Kings trading pick!

JJ22L

JJ22L

Starter
#241
#241
I'm being good about not jumping to conclusions and making any rash comments for two reasons:

1.) the trade isn't "official;"
2.) we don't know that this isnt the first move of many moves this summer.

This being said, and assuming that this trade IS official and that this will be the only move:

WTF??

Ok, with past moves I could rationalize them by blaming the financially strapped ownership. This trade, however, doesn't reek of any financial motivations. Therefore, this would fall squarely on the shoulders of Petrie. This is what concerns me. Our calling for Petrie to be the sole deision maker leading to these kinds of moves.


If Utah jumps us, and quality talents (that were originally considered 1-6 picks) fall to what "was" our 7th pick....sigh.
 
Last edited:
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#244
#244
MassachusettsKingsFan said:
This is unreal. Salmons likely means no Price/Ak/Battier.

We could have have just drafted Leonard, kept Beno, and signed one of Prince/Battier/AK.

Now we moved Beno, picked up a way overpaid ball hog in John Salmons, JUST to open up a spot for Jimmer or Kemba?

We royally ****ed this whole situation up.
Click to expand...
Yep, looking more like Knight is dropping to #7 too. If Salmons isnt traded and Knight drops to #7 then Petrie needs to go. Talk about running off fans.
 
Dime Dropper

Dime Dropper

All-Star
#246
#246
MDM said:
There was no way the Kings were going to draft Knight, even if he fell to 7 or even if the Kings were drafting 3rd so you can rest easy on that aspect of the trade. They are not that high on him--especially as a point guard.
Click to expand...
Actually the word was that the Kings really liked Knight, but wouldn't be in a position to get him.
 
Capt. Factorial

Capt. Factorial

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum
Staff member
#247
#247
Tetsujin said:
Because Kings fans are among the most overreactive, whiny fans in the NBA.
Click to expand...
What?!? Not wanting to spend an extra $11M on a player that we've already dumped once for the right to move DOWN in the draft is "whiny" and "overreactive"? Puh-leez. I mean, maybe there's something else coming, but on its own, this trade is junk.
 
OnYouLikeGlue

OnYouLikeGlue

Bench
#248
#248
Capt. Factorial said:
What?!? Not wanting to spend an extra $11M on a player that we've already dumped once for the right to move DOWN in the draft is "whiny" and "overreactive"? Puh-leez. I mean, maybe there's something else coming, but on its own, this trade is junk.
Click to expand...
An extra $11 million, worst logic I've ever seen. He's guaranteed 24 million over the next 3 years, not atrocious numbers. Not to mention he helps at one of the teams biggest weaknesses, perimeter defense, and he is an adequate spot up 3 pt shooter. I really don't get the "sky is falling" mentality over this deal. People wanted a new SF anyway, how much did you think it would cost to get a Prince/Battier anyway? And wasn't it not to long ago people were crying to spend some of the extra money the Kings have? And in reality its not even that much.
 
N

Nighthawk1

Starter
#249
#249
Capt. Factorial said:
What?!? Not wanting to spend an extra $11M on a player that we've already dumped once for the right to move DOWN in the draft is "whiny" and "overreactive"? Puh-leez. I mean, maybe there's something else coming, but on its own, this trade is junk.
Click to expand...
I agree, I see no benefit at this current juncture as to why this trade is a success. The King Nation was happy to get rid of Salmons the first time around, and for good reason. Apparently some people wish to relearn why.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#250
#250
OnYouLikeGlue said:
An extra $11 million, worst logic I've ever seen. He's guaranteed 24 million over the next 3 years, not atrocious numbers. Not to mention he helps at one of the teams biggest weaknesses, perimeter defense, and he is an adequate spot up 3 pt shooter. I really don't get the "sky is falling" mentality over this deal. People wanted a new SF anyway, how much did you think it would cost to get a Prince/Battier anyway? And wasn't it not to long ago people were crying to spend some of the extra money the Kings have? And in reality its not even that much.
Click to expand...
horribe trade. absolutely horrible.
 
Kings Faithful

Kings Faithful

Starter
#251
#251
OnYouLikeGlue said:
An extra $11 million, worst logic I've ever seen. He's guaranteed 24 million over the next 3 years, not atrocious numbers. Not to mention he helps at one of the teams biggest weaknesses, perimeter defense, and he is an adequate spot up 3 pt shooter. I really don't get the "sky is falling" mentality over this deal. People wanted a new SF anyway, how much did you think it would cost to get a Prince/Battier anyway? And wasn't it not to long ago people were crying to spend some of the extra money the Kings have? And in reality its not even that much.
Click to expand...
He might help some of our biggest weaknesses....but he also exacerbates a few as well. Not worth it.
 
RookieOfTheDay

RookieOfTheDay

Starter
#252
#252
Nighthawk1 said:
I agree, I see no benefit at this current juncture as to why this trade is a success. The King Nation was happy to get rid of Salmons the first time around, and for good reason. Apparently some people wish to relearn why.
Click to expand...
The team was terrible last time Salmons was here. there's no reason to think things will be the same this time because the team is totally different.
 
Capt. Factorial

Capt. Factorial

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum
Staff member
#253
#253
OnYouLikeGlue said:
An extra $11 million, worst logic I've ever seen.
Click to expand...
Salmons was run out of town last time he was here. Either all of a sudden he's a great player, or we're paying a bench player an extra $11M dollars and an extra year's worth of conrtact to replace another bench player with a better contract who was more tradeable.

I don't see the bad logic here, but thanks for the accusation.
 
RookieOfTheDay

RookieOfTheDay

Starter
#254
#254
Capt. Factorial said:
Salmons was run out of town last time he was here. Either all of a sudden he's a great player, or we're paying a bench player an extra $11M dollars and an extra year's worth of conrtact to replace another bench player with a better contract who was more tradeable.

I don't see the bad logic here, but thanks for the accusation.
Click to expand...
I always thought Salmons got an unfair rap. The team sucked back then and salmons was one of the guys people tried to make into a scapegoat for it. Same thing happened with Brad Miller.
 
OnYouLikeGlue

OnYouLikeGlue

Bench
#256
#256
Capt. Factorial said:
Salmons was run out of town last time he was here. Either all of a sudden he's a great player, or we're paying a bench player an extra $11M dollars and an extra year's worth of conrtact to replace another bench player with a better contract who was more tradeable.

I don't see the bad logic here, but thanks for the accusation.
Click to expand...
Who looks at cost over the long term, the salary cap is yearly, and the money is eventually spent on someone. And no one says he's a great player, but he fits what this team needs right now at SF, confused how more people don't see that. And his contract isn't horrible.
 
Tetsujin

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#258
#258
OnYouLikeGlue said:
Who looks at cost over the long term, the salary cap is yearly, and the money is eventually spent on someone. And no one says he's a great player, but he fits what this team needs right now at SF, confused how more people don't see that. And his contract isn't horrible.
Click to expand...
Seriously. Just think of this as us signing a player while simultaneously dropping Beno's salary.
 
MassachusettsKingsFan

MassachusettsKingsFan

All-Star
#262
#262
Some people are forgetting just how much of a ball stopper Salmons can be. I wouldnt take him and his contract for free, let alone dropping 3 spots in the draft, and dumping beno.

Talk about a player who doesnt play well off the ball .. and remember how bad and pouty he was when we moved him to the bench? as a starter he was OK, but once we tried to use him in a sixth man role he was absolutely terrible.

And when he was effective on our team before, we didnt have half the talent we do now. There is no room for his ball dominance on this team.
 
OnYouLikeGlue

OnYouLikeGlue

Bench
#265
#265
It's currently the largest and longest contract on the team. Will he be even the sixth-best player on the team next year?[/QUOTE]

Only because the whole team is basically still on rookie contracts. He doesn't have to be the main guy this time around. He's here to fill a role. Play good D, hit open threes, and score in transition. Once again, not seeing a problem.
 
Sluggah

Sluggah

All-Star
#266
#266
There's just no way Salmons will be allowed to dominate the ball with Tyreke, Cousins and our draft pick. So it's his GOOD qualities that will be utilized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.