Big Men via Free Agency or Trade

Bricklayer said:
he's 72
Click to expand...
That's an incredibly flip response from someone who usually backs up his comments with observations and reasons why Camby wouldn't be a good defensive <30 minute player for us.

Did anyone who's seen him last year think he suddenly lost the ability to play great defense?
 
Camby could contribute as a 3-4th big but I wouldn't want him as it would stifle Whiteside's development. If we sign a big, it has to be a starter. Otherwise I would prefer we sign no one. Let us not fill our team up with contracts that stifle any further need for money. Camby at the vet minimum would get far more than a far less experienced person.
 
*spits drink*
Whiteside's development?!

Look, I'm as intrigued by Whiteside's potential as anyone on here, but until the guy plays more than 2 minutes in an entire season for us, I'm not ready to pencil him into the roster until he proves he belongs on an NBA court.

And to not pick up a proven dominant NBA defensive center.... so he doesn't stifle Whiteside's development (!)... sounds rather ludicrous to me.

Further, I think there may be a real delusion on KF's about what Sammy did for us last year:
Here's his stats:

Year GP GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
2010–11 80 46 24.2 .473 .000 .730 8.2 .8 .4 1.4 8.1
and Camby's:
2010–11 59 51 26.1 .398 .000 .614 10.3 2.1 .7 1.6 4.7

So I didn't see Camby play, but from the stats, Camby started more games than Sammy, so he's obviously a starter. And last year was down from his career avg's.
He played MORE minutes per game than did Sammy.
He had more steals, more rebounds, more assists, and more blocked shots than Sammy did - and yes, he's 7 years older than Sam.
But every time I've seen Camby play, he seems to have more energy, and bring more to the game, than Sam does. This is just my opinion, but I get strong vibes that Sammy would not play very hard if given a big contract. I think it's in Camby's DNA to play hard.

I really don't think that Dalembert brings as much to this team as people on KF's have made themselves believe.
Yeah, I saw some good games from him but I saw a hell of a lot of other games where he couldn't get in the game cause he wasn't helping the team.
I've never seen Camby not help his team when he's on the floor.

I'd MUCH rather pay $9 million for one year to Camby (by the way, leaving room NEXT year for Whiteside once he proves he can make it in the NBA), than pay $10 million for multiple years for Dalembert.
 
Last edited:
Not sure there has been a strong postition by anyone to cease going after a great big defensive man in order to develop Whiteside. I think what is done with Whiteside needs to be considered however.

This team will not play for an NBA championship next year. It is possible, and I say possible, that they could play for an NBA championship in 4 years. The simple maturation of our kiddies will make us a better team. Given that, Camby would make us a better team next year but would not be a factor on a team fighting for a championship.

Whiteside is a big unknown. We may have gotten a bust and we may have gotten a great pick. Given that I personally think he dropped in the draft because of fears of his knee pain or how it affected his game in college AND that his injury is curable unlike many injuries, he might be another Daly. We need to find out. Whiteside very well could be the Daly-like player for the next 10 years.

I very much think we should lock down Daly until the end of his career or get Chandler and maybe one or two others on a longer contract. If we don't sign Daly, I will be hugely disappointed. We need the big defensive presence to fight for a championship. Camby is irrelevant to the long term goal. Camby is a once in a generation type player at what he does and I would love him to be on our team for 4 years if he was younger. Otherwise, I think he stifles Whiteside's development and in the long run it is more important to our team's long term goals to answer the questions about Whiteside than for a quick fix.

To make a long story short, I say sign a major defensive presence if he is a starter and if he can be projected to anchor that position for at least 4 years. Otherwise, anyone of lesser ability would be a bench player and we already have JJ/JT/Cuz/Whiteside.
 
Last edited:
Section 101 said:
Baja, it has nothing to do with Jimmers skills. It's about being a rookie PG. We need someone who already has the experience. I dont care if it was Kidd, Irving, Rose or any other PG coming in right now as a rookie. They all need time to learn and right now this team needs a vet to run things or we are going to have another 24/25 win season.
Click to expand...

There's no doubt that Fredette doesn't have any NBA experience, but he is a four year college player, and that makes a big difference. That alone might be a good reason to draft him over Knight. While the transition to the NBA is a big one, its much easier for a four year player than it is for a freshman.
 
Section 101 said:
Jason Smith wasnt offered a qualifying offer.
Click to expand...

Interestiing! I've liked Jason Smith coming out of college. I'd have to get him cleared physically, but he'd be a good backup if totally healthy. He was a great athlete when he entered the NBA. I'm curious if that ACL injury he had a couple of years ago robbed him of any athleticism. Curious that New Orleans didn't make him a qualifying offer. It wouldn't have been that much.
 
bajaden said:
Strange, the same thing was said about Curry, and he seemed to handle it just fine. Just because you, or some pundit somewhere says Fredette isn't ready to play the point in the NBA, doesn't make it so. Not saying he won't make some mistakes, but he's more than capable from a talent point of view to play point guard in the NBA. And I promise all the non believers on this fourm, that when, he not only proves he can play the point, but also be a star in this league, I will gleefully shove crow down each and everyone's throat that said the opposite. And I will dutifully accept crow if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

What's your time frame on Fredette being a star? Next year, three years from now, five years from now? I think it is germaine to the discussion. You may be right, but 11 teams didn't think he would be a star (or 9 if you leave out the first two picks in which there was a consensus they did have star potential).
 
Capt. Factorial said:
I know it's a schtick around here, but it really is kind of hard to argue against Tyreke as a "proven PG". He's our starter at PG, if you haven't noticed. And we've got three bodies for backups, all covering one position.

Meanwhile we've got two starters on the front line in Cousins and Thompson and one whole body in Whiteside as a backup, to cover two positions.

I guess it shouldn't surprise me to find somebody arguing such a daft position as that we needed to get a fifth PG more desperately than we needed to get a fourth big man. But it does.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what you mean by "proven point guard". Pooh played point guard last year; ergo Pooh is a "proven" point guard by virtue of the fact he played the position? Or do you mean by proven point guard that a player plays the position with a relatively high degree of skill? Personally, I use the latter definition, and by that definition I don't think Tyreke has proven anything. The body of work has not been extensive enough. One very fine ROY year; the other a very dissapointing soph year. He's a work in the making.
 
Kingster said:
What's your time frame on Fredette being a star? Next year, three years from now, five years from now? I think it is germaine to the discussion. You may be right, but 11 teams didn't think he would be a star (or 9 if you leave out the first two picks in which there was a consensus they did have star potential).
Click to expand...

Well obviously the teams that passed on him didn't ask my opinion. But then I wouldn't have given it anyway, because I wanted us to draft him. It is of course just my opinion. I don't like to put time frames on players, especially the PG position, which I think is one of the hardest positions to play in the NBA. But just for you, I'll say three years. And I'm talking about stardom now. Not just being able to contribute, which I think he'll be able to do right away. I thought Fredette and Walker were the two, most ready PG's in the draft. I believe Walker will be a star in this league as well.

Of course becoming a star depends on having the talent, but it also depends on getting minutes, so there are some intangibles that need to fall into place for both players. But I have faith in both guys. More faith than I do in Kawhi Leonard or Alec Burks. We shall see. I do know how to prepare crow when required to eat it.. No feathers please!
 
Kingster said:
I guess it depends on what you mean by "proven point guard". Pooh played point guard last year; ergo Pooh is a "proven" point guard by virtue of the fact he played the position? Or do you mean by proven point guard that a player plays the position with a relatively high degree of skill? Personally, I use the latter definition, and by that definition I don't think Tyreke has proven anything. The body of work has not been extensive enough. One very fine ROY year; the other a very dissapointing soph year. He's a work in the making.
Click to expand...

And the making is in the work!
 
I wonder how well Hickson and JT can play together both offensively with a high/low game, and defensively. It appears that Hickson has the length and athleticism to be a goalie style defender and JT has the strength to muscle PFs or Cs to prevent post scoring. If this combo can play well together, they may be a great second unit off the bench and the next big for the team to target would be to play primarily with Cousins (a la Dalembert).
 
Jespher said:
I wonder how well Hickson and JT can play together both offensively with a high/low game, and defensively. It appears that Hickson has the length and athleticism to be a goalie style defender and JT has the strength to muscle PFs or Cs to prevent post scoring. If this combo can play well together, they may be a great second unit off the bench and the next big for the team to target would be to play primarily with Cousins (a la Dalembert).
Click to expand...

Probably not the ideal scenario, but it could work if both players are commited to making it work. JT can play the center position, which is one of his values. But offensively, he's proven to be most effective with the 15 to 18 foot jumpshot, and the occasional selective post play. Unfortunately, Hickson did most of his scoring in the halfcourt last season with the 15 to 18 foot jumpshot, which was greatly improved from prior seasons. So it could get a little crowded out there. Best answer might be to take the ball out of JT's hands and leave the scoring up to Hickson. Defensively, Hickson has a way to go, but certainly has the athleticism to be a good defender. But then, so does Carmelo Anthony.

JT's defense has improved every year, and there's no reason to believe it won't improve more. But JT's strength on defense is man to man away from the basket. He's very good at moving his feet and staying in front of his man. However, under the basket is where he's encountered difficulty's in the past. Despite his size, he seems to have trouble holding position, and still has trouble keeping his hands off the offensive player. It should be noted though, that his fouls went down as the season progressed last season, and his post defense also improved. So we'll see.

On the other hand, If you were to have a starting lineup of Cousins and lets say, Chandler, then Thompson and Hickson off the bench would certainly be better than most of the other teams bench reserves in the NBA. And their time together on the floor would probably be minimal. I could see a scenario where Thompson would come in for Cousins, and Hickson would come in for Chandler, but seldom at the same time, with Cousins and Chandler getting their blows at staggered times, leaving Thompson and Hickson on the floor together for no more than 5 minutes at a time. Obviously you can substitute Dalembert for Chandler.

Now if we go into the season with just Cousins, Thompson, and Hickson, then its a whole different scenario, and one that I doubt will happen.
 
bajaden said:
Probably not the ideal scenario, but it could work if both players are commited to making it work. JT can play the center position, which is one of his values. But offensively, he's proven to be most effective with the 15 to 18 foot jumpshot, and the occasional selective post play. Unfortunately, Hickson did most of his scoring in the halfcourt last season with the 15 to 18 foot jumpshot, which was greatly improved from prior seasons. So it could get a little crowded out there. Best answer might be to take the ball out of JT's hands and leave the scoring up to Hickson.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting misconception right there. Thompson seems to frustrate everyone with his inability to tip the ball in and overall finishing ability inside but turns out he has great .694 on inside shots (including .51 on tip-ins, .909 on dunks and .712 on his other shots from close range) which were 40% of his shots and .381 on his jumpshots. Turns out he's top-10 in NBA in close shots %. Now consider "success" of bigs with outside shot: Cousins .330 on 61% of his shots, Hickson - .347 on 55% of his shots and Dalembert actually looks decent having .419 on 55% of his shots. So i would suggest let's go inside guys.
P.S. Varejao hit .450 of his jumpshots last year. Now this is a jumpshooter. :)
 
Last edited:
Gilles said:
That's an interesting misconception right there. Thompson seems to frustrate everyone with his inability to tip the ball in and overall finishing ability inside but turns out he has great .694 on inside shots (including .51 on tip-ins, .909 on dunks and .712 on his other shots from close range) which were 40% of his shots and .381 on his jumpshots. Turns out he's top-10 in NBA in close shots %. Now consider "success" of bigs with outside shot: Cousins .330 on 61% of his shots, Hickson - .347 on 55% of his shots and Dalembert actually looks decent having .419 on 55% of his shots. So i would suggest let's go inside guys.
P.S. Varejao hit .450 of his jumpshots last year. Now this is a jumpshooter. :)
Click to expand...

Well if your going on just last years stats, your right. And going on last years stats, Thompson is a better player than Hickson, at least statisticly. Putting results aside, I guess I should have said the Thompsons game seemed to start somewhere in the 15 to 18 foot range last season, and not in the post. So guess what I was trying to imply, is that both Thompson and Hickson shouldn't be setting up away from the basket, and that Thompson should be in the post. Thats what I meant by taking the ball out of Thompson's hands. Just didn't put it very well. I think Thompson is a guy that doesn't need plays run for him and he'll still get his points and rebounds.

Thompson appears to me, to be more of an opportunistic scorer in the post, than he is a purposeful one. If that makes sense to you.
 
bajaden said:
Well obviously the teams that passed on him didn't ask my opinion. But then I wouldn't have given it anyway, because I wanted us to draft him. It is of course just my opinion. I don't like to put time frames on players, especially the PG position, which I think is one of the hardest positions to play in the NBA. But just for you, I'll say three years. And I'm talking about stardom now. Not just being able to contribute, which I think he'll be able to do right away. I thought Fredette and Walker were the two, most ready PG's in the draft. I believe Walker will be a star in this league as well.

Of course becoming a star depends on having the talent, but it also depends on getting minutes, so there are some intangibles that need to fall into place for both players. But I have faith in both guys. More faith than I do in Kawhi Leonard or Alec Burks. We shall see. I do know how to prepare crow when required to eat it.. No feathers please!
Click to expand...

I definitely agree on the Leonard/Burks point. Jimmer is going to contribute much faster than those two.
 
Kingster said:
I definitely agree on the Leonard/Burks point. Jimmer is going to contribute much faster than those two.
Click to expand...

At the same time, it's hard to think of a more ideal situation for Leonard to have ended up than with the Spurs. If he's going to make it big, that's the place.

Still though, I liked Jimmer before the draft much more than I liked Leonard or Burks, so I'm very happy with our draft at the moment.
 
Dr. Spaceman said:
At the same time, it's hard to think of a more ideal situation for Leonard to have ended up than with the Spurs. If he's going to make it big, that's the place.

Still though, I liked Jimmer before the draft much more than I liked Leonard or Burks, so I'm very happy with our draft at the moment.
Click to expand...

The Spurs are the smartest organization in basketball. WHATEVER they do, I give them the benefit of the doubt. It wouldn't surprise me to see Leonard contribute immediately. But making baskets, which Jimmer does, is going to be a bigger contribution than getting rebounds for Leonard (at least that's my viewpoint).
 
Kingster said:
The Spurs are the smartest organization in basketball. WHATEVER they do, I give them the benefit of the doubt. It wouldn't surprise me to see Leonard contribute immediately. But making baskets, which Jimmer does, is going to be a bigger contribution than getting rebounds for Leonard (at least that's my viewpoint).
Click to expand...

Sam Presti and OKC along with Richard Jefferson's contract would like a word with you. ;)The Spurs are AMONG the smartest in basketball no doubt, though.

Perimeter defense and rebounding are precisely what the Spurs need, when you consider how weakened they are up front with a rapidly aging Timmy as their anchor. Tiago Splitter and DeJuan Blair are solid enough, but they're not the heirs apparent.

Still, I must say again that I love the Jimmer pick and am glad we passed on Leonard for him. Obviously we weren't the only team unimpressed with Leonard's athletic markers. And I cannot wait to see Jimmer as Super Beno.
 
kennadog said:
In case anyone missed it in the news links thread, here's one SI writer's view of available big men this off-season.

http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/sho...st-Of-The-Bigs&p=839991&viewfull=1#post839991
Click to expand...
Can any idiot write for SI? Putting Big Baby and Carl Landry ahead of Daly? Thadeus Young ahead of Daly? I would bet most championship contenders would not agree with this list at all.

And if Daly's feet are so slow, why is he the only center in the league besides Chandler that has any success guarding stretch 4's? He quicker on defense(sliding his feet), than just about any other center out there. Period.
 
Bricklayer said:
I wish I had missed it frankly.

But let's just hope the other GMs are as stupid as SI's writer. Don't hold your breath BTW.
Click to expand...
I was in no way endorsing it. Just throwing it in. I thought the order seemed strange, although I'm no expert. Apparently neither is the writer? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Y
76ers could acquire $36 million lottery pick via major trade with Kings
Replies
16
Views
2K
See_Hanks
See_Hanks
sactowndog
Kings Cap entering next year
Replies
3
Views
1K
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
“THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
6K
The_Jamal
T
iowamcnabb
“The List”
2 3
Replies
67
Views
4K
midtowner
M
twslam07
[Drastic Edition] “THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
twslam07
twslam07
Back
Top