Beno agrees to terms with Kings

[Jerryaki]

Lets say we are rid of Miller, KT, SAR, and Artest. so we have a line up of

Beno
Martin
Salmons
Thompson
Hawes

Garcia
Moore
Williams

lets say that team gets you the #9 pick. They what? Maybe you get a PF better than Thompson with that pick then you win 5 more games the next year. Well s**t you did what you were supposed to do you got rid of vets had nothing but kids and still just a little to much talent to get that #1 pick. So this goes on for 2 years then we have a rash of injuries and get the #1 and that guy is a Bogut or an Olowakandi. Then what. the injured players are back the next season and you get the 10th pick or so.

Don't get me wrong I am in favor of rebuilding. I just don't want it to turn into a 10 year rebuild.

To get that franchise you have to be the worst at the right time or be the worst for a long time. I prefer the right time but, we won't get that right time with the talent we already have with or without the vets.

You are basing this argument on a lot of assumptions/predictions. However, even if it does play out the way you've laid it out, you're overlooking a very real benefit: our team would have better talent AND a lower payroll ( because they will be on rookie contracts). As you've laid it out, we would have a young, CHEAP team that has some cohesion and winning under their belt, and we would presumably have either cap space due to their cheap contracts or trading assets to get us our cornerstone player.

I don't believe that the draft is the only solution for us, but I do believe it is absolutely critical to have it as part of the solution, something our front office seems to have been ignoring the past few years. I am, however, staunchly opposed to us signing and then playing vets who clearly have no role or positive contribution to our future, and this is where the rebuilding camp gets flack from the "anti-tank" camp.

Our refusal to commit to a rebuild has led us to this point...worrying if slovenia may crash our servers. =P

 

[Showtime]

Again, I'm not going over the same crap, because everything you guys are bringing up has already been addressed. It's not my fault if you didn't read or understand it.

 

[Showtime]

Probable it may not be (in any single year -- over time its guaranteed). But virtually the ONLY way it definitely is, in particular for a small market team like the Kings. If your chances are 20% of doing it through the draft each year (with a properly executed draft top pick strategy), and 5% (if that) of doing it any other way, then the first choice is stll the better choice. Arguing that the first choice is not "probable" is a copout when you offer no viable alternative that has been proven to work.

Where do you get that 5% figure? I showed how at BEST, there's a 20% chance to grab a franchise level player in the top 10. Yet you compare it to your made up 5% and somehow prove me wrong? lol.

You say I don't bring up any alternatives. Well, I guess you don't read my posts, because I did.

While we have wallowed, teams that were behind us have passed us up with their draft strategies. Some teams that were ahead of us have even fallen behind, and then bounced right back up to zoom right back past us with their draft strategies.

What team has even reached the finals in the past decade behind a franchise star that was drafted through the tanking strategy?

The coward will of course always point to the ones who have not made it (yet). But he can't prove his point by the negative -- fact is that teams (in fact almost every championship team) DO succeeed with the draft strategy.

The last ten championships were won by these teams:

Celtics, Spurs, Heat, Pistons, Lakers

None of which won a championship behind a franchise player that was drafted by them with the tanking method.

And until/unless he can prove (and he can't) that other teams are routinely using other ways to get to the top more often, that not EVERY team pulls of the draft strategy is not relevant. MORE contending teams do than through any other method. That is enough.

Your ignorance is astounding. I have already proven that on an average draft, there is about a 20% chance to land a franchise star in the top ten. I have showed examples of teams who have obtained franchise players and still aren't serious contenders, and I have shown why this team at this time can't afford such a direction if they wish to keep a team in the city. I suggest you start proving your case and show me specific examples of how deliberately not signing players and not playing players (tanking) has turned out to be a practical way to build a championship team.

 

[Jerryaki]

what were the alternatives you brought up??? here's my take on the other two:

trade - over the next few years, our only trading assets will be expiring contracts, which i think at best gets us a good player who is past his prime. i say this because teams looking to trade for cap space are looking to sign impending free agents who are better than the player they are giving up. they are looking to basically offload their depreciating asset in attempts to pick up an appreciating asset. (e.g. nets give up jefferson looking to land lebron)

free agency - we are a small market team, 10th according to the web. here's what they have listed, in order: MEM, NOH, SA, NO, MIL, CHA, IND, POR, ORL, SAC. of those teams, i can only think of one instance where their franchise player was via free agency (boozer to UTA, and that involved stabbing a blind guy in the back to get it done). vlade divac was our biggest free agent acquisition; do you really think this is the route?

of the teams in the last decade to win a championship, one thing is certain: they all had talent from the top of the draft (and miami even drafted theirs after a losing season). now, if you're a team like us, which has the best odds of getting that top pick: draft, trade, or free agency?

*btw: the teams who won it all in the decade before all drafted their franchise player (pistons, bulls, rockets, spurs).

 

[Spike]

Your ignorance is astounding. I have already proven that on an average draft, there is about a 20% chance to land a franchise star in the top ten. I have showed examples of teams who have obtained franchise players and still aren't serious contenders, and I have shown why this team at this time can't afford such a direction if they wish to keep a team in the city.

Your points are also opinion based. It is a fallacy to think that the Hornets and Jazz are not contenders, thereby negating the logic on Chris Paul and Deron Williams. Both teams have weaknesses, but they are strong enough to make runs deep into the playoffs. Are you suggesting that only the Lakers and Celtics are contenders, as they were the teams playing in the finals?

 

[Jerryaki]

ditto with the magic not being contenders in the east.

 

[Showtime]

Your points are also opinion based. It is a fallacy to think that the Hornets and Jazz are not contenders, thereby negating the logic on Chris Paul and Deron Williams. Both teams have weaknesses, but they are strong enough to make runs deep into the playoffs. Are you suggesting that only the Lakers and Celtics are contenders, as they were the teams playing in the finals?

I said that they aren't serious contenders because they still need a LOT of work to get to the next level, i.e. the finals. The Jazz have a solid squad, yet took a step back this past season by being one of the worst road teams in the entire league, and not building on their WCF appearance. They regressed. Before the season, I would have said they were contenders, but they had a worse season than last year.

The hornets have shown potential, but they won't get past the semis without a bench, and they are pretty limited in that area because of the cap situation. They don't have much money to spend, so for the time being, they won't fix their bench. That means they won't be making the finals until that happens. This is coming from a hornet fan btw.

My idea of a serious contender isn't just a team that can get to the semis. A serious contender, as I have stated several times previously, is a team built to make a run at the title. The Jazz and Hornets aren't there yet.

 

[Showtime]

of the teams in the last decade to win a championship, one thing is certain: they all had talent from the top of the draft (and miami even drafted theirs after a losing season). now, if you're a team like us, which has the best odds of getting that top pick: draft, trade, or free agency?

*btw: the teams who won it all in the decade before all drafted their franchise player (pistons, bulls, rockets, spurs).

I don't know why, but you still can't grasp what I'm talking about.

Duncan was drafted by the Spurs.

Wade by the heat.

MJ by the bulls, etc.

I never argued against the draft. I argued against the people who thought the MLE deals were keeping the team from reaching that level. Some people here wanted the kings not to sign the MLE deals in SAR, Salmons, and Moore because they wanted the team to lose to get a top pick. One of my points is that I don't think the Kings would have been bad enough without those guys to get a top pick.

There's a difference in being just so bad that you can't win so you get a pick, and using a strategy to intentionally lose as many games as possible to get a pick. The Spurs, Heat, and Bulls were just really bad teams. They didn't need to tank to get to that level.

The kings, in order to get to that level, did need to tank. The problem I have with that is the investment in losing, and the worst case scenario. I wouldn't have a problem with the kings losing 60-65 games and getting the top pick as long as they were really that bad, but even without the MLE deals, I don't think they would have been at that level.

 

[Jerryaki]

perhaps because what you're selling doesn't make sense? and maybe because i'm less inclined to make an effort to understand your points given your arrogant tone and overall attitude?

***
read this carefully: no one here, and i mean NO ONE, ever advocates "ok, cisco, go in there and miss that three on purpose." we argue against pointless MLE signings because it takes time away from the younger players, time away from their development as an individual and as a unit. that SAR signing turned out great, yah? moore was excellent last season, yah? at the very least, not signing those guys would've let the younger players get some more burn. will this likely lead to more losses? probably. but it's not definite, and if it doesn't, we can live with that because they are stepping in the right direction.

whether or not this team is bad enough without the MLE vets to get a high draft pick is a matter of opinion, namely yours.

what is YOUR plan for our future, genius?

 

[Showtime]

perhaps because what you're selling doesn't make sense? and maybe because i'm less inclined to make an effort to understand your points given your arrogant tone and overall jack*** attitude?

Maybe I seem like I have an attitude because of people not understanding a simple point that's been explained several times over that other people have been able to understand.

 

[Spike]

My idea of a serious contender isn't just a team that can get to the semis. A serious contender, as I have stated several times previously, is a team built to make a run at the title. The Jazz and Hornets aren't there yet.

Funny, I'd think that a serious contender IS making it to the semis, and is just a piece away from a championship. That's what keeps these teams from scrapping their rosters every year. But don't let my reasoning get in your way. We'll agree to disagree.

 

[Jerryaki]

a point so simple that slim and brick have refuted it ad nauseum and yet you still haven't come back with anything?

everything else is out the window: what is YOUR plan for the future?

 

[est.1999]

showtime I've been agreeing with most of what your saying but if the hornets were to get the one seed on these past playoffs(they were only one game behind) they wouldve gotten past the nuggs and the jazz I believe and I don't know how they would have faired against the lakers but I'm sure it wouldve been a hard fought series and whether they went to the finals of not you can't deny that they werent/arent contenders.

 

[Showtime]

a point so simple that slim and brick have refuted it ad nauseum and yet you still haven't come back with anything?

I HAVE addressed it and you have ignored it. Meanwhile, I have brought up questions to those viewpoints, and have yet to see a response.

everything else is out the window: what is YOUR plan for the future?

I can see what the team is trying to do. I also see some suggestions that I disagree with. I'm not saying I have an idea that's the best, I'm simply arguing against some of the suggestions brought up here by the members. I think what the team has done over the past few years is a reasonable way to rebuild considering their circumstances. They have positioned themselves to have a solid young core when they will have the cap space to sign a star. By that time, Martin will be in his prime, the bad contracts will be gone, and hopefully Hawes and Thompson will have developed into a dangerous young frontline.

 

[Jerryaki]

suppose this season that brad and moore get the bulk of the frontline minutes (thereby stunting the growth of hawes and thompson some more). in addition to that, john, who's no spring chicken, takes time away from garcia also, and garcia himself isn't exactly a super-duper sub. other than the consistency and solid play of martin, how is our young core developing, and will it be good enough in a few years?

on top of that, even you have to agree that given all the teams gunning for the same offseason and clearing cap space for it that sacramento does not have an edge over any of them. it's the sucky part of being a small market team. i've also listed before the franchise players who are going to be available that summer; do you really think we can land them???

 

[Showtime]

I like the attitude from Beno. Check this:

He decided not to play for his Slovenian national team because he's more interested earning his money with the Kings. Udrih is heading to Vegas on Friday to get in shape while working with Kings strength coach Daniel Shapiro for five days.
"I want to get in the best shape for training camp so that when it comes we can start getting ready for the team," Udrih said. "(The contract) comes with a lot of responsibility. I feel that (responsibility), and I'm going to go try to get better and get in the best shape I can."

That's from Sam's blog at the Bee.

 

[tyrant]

Easy tiger. Its not a good idea to challenge someone's basketball knowledge and then throw around opinions with little data to back it up.

Facts:
He was also traded for a 2nd round pick by one of the best franchises around.
He was then waived.
He was signed to a franchise in need of a pg in a contract year.
Beno has talent and played well for about a half a season.
This was all in the span of one year.

Now maybe he continues at that level or builds upon that wake-up-call induced opportunity. Maybe he doesn't. But history doesn't suggest that this is the kind of move that helps create a contender.

i agree with every line. why cant others just get it

 

[SacKings7]

i agree with every line. why cant others just get it

Beno didn't get much playing time in SA, and I don't think he even suited up for Minny. Finally given a chance to play, I think Beno showed us what he is capable of, and will play just as good for the next few seasons. Remember that Bobby Jackson wasn't exactly a well known player before he got here either

 

[tyrant]

Beno didn't get much playing time in SA, and I don't think he even suited up for Minny. Finally given a chance to play, I think Beno showed us what he is capable of, and will play just as good for the next few seasons. Remember that Bobby Jackson wasn't exactly a well known player before he got here either

and bobby jackson couldve never been our starting point gaurd at the time. he was an energy guy. he could never be a mike bibby. someone with clutch in their blood. and with that said i would still take bobby jackson over beno. so what does that say about our new point gaurd now? hm?

 

[VF21]

suppose this season that brad and moore get the bulk of the frontline minutes (thereby stunting the growth of hawes and thompson some more). in addition to that, john, who's no spring chicken, takes time away from garcia also, and garcia himself isn't exactly a super-duper sub. other than the consistency and solid play of martin, how is our young core developing, and will it be good enough in a few years?

on top of that, even you have to agree that given all the teams gunning for the same offseason and clearing cap space for it that sacramento does not have an edge over any of them. it's the sucky part of being a small market team. i've also listed before the franchise players who are going to be available that summer; do you really think we can land them???

WHY do you presuppose that Miller and Moore are going to see the "bulk of the frontline minutes" as though it's a foregone conclusion? We have, for the first time I can remember, young players with lots of potential at the 4 and 5, and I firmly believe they're going to be brought forward to maximize their potential.

As far as Salmons goes, when (and yes, I think "when" and not "if" has to be the operative word) Artest is gone, Salmons could easily start at the 3 with Cisco getting lots of time as our Bobby Jackson-like energy off the bench.

That will develop our young core. And there's really no evidence to support either side of this argument except for the obvious - we finally have committed to rebuilding, and I believe they'll do it.

I'm constantly amazed by the way some people seem to forget that they actually want the team to be good, to win, and to be profitable. That's why gazillionaires like the Maloofs buy sports teams. They aren't buying them to take flak from the fans or appear stupid at every juncture.

Sorry if I'm ranting but I think sometimes people, in their zeal to express their idea of what's best for the team, forget that TPTB have a lot more to lose by fielding a bad team year after year than any of us.

Petrie isn't incompetent. The Maloofs are pretty good owners when you look at the rest of the league. Have they been right 100% of the time? Of course not. But that doesn't mean they'll avoid doing what's best for their team at every juncture.

Our young guys are gonna see time this year, most likely LOTS of time. And THIS year we have the perfect coach - one with experience at the college level - to work with them. I think we're gonna be fine.

Sorry for totally derailing the topic at hand.

 

[Spike]

so what does that say about our new point gaurd now? hm?

It says that we have different opinions, at least what "clutch" means:
How about some examples?

Sacramento 114, L.A. Lakers 113 LOS ANGELES, March 9 (AP) -- Beno Udrih made two free throws to put Sacramento up by a point with 4.6 seconds remaining. The Kings then watched nervously as Kobe Bryant took the final shot.
http://www.nba.com/games/20080309/SACLAL/recap.html

Sacramento 112, San Antonio 99
SACRAMENTO, Calif., Nov. 26 (AP) -- Gregg Popovich could hardly believe Beno Udrih's name hadn't come up before the game.
"What, no Beno questions?'' the Spurs coach said of his former guard now with Sacramento, then joked, "We'll talk after he scores 30.''
He almost did.
Udrih scored a career-high 27 points against his former team while holding down Tony Parker on defense, and the Kings snapped San Antonio's five-game winning streak with a 112-99 victory against the Spurs on Monday night.
Udrih shot 8-for-12 and made all nine of his free throws.
http://www.nba.com/games/20071126/SASSAC/recap.html

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)—Unwanted in San Antonio, Beno Udrih appears to have found a home with the Sacramento Kings.
Udrih had 23 points and six assists to help the Kings beat the Detroit Pistons 105-95 on Sunday night.
Udrih, a late preseason cut by San Antonio who came to the Kings as a backup when Mike Bibby was injured just prior to the season, has quickly become a starter. He showed why against the Pistons, hitting 9 of 13 shots from the field and all five of his free throw attempts and fueling a strong second half by the Kings.
“I chose this team because I knew I would get an opportunity to play; I didn’t get that in San Antonio,” said Udrih, who played three seasons with the Spurs and owns two championship rings.
“Playing regular minutes has helped my confidence. In San Antonio I never knew how much I would play. I won’t come out here if I miss one or two shots in a row.”

Udrih hardly missed anything in the third quarter when he scored 15 points, including 11 in a stretch where the Kings outscored Detroit 15-1 to take the lead after trailing by nine points.
“He had an unbelievable game in the third quarter,” Detroit coach Flip Saunders said. “He made shots and he made plays. He’s been playing extremely well for them.”
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2007111823

Strong games vs. the Lakers, the Spurs, and the Pistons. I'm not saying he's an all-star, but he ain't chopped liver.

 

[Warhawk]

and bobby jackson couldve never been our starting point gaurd at the time. he was an energy guy. he could never be a mike bibby. someone with clutch in their blood. and with that said i would still take bobby jackson over beno. so what does that say about our new point gaurd now? hm?

Um, absolutely nothing considering Beno is not Bobby? I like Bobby, but I also like what Beno brings. They are two different players. I covered the Cisco vs. Bobby thing (http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?p=552661#post552661), now lets do Beno vs. Bobby:

From my previous post:

Bobby averaged 15.2 ppg his best year (2002-2003, his 6th in the league). He shot 46% and 38% from the 3. 3.7 rebouds, 3.1 assists, 1.2 steals.

Now Beno for last year (his 4th, as both starter and a sub):

12.8 pts, 46%, 39% from the 3, 3.3 rebounds, 4.3 assists, and 0.9 steals.

As a starter:

14.4 pts, 47%, 40% from the 3, 3.5 rebounds, 5 assists, and 0.9 steals.

I think Beno did a very capable job as a partial-season replacement. This year, with a training camp and more familiarity with the players, he should do even better.

Beno, when starting because Tony was injured, also played very well. When playing for us he had several clutch shots/plays, including a huge shot the big game in LA where we beat the Lakers.

 

[tyrant]

Um, absolutely nothing considering Beno is not Bobby? I like Bobby, but I also like what Beno brings. They are two different players. I covered the Cisco vs. Bobby thing (http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?p=552661#post552661), now lets do Beno vs. Bobby:

From my previous post:



Now Beno for last year (his 4th, as both starter and a sub):

12.8 pts, 46%, 39% from the 3, 3.3 rebounds, 4.3 assists, and 0.9 steals.

As a starter:

14.4 pts, 47%, 40% from the 3, 3.5 rebounds, 5 assists, and 0.9 steals.

I think Beno did a very capable job as a partial-season replacement. This year, with a training camp and more familiarity with the players, he should do even better.

Beno, when starting because Tony was injured, also played very well. When playing for us he had several clutch shots/plays, including a huge shot the big game in LA where we beat the Lakers.

it doesnt end. you cant justify your opinion by comparing numbers for half a years service. he's gotta build his own rep. quit trying to do it for him. you're failing miserably.

beno deserved to be resigned, but half a decade???

 

[SacKings7]

it doesnt end. you cant justify your opinion by comparing numbers for half a years service. he's gotta build his own rep. quit trying to do it for him. you're failing miserably.

beno deserved to be resigned, but half a decade???

I agree that the length of the contract is too long. However, this was Beno's first chance to really show the world what he could bring to a team when given minutes. You'd be surprised how much of a difference confidence makes in a player. And since he'll be the starter for the foreseeable future, I see no reason why that confidence doesn't continue to grow

 

[Warhawk]

it doesnt end. you cant justify your opinion by comparing numbers for half a years service. he's gotta build his own rep. quit trying to do it for him. you're failing miserably.

beno deserved to be resigned, but half a decade???

I'm not trying to "build his rep" - don't know where you are getting that. I reported his stats. You know, the facts?

I think 50 games in a season is a good indicator of how he may perform in the future. When he got an opportunity, he ran with it and performed fairly well. With more time and getting to know the coach and team and more work, he will improve.

 

[tyrant]

making something into nothing i guess. ive always said he is a good backup. thats it. no more. the expectations and standards for some of you fans have dropped mightily.

 

[Warhawk]

making something into nothing i guess. ive always said he is a good backup. thats it. no more. the expectations and standards for some of you fans have dropped mightily.

Whoever said he is the point guard for a championship run???

At the time we signed him, he was among the best guys available unless a trade brought one here. And frankly, I don't see CP3 showing up on our doorstep anytime soon for Miller or Artest. The only other 1 we had on the roster was a second-round pick in the draft who'd never set foot on a court with NBA players. Pie in the sky wishing will not get you far, you have to deal with reality.

 

[bajaden]

suppose this season that brad and moore get the bulk of the frontline minutes (thereby stunting the growth of hawes and thompson some more). in addition to that, john, who's no spring chicken, takes time away from garcia also, and garcia himself isn't exactly a super-duper sub. other than the consistency and solid play of martin, how is our young core developing, and will it be good enough in a few years?

on top of that, even you have to agree that given all the teams gunning for the same offseason and clearing cap space for it that sacramento does not have an edge over any of them. it's the sucky part of being a small market team. i've also listed before the franchise players who are going to be available that summer; do you really think we can land them???

Strikes me that both you and Showtime are arguing from a what if position. His what if position is positive, and yours is negative.. As far as the small market thing, I seriously don't think it matters in our regard. The Kings have a good reputation around the league for treating their players well and the Maloff's are held in high regard. Were on the west coast and thats an appealing incentive to a lot of players who like to get in a round of golf during the winter months. Besides, money talks. When you get right down to it, its all about money for the majority of the players.

On another subject. Showtime was accused of be arrogant in his posts. I thought he made some decent points and that a lot of you saw what you wanted to see and responded emotionally instead of intellectally. I think his suspposed arrogance was mostly frustration on his part, at people not being able to see what his point was. I have the same problem with my wife at times. Please don't tell her I said that.

 

[tyrant]

Whoever said he is the point guard for a championship run???

why did we sign him for 5 years then?

 

[bajaden]

and bobby jackson couldve never been our starting point gaurd at the time. he was an energy guy. he could never be a mike bibby. someone with clutch in their blood. and with that said i would still take bobby jackson over beno. so what does that say about our new point gaurd now? hm?

It simply says that YOU don't hold him in high regard. I'll take that for what its worth to me. Nothing.....