
2) Please provide a rationale for characterizing an opposition to henpecking as "homerism".
3) Please define "non-factor of a basketball player" in objective terms. (I will be disappointed if the definition is "not top-four scoring option")
4) Please find any statement of mine, made at any time, wherein I suggest that Barnes should be kept around (capital letters) FOREVER.
And, for the record, I will state here: I am open to trading Barnes if the trade makes sense. It is not my position that the Kings must keep Barnes, even this season. But I am, hopefully obviously, opposed to the idea that we should minimize Barnes' contributions to the team because he is not a superstar. No team starts five superstars.
No, the unfortunate human tendency to identify a weakest link and henpeck it to death is starting to become a cancer around these parts.
Thanks for making my point.
Lol, Harrison Barnes is Mr Mediocre, not a 5th superstar. It is what he has always been. He is also a slow thinker, you can literally see the hamster-wheels move when he plays. And if you can't see them, then more POWAA to you!
He was fine when the Kings were mediocre. These are different times though. Need to strive for better.
What is pissing me off is the Harrison Barnes Kangz fans who are trying to deflect Barnes' mediocrity to blaming Huerter. Losing Huerter would be a much more severe blow to this team than losing Mr Mediocrity Barnes. That's the real issue here. I'm not trying to henpeck the obvious weakest link, i.e., Barnes. Just trying to ensure that he is called out appropriately for what he does or does not bring, without any of his shortcomings being re-directed to Huerter.
Some people like deflecting. And then, some people like deflecting a lot!
He was fine when the Kings were mediocre. These are different times though. Need to strive for better.
What is pissing me off is the Harrison Barnes Kangz fans who are trying to deflect Barnes' mediocrity to blaming Huerter. Losing Huerter would be a much more severe blow to this team than losing Mr Mediocrity Barnes. That's the real issue here. I'm not trying to henpeck the obvious weakest link, i.e., Barnes. Just trying to ensure that he is called out appropriately for what he does or does not bring, without any of his shortcomings being re-directed to Huerter.
Some people like deflecting. And then, some people like deflecting a lot!
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think Siakam fits our team very well. He's a high-volume scorer who doesn't rebound very well for his size, doesn't shoot the ball well from three, and is a mediocre to poor shot blocker. His principal value lies in his ability to facilitate the offense and create open looks from the PF/C position which makes him duplicative with Sabonis. We'd have exactly the same problems we have now with Siakam on the roster and he's going to want $40 million per year to go on being a bad fit for us.
We don't need another big name, or All Star, or go-to scorer. We just need guys who will elevate our defense from non-existent to respectable. Some of that is skill-set -- we need players who fill in areas where we're weak. Someone who is strong on the boards. Someone who can protect the paint and prevent easy layups and dunks. Someone who can navigate screens and consistently contest outside shots effectively. And some of that is personality -- we don't just need good defenders, we need those good defenders to also be outspoken and demand accountability from everyone on the team.
We don't need another big name, or All Star, or go-to scorer. We just need guys who will elevate our defense from non-existent to respectable. Some of that is skill-set -- we need players who fill in areas where we're weak. Someone who is strong on the boards. Someone who can protect the paint and prevent easy layups and dunks. Someone who can navigate screens and consistently contest outside shots effectively. And some of that is personality -- we don't just need good defenders, we need those good defenders to also be outspoken and demand accountability from everyone on the team.
Keeping in mind that some players don't even enter their prime till 27/28. This was accepted for decades in the past, but the trend has been to push players into it a lot earlier in recent times. Point being, a lot of healthy athletes are not washed up at 32....and most great teams have a mix of players at different stages of their careers
at first glance, it seems like an easy yes. But then I considered a few things:
1) year to year comparison. In his age 23 season Bridges averaged 9 points a game. Keegan is over 15. Keegan’s three point makes last year were 30 more than Mikals career high. Bridges also only has one year over 40 percent. They are both about the same on the boards. Bridges is generally considered an elite defender but he does have a defensive rating of 119. Maybe that means very little because of the team he is on although they do have 3 or 4 guys in their core known for defense.
2) cost of contract. He is on a bargain deal for 2 more years but then you have to shell out the big bucks for him after that. Will Keegan’s first big contract be more reasonable?
3) cost to acquire. It would probably end up being something like Keegan, filler and likely 2 picks. That wouldn’t leave us with much flexibility moving forward and we would still be short a wing.
He is most certainly a better player now, how much has the gap closed this time next year?
1) year to year comparison. In his age 23 season Bridges averaged 9 points a game. Keegan is over 15. Keegan’s three point makes last year were 30 more than Mikals career high. Bridges also only has one year over 40 percent. They are both about the same on the boards. Bridges is generally considered an elite defender but he does have a defensive rating of 119. Maybe that means very little because of the team he is on although they do have 3 or 4 guys in their core known for defense.
2) cost of contract. He is on a bargain deal for 2 more years but then you have to shell out the big bucks for him after that. Will Keegan’s first big contract be more reasonable?
3) cost to acquire. It would probably end up being something like Keegan, filler and likely 2 picks. That wouldn’t leave us with much flexibility moving forward and we would still be short a wing.
He is most certainly a better player now, how much has the gap closed this time next year?
And that's the only key that matters if you're talking star players. Can't handle or create for yourself at the highest level and you are not a star. Can Keegan get that level of handles down? Maybe, but he clearly doesn't have star handles right now. However, I personally think Keegan is a better defender than Bridges when it comes to strength and lateral mobility at the end of the day.
Peja Stojakovic
Ray Allen
Reggie Miller
Rashard Lewis
Rip Hamilton
These players were not stars? Maybe not everybody on the floor needs to be an elite one-on-one scorer? I'm also pretty dubious of this distinction when many of the elite so-called shot creators in the league are nearly as adept at turning the ball over as they are at creating shots for themselves. I don't much care if Keegan could be the star of a different team as the #1 option and primary shot creator, I care if he can be a star player on this team.
Personally, what I want in a star player is high-level defense, situational awareness, efficient scoring, and a wide variety of counter-moves so that nobody can take away their offensive game entirely without trapping or double-teaming, and even then all you can do is slow them down. None of those criteria require elite handles. If Keegan can develop his post game, catch and shoot from multiple levels, consistently make pull up and turnaround shots in the mid range, and continue to perfect his step back three he would have all the tools needed to be an elite scorer on this Kings team, which already has two guys who are top 20 in assists per game every year. If he can do that while also playing All NBA defense, I don't see how anyone could argue that he's not a star player.
Ray Allen
Reggie Miller
Rashard Lewis
Rip Hamilton
These players were not stars? Maybe not everybody on the floor needs to be an elite one-on-one scorer? I'm also pretty dubious of this distinction when many of the elite so-called shot creators in the league are nearly as adept at turning the ball over as they are at creating shots for themselves. I don't much care if Keegan could be the star of a different team as the #1 option and primary shot creator, I care if he can be a star player on this team.
Personally, what I want in a star player is high-level defense, situational awareness, efficient scoring, and a wide variety of counter-moves so that nobody can take away their offensive game entirely without trapping or double-teaming, and even then all you can do is slow them down. None of those criteria require elite handles. If Keegan can develop his post game, catch and shoot from multiple levels, consistently make pull up and turnaround shots in the mid range, and continue to perfect his step back three he would have all the tools needed to be an elite scorer on this Kings team, which already has two guys who are top 20 in assists per game every year. If he can do that while also playing All NBA defense, I don't see how anyone could argue that he's not a star player.
Yeah I think star is sometimes used as a term to describe a style rather than a contribution. We could have someone who was all defensive first team with A+ off ball scoring but they wouldn't be described as a 'star' because they don't attack off the dribble??
It's the same with creation. You can create for yourself and others via off ball movement but it's not creation because you're not creating off the dribble?
Then it becomes do the king's need a 'star' who creates off the dribble? Not really - they have that. They don't have anyone who can consistently create opportunities defensively without being an impediment offensively.
It's the same with creation. You can create for yourself and others via off ball movement but it's not creation because you're not creating off the dribble?
Then it becomes do the king's need a 'star' who creates off the dribble? Not really - they have that. They don't have anyone who can consistently create opportunities defensively without being an impediment offensively.