Could the solution to our SG problems be Eric Gordon?

[Bricklayer]

When we sign a vet for the SG position, we blow the last 2 firstround picks in the process.
You wont build a sucessful franchise if you dont trust your players and help them to develop.
Some people act like players like Leonard came into the league as the player they are now, which is completely off the charge.
Drafting a player is only the first step. Developing a player is what really makes the difference and the Kings have been historically bad doing this.
From Tyreke Evans, over Omri Casspi, Trob or even Dmc to some extent, we never did a good job to develop the players. We throw away almost every potential we aquire via the draft and are lucky, that Dmc is so talented, that he developed regardless of the mess in this organisation.
Aquiring a veteran Sg just means we give up on our young players once again. We would repeat the same mistake again, while our biggest need is clearly the Pf position, where we play a veteran, that brings nothing to the table outside of solid man defense and gets outplayed by every starting Pf in the league and most backups.

Let me add, that I'm confused, that some people here think that guys like Danny Green are mediocre. In a league dominated by the pick&roll the role of the SG has changed and players like Green are among the best SG's of the league, cause this position doesn't require ISO-skills to the same amount like in the early 2000's anymore. Of course a SG, who is able to score out of isolations is valuable, but it isn't necessary and we talk about max players, when we want this skillset. Even Bradley Beal, who is one of the best SG's of the league, admitted, that scoring out of ISO's is only the next step in his development.
It's the same thing with the center position. The game has changed and modern era centers are more about defense, passing and finishing the pick&roll than they are about post up play and isolation. That doesn't mean, that they are worse, than their equivalents some time ago. They are just very different.

Young players are anathema to winning. We need to win. Not so hard. I don't really give a hoot if one day Ben becomes a solid SG in the league 4 years from now. Irrelevant to our problem. I care about what happens next year and the year after, because that's our Cuz window. Lose Cuz and Ben is completely irrelevant.

People keep trying to group "young players" all together as if there are one singular group all entitled to the same respect. You get a young player, better keep him! He's young! But that's not the deal. At one point on this team we had young Jimmer and young DeMarcus. Those were not REMOTELY the same thing. One entitled to absolutely all the respect in the world talentwise, the other just a rookie contract from out of the league. When you talk about oh, "young players" you are talking about the search for the homegrown special players. Not mediocrities, not scrubs. You bring them in, hope that you have found a special player, but as soon as that is not true they aren't magically protected by their youth. Mediocre guys of any age can be easily acquired every single year. "Youth" is about the search for stars. The Spurs didn't wait on "youth" with Kawhi, they waited on a star. If they had drafted Jimmer instead and waited on him they would be idiots.

Now circling back to Ben and the need to sacrifice yet another Kings season waiting on him.

Per 36 min:
Ben Yr1: 11.9pts (.376 .320 .804) 3.9reb 1.3ast 0.7stl 0.3blk 1.6TO PER 7.7
Ben Yr2: 13.4pts (.437 .358 .813) 3.2reb 1.9ast 1.0stl 0.3blk 1.9TO PER 10.4

Furthermore, before/after the All Star break (and with a new coach):
Before Break: 33.2min 11.7pts (.444 .362 .837) 3.0reb 1.5ast 0.8stl 0.3blk 1.6TO
After Break: 31.5min 12.9pts (.426 .350 .784) 2.8reb 2.1ast 1.3stl 0.2blk 1.8TO

progress? A bit. But other than an encouraging jump in steals after Karl arrived -- Karl likes gambling defense, while Ben has been one of the least disruptive defensive guards in the league in his early career, so likely a response to coaching -- its near stagnation. The sort of rounding of rough edges you expect out of a guy in his prime years who's already fully develoiped, not the quantum leap you'd expect out of a rising star.

Last year Ben was in serious running for the very worst major minute player in the NBA. This year his 10.4 PER ranks 152nd amongst all guards and guard-forwards, sandwiched nicely in between Austin Rivers at a 10.3PER and Ben Gordon at a 10.6 PER. This is what people sound so desperate to preserve. Now let me put two minutes restrictions on my search of all guards and guard-forwards (at basketball-referece.com): #1 guys need to have played 1000 total minutes. #2 guys need to have averaged 20+min a game. So again, looking at major minutes rotation guys, and doing that on purpose because almost every single guy below Ben on the initial list is a scrub getting no minutes because his team knows he's a scrub. We're the only team, the perpetual losing team, playing these guys big minutes. So anyway, here's the search of all major minute guards in the NBA this year, sorted by PER:

Ben McLemore ranks #101 of 108 total players. Ahead of only Austin Rivers, Quincy Pondexter, Joe Ingles, Lance Stephensen, Matthew Dellavedova, Kirk Hinrich, Dante Exum. It is, and has been, such an unnecessary self inflicted wound to continue throwing him out there as a starter. Even the uninspiring names thrown about to replace him like Mayo (#61) Gordon (#66) Hendersen (#63) Bellinelli (#70) Morrow (#47) etc. are a full level of more effective.

 

[Bricklayer]

If LMA leaves Portland and they'll rebuild the team, I'd go with a swap bewtween our #6/7/8 pick for Lillard.
Then trade DC(+Landry?) for M.Willians/PF/rim protector+a second round pick.

Ye, I know, it's fantatrade

It is indeed. Quite obviously if Aldridge leaves Portland the very one single piece they ain't trading is Lillard, who becomes their new young pillar, shaky as I view that pillar to be.

Might make them less eager to throw money at Matthews coming off his injury though. And Wes Matthews could be a great pickup, if healthy.

 

[Gilles]

Young players are anathema to winning. We need to win. Not so hard. I don't really give a hoot if one day Ben becomes a solid SG in the league 4 years from now. Irrelevant to our problem. I care about what happens next year and the year after, because that's our Cuz window. Lose Cuz and Ben is completely irrelevant.

People keep trying to group "young players" all together as if there are one singular group all entitled to the same respect. You get a young player, better keep him! He's young! But that's not the deal. At one point on this team we had young Jimmer and young DeMarcus. Those were not REMOTELY the same thing. One entitled to absolutely all the respect in the world talentwise, the other just a rookie contract from out of the league. When you talk about oh, "young players" you are talking about the search for the homegrown special players. Not mediocrities, not scrubs. You bring them in, hope that you have found a special player, but as soon as that is not true they aren't magically protected by their youth. Mediocre guys of any age can be easily acquired every single year. "Youth" is about the search for stars. The Spurs didn't wait on "youth" with Kawhi, they waited on a star. If they had drafted Jimmer instead and waited on him they would be idiots.

Now circling back to Ben and the need to sacrifice yet another Kings season waiting on him.

Per 36 min:
Ben Yr1: 11.9pts (.376 .320 .804) 3.9reb 1.3ast 0.7stl 0.3blk 1.6TO PER 7.7
Ben Yr2: 13.4pts (.437 .358 .813) 3.2reb 1.9ast 1.0stl 0.3blk 1.9TO PER 10.4

Furthermore, before/after the All Star break (and with a new coach):
Before Break: 33.2min 11.7pts (.444 .362 .837) 3.0reb 1.5ast 0.8stl 0.3blk 1.6TO
After Break: 31.5min 12.9pts (.426 .350 .784) 2.8reb 2.1ast 1.3stl 0.2blk 1.8TO

progress? A bit. But other than an encouraging jump in steals after Karl arrived -- Karl likes gambling defense, while Ben has been one of the least disruptive defensive guards in the league in his early career, so likely a response to coaching -- its near stagnation. The sort of rounding of rough edges you expect out of a guy in his prime years who's already fully develoiped, not the quantum leap you'd expect out of a rising star.

Last year Ben was in serious running for the very worst major minute player in the NBA. This year his 10.4 PER ranks 152nd amongst all guards and guard-forwards, sandwiched nicely in between Austin Rivers at a 10.3PER and Ben Gordon at a 10.6 PER. This is what people sound so desperate to preserve. Now let me put two minutes restrictions on my search of all guards and guard-forwards (at basketball-referece.com): #1 guys need to have played 1000 total minutes. #2 guys need to have averaged 20+min a game. So again, looking at major minutes rotation guys, and doing that on purpose because almost every single guy below Ben on the initial list is a scrub getting no minutes because his team knows he's a scrub. We're the only team, the perpetual losing team, playing these guys big minutes. So anyway, here's the search of all major minute guards in the NBA this year, sorted by PER:

Ben McLemore ranks #101 of 108 total players. Ahead of only Austin Rivers, Quincy Pondexter, Joe Ingles, Lance Stephensen, Matthew Dellavedova, Kirk Hinrich, Dante Exum. It is, and has been, such an unnecessary self inflicted wound to continue throwing him out there as a starter. Even the uninspiring names thrown about to replace him like Mayo (#61) Gordon (#66) Hendersen (#63) Bellinelli (#70) Morrow (#47) etc. are a full level of more effective.

You're an excellent lawyer, who knows, how to shape an argument. And how to pick the stats to comply with your argument.
PER is a bit of a voodoo stat, since Hollinger wrote all the box score statistics on a piece of paper, then started assigning weights, "until it made sense". Assists carry a lot of weight, so when you go just for minutes and guards, you get a lot of guys, who handle the ball, at the top. Hey, there's IT at #11. Kings should've kept him in the starting lineup, right? Ben on the other hand is often asked to go stand in the corner, and shoot a 3, when the ball arrives (fact, that he probably can't play bigger role consistently, is rather irrelevant, since Kings have three players in the starting lineup, who are used to/need to handle the ball a lot - inability to do more doesn't prevent Ben from filling the role). Play on a good rebounding team, while coach asks you to leak out? Less defensive rebounds for you. Hanging out on perimeter stretching the floor and then controlling transition defense? Less offensive rebounds for you.
How about limiting your search to guys with less than 20 USG% and 150 attempted 3s with sorting by shooting efficiency (TS%):http://bkref.com/tiny/S3Eu3. That looks much closer to a list of Ben's peers - now all the Dannys and Weses top the list instead of Russells and Stephs. BTW just on November and December games (30 overall) he would've topped that list at .610TS%, though lacking 7 minutes and 10 attempted 3-pointers to qualify.
So looking down that list, if Spurs and Blazers are willing to pay their players, while Grizzlies, Pels and Thunder are not willing to part cheaply with the cogs of their PO machines, who do you go after?

 

[bajaden]

It is indeed. Quite obviously if Aldridge leaves Portland the very one single piece they ain't trading is Lillard, who becomes their new young pillar, shaky as I view that pillar to be.

Might make them less eager to throw money at Matthews coming off his injury though. And Wes Matthews could be a great pickup, if healthy.

I agree that Matthews would be a great pickup, if totally healthy. I don't get why it becomes an either or, when talking about either signing a solid SG freeagent, or sticking with Ben and Nik. I'm not against trading either of them, but because you sign lets say a Matthews, that doesn't mean you have to get rid of one of them. If the team thinks either, or both have future potential, then keep them and develop them. Stauskas can play a little SF or PG in a pinch if needed. If they don't get enough minutes to suit their fans, then so what? Matthews is 28 years old. Sign him ( or anyone) to a three yr contract and by the time the contract runs it course, one or both of Ben and Nik would hopefully be ready to step up. I'm not against signing veterans, but I'am against needlessly discarding future talent.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I don't get why it becomes an either or, when talking about either signing a solid SG freeagent, or sticking with Ben and Nik. I'm not against trading either of them, but because you sign lets say a Matthews, that doesn't mean you have to get rid of one of them.

The interesting thing about this line of thinking is that because of the impending cash cascade next offseason, a lot of guys are going to be looking for one-year deals. Now, they'll probably be more inclined to take them with their own teams due to Bird Rights stuff, but even then I think there will definitely be some guys who will gladly get paid on a one-year deal now and then chase the money again next summer. Grab a guy (like Matthews) for one year to see how it works out, and there's no supreme need to dump either Ben or Nik - we could keep developing them and reassess in a year. Perhaps by that time it would make sense to hold on to both of them, or maybe it becomes obvious which guy to let go.

 

[Bricklayer]

I agree that Matthews would be a great pickup, if totally healthy. I don't get why it becomes an either or, when talking about either signing a solid SG freeagent, or sticking with Ben and Nik. I'm not against trading either of them, but because you sign lets say a Matthews, that doesn't mean you have to get rid of one of them. If the team thinks either, or both have future potential, then keep them and develop them. Stauskas can play a little SF or PG in a pinch if needed. If they don't get enough minutes to suit their fans, then so what? Matthews is 28 years old. Sign him ( or anyone) to a three yr contract and by the time the contract runs it course, one or both of Ben and Nik would hopefully be ready to step up. I'm not against signing veterans, but I'am against needlessly discarding future talent.

I don't think acknowledging that we need a dependable vet necessarily means you have to dump Ben. He is a nice guy, teammates like him, has some skills that could be of use if they develop -- specifically 3pt shooting and speed on the break for Karl. But I do think it means you have to understand that that is in play, that we aren't desperately clinging to old bad draft reports at this point.

And the thing is, at the end of the season Karl talked about needing a defensive wing stopper, more creativity, and 3pt shooting. Vlade repeatedly invoked Doug Christie as a model. And these things aren't Ben. Nor can all these indifferent pieces we have determined sacred for one reason or another -- Ben, Dwill, Omri, McCallum, whoever -- all or even mostly come back if we're going out searching for all those things above that we haven't been getting.

 

[KingsFanGER]

Young players are anathema to winning. We need to win. Not so hard. I don't really give a hoot if one day Ben becomes a solid SG in the league 4 years from now. Irrelevant to our problem. I care about what happens next year and the year after, because that's our Cuz window. Lose Cuz and Ben is completely irrelevant.

People keep trying to group "young players" all together as if there are one singular group all entitled to the same respect. You get a young player, better keep him! He's young! But that's not the deal. At one point on this team we had young Jimmer and young DeMarcus. Those were not REMOTELY the same thing. One entitled to absolutely all the respect in the world talentwise, the other just a rookie contract from out of the league. When you talk about oh, "young players" you are talking about the search for the homegrown special players. Not mediocrities, not scrubs. You bring them in, hope that you have found a special player, but as soon as that is not true they aren't magically protected by their youth. Mediocre guys of any age can be easily acquired every single year. "Youth" is about the search for stars. The Spurs didn't wait on "youth" with Kawhi, they waited on a star. If they had drafted Jimmer instead and waited on him they would be idiots.

You don't keep young players, because they are young. You keep them, when you see a valuable potential in them. This Spurs didn't wait on a star - they turned Kawhi into a star! That's the major difference. They saw a player with certain attributes and worked on the holes in his game, making him better every year by teaching him how to succeed in the NBA. If the Kings were smart enough to draft Kawhi, he wouldn't be the same player he is now. Most likely he would be in the situation Ben is in now and some fans would have given up on him.
The thing with Ben is, that he has all the tools to be a very good 3&D SG. Athletic, good shooting form. What he lacks is feel for the game, defensive instincts and handles. Now his ability to handle the ball is no problem for a 3&D player. This is not his job. He is able to drive straight to the basket and that's all he needs to be able to do. What's more critical is his lack of headiness on the defensive end. Exactly what Malone mentioned back in the days: he must learn, who he is guarding and how to do it.
But from my point of view, this is not on the player. All reports I read about Ben, mentioned that he works extremely hard. He seems to be a gymrat and this is all you can ask out of a young player. Everything else is on the franchise.
Ben has already had 3 coaches in his second year in the league. With Karl there is hopefully some consistency now and the chance, that Ben improves his defense by working with the assistant coaches and watching lots of film.
You just can't give up on a player, who fits right into the definiton of the ideal SG in the contemporary NBA, when he is able to improve his game in 1 area.

 

[ockingsfan]

Eric Gordon Camp is looking for a possible trade partner for him once he opts in.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...-Possible-Deals-Despite-Expectation-To-Opt-In

A possible trade that can work out for both the Kings and the Pelicans.

Kings send Carl Landry and Jason Thompson for Eric Gordon.

Why Kings do it? Essentially we are trading JT for Gordon and we unload Landry contract a year early. We get a legitimate starting shooting guard in Gordon and we could use either Ben or Nik in a possible trade for a PG, Lawson? We draft WCS at #6. Worst case, Gordon is a 6th man of the year candidate and we get out of Landry's contract a year early.

Why the Pelicans do it? They move Gordon and open up more PT for Evans and Holiday. JT gives them someone to replace Asik who is a free agent. Landry also played well for them and I am sure he has supporters in the FO there. Landry could be useful with his inside scoring off the bench.

 

[Gilles]

Worst case would be WCS takes half a season to adapt, Cuz has to cover everyone on D and fouls out every night, Gordon plays 60 games, Kings win 38 games, and Cuz leaves this joke of a franchise.
Kings can't afford to take on this much money for an above average player.
Matthews returning to 90% strength? Yes. Gordon would be "hell, no".

 

[sdballer]

Eric Gordon Camp is looking for a possible trade partner for him once he opts in.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...-Possible-Deals-Despite-Expectation-To-Opt-In

A possible trade that can work out for both the Kings and the Pelicans.

Kings send Carl Landry and Jason Thompson for Eric Gordon.

Why Kings do it? Essentially we are trading JT for Gordon and we unload Landry contract a year early. We get a legitimate starting shooting guard in Gordon and we could use either Ben or Nik in a possible trade for a PG, Lawson? We draft WCS at #6. Worst case, Gordon is a 6th man of the year candidate and we get out of Landry's contract a year early.

Why the Pelicans do it? They move Gordon and open up more PT for Evans and Holiday. JT gives them someone to replace Asik who is a free agent. Landry also played well for them and I am sure he has supporters in the FO there. Landry could be useful with his inside scoring off the bench.

If we didn't think we had a shot at another SG, I'd consider that. We'd take on $2M (which is likely the only reason NO would consider it.

 

[ockingsfan]

Worst case would be WCS takes half a season to adapt, Cuz has to cover everyone on D and fouls out every night, Gordon plays 60 games, Kings win 38 games, and Cuz leaves this joke of a franchise.
Kings can't afford to take on this much money for an above average player.
Matthews returning to 90% strength? Yes. Gordon would be "hell, no".

You are assuming Matthews would even consider us as a free agent.

Also, if you trade Jason Thompson you would have to sign someone else for depth, like ed Davis or Cole Aldrich.

Let's not pretend that Jason Thompson off the bench will determine if dmc stays or goes at end of the day.

 

[randymoss1881]

No way
Dude would eat up our cap space

 

[sdballer]

No way
Dude would eat up our cap space

Not that much if we sent out JT and Landry. We'd take on a couple extra million and his deal ends next season.

 

[ockingsfan]

Not that much if we sent out JT and Landry. We'd take on a couple extra million and his deal ends next season.

Exactly, if we can move Landry and his 2 remaining years in his deal, we would free up almost 7 million for free agency a year early.

Gordon has only one more year on his contract and then we free up his 15 million for 2016 free agency.

 

[Gilles]

You are assuming Matthews would even consider us as a free agent.
Also, if you trade Jason Thompson you would have to sign someone else for depth, like ed Davis or Cole Aldrich.
Let's not pretend that Jason Thompson off the bench will determine if dmc stays or goes at end of the day.

Kings need two solid big men besides Boogie, even if they draft WCS. JT is a solid big man, who proved he can play next to Boogie, even when he makes 40% from the field. Davis is half of that, and Aldrich is barely any of that. Trade JT for a questionable upgrade at SG (I look at the whole package, that includes 20 missed games), that also eats into your cap space, and you don't have resources to patch holes in frontcourt.

Not that much if we sent out JT and Landry. We'd take on a couple extra million and his deal ends next season.

It would move Kings from $8.5 million to MLE-sized cap space. So they would jump behind half dozen PO teams, that have as much to offer.

 

[randymoss1881]

Not that much if we sent out JT and Landry. We'd take on a couple extra million and his deal ends next season.

We'd only have 6million after that to fill our starting C and back up C/PF. Unless you're assuming we get WCS

 

[ockingsfan]

Kings need two solid big men besides Boogie, even if they draft WCS. JT is a solid big man, who proved he can play next to Boogie, even when he makes 40% from the field. Davis is half of that, and Aldrich is barely any of that. Trade JT for a questionable upgrade at SG (I look at the whole package, that includes 20 missed games), that also eats into your cap space, and you don't have resources to patch holes in frontcourt.

It would move Kings from $8.5 million to MLE-sized cap space. So they would jump behind half dozen PO teams, that have as much to offer.

Let's be honest here, the Kings are not getting any marquee free agents this summer.

First, our FO still has a horrible image around the league and 2) we don't have an astounding amount of cap space.

We will need to improve by the Draft and by trades.

Of course for us to consider trading JT, we need to draft WCS first on June 25th.

From a Free agency stand point, we will be need to find players that are undervalued, i.e. Darren Collison type players, and give them a MLE type offer. Someone like Ed Davis fills that same sort of gamble, that could pay off with a solid role player for us.

I think you also miss the point of a move like this, is to move Landry's immovable contract a year early, that would give us more cap space to make a splash in the 2016 Free agency.

 

[Gilles]

1. Kings are not making a splash next summer, if everyone believes Boogie is on his way out, and another under-40 win season will be a good clue.
2. Kings don't need a marquee FA. They need to find defensive-minded role-playing big to put into the starting lineup next to Boogie. Being able not to impede Cousins on offensive end seems to be a requirement. That's why Davis is towards the end on the list of possible acquisitions even as a bench big.
3. There will be a lot of loose money on the market in 2016. Teams will also need to reach the floor of 95% of salary cap - going rate for absorbing 7.5% of the cap will be a high 2nd rounder at the most.

 

[ockingsfan]

1. Kings are not making a splash next summer, if everyone believes Boogie is on his way out, and another under-40 win season will be a good clue.

With the Salary cap expecting to go up significantly next summer, the Kings should have over $30 million in cap space, I am sure they will be able to get some decent talent next summer.

2. Kings don't need a marquee FA.

You just suggested to sign Wes Matthews.

Matthews returning to 90% strength? Yes. Gordon would be "hell, no".

I would say Matthews would be a marquee free agent.

They need to find defensive-minded role-playing big to put into the starting lineup next to Boogie. Being able not to impede Cousins on offensive end seems to be a requirement. That's why Davis is towards the end on the list of possible acquisitions even as a bench big.

JT has been playing next to DMC for years now and let's look at the outcomes., 28, 28, 29 wins.

JT is not going to make or break your season. He is a nice luxury coming off the bench, but he can be replaced by a defensive big at half the price. I prefaced any trade of JT with the drafting of WCS. I would hope that WCS can replace JT's production before the half way mark of the season, otherwise, we would be in big trouble, regardless if we had JT off the bench or not.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Dave brought up Wes Matthews a few weeks back, and that had me re-thinking the Afflalo stuff.

I mean, targeting Matthews lets us know the Kings are willing to spend on SG help. Matthews is better than Afflalo, yes, but Afflalo is more attainable. He could be convinced to opt out of his option for next season, if he wasn't planning to do that already.

If the Kings strike out on the 'good' options, players like Kevin Martin and Marcus Thornton are worth talking to. We saw what Karl and playing time did for Omri Casspi. Martin and Thornton have both had their moments play in an up tempo offense, and they wouldn't be starters, but solid bench scoring at a weak position would help.

 

[Gilles]

With the Salary cap expecting to go up significantly next summer, the Kings should have over $30 million in cap space, I am sure they will be able to get some decent talent next summer.

You just suggested to sign Wes Matthews.

I would say Matthews would be a marquee free agent.

JT has been playing next to DMC for years now and let's look at the outcomes., 28, 28, 29 wins.

JT is not going to make or break your season. He is a nice luxury coming off the bench, but he can be replaced by a defensive big at half the price. I prefaced any trade of JT with the drafting of WCS. I would hope that WCS can replace JT's production before the half way mark of the season, otherwise, we would be in big trouble, regardless if we had JT off the bench or not.

1. I'm sure, Kings will be able to attract Sessions for $8 million. This year's pick, plus FA signing, plus Room Exception signing will most likely mean $15 million at most in 2016 cap space.
2. Matthews with injury concerns is not a marquee FA.
3. DMC has nothing to show for all these years in Sacramento. Let's trade him then, right?! JT is a role player. He can't turn team's fortunes around by himself, but he can definitely play a role. And lol at finding a replacement for him at $3 million.

 

[206Fan]

Dave brought up Wes Matthews a few weeks back, and that had me re-thinking the Afflalo stuff.

I mean, targeting Matthews lets us know the Kings are willing to spend on SG help. Matthews is better than Afflalo, yes, but Afflalo is more attainable. He could be convinced to opt out of his option for next season, if he wasn't planning to do that already.

If the Kings strike out on the 'good' options, players like Kevin Martin and Marcus Thornton are worth talking to. We saw what Karl and playing time did for Omri Casspi. Martin and Thornton have both had their moments play in an up tempo offense, and they wouldn't be starters, but solid bench scoring at a weak position would help.

I want to see Kevin Martin back. I wonder how much it would take to get him

 

[ockingsfan]

Dave brought up Wes Matthews a few weeks back, and that had me re-thinking the Afflalo stuff.

I mean, targeting Matthews lets us know the Kings are willing to spend on SG help. Matthews is better than Afflalo, yes, but Afflalo is more attainable. He could be convinced to opt out of his option for next season, if he wasn't planning to do that already.

Agreed.

I think Afflalo is a lot more attainable because of his ties to Coach Karl.

Matthews will still be a hot commodity, even with his injury concerns, especially since he is already working out after his surgery. I doubt he doesn't get a better offer from a contending team.

 

[randymoss1881]

Agreed.

I think Afflalo is a lot more attainable because of his ties to Coach Karl.

Matthews will still be a hot commodity, even with his injury concerns, especially since he is already working out after his surgery. I doubt he doesn't get a better offer from a contending team.

If you look t teams with cap space, a starting opening at SG, and is a contender or has that potential we are pretty high on the list.