Kings sign Landry (part 2)

[M_Barragan]

Hi Guys,

Long long time reader and once active poster with various Aliases.

Just want to say i'm really happy this team is here for good.

I am sad to see Tyreke go. He was my favorite player ever since I met him at the Rookie rally when we drafted him and I caught a black kings stress ball he threw me.

I am also happy to see him in a position to succeed as I don't think Sacramento would have been a good fit for him with the players we have and the team they are trying to build.

On Carl,

He is Malone's Guy I think more then just what he brings on the Court they want someone that brings things off the Court to teach our youth how to play and compete like Pro's. Sometimes that is worth over paying for.

I think it's not realistic for people to think we would be competing for play off birth this year. I took years to mess us up to this point. It will take more then one off season to fix it.

What I want this team to do next year is compete like Pro's regardless of a win or loss. And I think that is the priority here. It is one thing to lose because you don't care. It is another to lose because you don't Have the talent to beat the other guy.

In reality we will be a lotto team next year. If MCM pans out that lotto pick next year will give us the 3rd piece this team needs. And with the cap space we have and the new CBA repeater tax coming live next off season teams will be off loading very good players to get under the cap.

That is when this team makes their moves and rounds off their team with the pieces we already have. I assume that is what PDA is positioning himself for.

 

[MizzouKing]

That's what I was saying earlier. In a few minutes there will be some posts from the usual suspects telling you why you're obviously wrong, but you're not. A strong character guy with reasonably good skills and some maturity can have significant value in a young locker room, and if he has a good relationship with a new coach it boosts the chances of a culture change occuring more quickly.

It may be mostly about the superstar, but reality is socially defined. When a team is winning, a good locker room can have a positive effect on a less-than-stable/mature guy like DMC.

On Carl,

He is Malone's Guy I think more then just what he brings on the Court they want someone that brings things off the Court to teach our youth how to play and compete like Pro's. Sometimes that is worth over paying for.

PS: This still doesn't make it a good signing IMHO, but there are a few positives to draw on. As long as we don't get another headline about Salmons being signed to a long term contract extension, I'll try to stay on the side of optimism.

 

[jalfa]

That's what I was saying earlier. In a few minutes there will be some posts from the usual suspects telling you why you're obviously wrong, but you're not. A strong character guy with reasonably good skills and some maturity can have significant value in a young locker room, and if he has a good relationship with a new coach it boosts the chances of a culture change occuring more quickly.

It may be mostly about the superstar, but reality is socially defined. When a team is winning, a good locker room can have a positive effect on a less-than-stable/mature guy like DMC.

wrong is a strong word, I'll refrain from using it and instead just note that Carl has already been here, has already played with pretty much our entire frontcourt and that I don't see any reason to consider him more of a pro's pro than Chuck (or what Chuck was before he came here).

 

[The_Jamal]

wrong is a strong word, I'll refrain from using it and instead just note that Carl has already been here, has already played with pretty much our entire frontcourt and that I don't see any reason to consider him more of a pro's pro than Chuck (or what Chuck was before he came here).

And I don't think that same front-court will be here at the beginning of the season.

This moves screams we have a trade in the works involving JT and or Ppat. If not, this move becomes absolutely redundant and a big waste

 

[M_Barragan]

I think it's more of Carl already knowing what Malone's system is and getting the players to buy into that system. Not to mention Carl is a lot more serviceable then Hayes.

With Tyreke gone we needed another player with an offensive punch so the signing makes sense to me.

 

[KingsFanGER]

The only valuable PF in FA were Smith, Millsap, Landry, Hansbrough and Hickson right? Maybe you can add Martin, Maxiell and Brand.
Out of these guys is there anyone you would like more, than Landry to play for the Kings. But you should take the actual salary into account.
I feel we didnt make a too bad move, if we can get rid of one of our PF in a trade.

Btw. how about signing Bernard James as a bench big for defensive purposes? More mobile than Aldridge and might be a good shotblocker and rebounder if given minutes.

 

[dude12]

The people who continue to say that Landry shouldn't have been signed because we already had him and he didn't work with Cousins should use this same criteria with Tyreke who had 3 years with Cousins. The Evans / Cousins pairing did not work. Doesn't mean all blame goes to Evans, but it didn't work as the wins stayed around 25-28. Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost. Gives us depth to make another move.

 

[OnYouLikeGlue]

The people who continue to say that Landry shouldn't have been signed because we already had him and he didn't work with Cousins should use this same criteria with Tyreke who had 3 years with Cousins. The Evans / Cousins pairing did not work. Doesn't mean all blame goes to Evans, but it didn't work as the wins stayed around 25-28. Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost. Gives us depth to make another move.

And...I think the biggest key it allows us to play a similar style of offense with Cousins on the bench. An inside out approach since none of the bigs that were on the roster have anywhere near the inside game Landry does.

 

[jalfa]

The only valuable PF in FA were Smith, Millsap, Landry, Hansbrough and Hickson right? Maybe you can add Martin, Maxiell and Brand.
Out of these guys is there anyone you would like more, than Landry to play for the Kings. But you should take the actual salary into account.
I feel we didnt make a too bad move, if we can get rid of one of our PF in a trade.

Btw. how about signing Bernard James as a bench big for defensive purposes? More mobile than Aldridge and might be a good shotblocker and rebounder if given minutes.

well, Brandan Wright would've been a better fit and more what I'd have been looking for in an FA addition. otherwise, not signing anybody would've been just as fine by me, considering that I think Thompson is actually a better fit next to Cuz (noticed today that his midrange numbers are much better than those of Landry, btw).

The people who continue to say that Landry shouldn't have been signed because we already had him and he didn't work with Cousins should use this same criteria with Tyreke who had 3 years with Cousins. The Evans / Cousins pairing did not work. Doesn't mean all blame goes to Evans, but it didn't work as the wins stayed around 25-28. Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost. Gives us depth to make another move.

Landry didn't fit with Cuz because both are at their best in the same space and doing the same thing offensively and don't at all compliment each other defensively. the problem with Evans, imo, wasn't that he didn't fit with Cuz, but that he didn't fit with the other guys doing the stuff he does best, handling the ball and attacking the rim. that territory wasn't encroached upon by Cuz, but by the likes of Thomas, Thornton or Salmons. in the case of Cuz and Landry, the FO got smart and got rid of the lesser talent, Landry, before Westphal screwed it all up even more. they never did get around to the same realisation with Tyreke, sadly.

 

[hrdboild]

The people who continue to say that Landry shouldn't have been signed because we already had him and he didn't work with Cousins should use this same criteria with Tyreke who had 3 years with Cousins. The Evans / Cousins pairing did not work. Doesn't mean all blame goes to Evans, but it didn't work as the wins stayed around 25-28. Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost. Gives us depth to make another move.

The question is, why aren't you using the same criteria for both players? If Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost, than so is Tyreke Evans. If Evans didn't work with Cousins and needed to go, than so did Landry. You're using one criteria to dismiss one player and then pretending as if it doesn't apply to someone else and you're calling me inconsistent? I didn't say Landry can't help us, I said that it was a bad idea to me to trade away Tyreke before giving him a chance to prove he can play under Malone. Turning around and spending 60% of what Tyreke was offered for a roleplayer who also was on the team with Cousins before and didn't gel means that you are willing to give Landry a chance to prove that he can play better under Malone. They are different players, Landry does have a track record with Malone already, but it makes the decision on Tyreke look even worse to me because at best Landry is a glue guy, not a key player.

And I've been criticizing Petrie for literally years and years for tying up all his cap space on mid-level deals which prevented us from having enough left over to actually get the key players that we needed. Thornton - 8 million. Salmons - 7.5 million. Hayes - 5.7 million. Thompson - 5.6 million. Landry - 6.5 million. I've made this argument before, but it bears repeating. Look at the salaries of every playoff team. How many players do you see with contracts in the 5-9 million dollar range? It's 1 or 2 at most for all of them. We now have 5 of them. This is exhibit A for why this rebuild has taken 7 years and isn't even close to accomplishing anything. You commit to the guys who actually matter, the 10-15 million dollars players, the stars and the third banana guys and you fill out your roster with cheap roleplayers. That is the recipe for success that works for every team in the league. When you hear people saying that this has been a Petrie-esque off-season, this is what they're referring to.

 

[jdbraver]

The question is, why aren't you using the same criteria for both players? If Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost, than so is Tyreke Evans. If Evans didn't work with Cousins and needed to go, than so did Landry. You're using one criteria to dismiss one player and then pretending as if it doesn't apply to someone else and you're calling me inconsistent? I didn't say Landry can't help us, I said that it was a bad idea to me to trade away Tyreke before giving him a chance to prove he can play under Malone. Turning around and spending 60% of what Tyreke was offered for a roleplayer who also was on the team with Cousins before and didn't gel means that you are willing to give Landry a chance to prove that he can play better under Malone. They are different players, Landry does have a track record with Malone already, but it makes the decision on Tyreke look even worse to me because at best Landry is a glue guy, not a key player.

And I've been criticizing Petrie for literally years and years for tying up all his cap space on mid-level deals which prevented us from having enough left over to actually get the key players that we needed. Thornton - 8 million. Salmons - 7.5 million. Hayes - 5.7 million. Thompson - 5.6 million. Landry - 6.5 million. I've made this argument before, but it bears repeating. Look at the salaries of every playoff team. How many players do you see with contracts in the 5-9 million dollar range? It's 1 or 2 at most for all of them. We now have 5 of them. This is exhibit A for why this rebuild has taken 7 years and isn't even close to accomplishing anything. You commit to the guys who actually matter, the 10-15 million dollars players, the stars and the third banana guys and you fill out your roster with cheap roleplayers. That is the recipe for success that works for every team in the league. When you hear people saying that this has been a Petrie-esque off-season, this is what they're referring to.

agreed, but I would hope we are looking to get rid of the other contracts by trade or letting them lapse. Landry can be malones one guy, but u r right it needs to stop w him.

 

[OnYouLikeGlue]

The question is, why aren't you using the same criteria for both players? If Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost, than so is Tyreke Evans. If Evans didn't work with Cousins and needed to go, than so did Landry. You're using one criteria to dismiss one player and then pretending as if it doesn't apply to someone else and you're calling me inconsistent? I didn't say Landry can't help us, I said that it was a bad idea to me to trade away Tyreke before giving him a chance to prove he can play under Malone. Turning around and spending 60% of what Tyreke was offered for a roleplayer who also was on the team with Cousins before and didn't gel means that you are willing to give Landry a chance to prove that he can play better under Malone. They are different players, Landry does have a track record with Malone already, but it makes the decision on Tyreke look even worse to me because at best Landry is a glue guy, not a key player.

And I've been criticizing Petrie for literally years and years for tying up all his cap space on mid-level deals which prevented us from having enough left over to actually get the key players that we needed. Thornton - 8 million. Salmons - 7.5 million. Hayes - 5.7 million. Thompson - 5.6 million. Landry - 6.5 million. I've made this argument before, but it bears repeating. Look at the salaries of every playoff team. How many players do you see with contracts in the 5-9 million dollar range? It's 1 or 2 at most for all of them. We now have 5 of them. This is exhibit A for why this rebuild has taken 7 years and isn't even close to accomplishing anything. You commit to the guys who actually matter, the 10-15 million dollars players, the stars and the third banana guys and you fill out your roster with cheap roleplayers. That is the recipe for success that works for every team in the league. When you hear people saying that this has been a Petrie-esque off-season, this is what they're referring to.

We didnt trade him away, he signed with another team. And there arent enough glue guys on this team, and it gives us a post presence for when Cus goes to the bench. I'm good with this move as long as its a precursor to further moves that use our existing bigs and guards to bring back an upgrade at SF.

 

[hrdboild]

We didnt trade him away, he signed with another team. And there arent enough glue guys on this team, and it gives us a post presence for when Cus goes to the bench. I'm good with this move as long as its a precursor to further moves that use our existing bigs and guards to bring back an upgrade at SF.

Semantics. We had an opportunity to sign him for $44 million and decided to sign and trade him instead.

 

[Bricklayer]

That's what I was saying earlier. In a few minutes there will be some posts from the usual suspects telling you why you're obviously wrong, but you're not. A strong character guy with reasonably good skills and some maturity can have significant value in a young locker room, and if he has a good relationship with a new coach it boosts the chances of a culture change occuring more quickly.

It may be mostly about the superstar, but reality is socially defined. When a team is winning, a good locker room can have a positive effect on a less-than-stable/mature guy like DMC.



PS: This still doesn't make it a good signing IMHO, but there are a few positives to draw on. As long as we don't get another headline about Salmons being signed to a long term contract extension, I'll try to stay on the side of optimism.

Landry was here before.

He mattered not at all in the lockerroom. In fact Cousins may have sacrificing chickens in there as he was wildly out of control during his first year. We heard this same nonsense with Hayes. Another good guy BTW, but you can't lead from the rear.

And my point, unrefuted has been this: if we are concerned about culture, and then your first move is to trade your 2nd best player, who is a good guy. And then your second move is to sign as a free agent a good guy...who plays exactly the same position and is going to force the replacement as the 3 best guys/good citizens on the team (you can't get more good citizeny than Hayes/JT/Patterson), then what exactly is the point? This is called spinning your wheels.

And BTW the message seems to be changing every few days, as do the attempts to justify everything. We want to defend! Trade away best perimeter defender for a lousy one. We want to pass, get Grievez. Then followup by signing noted non passer. I think more passing is grand, more defense is grand, more rebounding is grand, more good citizens is grand. But the key word is MORE.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Semantics. We had an opportunity to sign him for $44 million and decided to sign and trade him instead.

NOT semantics. OnYouLikeGlue is just flat WRONG. we are doing a sign and trade, that is how we are getting Vasquez and the 2 second round picks. We FACILITATED this turd sandwich of a deal.

 

[BonziFan]

Landry was here before.

He mattered not at all in the lockerroom. In fact Cousins may have sacrificing chickens in there as he was wildly out of control during his first year. We heard this same nonsense with Hayes. Another good guy BTW, but you can't lead from the rear.

And my point, unrefuted has been this: if we are concerned about culture, and then your first move is to trade your 2nd best player, who is a good guy. And then your second move is to sign as a free agent a good guy...who plays exactly the same position and is going to force the replacement as the 3 best guys/good citizens on the team (you can't get more good citizeny than Hayes/JT/Patterson), then what exactly is the point? This is called spinning your wheels.

And BTW the message seems to be changing every few days, as do the attempts to justify everything. We want to defend! Trade away best perimeter defender for a lousy one. We want to pass, get Grievez. Then followup by signing noted non passer. I think more passing is grand, more defense is grand, more rebounding is grand, more good citizens is grand. But the key word is MORE.

I don't think you can judge anything from the previous regime, which I could be wrong, but I thought you have said that too.

 

[TTown Kings]

wrong is a strong word, I'll refrain from using it and instead just note that Carl has already been here, has already played with pretty much our entire frontcourt and that I don't see any reason to consider him more of a pro's pro than Chuck (or what Chuck was before he came here).

This. His leadership qualities didn't have much impact before so why would that change now. How's the saying go about learning from history? Or doing the same things over again and expecting different results? Those are my takes on this situation. Been there, done that, seen the outcome. Have no desire to see it again. That's why I'm frustrated with all of this.

 

[John Galt]

(you can't get more good citizeny than Hayes/JT/Patterson)

I think that is debatable. I like to maintain a very positive persona on here so I won't light into Hayes and JT with specifics, but somebody has reported seeing one of those guys driving around Sac stoned off his a$$ (the dopey mouth-breathing one), and the other is a stubby dufus who can't jump. I feel like Landry is a big upgrade over either. And whatever the knock on Landry, he earned plenty of supporters both in Houston and the Bay.

I'd be thrilled if we could dump Hayes for a second rounder. Thompson is kinda fun to have around and might bang around at C so I can take or leave him, but having Hayes on the team is downright depressing. Maybe he's a good character guys in a Mister Rogers kind of way, but he's not my kinda guy and neither is JT.

Patterson to me is a higher level player than all of them and I'm fine with him as starting PF.

 

[John Galt]

NOT semantics. OnYouLikeGlue is just flat WRONG. we are doing a sign and trade, that is how we are getting Vasquez and the 2 second round picks. We FACILITATED this turd sandwich of a deal.

I think y'all are sleeping on Vasquez. squint your eyes and add 3ppg to his stats least year. Now would you like to have a pg like that on your team? I just think he deserves a chance to excel before we light ourselves on fire over this deal.

 

[jalfa]

I think that is debatable. I like to maintain a very positive persona on here so I won't light into Hayes and JT with specifics, but somebody has reported seeing one of those guys driving around Sac stoned off his a$$ (the dopey mouth-breathing one), and the other is a stubby dufus who can't jump. I feel like Landry is a big upgrade over either. And whatever the knock on Landry, he earned plenty of supporters both in Houston and the Bay.

you choose to run with unsubstantiated slander of the highest order and insult the intelligence of one of the smartest players of this league. you've also repeatedly insulted those of us that dare to voice criticism of the moves so far and claim to be maintaining a positive persona? seriously?

 

[jalfa]

I think y'all are sleeping on Vasquez. squint your eyes and add 3ppg to his stats least year. Now would you like to have a pg like that on your team? I just think he deserves a chance to excel before we light ourselves on fire over this deal.

substract 3APG and he looks downright mediocre. there's substantial reason to believe that that's much more likely to be the case.

 

[VF21]

This. His leadership qualities didn't have much impact before so why would that change now. How's the saying go about learning from history? Or doing the same things over again and expecting different results? Those are my takes on this situation. Been there, done that, seen the outcome. Have no desire to see it again. That's why I'm frustrated with all of this.

Different regime! Malone knows Landry and Landry knows Malone. I suspect there will actually be communication and respect in the locker room, something we know for a fact wasn't present last year (and has most likely been gone for a long time), and it always helps to have a friendly face in the crowd.

 

[VF21]

you choose to run with unsubstantiated slander of the highest order and insult the intelligence of one of the smartest players of this league. you've also repeatedly insulted those of us that dare to voice criticism of the moves so far and claim to be maintaining a positive persona? seriously?

Hey, the insults have been flying all over the place so don't act as though John Galt was the only one who may have temporarily failed at maintaining a positive persona. This board has been beyond ridiculous the past few days. It would have tried the patience of a saint. I know of at least a couple of generally very civil and polite people who have removed themselves from participation for the time being because things have been way too contentious.

It would really be nice if the jabs and snark could be put aside. There's tons of room for discussion and debate without the need to ridicule, debase, insult, etc.

 

[dude12]

The question is, why aren't you using the same criteria for both players? If Landry is a reasonable acquisition at a reasonable cost, than so is Tyreke Evans. If Evans didn't work with Cousins and needed to go, than so did Landry. You're using one criteria to dismiss one player and then pretending as if it doesn't apply to someone else and you're calling me inconsistent? I didn't say Landry can't help us, I said that it was a bad idea to me to trade away Tyreke before giving him a chance to prove he can play under Malone. Turning around and spending 60% of what Tyreke was offered for a roleplayer who also was on the team with Cousins before and didn't gel means that you are willing to give Landry a chance to prove that he can play better under Malone. They are different players, Landry does have a track record with Malone already, but it makes the decision on Tyreke look even worse to me because at best Landry is a glue guy, not a key player.

And I've been criticizing Petrie for literally years and years for tying up all his cap space on mid-level deals which prevented us from having enough left over to actually get the key players that we needed. Thornton - 8 million. Salmons - 7.5 million. Hayes - 5.7 million. Thompson - 5.6 million. Landry - 6.5 million. I've made this argument before, but it bears repeating. Look at the salaries of every playoff team. How many players do you see with contracts in the 5-9 million dollar range? It's 1 or 2 at most for all of them. We now have 5 of them. This is exhibit A for why this rebuild has taken 7 years and isn't even close to accomplishing anything. You commit to the guys who actually matter, the 10-15 million dollars players, the stars and the third banana guys and you fill out your roster with cheap roleplayers. That is the recipe for success that works for every team in the league. When you hear people saying that this has been a Petrie-esque off-season, this is what they're referring to.

Not to get into a long drawn out back and forth, but the belief with the FO is that Evans is not worth the contract and they are going in another direction. For those that wish the FO would have matched Evans and tried him at PG with Mac at SG....I see why you would want to try that but it appears that the FO doesn't buy in to that scenario. I agree with them as it hasn't worked and further would hinder the development of McLemore. Bottom line is it hasn't worked with Tyreke at PG and his new team doesn't tview him as a PG either.

I just like what the moves so far.....the key being "so far".

I like the coaching hire...make that love the coaching hire based on what he's done. He ran the Warriors on the floor, Mark Jackson managed them. I hope it translates to being the head guy.

I like not giving the salary to Reke and taking back Vazquez who I think is a better fit for this team at this point.
I like the Landry signing at a reasonable amount...a guy off the bench.
I'm sure there is going to be more moves to get rid of more players or move assets to fill holes.
I'd like for them to get a guy like Sam Young who can only help the culture of the team......I think we saw some of that when TRob went out and PPat and Douglass and Aldrich came in last year....thought they were good adds.
Really would like to see Thornton go....very selfish
Would really hope that we could move Jimmer...dude can't play. I'm sure there is a fit for him somewhere but when you can't dribble or defend.....that's not good.
Would love to see a new SF...I think everyone and their mom are waiting for this more than anything right now.

 

[OnYouLikeGlue]

NOT semantics. OnYouLikeGlue is just flat WRONG. we are doing a sign and trade, that is how we are getting Vasquez and the 2 second round picks. We FACILITATED this turd sandwich of a deal.

No, he was leaving via free agency, but we were able to work a deal to not lose him for nothing and instead got an improving, tall pass first PG and 2 picks. You can't look at this as a normal player for player trade because its not. Evans chose to sign with NO and we found a way to get something in return.

 

[spudfan]

Hey, the insults have been flying all over the place so don't act as though John Galt was the only one who may have temporarily failed at maintaining a positive persona. This board has been beyond ridiculous the past few days. It would have tried the patience of a saint. I know of at least a couple of generally very civil and polite people who have removed themselves from participation for the time being because things have been way too contentious.

It would really be nice if the jabs and snark could be put aside. There's tons of room for discussion and debate without the need to ridicule, debase, insult, etc.

Maybe so. But John Galt has been the worst poster seen here in years. Incessant trolling and extremely sarcastic posts that don't even try to pretend to invoke any kind of conversation.

 

[sergmatt]

Sometimes I wonder if Kings fans remember any of what made the Kings glory teams so good. A big part of what made the Webber-Vlade-Christie-Peja-Bibby/J-Will-Pollard-Jackson-Hedo was...TEAM CHEMISTRY

When players and coaches from the Golden State Warriors were interviewed last year and asked what the reasons were for their team playing so good, the first thing you'd always hear is that last year's Warriors team had great team chemistry and that all of the guys really enjoyed playing with each other and hung out off the court.

The last several years the Kings have had terrible team chemistry.

So the Kings go out and sign Carl Landry a "Malone Guy" that totally buys into his system. Landry is also a well-liked and well-respected good locker-room guy that just came from a team that fostered team chemistry.

And yet how many fans even notice this? All these posts bashing his game and talking about how redundant it is and either failing to acknowledge or even comprehend that this signing was about more than just on-court contribution from Landry.

Part of turning a team into a winner is changing the culture and fostering a winning environment. No doubt Landry was brought in to help accomplish this.

 

[VF21]

Maybe so. But John Galt has been the worst poster seen here in years. Incessant trolling and extremely sarcastic posts that don't even try to pretend to invoke any kind of conversation.

Nope. Not even in the top 10.

The point is that a lot of us could stand to step back a bit, take a deep breath and quit reacting emotionally to every little perceived insult. Having read every single post of the past few days - and a few PMs to me that would make a sailor blush - I'm well aware of sarcasm, cursing, vitriolic excess, etc. Regardless of who has or hasn't done it, why can't it just stop?

When decent posters quit engaging because they're afraid of being attacked for their views, we've strayed away from what KF has always been about. There was a board long ago that allowed all that stuff. A number of us actually started there and came to sachoops (the old name for KF) when it got to be too much. Other unfiltered boards have gone the same way.

Civility in discourse does wonders. We have some incredible basketball minds around here but right now a lot of them are being drowned out by the screams and rage of the vocal minority. I personally would hate it if some of those minds just quit posting...

Just my two cents, btw. I don't want to argue about it. It's really exhausting and takes away from what i do like to talk about. The Kings. The future (now that we know we have one), and how to get back to being a winning franchise with the best fans in the NBA.

 

[rainmaker]

Sometimes I wonder if Kings fans remember any of what made the Kings glory teams so good. A big part of what made the Webber-Vlade-Christie-Peja-Bibby/J-Will-Pollard-Jackson-Hedo was...TEAM CHEMISTRY


Part of turning a team into a winner is changing the culture and fostering a winning environment. No doubt Landry was brought in to help accomplish this.

A larger part of that team's success was star talent, and that star talent was then surrounded by role players which fit well. When we go about trading one of our top two star talents and replace him with a role player, then add another role player who doesn't fill needs and just clutters the PF position, we're going in the opposite direction.

Chemistry is great. It's important. But it means half as much when it's not based around star talent. Remember when GS had the star talent in Webber and chose to go with chemistry instead and shipped him East? Well, they then sucked for years. That improved chemistry and character did little for them on the court. Then Wash did the same, with Webber and Rasheed, had the star talent but went for chemistry/character instead, and like GS then sucked for years. Chemistry/character means little if the result is a worse team, and I'd much rather have had the team cancers like Webber, JWill and Vernon Maxwell here than a bunch of choir boys who can't win games.

 

[spudfan]

The bench mob had some great chemistry!