Defenders Still Available as Free Agents

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
#1
We have 1 defender in the rotation (Mbah a Moute). Maybe 2 to 2 1/2 (Mbah a Moute, Hayes, Salmons) total on the whole squad, pending McCallum's development. Hence this Defenders Still Available as Free Agents as of 09/07/13 thread -- none of them are going to start for you, but maybe you could lay out a non or partially guaranteed contract to a couple of them to give you training camp options:

SG Marquis Daniels
SF James Johnson
SG Dahntay Jones
SG DeShawn Stevensen
SF Mikael Pietrus
C Cole Aldrich
PF Louis Admuundsen
SG Terrence Williams
SF Sam Young
SG Roger Mason
SG Delonte West
SF Renaldo Balkman
PG Royal Ivey
PF Kurt Thomas
SG Sasha Pavlovic
C Jason Collins
PF Jared Jeffries
C Kyrylo Fesenko
 
#2
I've always been a big fan of Terrence Williams, can do all the little things well. He has decent size and strength to play either the SG or SF and can handle the ball as a point forward. Didn't really work out his first stint here but he could be a bargain if Malone can get something out of him. But he needs to get his act together and the time is going to come where he will be out of chances to make a team. Then again, it probably goes against Malone's principles of having high character players.
 

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#3
To me the two most interesting names on the list are Aldrich and Pietrus, based on need. Assuming the players are mature enough to deal with Collins orientation he is a good guy, a pro and has proven he can handle 10-15 min a night at the C so I think he is a good pick as well, but last season Aldrich showed signs of a bit more of a presence. Of course bringing in another 3 REALLY means we just have get rid of one or more of our stiffs.
 
#4
To me the two most interesting names on the list are Aldrich and Pietrus, based on need. Assuming the players are mature enough to deal with Collins orientation he is a good guy, a pro and has proven he can handle 10-15 min a night at the C so I think he is a good pick as well, but last season Aldrich showed signs of a bit more of a presence. Of course bringing in another 3 REALLY means we just have get rid of one or more of our stiffs.
I think I would also add C Kyrylo Fesenko to your list of Aldrich and Pietrus.
 
#5
None of those guys can defend at the level of our rotational players. Even if they could, everyone on that list ruins any defensive value they have with their offensive game.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
#6
None of those guys can defend at the level of our rotational players. Even if they could, everyone on that list ruins any defensive value they have with their offensive game.
Which rotational players may I ask? Because I suspect this is about to get dubious.
 
#8
Which rotational players may I ask? Because I suspect this is about to get dubious.
They'd be fine to sit at the end of the bench. But why would you want Stevenson getting minutes over McLemore? Or Amundosn/Jeffries/Thomas getting minutes over Ppat or Hayes? Those guys simply do not have anything left to offer NBA teams other than vet experience sitting at the end of the bench.

I wouldn't mind replacing Jimmer/Outlaw with Jones, Stevenson, or Young. But that's about the extent i'd go with it
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Contributor
#9
I personally don't see the need to get any of them. I'd rather have a roster slot available should something decent come along.
 
K

KingMilz

Guest
#10
Devin Ebanks is still out there would not mind giving him some back up mins @SF, he's a decent mid range shooter and got good length
 
#12
One of those guys would be a great situational defender on a good team bound for the playoffs. For the Kings Trent Lockett and other Summer league players that have shown some defensive promise are a better move at this time.

This team still needs to find/develop solid starters at the 1 to 4. DMC is the only player who has a role defined at this point. The new coaching and front office staff has to decide which players to keep and which to deal. Trades this season and the draft next year will bring in the players to run Malones defense if the current team cannot.

I have accepted the fact the Kings will not win many games this year. I would like to see the team learn to play defense. At some point this season I would like to see defined roles and a solid 8 to 9 man rotation develop. Guys need to play together for quite awhile to develop a team mentality. I just hope the owners are prepared to stay the course and support Coach Malone, it could get ugly with the current roster.

KB
 
#14
All that aside I do like Aldrich, Fesenko, Young, Pietrus and Jones from your list. All those guys have some of the NBA Dog in them. Those are the guys that have been hounding Jimmer defensively since he stepped foot on an NBA floor. The players have their own school for NBA hopefuls like young Freddette:) But thats a discussion for another time.

KB
 
#15
Aldrich was ok when he was here. The things he did well, set screens and take up space, stood out on our team cause we were just not good. I'd rather have him than Hayes but Hayes is still taking up a roster space. Like King Baller said, some of these guys would be good role players on contending teams who need a guy to fill a niche or matchup.

One guy that I've always liked as an energy guy off the bench is Balkman. Can guard 3's and some 4's.....very good rebounder and defender, tough, can run the floor. He has to be with the right unit on the floor because he has less offensive game than Mbah a Moute.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#16
We have 1 defender in the rotation (Mbah a Moute). Maybe 2 to 2 1/2 (Mbah a Moute, Hayes, Salmons) total on the whole squad, pending McCallum's development. Hence this Defenders Still Available as Free Agents as of 09/07/13 thread -- none of them are going to start for you, but maybe you could lay out a non or partially guaranteed contract to a couple of them to give you training camp options:

SG Marquis Daniels
SF James Johnson
SG Dahntay Jones
SG DeShawn Stevensen
SF Mikael Pietrus
C Cole Aldrich
PF Louis Admuundsen
SG Terrence Williams
SF Sam Young
SG Roger Mason
SG Delonte West
SF Renaldo Balkman
PG Royal Ivey
PF Kurt Thomas
SG Sasha Pavlovic
C Jason Collins
PF Jared Jeffries
C Kyrylo Fesenko

In the short term, I agree with your analysis of our current players. However, long term, as you mentioned McCallum could be a very good defender. He defended well in summer league and he defended well at Detroit. Another player with very good defensive potential is McLemore. However, he needs a lot of experience in that area. If he has the desire, and is willing to do the work, he has the athletic ability to be a very good defender.

Aside from that, there are only a few players on the list that interest me. I've always liked Sam Young, who is capable of holding his own offensively as well. I thought Aldrich was fine as long as he does what he does best, rebound and defend the basket. I also like Pietrus and Admuundsen. Both guys are blue collar workers, but both are limited in what they can do. I think I might agree most with VF21 about keeping the roster spot open for flexability in case a good deal presents itself. I doubt signing any of these guys will make much difference in our wins and losses this season.
 
#17
If Aldrich continues to be available and the FO can't find a trading partner to get a big, I believe we will pick up Aldrich. Regardless of not now having a slot. They can always make a vacancy.
 
#18
Not sure what the point is if they're just going to be a 12-15th man at the bottom of the bench. Even Aldrich would likely be buried on the bench behind Cousins, Thompson, Landry, and Patterson. The real need is a rotation player, and that's likely going to come via trade. Hopefully some combination of Patterson and/or Thompson for a defensive big; assuming Cousins and Landry aren't going anywhere.

Edit to add: Salmons isn't that bad, either, if played at the proper SG position. If McCollum turns out to be a decent defender, a McCollum/Salmons/Mbah a Moute guard and wing lineup would actually be pretty good defensively when needed situationally, but, again, bigs are the problem.
 
#19
Most everyone on the list are scrubs. Especially Jason Collins. They would end up hurting the team more than they would help with D. The only players on the list I wold consider are young players just to see if they have anything we could use in the future, but that list is pretty much NBADL talent if that.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#21
Deng?

http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...-Talks-End-After-Not-Reaching-Financial-Stage

Not a FA til next summer, but if The Bulls have given up on resigning him, maybe we can work out some kind of trade?

Not trying to thread jack or anything...I realize this is supposed to be about FAs. But, if the contract negotiations really broke down...He might as well be a FA with all the trade assets we have, right? :p

He might be someone that can be acquired at the trade deadline, depending how their season is going. If Rose is back to form, and they think they have a chance to make a run at the title, then all bets are off till after the season, at which time he'll be a freeagent. At that point we'd have to manufacture a sign and trade, since we won't have much in the way of capspace. I'm assuming of course that we extend Cousins to a max contract, and resign one of either, Vasquez or IT. Then there's the restricted freeagent Patterson to deal with.

Of course if the Kings want serious capspace, then just let them all walk, including Cousins. Just joking, just joking. But I think you see my point. The only way to clear any capspace after signing Cousins to a max extension, would be to let Patterson, Vasquez, IT, and Fredette, along with Salmons walk out the door. And even if they did that, they still wouldn't have a large amount of capspace to work with. About 6.2 mil, assuming that Cousins signs for about an average of 14 mil a year.

Here's the question! Do you as a team resign all those players, except for Salmons, which would push you toward going over the luxury tax threshold much less the cap threshold, if you just won only 34 or 35 games the previous season? I think not! Sadly we have players like Hayes and Outlaw taking up valuable space and contributing very little. The new owners didn't sign those players, but its still their problem. If there was ever a time we need to get lucky in the draft, its this next one.

I hate to say it, but new management may long term visions right now. For instance, if they wait till the 2014/15 offseason, and this next offseason only resign Vasquez and Patterson to reasonable contracts, somewhere in the 5 to 6 mil a year range, and extend Cousins, then in that 2014/15 offseason they could have as much as 17.4 mil in capspace depending on what they do with A Moute. Of course Patterson may also become a victim of the capspace problem as well. Most of it probably depends on how all the pieces fit together. You keep those that do, and get rid of those that don't.
 
Last edited:

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#22
He might be someone that can be acquired at the trade deadline, depending how their season is going. If Rose is back to form, and they think they have a chance to make a run at the title, then all bets are off till after the season, at which time he'll be a freeagent. At that point we'd have to manufacture a sign and trade, since we won't have much in the way of capspace. I'm assuming of course that we extend Cousins to a max contract, and resign one of either, Vasquez or IT. Then there's the restricted freeagent Patterson to deal with.

Of course if the Kings want serious capspace, then just let them all walk, including Cousins. Just joking, just joking. But I think you see my point. The only way to clear any capspace after signing Cousins to a max extension, would be to let Patterson, Vasquez, IT, and Fredette, along with Salmons walk out the door. And even if they did that, they still wouldn't have a large amount of capspace to work with. About 6.2 mil, assuming that Cousins signs for about an average of 14 mil a year.

Here's the question! Do you as a team resign all those players, except for Salmons, which would push you toward going over the luxury tax threshold much less the cap threshold, if you just won only 34 or 35 games the previous season? I think not! Sadly we have players like Hayes and Outlaw taking up valuable space and contributing very little. The new owners didn't sign those players, but its still their problem. If there was ever a time we need to get lucky in the draft, its this next one.

I hate to say it, but new management may long term visions right now. For instance, if they wait till the 2014/15 offseason, and this next offseason only resign Vasquez and Patterson to reasonable contracts, somewhere in the 5 to 6 mil a year range, and extend Cousins, then in that 2014/15 offseason they could have as much as 17.4 mil in capspace depending on what they do with A Moute. Of course Patterson may also become a victim of the capspace problem as well. Most of it probably depends on how all the pieces fit together. You keep those that do, and get rid of those that don't.
They need to unload Salmons, Hayes, Thornton and Outlaw. All of them combined might be worth zero because Outlaw and Hayes probably have negative value. I don't know how they do it, but those guys should all be gone in the next year.
 
#23
He might be someone that can be acquired at the trade deadline, depending how their season is going. If Rose is back to form, and they think they have a chance to make a run at the title, then all bets are off till after the season, at which time he'll be a freeagent. At that point we'd have to manufacture a sign and trade, since we won't have much in the way of capspace. I'm assuming of course that we extend Cousins to a max contract, and resign one of either, Vasquez or IT. Then there's the restricted freeagent Patterson to deal with.

Of course if the Kings want serious capspace, then just let them all walk, including Cousins. Just joking, just joking. But I think you see my point. The only way to clear any capspace after signing Cousins to a max extension, would be to let Patterson, Vasquez, IT, and Fredette, along with Salmons walk out the door. And even if they did that, they still wouldn't have a large amount of capspace to work with. About 6.2 mil, assuming that Cousins signs for about an average of 14 mil a year.

Here's the question! Do you as a team resign all those players, except for Salmons, which would push you toward going over the luxury tax threshold much less the cap threshold, if you just won only 34 or 35 games the previous season? I think not! Sadly we have players like Hayes and Outlaw taking up valuable space and contributing very little. The new owners didn't sign those players, but its still their problem. If there was ever a time we need to get lucky in the draft, its this next one.

I hate to say it, but new management may long term visions right now. For instance, if they wait till the 2014/15 offseason, and this next offseason only resign Vasquez and Patterson to reasonable contracts, somewhere in the 5 to 6 mil a year range, and extend Cousins, then in that 2014/15 offseason they could have as much as 17.4 mil in capspace depending on what they do with A Moute. Of course Patterson may also become a victim of the capspace problem as well. Most of it probably depends on how all the pieces fit together. You keep those that do, and get rid of those that don't.
I think that went into the line of thinking with Reke. All of a sudden,the next 3 seasons, you have $31 mil committed to Reke, JT, and Cousins. Not to mention around $16mil committed to Thornton, Outlaw, and Hayes the next 2. Then ur, looking at contracts like Patterson, McLemore, IT. Yes, we all know the problems that the core experienced. But I can understand how a new front ofice looking to completely overhaul the team and culture NOT want to essentially be committed to a core that hasn't won 100 games the past 4 years.
 
#24
They need to unload Salmons, Hayes, Thornton and Outlaw. All of them combined might be worth zero because Outlaw and Hayes probably have negative value. I don't know how they do it, but those guys should all be gone in the next year.
Salmons only has a small amount guaranteed next year, so that should take care of him. If Hayes and Outlaw don't regain some of their prior form, I could see the team using the "stretch provision" on them next summer.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#26
I think that went into the line of thinking with Reke. All of a sudden,the next 3 seasons, you have $31 mil committed to Reke, JT, and Cousins. Not to mention around $16mil committed to Thornton, Outlaw, and Hayes the next 2. Then ur, looking at contracts like Patterson, McLemore, IT. Yes, we all know the problems that the core experienced. But I can understand how a new front ofice looking to completely overhaul the team and culture NOT want to essentially be committed to a core that hasn't won 100 games the past 4 years.

I believe that with Tyreke, there was more to it. I know this is an unpopular view, but I believe that they didn't think Tyreke fit into what they were trying to do. D'Alessandro said that he wanted to change the culture of the team, and what he wanted was a less selfish team that moved the ball along with playing good team defense. Malone when asked about the changes that needed to take place, he restated almost exactly what D'Alessando had said. Then yesterday, Mullin basically said the same thing again. Unselfish play! More passing! Keep everyone on the team involved and a part of whats going on. Little or no isolation play. When you take everything they've said into consideration, and you look at Tyreke's strengths, its easy to see that they didn't think he fit what they wanted to do. Then when you add his big salary on top of that, it was probably a no brain'er for them. Unpopular on this forum for sure, but if you take the emotion out of it, you can see their point. Even if you don't agree with it.

The truth is, that if you wanted to move Tyreke and get equal value for him, it should have been done before the trade deadline. Unfortunately, they didn't have control of the team then. I think they're looking at the team the same way you just looked at it. It hasn't been able to win even 30 games since, it feels like forever. So your the new GM and coach! How do you get excited about keeping all the core players that haven't been able to win anything. You probably don't, and so now you have to decide who you want to keep and who you want to get rid of. Its easy for us as fans to say this player or that player has to go. Its not that easy to accomplish that. You don't want to just give money away if you don't have to. The stretch provision is a nice tool, but it doesn't totally clear you of all the financial responsibility, and your still paying a player for doing nothing. I think its a tool that you use only if you need extra space for another deal. I don't think you do deals just to do deals.

I think they want to rebuild through the draft, and by bringing in players that for the most part fit the type of team they want to build.. There aren't many perfect players that fit on both sides of the ball. Case in point, James Johnson. Good defender, but terribly selfish, and poorly skilled player on the offensive side of the ball. He might have been tolerable if had stayed out of the way and not been a ball stopper. How much of that was Keith Smarts fault is unkown. Point is, the time for bringing in other teams rejects in the thought that just maybe we'll strike gold because a light suddenly goes off his head should be over. Its time to make good draft choices, and bring in proven players that know how to play the game. Its one thing to spend the time and money to develop your young players, but its quite another to try and develop another teams failure that's been in the league for 5 or 6 years already. Only contending teams with an already established core can afford those moves. Example: Its one thing for the Miami Heat to bring in a Michael Beasley, and quite another for a team like the Kings to bring him in.

If Cousins is to be our rock. Our foundation player, then we need to build from the ground up with pieces that fit the best around him. Helping to make Cousins a great player, an all star player won't make us a winner, but it will give us credibility and be a huge step in that direction. As the movie said, build it and they will come. Right now, we're just starting, so its going to take time. Its in an entirely different direction, and some may not like that direction. But the fact remains, that the direction we were going in, wasn't adding up to winning seasons. For the last 4 or 5 years, we started every season hoping we could just win 35 games or so. When you stop and think about it, that's pathetic. So I'm not saying that this group is going to be successful. That remains to be seen. But one thing is for sure, what we've been doing hasn't been successful. So I'm willing to wait and see.
 
#27
I believe that with Tyreke, there was more to it. I know this is an unpopular view, but I believe that they didn't think Tyreke fit into what they were trying to do. D'Alessandro said that he wanted to change the culture of the team, and what he wanted was a less selfish team that moved the ball along with playing good team defense. Malone when asked about the changes that needed to take place, he restated almost exactly what D'Alessando had said. Then yesterday, Mullin basically said the same thing again. Unselfish play! More passing! Keep everyone on the team involved and a part of whats going on. Little or no isolation play. When you take everything they've said into consideration, and you look at Tyreke's strengths, its easy to see that they didn't think he fit what they wanted to do. Then when you add his big salary on top of that, it was probably a no brain'er for them. Unpopular on this forum for sure, but if you take the emotion out of it, you can see their point. Even if you don't agree with it.

The truth is, that if you wanted to move Tyreke and get equal value for him, it should have been done before the trade deadline. Unfortunately, they didn't have control of the team then. I think they're looking at the team the same way you just looked at it. It hasn't been able to win even 30 games since, it feels like forever. So your the new GM and coach! How do you get excited about keeping all the core players that haven't been able to win anything. You probably don't, and so now you have to decide who you want to keep and who you want to get rid of. Its easy for us as fans to say this player or that player has to go. Its not that easy to accomplish that. You don't want to just give money away if you don't have to. The stretch provision is a nice tool, but it doesn't totally clear you of all the financial responsibility, and your still paying a player for doing nothing. I think its a tool that you use only if you need extra space for another deal. I don't think you do deals just to do deals.

I think they want to rebuild through the draft, and by bringing in players that for the most part fit the type of team they want to build.. There aren't many perfect players that fit on both sides of the ball. Case in point, James Johnson. Good defender, but terribly selfish, and poorly skilled player on the offensive side of the ball. He might have been tolerable if had stayed out of the way and not been a ball stopper. How much of that was Keith Smarts fault is unkown. Point is, the time for bringing in other teams rejects in the thought that just maybe we'll strike gold because a light suddenly goes off his head should be over. Its time to make good draft choices, and bring in proven players that know how to play the game. Its one thing to spend the time and money to develop your young players, but its quite another to try and develop another teams failure that's been in the league for 5 or 6 years already. Only contending teams with an already established core can afford those moves. Example: Its one thing for the Miami Heat to bring in a Michael Beasley, and quite another for a team like the Kings to bring him in.

If Cousins is to be our rock. Our foundation player, then we need to build from the ground up with pieces that fit the best around him. Helping to make Cousins a great player, an all star player won't make us a winner, but it will give us credibility and be a huge step in that direction. As the movie said, build it and they will come. Right now, we're just starting, so its going to take time. Its in an entirely different direction, and some may not like that direction. But the fact remains, that the direction we were going in, wasn't adding up to winning seasons. For the last 4 or 5 years, we started every season hoping we could just win 35 games or so. When you stop and think about it, that's pathetic. So I'm not saying that this group is going to be successful. That remains to be seen. But one thing is for sure, what we've been doing hasn't been successful. So I'm willing to wait and see.
Very good post. It pretty well spells out my view of what has gone on so far. I hope the team is successful in improving play and hope the FO gets some success. A month from now we will have almost two weeks of training camp and our first game. The guys on the bench and the guys on the floor should know each others names by then and what language the coaching staff is speaking. Good times for my basketball enjoyment ahead.
 
K

KingMilz

Guest
#28
Balkman had a excellent showing at the America's games, his shot looked a bit better and his athletic ability/speed is still elite as is his hustle. I still think Ebanks is worth a gamble if he lives up to his potential could be our starting SF this season (which is not hard to do). He's still fairly young @23/24 just never really got a chance in LA.
 
#29
...The stretch provision is a nice tool, but it doesn't totally clear you of all the financial responsibility, and your still paying a player for doing nothing. I think its a tool that you use only if you need extra space for another deal. I don't think you do deals just to do deals.
.....
Like you said, I wouldn't use the stretch provision just for the sake of it. Hayes may be redeemable with the emphasis of passing, something he used to be noted for. Outlaw takes up a space and if you stretched him this year, the yearly cost would be 1.2 million (for five years). How much that space is worth would depend if there is someone that they feel would be more productive and on that I don't know.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#30
Like you said, I wouldn't use the stretch provision just for the sake of it. Hayes may be redeemable with the emphasis of passing, something he used to be noted for. Outlaw takes up a space and if you stretched him this year, the yearly cost would be 1.2 million (for five years). How much that space is worth would depend if there is someone that they feel would be more productive and on that I don't know.

I believe we are in total agreement!