Tony Parker for 7th

[Bricklayer]

http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA/status/83434743282155520

The plot thickens.

I can see that bein true, but again, EVERY SINGLE ONE of these stories has come from the same source -- Adrian Wojnarowski. Maybe he has a very chatty source right on the coaching staff or something. But its always suspicious when you have a one man rumor mill going, and the man is clear across the country from the team with no obvious connection.

 

[spudfan]

Guys, you're missing the point. The real question is, would you pay $13 million a year for Tyreke to master the art of floaters under Parker's guidance? Because honestly if he did he would be pretty damn unstoppable. Who needs a mid-range pullup when you can just pull up for a floater.

This was one of my thoughts too, and I like it

 

[Bricklayer]

Well, not quite top-30. By my count his $12.5M per year is tied with one other contract for 40th among outstanding contracts (contracts for next season at least) in terms of dollars per year over the lifetime. There are another 16 outstanding contracts worth at least $10M per year, for a total of 57 contracts either bigger or within sniffing distance. So, at this point your average team has two guys in the Tony Parker price range. We don't have any, so it's reasonable to think we can afford him.

If you look at advanced stats (which I know you hate, but here you go anyway) Parker was 27th in Win Shares and 26th in PER among players with 1500+ minutes last year, so he may be outperforming that salary a little. Among PGs he was 5th in points per game, 15th in assists per game, 8th in TS% and 1st in FG%.

The thing is, we know who Tony Parker is. He's a proven commodity. He's a veteran in the prime of his career, a three-time All-Star, and if anything it looks to me like he's just a little bit underpaid right now. We have money to spend, and we can afford him. Presumably as the salary cap drops over the next few years his contract will be a bit less palatable, but as it stands right now with Parker in the wing and without sending off a contract like Beno to counter his money, we would be at the following salary levels:

2011-2012: $40M for 9 players (Evans, Cousins, Parker, Beno, Cisco, Thompson, Casspi, Greene, Whiteside)
2012-2013: $38M for 7 players (Evans, Cousins, Parker, Beno, Cisco, Casspi, Whiteside)
2013-2014: $18M for 3 players (Cousins, Parker, Whiteside)

Everybody else that we would sign to fill out the roster for now and the future would be signed under the new CBA rules where we would still have a decent advantage over most teams in cap space and would of course be smaller deals than we are used to now (by, what, maybe 30%?). We can totally survive Parker's contract if we trade for him, and things only look better if we can strongarm the Spurs into taking Beno back (or find a third team to shift Beno's deal to if Pop refuses Beno for personal reasons). I think he's worth the gamble at this point. Unless we really love a guy at #7 (somehow I don't see Fredette or Leonard leading us to the playoffs next year, but Parker, yes) or we see a better way to spend the money, I think we have to go for it.

If you think 13mil for a 17pt 6ast PG is some sort of bargain...

Seriously, Parker has always been ridiculously overhyped for his role as third best player on his own team. But to get amped over the idea of having your highest paid player, by far, be a one dimensional guard who can't shoot and doesn't defend particularly well is just very odd. And btw replacing Beno with Parker means a LOT of Reke at SF.

Its not about the pick. Talentwise its a clear win as far as I'm concerned. I have no love for any of our likely options at #7. Its about fit and flexibility. As in we waste our cap room on a player we don't need or really have room for, forcing young guys left and right to either dial back or play out of position. All for the low low price of $13mil. And all this for a guy who is neither shooter (his 25 made threes last year were his most in 7 years) nor defender.

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

If you think 13mil for a 17pt 6ast PG is some sort of bargain...

Seriously, Parker has always been ridiculously overhyped for his role as third best player on his own team. But to get amped over the idea of having your highest paid player, by far, be a one dimensional guard who can't shoot and doesn't defend particularly well is just very odd. And btw replacing Beno with Parker means a LOT of Reke at SF.

Its not about the pick. Talentwise its a clear win as far as I'm concerned. I have no love for any of our likely options at #7. Its about fit and flexibility. As in we waste our cap room on a player we don't need or really have room for, forcing young guys left and right to either dial back or play out of position. All for the low low price of $13mil. And all this for a guy who is neither shooter (his 25 made threes last year were his most in 7 years) nor defender.

Whoa! Someone who actually watches the games!

People here seem to be blinded by the flashing lights of a former all-star. There are many former all-stars in this league, and I promise you that not all of them are fits on this team, no matter how talented they are. Tony Parker is not a good fit on this team. This isn't NBA 2K, where you can accumulate as much talent as you can, fit be damned, and raise your rating overnight.

We've been looking for a guy who can spread the floor for our two stars and/or help with defensive assignments on the perimeter. Now everyone is all amped up to drop $13 million a year on a guy who does neither of those things? Awesome. I know we're desperate for star-power in Sacramento, but good lord.

 

[Dime Dropper]

With all due respect, it's a tad naive to expect Evans to emulate Parkers game if he comes here. He might learn a thing or two, but assuming that he's going to be doing floaters every game is silly. Tyrekes game is based on power and athleticism. He's not built to put up floaters and tear-drops in the lane and never will be.

I recognise that Parker is a good player, but I'm still not sure I like this. It seems a little redundant and restricts the effectiveness of Evans. He doesn't really fit, and that contract is not a good one. We shall see. Kings FO seem determined to get a PG and to trade the pick.

 

[Bricklayer]

Now of course for all that I continue to point out this seems a Woj only crusade, I should note this old thing I just came across. Woj on the eve of the 2009 draft:

The Sacramento Kings have all but ruled out drafting star Ricky Rubio with the fourth pick and have focused on two other guards: Tyreke Evans and Jonny Flynn, league sources said.

The Kings’ front office is fearful of the legal wrangling needed to free Rubio from the contractual mess with his Spanish team, and doesn’t feel strongly enough about him as a “can’t-miss” star to endure the saga.

For now, the Kings’ front office and coaching staff is largely divided on Evans and Flynn. They’ll debate it well into Thursday. The Kings could be inclined to take Israeli Omri Casspi with the 23rd pick, but opposing teams say they’re still interested in packaging Nos. 23 and 31 to move up.

Not bad.

 

[mac]

With all due respect, it's a tad naive to expect Evans to emulate Parkers game if he comes here. He might learn a thing or two, but assuming that he's going to be doing floaters every game is silly. Tyrekes game is based on power and athleticism. He's not built to put up floaters and tear-drops in the lane and never will be.

I recognise that Parker is a good player, but I'm still not sure I like this. It seems a little redundant and restricts the effectiveness of Evans. He doesn't really fit, and that contract is not a good one. We shall see. Kings FO seem determined to get a PG and to trade the pick.

Not built to put up floaters and tear drops??? Tyreke Evans basically gets to the rim whenever he wants and this season put up a lot of weird twisting layups trying to avoid the shotblockers, a lot of which did not fall. I agree that his game is based on power and quickness, beating guys off the dribble especially. But what happens when the opponents clog the lane? Do you still want Tyreke trying to "power" his way through for an awkward layup?

I don't see how people can say that the biggest thing Tyreke needs now is his mid-range pullup jumpshot, but can say that he doesn't need floaters. They essentially are tools to achieve the same goal - getting a shot over the defense by not driving the ball in too deep but taking the shot slightly earlier when the defense gives you space. Contrary to "popular" belief, Tyreke developing a mid range jumpshot is not so that he can spot up and shoot baseline jumpers off drive and dishes from godknowswho.

And for the record, it was a joke.

 

[Aenadin]

they are trying to include jefferson in the deal...

why do the spurs a favor.. this move is obviously a bail out for them.. we think we are getting the upper hand but we are not. parker isn't all that good (i mean he is good.. but you dont throw your top 10 pick on him on any given draft). maybe he was good when duncan was prime.. we already have a guard who dominates the ball, and controls the tempo of the game in evans.. beno is a solid bench point guard.

the money we pay him could be used to paying for thornton and dalembert. and other pieces. and all this rumr that they must win now... i dont buy it. we are not in a winning condition just yet. we will see if tyreke and DMC get better this offseason. in petrie we trust.. but if he trades for parker oh lord. im going to be disappointed

 

[ESP47]

Parker destroys us every time we play them. For a guy that can't shoot and isn't a C or PF, he sure does get by with his 50% FG percentage and 18-19ppg. The fact is that he scores at a very high percentage despite not having a 3 point shot. I'll take that any day over a guy who can shoot 3's but still only makes 44% of hit shots overall.

 

[Aenadin]

parker destroys us cause our bigs werent good enough then. i remember quick guards running lay up drills on miller and hawes.. defensive scheme and team defense is also lacking.

id rather have a shooter aside reke and dmc to open the floor up.. and all of them get offensive touches than watch reke and parker take turns driving per possession. if it wasnt for his durability and age id pick manu over parker. any day

 

[Dime Dropper]

Not built to put up floaters and tear drops??? Tyreke Evans basically gets to the rim whenever he wants and this season put up a lot of weird twisting layups trying to avoid the shotblockers, a lot of which did not fall. I agree that his game is based on power and quickness, beating guys off the dribble especially. But what happens when the opponents clog the lane? Do you still want Tyreke trying to "power" his way through for an awkward layup?

I don't see how people can say that the biggest thing Tyreke needs now is his mid-range pullup jumpshot, but can say that he doesn't need floaters. They essentially are tools to achieve the same goal - getting a shot over the defense by not driving the ball in too deep but taking the shot slightly earlier when the defense gives you space. Contrary to "popular" belief, Tyreke developing a mid range jumpshot is not so that he can spot up and shoot baseline jumpers off drive and dishes from godknowswho.

And for the record, it was a joke.

You're missing the point completely. I'm not saying a floater wouldn't be a very useful weapon in his arsenal, I'm saying it's not going to become one to any great degree. And it's certainly not going to happen just because Parker is on the team. Tyreke has other things he needs to improve before he thinks about adding a floater. And even if he does, he's not going to be automatic with it as some seem to believe.

And I never, ever insinuated that Evans needs to develop a mid-range game so he can catch-and-shoot. And to be honest, I don't think I've seen many people say that either, so I don't know where you're getting it from.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

If you think 13mil for a 17pt 6ast PG is some sort of bargain...

I tried to make the case that his contract is in line with his value, and that we could afford that contract. I think it was a reasonable case.

...who can't shoot...

This is very, very wrong. We do know that Parker is not a good three-point shooter, but he is a very good shooter overall. After his first four years in the league, when he didn't improve his three-point shooting there was a clear coaching decision to have him stop taking them. His number of three-point attempts dropped by a factor of 4 to 5, and it did wonders for his shooting percentage. Since then (6 years) Tony Parker has played over 14000 minutes and has had the highest shooting percentage of any point guard. Not just any point guard who has played 14000 minutes, not just any point guard who has played 1000 minutes, but any point guard who has at least FOUR TOTAL field goal attempts over the last six years. He is the single best shooting point guard out there, and to say that he can't shoot is plain wrong.

And btw replacing Beno with Parker means a LOT of Reke at SF.

I don't see why you'd think that. If we replace Beno then the minutes breakdown shouldn't be terribly different than last year. If we keep Beno and play him 30 minutes a game, then we're in for a lot of three guard lineups. But I don't imagine we'd do that unless we had basically run out of options at SF. Either way I doubt we'd keep Beno.

As in we waste our cap room on a player we don't need or really have room for, forcing young guys left and right to either dial back or play out of position. All for the low low price of $13mil.

We need talent. Tony Parker is better than any player we can hope to get on the free agent market this year. He may be a better talent than anybody on the free agent market, period (Tyson Chandler, Marc Gasol, and Nene are the only guys that even give him a run for his money, in my opinion). And we have the money to pay for that talent without killing our financial flexibility. We won 24 games last year and we may have a chance to add via trade a guy who likely is a top-30 player in the league (your protestations that he's not refuted above). We would be stupid not to do it.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

they are trying to include jefferson in the deal...

From what I can tell, Spurs fans are hoping to include Jefferson in the deal. Not gonna happen. Parker costs money, but brings value. Jefferson would take away the flexibility we'd have to flesh out our team without bringing back any value. Nope. Can't do that.

Edit: Looks like Marc Stein is hearing that from the Spurs side as well - I hadn't seen that before. So it's not just fans. It's still not going to happen.

 

[Hoovtrain]

parker destroys us cause our bigs werent good enough then. i remember quick guards running lay up drills on miller and hawes.. defensive scheme and team defense is also lacking.

id rather have a shooter aside reke and dmc to open the floor up.. and all of them get offensive touches than watch reke and parker take turns driving per possession. if it wasnt for his durability and age id pick manu over parker. any day

Parker killed us when we were contenders with Webb, Vlade, Pollard downlow and Christie and Bobby on the perimter. This isn't some recent occurrence.

 

[Dime Dropper]

From what I can tell, Spurs fans are hoping to include Jefferson in the deal. Not gonna happen. Parker costs money, but brings value. Jefferson would take away the flexibility we'd have to flesh out our team without bringing back any value. Nope. Can't do that.

Edit: Looks like Marc Stein is hearing that from the Spurs side as well - I hadn't seen that before. So it's not just fans. It's still not going to happen.

It better not, or Geoff is going to get seriously questioned again. He's redeemed himself the last couple years, but taking on Jefferson's contract on top of Parkers would be nothing short of idiotic.

 

[Kingster]

For all those who want us to bring in Tony Parker, what do you expect Tyreke to do on the court? Spot up at the three point line? Come off of picks and shoot fade away jumpers? Have we seen him do anything on a basketball court which makes that look like a potentially good pairing?

I don't see Tyreke being a particularly good pairing with anyone (and for the Kings to win games) unless Tyreke improves his game and becomes a more well rounded player (like becoming a better medium and outside shooter). He's got to round out his game so he can complement others and vice versa. He has the potential to be a very well rounded player and play with just about anyone, but whether that happens remains to be seen. So it's as much up to Tyreke to round himself out as it is to management to figure out how to fit the square peg in the round hole.

To your question, Tyreke has shown that he can cut without the ball, and that he can post up. I would expect that he would do more of that with Parker. Parker would get the ball upcourt and set up the offense. Is it perfect? No, it's not, because of the poor outside shooting of Tyreke, but it's just about the least imperfect combination I can think of.

 

[kennadog]

This morning on the Rise Guys (KHTK), they were saying the Spurs want to attach Richard Jefferson to a deal for Tony Parker. We're really talking a lot of contract money, if true.

 

[Kingster]

I already wrote a post suggesting Parker as someone Kings management should go after. (The predominant response: The Spurs will never let him go). I think it's a no-brainer. He's got several rings, which brings instant credibility in the lockeroom. You want a veteran leader? There his is. You want quickness in the backcourt? There his is. You want a winner? There he is. You want a guy who knows what unselfish basketball is all about? There he is. And he's been coached by the best in the business. What more could you want?

 

[ElRey]

I don't like this deal because either Thornton goes to the bench or we have to move Tyreke to small forward!

 

[est.1999]

I'm not a fan of this trade, but it's at least something I could debate/ponder, but when you throw Jefferson's name into the mix just forget about the whole thing.

 

[rexb_kings]

Parker for 7th pick looks like a great idea, but i don't see how Parker and Tyreke can work at the backcourt. Unless you go against the grain and trade Tyreke for someone like Gay/Iguodola and keep Thornton at 2.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I'm not a fan of this trade, but it's at least something I could debate/ponder, but when you throw Jefferson's name into the mix just forget about the whole thing.

Why? Jefferson is better than any SF the Kings have and the Kings actually have the cap-room to adsorb Parker and Jefferson's salaries. It wouldn't cripple the team long term either because by the time Evans and Cousins need to be resigned with bigger contracts, Parker and Jefferson's contacts would be expiring anyways.

Imagine this team for the next three or four years

Dalembert C
Cousins PF
Jefferson SF
Evans SG
Parker PG

Thornton 6th man
Thompson 7th man

That would be a good team that should be able to contend for the playoffs right away an isn’t that what we all want and what this franchise and city need?

 

[JB_kings]

The other side of the coin says if you can get two playoff proven starters and add them to young inexperienced talented players, it could have the rising tide effect. The worry is that it better work because all that cap space freedom would be eaten up quickly. If you feel that this gets you to the playoffs, then you worry about replacing them a few years after tasting playoff ball with veterans. You will need veterans no matter what. This team as it sits today is not going to get there without some leadership who have been there. The question is, are these the guys?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

The other side of the coin says if you can get two playoff proven starters and add them to young inexperienced talented players, it could have the rising tide effect. The worry is that it better work because all that cap space freedom would be eaten up quickly. If you feel that this gets you to the playoffs, then you worry about replacing them a few years after tasting playoff ball with veterans. You will need veterans no matter what. This team as it sits today is not going to get there without some leadership who have been there. The question is, are these the guys?

Well, the Kings don't exactly have a ton of other options on the table. You aren't Likely to do any better than Parker/Jefferson in free agency this year. I don't think they're going to find a better deal than this in terms of propelling the team back to the playoffs.

 

[est.1999]

How are you gonna sign dalembert and thornton when you bring in like $20 million from the spurs?

 

[funkykingston]

The other side of the coin says if you can get two playoff proven starters and add them to young inexperienced talented players, it could have the rising tide effect. The worry is that it better work because all that cap space freedom would be eaten up quickly. If you feel that this gets you to the playoffs, then you worry about replacing them a few years after tasting playoff ball with veterans. You will need veterans no matter what. This team as it sits today is not going to get there without some leadership who have been there. The question is, are these the guys?

No. They aren't. That lineup is horribly unbalanced. Parker and Tyreke would be a disaster sharing a backcourt. Two guys who need the ball in their hands with shaky outside shots whose game is predicated on getting in the lane and scoring inside. Jefferson shot very well from 3 last year but he hasn't been consistent throughout his career. More importantly most of his athleticism is gone at this point making him pretty one dimensional and his rebounding numbers continue to drop. Also, when Tyreke takes a break you have a tiny backcourt of Parker and Thorton.

Most importantly, this team might make the playoffs but it isn't a contender and won't be. And there will be no caproom left to improve it after this move. So the team will tread water until Parker and Jefferson fall off and then have Evans and Cousins approaching their primes without significant help around them. I don't like the idea of this trade at all. I'd much rather that Petrie keep the pick, draft the BPA and add leadership via an experienced vet who comes at a much lower price tag.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

How are you gonna sign dalembert and thornton when you bring in like $20 million from the spurs?

By being about 35 million under next year's projected cap at present.

 

[sidney]

I'm not a fan of this trade, but it's at least something I could debate/ponder, but when you throw Jefferson's name into the mix just forget about the whole thing.

My first reaction as well. However, if we did take back Jefferson we should be sending back Beno, Garcia, and Casspi. That would clear up the roster roles and still leave us plenty of room to sign Dalembert and Thornton.

Jefferson shot 44% from 3 last year so that may help spread the floor. He's only a career 36% 3P shooter though so last year was not the norm

 

[Dime Dropper]

No. They aren't. That lineup is horribly unbalanced. Parker and Tyreke would be a disaster sharing a backcourt. Two guys who need the ball in their hands with shaky outside shots whose game is predicated on getting in the lane and scoring inside. Jefferson shot very well from 3 last year but he hasn't been consistent throughout his career. More importantly most of his athleticism is gone at this point making him pretty one dimensional and his rebounding numbers continue to drop. Also, when Tyreke takes a break you have a tiny backcourt of Parker and Thorton.

Most importantly, this team might make the playoffs but it isn't a contender and won't be. And there will be no caproom left to improve it after this move. So the team will tread water until Parker and Jefferson fall off and then have Evans and Cousins approaching their primes without significant help around them. I don't like the idea of this trade at all. I'd much rather that Petrie keep the pick, draft the BPA and add leadership via an experienced vet who comes at a much lower price tag.

Well said. I hope this doesn't go down. Petrie should be smarter than this.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

No. They aren't. That lineup is horribly unbalanced. Parker and Tyreke would be a disaster sharing a backcourt. Two guys who need the ball in their hands with shaky outside shots whose game is predicated on getting in the lane and scoring inside. Jefferson shot very well from 3 last year but he hasn't been consistent throughout his career. More importantly most of his athleticism is gone at this point making him pretty one dimensional and his rebounding numbers continue to drop. Also, when Tyreke takes a break you have a tiny backcourt of Parker and Thorton.

Most importantly, this team might make the playoffs but it isn't a contender and won't be. And there will be no caproom left to improve it after this move. So the team will tread water until Parker and Jefferson fall off and then have Evans and Cousins approaching their primes without significant help around them. I don't like the idea of this trade at all. I'd much rather that Petrie keep the pick, draft the BPA and add leadership via an experienced vet who comes at a much lower price tag.

Is treading water for a few years until Evans and Cousins are in their primes really a bad thing though? I mean let's be real here. Barring a team of destiny type miracle, the Kings aren't winning the championship next year or the year after that or the year after that. Right now the goal is just to get out of the basement, contend for the playoffs, play quality basketball, and hopefully bring good attendance and regional interest back to the team in the process.

With all the renewed season ticket interest of late, there’s a lot at stake and a lot of pressure on the organization to start winning now. They can’t risk another disappointing season at this juncture and right now I don’t see any better options out there to immediately improve the team than bringing in a 29 year old all star PG with championship experience.

The arena issues and uncertainty of the team’s future in Sacramento are even more reasons why Kings fans should be totally in favor of making some win now moves. We need all the momentum we can get and some winning would go a long way in that regard.

The only person in this draft that really intrigues me is Jimmer but can the Kings afford to take a gamble on him and wait a few years for him to develop if an opportunity to grab Tony Parker is on the table? I don’t think so. Not with the current state of things regarding the Sacramento Kings.