Worst trade of 2011 Offseason?

[pshn80]

Brick's analysis of Salmon's attitude/personality is pretty much how I see it. I do see his selection as a nice fit with what the Kings were doing in the draft. The Kings apparently decided to select a point guard first. To do that Beno had to go. In looking for a trade, value for value, they found a match in Salmons. It gave them Beno value at the three - Beno value - and that's probably just what they wanted, value for value, no add ins, cash, other bodies.

There has been a lot said here about what Salmons is and is not. In my book it all has some basis in fact. Included in what has been said is the fact that he is a multi-talented basketball player. I have watched him alot playing here and I agree he's good, he surprised me when he finally got to play as a starter. Also said is a lot about his personality and qualities as a positive team player. The thing that hasn't been said is that Petrie knows everything about him that I do and a whole helluva lot more. He is the one making the judgement to pick so I without hesitation trust Petrie and his judgement.

I think we have basically improved the team with his selection. Now all we have to worry about is Evans and Cousins, Thornton, who distributes and how well, Fredette, play at small forward, return of Dalembert, how we invest cap money this summer if we have a CBA, and other small matters like hot dog wrappers, making it up and down the stairs and being able to maintain my positive attituda and still enjoy reading and posting on these threads. Let's hope the TDOS don't last too long.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I just don't see how anyone can defend this trade. It is one of the worst trades I think I've ever seen. There isn't one single argument that can be made in favor of doing it.

1.) We got the worse player in the deal
2.) We moved back three spots in the draft to get him.
3.) We picked up the worse contract to the tune of an extra year and ~10 million
4.) Casspi was actually more productive last year than Salmons by just about every statistical metric. We're essentialy giving up on a 23 year old 1st rounder from two years ago in order to add an aging vet that isn't actually better than him.
5.) Salmons has never been known to be anything other than a black-hole on offense, which makes you wonder how he will fit in with Reke, Marcus, and Cousins.

I can't fathom why a rebuilding team would want to add a declining thirty something vet on a bad contract who was never particularly good to begin with. It's even harder to understand why we would give up anything of value to get him, let alone one of the better players on our team and three spots in the draft.

The funny thing about it is that we didn't even wait to see who might have fallen to us at #7 before we made the trade. And if we were just dead set on Fredette as most of the reports right before the draft claimed, then we sure gave any team interested in him (utah, per reports) a golden opportunity to swoop in and draft him before our pick. That nightmare scenario would have us missing out on our desired player in the draft just so we could acquire John Salmons.

There are several arguments that can be made for it. It replaced a notoriously bad defender with a good defender. It addressed a positional need on the team. It cleared up room for Jimmer in the rotation. Even if it turns out to be a failure it still won't be near as bad as the Chris Webber trade or even the Mike Bibby trade. The Chris Webber trade ended an era got nothing of any real value back in return. It's in a whole other league.

 

[swisshh]

Actually, you're not replacing Beno's defense. You're probably losing defense as Jimmer will take Beno's minutes and his inexperience will make him a bigger liability on defense. Your upgrading defense a bit over Casspi/Greene, but Salmons D has fallen off as he has lost a step. His offense relies on beating his man with his first step as well. That is what is worrisome.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

The C-Webb trade did end an era, yes. But we all know that if the purpose of trading him was to start another era we should have sold the whole fort then and started a rebuild, but there wasn't anything Petrie could do about that, beings he wasn't the one calling most of those shots back then...due to the Maloofs and their future Anaheim plans. But I think the team we have this year will be the most competitive one we've seen in quite some time. I know for a fact that Jimmer isn't the WORST defender, and that's not the reason we drafted him in the first place...more than likely you'll see alot of switching on the defensive end when Jimmer is in the game..and that's one of the main reasons we made THIS trade, to upgrade at the 3, but with the ability to switch up and guard at the 2...which Salmons can definitely do. There's nothing...and I repeat, NOTHING wrong with this trade, IMO. And it doesn't even remotely compare with any of the trades the Maloofs made with C-Webb, Bibby, etc. Beno was a decent shooter...but played the WORST matador defense in the history of civilization, which made this trade a no brainer IMO. Getting a younger, and arguably better shooter in Jimmer...plus upgrading the SF position with a serviceable Salmons...WINNING! The interesting thing will be to see what Petrie does with the Greene, Casspi, Garcia logjam...I could see 2 of these 3 not being here next season. I think Casspi and Garcia have the most value, so wouldn't surprise me to see both of them gone in some sort of trade...Donte...not sure where he fits, or where he'll EVER fit in with this team, beings he's so inconsistent...yes, he's still young, but if you don't start to show some sort of improvement by your 4th season, you have to assume it ain't gonna happen, right?

 

[Showtime]

There are several arguments that can be made for it. It replaced a notoriously bad defender with a good defender.

Where? As has already been pointed out, Jimmer is at this point, a much larger liability defensively than Beno, and the gap there is a larger negative gap than the positive gap Salmons provides. They essentially swapped out some inconsistent average defenders with one poor one and one above average one. That's not an overall net gain.

It addressed a positional need on the team.

And it created a positional need on the team at the point position. Therefore, it's not a net improvement. Also, at the end of last season, with a healthy team and shortened rotation, they already compensated for that positional need by removing Casspi and giving the SF minutes to a 3-guard rotation. So, there wasn't a glaring weakness there anyway. The positional need had already been addressed, while at the same time winning at a rate they hadn't been all season long. There was no reason they couldn't continue that.

It cleared up room for Jimmer in the rotation.

But did he really need to come in anyway and play heavy minutes? They have now made that mandatory instead of an option, and if he struggles, the team is screwed at that position.

Even if it turns out to be a failure it still won't be near as bad as the Chris Webber trade or even the Mike Bibby trade.

That's not the measuring stick here. We are talking about the available options the team had now, now some deal that took place years ago.

 

[Kingsguy881]

Where? As has already been pointed out, Jimmer is at this point, a much larger liability defensively than Beno, and the gap there is a larger negative gap than the positive gap Salmons provides. They essentially swapped out some inconsistent average defenders with one poor one and one above average one. That's not an overall net gain.

Who are SOME? And how can someone consider Beno's defense inconsistent and average at the same time?

Try a below average defender, and he was consistent at being that.

 

[ParniValjak]

Where? As has already been pointed out, Jimmer is at this point, a much larger liability defensively than Beno, and the gap there is a larger negative gap than the positive gap Salmons provides. They essentially swapped out some inconsistent average defenders with one poor one and one above average one. That's not an overall net gain.



And it created a positional need on the team at the point position. Therefore, it's not a net improvement. Also, at the end of last season, with a healthy team and shortened rotation, they already compensated for that positional need by removing Casspi and giving the SF minutes to a 3-guard rotation. So, there wasn't a glaring weakness there anyway. The positional need had already been addressed, while at the same time winning at a rate they hadn't been all season long. There was no reason they couldn't continue that.



But did he really need to come in anyway and play heavy minutes? They have now made that mandatory instead of an option, and if he struggles, the team is screwed at that position.



That's not the measuring stick here. We are talking about the available options the team had now, now some deal that took place years ago.

Here is the thing. Beno's minutes already decreased by the end of the season and he was not going to get many more. We absolutely needed an upgrade at SF. That was by far our weakest link last year and the year before that....in fact ever since we shipped Artest out.

Jimmer is not going to play heavy minutes. Its not far fetched to pencil in Evans and Thornton for 36 mpg. That leaves a total of 24mpg for Jimmer. That is hardly significant minutes especially when you consider that Cisco is likely to get some minutes at the 2.

Oh and Salmons is VERY VERY good defender. Not above average but one of the best defensive players in the league. If anything, going by the stats from 82games his defense has improved since the last time he was here.

 

[swisshh]

I don't believe SF was our weakest link. Out of Evans, Greene or Casspi, you normally got one decent game out of those three that you could play at SF for a bit. Beno being our only PG and his deferral to Evans at the end of games was what lost the team so many close 4th quarters. Both defenses would tighten up at the end of the game, but the Kings offense often bailed out the other team's D by forcing bad shots and making turnovers. This is not something cured by experience. You need a legitimate NBA offensive system and someone to run it. The Kings looked like the Grizzlies without Mike Conley and if you watched the Grizz without Conley in the playoffs, they normally fell behind and their great D got burdened by turnovers and bad shots.

There are two basic ways to get to the playoffs: Being a great defensive team with a structured offense OR being a great offensive team with some decent team defense. Both situations need either a guy to run a set offense or a playmaker to run the break. By avoiding the PG problem, the Kings can't commit to either philosophy.

 

[est.1999]

I think in every one of your posts you refer to Evans as a sf. Not a 2 guard, not a PG, not a guard, but a sf. Wtf is wrong with you? Do you ever stop?

 

[Section 101]

I think in every one of your posts you refer to Evans as a sf. Not a 2 guard, not a PG, not a guard, but a sf. Wtf is wrong with you? Do you ever stop?

and I have asked this several times. What makes Salmons more of a SF than Evans?

 

[Bricklayer]

SF was obviously our weakest link. Its just stupid to even continue to play the word games over it. We essentialy did not have one last year. A source of constant instability, flameouts, and mismatches. One of the 5 worst SF platoons in the NBA. It was the positonal hole.

Now Salmons is not a true SF himself. He's a swingman who I think is more of a shooting guard. But he's played a lot of SF in his career, played a lot if it for us to make room for Kevin at SG, and if we are able to bring back the Twin Towers frontline and with a physically dominant player at the PG in Evans, we may be able to cover for him being smaller/weaker than many/most guys at that position. Its an upgrade, and if he'll just play the game the right way he might even be a middling SF vis a vis the rest of the league. Critical wil be the defense. That's such a huge thing there. If he can just focu on that end anf slow the opposing team's best perimeter guy every night, then we have tken a step forward.

 

[Kingster]

SF was obviously our weakest link. Its just stupid to even continue to play the word games over it. We essentialy did not have one last year. A source of constant instability, flameouts, and mismatches. One of the 5 worst SF platoons in the NBA. It was the positonal hole.

Now Salmons is not a true SF himself. He's a swingman who I think is more of a shooting guard. But he's played a lot of SF in his career, played a lot if it for us to make room for Kevin at SG, and if we are able to bring back the Twin Towers frontline and with a physically dominant player at the PG in Evans, we may be able to cover for him being smaller/weaker than many/most guys at that position. Its an upgrade, and if he'll just play the game the right way he might even be a middling SF vis a vis the rest of the league. Critical wil be the defense. That's such a huge thing there. If he can just focu on that end anf slow the opposing team's best perimeter guy every night, then we have tken a step forward.

Another way to look this trade, is not by position weakness, but by skill weakness. The greatest skill weakness on this team was assist/turnovers. Now, the Kings lose arguable their best ball handler in Beno. They get in return a rookie, who in college, was a pretty good ball handler, but certainly not great either. They also get dribble, dribble, dribble Salmons. Yes, Salmons should be able to be better able to spread the floor and penetrate to the basket, but with dribble, dribble, dribble, that doesn't help assist/turnovers for the team. To me, that's a decided net minus. When it comes to defense, the best you can say is that Jimmer will be as good as Beno on defense (at least initially), and Salmons will be better than what we have. So there's a net plus.

 

[bajaden]

A lot of conclusions are being arrived at, based on assumptions. Assumptions I have to believe, come from reading more than watching. Everyone is assuming that Fredette will be a bad defender. Those people could be right, but in the end, its still an assumption. There were circumstances that led to Fredette's poor defense at BYU. So to that end, I'm willing to keep an open mind and say, lets see! Beyond that, there's the assumption that Fredette can't lead a team. In some people's mind, he's nothing more than a 3 pt chucker who can't create his own shot.

Obviously those people never saw him play. Kingster watched at least one game, and concluded that Fredette is only right handed and couldn't handle the ball or shoot the ball with his left hand. Now that may have been true in the one game he watched, but anyone that watched him play all year would simply laugh at that statement as totally ridiculous. I'm not trying to pick on Kingster. I'am trying to point out that you can't just watch one game, or not watch any games and then make intelligent posts about any player. At the college level, Fredette was a very good ballhandler, a good passer, could score with either hand at the basket, was very good at getting to the basket, was credited with high basketball IQ, and with good court vision. How all those things will translate to the NBA is a different matter. But until proven wrong, I'll continue to be positive about it.

Kingster liked to point out that Kemba, who he liked, and I did as well, was outstanding at getting to the basket and also getting to the freethrow line. OK, I agree! But does the fact that Fredette got to the freethrow line as many times as Walker not deserve the same credit. Fredette and Walker are very similar in their accomplishments. But yet, many on this fourm will give credit to Walker, but not to Fredette. I understand having favorite players. But you don't have to discredit one, to praise another. And I've never understood, why, if one is going to assume something, especially with no first hand knowledge, the assumption has to be negative. I don't get it, and never will. I prefer to take a wait and see attitude.

 

[Kingster]

I think you're confusing the issue with the Kemba Walker - Jimmer debate. (Also, I don't recall ever lauding Kemba about his ability to get to the free throw line).

The issue is more than Jimmer or Walker or Knight. It's Jimmer, Walker, Knight, Beno and Salmons. Let's leave aside the potential "opportunity costs" of Walker and Knight and focus on Beno, Jimmer, and Salmons. I've already said Salmons is a net plus on defense and to me he's at best a wash on offense because of his dribble, dribble, dribble. Then the question is: Have the Kings gotten better or worse in their ballhandling because of this deal? I think the've gotten worse. I see no reason to believe that Jimmer, a rookie, is going to be better than Beno in ball handling next year. If you do, then make your case, but don't obfuscate with irrelevant arguments about Kemba Walker.

With respect to defense, I am making assumptions with the Beno/Jimmer comparison. But on the other hand, I think I'm giving Jimmer the benefit of the doubt in that assumption - that Jimmer will be as good next year on the defensive end than Beno was last year. So then, the question is, is it a reasonable assumption? Well, first Beno obviously has superior experience in defending in the NBA. Check for Beno. The next thing to think about on the defensive side of the ball is athleticism. After having watched both of them, is Jimmer an obvious choice for his superiority in athleticism over Beno? If Jimmer is superior to Beno in athleticism, it doesn't jump right out at you. So, to me that's a wash. So Jimmer gets a minus on experience and a wash on athleticism relative to Beno. But because I've bent over backwards, I've said that Jimmer could be as good as Beno next year on the defensive end. If anything, I'm giving your side of the argument the benefit of the doubt.

So, to me, in the Jimmer for Beno trade you're losing in ballhandling and at best getting a wash on the defensive end. Granted, over the next few years, I would anticipate Jimmer would improve in those areas, but for next year I'm dubious about the assist/turnover weakness and still skeptical about our ability to guard quick point guards in this league. Throw in Salmons and you still get less ballhandling than last year, but with more defense at the wing position.

 

[est.1999]

We didn't lose in ball handling. I think Reke will be much improved next season in that aspect of his game.

 

[kupman]

I think that the biggest holes we had last year were a #1 lack of a SF and #2 the lack of a shooter. In this trade we addressed both issues and left a lot of cap space to sign another significant name.

I am happy with the progress that is being made.

 

[kennadog]

Nobody knows yet how Fredette will fare at the defensive end of the court in the NBA. As to his athleticism, though, I'd have to think someone who was offered a scholarship to play football, can't be too bad an athlete. He was an excellent wide receiver through his junior year in high school, becoming the #1 rated receiver in NY State. For his senior year he stopped playing football to focus on basketball.

One of many articles about Fredette and football: http://poststar.com/sports/article_dede5480-00f9-11e0-bbe0-001cc4c002e0.html

 

[R2D2]

At the college level, Fredette was a very good ballhandler, a good passer, could score with either hand at the basket, was very good at getting to the basket, was credited with high basketball IQ, and with good court vision. How all those things will translate to the NBA is a different matter. But until proven wrong, I'll continue to be positive about it.

I agree with your observations. I will also assume that you saw Jimmer play more often than I. Having said that during his years at BYU Jimmer did not play defense. And that was at the college level. I hope you will agree that it's even tougher on the NBA level... So I am keeping my mind open but by the same token until I am proven wrong I'll continue to be worried about it.

Just to be clear - I like Petrie's pick. And I like the fact we traded down and still where able to get the guy we wanted. There was not a huge difference (IMO) in this draft between the 5th pick and the 12th (I like Burks as well). But let me say one more thing that took me a few days to crystalize. I do not like the trade that came along with moving our pick. The reason for that being is that it shattered my hopes. The way I saw it we have cap space and two main objectives going into the off season (IMO) - resigning Daly and signing a SF. (MT is restricted so keeping him is easier). I was hoping we will spend our cap on these two needs. We (this forum) were debating about the big veteran FAs available at the SF position for months (AK, Battier etc.). Now we are locked with a tweener SG/SF, almost 32 (by the time next season hopefully starts) with a bad contract (not poisonous as some claim, but bad nevertheless) and questionable leadersip skills (and I am being polite here...). So now people say that this is the sort of stock that is willing to come to Sactown because no high caliber FA will ever come here. And we move on to open new threads about replacing Daly with Nene or Chandler in case we can't re-sign him. It's ridiculous...
It's also what stings me the most.

Talking is cheap. The FA can talk about splashing cash as much as it wants, but as long as the Maloofs are in dire financial straits and their best solution to one of this team's most prominent needs is obtaining Salmons and shedding Beno's contract in the process (which is another indication) I am somewhat worried that this "spending frenzy" is just a deception. But once again - I am keeping my mind open and hope I am proven wrong. Trust me, amigo, it won't be the first time...

Kingster watched at least one game, and concluded that Fredette is only right handed

I'll give Kingster credit where credit is due, as Jimmer is indeed right handed. And that's not from reading more than watching...

 

[Kingster]

We didn't lose in ball handling. I think Reke will be much improved next season in that aspect of his game.

And that is another assumption. We'll see...

I'd just like Tyreke to be able to get the ball over half court in six seconds or less and set up the offense as a start.

 

[Kingster]

Nobody knows yet how Fredette will fare at the defensive end of the court in the NBA. As to his athleticism, though, I'd have to think someone who was offered a scholarship to play football, can't be too bad an athlete. He was an excellent wide receiver through his junior year in high school, becoming the #1 rated receiver in NY State. For his senior year he stopped playing football to focus on basketball.

One of many articles about Fredette and football: http://poststar.com/sports/article_dede5480-00f9-11e0-bbe0-001cc4c002e0.html

Do you think Fredette is a superior athlete to Beno?

 

[Kingster]

I think that the biggest holes we had last year were a #1 lack of a SF and #2 the lack of a shooter. In this trade we addressed both issues and left a lot of cap space to sign another significant name.

I am happy with the progress that is being made.

We got a shooter - Thornton.

 

[Kingster]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/sortab...s&dir=&low=&high=&=season&seasonState=regular

The Kings had the 2nd worst assist/turnover ratio in the league last year, the 2nd worst turnovers in the league, and the 8th worst assist total.

 

[bajaden]

We got a shooter - Thornton.

Actually we now have two shooters, and I'm not including Salmons. Thornton and Fredette. While I struggle to find positives about the trade, purely on aquiring Salmons, defense is the main attribute I come up with. While Salmons is a decent to good 3 pt shooter, you usually have to twist his arm to take a shot from out there. He prefers to go to the basket, which doesn't blend well with Tyreke. I don't want to beat a dead horse. I'm not saying anything that everyone didn't already know. Who knows, maybe in this stage of his career he'll be content to just play some defense, and take the spot up three. I'm not going to hold my breath, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until he proves otherwise.

 

[bajaden]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/sortab...s&dir=&low=&high=&=season&seasonState=regular

The Kings had the 2nd worst assist/turnover ratio in the league last year, the 2nd worst turnovers in the league, and the 8th worst assist total.

I knew it had to be bad without looking it up. Typical of a young team though. And, (excuse me Paul WestPhal) typical of a badly coached team. I think we have a little bit of a combination of both. The good thing, and the bad thing, is that most of our turnovers were unforced. The bad thing is obvious, but the good thing is that they're correctable with better decision making, which comes with more experience. Just getting into our offense sooner will cut down on some of the turnovers. When you get in late, you tend to rush your play, plus, you lose the options off that play. And many times that results in a turnover.

Add in, that young teams tend to play as individuals instead of as a team at times, which leads to too much one on one, I'll save the day, play. That also adds to the turnover list. I've always said, that you can look at just about any boxscore and not look at the score itself, but just at the turnovers, assists, and rebounds, and tell who won the game. Just about anytime your team has over 20 assists, and under 12 turnovers, and more rebounds than the other team, you'll win the game 8 out of 10 times. So big improvements need to come in that area.

 

[Bricklayer]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/sortab...s&dir=&low=&high=&=season&seasonState=regular

The Kings had the 2nd worst assist/turnover ratio in the league last year, the 2nd worst turnovers in the league, and the 8th worst assist total.

The Wizards hard the 3rd worst assist/turnover ration, and the 2nd worst assist total. Should they be worried about acquiring ballhandlers too?

The point being this: we need to improve in that arena. But young teams are almost always bad at those stats, regardless of type of personnel. And as young teams get older, they almost always improve. Added maturity for Cousins will help a ton just by itself.

I am not terribly amused at losing Beno. Truth be told I would feel more comfortable right now if the trade had been the #7 for Salmons straight up, and we still had Beno as the third guard rather than Jimmer. But he was going to see his minutes shrink next year with Reke and Thronton both coming into camp at fullspeed, and was hardly some giant assist guy even when he got the minutes. Our A/T ratio this year is going to be determined far more by how much our young core guys grow up than by the maybe 0.5 to 1.0 extra assist Beno might have given us over Jimmer in his 20-25min a game.

 

[Kingster]

Actually we now have two shooters, and I'm not including Salmons. Thornton and Fredette. While I struggle to find positives about the trade, purely on aquiring Salmons, defense is the main attribute I come up with. While Salmons is a decent to good 3 pt shooter, you usually have to twist his arm to take a shot from out there. He prefers to go to the basket, which doesn't blend well with Tyreke. I don't want to beat a dead horse. I'm not saying anything that everyone didn't already know. Who knows, maybe in this stage of his career he'll be content to just play some defense, and take the spot up three. I'm not going to hold my breath, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until he proves otherwise.

I just keep thinking that the first three weeks of practice Westphal should enforce a no dribble rule. Seriously. You put the ball down on the floor and you get a $500 fine. I've always heard it takes 3 weeks to break a bad habit. Then maybe he can follow it up for the next two weeks with a two dribble rule. It might break the bank of Tyreke and Salmons, but it would be very nice for local charities...

 

[Kingster]

The Wizards hard the 3rd worst assist/turnover ration, and the 2nd worst assist total. Should they be worried about acquiring ballhandlers too?The point being this: we need to improve in that arena. But young teams are almost always bad at those stats, regardless of type of personnel. And as young teams get older, they almost always improve. Added maturity for Cousins will help a ton just by itself.

I am not terribly amused at losing Beno. Truth be told I would feel more comfortable right now if the trade had been the #7 for Salmons straight up, and we still had Beno as the third guard rather than Jimmer. But he was going to see his minutes shrink next year with Reke and Thronton both coming into camp at fullspeed, and was hardly some giant assist guy even when he got the minutes. Our A/T ratio this year is going to be determined far more by how much our young core guys grow up than by the maybe 0.5 to 1.0 extra assist Beno might have given us over Jimmer in his 20-25min a game.

I don't know. Should they?

The loss of Beno. The addition of Salmons. The addition of a rookie pg getting 20-25 minutes a game. Our young core better get a lot better with assists/turnovers if this team is going to have a chance of getting to .500 ball.

 

[kennadog]

Do you think Fredette is a superior athlete to Beno?

I didn't really watch Fredette play at BYU, but I would guess he is not going to be called an athletic freak, ever. But Beno has never been particularly athletic either. I don't think Fredette is a worse athlete than Beno.

I know Jimmer said he's always had to prove himself. Apparently, from reports, he is a very dedicated, hard-working athlete, where Beno was called lazy with the Spurs. I think Beno changed his attitude in Sacramento, but Fredette probably doesn't have to change his attitude at all.

Freak athletes don't always end up being good/great players. It's nice to have that advantage, but heart, smarts, hard work and a desire to get better every day can take an player farther than anyone expects. Ideally a player would have both the physical assets and the intangibles.

 

[Kingster]

I didn't really watch Fredette play at BYU, but I would guess he is not going to be called an athletic freak, ever. But Beno has never been particularly athletic either. I don't think Fredette is a worse athlete than Beno.

I know Jimmer said he's always had to prove himself. Apparently, from reports, he is a very dedicated, hard-working athlete, where Beno was called lazy with the Spurs. I think Beno changed his attitude in Sacramento, but Fredette probably doesn't have to change his attitude at all.

Freak athletes don't always end up being good/great players. It's nice to have that advantage, but heart, smarts, hard work and a desire to get better every day can take an player farther than anyone expects. Ideally a player would have both the physical assets and the intangibles.

All I'm saying is that it seems very reasonable, given Jimmer's comparable athletic status to Beno, and Beno's superior experience, that's it's hard to see Jimmer doing better than Beno next year on the defensive end. Maybe two or three years from now. Not next year.

I agree that intangibles are important. It's one of the reasons I can't stand getting Salmons back.

 

[bajaden]

All I'm saying is that it seems very reasonable, given Jimmer's comparable athletic status to Beno, and Beno's superior experience, that's it's hard to see Jimmer doing better than Beno next year on the defensive end. Maybe two or three years from now. Not next year.

I agree that intangibles are important. It's one of the reasons I can't stand getting Salmons back.

Fredette is certainly a good enough athlete to play good defense. Hell, there have been great athletes that were terrible defenders. But it will take time. I think Fredette is a better overall athlete than Beno, but the difference won't make much difference at first. Its all about knowing where to go, and when to rotate. Fredette is certainly strong enough to fight through screens, instead of going under them, which Beno use to do quite often, although he was getting better at it.

Everyone makes an issue of staying in front of your man. Thats all well and good, but tell me, who is it that can stay in front of Rose, or Westbrook, or Paul, etc. They can't even stay in front of one another most of the time. But they can make sure that if they're beat, that their man goesTh in the direction they want him to go. The more great individual defenders you have, the better off you are. But its really all about team defense, and that just takes time. It also helps to have a good defensive coach. Not sure who that is on the Kings.