Kings Should Offer Artest a Contract
- Thread starter Purple Reign
- Start date
Ron most likely quits being a bargain this summer. At best, this team isn't likely to be a contender for 2-3 years and then Ron will be passing out of his prime and with a salary he may not be worth at 31 or 32. That's why I don't think he's part of a rebuild. I certainly don't see a point to re-signing him this summer, except in a S&T.
After thinking about it, I'm glad we didn't give into Denver. I'm not really a fan of Artest, but he is a top 5 player at his position. He can guard the other teams best player, at the 2,3, or 4. Nobody can really stop him on offense. He always hustles and plays with emotion.
If we can sign him for a couple years, then trade him and get real value for him.
If we can sign him for a couple years, then trade him and get real value for him.
I can't argue with the past but to use the past in the way you have has a large glop of speculation in it. All I can say is that he is older and even guys like Ron can learn. I wouldn't build a team with Ron as a pillar and didn't say that. You need a more stable leader but Ron's effort and physical skills (and willingness to teach) are a unique combination.
Attributing Ron's teams' failures to Ron is stretching things just to suit your prejudice towards Ron.
Why, when you grade the team after every game, does Ron average out as the best on the Kings? Are we to think he is the best player yet somehow it will be his influence that costs us some playoff game?
Attributing Ron's teams' failures to Ron is stretching things just to suit your prejudice towards Ron.
Why, when you grade the team after every game, does Ron average out as the best on the Kings? Are we to think he is the best player yet somehow it will be his influence that costs us some playoff game?
I can't speak for others, but it just isn't that black and white. I think you are misconstruing the term "tank," first of all. Having a bunch of young guys who play hard and have potential, but may lose a lot until they gain experience is not tanking.
It's exciting to get to the playoffs, if you are an upcoming, young and talented team, even if you're out in the first round. I'ts not fun to squeak into the playoffs and lose in the first round, if it's with a team on it's way down or just living in perpetual mediocrity. Then you miss out on a decent draft pick, too, so you can continue to wallow in mediocrity.
We prayed to win and to get to the playoffs, because the team wallowed in mediocrity for so many years. I would prefer not to go back to that. Is that hard to understand?
It's exciting to get to the playoffs, if you are an upcoming, young and talented team, even if you're out in the first round. I'ts not fun to squeak into the playoffs and lose in the first round, if it's with a team on it's way down or just living in perpetual mediocrity. Then you miss out on a decent draft pick, too, so you can continue to wallow in mediocrity.
We prayed to win and to get to the playoffs, because the team wallowed in mediocrity for so many years. I would prefer not to go back to that. Is that hard to understand?
Fans would pray to make it to the POs because we had a young, exciting team on the rise. Now we are on the opposite side of the hill, and we must repeat the process. We sucked alot before we got to where we were. And we got our good players through sucking, and some luck.
We did not have to tank because we were naturally crap. But we acquired some good young talent and worked from there. That's how we became so good. And that's what we have to do again. We can not win anything with an old, average team - which is what we are at the moment.
Kings fans haven't just became monsters, it's a process every team has to go through
We did not have to tank because we were naturally crap. But we acquired some good young talent and worked from there. That's how we became so good. And that's what we have to do again. We can not win anything with an old, average team - which is what we are at the moment.
Kings fans haven't just became monsters, it's a process every team has to go through
Can someone help me out? how does Re-signing Ron work now? do we have to wait untill the season is over or can we do it now? Also what teams have the capspace and threat to try and sign ron away from us next season for the money he wants?
The more I think about it the more keeping ron makes sense...
If Shelden,Hawes & our three draft picks this year turn out good with ron,kevin,garcia,salmons,miller,beno,douby on the squad we have a playoff team.
The more I think about it the more keeping ron makes sense...
If Shelden,Hawes & our three draft picks this year turn out good with ron,kevin,garcia,salmons,miller,beno,douby on the squad we have a playoff team.
I don't know when exactly you claim to have become a fan but we PRECISELY tanked to build that team that went to the Finals. '97-'98 season was thrown on the fire, assets were traded away, salary cap room freed (to sign Vlade) and we sprialed down the stretch to secure the pcik that brought us JWill (and could have brought us Pierce or Dirk).
If we had run things back then the way we do now, there never would have been a "golden age". We would have clogged our cap with mediocre vets, never had room to sign Vlade, picked #12 that year instead of #7, drafted Michael Doleac, held onto our aging stars rather than trade them away for a brighter future, and continued to "compete" and "try to win every game" to the tune of 30-40 wins every year.
If we had run things back then the way we do now, there never would have been a "golden age". We would have clogged our cap with mediocre vets, never had room to sign Vlade, picked #12 that year instead of #7, drafted Michael Doleac, held onto our aging stars rather than trade them away for a brighter future, and continued to "compete" and "try to win every game" to the tune of 30-40 wins every year.
If he asks too much, don't sign him. I never said to sign him no matter what he wants. I could be proven wrong with the correct manipulation of stats, but I suspect the best athletes have a longer prime period than the average athletes. I don't expect him to flame out at 31. He turned 28 in November.
He can be resigned as an Early Bird by us or MLE by anyone else except a couple teams. It puts us in the driver's seat and no, I wouldn't sign him at the max that Early Bird allows unless it was for 3 years.
Besides, I don't think he will opt out. It would be a stupid move on Ron's part and as flaky as he may be, flakiness dose not equate with lack of intelligence.
He can be resigned as an Early Bird by us or MLE by anyone else except a couple teams. It puts us in the driver's seat and no, I wouldn't sign him at the max that Early Bird allows unless it was for 3 years.
Besides, I don't think he will opt out. It would be a stupid move on Ron's part and as flaky as he may be, flakiness dose not equate with lack of intelligence.
We are not as bad as a team as you guys make us out to be. We have beaten alot of good teams this year. We are a fairly young team, if spencer develops and a slight chance of shelden doing good we will be a young team on the rise. With a good power forward and a little time to build chemistry this team would be an ok playoff team. Add what we may get in free agency, not this summer but next and it's not as bad as you think. I dont think we really need to be upset about ron winning us games.
We have at this time 7 players on the roster over the age of 30. We have 3 younger than 25.
Again with this magic PF, who better materialize damn quick with the clock ticking on Brad. And the larger issue -- is being an "ok playoff team" really your idea of hijinks? Is that supposed to inspire? Its my idea of roadkill. Who the hell sets off to become the Washington Generals?
Again with this magic PF, who better materialize damn quick with the clock ticking on Brad. And the larger issue -- is being an "ok playoff team" really your idea of hijinks? Is that supposed to inspire? Its my idea of roadkill. Who the hell sets off to become the Washington Generals?
We cannot extend his contract because contracts cannot be extended if they are less than 4 years in length and Ron's contract is 3 years. We have to wait until the season is over. If he doesn't opt out, we have him another year and resigning is not an issue. If he opts out, he is a free agent and two teams have cap space to go after him, one is Philadelphia. I don't recall the other. With all the trading, I lost track. The rest can offer the MLE which will be about $3 mil less than if he stayed with us.
We can offer Early Bird amount of money and no one else can. Early Birds can get 175% of their present salary which would be too much for Ron but that is the most a team without cap space can offer.
We can offer Early Bird amount of money and no one else can. Early Birds can get 175% of their present salary which would be too much for Ron but that is the most a team without cap space can offer.
That is your opinion. Many of us ARE upset about Ron still being around because with him we are only a borderline playoff team at best.
Great, that means more 1st rounders on the bottom edge of the lottery instead of getting a top 5 pick like we need! After all, the bottom of the lottery is where superstars are found right? Especially the types of players we need, like legit 6'10+ defensive-oriented PF's and C's that are mobile. Plus Petrie has a great track record drafting those sorts of players too...or not.
Oh but we can get a good player like that in free agency or in a trade right? After all, that is how we finally got our young superstar PF Chris Webber that helped us get to the cusp of the finals, and those sorts of trades happen all the time...or not.
These next two years are the time to tear things down in preparation for what we really need to get back to being competitive. Instead with Artest around this season our draft pick will sliding down lower and lower, and it is doubtful we get the sort of value we would have received before the deadline. I thought Petrie finally started to "get it" that we needed to rebuild around our youth when he traded Bibby, but now he pulls this.
Yes we would go through a bad few years to get back to those good times when we were competing for championships, but it is better than year after year of mediocrity.
Great, that means more 1st rounders on the bottom edge of the lottery instead of getting a top 5 pick like we need! After all, the bottom of the lottery is where superstars are found right? Especially the types of players we need, like legit 6'10+ defensive-oriented PF's and C's that are mobile. Plus Petrie has a great track record drafting those sorts of players too...or not.
Oh but we can get a good player like that in free agency or in a trade right? After all, that is how we finally got our young superstar PF Chris Webber that helped us get to the cusp of the finals, and those sorts of trades happen all the time...or not.
These next two years are the time to tear things down in preparation for what we really need to get back to being competitive. Instead with Artest around this season our draft pick will sliding down lower and lower, and it is doubtful we get the sort of value we would have received before the deadline. I thought Petrie finally started to "get it" that we needed to rebuild around our youth when he traded Bibby, but now he pulls this.
Yes we would go through a bad few years to get back to those good times when we were competing for championships, but it is better than year after year of mediocrity.
Sarcasm doesn't work well with the printed word. I can name a few top 50 players who were drafted outside of pick number 10. That doesn't mean a number 16 pick will year in year out be a better pick but occasionally great players fall a long ways.
We just traded and got a #5 pick and people are lining up to say he is no good.
We just traded and got a #5 pick and people are lining up to say he is no good.
Win what? When?
I;ve mentioned before:
Win
40
40
45
45
45
you are a NOT a winner. You are a loser. A nobody. A nothing. A speed bump. A joke. The guy everybody wants to play because you suck and you just aren't bright enoguh to know it.
vs.
Win:
25
30
40
50
55
60
You are a winner. Know how its done. Have sacrificed and put in the work. And it involved some big time losing. But losing with a cause, a purpose, and a plan.
I;ve mentioned before:
Win
40
40
45
45
45
you are a NOT a winner. You are a loser. A nobody. A nothing. A speed bump. A joke. The guy everybody wants to play because you suck and you just aren't bright enoguh to know it.
vs.
Win:
25
30
40
50
55
60
You are a winner. Know how its done. Have sacrificed and put in the work. And it involved some big time losing. But losing with a cause, a purpose, and a plan.
Sounds like Christmas day around here, when you open your present and find it isn't what you wanted.
1. There's a possibility that Ron opts out. If so, then Denver and other teams were probably throwing poor trade ideas our way. In addition, I'm assuming Petrie wanted to attach the albatross that is KT with any trade, creating more difficulties. I can't say I blame him. "If you want Ron, you must take KT." What teams have that kind of fungible money?
2. If 2010 is the year of true cap space, then keeping Ron around isn't damaging anything financially, as he's not lengthening problems from a monetary standpoint.
3. People are complaining that Ron = more wins. That's a bad thing? You're getting someone (for the time being) who wants to win, and wants his teammates to get better. Yes, I understand a worse record = better draft pick. However, someone did the math earlier, and noted that our slot in the draft won't improve unless we forget how to dribble a basketball. The Kings are NOT THAT BAD OF A TEAM. I don't feel like doing the math, but I'm pretty sure it's impossible to "earn" a top 10 draft pick at this stage of the game. We need negative wins, and by my count, a loss only counts as "1". Besides, who's to say that players and picks won't be packaged to move up in the draft?
4. Seeing as how Ron is still here (and I've been on the record for wanting him gone), I say "Welcome. Kick some butt and show the young guys how to play some tough D." As Kent Brockman once said, "I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords."
FIN.
1. There's a possibility that Ron opts out. If so, then Denver and other teams were probably throwing poor trade ideas our way. In addition, I'm assuming Petrie wanted to attach the albatross that is KT with any trade, creating more difficulties. I can't say I blame him. "If you want Ron, you must take KT." What teams have that kind of fungible money?
2. If 2010 is the year of true cap space, then keeping Ron around isn't damaging anything financially, as he's not lengthening problems from a monetary standpoint.
3. People are complaining that Ron = more wins. That's a bad thing? You're getting someone (for the time being) who wants to win, and wants his teammates to get better. Yes, I understand a worse record = better draft pick. However, someone did the math earlier, and noted that our slot in the draft won't improve unless we forget how to dribble a basketball. The Kings are NOT THAT BAD OF A TEAM. I don't feel like doing the math, but I'm pretty sure it's impossible to "earn" a top 10 draft pick at this stage of the game. We need negative wins, and by my count, a loss only counts as "1". Besides, who's to say that players and picks won't be packaged to move up in the draft?
4. Seeing as how Ron is still here (and I've been on the record for wanting him gone), I say "Welcome. Kick some butt and show the young guys how to play some tough D." As Kent Brockman once said, "I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords."
FIN.