Screw the reports. When has anyone ever heard the Kings say, "We blew it. We didn't get our guy"? They make the pick, they defend it as the best player available, end of story. And of course they get what they "want" when they never tell you the truth of who they really "wanted". It's all spin. Close the ranks. Market Jimmer mania. Market Salmons "homecoming". (Napier is an absolute whore in marketing the Salmons trade). Rahh, rahh, siscumbah.
Anyone upset they could have had Knight?
- Thread starter RookieOfTheDay
- Start date
While I think it will be Reke/Thornton on opening night, I also believe Petrie/Westy drafted Jimmer with the plan of a Jimmer/Reke backcourt in the future. In a post draft interview, Westy stopped just short of saying Jimmer would be our starting pg, but was giddy and hopping around when answering that question. He said he clearly pictures Jimmer as a pg, and said a number of times he and Reke should be a great pairing.
I could be completely wrong, but my guess is Jimmer/Reke are the backcourt within a year, depending on the lockout. I don't think Reke/Thornton is the long term plan.
I could be completely wrong, but my guess is Jimmer/Reke are the backcourt within a year, depending on the lockout. I don't think Reke/Thornton is the long term plan.
I said that Salmons was a very good passer, which is different than saying he passed the ball a lot. Salmons played the point at Philly at times. I'm only saying what he's capable of, and not how he uses that capability. I'm also saying that he didn't always play the way he did with us. Which means he capable of playing differently. Now whether he will or not is the great unknown. And if he won't, or can't, then I don't think it will work very well. But since I don't have a choice, I'll wait and see! Mainly I'm willing to wait and see what the team looks like when we start the season before I start anticipating sucide.
I'm aware that we have far too many players at the SF positon. But I think logic tells us that some of them are going to be moved. Its possible that Greene may be asked to play some PF at times. Maybe he'll be moved to that position fulltime. Or Greene and Casspi both might be gone. I know that they're trying to move Cisco. So just for the fun of it, how would you feel if when the season started, our SF's were Kirilenko, Salmons, and Honeycutt. With Honeycutt being the possible heir apparent down the road. Not saying thats going to happen, but something like it could happen. So I can look at it from your prospective, or mine. I happen to like my result better, and since both hypothetical, I'll choose mine. At least until reality happens.
Let me be clear about the main theme of my response to you. I was not saying I was thrilled with reaquiring Salmons, and I wasn't defending how he played when he was here last. I was simply responding to some things I thought you had wrong. You implied that he was a poor passer. He's not! He's a very good passer, but as I stated, that doesn't mean he passes the ball a lot. It just means he capable of passing the ball well. You said he was not a good defender. And he's a very good defender. In fact, to me, its his one redeeming factor that I cherish. There was an implication that he was a poor shooter, and he's not, and as for shooting the ball, except for his last year here, he really didn't shoot the ball that much. averaging only a little over 6 shots a game, and he shot right at 38% from the three.
Personally I don't care if you like him or not. As I said, he's not my first choice. But I'm not going to distort what he can or can't do just because I don't like him. If he didn't dribble the ball as much as he did, I doubt anyone would really have a problem with him.
I'm aware that we have far too many players at the SF positon. But I think logic tells us that some of them are going to be moved. Its possible that Greene may be asked to play some PF at times. Maybe he'll be moved to that position fulltime. Or Greene and Casspi both might be gone. I know that they're trying to move Cisco. So just for the fun of it, how would you feel if when the season started, our SF's were Kirilenko, Salmons, and Honeycutt. With Honeycutt being the possible heir apparent down the road. Not saying thats going to happen, but something like it could happen. So I can look at it from your prospective, or mine. I happen to like my result better, and since both hypothetical, I'll choose mine. At least until reality happens.
Let me be clear about the main theme of my response to you. I was not saying I was thrilled with reaquiring Salmons, and I wasn't defending how he played when he was here last. I was simply responding to some things I thought you had wrong. You implied that he was a poor passer. He's not! He's a very good passer, but as I stated, that doesn't mean he passes the ball a lot. It just means he capable of passing the ball well. You said he was not a good defender. And he's a very good defender. In fact, to me, its his one redeeming factor that I cherish. There was an implication that he was a poor shooter, and he's not, and as for shooting the ball, except for his last year here, he really didn't shoot the ball that much. averaging only a little over 6 shots a game, and he shot right at 38% from the three.
Personally I don't care if you like him or not. As I said, he's not my first choice. But I'm not going to distort what he can or can't do just because I don't like him. If he didn't dribble the ball as much as he did, I doubt anyone would really have a problem with him.
Even if that's true, it STILL doesn't change the essential relationship, unless you think Jimmer is more PG than Beno was, which seems unlikely based on his college work. Now if we were truly looking at guys like Felton or Parker it means that we have given some thought to a purer PG (although Parker is far from pure). But it very clearly has never been a priority, and indeed we consitently trend away from it.
Baja, I've always respected your opinion, and am not sure why all the sudden you're throwing mine to the side. My opinion isn't based on simply watching Salmons a few times, and looking at his player profile. Between his time here, in Philly, and Chi I've probably watched Salmons play 150-200 games. Is that sample size not big enough to form an opinion in your eyes?
Just because I have formed a different opinion than you, based on watching him many times, doesn't mean I'm "distorting" facts, or am "dead wrong" when it comes to something which is subjective.
You want to be more positive in your outlook. I'm pessimistic based on what I've seen from him. But because you think I don't like the guy, you dismiss my opinion, or say I'm distorting facts? I don't think his offensive playing style fits. You disagree. Niether is a fact. I don't think he's that great of a shooter, and IMO he's better off the dribble than as a spot up shooter. You disagree. Well, the facts, and his shooting %'s show he's definitely not a great shooter. You think he's a better passer than I do. Difference of opinion, again. You can't say he's a great passer though, when factually he's never averaged over 4 per(even when kicking to AI in his prime), and has a 2.5 apg career average.
You definitely are more optomistic in your outlook with Salmons than I, but accusing me of distorting facts, to prove an agenda or something along those lines, is a bit of a stretch.
Just because I have formed a different opinion than you, based on watching him many times, doesn't mean I'm "distorting" facts, or am "dead wrong" when it comes to something which is subjective.
You want to be more positive in your outlook. I'm pessimistic based on what I've seen from him. But because you think I don't like the guy, you dismiss my opinion, or say I'm distorting facts? I don't think his offensive playing style fits. You disagree. Niether is a fact. I don't think he's that great of a shooter, and IMO he's better off the dribble than as a spot up shooter. You disagree. Well, the facts, and his shooting %'s show he's definitely not a great shooter. You think he's a better passer than I do. Difference of opinion, again. You can't say he's a great passer though, when factually he's never averaged over 4 per(even when kicking to AI in his prime), and has a 2.5 apg career average.
You definitely are more optomistic in your outlook with Salmons than I, but accusing me of distorting facts, to prove an agenda or something along those lines, is a bit of a stretch.
I do not believe for a second, that if Knight was at 7 Petire would pull the trigger, and all in all Knight was his man, with Jimmer being the consolation prize.
You could see by Petrie responses he didn't wish to directly speak about the case, and that the reporters were kinda 'scared' to ask whats on everyones mind.
And assuming this is true - and I honestly believe it is, it was a BAD trade.. Petrie knows it but he's scared to admit it right now.. he moved to quick, and lost his man and the BPA.. no need to suger-coat it.
You could see by Petrie responses he didn't wish to directly speak about the case, and that the reporters were kinda 'scared' to ask whats on everyones mind.
And assuming this is true - and I honestly believe it is, it was a BAD trade.. Petrie knows it but he's scared to admit it right now.. he moved to quick, and lost his man and the BPA.. no need to suger-coat it.
Haha, I'm was one of those people who was pissed when they picked Tyreke over Rubio. To be fair though, we haven't seen what Rubio can do in the NBA yet. Maybe five years down the road Rubio will be the best PG in the league and us Rubio folks will be crowing about how we were right all along.
Last edited:
It does, doesn't it? We all have our favorites and a lot of the reasoning isn't based on careful analysis or team need. We like what we like and then gather together an argument to support it, sometimes ignoring the reality. I happen to trust Petrie and his group of advisers and scouts. THIS IS MY BIAS! They have done more good than not especially on draft day. Certainly, Petrie, et al, are not trying to sabotage the Kings.
The love for Knight is real. I think he killed himself in the pre-draft work outs though. That move seemed gutless to me.
With the Kings, we needed a genuine three point threat not only to cover for Tyreke but to cover for the rest of the team. People can argue about Fredette but I don't think I am stretching too far by saying he very well may go down in NBA history as one of the best three point shooters. The question comes as to whether he will be more than that.
There are no guarantees with Knight. Also, clearly he is not the three point shooter the Kings need. Knight may be the better PG but he may not be the best PG for the Kings. As our team is the Kings .......... ah, you know.
The love for Knight is real. I think he killed himself in the pre-draft work outs though. That move seemed gutless to me.
With the Kings, we needed a genuine three point threat not only to cover for Tyreke but to cover for the rest of the team. People can argue about Fredette but I don't think I am stretching too far by saying he very well may go down in NBA history as one of the best three point shooters. The question comes as to whether he will be more than that.
There are no guarantees with Knight. Also, clearly he is not the three point shooter the Kings need. Knight may be the better PG but he may not be the best PG for the Kings. As our team is the Kings .......... ah, you know.
Sabotage, no. But does that mean they're good at what they do? The evidence is not in Petrie's favor. 2 division wins and a 49% overall winning percentage in 17 seasons as the GM is not getting it done. This is what getting it done looks like.
Knight was still the second PG taken in the draft so I don't think he hurt his stock that much by not working out against Jimmer and Kemba. Three teams in the top 7 think they have their franchise PG already and the others felt they had bigger needs elsewhere.
Knight was still the second PG taken in the draft so I don't think he hurt his stock that much by not working out against Jimmer and Kemba. Three teams in the top 7 think they have their franchise PG already and the others felt they had bigger needs elsewhere.
People had him going 4th and he went 7th. What's that? A million a year. I'm not going to look it up. I want a warrior. I wanted Knight until he pulled those shenanigans. Blame it on his agent if you wish but if THAT is true, what was his agent seeing that we weren't seeing? It simply was not a good move. If you thought it was something to be ignored, that's fine.
I will never get into an argument about Petrie. It's useless.
I will never get into an argument about Petrie. It's useless.
Yeah seems like the Rubio Loving/True PG/Tyreke NaPG crowd (including Ailene Voisin) is unanimously against picking Jimmer and the trade in general. guess time will tell. I think we are going to be argueing about this like we did about the Tyreke/Rubio draft, except this could potentially last ALL YEAR with a potential lockout year. Really hoping for no lockout!
I think Jimmer is going to be a good player, so I'm not actually opposed to Jimmer, but F that. We should have had our 3rd straight Calipari rookie. 2 straight from Kentucky, 1 from Memphis. 3 players in a row, that were taught the exact same system. Then if the Maloofs had any real sacks, they'd do what they needed to do to get Cal from Kentucky and give him another chance in the NBA with 3 of his recent star players.
Petrie didn't have a contingency plan for Knight, and it cost the Kings a chance of a lifetime. This is going to be Jason Williams over Paul Pierce all over again. Fredette playing the role of J-Will, and Knight playing the role of Pierce.
Petrie didn't have a contingency plan for Knight, and it cost the Kings a chance of a lifetime. This is going to be Jason Williams over Paul Pierce all over again. Fredette playing the role of J-Will, and Knight playing the role of Pierce.
I again wonder where this Knight frenzy is coming from. In some draft years he would not even be Top 10. You would think we passed on CP3 or something.
Geoff never wanted Knight. Inexplicable if somehow you have jumped on this bizarre hype wagon. But seemingly true. Just didn't want him. Didn't think he had the goods. Same GM who has made a recent habit of drafting the BPA for years now.
Geoff never wanted Knight. Inexplicable if somehow you have jumped on this bizarre hype wagon. But seemingly true. Just didn't want him. Didn't think he had the goods. Same GM who has made a recent habit of drafting the BPA for years now.
uhhh I don't think Knight is projected to be a superstar, but instead a good combo guard like Jason Terry. Kings aren't the only ones to to sour on Knight either. Knight slipped in this draft. Utah, and Toronto passed on him as well, instead picking a Turkish center that hasn't played for long time, and a Lithuanian center that likely won't play for a year.
Last edited:
It's not the same at all. Why does this forum insist on not allowing room for objective people? Rubio was there to take and there were already some talk that the Kings preferred Evans. It was clear the Kings did not want Rubio. That debate is a question of whether it was a good choice between the two.
The Knight debate is that the Kings had him as their #1 guy, but agreed to a trade and swap of their pick, only to see him fall to them and be unable to grab him. The other side argues that the Kings were never interested in Knight, despite working him out and sounding interested in him, and reports from all over that he was their #1 guy but they were considering other options while not expecting him to fall. He also fit the need of a defensive guard and a shooter who can play a little point.
But obviously because some spin came out later, they weren't interested. The entire world was just making **** up.
So no, Rubio and this debate are not the same thing. The only thing in common are the same people spinning PR.
The Knight debate is that the Kings had him as their #1 guy, but agreed to a trade and swap of their pick, only to see him fall to them and be unable to grab him. The other side argues that the Kings were never interested in Knight, despite working him out and sounding interested in him, and reports from all over that he was their #1 guy but they were considering other options while not expecting him to fall. He also fit the need of a defensive guard and a shooter who can play a little point.
But obviously because some spin came out later, they weren't interested. The entire world was just making **** up.
So no, Rubio and this debate are not the same thing. The only thing in common are the same people spinning PR.
That's just selective. For a week leading into the draft people numerous reports had us taking Freddete. He was our guy. There were reports us looking to trade pick but none of them were about us trading up to get Knight.
Since his workout with us, Jimmer has been linked as our guy and if by some miracle he slipped passed our pick, Utah was going to be all over him like a rash with pick 12.
Since his workout with us, Jimmer has been linked as our guy and if by some miracle he slipped passed our pick, Utah was going to be all over him like a rash with pick 12.
It's hard to say what really happened with Knight. whether he was #1 on our draft board and the Kings never thought he could slip that far OR if the Kings never liked him at all. The reports on the Kings and Jimmer have been consistent the past week though. Most of the mocks had us taking Jimmer or Leonard.
Same could be said about Por and their horrible gm's. They haven't been very good at looking at the knee history of players, and evaluating the risk.
Bottom line is, no gm is perfect, and the draft requires a little luck when you've done it for a long time. You're predicting the future of 17-22 yr olds mainly, and was tougher with high schoolers. It's not an exact science.
Bottom line is, no gm is perfect, and the draft requires a little luck when you've done it for a long time. You're predicting the future of 17-22 yr olds mainly, and was tougher with high schoolers. It's not an exact science.
Kings Draft Spencer Hawes thread
There's a lot of negativity in that thread, not just my own. As for who we should have picked instead, see picks 11-20 of that draft. Thankfully we managed to pawn him off on Philadelphia before his rookie contract was up.
And Sptsjunkie, it might not have been what you intended, but I think you made a pretty good case that the Spurs have not done a good job with the draft over the past 17 years either. Two hits and a Hall of Fame first overall pick is hardly stellar. They have a tendency to draft off-the-radar international players which leads to a lot of busts but also they're two highest profile successes. In defense of Buford/Popovich I would say that they're almost always picking at the bottom of the first round where the success rate is a lot lower. But clearly their franchises success over that time period has not been built through the draft. That or having one Hall of Fame first overall pick makes up for a lot of other mistakes (see also: Lebron James, Cleveland)
But that was just you having fun, and so much is wrong with my argument so... enlighten me.
Or not. I guess if you have better things to do I can't blame you.
EDIT: Did I go back in time?
There's a lot of negativity in that thread, not just my own. As for who we should have picked instead, see picks 11-20 of that draft. Thankfully we managed to pawn him off on Philadelphia before his rookie contract was up.
And Sptsjunkie, it might not have been what you intended, but I think you made a pretty good case that the Spurs have not done a good job with the draft over the past 17 years either. Two hits and a Hall of Fame first overall pick is hardly stellar. They have a tendency to draft off-the-radar international players which leads to a lot of busts but also they're two highest profile successes. In defense of Buford/Popovich I would say that they're almost always picking at the bottom of the first round where the success rate is a lot lower. But clearly their franchises success over that time period has not been built through the draft. That or having one Hall of Fame first overall pick makes up for a lot of other mistakes (see also: Lebron James, Cleveland)
But that was just you having fun, and so much is wrong with my argument so... enlighten me.
Or not. I guess if you have better things to do I can't blame you.EDIT: Did I go back in time?
Last edited: