Carmichael Dave on Fresno Radio - trade Martin?

[Fresno King]

He was on our local ESPN affiliate a couple of weeks ago and thinks the Kings should trade KEVIN MARTIN to start the rebuilding process. Has he been saying that on his show up there? Thoughts?

I never thought of it, but we could put some interesting packages together with him... could be the only way we can get rid of KT's bloated contract. The thought of trading Martin doesn't sit well with me, but neither did that Richmond for Webber trade way back when...

 

[BMiller52]

That makes me barf.

 

[Bricklayer]

Ok sure.

Here is the one proviso: what are you getting back? Because for instance if you could trade Kevin to bring back Oden for instance, yeah, I'm on board. But otherwise that makes absolutely no sense at all. Time to rebuild...so to kick things off we'll start by trading away our best young player/only young building block? Isn't the whole point of rebuilding to acquire young pieces just like Kevin?

If he's suggesting concrete scenarios, then maybe. Depends on what they are, and how outlandish he's getting. If he's just suggesting it as a phbilosophical approach, its loony.

 

[BMiller52]

Ok sure.

Here is the one proviso: what are you getting back? Because for instance if you could trade Kevin to bring back Oden for instance, yeah, I'm on board. But otherwise that makes absolutely no sense at all. Time to rebuild...so to kick things off we'll start by trading away our best young player/only young building block? Isn't the whole point of rebuilding to acquire young pieces just like Kevin?

If he's suggesting concrete scenarios, then maybe. Depends on what they are, and how outlandish he's getting. If he's just suggesting it as a phbilosophical approach, its loony.

Agreed man it's kind of a dumb idea because what are we getting back?
We're rebuilding so it probably wouldn't be a star paid a lot(and shouldn't be a star paid a lot unless its an Amare Stoudemire or someone like that). A draft pick(unless it's Oden or Durant) is basically too risky, the teams with Oden/Durant wouldn't make that deal anyway. Not sure why another team would want to trade their young star for ours, that wouldn't make sense. Not like we'd get back a Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Okafor, etc.

 

[ParniValjak]

As Brick said, it depends in what context it was said. You would want to keep Martin but if you could get a stud young big by making Martin the part of the package, then surely you would pull the trigger.

Stud bigs are as rare as hen's teeth while good SGs are dime a dozen.

 

[nbrans]

As Brick said, it depends in what context it was said. You would want to keep Martin but if you could get a stud young big by making Martin the part of the package, then surely you would pull the trigger.

Stud bigs are as rare as hen's teeth while good SGs are dime a dozen.

I never understand this sentiment -- I don't think it's true at all. Take the top 20 scorers in the NBA:

Kobe - wing
Carmelo - wing
Arenas - wing
LeBron - wing
Ray Allen - wing
Iverson - wing
Vince Carter - wing
Joe Johnson - wing
Tracy McGrady - wing
Nowitzki - big
Randolph - big
Bosh - big
Garnett - big
Ben Gordon - wing
Carlos Boozer - big
Elton Brand - big
Amare Stoudemire - big
Kevin Martin - wing
Tim Duncan - big
Antawn Jamison - big

11 wings, 9 bigs. Sure, there are scoring wings clustered at the top, but there are just as many bigs in the top 20 -- and this doesn't even include non-scoring good bigs (or at least non 20 ppg scoring bigs) such as Dwight Howard and Ben Wallace. Why does everyone think it's so easy to find a 20 ppg wing scorer? It's just as rare as finding a good big.

 

[Fox]

Let me preface with saying that I believe Martin is the franchise player of the Kings CURRENT group...and also happens to be my favorite player to watch.

With that being said I can see the argument in favor of trading him. For example, we knew a couple years ago that this Kings team wasn't going to win a title, they were still good, but not contenders. At that time guys like Bibby and Miller had a tremendous amount of value and instead of moving them we held on to the hope that the CURRENT group could get it done, now their value is far less as they've deteriorated in this system without a Vlade or Webber around.

Using that example with Martin, he has a ton of value right now, possibly enough to move a player like Miller or Thomas and bring in a high draft pick and/or a young player with a lot of potential in return. Perhaps that young player could develop into what Martin has anyway. Martin has developed well but can he develop into a star player with the likes of Bibby around who IMO is holding him back.

The deal would have to be sweet but if it can get us rebuilt a year or two earlier than otherwise it definitely deserves a look.

 

[VF21]

Ok sure.

Here is the one proviso: what are you getting back? Because for instance if you could trade Kevin to bring back Oden for instance, yeah, I'm on board. But otherwise that makes absolutely no sense at all. Time to rebuild...so to kick things off we'll start by trading away our best young player/only young building block? Isn't the whole point of rebuilding to acquire young pieces just like Kevin?

If he's suggesting concrete scenarios, then maybe. Depends on what they are, and how outlandish he's getting. If he's just suggesting it as a phbilosophical approach, its loony.

That pretty much sums up everything I could have said, with one possible addition:

Carmichael Dave = radio personality = need to get people to listen = occasional "provocative" statements

 

[kupman]

GP has often stated that he will make any trade that makes the Kings better - so yeah, we could trade Kmart for the right situation.

Here is one right now, Kmart + K9, SAR (and maybe some additional scrubs) for Kevin Garnett. I would be very happy with that as much as I love Kmart.

Just one small problem - McHale will not like it.

 

[Spike]

I never understand this sentiment -- I don't think it's true at all. Take the top 20 scorers in the NBA:

Kobe - wing
Carmelo - wing
Arenas - wing
LeBron - wing
Ray Allen - wing
Iverson - wing
Vince Carter - wing
Joe Johnson - wing
Tracy McGrady - wing
Nowitzki - big
Randolph - big
Bosh - big
Garnett - big
Ben Gordon - wing
Carlos Boozer - big
Elton Brand - big
Amare Stoudemire - big
Kevin Martin - wing
Tim Duncan - big
Antawn Jamison - big

11 wings, 9 bigs. Sure, there are scoring wings clustered at the top, but there are just as many bigs in the top 20 -- and this doesn't even include non-scoring good bigs (or at least non 20 ppg scoring bigs) such as Dwight Howard and Ben Wallace. Why does everyone think it's so easy to find a 20 ppg wing scorer? It's just as rare as finding a good big.

It's not just about scoring. There are plenty of 20 ppg wings; that's what they're supposed to do. Big men (real big men) can influence the game in a way that a pure shooter cannot. (Rebounds, blocked shots, etc.) Very few of the wings on the list will consistently do more than shoot...only LeBron comes to mind.

Tim Duncan is proving that this post season, and for the most part, so is Boozer. While Nowitzki is tall, I don't know that he plays like a big (for the sake of this conversation) - same for Jamison.

 

[nbrans]

It's not just about scoring. There are plenty of 20 ppg wings; that's what they're supposed to do. Big men (real big men) can influence the game in a way that a pure shooter cannot. (Rebounds, blocked shots, etc.) Very few of the wings on the list will consistently do more than shoot...only LeBron comes to mind.

Tim Duncan is proving that this post season, and for the most part, so is Boozer. While Nowitzki is tall, I don't know that he plays like a big (for the sake of this conversation) - same for Jamison.

You need both. You can't just win solely with a good big man (as the TWolves are finding out) and you can't just win solely with a good wing (Lakers). You have to have both inside and outside.

But that wasn't really what I was getting at -- For some reason people think that it is super easy to find good wings and really hard to find good bigs. I don't really think that's the case.

On the margins of the league I think it's true -- there are a lot of DeShawn Stevensons out there on NBA rosters and in the NBDL, whereas finding a serviceable big is more difficult. But 20 ppg wings are anything but a dime a dozen -- there were only 11 of them in the entire league, and there are just as many good bigs out there. 20 ppg wings don't grow on trees, particularly when they're 23 years old.

 

[cfechter]

That pretty much sums up everything I could have said, with one possible addition:

Carmichael Dave = radio personality = need to get people to listen = occasional "provocative" statements

Carmichael Dave = not a basketball guy. Actively trying to trade Martin at this point is just plain crazy since we don't even know how good he could be.

 

[Merdiesel]

He was on our local ESPN affiliate a couple of weeks ago and thinks the Kings should trade KEVIN MARTIN to start the rebuilding process. Has he been saying that on his show up there? Thoughts?

I never thought of it, but we could put some interesting packages together with him... could be the only way we can get rid of KT's bloated contract. The thought of trading Martin doesn't sit well with me, but neither did that Richmond for Webber trade way back when...

Not the same case at all...

It would be a big mistake to trade Martin right now.

 

[NikateeN]

Martin should stay for sure, if we were looking for one of those quick fix get rich in a hurry things then trade him for some old slow vets like Bibby, but if were are in rebuild mode it just makes no sense to trade him, unless we get a durant type of player in return, which we wouldnt.

 

[Kingster]

He was on our local ESPN affiliate a couple of weeks ago and thinks the Kings should trade KEVIN MARTIN to start the rebuilding process. Has he been saying that on his show up there? Thoughts?

I never thought of it, but we could put some interesting packages together with him... could be the only way we can get rid of KT's bloated contract. The thought of trading Martin doesn't sit well with me, but neither did that Richmond for Webber trade way back when...

Kevin is the only core the Kings have. Forget about it!

 

[Bricklayer]

You need both. You can't just win solely with a good big man (as the TWolves are finding out) and you can't just win solely with a good wing (Lakers). You have to have both inside and outside.

Sub-superstar wings are about the least valuable pieces on the floor (at that level). They do one thing, score. Its what they are supposed to do of course, but its still a limited skill that doesn't drive titles. Its also one that eerybody wants to do, and not a few people could do reasonably well given the green light (as opposed to something like passing or shotblocking where its a rare skillset). And sure, if you can get an MJ or Wade who scores, rebounds, assists, and is unstoppable when he wants to be, sure. But a 20ppg scoring OG/SF, by himself, adds very few wins to your total unless he's doing other things (ala a Pippen or whatever).

PGs at a similar level (let's say Deron Williams), they do two things, and often three (score, pass, control tempo, maybe some steals/disruption). Bigs at that level (let's say Randolph, Boozer or Howard) do two or maybe even three (score, board, block). But wings? They're the pretty boys. The one dimensional finishers. Least valuable pieces on the floor...until you hit the ultra elite guys who are ultra elite precisely because they are not one dimensional.

All of that said, I still don't see the point of shopping Kevin unless you have a very specific target in mind. There are at least half a dozen pieces on this team that do not fit and do not belong in a Kings uni anymore. So until/unless somebody show me some team out there willing to give up a big YOUNG stud in exchange for our little OG -- something along the Mitch/Webb trade maybe, worry about shipping the other guys out. Rebuilding is hard enough when you only have one piece in place. Its that much harder if you trade that one too and basically need a whole new starting 5.

 

[nbrans]

^20 ppg is valuable no matter how you slice it. You need scoring on your team, and however that 20 ppg comes, it's extremely valuable to have someone you can count on for points. It may not get you a championship, it may not even get you wins by itself, but it's a start. And all I'm saying is that 20 ppg scorers, whether the one-dimensional kind or the multi-dimensional kind, are not very easy to come by. They're just as difficult to find as a good big, and I really disagree that they're the least valuable people on the floor. Someone has to put the ball in the basket to win games. All the rebounding, shotblocking, defense, and passing in the world is worthless if you can't put the ball in the hoop. I agree with you that every great player in the league brings more than just one thing to the table, but at the same time, guys who do one thing really really well are also very valuable.

Now, that doesn't mean you sit back and congratulate yourself for finding a good wing, Kevin needs to develop other facets of his game and he needs help on the interior, but finding guys like him is extremely difficult to do. They don't grow on trees. You could give up Kevin for a good young big, and then you'd have to turn around and find antoher player like Kevin. In other words, you'd be pretty much back at square one.

 

[Warhawk]

^20 ppg is valuable no matter how you slice it. You need scoring on your team, and however that 20 ppg comes, it's extremely valuable to have someone you can count on for points. It may not get you a championship, it may not even get you wins by itself, but it's a start. And all I'm saying is that 20 ppg scorers, whether the one-dimensional kind or the multi-dimensional kind, are not very easy to come by.

Especially efficient ones, like Kevin.

 

[carmichaeldave]

Carmichael Dave = not a basketball guy. Actively trying to trade Martin at this point is just plain crazy since we don't even know how good he could be.

Carmichael Dave = Kings Fan first, Kings journalist second.

Look, as it was suggested earlier in this thread, I wasnt just throwing that out there to get people to listen. That's called "turnkey radio", and I have no respect for it. It is an idea that goes against the grain, but I stand by it.

I love Kevin Martin, and think as good of a player as he is, he is just as good of a person. However, as was also stated earlier, a 2 guard in this league is not a tough spot to fill.

I understand he is still growing and developing, but IMO he will be at best a 20-22 point, 5 board, 2 assist guy with passable defense. Certainly that is a great player, and he may even make the all star team once or twice.

However, the Kings are in salary cap hell with Bibby, Miller, and Thomas. Their most talented player is Ron Artest, and he will command .75 cents on the dollar if the Kings trade him now, due to his other "things".

Sure, we all want the Kings to trade Miller and Thomas, but we also live in the real world, as do other NBA GMs. Saying it does not make it so, and there is the chance that some very hard choices will need to be made in the near future.

I do not believe that K-Mart is a franchise cornerstone, and I also believe I am in the majority. I also believe when you combine age, talent, and contract, he is by far the Kings most tradable commodity. That being said, the idea I proposed in Fresno, and several times up here, was to explore packaging him with a Miller or Thomas contract. The idea that he is "untouchable" is ludicrous to me, as no one should be untouchable on that roster.

It was a mainly philosophical thought, because when you start getting into specifics, the conversation just turns into a verbal RealGM machine. But I do think the idea should be looked at and explored. If you were able to rid yourself of one of the big two contracts (especially Thomas), get a decent starter in return, you also have to factor in the cap flexibility and impending roster signing that would come from that trade into the mix.

Again, I am not saying anyone who disagrees is ignorant, and I understand its not a popular concept. However, I personally do not attach myself to individual players, as a fan I care only about wins and losses, present and future.

IMO, you usually have to give value to get value. If the right offer came along, I would hope that GP would entertain it. However, I have also learned that GP is smarter than I ever will be, and I'm sure its nothing new to him.

Just lurking, and thought I'd drop in my .02

 

[nbrans]

^Again, this idea that it's easy to fill the 2 spot. Do you know how many 2 guards in the league score 20+ points? Kobe, Ray Allen, Vince Carter, Joe Johnson, Ben Gordon, Kevin Martin. That's it. Six guys. Add Arenas and Iverson if you want to expand the defintion a bit, although they both primarily play point.

How is it easy to find someone who can score like that? I don't get it. I understand the argument that it's better to have a multidimensional player scoring 20 because they're also doing other things to help you win, but this idea that Martin is easily replaceable is completely foolhardy to me.

 

[kupman]

CD is correct. Kmart is tradable. GP knows this. There is no player alive that is not tradable in GP's eyes if it makes the Kings better.

It is all about details...i.e. what do we get in return? Kmart may offer the Kings the biggest return as he is probably the most coveted player on the Kings roster.

 

[Bricklayer]

^Again, this idea that it's easy to fill the 2 spot. Do you know how many 2 guards in the league score 20+ points? Kobe, Ray Allen, Vince Carter, Joe Johnson, Ben Gordon, Kevin Martin. That's it. Six guys. Add Arenas and Iverson if you want to expand the defintion a bit, although they both primarily play point.

How is it easy to find someone who can score like that? I don't get it. I understand the argument that it's better to have a multidimensional player scoring 20 because they're also doing other things to help you win, but this idea that Martin is easily replaceable is completely foolhardy to me.

Did Wade, Redd and Rip retire?

But that's a minor oversight -- assuming got left off due to the injuries (well, except Rip). Not exactly a lot of great teams the guys on that list led either. The point wouldn't be that everybody can score 20 -- although a lot of OG/SFs could in fact score 15. The point would be that that in itself is not nearly as valuable as a similarly positioned player at a more important position.

In the modern (basically going back to 1980 just because that's about my earliest memories of it) history of NBA champions I can think of very few, VERY few examples where those guys were even part of title teams. Rip of course beign the shining exception, but as with everything else with those Pistons both aberrant and part of a collective. Maybe the third or even 4th most important piece. Before that? Maybe you could qualify Rice's one struggling year with the Lakers. but they neither liked him nor needed him to win two more. He was just along for the ride. Before that? Closest thing might be Dumars, who was overrated, but nonetheless combined his scoring with being an All League type defender year in and year out. Had a second dimension. And before that...maybe nobody. I guess you could count Byron Scott, but I'm not sure he ever scored 20 and was clearly just the also ran #4 guy on those squads. I mwan, its a real thin crop. 1 year for Rip. 1 for Rice (maybe, did not average 20 or really matter). 2 for Dumars, who actually may be overqualified because he did other things.

That doesn't mean that there is any reason that a title team cannot have a guy like that on it. But it does mean that if he is, he's probably a spare luxury. Scoring, alone without more, does not and has never tracked well with winning big. The game is normally won elsewhere.

 

[nbrans]

^Wade didn't play enough games (forgot that they sort for that) so yeah, include him, Rip scored 19.8.

You could also add in Houston-era Clyde Drexler into the mix of champion 20 ppg just-scorers, but yeah, I agree that the track-record of one-dimensional 20 ppg scorers on championiship teams is mixed. These types of guys have always been #2s and you have to find that #1, but they can be a valuable piece.

But that also assumes that Kevin can't add more dimensions to his game -- before last season he was a pretty good defender, maybe he can step that back up now that he has a full season under his belt. He started creating his shot more at the end of the season, and his passing was improving. I'm not ready to give up on the idea that he could be a 25-28 ppg scorer plus more of a passer plus more of a defender. He's got the tools, it's a matter of putting things together and developing more stamina.

And still, even if Kevin is destined to be a #2 or #3 he has the potential to be a really good #2 or #3, particularly because he's so efficient that it opens up shots for other guys. As Minnesota and LA have shown, finding that #2 or #3 can be extremely difficult.

Now, if we're talking about giving up Kevin for a young sure thing #1, a multidimensional star, maybe you do that if you can also free up enough room to go after another #2. But otherwise I think we should appreciate what we have, and especially appreciate that it's not at all easy to come by.

 

[VF21]

Carmichael Dave = Kings Fan first, Kings journalist second.

Look, as it was suggested earlier in this thread, I wasnt just throwing that out there to get people to listen. That's called "turnkey radio", and I have no respect for it. It is an idea that goes against the grain, but I stand by it.

I love Kevin Martin, and think as good of a player as he is, he is just as good of a person. However, as was also stated earlier, a 2 guard in this league is not a tough spot to fill.

I understand he is still growing and developing, but IMO he will be at best a 20-22 point, 5 board, 2 assist guy with passable defense. Certainly that is a great player, and he may even make the all star team once or twice.

However, the Kings are in salary cap hell with Bibby, Miller, and Thomas. Their most talented player is Ron Artest, and he will command .75 cents on the dollar if the Kings trade him now, due to his other "things".

Sure, we all want the Kings to trade Miller and Thomas, but we also live in the real world, as do other NBA GMs. Saying it does not make it so, and there is the chance that some very hard choices will need to be made in the near future.

I do not believe that K-Mart is a franchise cornerstone, and I also believe I am in the majority. I also believe when you combine age, talent, and contract, he is by far the Kings most tradable commodity. That being said, the idea I proposed in Fresno, and several times up here, was to explore packaging him with a Miller or Thomas contract. The idea that he is "untouchable" is ludicrous to me, as no one should be untouchable on that roster.

It was a mainly philosophical thought, because when you start getting into specifics, the conversation just turns into a verbal RealGM machine. But I do think the idea should be looked at and explored. If you were able to rid yourself of one of the big two contracts (especially Thomas), get a decent starter in return, you also have to factor in the cap flexibility and impending roster signing that would come from that trade into the mix.

Again, I am not saying anyone who disagrees is ignorant, and I understand its not a popular concept. However, I personally do not attach myself to individual players, as a fan I care only about wins and losses, present and future.

IMO, you usually have to give value to get value. If the right offer came along, I would hope that GP would entertain it. However, I have also learned that GP is smarter than I ever will be, and I'm sure its nothing new to him.

Just lurking, and thought I'd drop in my .02

Kevin Martin is arguably the brightest spot in the Kings heavens right now, so of course we should trade him?

Sorry, Dave, but this sounds more like trading just for the sake of trading and I'm strongly against it.

Of course, he's tradeable if the deal is right AND will significantly improve the Kings. The point is it sounded as though you felt trading Martin should be a first priority for the Kings if they want to rebuild and that's just crazy IMHO.

 

[carmichaeldave]

i certainly didnt mean to imply it should be first priority.......and i wouldnt want him traded just for kicks and giggles....

if the deal is right, and its something that can improve the team now or in the near future, all i am saying is that it should be entered in the realm of possibility, not scoffed at like its blasphemy. that's all.

 

[Warhawk]

CD-

First I want to say thanks for popping in to expand upon what bits we were reading/hearing.

I think like VF, many might have gotten the wrong impression of what you might have been discussing. Always nice to get it straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Agree or disagree, it's better to get the whole story before bashing someone.

 

[BMiller52]

I know what you mean man obviously we should make a trade to make the team's situation/talent level better but the fact is that we're not going to get what Martin's worth in a deal. We need a frontcourt 15-20/10 guy who can block shots and play man to man D. Martin won't get us that guy...

 

[VF21]

i certainly didnt mean to imply it should be first priority.......and i wouldnt want him traded just for kicks and giggles....

if the deal is right, and its something that can improve the team now or in the near future, all i am saying is that it should be entered in the realm of possibility, not scoffed at like its blasphemy. that's all.

I think then, conceptually, we're probably in agreement. I just do not think there are that many potential deals out there that would benefit the team more than losing Martin would hurt.

You know me, Dave. I tell it like I see it.

Good to see you respond anyway...

 

[carmichaeldave]

well. then again, i'm not a basketball guy

 

[Entity]

nbrans i totally see what you are saying. Basically Kevin Martin is just as valuable to us as a young big would be.