Evans to veterans to expansion draft...
- Thread starter King Baller
- Start date
OK
What if the Kings had not given the vets those minutes? Where would the team be now?
KB
What if the Kings had not given the vets those minutes? Where would the team be now?KB
point is... we have NOTHING to play for except to see where we stand. The vets will not be part of rebuild, so why give them minutes? That is the thinking behind hating that aspect of the king's rotation.
hm let me rephrase
we had one of the best shooters in the NBA (read, not most clutch) but there are not many players besides pedja that people would have picked to shoot. He fit our offense picture perfectly. I don't see how Wallace would have started over him. Should have been given more minutes somehow, but not at expense of pedja.
I love the last one.. I also never understood exposing Wallace to the expansion draft. Hell, we could have exposed Webber. No one would have picked him up with his huge salary. Of course he might have taken it as a wee insult.
This site amazes me sometimes. Not only would no franchise in the NBA ever expose their best and star player in an expansion draft, this has to be the only fan base where there's more than an infinitesimal percentage of fans who would even consider it.
Blaming Petrie for not protecting Wallace is reasonable. Blaming Petrie for not exposing Webber in order to protect Wallace is ****ing insane.
Blaming Petrie for not protecting Wallace is reasonable. Blaming Petrie for not exposing Webber in order to protect Wallace is ****ing insane.
I certainly understand why Webber wasn't exposed. I just used as an example of how ridiculous it was that we couldn't have found a way to protect Wallace. It wasn't as though the Kings didn't know that the expansion draft was coming. With a little creative thought, they could have avoided loosing Wallace. Which leads to believe that they didn't shed any tears over his departure.
Theoretically it makes sense, as with Webber's monster contract and the reduced payroll limit the team had to work with they for all intents and purposes couldn't have taken him and still had many other players of value on the team. In fact, I thought they stated that they would not take on any real high-$$$ players at all..... Of course, theory and practice are two different things.
Would have been easy to pull Webb aside and tell him the honest truth. I would like to believe he would have been OK with it since A. We dont REALLY want to get rid of him. B. It would have made the team better if Wallace stayed. C. It wouldn't have looked like we were showing him the door. D. No way in hell the Bobcats pick him up. We were on the cusp of a championship, and at that point we had precious little options as to how to keep Wallace. Keeping Webb turned out to be a mistake, but back then nobody could predict that. I personally don't blame Petrie for not exposing Webb. I blame him for letting it get to the point where we HAVE to discuss the fact because it is the best and only option we had.
Water under the bridge, but why WOULDN'T the Bobcats have picked Webb? It's not as if they were going to compete straight out of the gate anyway, and they would have pretty much gotten a franchise player, a proven veteran. It would be similar to what Memphis did with Allen Iverson this year, only Webb would have had less question marks and more money but the franchise player value would have been worth it for 'em.
If Wallace hadn't made the team better all the time he had been there, I don't think you can defend the statement that "the team would have been better with him". I've always believed that his exposure and selection by Charlotte was the kick in his butt that's made him the near-All Star player he is today; had he stayed in Sacramento under the conditions that existed then, he would most likely have still been cruising (or worse). Petrie's mistake was not planning properly for that exposure thing re: Peeler.
If Wallace hadn't made the team better all the time he had been there, I don't think you can defend the statement that "the team would have been better with him". I've always believed that his exposure and selection by Charlotte was the kick in his butt that's made him the near-All Star player he is today; had he stayed in Sacramento under the conditions that existed then, he would most likely have still been cruising (or worse). Petrie's mistake was not planning properly for that exposure thing re: Peeler.
Last edited:
The Bobcats could only have 2/3 the salary of the other teams salary cap the first year. There is no way they could have added Chris's $17.5 million salary. The NBA cap was at $43.9 million. The Bobcats could only spend $29 million total that year for players. No way they could have Webber making 60% of their salary.......that only leaves $11.5 million for all the rest of the players. Can't build a team that way.
Thanks Warhawk... was looking for those stats. Combine that with the fact that if you had talked face to face with Chris, I don't think he would have had problems with it. I'm sure he would have rather had a good team that can win, and regardless of how good Wallace was then, it didn't make us better when he left.
I have always liked Webber as a person, but he WAS a prima donna. This is the same player that refused to come off the bench when coming back from injury. I guarantee you that he would have been upset about being unprotected (and made sure everyone knew it).
As for the part I bolded, I don't see what the problem was. The Kings had too many good players and had to leave one of them unprotected (Wallace). It seems to me that having so many good players that you have no choice be leaving one exposed is a good thing, not a bad thing.
As for the part I bolded, I don't see what the problem was. The Kings had too many good players and had to leave one of them unprotected (Wallace). It seems to me that having so many good players that you have no choice be leaving one exposed is a good thing, not a bad thing.
At that point in time, both Bobby and Christie were much more valuable to the Kings than Wallace. I was a big fan of Wallace at the time and wanted to see him play more, but would have been pissed off if we had lost Christie or Bobby instead of him (at that point in time).
We have all seen what Wallace has become since leaving, but there was no guarantee that he would develop at that rate, and had already shown himself to be injury prone.
We have all seen what Wallace has become since leaving, but there was no guarantee that he would develop at that rate, and had already shown himself to be injury prone.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that teams could only protect 7 players on their team. However, they could only lose 1 of the unprotected players from their roster. If memory serves, the Kings protected Vlade, Webber, Miller, Christie, Bibby, Bobby, and Peja (it's been a while, so forgive my memory if wrong). Everyone else was unprotected I believe.
Vlade was a free agent and was not eligible to be protected/exposed. (People often mention Peeler, but he was also a free agent and not eligible. Despite what you may hear, Peeler was not protected.) Wallace, obviously, was exposed. The other 6 on your list were protected.
The only other player possibly eligible to be protected/exposed was Darius Songaila, who was a restricted free agent. I'm unclear on Darius' status because he was an RFA. While RFAs were eligible to be exposed, if they were selected, they became unrestricted free agents rather than having their RFA status switched to Charlotte.
Each team was required to expose at least one player regardless of the number of players on their roster; what I'm unclear about is whether the required one-player exposure could be satisfied with an RFA, but my best guess would be that that is not the case. So, best guess is that Darius could not qualify as our exposure.
If so, then Petrie's error was not so much in exposing Wallace. Gerald had done next-to-nothing in three years as a King and the other 6 options (Webber, Bibby, Miller, Stojakovic, Christie and Jackson) were the major pieces to a team that was hoping to challenge for a title, and could not reasonably have been exposed. Wallace was the only logical choice, even though we knew he'd be taken.
Petrie's error was in not planning for the expansion draft in the prior offseason. If Peeler or Songaila (or another "throwaway" player) were signed to a two-year deal instead of a one-year deal in '03, that player would have instantly become "expansion draft bait" used to preserve our hold on Wallace in '04. It's not like we didn't know the expansion draft was coming.
The only other player possibly eligible to be protected/exposed was Darius Songaila, who was a restricted free agent. I'm unclear on Darius' status because he was an RFA. While RFAs were eligible to be exposed, if they were selected, they became unrestricted free agents rather than having their RFA status switched to Charlotte.
Each team was required to expose at least one player regardless of the number of players on their roster; what I'm unclear about is whether the required one-player exposure could be satisfied with an RFA, but my best guess would be that that is not the case. So, best guess is that Darius could not qualify as our exposure.
If so, then Petrie's error was not so much in exposing Wallace. Gerald had done next-to-nothing in three years as a King and the other 6 options (Webber, Bibby, Miller, Stojakovic, Christie and Jackson) were the major pieces to a team that was hoping to challenge for a title, and could not reasonably have been exposed. Wallace was the only logical choice, even though we knew he'd be taken.
Petrie's error was in not planning for the expansion draft in the prior offseason. If Peeler or Songaila (or another "throwaway" player) were signed to a two-year deal instead of a one-year deal in '03, that player would have instantly become "expansion draft bait" used to preserve our hold on Wallace in '04. It's not like we didn't know the expansion draft was coming.
Again, a lot of you are assuming the Kings wanted to keep Gerald Wallace. At that time, he was not the player he is now. There were a lot of rumors floating around about his complete lack of work ethic, his failure to take things seriously, etc. The Gerald Wallace we see today might well never have developed as such here in Sacramento. Going to Charlotte, he grew up and flourished. That easily might not have happened here...
GW3 nor GW00 is or was ever going to win a championship, therefor the Petrie made the correct decision. His shot was never pretty and is only effective in the regular season. He never has seen a postseason as a bobcat, but let me tell you, that shot will not work in the pressurecooker that is the NBA Playoffs. Petrie isn't a total failure, his biggest mistake was not selecting Rondo, when it was obvious the freshman out of kentucky who averaged 4 steals a game was going to be somebody. Mikki and Beno weren't as bad as they look, Mikki and Beno have only been paid like 18 million for the 2-3 seasons they served as kings. Petrie traded Webber well enough, and didn't resign Vlade. Both were good moves for the team. I do beleive I am a better talent evaluator that Petrie, but he has better pull with other teams and their GM's. Its not checkers, its chess. And he is the best chess player we have in the FO. Petrie also has a habit of making bad picks in the 2nd round. But, he didn't screw up this year, and that is what matters.
Okay, I am a professional at explaining that whole debacle at this point:
The two expansion draft rules were:
1) Each team could protect up to 8 players
2) But each team HAD to expose at least 1 player even if they had 8 or fewer
-- so, if you had 10 guys under contract, you could protect 8 of the 10; but if you only had 8 guys (or 7 or 6 or whatever) under contract, you would still always have to expose 1 of them.
Those rules were known years beforehand -- nobody was surprised, everybody should have been prepared.
Our Situation:
1) we had 8 players definitely under contract: Webber, Miller, Christie, Bibby, BJax, Peja, Songaila and Wallace
2) we had one player under contract who we gave an opt out provision to (Peeler)
3) Vlade was a FA and so did not count
-- if Peeler did not opt out, then we could have exposed Peeler, and protected the other 8 players
-- when Peeler opted out, we were forced to expose one of the other 8, we chose Wallace, and lost him
The mistake was 100% in giving Peeler an opt out in his contract. If he was signed to a straight two year contract without an opt out, we could have protected everybody else. By giving him an opt out, it let him screw us. And at the time we signed him to the contract, we already knew what the rules of the expansion draft were going to be. Maybe Geoff just wasn't expecting Songaila to work out, and planned on exposing him. But of course if that were the case, why even sign him (that was his rookie year). But regardless, all we had to do was sign somebody, anybody, whether Peeler or somebody else, to a 2 year deal in the offseason in order to be expansion draft bait. When we failed to do so by giving Peeler the option to opt out of his second year, it meant we had to give up a core guy.
+1 and the never developing here in Sacto applies to Hedo also. People do you forget how good Peja was then? Peja's 3 was a dagger and do you recall how well he defended Dirk N.?
I enjoying watching the player GW has become. Buts that not what he was then. Same applies to brother Hedo.
As an aside who remembers Hedo's pre-nosejob rookie season? Kings were playing the Suns and Ainge is doing the play by play......Look at Hedo go after those rebounds!!!.....chuckle....that kid really has a nose for the ball....chuckle...chuckle.... Sure Ainge was cold.....but it was sure funny And the Kid had the bread to get it fixed real nice.
KB
I enjoying watching the player GW has become. Buts that not what he was then. Same applies to brother Hedo.
As an aside who remembers Hedo's pre-nosejob rookie season? Kings were playing the Suns and Ainge is doing the play by play......Look at Hedo go after those rebounds!!!.....chuckle....that kid really has a nose for the ball....chuckle...chuckle....
Sure Ainge was cold.....but it was sure funny And the Kid had the bread to get it fixed real nice.KB
I think the point is, regardless of how good Peja actually was (or wasn't), he was THE small forward for the foreseeable future. Wallace wouldn't have developed behind him, nor would Hedo. I personally regret the loss of Hedo in hindsight more than Wallace, but then I was never sold on just how great Gerald Wallace might be anyway... Hedo, on the other hand, has truly grown into a caliber player. Petrie picked him; I just wish we'd been able to find a way to keep him around and get rid of Pookie Princess.