Worst trade of 2011 Offseason?

[jalfa]

It's fascinating to me that NOW, KF's say Udrih is a good player and they'd rather he not leave, when I've been one of the few guys defending him for over a year.

KF's Before: Aw, he sucks and every positive stat is obliterated by his single-handed destruction of our team defense. Get rid of his bloated contract (?!) for a box of donuts and I'll be happy.

KF's Now: He was the only consistent team player we had yadda yadda yadda.

Y'all got what you deserve - you belly-ached about his (quite reasonable for a 6th man guard much less the starting PG) contract for years and demonized his defense and dismissed his consistent stabilizing contributions and now he's traded for a me-first chucker who can score (when he's not feeling pouty) with an inarguably worse contract.

Congrats, KF's - you all had a part in this.

???

Ever since Paul Westphal became headcoach, Beno has been performing at the level everybody expected out of him. The overwhelming sentiment, especially after the Kings acquired Marcus Thornton and Beno did a brilliant job tonning down his own offense to accomodate him, was that Beno was a good steadying vet influence that could definitely be kept around until his contract ran out. It's been a long time since I've seen anyone clamouring for his immediately being dumped.

 

[ParniValjak]

He shot over 40% in one year, split between us and Chicago. Since then he's been at 38%. My thing is that he went from being a guy most kings fans hated, to someone who struggled massively as a buck last year, yet now he's a good pick up for us. In the last couple hours he's been called a leader, a great 3 point shooter a great defender and one of the best sf in the league. What? Would any of the fans defending this move ever have suggested trading for salmons to fill our sf hole? No. The reasons are obvious. They don't change because we did trade for him.

Is he a leader?! NO!!
Is he a great 3 point shooter? NO but he is a good shooter from beyond the arc!
Is he a very good defender?! My word he is. Thats his drawing card here. He is a very good defender who can shot the 3 at a good percentage. Thats what this team needed. A veteran defensive SF who can shoot the 3.

The upside is he also is a good ball handler and he can guard from 1-3. Downside of course is that he is a bit of a black hole and is not a great leader...someone who pouts when things are not going his way.

However, the thing is, he is an upgrade to a SF position without us losing a starter in the process of getting him and STILL drafting the player we wanted all along. Some of the things we needed to address this off season was a defensive SF veteran who can shoot the 3 and handle the ball (tick, not perfect but he brings all of those attributes to the table). We also added additional shooting and ball handling to the backcourt in Jimmer.

Bottom line is we are a better defensive team and a better 3pt shooting team after this trade without it impacting our salary cap space.

Would I have suggested Salmons as our SF?! Probably not but he certainly does bring a lot of what we need. Hopefully, he is willing to come in and do what we ask him to do, rather than what he wants to do. With Tyreke and Salmons our perimeter defense improves. If Salmons comes in, busts his boiler on the defensive ends and picks his spots offensively, this could turn out to be a great trade for us.

Lets be honest here, when Petrie signed Slamons as a FA (when god told him to rescind the agreed deal with Toronto when we offered him more money) everyone here thought it was a waste of the money at the time (less than MLE). In a couple of years Salmons proved to be an absolute bargain. Was him being a back hole part of our lack of talent?! Time will tell.

This deal is nowhere near as bad as many people think. Is it a great move?! No but a solid move that makes us better without it impacting our salary cap room. If we re-sign Dalembert and Thornton we have a really good starting 5. Three of those players are good to great defenders (Daly, Reke, Salmons). Four of those starters are capable of creating for themselves and others (Cousins, Salmons, Thronton, Reke). Three of the starting 5 are good ball handlers (Reke, Salmons, Thornton).

This could work out really well provided that Salmons comes in and does what we need him to do and not what he wants to do.

 

[Smills91]

What an epic, epic disaster. Not only do you manage to downgrade TWICE with the trade (7 to 10, Beno to Salmons) but then you suffer a massive opportunity cost and miss out at Knight who's a perfect fit, sitting there at 7. I haven't been this upset about our front office offering such a debacle in a long time.

Let's try re-evaluating this, as this was a TRADE.

At the end of the day, are we better or worse at PG? IMO Jimmer right now is probably as good as Beno talent-wise, and likely better going forward as he gains experience.
Are we better or worse at SF? Salmons has his warts, but he's a veteran, plays some of the best perimeter defense in the league, is an excellent ball-handler and a solid deep threat.

Let's ignore the contracts, because it's pretty irrelevant over these next two years. If John isn't moved by the third year, we can evaluate it in that matter.

Overall, I see the Kings better at the 1 and the 3 than we were last year and we did it by only incrementally adding about 1.5 million in salary next season overall. So we traded Beno's contract at PG, to address the hole at SF.

Now we have the full cap space to re-sign Thornton and probably Dalembert.

C - Dalembert, Whitside
PF: Cousins, Thompson, Jackson
SF: Salmons, Greene, Honeycutt, Casspi
SG: Tyreke, Thornton, Garcia
PG: Jimmer, Isaiah, Pooh

I can see Darnell and Pooh being let loose. I definitely see Casspi getting dealt. In fact, I could see us taking on a veteran big man, to augment the frontcourt by absorbing salary and sending Casspi + out.

 

[ParniValjak]

This was not a good trade.

Even if it were just Beno for Salmons it wouldn't have been a good trade.

By all accounts Brandon Knight was at the top of the Kings' PG draft board (well at least after Irving). We gambled that he wouldn't be there and lost. So basically we passed on Knight, gave away the only guy who passes on our team, got a player who has been disgruntled here in the past, took on more salary for more years, and got a older with this trade.

No excuses that we needed a SF so that's why we traded. Jeff Green is expected to look for about 4 years/30 million. You telling me we couldn't have sent him a nice overpriced offer? Or any of the other free agent SFs out there that won't be 35 in 3 years?

Oh please its YOU that thinks that Knights was on top of our board! Everything in the last few days suggested Jimmer was who we wanted.

Secondly, Jeff Green would be just about the worst possible fit for this team. A tweener that is not great at any one thing. He is an undersized 4 that cannot guard 3s and is not a good rebounder for his size. For all his flaws, Salmons is a MUCH better fit at SF. A much better defender (can guard 1-3), ball handler and a shooter from behind the 3 point line and he can create his own shot if needed.

Is Salmons a perfect fit?! **** no! But he is not that bad a fit, especially if he has learned to take the back seat and concentrate on other things. In the past with us, Bulls and Bucks he has been asked to be one of the main scorers. This time around with us, he will be a 4th option at best. He can do what we need him to do very well but the question is whether he is willing to sacrifice his urges for the benefit of the team.

 

[ParniValjak]

Let's try re-evaluating this, as this was a TRADE.

At the end of the day, are we better or worse at PG? IMO Jimmer right now is probably as good as Beno talent-wise, and likely better going forward as he gains experience.
Are we better or worse at SF? Salmons has his warts, but he's a veteran, plays some of the best perimeter defense in the league, is an excellent ball-handler and a solid deep threat.

Let's ignore the contracts, because it's pretty irrelevant over these next two years. If John isn't moved by the third year, we can evaluate it in that matter.

Overall, I see the Kings better at the 1 and the 3 than we were last year and we did it by only incrementally adding about 1.5 million in salary next season overall. So we traded Beno's contract at PG, to address the hole at SF.

Now we have the full cap space to re-sign Thornton and probably Dalembert.

C - Dalembert, Whitside
PF: Cousins, Thompson, Jackson
SF: Salmons, Greene, Honeycutt, Casspi
SG: Tyreke, Thornton, Garcia
PG: Jimmer, Isaiah, Pooh

I can see Darnell and Pooh being let loose. I definitely see Casspi getting dealt. In fact, I could see us taking on a veteran big man, to augment the frontcourt by absorbing salary and sending Casspi + out.

I highly doubt that Jimmer start buts never the less it a solid, much more balanced team than a couple of years ago.

In addition to re-signing Thornton and Dalembert, I suspect we will clear out some log at SF and use our cap space to bring in a veteran 4th big man and a veteran PG (eg Earl Watson) whether via trades or free agency.

I really liked Beno. He was just about the perfect 3rd guard on the roster. A consummate pro who provided some real leadership and was arguably our most consistent player over the last 2 years but we traded him to essentially address our biggest need at SF.

 

[Bricklayer]

Yes, people, alas often the same people, are twisting themselves into knots trying to make this trade work for their own interests, but its if nothing a clear indication that they have decided to go with Reke/Thornton in the backcourt, that Reke as PG is still the plan, and that putting two smaller long range bombing SGs who can handle a little alongside Reke is how they plan to complement him.

Here is current planned rotation:

C- Dalembert
PF- Cousins
PF/C- Thompson

Same three bigs we closed last season with, with Cousins hopefully growing considerably in year 2. Very strong rebounding group. Which is good given Petrie's seeming preference for the wussier side of SFs. Whiteside has a chance to be big #4 and add extra length and shoblocking. Big #5 isn;t on the roster, so will have to be picked up in free agency. Likely a minor player. Maybe an old vet for leadership, who knows. Just after the Salmons thing pray its not Brad or Mikki,

SF- Salmons
SF/SG- Garcia? (Greene? Casspi? Honeycutt?)

Now we have a veteran platoon at SF. The same one we had 4 years ago. And Petrie thought this would be a good thing to repeat? In any case, both guys can hit the three -- a requirement. Both guys can bring it up a little, which also helps. Salmons becomes our defensive stopper, and that guy who keeps Reke from having to guard Kobe and Wade every night. I still think Casspi gets traded, for what I don't know. Spot minutes possibly for Greene or maybe Honeycutt if he's ready (more likely D-league) to provide a different, bigger defensive flavor. Overall a pretty good set of defenders at SF really.

SG- Thornton
PG- Reke
PG/SG- Jimmer

I don't like the inexperienced wildcard at 3rd guard in a year we are trying to take a step forward, but seems pretty obvious the idea is to always have Reke alongside a guy who can shoot, and both guys can handle a little, if not be top flight creaters. MUCH offense. Defense probably about the same as last year just swapping Jimmer for Beno. At least you hope he's not much worse. Some FA money likely goes to picking up a veteran purer PG to be guard #4 in case Jimmer stumbles.


It doesn't seem that hard to understand to me. My personal aversion to that spirit leeching malcontent at SF aside its a logical 8 man rotation:

C- Dalembert
PF/C- Cousins
SF/SG- Salmons
SG- Thornton
PG/SG- Evans

PF/C- Thompson
PG/SG- Jimmer
SF/SG- Garcia


With maybe Donte as a SF/PF as guy #9, Whiteside as PF/C as #10, PG to be acquired as #11, vet roleplaying big as #12.

 

[ParniValjak]

My concern at the moment is lack of veteran leadership. This will hopefully get addressed with trades and/or free agent signings.

We lost a good veteran leader in Beno for Salmons who has a bit of a reputation of being difficult if he doesn't get what he wants.

We got better with our starting unit but lost a bit of bite and leadership off the bench.

 

[UK_King]

Petrie and Westphal are very vocal in stating they'll be aggressive in free agency.

maybe some more trades to come as well.

Casspi won't stick around either thats for sure.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Eh, I don't like the idea of Jimmer Fredette as a Sacramento King in any way, shape or form, but I'll actually defend trading down for him... Why not just take Jimmer at 7? Because the difference between 7 and 10 is half a million per. Hell, if not for the fact that New York and Utah had both expressed interest, we probably could have gotten away with trading down to Indiana's pick, and still got him.

And why's that?

I thought I made this clear in the Dallas thread in the NBA forum, where everybody was on my case for saying I hate Stojakovic: I don't like non-rebounding jumpshooters. Never have. I think that they should all be dragged into the street and shot on the six o'clock news.

If I ruled the world, the Kings' starting lineup would probably be Evans, Afflalo, Wallace, Cousins and Dalembert, with Thornton as the sixth man. I want players that can shoot well enough to keep the defense honest, but don't particularly look for the jump shot as the first option. And, IMO, players like Fredette are the opposite of that.

 

[Rookie]

Now we have a veteran platoon at SF. The same one we had 4 years ago. And Petrie thought this would be a good thing to repeat?

I'm not sure he's playing the same role. 3-4 years ago, he was probably one of the team best player, this time around I think he will be playing the supporting role.

Overall...I like the draft+trade. Could it be better? Who knows. But as some had mentioned, it's an upgrade...
I love upgrade..just upgrade my computer to i7-2600k with Asus sabertooth. Build it last night and lightning fast...ready for some HD movie editting.

 

[mac]

I thought I made this clear in the Dallas thread in the NBA forum, where everybody was on my case for saying I hate Stojakovic: I don't like non-rebounding jumpshooters. Never have. I think that they should all be dragged into the street and shot on the six o'clock news.

If I ruled the world, the Kings' starting lineup would probably be Evans, Afflalo, Wallace, Cousins and Dalembert, with Thornton as the sixth man. I want players that can shoot well enough to keep the defense honest, but don't particularly look for the jump shot as the first option. And, IMO, players like Fredette are the opposite of that.

I'm guessing that you feel being one of the shortest players on court doesn't excuse him from needing to rebound a lot? I can understand if you feel this way about Peja, since he's a SF and pretty tall. But Jimmer??? In the first place he wouldn't even be in position to rebound much.

 

[mac]

I'm not sure he's playing the same role. 3-4 years ago, he was probably one of the team best player, this time around I think he will be playing the supporting role.

Overall...I like the draft+trade. Could it be better? Who knows. But as some had mentioned, it's an upgrade...
I love upgrade..just upgrade my computer to i7-2600k with Asus sabertooth. Build it last night and lightning fast...ready for some HD movie editting.

Love the really random insight

Anyway my thoughts are that the team looks pretty decent on paper, and that we shouldn't be too quick to judge because there will more than likely still be several changes to our roster. It looks like Salmons is going to be with us however, and I think it's better to hold back judgement until we see how he plays with the rest of the guys.

If we're going to trade any of our SFs, I hope it's Omri, because Garcia brings some veteran leadership (although his skills as a player aren't that outstanding) and IMO Greene is good for team chemistry, whether he gets to play or not. Hope that Whiteside and the other young guys will continue to develop and be able to contribute more to the team.

More than anything however, I fantasize that Greene will suddenly become the SF we envisioned him to be and make either Salmons or Garcia (along with Omri) expendable.

 

[Section 101]

Yes, people, alas often the same people, are twisting themselves into knots trying to make this trade work for their own interests, but its if nothing a clear indication that they have decided to go with Reke/Thornton in the backcourt, that Reke as PG is still the plan, and that putting two smaller long range bombing SGs who can handle a little alongside Reke is how they plan to complement him.

Here is current planned rotation:

C- Dalembert
PF- Cousins
PF/C- Thompson

Same three bigs we closed last season with, with Cousins hopefully growing considerably in year 2. Very strong rebounding group. Which is good given Petrie's seeming preference for the wussier side of SFs. Whiteside has a chance to be big #4 and add extra length and shoblocking. Big #5 isn;t on the roster, so will have to be picked up in free agency. Likely a minor player. Maybe an old vet for leadership, who knows. Just after the Salmons thing pray its not Brad or Mikki,

SF- Salmons
SF/SG- Garcia? (Greene? Casspi? Honeycutt?)

Now we have a veteran platoon at SF. The same one we had 4 years ago. And Petrie thought this would be a good thing to repeat? In any case, both guys can hit the three -- a requirement. Both guys can bring it up a little, which also helps. Salmons becomes our defensive stopper, and that guy who keeps Reke from having to guard Kobe and Wade every night. I still think Casspi gets traded, for what I don't know. Spot minutes possibly for Greene or maybe Honeycutt if he's ready (more likely D-league) to provide a different, bigger defensive flavor. Overall a pretty good set of defenders at SF really.

SG- Thornton
PG- Reke
PG/SG- Jimmer

I don't like the inexperienced wildcard at 3rd guard in a year we are trying to take a step forward, but seems pretty obvious the idea is to always have Reke alongside a guy who can shoot, and both guys can handle a little, if not be top flight creaters. MUCH offense. Defense probably about the same as last year just swapping Jimmer for Beno. At least you hope he's not much worse. Some FA money likely goes to picking up a veteran purer PG to be guard #4 in case Jimmer stumbles.


It doesn't seem that hard to understand to me. My personal aversion to that spirit leeching malcontent at SF aside its a logical 8 man rotation:

C- Dalembert
PF/C- Cousins
SF/SG- Salmons
SG- Thornton
PG/SG- Evans

PF/C- Thompson
PG/SG- Jimmer
SF/SG- Garcia


With maybe Donte as a SF/PF as guy #9, Whiteside as PF/C as #10, PG to be acquired as #11, vet roleplaying big as #12.

Brick and others who usually disagree with me please explain something to me.

You keep saying Tyreke isnt a SF, yet Salmons is a SF and not a guard.

I think you agree their games are similar. Both are listed at 6'6". I looked at their draft stats. Evans 6'4" w/o shoes 8'8' standing reach, 220lbs. Salmons 6'5.5' w/o shoes, 8'8' standing reach, 207 lbs.

So why is Salmons a SF and not tyreke. Why is Evans a guard and not Salmons?

 

[Section 101]

I thought I made this clear in the Dallas thread in the NBA forum, where everybody was on my case for saying I hate Stojakovic: I don't like non-rebounding jumpshooters. Never have. I think that they should all be dragged into the street and shot on the six o'clock news.

If I ruled the world, the Kings' starting lineup would probably be Evans, Afflalo, Wallace, Cousins and Dalembert, with Thornton as the sixth man. I want players that can shoot well enough to keep the defense honest, but don't particularly look for the jump shot as the first option. And, IMO, players like Fredette are the opposite of that.

Peja's rebounding was not bad in 03 thru 04 when webb was out. And it went up in the playoffs. I think you also have to look who he had around him. He had Vlade and Webb who were pulling down 10 boards a game each and Peja was playing with them not the reserves. There werent as many rebounds for him to get.

 

[TTown Kings]

The article is spot on. This trade is indefensible. We traded a better player to move down three spots? We should have gotten something back. I just don't get it. All that capsapce, just fricking wait till free agency to get a better vet SF at or around the same price. I mean c'mon John Salmons or Prince/AK47/Battier/etc.....

And Salmons on the court getting no shots is just trouble waiting to happen. He's been a malcontent everytime it's happened before. Where are his shots going to come from with Reke, DMC, Marcus and Jimmer? This is not going to go well. Bad, bad, bad, bad trade.

 

[Showtime]

I'm wondering if people even remember Salmons around here.

First off, let me start by saying that Beno was one of the most consistent and efficient Kings the past two years (only one other than JT who shot 50%). He was also the only true point guard on the team.

Now, let's take a refresher course on Salmons. He was an inconsistent backup in Philly who couldn't establish himself in the rotation because of better players ahead of him. But it wasn't helping that he wasn't mr reliable in the limited time he did see the court. Still, GP saw something, and got him. He remained inconsistent with the kings, where coming off the bench he couldn't establish himself on a nightly basis. It wasn't until some roster moves were made (along with injuries) that he became a full-time starter and got the ball that we really saw what he could do. Not to mention, there were reports of unhappiness about how he was being used. He goes to Chicago, where he's productive at first, and then regresses and is traded. Then, he goes to the bucks who need perimeter play, and he doesn't meet expectations. He again has a pretty good first season, but as time goes on, his production again drops. The inconsistent Jennings needed another solid player next to him, and Salmons, while having his moments, still couldn't shine as the player they hoped he could be. And now, GP got him back because, in his words, he would significantly improve the forward position, because he was one of the better players on a team that was better than this one. Oh, wait, that 17 win team GP? Where are his shots going to come from when you have Cousins, Evans, Jimmer, and MT ahead of him? How are you going to find consistency in this rotation when Paul notoriously shifts guys and lineups around? How is he going to be happy when he's not getting his shots?

Salmons needs two things to be consistently good: starting minutes, and the ball. If he doesn't have both, he's not going to be any better than Casspi or Donte IMO.

What this team needed was a team-first veteran SF, preferably with good defense. Tay Prince, who is in the last year of his deal, could have probably been acquired with some additional assets. Rasual Butler could have been inquired about on the extreme cheap, and would have fit in nicely with this group. Caron Butler is a free agent, and far better than Salmons. Troy Murphy is another free agent who would stretch the court, and can rebound from the 3. Dunleavy is another solid player who is a free agent. Battier another. There are more, I was just skimming some contracts. So, that's just free agents, not to mention guys on the block. An overpaid, me-first guy was just the wrong move here.

 

[lancewarchibald]

I'm a brand new Kings fan from Utah so as of right now I still have an outsider's point of view. I thought it was a great trade. I'm also really big on Jimmer and I'm really big on defense (Salmons). The knock on the Kings has been their defense, so who cares about efficiency, Salmons isn't going to be asked to score much anyway. You improve your defense with Salmons then add Jimmer who is going to be fantastic with Tyreke. That backcourt is going to be hot. They perfectly compliment each other's strengths, and it doesn't hurt having Cousins drawing double teams underneath to open up shots for Jimmer. They saved money by trading down to pick Jimmer who will be off the ball on offense and guard the opposing teams PG and got a starting SF in Salmons who will have a much bigger impact than Udrih would have. I thought it was smart.

 

[hrdboild]

I think Salmons will be a SF for us.

Looking at our team, it came down to one of two options:

We keep 7th but can't justifiably grab a person for the back court and resign Thorton. I don't think we could of gotten anything of value just trading Beno by himself.

We would of had Evans, Beno, Walker/Knight/Jimmer and Garcia. No way we would of spent money on Thorton to stay around.

The 2nd option was to unload Beno and still have a shot at a player we like and get a need addressed.

Now we have a solid rotation of Evans, Jimmer, Thorton, and Garcia. With Casspi/Salmpons/ Green rotation at the 3.

And lets be reaslitic, Jimmer will sell tickets, he will attarct attetion and get us some national tv coverage. At the current state of the franchise, we need this, we need people to pay attention to the Kings and more importantly their future in Sacramento.

Salmons makes more money than Beno, so if anything this trade hurts our chances of re-signing Thornton. Realistically it probably has no effect at all. If its Salmons or Beno making 7-8 million per we still have the same 27 million or so in cap space to spend this year. So in no way did we have to make this trade to be able to re-sign Thornton. And while Beno's contract would have expired in time for Tyreke's extension, Salmons' will not.

As to your second point, you said we couldn't trade Beno on his own and acquire a player of value. We traded down from 7 to 10 so that was giving up value. And we got a player with a bigger contract for 3 years instead of 2, again giving up value. We added John Salmons, a player the Bucks were almost certainly looking to trade this year after a disappointing season and $25 million left on his contract. And, perhaps most significantly, Beno was a better player last year than John Salmons. That was what John Hollinger got all bent out of shape about. So we didn't actually get value for Beno, in almost every way we gave up value. Actually buying out Beno's contract, if we felt like he had to be moved at all costs, would have been a better value than what we did.

Which brings me to my third point, and the reason I hate this trade. The Jimmer and Knight debate is a lost cause. I think it's self-evident which one is going to be the better player and many people disagree. I can let that go since it's all a matter of opinion with the draft. But the contention that we just improved our team for next year? Really? We swapped out Beno for Jimmer. Is that an upgrade? Maybe. Jimmer has a lot of the same weaknesses as Beno. He's not a rebounder, he's not a defender, so his value is going to be tied to his scoring and he's going to have to compete with 3 (!) other scoring guards now to get his points.

Adding Salmons, however, is not an upgrade in my opinion because slotting him into the starting lineup (which we certainly will with that contract) is eliminating other options to upgrade the SF position. Almost anyone would have been an upgrade over what we had this year. We could have traded for a SF. We could have signed a free agent SF. We could have kept Beno and drafted a SF. If you had made a wishlist of acceptable SF targets at the end of the season, would anyone have put John Salmons on that list? The guy is the very definition of a me first player. And he's not even a SF! He's been traded 3 times in 4 years and so far (we'll have to wait and see with Milwaukee) the team trading him has been better off without him.

Thornton is hopefully coming back. We probably can't do better than Dalembert as our starting C. I would at least explore the possibility of upgrading at PF and moving Cousincs to C but it would have to be a defensive stud at PF and those are few and far between (well we did just draft one, but not for our team). There's no more room in the rotation. We have money to waste on something, but nothing to trade and no big free agents to sign. Did we get better offensively? Maybe. Did we get better defensively? No. We're left with the same problem we had this year -- too many mediocre players in the rotation and not enough good ones. We're taking baby steps here while other franchises are actually getting things done. And if we lose Dalembert now, we are actually going to be significantly worse next year. Is that going to sell more tickets?

 

[Agent23]

It's fascinating to me that NOW, KF's say Udrih is a good player and they'd rather he not leave, when I've been one of the few guys defending him for over a year.

KF's Before: Aw, he sucks and every positive stat is obliterated by his single-handed destruction of our team defense. Get rid of his bloated contract (?!) for a box of donuts and I'll be happy.

KF's Now: He was the only consistent team player we had yadda yadda yadda.

Y'all got what you deserve - you belly-ached about his (quite reasonable for a 6th man guard much less the starting PG) contract for years and demonized his defense and dismissed his consistent stabilizing contributions and now he's traded for a me-first chucker who can score (when he's not feeling pouty) with an inarguably worse contract.

Congrats, KF's - you all had a part in this.

Lol. Beno Udrih was the least criticized King the last 2 years. Stop crying. You just noticed the criticism he received because he was your favorite player. Its funny how you think anybody on here had ANYTHING to do with him being dealt.

 

[Bricklayer]

Salmons makes more money than Beno, so if anything this trade hurts our chances of re-signing Thornton. Realistically it probably has no effect at all. If its Salmons or Beno making 7-8 million per we still have the same 27 million or so in cap space to spend this year. So in no way did we have to make this trade to be able to re-sign Thornton. And while Beno's contract would have expired in time for Tyreke's extension, Salmons' will not.

As to your second point, you said we couldn't trade Beno on his own and acquire a player of value. We traded down from 7 to 10 so that was giving up value. And we got a player with a bigger contract for 3 years instead of 2, again giving up value. We added John Salmons, a player the Bucks were almost certainly looking to trade this year after a disappointing season and $25 million left on his contract. And, perhaps most significantly, Beno was a better player last year than John Salmons. That was what John Hollinger got all bent out of shape about. So we didn't actually get value for Beno, in almost every way we gave up value. Actually buying out Beno's contract, if we felt like he had to be moved at all costs, would have been a better value than what we did.

Which brings me to my third point, and the reason I hate this trade. The Jimmer and Knight debate is a lost cause. I think it's self-evident which one is going to be the better player and many people disagree. I can let that go since it's all a matter of opinion with the draft. But the contention that we just improved our team for next year? Really? We swapped out Beno for Jimmer. Is that an upgrade? Maybe. Jimmer has a lot of the same weaknesses as Beno. He's not a rebounder, he's not a defender, so his value is going to be tied to his scoring and he's going to have to compete with 3 (!) other scoring guards now to get his points.

Adding Salmons, however, is not an upgrade in my opinion because slotting him into the starting lineup (which we certainly will with that contract) is eliminating other options to upgrade the SF position. Almost anyone would have been an upgrade over what we had this year. We could have traded for a SF. We could have signed a free agent SF. We could have kept Beno and drafted a SF. If you had made a wishlist of acceptable SF targets at the end of the season, would anyone have put John Salmons on that list? The guy is the very definition of a me first player. And he's not even a SF! He's been traded 3 times in 4 years and so far (we'll have to wait and see with Milwaukee) the team trading him has been better off without him.

Thornton is hopefully coming back. We probably can't do better than Dalembert as our starting C. I would at least explore the possibility of upgrading at PF and moving Cousincs to C but it would have to be a defensive stud at PF and those are few and far between (well we did just draft one, but not for our team). There's no more room in the rotation. We have money to waste on something, but nothing to trade and no big free agents to sign. Did we get better offensively? Maybe. Did we get better defensively? No. We're left with the same problem we had this year -- too many mediocre players in the rotation and not enough good ones. We're taking baby steps here while other franchises are actually getting things done. And if we lose Dalembert now, we are actually going to be significantly worse next year. Is that going to sell more tickets?

Two things:
1) we defintiely got better defensively. People haven't been watching Salmons play defense the last few years if they don't think we have. I would put him Top 20 in the NBA as a perimeter defender.
2) we do still have that money to waste, and many of the options we had at SF with that money are still there even with Salmons acquisition. At this point Salmons does not have to be a 35min a night guy. Guys like AK47 and Battier have been on and off bench guys/6th men for years. If you wanted to, a big if of course, but if you wanted to we still hae the money to for instance plop a nice constrat down in front of Battier and say come be a 6th man for us at $7mil or some such -- something he may not get anymore otherwise. And a Salmons/Battier SF combo, with spot minutes then from Cisco, would be one fo the best defensive SF tandems in the league.

Much as Salmons does litttle to warm the hackles of my heart, his acquisition didn't really shut any doors on us. If Jimmer isn't ready you could also do the Salmons to SG, then AK47 (or whoever) signed as your SF to make a VERY strong defensive team, with Thornton off the bench. Or maybe Salmons, whatever. General point being most things are still open for us at this point.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I thought I made this clear in the Dallas thread in the NBA forum, where everybody was on my case for saying I hate Stojakovic: I don't like non-rebounding jumpshooters. Never have. I think that they should all be dragged into the street and shot on the six o'clock news.

If I ruled the world, the Kings' starting lineup would probably be Evans, Afflalo, Wallace, Cousins and Dalembert, with Thornton as the sixth man. I want players that can shoot well enough to keep the defense honest, but don't particularly look for the jump shot as the first option. And, IMO, players like Fredette are the opposite of that.

I'm guessing that you feel being one of the shortest players on court doesn't excuse him from needing to rebound a lot?

 

[Vlade4GM]

So basically the only people who like this trade are the people who still have a soft spot for Salmons.

 

[pshn80]

So basically the only people who like this trade are the people who still have a soft spot for Salmons.

No. I like it and was only a mild fan of Salmon's. Let me assure you, Vlade, this trade will work out just fine and it will be fun to watch the KIngs play. Also, takes the heat off of Tyreke/Cousins to some extent and that's good.

 

[Vlade4GM]

We just added yet another ball dominant scorer who is about to be 32 and is under contract for 3 more years at about 7-8 million a year. Let me give you a glimpse into the future, we're going to regret this trade and Salmons contract will be a bane on our payroll. A win now team should not even do that trade, let alone a rebuilding team. I don't know who is calling the shots for the Kings right now, but whoever it is, is a moron.

 

[hrdboild]

Two things:
1) we defintiely got better defensively. People haven't been watching Salmons play defense the last few years if they don't think we have. I would put him Top 20 in the NBA as a perimeter defender.
2) we do still have that money to waste, and many of the options we had at SF with that money are still there even with Salmons acquisition. At this point Salmons does not have to be a 35min a night guy. Guys like AK47 and Battier have been on and off bench guys/6th men for years. If you wanted to, a big if of course, but if you wanted to we still hae the money to for instance plop a nice constrat down in front of Battier and say come be a 6th man for us at $7mil or some such -- something he may not get anymore otherwise. And a Salmons/Battier SF combo, with spot minutes then from Cisco, would be one fo the best defensive SF tandems in the league.

Much as Salmons does litttle to warm the hackles of my heart, his acquisition didn't really shut any doors on us. If Jimmer isn't ready you could also do the Salmons to SG, then AK47 (or whoever) signed as your SF to make a VERY strong defensive team, with Thornton off the bench. Or maybe Salmons, whatever. General point being most things are still open for us at this point.

These two things are connected though. If Salmons is the starter at SF then we're not signing another major contributor at the same position. And if we do bring in another SF, then how good Salmons is defensively doesn't matter much while he's on the bench. I'd rather have Greene coming off the bench than Salmons if it comes to that. He's a good defender, plays well with our key players, and still has potential to get better. Salmons is more expensive, has an inconsistent track record year to year, and a history of making terrible decisions with the ball in critical situations. The price to performance ratio of Greene wins over Salmons by a landslide as the backup SF.

I had hoped, since we did draft a PG, that upgrading the SF position would be the primary goal this off-season and if Salmons is going to be it I'm very disappointed. You've been following this team at least as long as I have. You've seen the same free agent signings, the same trades. Do you honestly believe Petrie is going to find someone else other than Salmons to start at SF now? I sure don't. What this trade says about our other plans for the off season is what worries me the most.

If I'm totally wrong on this and they plan to play Salmons at SG and bring in another SF then I don't hate the trade, but it does make Thornton and Jimmer somewhat redundant. That alone isn't a huge issue, but we've just committed to Jimmer for the next 4 years, Salmons for the next 3, and we're about to commit to Thornton for 4 or 5 years as well. So one of these guys is going to end up as an expensive bit player. It doesn't kill the team, but it doesn't make this trade look any better.

 

[IfAt1st]

Its funny how you think anybody on here had ANYTHING to do with him being dealt.

Wow - you actually think that fans constantly complaining on media outlets and in public about a player has no effect on the management of a team?

In my experience, that is utterly naive and ignoring reality. Many trades have been influenced by a team's fanbase.

 

[Showtime]

So basically the only people who like this trade are the people who still have a soft spot for Salmons.

I like Salmons' talent and skillset, but he's the wrong fit for this team right now. He needs the ball to be effective, and he's coming to a team that without him, already has an issue spreading around the shots.

 

[Boogie-havoc]

We just added yet another ball dominant scorer who is about to be 32 and is under contract for 3 more years at about 7-8 million a year. Let me give you a glimpse into the future, we're going to regret this trade and Salmons contract will be a bane on our payroll. A win now team should not even do that trade, let alone a rebuilding team. I don't know who is calling the shots for the Kings right now, but whoever it is, is a moron.

No to mention the guy incharge of the team regressing from year 1 to year 2, proove to be completely useless coach is still calling the shots and is the one who needs to actually find a way to handle this.

 

[andjel]

Jimmer is the key

Considering that Kings are betting that Jimmer will be 3rd guard this season, Kings traded $6.6mil (7.8 next year) mil for the 4th guard in the rotation, for $8.5mil (8 next year) 1st SF in the rotation.

Paying 1 mil extra per year as insurance in case Battier/AK... do not sign with us is worth it plus you get the player who will play instead of wave towel.

 

[rainmaker]

These two things are connected though. If Salmons is the starter at SF then we're not signing another major contributor at the same position. And if we do bring in another SF, then how good Salmons is defensively doesn't matter much while he's on the bench. I'd rather have Greene coming off the bench than Salmons if it comes to that. He's a good defender, plays well with our key players, and still has potential to get better. Salmons is more expensive, has an inconsistent track record year to year, and a history of making terrible decisions with the ball in critical situations. The price to performance ratio of Greene wins over Salmons by a landslide as the backup SF.

I had hoped, since we did draft a PG, that upgrading the SF position would be the primary goal this off-season and if Salmons is going to be it I'm very disappointed. You've been following this team at least as long as I have. You've seen the same free agent signings, the same trades. Do you honestly believe Petrie is going to find someone else other than Salmons to start at SF now? I sure don't. What this trade says about our other plans for the off season is what worries me the most.

If I'm totally wrong on this and they plan to play Salmons at SG and bring in another SF then I don't hate the trade, but it does make Thornton and Jimmer somewhat redundant. That alone isn't a huge issue, but we've just committed to Jimmer for the next 4 years, Salmons for the next 3, and we're about to commit to Thornton for 4 or 5 years as well. So one of these guys is going to end up as an expensive bit player. It doesn't kill the team, but it doesn't make this trade look any better.

I completely agree. I don't understand why others think this doesn't affect our ability to sign a big FA at all. Of course the cap space is still there. That's not the issue. The issue is before the trade, we had a gaping hole at sf, now Salmons has filled that hole which will deter an AK or Prince from signing here.

There are a few fans who think we'll still sign a major FA as a sf, and it will work out fine. I don't see that at all. Why the hell would AK consider coming to a team with 6 sf's, one of them being the now highly paid Salmons? If AK or Prince does sign, then we're paying a hell of a lot for Salmons to come off the bench. What the hell do we need his contract coming off the bench for? And that's with not even getting into playing style.