Watch for it - Maurice Taylor (merged)
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
I don't think we would be that bad off if we were to trade for KG. I still think the most likely trade would be Brad and Bibby for KG. Maybe we would have to throw in a draft pick as well. With KG we don't need Brad and our rebounding improves. I would hate to lose Bibby, but I think we could survive with Salmons and Price filling the 1 spot, and Garcia and Artest bring up the ball once in a while. Defensively we would be better right away. It would be interesting anyway, and fun to watch. I'm not however, holding my breath.
John Hollinger's:
Houston previously donated Taylor to the Knicks in a midseason salary dump after the Rockets had become frustrated with Taylor's increasing offensive ineptitude. Taylor is a decent defender and can hit mid-range jump shots, which makes him look competent at first. But he provides nothing on the boards, settles for too many long jumpers, and rarely gets to the basket. Of the Knicks' four power forwards, Taylor ranks a clear fourth, so unless he makes some drastic improvements, he won't be leaving his seat much. He can defend, however.
Hoopshype:
Houston previously donated Taylor to the Knicks in a midseason salary dump after the Rockets had become frustrated with Taylor's increasing offensive ineptitude. Taylor is a decent defender and can hit mid-range jump shots, which makes him look competent at first. But he provides nothing on the boards, settles for too many long jumpers, and rarely gets to the basket. Of the Knicks' four power forwards, Taylor ranks a clear fourth, so unless he makes some drastic improvements, he won't be leaving his seat much. He can defend, however.
Hoopshype:
Think the best defense for Geoff on this is just that at this late date there are few if any other players of Mo's overall caliber left to sign on the frontcourt -- so not much else to choose from. I don't think Geoff has been anything more than average for some time now, but what little he has done has been almost exclusively opportunistic the last few years. Reef -- only when the Jersey deal broke down. Salmons -- when God told him not to go to Toronto. Keon suddenly hit the market late. JJ was sitting at home when the season started. Ron (if that was even Geoff) when Ron went nutso and suddenly hit the market, etc. Master of swooping in suddenly when a deal goes bad. So Mo would fit right in as a guy who pops up on the market out of the blue after being bought out.
On the flipside, it could just be one more nail in the Petrie coffin as a guy who values offensive ability first, second, and third, and so accumlates soft, small frontcourt players like they are candy.
On the flipside, it could just be one more nail in the Petrie coffin as a guy who values offensive ability first, second, and third, and so accumlates soft, small frontcourt players like they are candy.
Partly true. However, being able to jump at the sign of opportunity is also a huge skill. Say whatever about Reef's softness (though playing with jaw shut does not shout soft to me), but he is a bargain at MLE.
As to Petrie valuing offensive skill over toughness, it might also be partly due to Adleman. When we had the occasional tough guy (Pollard, Tag, Potato), he didn't use them much. In fact, Miller had a bit of a reputation as a bad boy, and now he has morphed into a softie
. At the same time, Rick also deserves credit for getting career performances from his players, and resurrecting the career of JJ.
Petrie's recent record with trades is not glittering, but it is partly due to our reluctance to sign or S&T our own free agents. Doug's trade for Mobley, Bobby and Tag for Bonzi were not bad trades, and Darius for two second rounders, I thought was brilliant. However, since we let these guys walk, they seem bad.
Finally, there is so much more to a GM than trades. For several years, we traded away our future in the form of draft picks in an effort to win now. Talented young guys on our roster weren't given a chance due to talent overload. Since then, he has changed a highly paid veteran, but ageing roster, to a relatively younger roster below the luxury cap, while managing to reach the playoffs each time in a tough West. (low by our recent lofty standards, but a huge achievement none the less). With low draft picks, he has managed to pick guys that have fans excited and hopeful. While time shall tell if the kids justify this hope, Petrie's record in plucking good players with low draft picks is excellent.
As to Petrie valuing offensive skill over toughness, it might also be partly due to Adleman. When we had the occasional tough guy (Pollard, Tag, Potato), he didn't use them much. In fact, Miller had a bit of a reputation as a bad boy, and now he has morphed into a softie
. At the same time, Rick also deserves credit for getting career performances from his players, and resurrecting the career of JJ.Petrie's recent record with trades is not glittering, but it is partly due to our reluctance to sign or S&T our own free agents. Doug's trade for Mobley, Bobby and Tag for Bonzi were not bad trades, and Darius for two second rounders, I thought was brilliant. However, since we let these guys walk, they seem bad.
Finally, there is so much more to a GM than trades. For several years, we traded away our future in the form of draft picks in an effort to win now. Talented young guys on our roster weren't given a chance due to talent overload. Since then, he has changed a highly paid veteran, but ageing roster, to a relatively younger roster below the luxury cap, while managing to reach the playoffs each time in a tough West. (low by our recent lofty standards, but a huge achievement none the less). With low draft picks, he has managed to pick guys that have fans excited and hopeful. While time shall tell if the kids justify this hope, Petrie's record in plucking good players with low draft picks is excellent.
I don't think we've done anything of the sort -- salary now can't be more than maybe $5mil off of the alltime high. Just the cap/tax catching up with us. And really that is no excuse anyway -- can't have been easy for Geoff to have to play by the same financial rules as 90% of the other GMs in the league? I've mentioned before that his best years -- his GM of the year years in the first 4-5 of the Maloof era -- coincided with him having a major advanatage over most other GMs in a couple of deep pocket owners green lighting everything.
And of course what we've done now is roughly the least inspiring thing you can do -- the long, slow, tedious and often boring slide into oblivion. Being "competitive" and grabbing a #8 seed on the way up is exciting and builds for the future. Being "competitive and eking out a #8 seed on the way down is both a waste of time and counterproductive. Deprives you of talent, and provides you with nothing you haven't had before.
This year may be make or break. There is opportunity here. But not if we sit on our hands again. We've got money coming off the books....but not enough to do anything with. We will likely get another midround pick...but not enough to land a star with. Some of our core guys are hitting 30+ now, not fading yet, but only a few years off. Now would be the time for some aggressive maneuvring to turn the corner.
And of course what we've done now is roughly the least inspiring thing you can do -- the long, slow, tedious and often boring slide into oblivion. Being "competitive" and grabbing a #8 seed on the way up is exciting and builds for the future. Being "competitive and eking out a #8 seed on the way down is both a waste of time and counterproductive. Deprives you of talent, and provides you with nothing you haven't had before.
This year may be make or break. There is opportunity here. But not if we sit on our hands again. We've got money coming off the books....but not enough to do anything with. We will likely get another midround pick...but not enough to land a star with. Some of our core guys are hitting 30+ now, not fading yet, but only a few years off. Now would be the time for some aggressive maneuvring to turn the corner.
Last edited:
John Hollinger's:
Houston previously donated Taylor to the Knicks in a midseason salary dump after the Rockets had become frustrated with Taylor's increasing offensive ineptitude. Taylor is a decent defender and can hit mid-range jump shots, which makes him look competent at first. But he provides nothing on the boards, settles for too many long jumpers, and rarely gets to the basket. Of the Knicks' four power forwards, Taylor ranks a clear fourth, so unless he makes some drastic improvements, he won't be leaving his seat much. He can defend, however.
Hoopshype:
Houston previously donated Taylor to the Knicks in a midseason salary dump after the Rockets had become frustrated with Taylor's increasing offensive ineptitude. Taylor is a decent defender and can hit mid-range jump shots, which makes him look competent at first. But he provides nothing on the boards, settles for too many long jumpers, and rarely gets to the basket. Of the Knicks' four power forwards, Taylor ranks a clear fourth, so unless he makes some drastic improvements, he won't be leaving his seat much. He can defend, however.
Hoopshype:
It seems like Petrie just signs whoever nobody else wants.
I'm honestly a little tired of people lamenting that Amundson and Williams won't get time with Taylor on the team. What in the heck have those guys ever done? Maurice Taylor has at least averaged 17 points a game and is a proven commodity. Amundson and Williams couldn't even get themselves drafted!
If this team is rebuilding, fine, play the youngsters and see what happens. But all signs point to this team at least trying to be competitive.
I know potential is titilating and mysterious, but come on. These guys couldn't get drafted in a year with terrible big men. If they turn out to be spectacular in training camp, fine, leave them on the roster. But otherwise I'll take Maurice Taylor, thank you very much.
If this team is rebuilding, fine, play the youngsters and see what happens. But all signs point to this team at least trying to be competitive.
I know potential is titilating and mysterious, but come on. These guys couldn't get drafted in a year with terrible big men. If they turn out to be spectacular in training camp, fine, leave them on the roster. But otherwise I'll take Maurice Taylor, thank you very much.
True. But how many other GMs have managed to remain competitive, particularly in the West? Over the last 7-8 years, only Kings, Spurs and Mavs have managed to hit the playoffs each year. Of course, their recent record has been much more impressive than ours. Of these, the Mavs continue to have a high payroll. Spurs have done a magnificent job of course of maintaining excellence while staying within LT. Having Duncan helps. However, they too have been very good at plucking excellent talent with low draft picks.
I do agree that if there is a good chance to improve dramatically next year, it might be acceptable to trade some of our guys for picks and cap space. Don't know if Petrie has that mandate from the Maloofs. Also, someone needs to take some of our vets off our hands for draft picks and expiring contracts.
I do agree that if there is a good chance to improve dramatically next year, it might be acceptable to trade some of our guys for picks and cap space. Don't know if Petrie has that mandate from the Maloofs. Also, someone needs to take some of our vets off our hands for draft picks and expiring contracts.
Thing is these guys have potential with aspects of the game the Kings need: Rebounding, shot blocking, and hussle play.
Mo doesnt do any of those things, he used to do alright offensively, but the Kings dont really need that right now.
If this guy could pull down a few boards and block a few shots a game I wouldnt care if he took Williams' or Amundson's spot...Thing is he cant. He'll probably average 12-15 minutes a game and something like 5 pts 3 rebs...Williams could probably give us that a game, with a block or two to go with it.
And the dude got waived by THE KNICKS...Hard to be optimistic about him.
Mo doesnt do any of those things, he used to do alright offensively, but the Kings dont really need that right now.
If this guy could pull down a few boards and block a few shots a game I wouldnt care if he took Williams' or Amundson's spot...Thing is he cant. He'll probably average 12-15 minutes a game and something like 5 pts 3 rebs...Williams could probably give us that a game, with a block or two to go with it.
And the dude got waived by THE KNICKS...Hard to be optimistic about him.
Spurs have been in the mix all along and have won 3. Lakers barring that one season have been in the mix and also have won 3 and one trip to the finals. Mavs, wolves, kings, blazers and suns have had one shot each at the conference finals and as of now only the mavs and the suns have another shot at it at this point of time.
Kings apart from 2002 have not had a shot at it and i wouldnt club the kings along with those teams, they should be clubbed along with the wolves who also had a similar run and were eliminated by the lakers.
Do you want to hit the playoffs every year and not go anywhere, just like the hawks used to do earlier or the cavs earlier or would you want to be in the bulls, pistons, lakers, spurs mode where you hit the playoffs and have a shot at the ring most of the time, though you might have slipped for a couple of years and not make the playoffs.
Kings apart from 2002 have not had a shot at it and i wouldnt club the kings along with those teams, they should be clubbed along with the wolves who also had a similar run and were eliminated by the lakers.
Do you want to hit the playoffs every year and not go anywhere, just like the hawks used to do earlier or the cavs earlier or would you want to be in the bulls, pistons, lakers, spurs mode where you hit the playoffs and have a shot at the ring most of the time, though you might have slipped for a couple of years and not make the playoffs.
I disagree with the T-Wolves assessment. from 2002-2004 we had CONTENTION shots. The thing was, we continually were crippled with a MAJOR injure. From Peja to B-Jax to ULTIMATELY C-Webb. We'd STILL be contending if we had the old, HEALTHY C-Webb and THAT is what has seperated the Kings from the Spurs/Mavs. Their stars, Duncan-Dirk haven't had a career altering injury(yet). C-Webb did.
Now our main "CORE" group is Ron Artest, Kevin Martin, John Salmons and Francisco Garcia.
Our SECONDARY "core" group is Mike Bibby, Brad Miller and Shareef Abdur-Rahim who are their to keep us competitive and fill voids from our main core group. Thinking about it that way shows the both Mike and Brad could very well be on the outs in the next couple of years when that opportunistic deal is made available for Petrie. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will this new Kings roster.
Petrie is merely biding time, until he can build around the Artest.
Now our main "CORE" group is Ron Artest, Kevin Martin, John Salmons and Francisco Garcia.
Our SECONDARY "core" group is Mike Bibby, Brad Miller and Shareef Abdur-Rahim who are their to keep us competitive and fill voids from our main core group. Thinking about it that way shows the both Mike and Brad could very well be on the outs in the next couple of years when that opportunistic deal is made available for Petrie. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will this new Kings roster.
Petrie is merely biding time, until he can build around the Artest.
Mavs, yes.
Suns...only if they sustain. Closer to the Suns of the late 80's/early 90s.
Blazers...closer to the Blazers of the early 90's then the shortlived group from 2000.
Wolves...that's just trolling. They made it out of the first round in exactly one year and promptly disappeared from the playoffs therafter. We on the other hand were one of the three power teams in the entire league for 4 years.
And all of the legit comparisons (Cleveland of late 80's/early 90's possible too, although injuries meant they only had a few runs) have the same "feel" as the Kings -- extraordinarily offensively talented teams, ensemble casts, that never got over the top.
Now Geoff, Blazer at heart that he is, appears to be doing the 80s/90s Blazers clingy thing -- the Indiana/Portland/Utah and to a lesser degree Phoenix hang on and on and on thing -- do whatever you can to keep in that first round of the playoffs, even if you have no hope of advancing. The good news is that Indiana, Portland and the Suns at least managed to hang on so long they eventually got brief contending revivals and a second long shot at the apple before finally crashing and burning. The bad news that the obvious common denominator of the Indiana/Portland/Utah/Suns cling on strategy is that none of those teams ever won a title with it. That the one oddball Detroit exception aside --and they don't fit basically anybody's pattern -- the teams winning the titles were all led by legends, and it is kind of difficult to draft a legend at #20. Clinging on is a second place strategy focused on not losing, rather than winning.
Last edited:
You're spot on my friend. As a Rockets fan, I am always thankful for the generosity of one Isiah Thomas and his willingness to absorb our absolutely asinine contracts that we have given out to clowns like Mo Taylor.
He played his way into an absurd contract by having a good year with the Clips and then just went downhill. He's a below average rebounder with poor instincts in terms of how and when to rebound. He half-asses defense all the time and is actually pretty easy to back down and score on. For some reason, his athletic ability and strength never translated onto the court.
He has a nice mid-range jumper but that's the extent of his offense. He doesn't have any game on the post and he definitely won't be getting you any offensive rebounds. Plus he's kind of undersized for the power forward spot to begin with. He's basically what we have in juwan howard except he's younger but stupider and doesn't try.
On the brightside, you got him cheap so I guess that's good and if he doesn't work out, it shouldn't cost too much to deal him or cut him. Worst comes to worst, just send him back to new york. They'll probably give you an unconditional first round pick and Channing Frye.
He played his way into an absurd contract by having a good year with the Clips and then just went downhill. He's a below average rebounder with poor instincts in terms of how and when to rebound. He half-asses defense all the time and is actually pretty easy to back down and score on. For some reason, his athletic ability and strength never translated onto the court.
He has a nice mid-range jumper but that's the extent of his offense. He doesn't have any game on the post and he definitely won't be getting you any offensive rebounds. Plus he's kind of undersized for the power forward spot to begin with. He's basically what we have in juwan howard except he's younger but stupider and doesn't try.
On the brightside, you got him cheap so I guess that's good and if he doesn't work out, it shouldn't cost too much to deal him or cut him. Worst comes to worst, just send him back to new york. They'll probably give you an unconditional first round pick and Channing Frye.
