Is this the worst Petrie miscalculation that you've ever personally witnessed?
- Thread starter Anthony1
- Start date
What worries me the most about this trade is if we do not resign Thorton. Salmons is a SG. He may have pretended to be a SF, just because we had Martin, but he is a 6'6" SG. That defensive minded SF on the Bucks? That was Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, who incidentally we could have just signed as a free agent. Salmons had a usage rate of 21% last year. If we do have Thorton, Evans, Cousins and Jimmer he is effectively useless.
Also for those who think he is an upgrade:
NAME .............PTS/36 eFG FT 3P% TS% PER
John ....Salmons 14.4 46.2 81.2 37.9 51.0 12.9
Francisco Garcia 14.5 52.1 85.5 36.2 55.1 13.5
I sincerly hope he is moved before the season starts, or is buried at the end of the bench, either would work.
Also for those who think he is an upgrade:
NAME .............PTS/36 eFG FT 3P% TS% PER
John ....Salmons 14.4 46.2 81.2 37.9 51.0 12.9
Francisco Garcia 14.5 52.1 85.5 36.2 55.1 13.5
I sincerly hope he is moved before the season starts, or is buried at the end of the bench, either would work.
There's no doubt we are resigning Thornton. That should be perfectly obvious. Which makes Salmons..a "SF" in the same way Cisco is a SF. As I have partially alluded to, this seems throwbacky to me to a time I don't want to be thrown back too, when we were smaller/weaker than our opponents at every positons and played blown up SGs, swingmen, as our main SFs.
That said what ESPN's dear old basketball accountant can't factor into his sad little attempts to turn basketball into a formula, is that Salmons is a very good defender. Tony Allen and Shane Battier look like turds from Hollinger's viewpoint too, because he simply doesn't know basketball. This would be a major reason we got Salmons back.
Now, could there be a possiblity that we could try Salmons in the backcourt next to Reke, Thornton off the bench, Jimmer deep bench, and then go sign a major SF? I suppose. Or might have before the coach and Reynolds were apparently on after the trade about how they're going to start Salmons at SF. But eitehr way Thornton is there, and Salmon's role is much less than its been on his last few teams. Now we just have to convince HIM of that. Easier said than done.
That said what ESPN's dear old basketball accountant can't factor into his sad little attempts to turn basketball into a formula, is that Salmons is a very good defender. Tony Allen and Shane Battier look like turds from Hollinger's viewpoint too, because he simply doesn't know basketball. This would be a major reason we got Salmons back.
Now, could there be a possiblity that we could try Salmons in the backcourt next to Reke, Thornton off the bench, Jimmer deep bench, and then go sign a major SF? I suppose. Or might have before the coach and Reynolds were apparently on after the trade about how they're going to start Salmons at SF. But eitehr way Thornton is there, and Salmon's role is much less than its been on his last few teams. Now we just have to convince HIM of that. Easier said than done.
Last edited:
Everybody is underestimating the Salmons trade - it's worse than you think.
The only way this trade makes sense is if near-over-the-hill Salmons is shipped outahere pronto. With this young, impressionable, fragile team he can be a full-blown cancer. A cancer that "leads" by his passive-agressive-depressive bull****. Forget about the compatibility of his skills for a moment. That's less than irrelevant when you look at how a guy like Salmons can affect the culture of this team. We needed to bring a veteran leader in here that could be a role model for this team and show them the way. Nobody in their right mind thinks Salmons is that guy. It was hilarious when I was watching the NBA channel this morning. They didn't even bring his name up in the trade (ok, once when they said he would be coming to Sacto). But they did say that Sacto needs that veteran leader that can show them how to play unselfish basketball. Connect the dots - Salmons isn't the guy. He is the selfish veteran, the exact opposite of what this team needs.
The other joke on the NBA channel was how many balls on the floor they would need with Tyreke, Thornton, Jimmer, Cousins (somehow they forgot about Salmons - an unforgivable error in my view). They were joking about how Westphal is going to handle this mess of chemistry. Gooooooooood Freakin Luck, Westphal. This test tube of chemicals has "unstable volatile organics" written all over it. He's going to be very lucky or show himself to be extremely good if this thing doesn't blow him up.
The only way this trade makes sense is if near-over-the-hill Salmons is shipped outahere pronto. With this young, impressionable, fragile team he can be a full-blown cancer. A cancer that "leads" by his passive-agressive-depressive bull****. Forget about the compatibility of his skills for a moment. That's less than irrelevant when you look at how a guy like Salmons can affect the culture of this team. We needed to bring a veteran leader in here that could be a role model for this team and show them the way. Nobody in their right mind thinks Salmons is that guy. It was hilarious when I was watching the NBA channel this morning. They didn't even bring his name up in the trade (ok, once when they said he would be coming to Sacto). But they did say that Sacto needs that veteran leader that can show them how to play unselfish basketball. Connect the dots - Salmons isn't the guy. He is the selfish veteran, the exact opposite of what this team needs.
The other joke on the NBA channel was how many balls on the floor they would need with Tyreke, Thornton, Jimmer, Cousins (somehow they forgot about Salmons - an unforgivable error in my view). They were joking about how Westphal is going to handle this mess of chemistry. Gooooooooood Freakin Luck, Westphal. This test tube of chemicals has "unstable volatile organics" written all over it. He's going to be very lucky or show himself to be extremely good if this thing doesn't blow him up.
Beyond resigning Dally and Thornton, the thing that almost everyone on this board agreed on was that we needed a small forward who can play lock down D and some outside shooting that can stretch the floor. Isn't that what this trade allowed us to do? Regardless on whether you like Salmons as a person, he plays great defense at the 3 position and can hit from long range. The Kings were able to pick an outstanding shooter in the draft after this trade as well. Biggest needs addressed.
If we don't do this trade, worst thing that could have happened this offseason is not being able to sign that big name free agent that everyone says we need. Like has been said before, a losing Sacramento team where owners are questionable and relocation of the team is still up in the air is not a huge free agent selling point. Trades and drafts are our best options as a franchise. Now, if we can't move Salmons for something better or sign a bigger name, he still possesses the skill set that this team was looking for at his position and we don't completely lose out.
If we don't do this trade, worst thing that could have happened this offseason is not being able to sign that big name free agent that everyone says we need. Like has been said before, a losing Sacramento team where owners are questionable and relocation of the team is still up in the air is not a huge free agent selling point. Trades and drafts are our best options as a franchise. Now, if we can't move Salmons for something better or sign a bigger name, he still possesses the skill set that this team was looking for at his position and we don't completely lose out.
With Westphal... if you don't like his starting lineup. Just wait a few minutes. It will change.
The reason I don't like Salmons is not so much in his skill sets as it is in his mindset. Example from Brandon Jennings last night:
Spoke to Brandon Jennings last night on what John Salmons brings to Kings: "he can take over a game."
I'm sure Jennings was trying to pay a compliment. But it shows you the mindset of Salmons. He thinks he should take over games. We don't need that to get to the next level. If Salmons is going to take over games for the Kings, then the wheels have already come off the next season.
We needed a guy with a mindset like Shane Battier. the Kings had some turmoil last year over this type of stuff. Adding Salmons to the roster is pouring gas on a fire in my eyes.
The reason I don't like Salmons is not so much in his skill sets as it is in his mindset. Example from Brandon Jennings last night:
Spoke to Brandon Jennings last night on what John Salmons brings to Kings: "he can take over a game."
I'm sure Jennings was trying to pay a compliment. But it shows you the mindset of Salmons. He thinks he should take over games. We don't need that to get to the next level. If Salmons is going to take over games for the Kings, then the wheels have already come off the next season.
We needed a guy with a mindset like Shane Battier. the Kings had some turmoil last year over this type of stuff. Adding Salmons to the roster is pouring gas on a fire in my eyes.
The problem with Salmons is that his defense is nowhere as good as he is hyped to be. Once in a while, he got motivated and put a stranglehold on Kobe but there were too many moments where he got owned badly, especially by the bigger SFs. He is an odd duck defender - he will D up his man alright but when it comes to helping his teammates, screw that! You will never see him take a charge or sacrifice his body in any way; too many times he refused to leave his man to challenge open shooter, even if his man is Bowen and the open shooter is Manu. He does not rotate well on defense and in the event that he is caught guarding a big man, he simply gave up and let the guy get a dunk. Salmons, simply put, is a selfish defender - his only worries are whether or not his man has a big night and to stay out of foul trouble.
With that said, getting Salmons for Beno is really just, meh. Both selfish, both don't win, and both are stop-gaps. It's really just a trade of one journeyman who we dont need for another who plays a position that we do.
One thing that I suspect motivated this trade is that the Maloof is broke. The trade makes sense if they don't have the money make a splash in FA. I honestly don't think the coaching staff is too fond of Salmons but when your boss is on a budget, you just make do with the best of the crap.
With that said, getting Salmons for Beno is really just, meh. Both selfish, both don't win, and both are stop-gaps. It's really just a trade of one journeyman who we dont need for another who plays a position that we do.
One thing that I suspect motivated this trade is that the Maloof is broke. The trade makes sense if they don't have the money make a splash in FA. I honestly don't think the coaching staff is too fond of Salmons but when your boss is on a budget, you just make do with the best of the crap.
Call me crazy but I liked the trade and our draft day even if I did have to sleep on it. At first I hated the thought of bringing back John freakin Salmons, I hated dude when he was here thought he was annoying and thought way to highly of his average NBA game. Then I thought back to who was on those teams guys like Brad Miller, Ron Artest, etc, just flat out boring Kings basketball too watch.
Fast forward some years and we have a new younger squad with a clear goal in mind and that's getting back into being a lock every year for a playoff spot. John Salmons is many things but atleast he brings it every night and if anything having a consistent guy out there hopefully lights a fire under our hopeful SF's of the future making them become more consistent or it's see ya later. I know this isn't as bad as the thought of Richard Jefferson stinking it up in a Kings uni or Tony Parker breaking down missing a ton of games either.
As for our draft day picks, this is the 3rd year in a row where I'm satisfied with our selections. I like Jimmer, although I think he is a tad bit over hyped. He can shoot the lights out though that cannot be denied and if/when we resign Thornton while throwing in a corner Cassipi 3 ball every now and then our team will finally be lights out from 3 again.
I liked Honeycutt as well, I think he has potential to be a solid nba player and if anything he will be great insurance if we have to ship out one of our SF's or if one of them goes down with injury.
At the end of the day there were worse draft day deals done yesterday and picks that were made, we should all just enjoy the fact that the Kings are still gonna be at Arco next year and hell since we got Jimmer that basically locks us in to a bunch of late night ESPN games.
Fast forward some years and we have a new younger squad with a clear goal in mind and that's getting back into being a lock every year for a playoff spot. John Salmons is many things but atleast he brings it every night and if anything having a consistent guy out there hopefully lights a fire under our hopeful SF's of the future making them become more consistent or it's see ya later. I know this isn't as bad as the thought of Richard Jefferson stinking it up in a Kings uni or Tony Parker breaking down missing a ton of games either.
As for our draft day picks, this is the 3rd year in a row where I'm satisfied with our selections. I like Jimmer, although I think he is a tad bit over hyped. He can shoot the lights out though that cannot be denied and if/when we resign Thornton while throwing in a corner Cassipi 3 ball every now and then our team will finally be lights out from 3 again.
I liked Honeycutt as well, I think he has potential to be a solid nba player and if anything he will be great insurance if we have to ship out one of our SF's or if one of them goes down with injury.
At the end of the day there were worse draft day deals done yesterday and picks that were made, we should all just enjoy the fact that the Kings are still gonna be at Arco next year and hell since we got Jimmer that basically locks us in to a bunch of late night ESPN games.
Jimmer has been my pick for a few weeks now. Seemed like the best fit. Probably the best shooter in the draft and he's already 22 with 4 years of college, so there should be none of the problems that come with dealing with a raw, immature 19 year old for a few seasons until they're ready to play at the NBA level. Jimmer seems ready now.
Knight fell that far, because a number of scenarios magically occurred to create the unlikely situation of him slipping.
1. Utah decided to go with a big. Utah could have taken Knight at no.3, but they decided to go with Kanter. I don't consider this to be an indication that Utah wasn't interested in Knight, they just felt that being so high in the draft that it would be prudent to come away with one of the few quality bigs, and possibly the best big in this draft.
2. Cleveland obviously, wasn't going to take Knight at 4, after already getting Irving at No.1. However, their selection of Tristan Thompson is what really caused this whole thing to happen. This allowed Jonas Valanciunas to fall right into Toronto's lap. Toronto made the same decision that Utah did. They went with a talented big man, hoping to hit the jackpot.
3. Washington, is not going to take another PG after getting Wall last year, which allowed Knight to slip all the way to 7.
We could have had Knight at No.7, which just a week ago would have been considered an almost impossible scenario. Any talk that anybody is hearing regarding "We wanted Jimmer all along, and would have taken either Walker or Jimmer instead of Knight" is just pure spin zone material. The Kings got caught with their pants down plain and simple. Man, what I would have given to see a live camera into the Kings draft headquarters when the name Tristan Thompson was announced. That pick basically was the domino that triggered the whole thing. Toronto was supposed to take Knight, because they thought that Valanciunas wouldn't have been available for them.
This was a clusterf*ck of titanic proportions. Anything we are hearing to the contrary is nothing more than spin. Petrie should have had a contingency plan for something crazy like this happening. He should have had an out. You can't look me straight in the face and honestly say that Petrie wanted Jimmer more than Knight. Sure, he wanted Jimmer alright, but he didn't think there was any chance that Knight would have been there, which is what everybody else on these forums thought last week. Nobody even thought there was a slight chance, so nobody really entertained the idea of Knight in a Kings uniform. This was a grand miscalculation, no other two ways about it.
1. Utah decided to go with a big. Utah could have taken Knight at no.3, but they decided to go with Kanter. I don't consider this to be an indication that Utah wasn't interested in Knight, they just felt that being so high in the draft that it would be prudent to come away with one of the few quality bigs, and possibly the best big in this draft.
2. Cleveland obviously, wasn't going to take Knight at 4, after already getting Irving at No.1. However, their selection of Tristan Thompson is what really caused this whole thing to happen. This allowed Jonas Valanciunas to fall right into Toronto's lap. Toronto made the same decision that Utah did. They went with a talented big man, hoping to hit the jackpot.
3. Washington, is not going to take another PG after getting Wall last year, which allowed Knight to slip all the way to 7.
We could have had Knight at No.7, which just a week ago would have been considered an almost impossible scenario. Any talk that anybody is hearing regarding "We wanted Jimmer all along, and would have taken either Walker or Jimmer instead of Knight" is just pure spin zone material. The Kings got caught with their pants down plain and simple. Man, what I would have given to see a live camera into the Kings draft headquarters when the name Tristan Thompson was announced. That pick basically was the domino that triggered the whole thing. Toronto was supposed to take Knight, because they thought that Valanciunas wouldn't have been available for them.
This was a clusterf*ck of titanic proportions. Anything we are hearing to the contrary is nothing more than spin. Petrie should have had a contingency plan for something crazy like this happening. He should have had an out. You can't look me straight in the face and honestly say that Petrie wanted Jimmer more than Knight. Sure, he wanted Jimmer alright, but he didn't think there was any chance that Knight would have been there, which is what everybody else on these forums thought last week. Nobody even thought there was a slight chance, so nobody really entertained the idea of Knight in a Kings uniform. This was a grand miscalculation, no other two ways about it.
This is horrible. This idea.
Bibby was nails that series. He wasn't the problem and having him swapped for Pierce would have been negligible at best.
I don't buy for a second that Petrie is stupid and short sighted enough to not have an out in the event Knight fell to 7 if Knight was who he really wanted. You don't have to be a basketball genius to see that trading down could backfire if a player slips a few spots. This is basic common sense stuff. They knew there was a chance Knight could fall. Nothing was a lock in this draft after 1 and 2. When you consider all that it seems pretty clear that Jimmer was their guy all along. You're right that they would never come out and admit they blew it with Knight if that's indeed what happened. I just don't believe that they ever thought Knight was better than Jimmer.
I think that much like the Rubio situation, fans and the hype were much higher on Knight than our front office was. Or a number of front offices were realy given how far he slipped. And now fans want to project their own frustration and say oh, Geoff messed up, he could have had MY guy. But that's the thing, it was YOUR guy. It wasn't Geoff's. He may be wrong about the kid and you may be right, but nothing either predraft or draft day suggested he thought nearly as highly of Knight as he did Jimmer.
It's also worth pointing out that Bibby never played that good again. Another thing to consider is that not only would Pierce have made them contenders from 2000-2003 but Pierce could have replaced Webber as the franchise player after the Webber injury, a task Bibby never was up to and in hindsight probably shouldn't even have been expected to be. With Pierce the last 5-7 years of Kings basketball are likely vastly different and probably a whole lot better.
What people are missing is that the $8mil is still there. By making this swap, it prserved the same capspace (well almost) as we had before the trade. We knew we wanted Jimmer, and knew that with Reke/Thornton there, if we draft Jimmer and keep Beno either our draft pick gets no time, or our 7mil backup PG gets no time. So you clear out Beno's deal before he either squishes Jimmer, or becomes an unmoveable $7mil end of bencher. And you bring back Salmons with it. Buut by basically swapping the contracts it doesn;t close down any of the possibilities you had before the trade. You like AK47? You probably still have the money to make a run at him and make a Salmons/Ak47 pairing at SF. We didn't spend $8mil on Salmons. We spent about $1.5mil on him.
You don't seem to understand that Salmons brings shooting and defense, two things the Kings desperately needed. Now if he turns out to be the cancerous black hole that many of you are predicting, I'll gladly concede that you were right and I was wrong. I'm actually pretty confident that this was a decent move and the team will be better for it. We'll just have to wait and see.
This is my biggest problem with Petrie. We somehow lucked our way into a size/strength advantage at two positions and he just can't help but make our lineup smaller. This is why we're consistently one of the worst defensive teams year after year. No matter how much he says he wants to build a tough team or a defensive team, he settles on the same types of players every time. It's not the coaches fault.
Not his worst by any means, especially if you count his inactivity in times he should have been active.
I'm fine with the Jimmer pick. I think its a worthy gamble. The difference between Jimmer and what else is available is probably minimal.
I'm fine with getting rid of Beno. I am tired of a team who can't defend and Beno is one of the worst.
It's the bringing in of Salmons that blows my mind. So not good for a developing team. Just a dumb move.
There is no way in hell this tops "the movable pieces trade". That one will be hard to top.
I'm fine with the Jimmer pick. I think its a worthy gamble. The difference between Jimmer and what else is available is probably minimal.
I'm fine with getting rid of Beno. I am tired of a team who can't defend and Beno is one of the worst.
It's the bringing in of Salmons that blows my mind. So not good for a developing team. Just a dumb move.
There is no way in hell this tops "the movable pieces trade". That one will be hard to top.
Assuming it costs around 15 million to resign Dalembert and and Thornton, that would leave them 10-15 million under the cap still. Enough to make a serious run at a FA. Or, they could just stay 10-15 million under the cap and have some flexibility going forward. Despite what some people, including myself may want, they don't actually have to or need to spend all their cap space this year. If they can resign Thornton and Dalembert in addition to drafting Jimmer and bringing in Salmons, that's a very good off season in my book.
A- defense at least. He is really tough on man. Not a great team defender, but he can, and has, heavily harassed Kobe in the past. Not to mention Reke. Without help. And he can hit the three decently. And he's good in transition.
If he just knew his role and played the off the ball roleplayer he would be a good one.
If he just knew his role and played the off the ball roleplayer he would be a good one.
Our owners are the Maloofs, so yes I realize that is the most likely scenario. But is preserving cap space really the best way to try and keep this team in Sacramento? I'm not suggesting signing somebody just because we can, but I hope they keep their options open and at least inquire about some possible moves or signings that could improve this team.