And Starting at the 3 for your kings JOHN SALMONS

[Telemachus]

I tend to agree with Nbrans, though. I don't think his "lesser" performance as a sub is "attitude" (like KT and some others we have seen), it's just his game and the way it fits in to the team and the flow of the game.

Attributing that to "pouting" is unfair if that is the case because I really haven't seen anything significant out of John to make me think he is anything but a team player and a pretty positive influence on the team as a whole.

I agree with this as well. If you look at Salmons's numbers coming off the bench, the only stats that really suffered are his offensive ones. His shots dropped, and his FG% dropped (obviously leading to fewer points). But his defense, RBs, Asts, and Stls were all pretty much on par with what he did as a starter.
Someone pointed out that Salmons was a good bench player in Philly; but he primarily came in for his defense, not his offense in Philly.

 

[Bricklayer]

I agree with this as well. If you look at Salmons's numbers coming off the bench, the only stats that really suffered are his offensive ones. His shots dropped, and his FG% dropped (obviously leading to fewer points). But his defense, RBs, Asts, and Stls were all pretty much on par with what he did as a starter.
Someone pointed out that Salmons was a good bench player in Philly; but he primarily came in for his defense, not his offense in Philly.

Well, not sure who said that, but no, he was not a good bench player in Philly either -- that was the problem there too. And actually reportedly the reason why we were interested in him (why anybody was because he was such a nothing bench guy) were presisely his performances when he got the occasional start there. It was like night and day. Still is.

 

[Entity]

Well, not sure who said that, but no, he was not a good bench player in Philly either -- that was the problem there too. And actually reportedly the reason why we were interested in him (why anybody was because he was such a nothing bench guy) were presisely his performances when he got the occasional start there. It was like night and day. Still is.

I agree. When it gets to the point where John is not a starter thats the precise point he needs to be dealt.

 

[bloom]

Can we just trade the guy. His attitude last year just turned me off and until he can turn his game around, I can't support him...On top of him not being able to come off the bench, he holds the ball forever when he does have the rock and even forces some shots. Some (or a lot) of his game resembles Ron’s. I don't want to see that type of game on our team again.

The thing about Salmons that makes him ill-suited as a bench player but good as a starter is that he really picks his spots and opportunities. Like Kevin, he mostly plays within the offense, he doesn't tend to force action, and since he's not much of a spot-up shooter, he is basically dependent upon picking his spots and being opportunistic on offense. Over the course of 30 minutes as a starter, he may have 15 quiet minutes offensively followed by a 20 point burst in the next 15 minutes. As a starter, his stats are fantastic, and that playing-within-the-offense character really meshes with Kevin Martin. But if you break up those 30 minutes into two, if he were coming off the bench that's a 0 one game and a really good game the next, which is essentially the patented John Salmons coming off the bench pattern.

*scratches head* I think we're watching two different guys. Sure, there were times where he played within the offense but mostly not. But we have 2 different opinions, we all see different things

There is one positive about John that I can see, he can take it to the hole while the other players might be reluctant.

 

[1kingzfan]

Can we just trade the guy. His attitude last year just turned me off and until he can turn his game around, I can't support him...On top of him not being able to come off the bench, he holds the ball forever when he does have the rock and even forces some shots. Some (or a lot) of his game resembles Ron’s. I don't want to see that type of game on our team again.

Spot on. I'm with you here.

Despite his acumen at aggressiveness in taking it to the hole, and he is very, very good at this, he cannot see the floor well and holds the ball way too long, often stifling the offense into a late rushed shot by others or a bad desperation shot by John. I am more concerned about him in a starting role with this tendency than the bench head case stuff being bandied about.

I have no doubt that John could average 16-20 ppg next season as a starter, but at what cost to team play and overall young player development? Although I agree that Cisco is a nice energy 6th man a la Ginobili, I would rather see him start at SF (unless Geoff comes up with a better vet) and John moved elsewhere. Our rebuilding Kings, with many youngsters, needs to re-establish itself as a premier passing team on O, getting everyone involved, and get those assists numbers way up. John will not help that cause.