Beno and Brad - Got to go

[Kingster]

Like I said in my first post,

Stop looking at numbers.

Yeah STATISTICALLY he is almost identical to last year, but last year he was a whole different kind of PG. Consistent, smart, and selective, which imo are three very very important aspects of a good PG. It makes no sense for you guys to base things solely on stats. For example....On paper, averaging 10 points for 2 games when scoring 10 in both is NOT the same as scoring 20 pts in one game and 0 in the next. I'd take the first one every time.

Good point. But there is a number for what you are talking about - standard deviation. I generally agree with you on stats - they can be very misleading. There are no decent stats for defense, but everybody acknowledges how important it is.

 

[tradepeja]

Its been obvious since about the 2nd week of the season that Beno's work ethic, conditioning, and overall mentality are in a completely different place from last year. The pressure was good for him last year. He was an inch away from being out of the league. Now, he's a multi-millionaire. Not even the most honest man alive could not allow that to affect him, so while I'm not happy with how he's playing, I can kind of understand why.

I don't think Brown is starting material, and unless we pick up Felton, Udrih is our starter for now and for a while.

 

[One and Done]

Giving Beno a 5-year/30 million contract was a bad idea that most of us fans agreed upon before it was inked.

He's great at penetrating to the basket, has a nice jumper, but that's about it. He looked good last year because:

1.) He was a marked "scrub" picked up off of waivers, and surprised many
2.) He penetrated well, something Mike Bibby rarely did in his later years
3.) Showed more true-PG skills than Bibby, who seemed to be relegated to a jumpshooter
4.) He was shooting 3's much better than his career average
5.) He played with heart. He truly played to his potential...and cashed in this summer.

This year, he's reverted back to the player that he was in San Antonio: shoot-first, turnover-prone PG who is a poor defender. This is further amplified by raised expectations, via contract, and declining FG, 3-PT %'s. His defense is also getting worse, as PGs blow by him at will...and he's been inconsistent, not just game-to-game, but in the minutes he plays. I don't know how best to explain it, but sometimes you look at his stats and are surprised, as they look decent, but if you watched the game, he looked a lot worse than the his stats read.

As for Brad, I've always been an advocate of keeping him. I don't think Hawes is ready to be the full-time starting center of this team. Plus, who's going to make up for all the assists, Beno? The offense has and currently run mostly through Brad, and losing him would be a blow.

But then again, we're on pace to win 20-25 games this season. What's to lose, huh? If the team, with Brad, isn't winning, then why not trade him if the right deal comes along? Plus, he appears to be declining...

Beno is untradeable...sorry. But Brad still is, but not to many. If we do trade him at the deadline, let's get a good player, bencher, and a 2010 pick (I say '10 because this draft might be the worst since '00). Sad to see him go, but honestly, what do we have to lose?

 

[=LarryLegend=]

Beno signing is looking more and more like a Jerome James signing everyday.

Nothing is that bad!

 

[Spike]

Giving Beno a 5-year/30 million contract was a bad idea that most of us fans agreed upon before it was inked.

Not me, and I'll stand by my comments. His salary is average. In fact, below average for starting PGs. He's a placeholder until we arrive at a permanent solution at PG. After that, he's a PG being paid MLE money - nothing too earth-shattering.

As said before, what has changed has been people's expectations of what Beno should be. You can't deny the statistics just because it doesn't fit your point. He's the same as last year. He's made the same mistakes as last year. He doesn't have Kevin Martin to draw the defenders this year, so his mistakes are magnified (in our eyes.)

 

[bajaden]

Beno signing is looking more and more like a Jerome James signing everyday.

They look nothing alike at all. One is 6'2" and weighs 200 pounds and the other is 7' and weighs 800 pounds.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Not me, and I'll stand by my comments. His salary is average. In fact, below average for starting PGs. He's a placeholder until we arrive at a permanent solution at PG. After that, he's a PG being paid MLE money - nothing too earth-shattering.

Exactly. And since we're likely to find our permanent PG solution in the draft, either in '09 or '10, it's not as if the solution is going to step in and take over the starting minutes immediately. Even if we draft our next great PG in the upcoming draft, Beno will likely be the starter for the first 2.5 years of his five year deal (this year and the first year and a half before the solution is ready to take over). If we hold on to Beno for the entire contract, we're realistically looking at him being our starter (at the MLE) for 2.5 to as many as 4 years (if we don't get our PG until 2010, and he's raw). Then he's an MLE back-up PG. Seems like decent planning to me.

 

[Smills91]

Beno's slightly overpaid, but not by much. He's a solid PG that can keep things moving. I'd compare his impact to an Antonio Daniels. The thing I don't like about the contract is the LENGTH, not the size. He's cheap enough though that he can still be justifiable in a reserve role and/or moved in a couple years to a team in DIRE need of a PG(there's always a few of those each year).

 

[One and Done]

The thing I don't like about the contract is the LENGTH, not the size.

The length is the biggest problem here. Say we do get that dreamy PG and he's able to make an impact quickly. How well will Beno come off the bench? I'm worried about that particular. Is anyone going to want to trade for a, hypothetically, 3-year, $15 million dollar contract that is inneffective off the bench?

That's a big question mark, and I'm not sure that McHale/Wallace/Jordan will be employed in front offices at that juncture.

 

[DoDiGaG0]

Always was against the Beno singing

overpaid -- we weren't going to be title contenders this year anyway and I think we should of let him walk and though about better options @ the future.

I would of rather taken Vujacic at 3 years MLE to be honest

 

[AriesMar27]

yeah... and now we're stuck with him... but it would be nice if we could somehow pawn him off on some other team like miami... miller/beno/salmons for marion/banks... banks sucks but his contract is shorter than benos and he is a scrub among scrubs.... that gets rid of all of our excess baggage and doesnt hurt the teams 2010 capspace...

 

[Gary]

I think the only way we get out of Beno's contract is if we take some other teams crap back in return..

I am sick of Beno already.. He just flat out sucks. I was way wrong about this guy and now I gotta live with it. Maybe in taking back some crap we get a couple years of relief? Maybe instead of the 5 years left we get a guy with more salary and a couple years left..

Maybe we take back Marbury or something for Beno, Brad, and someone else. Plus we get one of their picks. Who knows... All I want is that poser PG we have out of Sac.

 

[Gary]

Exactly. And since we're likely to find our permanent PG solution in the draft, either in '09 or '10, it's not as if the solution is going to step in and take over the starting minutes immediately. Even if we draft our next great PG in the upcoming draft, Beno will likely be the starter for the first 2.5 years of his five year deal (this year and the first year and a half before the solution is ready to take over). If we hold on to Beno for the entire contract, we're realistically looking at him being our starter (at the MLE) for 2.5 to as many as 4 years (if we don't get our PG until 2010, and he's raw). Then he's an MLE back-up PG. Seems like decent planning to me.

I don't think so.. Lets say we get Rubio... I would have NO problem starting Rubio next year. Paul started, and Williams started so why not Rubio? If you get a top PG in the draft they are meant to start. it would be a waste not to.. Especially since Rubio at 11 years old was better than Beno is now, so a 20 year old Rubio would have to be at least 10x better than Crapo.

 

[Nighthawk1]

I don't think so.. Lets say we get Rubio... I would have NO problem starting Rubio next year. Paul started, and Williams started so why not Rubio? If you get a top PG in the draft they are meant to start. it would be a waste not to.. Especially since Rubio at 11 years old was better than Beno is now, so a 20 year old Rubio would have to be at least 10x better than Crapo.

I agree with you 100%, and the only way to get a top level PG seemingly right now is to draft one because most teams with one don't want to give them up. I wasn't happy when they signed him to a MLE, never thought he deserved it.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I don't think so.. Lets say we get Rubio... I would have NO problem starting Rubio next year. Paul started, and Williams started so why not Rubio? If you get a top PG in the draft they are meant to start. it would be a waste not to..

Rose stepped into a starting role right away, too, as did Westbrook (though that seemed more of necessity). Then again, Augustin isn't starting (but he's getting good minutes) and Bayless isn't sniffing the court unless it's a blowout. You look at last year and Conley stepped into the starting lineup, but he hasn't looked particularly good - Memphis just didn't have any other choice. Acie Law isn't playing, Crittenton isn't playing, and Stuckey only just now inherited the starting job after Billups was traded. So of the last 8 PGs picked in the top 20, only one has seized a starting role from an incumbent, and he was taken #1 overall. Two took an open PG position. One played well enough that his team felt they could trade away their incumbent and give him the starting nod after 1.5 years (which was my estimate). One is getting good playing time but not starting behind a seemingly inferior incumbent, and three aren't playing serious minutes. So it seems that it takes a pretty special young point guard to grab a starting role immediately, if there is already an incumbent in place.

But I'm not really sure that there are any PGs in this draft that are going to be able to do that. Rubio? Probably, but the most recent news I've seen suggests he's not planning to enter the draft this year. That could change, of course, but we'd also need to get a top-3 pick to get him.

Then who is left? You've got Jennings, who looks very raw. You've got Holiday who also looks pretty raw. You've got Curry, who may not even be a point guard. That pretty much leaves Lawson, Collison, and Mills. Any of those PGs (and possibly all seven of them) could go top-20 at this point, and Rubio is probably the only one who can make the argument to oust an incumbent. I simply think any one of those guys (aside from Rubio) would not start next year, which means that 1.5 more years of Beno starting is likely, even if we draft a good PG this year.

 

[Gary]

You are right.. If Rubio doesn't enter (I would throw a fit if we had a chance to draft him, and didn't get it because of him not entering) I would take him with a top 5.

Jennings probably not... I would use the Houston pick though to get Collison, or Law if they were to slip to that pick which they probably would.

 

[Rockmeister]

Maybe we take back Marbury or something for Beno, Brad, and someone else. Plus we get one of their picks. Who knows... All I want is that poser PG we have out of Sac.

Take back Murbury???? We never had him. And I'll pass on him.

If people want Beno and Brad to go, I think Mikki Moore and John Salmons need to go before them.

 

[Gary]

Meant we take him in return for Brad, and Beno. Should have used better wording.. I just want those two to go and would take an ender for both of them so we free up money for a FA that wants to win and does not suck. I doubt we would even play Marbury if we got him. I know I wouldn't if I was coach. It was just meant as an ending salary for the two because that's all they are worth right now.

 

[Nighthawk1]

Take back Murbury???? We never had him. And I'll pass on him.

If people want Beno and Brad to go, I think Mikki Moore and John Salmons need to go before them.

MM is an expiring, This year if we don't pick up his Team Option (correct me if I'm wrong here) and Salmons is probably also on the trading block but it's not neccessary to trade him such as Miller and Udrih. Udrih has bad vision and can seemingly only succeed in pick and roll's, one dimensional and seems to have poor heart (likes to play blame game). Miller is just eating up minutes at center taking away from Hawes developing there, which in turn effects JT who doesn't get as many minutes at PF as he should. So I think its more more important to trade off Udrih and Miller first...

 

[Bricklayer]

MM is an expiring, This year if we don't pick up his Team Option (correct me if I'm wrong here) and Salmons is probably also on the trading block but it's not neccessary to trade him such as Miller and Udrih. Udrih has bad vision and can seemingly only succeed in pick and roll's, one dimensional and seems to have poor heart (likes to play blame game). Miller is just eating up minutes at center taking away from Hawes developing there, which in turn effects JT who doesn't get as many minutes at PF as he should. So I think its more more important to trade off Udrih and Miller first...

Mikki is actually kinid of a half an dhalf -- weird deal where if we do not pick up his option for the full $6mil, we have to pay him $3 mil instead to go away. So kind of a half expiring. Pay him the full third year amount to play, or pay him half the third year amount not to.

 

[Section 101]

Mikki is actually kinid of a half an dhalf -- weird deal where if we do not pick up his option for the full $6mil, we have to pay him $3 mil instead to go away. So kind of a half expiring. Pay him the full third year amount to play, or pay him half the third year amount not to.

I thought the 3 million was only guaranteed if he was on the roster.

 

[Bricklayer]

I thought the 3 million was only guaranteed if he was on the roster.

Other way around -- its only guaranteed if he's NOT on the roster.

Basically its an insurance policy against getting cut/waived, and an inspirtation to make teams want to pick up the extra year. Form my perspective I look at it as more of a partial ender potentially valuable in trade talks for a team tryiign to squeeze under the tax threshhold next year.

 

[Section 101]

Other way around -- its only guaranteed if he's NOT on the roster.

Basically its an insurance policy against getting cut/waived, and an inspirtation to make teams want to pick up the extra year. Form my perspective I look at it as more of a partial ender potentially valuable in trade talks for a team tryiign to squeeze under the tax threshhold next year.

Sorry that's what I meant. If he is waived before next season then he counts nothing. If he's on the roster then $3 million of the 6 is guaranteed for the year.

 

[Prince_XY]

Maybe we take back Marbury or something for Beno, Brad, and someone else. Plus we get one of their picks. Who knows... All I want is that poser PG we have out of Sac.

Marbury, the one who thinks he's a SUPERSTAR?

This is like taking back both the problems we have on Artest and Bibby.

But hey, not a bad idea. He is a quality point guard if he can change his attitude. And he might actually change his attitude now that nobody wants him.

Is he an expiring contract?

 

[Warhawk]

Sorry that's what I meant. If he is waived before next season then he counts nothing. If he's on the roster then $3 million of the 6 is guaranteed for the year.

Nope. If he is waived, we owe him $3 mil (assuming nobody picks him up). If he iws on the roster, he gets $6 mil. Now, the nice part for another team is, if we trade him this season and they waive him, it is basically a semi salary dump, because they can trade away $6 mil in contract for MM, waive him, and only owe him $3 mil next year instead of the full $6 mil.

 

[bloom]

Beno is a completely different player from last year to this year. I don’t care if his stats are the same. His play and court leadership has changed. And I can’t say that he’s surrounded by different players, Artest is gone and he’s playing with some new guys in Jason and Donte, and he doesn’t really even play with Donte. Plus, they’ve practiced together and he should have a feel for the new guys on the team by now.

My question is what happened to him? Was his play only for a contract? I don’t think so, or at least I hope not. It seems like he’s not as relaxed on the court as last year. I think he can get back to his play from before, I don’t want him gone because he’s not the same (he should get back to what we had before), but if we do find someone better than yeah, you should pull the trigger.

And Beno needs to stop looking/blaming his other teammates and realize that he needs to improve and some things are his fault.

I’ve wanted to keep Brad until now, we need to trade the guy. And I hope Geoff is going to trade him by the deadline. He’s a great player but it’s time for him and us (some people say that his time to go was a long time ago). But we need to start moving a little quicker.

 

[bajaden]

Mikki is actually kinid of a half an dhalf -- weird deal where if we do not pick up his option for the full $6mil, we have to pay him $3 mil instead to go away. So kind of a half expiring. Pay him the full third year amount to play, or pay him half the third year amount not to.

I'm just going on memory, and with me thats not a good thing, but I believe the buyout is 2 mil instead of 3.

 

[NME]

I'm just going on memory, and with me thats not a good thing, but I believe the buyout is 2 mil instead of 3.

Right, it's $2 million if they cut him by June 20th; $6 million otherwise.