Is there anyone who would still rather have Landry than Martin?

[RookieOfTheDay]

Just curious. I know last year the majority of fans were glad to see Martin go and optimistic about Landry. Does anyone still think that though? Anyone, at this point, not think that The Kings got robbed in that trade?

The more I think about it, I think it may be one of the worst trades Petrie has made. Martins’s scoring and shooting are sorely missed on this team now. They shipped him out too soon. They should have at least given it a full season to try and integrate him and Tyreke

Imagine how good a trio of Evans/Martin/Cousins could potentially be after a few seasons of playing together. It would have been the right balance of finesse players and tough players that good teams usually have.

I know hindsight is 20/20 and they had know way of knowing they'd draft Cousins. But if they had known, would they still have traded Martin?

I know it’s in the past and what’s done is done but I’m curious to see what other people’s thoughts are on it.

Were they wise to get rid of Martin because of he tends to be so injury prone?

Would he fit in better with this team than Landry does?

Was trading him a mistake?

 

[Bricklayer]

Would he fit in better with this team than Landry does?

Was trading him a mistake?

No and no.

First of all Kevin wasn't working and wasn't going to work, period. Some of that is Kevin centric, some of it the basic dynamic of 2 20pt scorers in one non-run n gun backourt.

Secondly, this is one of those areas in which the big picture that people are missing becomes so important. Kevin Martin wasn't traded for Carl Landry. Kevin Martin was traded for Carl Landry and the $12 million in cap room we are going to have this summer (or $9mil in cap room and a $3mil ender we have right now). Same way that Mike Bibby was not traded for Anthony Johnson, Tyronn Lue, Shelden Williams, Lorenzen Wright and a 2008 second round draft pick -- he was traded for capspace. And like Bibby, or any other of the expensive soft vets we have unloaded, his departure opens doors for young guys to make the team theirs and for a new team spirit that included defense. We obviously had hopes that Landry would work out as a post option we lacked, but in the end the player we get with the money that we were using to play Kevin will be the player we got out of that trade. Landry has turned out to just be a placeholder. Nor, while its obvious that I would have preferred getting back somebody but Landry at this point, can you really say Petrie screwd up in not getting more, becuase I am damn sure that Carl Landry was not the best player Geoff asked about last winter, he was just the best player anybody would give up for Kevin with his value tanking.

All of which leaves you with this:
1) a move that had to be made
2) did the best we could with an expensive trade piece with declining value
3) immediate results/placeholder player has disappointed
4) true effects on team won't be known until Kevin's caproom is used, presumably in the next year (or whenever the lockout ends)

 

[mac]

Just curious. I know last year the majority of fans were glad to see Martin go and optimistic about Landry. Does anyone still think that though? Anyone, at this point, not think that The Kings got robbed in that trade?

The more I think about it, I think it may be one of the worst trades Petrie has made. Martins’s scoring and shooting are sorely missed on this team now. They shipped him out too soon. They should have at least given it a full season to try and integrate him and Tyreke

Imagine how good a trio of Evans/Martin/Cousins could potentially be after a few seasons of playing together. It would have been the right balance of finesse players and tough players that good teams usually have.

I know hindsight is 20/20 and they had know way of knowing they'd draft Cousins. But if they had known, would they still have traded Martin?

I know it’s in the past and what’s done is done but I’m curious to see what other people’s thoughts are on it.

Were they wise to get rid of Martin because of he tends to be so injury prone?

Would he fit in better with this team than Landry does?

Was trading him a mistake?

I'll give you this, if Martin were still on the team we wouldn't be 4th last in FT%. I don't know what in the world happened to Landry's FT shooting. Wasn't he up at 80% last season? Must have gone to Shaq for shooting lessons.

Umm ... no, I wouldn't rather have Martin than Landry. I think that if we had Martin this season we'd probably have more wins, firstly because Landry is just playing like doo doo most games and secondly because the team needs offense with Tyreke bothered by his foot or drugs or aliens or whatever it is. Haha that just gave me a thought, if the space jam aliens came to the Kings would they bother stealing our talent or would they figure they might as well face Bugs Bunny and crew with their own play. Going back to the topic, in the long run when Tyreke gets healthy we won't have a need for Martin. He's overpaid to simply be a 3 point threat. Landry on the other hand, is much more movable (IMO) and if he can ever get back to playing like he's supposed to could be a valuable piece off the bench.

 

[kingsboi]

Despite Landry's bad play since coming here, I still would take him 10/10 times over Martin. I hated Martin and I will never like him. He is a ignorant dude, you can tell it all over his face. Besides that point, he just did not fit with this team anymore once Reke established himself as the "main" guy. It didn't help that he played zero defense and his offense wasn't all that impressive the last two years in Sac despite his numbers. At best, he is a third option on a good playoff team so we were better suited letting him go elsewhere and maybe flourish under a new system/coach.

Trading him was also good because we got an expiring in Landry and Martin's contract would run what? 3 more years after this season? So yeah, I'd def. take a expiring over a guy who just looked like he didn't want to be here. Now, I know we didn't do any spending last summer but I am assuming that this is the summer we will be spending boat loads of cash to bring in some players that will help this team out. I am not a big Landry fan, but I still liked the trade when it happened last year.

 

[Bricklayer]

I hated Martin and I will never like him. He is a ignorant dude, you can tell it all over his face.

Um...what??

 

[bajaden]

Nope, I don't want Martin back. Both for our sakes and his sake. He just wasn't going to fit on this team with Evans. So one had to go. I suspose you could argue that we should have given it more time, but any decision can be questioned after the fact. As Bricky pointed out, we can't really judge this deal until we see the final outcome, which hopefully will be this next offseason.

 

[bajaden]

Despite Landry's bad play since coming here, I still would take him 10/10 times over Martin. I hated Martin and I will never like him. He is a ignorant dude, you can tell it all over his face. Besides that point, he just did not fit with this team anymore once Reke established himself as the "main" guy. It didn't help that he played zero defense and his offense wasn't all that impressive the last two years in Sac despite his numbers. At best, he is a third option on a good playoff team so we were better suited letting him go elsewhere and maybe flourish under a new system/coach.

Trading him was also good because we got an expiring in Landry and Martin's contract would run what? 3 more years after this season? So yeah, I'd def. take a expiring over a guy who just looked like he didn't want to be here. Now, I know we didn't do any spending last summer but I am assuming that this is the summer we will be spending boat loads of cash to bring in some players that will help this team out. I am not a big Landry fan, but I still liked the trade when it happened last year.

Isn't it possibe to have said all that and remain civil at the same time? Do we have to call someone names in order to make a point?

 

[kingsboi]

Um...what??

What, you don't think so?

 

[kingsboi]

Isn't it possibe to have said all that and remain civil at the same time? Do we have to call someone names in order to make a point?

Sometimes you just do.

 

[est.1999]

You can't be a Gilbert Arenas fan and then say you hated Martin because he was an ignorant dude.

 

[kingsboi]

You can't be a Gilbert Arenas fan and then say you hated Martin because he was an ignorant dude.

But Gil was just a goof ball, an idiot at times, yes. Martin has "a-hole" written all over him.

 

[est.1999]

But Gil was just a goof ball, an idiot at times, yes. Martin has "a-hole" written all over him.

Then you're talking about arrogance, not ignorance. And I still don't see it. He was just a softy who had zero leadership skills. But I thought he was a good kid and not an A-hole at all.

 

[kingsboi]

Then you're talking about arrogance, not ignorance. And I still don't see it. He was just a softy who had zero leadership skills. But I thought he was a good kid and not an A-hole at all.

Well, you stick with what you believe and I will do the same.

 

[pshn80]

Would he fit in better with this team than Landry does?

Was trading him a mistake?

Martin would not fit better. Trading him was not a mistake. Landry may yet prove to have some value fot this team. But in any event Martin needed to go and Landry was a reasonable pick up. Incidently, his play doesn't frustrate me to extent that many of the others do. When the rest of the team does better, Landry likely will too.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

This thread has been sanitized: there's a reason why politics are not allowed to be discussed on this message board. Feel free to continue the discussion posed by the OP.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Agree with Brick & Baja, but also want to add this:

I think there is room for an earnest debate on whether that trade looks bad because of talent or coaching.

Last year before the trade, KMart was averaging: 19 points and 4 rbs on 39% shooting in 36min/game

Last year before the trade, Landry was averaging: 16 points and 5.5 rbs on 55% shooting in 28min/game

So did KMart rapidly improve and Landry forget how to play basketball? Or is it possible the common theme here is Adelman getting the best out of his players and Westphal doing the opposite?

 

[IfAt1st]

I was ecstatic when I heard about the Martin/Landry trade, not because Landry was important to the Kings, but because Martin's absurdly-overpriced contract was going to become an albatross around the Kings necks that would have killed their ability to sign other players.

The amount of money they dodged (in getting rid of Martin's contract) is HUGE.

Plus, I couldn't stand watching Martin drive to the basket, flopping and flailing his arms in the air and hoping to get a call - that's what his offense consisted of for us that last year more than half the time.
It was an embarrassment, and I couldn't watch the Kings when he was playing like that.

ANYthing we have on the floor now is better than watching Martin drive, throw up crap, and not get the foul call.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

but because Martin's absurdly-overpriced contract was going to become an albatross around the Kings necks that would have killed their ability to sign other players.

The amount of money they dodged (in getting rid of Martin's contract) is HUGE.

Yeah but it’s a pointless move unless that money is used to sign a player who is better than Martin. It’s just another in a long line of salary dumps.

ANYthing we have on the floor now is better than watching Martin drive, throw up crap, and not get the foul call.

Really?? You sure about that? You’d rather watch Dalembert jack up bricks from 3 feet away from the basket? You’d rather watch Landry drive into 3 defenders at the basket rather than pass the ******* ball? To each their own.....I guess.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Yeah but it’s a pointless move unless that money is used to sign a player who is better than Martin. It’s just another in a long line of salary dumps.

I'd amend this slightly, to can we signs a player(s) who are a better fit. Clearly having Martin and Reke together was not working and they did not fit well. The next player we bring in might not be as talented as Martin overall, but if he is a better fit for our team and helps us win games, that's a victory.

Also, we'll have to see if we get anything for Landry before the deadline, because whatever assets we receive for him also have to be factored in.

 

[beb0p]

Martin for Landry was without a doubt a bad trade. Not that we shouldn't have traded KMart, but KMart for capspace is a trade that the Kings can make at anytime and should have fetched at least a draft pick or good young player coming back. (Shaking my head) Regardless of how much you hate him, you don't trade a 20-pt scorer in his prime for a promising 6th Man of the Year. You just don't. Golden State traded Jason Richardson for the #8 pick. Seattle traded an aging Ray Allen for the #5 pick. We traded KMart for frickin Carl Landry. Enough said. I didn't like the trade then and I like it even less now, and that's coming from someone who thought Landry was one of the more underrated guys in the league.

And I don't understand all this talk of "We got Capspace! Capspace!" As if we're the Knicks and there are lines of FAs waiting out the door. Who the hell are we going to sign that's better than KMart? Who the hell would want to come here? Just watch, that money is going to be spend on someone like Mike Dunleavy Jr.

KMart is worth something on the trade market and the Kings got next to nothing in return; and he was traded before anyone knows for sure how a healthy Kevin + Tyreke + Cousins + healthy Garcia may look.

Personally I think the Maloofs wanted to go cheap, and if it was indeed a money issue I can understand that trade. As for Petrie, nothing gets a player traded faster than missing a lot of games, regardless if the injury is fully recoverable or not; I think there is shade of his own playing career in works here.

I'd love to have KMart back, I don't know if he fits with Tyreke or not but I do know you can get a lot more in return for him this season.

 

[pshn80]

This thread has been sanitized: there's a reason why politics are not allowed to be discussed on this message board. Feel free to continue the discussion posed by the OP.

I understand and agree, I'm sorry i contributed to it.

 

[pshn80]

I'd love to have KMart back, I don't know if he fits with Tyreke or not but I do know you can get a lot more in return for him this season.

I'm sorry but no way do I agree with this. And in my mind it is not compatibitliy with Evans that's important to me, it is the fact that I did not want a team built around Martin. If he and the Rockets prosper together, more power to them and good luck.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

And I don't understand all this talk of "We got Capspace! Capspace!" As if we're the Knicks and there are lines of FAs waiting out the door.

The funny thing about the folks that go around trumpeting WE GOT CAP SPACE, is that they generally balk at the idea of using that space to sign anyone. I've seen dozens of players mentioned, ranging from stars to role players that the Kings might sign and these folks pretty much shoot down every one of them.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Just curious. I know last year the majority of fans were glad to see Martin go and optimistic about Landry. Does anyone still think that though? Anyone, at this point, not think that The Kings got robbed in that trade?

The more I think about it, I think it may be one of the worst trades Petrie has made. Martins’s scoring and shooting are sorely missed on this team now. They shipped him out too soon. They should have at least given it a full season to try and integrate him and Tyreke

Imagine how good a trio of Evans/Martin/Cousins could potentially be after a few seasons of playing together. It would have been the right balance of finesse players and tough players that good teams usually have.

I know hindsight is 20/20 and they had know way of knowing they'd draft Cousins. But if they had known, would they still have traded Martin?

I know it’s in the past and what’s done is done but I’m curious to see what other people’s thoughts are on it.

Were they wise to get rid of Martin because of he tends to be so injury prone?

Would he fit in better with this team than Landry does?

Was trading him a mistake?

i was kmarts biggest fan but he wasn't working with reke. he had to go so reke could grow. i don't regret that trade at all.

 

[beb0p]

I'm sorry but no way do I agree with this. And in my mind it is not compatibitliy with Evans that's important to me, it is the fact that I did not want a team built around Martin. If he and the Rockets prosper together, more power to them and good luck.

No one is advocating building a team around Martin, and it is a complete separate issue from how much you should have gotten in a trade for him.

By all means trade Martin, but by all mean, GET FAIR MARKET VALUE for him. Don't just give away a good player.

 

[beb0p]

The funny thing about the folks that go around trumpeting WE GOT CAP SPACE, is that they generally balk at the idea of using that space to sign anyone. I've seen dozens of players mentioned, ranging from stars to role players that the Kings might sign and these folks pretty much shoot down every one of them.

Yes, I do notice that from a lot of posters. The truth is they are not going to like the FAs that do want to come here.

 

[Spike]

The funny thing about the folks that go around trumpeting WE GOT CAP SPACE, is that they generally balk at the idea of using that space to sign anyone. I've seen dozens of players mentioned, ranging from stars to role players that the Kings might sign and these folks pretty much shoot down every one of them.

Here's the thing. At this point, overpaid role-players are what's available on the market. We have two superstars in the making, and the trick will be to find the right players to fit their game. I think we're seeing that we need s Mike Miller type player, and he just isn't out there for the taking right now. Why spend just to spend?

Add to that the looming CBA issue, and it would be foolish to just throw money at mediocre players. Temperance is the correct path at this point, ugly as it is.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

we need s Mike Miller type player, and he just isn't out there for the taking right now. Why spend just to spend?

Not now but he was in free agency. So were a few other players of that type like Korver and Redick. No one suggested to spend just to spend.

Add to that the looming CBA issue, and it would be foolish to just throw money at mediocre players. Temperance is the correct path at this point, ugly as it is.

Whenever this comes up folks tend to act like the only option is overpaying mediocre players. I don't think anyone wants that. As Kings fans, we all need to accept that barring a miracle, a star player isn't coming here, so it's stupid to sit on your money waiting for a star to spend it on. What they could get though, is a player that's somewhere in between mediocre and a star like a Felton, Wallace, Billups, etc.

 

[Spike]

Not now but he was in free agency. So were a few other players of that type like Korver and Redick. No one suggested to spend just to spend. Whenever this comes up folks tend to act like the only option is overpaying mediocre players. I don't think anyone wants that. As Kings fans, we all need to accept that barring a miracle, a star player isn't coming here, so it's stupid to sit on your money waiting for a star to spend it on. What they could get though, is a player that's somewhere in between mediocre and a star like a Felton, Wallace, Billups, etc.

But the way the CBA is currently written, we WOULD have to overpay. I would rather let things get ugly this year while Cousins, Evans, Greene and Casspi grow together and learn from minutes. We're seeing some good growth-just not wins.

I ask this in all seriousness - who is available? We know Melo wants out, but he doesn't want Sacramento, and we'd have to give up either Reke or Cousins to get him. Probably the same with Wallace. Would they take Casspi? Probably not.

 

[Asaf]

Not now but he was in free agency. So were a few other players of that type like Korver and Redick. No one suggested to spend just to spend. Whenever this comes up folks tend to act like the only option is overpaying mediocre players. I don't think anyone wants that. As Kings fans, we all need to accept that barring a miracle, a star player isn't coming here, so it's stupid to sit on your money waiting for a star to spend it on. What they could get though, is a player that's somewhere in between mediocre and a star like a Felton, Wallace, Billups, etc.

Again, you don't really know if Petrie went after Miller or not, so it's all speculation. It's a real possibility that we offered him more money than Miami but he decided it's more important for him to have a shot at a ring.

The other thing, and this is happening as we speak and is a great example, is that you might sign a player for a long-term contract and lots of money, and in a season or two discover he is not what you need. Consider this - Last season, and through this offseason, everyone was convinced that Tyreke is our future PG, so everyone was talking about how we need a SG to complement him. All of the sudden, it is becoming more and more apparant that that's not going happen. Tyreke is still "just a guard" in Westphal's book, but it's clear that he will eventually make the transition to become a full-time SG. Now, imagine if we went and spent big money on a top-tier SG. That would be wasting a huge chunk of our capspace (which we will desperately need in the near future, when we have to pay the young guys and get some vets to complete the puzzle) on someone who will inevitably be a bench player (unless we are planning on benching Tyreke..) or play out of position.

This is why it makes much more sense to wait and see which of our young players pan out, and then make the moves. I know it sucks right now, although I think it would suck a lot less if we had a better coach, but regardless we need to wait and get through this awful period and not make panic moves like Detroit. Spending too much money now can make us a bit more relevant in the near future, but it can make us irrelevant long term.