Early look at some 2012 freeagents:

[Spike]

He's more of a PF than Donte would ever dream of. He's an excellent rebounder thats gotten better every year. But hey, play him where you want. He's a better player than Donte, Outlaw, and anyone else you want to throw out there at the SF or PF position not named Jason Thompson. And thats what this is really all about. Improving your team with players you think can be on a contending team, and removing players that can't.

Settle down there, I was just looking to give a comparable comparison to someone who didn't know Ilyasova's game. I think that their skillsets are similar, except that Ilyasova is polished and using his potential (he's what I think Donte could[/]be.) I stand by my comment that Greene isn't a PF. I do agree that he (Ilyasova) would make our team much better. A frontcourt of Ilyasova, Thompson, and Cousins, at the very least, would plug up quite a few holes.

I would prefer Batum, though, as I think his potential ceiling is higher and that there's no way Smart would play him at a position other than SF.

 

[Spike]

The problem with Batum is that he's restricted, and he would have to be overpaid in order to deter the Blazers from not matching. Should the team overpay Batum? When there are other SFs out there in free agency, draft, or by trade? That's a different question than suggesting the team isn't willing to spend at all.

I think we're going to have to overpay to get the right player, and I'd be willing to do that. I feel like the Kings overpaid at the time for Vlade, but it worked out so sooo well.

 

[Gary]

I have nothing against Steve Novak. He's a great shooter, and if you want him for his 8 to 10 minutes a game where he stands in the corner and waits for the spot up shot, and you can get him for the league minumun, then fine, I'm on board. But thats all he does. To my mind, Novak is a luxury on a contending team, but not a player I want taking up space on a team thats in need of a lot more than a spot up shooter who can't do anything else. Now I don't mean to be harsh on him. But I think you know what I'm talking about. He doesn't rebound, and he isn't a good ball handler. I won't even get into defense, which is a bad word on the Kings right now.

How about we look for a player that can contribute at both ends of the floor.

20 minutes suits him better, and he can shoot off the dribble if his shot isn't open. Seen him do a lot of catch, see the shot will be too contested, then dribble up a couple paces to shoot from midrange.

You had guys like Jeff Green on your list. that guy is terrible, and wouldn't do anything for this team. At least Novak would provide 3-t shooting, which we are 3rd to last in the league at. So he put's up maybe 4 a game, and hits 1.7.. That would put us much further up the list than third to last. Also, we put MT on the bench next year who's he going to kick it out to? Novak is that perfect player.

I agree what you said about him being a perfect fit for a bench spot on a contending team, but I feel he could also help our team out as well. But maybe I am hoping for him a bit early. Maybe in a couple years when we are hoping to make the playoffs.

 

[DesertFox]

This team can't afford to add anymore more weak defenders. Unless the team adds a stud in the middle, they can't win with more than one weak perimeter player on the court at a time. Thornton has his moments but is iffy at best, and Jimmer goes without saying, so most of the time the team will already have someone who will need some help. Green or Novak will not make things worse but will give up almost as much as they provide.

I don't care about adding a stud, just an average player, maybe poor handling the ball and rebounding, but plays plus D and can hit the open 3. That's how to build a roster, get guys who's weaknesses mesh with other's strengths.

 

[Gary]

This team can't afford to add anymore more weak defenders. Unless the team adds a stud in the middle, they can't win with more than one weak perimeter player on the court at a time. Thornton has his moments but is iffy at best, and Jimmer goes without saying, so most of the time the team will already have someone who will need some help. Green or Novak will not make things worse but will give up almost as much as they provide.

I don't care about adding a stud, just an average player, maybe poor handling the ball and rebounding, but plays plus D and can hit the open 3. That's how to build a roster, get guys who's weaknesses mesh with other's strengths.

Things would change overnight if we got the 1st pick. We could then start adding guys as the supporting cast around our 5. Most MT to the bench, and Evans to SG. Give it a year with IT/Evans/Salmons/Davis/Cousins..

Get MTs opinion on who he would like in the second unit. Who he would feel good about playing with and who he could get some results with. If for some reason Evans doesn't work out at SG and we are out of options on where to put him then we start looking at places we could move him. Looking too far ahead though.. But like I said above, things would change if we got the #1 pick.

I was messing around with the ESPN draft board, and the kings got the 1st pick 3 times out of 10 lol.. crosses fingers!*

 

[bajaden]

Settle down there, I was just looking to give a comparable comparison to someone who didn't know Ilyasova's game. I think that their skillsets are similar, except that Ilyasova is polished and using his potential (he's what I think Donte could[/]be.) I stand by my comment that Greene isn't a PF. I do agree that he (Ilyasova) would make our team much better. A frontcourt of Ilyasova, Thompson, and Cousins, at the very least, would plug up quite a few holes.

I would prefer Batum, though, as I think his potential ceiling is higher and that there's no way Smart would play him at a position other than SF.

I guess where you and I are differing, is in how we're looking at Ilyasova. Your looking at him as a SF, and therefore seeing Batum as a better player. And at the SF position, I agree. I'm looking at him as a PF, where we desparately need depth, and quality depth.

 

[bajaden]

20 minutes suits him better, and he can shoot off the dribble if his shot isn't open. Seen him do a lot of catch, see the shot will be too contested, then dribble up a couple paces to shoot from midrange.

You had guys like Jeff Green on your list. that guy is terrible, and wouldn't do anything for this team. At least Novak would provide 3-t shooting, which we are 3rd to last in the league at. So he put's up maybe 4 a game, and hits 1.7.. That would put us much further up the list than third to last. Also, we put MT on the bench next year who's he going to kick it out to? Novak is that perfect player.

I agree what you said about him being a perfect fit for a bench spot on a contending team, but I feel he could also help our team out as well. But maybe I am hoping for him a bit early. Maybe in a couple years when we are hoping to make the playoffs.

Mi amigo, I had a lot of players on the list. And, just because they're on the list, doesn't mean I endorse going after them. I just tried to list all the players I thought were well known, or unknown to some, but with potential. Believe me, there are a lot of players on that list, that I don't want on our team.

As far as Jeff Green goes. I guess I'm one of the few that still think he has the potential to be a good player. I think he's the victim of being labeled a tweener, and therefore has been jerked around as a player without a true position. I've always thought he was athletic enough to play the SF positon. The problem is, most of his skill set lends itself to the PF position. If he could ever develop good handles, and your handles don't have to be great for the SF position, and improve his jumpshot, he'd have a place in the league. Maybe not as a starter, but certainly as a rotation player.

 

[ParniValjak]

Why do you assume the team wouldn't spend for Batum? I keep seeing accusations here that the team didn't open the pocketbooks, but does no one remember the failed attempts to sign Kirilenko and Crawford? If I remember correctly, the issue is that neither wanted to play here because of fit, not because of money. Not to mention the fact that the team took on more money in the Salmons deal (which has the dubious double distinction of being a bad move from both a talent perspective and financially).

The problem with Batum is that he's restricted, and he would have to be overpaid in order to deter the Blazers from not matching. Should the team overpay Batum? When there are other SFs out there in free agency, draft, or by trade? That's a different question than suggesting the team isn't willing to spend at all.

Because for years we have been hearing about the off-season 2012 only to walk away with scraps. While the Salmons acquisition is for more money in terms of length of the deal (1 more year than Beno' deal) when all the wheeling and dealing was done prior to the lockout, we only added an extra $1million to the total salary for this year. We also added additional $7million odd just to make the minimal limit.

The Crawford offer was for similar money and length of the deal and it came down to the play off team Vs the lottery team. The Kirilenko offer was all rumours and he has stated a number of times during the lockout that he would stay with CSKA this year which made the offer more of a dressing and it needed to be significantly better than what he is getting from CSKA which in the end it wasn't.

I am yet to be convinced that this team is willing to spend to move forward. What they have shown is the willingness to move sideways salary wise to try and address certain holes (eg Salmons for Beno) but in the process they create another hole somewhere else. Over the last 5 years, particularly last 3 years we have shown no willingness to spend money to get better. Forget the length of the contract as they are irrelevant because you have to spend a certain amount on player payroll every year but look at the yearly payroll and we have had lowest payroll in the league for the last 3 years. That is despite proclaiming that 2012 is our off-season when everyone questioned why we at least did not attempt to enter the 2011 FA market.

 

[rainmaker]

I guess where you and I are differing, is in how we're looking at Ilyasova. Your looking at him as a SF, and therefore seeing Batum as a better player. And at the SF position, I agree. I'm looking at him as a PF, where we desparately need depth, and quality depth.

I like Ilyasova, though admittedly more as a SF. What I don't understand about what appears to be your opinion on potential PF's, and maybe you can clear it up for me, but why do you like the idea of putting Ilyasova or Ryan Anderson next to Cuz?

Ilyasova as a SF here with some backup PF mins I'm fine with. Anderson is a good player but imo has not proven to be the type we'd ideally want to put next to Cuz. He's a solid man defender, but from what I've seen not a great help defender by any means or any kind of a shotblocker, nor is he that good of a rebounder. Yes he's a very good shooter and can score some in the post, although I wouldn't be calling many iso postups for him, but I'm curious as to why you'd like an Ilyasova or Anderson next to Cuz, instead of better rebounders/defensive players who can alter a few shots?

Now if your point is depth, then I might agree. But you've mentioned in this thread both players would make this team better, which they would, but that also seems to implies you think they're good fits next to Cuz and you'd go in that direction. Why do you prefer that route instead of a more physical, defensive minded type?

 

[hrdboild]

I like Ilyasova, though admittedly more as a SF. What I don't understand about what appears to be your opinion on potential PF's, and maybe you can clear it up for me, but why do you like the idea of putting Ilyasova or Ryan Anderson next to Cuz?

Meh, it's a weak year for PFs. I think Bajaden was simply listing anyone worth sniffing at. When I posted my off-season plan a few weeks ago I considered including Ilyasova as a possible free agent target, but eventually decided the fit wasn't good and left him off. He's a good player -- he's a big part of that Milwaukee team and they're competing for a playoff spot -- but like you said he doesn't really help us much where we need help.

As regards the Jeff Green discussion, I did list him as a possible target though with some reservations. I think the SF/PF tweener label has been part of the problem, along with the elevated expectations of a #5 pick. I had him down as a SF all the way out of Georgetown and that wasn't going to happen in OKC with Durant on board. Boston picked him up as an instant-offense type of reserve player but also used him as insurance for KG's knees, and he's not especially suited to either role. He's a guy that does a lot of things well but nothing exceptionally well -- a sort of role-player deluxe with above-average passing ability -- he'd be a good fit as a third or fourth option on the offense and a perimeter defender from the SF position where his size and athleticism are best utilized. I'm worried about his inconsistency though. OKC gave him a ton of time to prove himself as part of their core and he never really got there. I also think he would have been a much better fit on those old Princeton offense teams we used to run than this current group.

 

[bajaden]

I like Ilyasova, though admittedly more as a SF. What I don't understand about what appears to be your opinion on potential PF's, and maybe you can clear it up for me, but why do you like the idea of putting Ilyasova or Ryan Anderson next to Cuz?

Ilyasova as a SF here with some backup PF mins I'm fine with. Anderson is a good player but imo has not proven to be the type we'd ideally want to put next to Cuz. He's a solid man defender, but from what I've seen not a great help defender by any means or any kind of a shotblocker, nor is he that good of a rebounder. Yes he's a very good shooter and can score some in the post, although I wouldn't be calling many iso postups for him, but I'm curious as to why you'd like an Ilyasova or Anderson next to Cuz, instead of better rebounders/defensive players who can alter a few shots?

Now if your point is depth, then I might agree. But you've mentioned in this thread both players would make this team better, which they would, but that also seems to implies you think they're good fits next to Cuz and you'd go in that direction. Why do you prefer that route instead of a more physical, defensive minded type?

First, I'm just trying to upgrade the roster. We have no depth at the PF position, and although we have depth at the SF position, there's no quality. So first things first. Lets get rid of players that aren't in our long range plan, and replace them with quality players. I believe Anderson and Ilyasova both fall into that catagory. I believe Humphries would also fall into that catagory.. Ditto Batum! I'm not suggesting anyone as a starter next to Cousins. At least not yet. I perfer to see who we draft, and who we let walk first.

I understand your point of view. But who is it you want from that list that fills all your required needs? I like Chris Kaman, but I don't see him starting next to Cousins. I can see him as his backup. If we assume for a moment that we can't aquire that dream player, for whatever reason, and we end up with Cousins and Thompson as our starting front line, then we need depth behind them. We've lost games this year simply because our bench sucked. It didn't score, and our bench rebounding was just terrible.

Yes, I realize we need to improve our defense, but the kind of player that everyone wants next to Cousins doesn't grow on trees. If the god's smile upon us for once, and we end up with Davis, then that part of the problem is solved. Otherwise, we'll have to trade for someone because I don't see anyone in the unrestricted freeagent market that would help. I think Hibbert would be great, but he's restricted, and I seriously doubt they wouldn't match our offer.

My point is, the perfect player we're looking for, to put next to Cousins, just might not be there, or if there, might not be obvious. So lets at least look at who is there, and if we can upgrade our roster, lets do it. As far as Anderson goes. He was a terrific rebounder at Cal. I think a lot of people have forgotten that. Unfortunately, or fortunately, he's such a good shooter, that he plays away from the basket, which in turn affects his rebounding. He's still averaging over 7 boards a game.

 

[ParniValjak]

First, I'm just trying to upgrade the roster. We have no depth at the PF position, and although we have depth at the SF position, there's no quality. So first things first. Lets get rid of players that aren't in our long range plan, and replace them with quality players. I believe Anderson and Ilyasova both fall into that catagory. I believe Humphries would also fall into that catagory.. Ditto Batum! I'm not suggesting anyone as a starter next to Cousins. At least not yet. I perfer to see who we draft, and who we let walk first.

I understand your point of view. But who is it you want from that list that fills all your required needs? I like Chris Kaman, but I don't see him starting next to Cousins. I can see him as his backup. If we assume for a moment that we can't aquire that dream player, for whatever reason, and we end up with Cousins and Thompson as our starting front line, then we need depth behind them. We've lost games this year simply because our bench sucked. It didn't score, and our bench rebounding was just terrible.

Yes, I realize we need to improve our defense, but the kind of player that everyone wants next to Cousins doesn't grow on trees. If the god's smile upon us for once, and we end up with Davis, then that part of the problem is solved. Otherwise, we'll have to trade for someone because I don't see anyone in the unrestricted freeagent market that would help. I think Hibbert would be great, but he's restricted, and I seriously doubt they wouldn't match our offer.

My point is, the perfect player we're looking for, to put next to Cousins, just might not be there, or if there, might not be obvious. So lets at least look at who is there, and if we can upgrade our roster, lets do it. As far as Anderson goes. He was a terrific rebounder at Cal. I think a lot of people have forgotten that. Unfortunately, or fortunately, he's such a good shooter, that he plays away from the basket, which in turn affects his rebounding. He's still averaging over 7 boards a game.

That's all well and good and both Anderson's and Ilyasova's shooting would be very handy on this team. However, we need to be really careful about spending money on players that do not necessarily fit in the overall puzzle. Just upgrading talent is not necessarily the smartest way to go about it. I think it would be fair to say that overall, at the start of this season we were more talented than at the end of last season. We lost Dally and replaced him with Hayes (IMHO an overall downgrade) and we have switched Beno with Salmons and overall you could say that Salmons is more talented but not as good a fit. Then we got a clear upgrade in talent in the Hickson - Casspi swap. In fact, I would argue that JJ is more talented than JT but he is NOT a better fit than JT for this team. Then you add Jimmer, Honeycutt, Thomas and Outlaw who are all more talented than Jetter, Head or Darnell Jackson. The problem is that we upgraded the pure talent base but because they are all a bunch of misfits the overall quality of the team has decreased.

The point I am trying to make is that the "fit" sometimes is more important than talent upgrade. For one, if the talent does not fit with key pieces that you have, the player you get will not play up to their talent and then you have a problem. I like Anderson as a player and I think his shooting would be an asset but I also don't think he will get as many looks in Sacramento as he would in Orlando. By the time you account for offensive touches for Cousins, Evans and Thornton, Anderson won't get his fair share. And that's before we start talking about Salmons (yes we are stuck with him), IT and even Jimmer who I suspect will play a bigger role next year. So in essence you are paying a top dollar for a player who won't give you the best value because you will not play their to their potential as you have more "important" pieces to account for.

Sometimes, you are better off not doing much than making the wrong move (see Salmons, Hayes, Outlaw from the latest off-season). At least you preserve the cap flexibility to make a move when one becomes available. I also think, sometimes you need to be willing to make a move and you will get the type of player that would help. I don't think we are willing to make a move to be honest. Take Houston for example, they signed Dalembert and despite having Dally, who has been playing pretty well, they still went out and got Camby via trade. Now I think Camby would have helped us here and now but we were obviously not willing to get it done at that front.

I would rather we don't make a move than make one for the sake of it. I think JT has some real value and I would think there would be many teams out there that would love to have him as that big role player. I have said many times before, he is as good a 3rd big (1st big off the bench) as one could hope to get. He has length, is a good rebounder, a solid defender, can score a bit both with his back to the basket and with a mid range jumper, brings energy off the bench, is effective without needing the ball and is a great locker room guy. Those guys are worth a fair bit on the market and I would not be surprised if he gets many calls come July 1. We need to upgrade that PF spot to move JT to a more natural role but not at any cost. There are trades that could be pulled off and doesn't necessarily need to be a FA but we need to be willing to make them, and I don't think we have shown even a slight interest to make a significant move. We have settled for scraps in hope we can uncover our next Pollard and Bobby Jackson.

I like Anderson and Ilyasova but not for this team with the way it is currently constructed (ie Cousins as the center piece) because I think that will lead to a similar situation that we had with JJ this year, though both would be slightly better fit considering their shooting range but we would make absolutely no improvements defensively and IMHO that MUST be the #1 priority this off season.

Personally, I would go all out for Batum, put Thornton on the block (along with other "goodies") and hope he can get me the PF or C that I can pair with Cousins and re-sign JT to a reasonable deal as my first big off the bench. This is all provided that miracles do not happen and we don't get the #1 pick. If basketball goods smile down on us and we get Davis, then I would still re-sign JT and go all out after Batum and still put up Thornton for a player that would be a better fit with the team going forward.

 

[bajaden]

That's all well and good and both Anderson's and Ilyasova's shooting would be very handy on this team. However, we need to be really careful about spending money on players that do not necessarily fit in the overall puzzle. Just upgrading talent is not necessarily the smartest way to go about it. I think it would be fair to say that overall, at the start of this season we were more talented than at the end of last season. We lost Dally and replaced him with Hayes (IMHO an overall downgrade) and we have switched Beno with Salmons and overall you could say that Salmons is more talented but not as good a fit. Then we got a clear upgrade in talent in the Hickson - Casspi swap. In fact, I would argue that JJ is more talented than JT but he is NOT a better fit than JT for this team. Then you add Jimmer, Honeycutt, Thomas and Outlaw who are all more talented than Jetter, Head or Darnell Jackson. The problem is that we upgraded the pure talent base but because they are all a bunch of misfits the overall quality of the team has decreased.

The point I am trying to make is that the "fit" sometimes is more important than talent upgrade. For one, if the talent does not fit with key pieces that you have, the player you get will not play up to their talent and then you have a problem. I like Anderson as a player and I think his shooting would be an asset but I also don't think he will get as many looks in Sacramento as he would in Orlando. By the time you account for offensive touches for Cousins, Evans and Thornton, Anderson won't get his fair share. And that's before we start talking about Salmons (yes we are stuck with him), IT and even Jimmer who I suspect will play a bigger role next year. So in essence you are paying a top dollar for a player who won't give you the best value because you will not play their to their potential as you have more "important" pieces to account for.

Sometimes, you are better off not doing much than making the wrong move (see Salmons, Hayes, Outlaw from the latest off-season). At least you preserve the cap flexibility to make a move when one becomes available. I also think, sometimes you need to be willing to make a move and you will get the type of player that would help. I don't think we are willing to make a move to be honest. Take Houston for example, they signed Dalembert and despite having Dally, who has been playing pretty well, they still went out and got Camby via trade. Now I think Camby would have helped us here and now but we were obviously not willing to get it done at that front.

I would rather we don't make a move than make one for the sake of it. I think JT has some real value and I would think there would be many teams out there that would love to have him as that big role player. I have said many times before, he is as good a 3rd big (1st big off the bench) as one could hope to get. He has length, is a good rebounder, a solid defender, can score a bit both with his back to the basket and with a mid range jumper, brings energy off the bench, is effective without needing the ball and is a great locker room guy. Those guys are worth a fair bit on the market and I would not be surprised if he gets many calls come July 1. We need to upgrade that PF spot to move JT to a more natural role but not at any cost. There are trades that could be pulled off and doesn't necessarily need to be a FA but we need to be willing to make them, and I don't think we have shown even a slight interest to make a significant move. We have settled for scraps in hope we can uncover our next Pollard and Bobby Jackson.

I like Anderson and Ilyasova but not for this team with the way it is currently constructed (ie Cousins as the center piece) because I think that will lead to a similar situation that we had with JJ this year, though both would be slightly better fit considering their shooting range but we would make absolutely no improvements defensively and IMHO that MUST be the #1 priority this off season.

Personally, I would go all out for Batum, put Thornton on the block (along with other "goodies") and hope he can get me the PF or C that I can pair with Cousins and re-sign JT to a reasonable deal as my first big off the bench. This is all provided that miracles do not happen and we don't get the #1 pick. If basketball goods smile down on us and we get Davis, then I would still re-sign JT and go all out after Batum and still put up Thornton for a player that would be a better fit with the team going forward.

I think the Kings resigning Thompson is a done deal. He's just too valuable to the team. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Ilyasova and Anderson. I'm totally befuddled as to why they wouldn't be a good fit on our team. But then I guess I'm always surprised when people think that a player thats good enough to play on a contender, isn't good enough to play on our team. I suspose fit can come into play, but I'm not sure how either of those players doesn't fit. Both are pretty good man defenders. Both are decent to good passers. Both are good rebounders, and both are good shooters.

Now I'll agree that neither are shotblockers, but if thats the requirement for being on our team, we're doomed from the beginning. I think people are obbsessed with shotblocking. Who was the great shotblocker on our team with Webb, Vlade etc ? Don't get me wrong, I think having one is terrific, but its not the be all to end all. You still have to have quality players on your team. Who are those quality players that are presently on our team. Here's a list with a star rating. 5 stars = possible starter on a contending team. 4 stars = possible rotation player on a contending team. 3 stars = possible bench player on a contending team. Anything below that, I don't want on my team. And by contending, I mean a team that is a serious contender for a championship.

Cousins: *****
Evans: *****
Thornton: *****
Thompson: ****
Thomas: **** (based solely on what I've seen so far)
Hayes:****
Salmons: **** (This is a hard one for me. Not worth the money, but he is talented)
Williams: **** (Jury is still out, but so far, so good)
Whiteside: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Fredette: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Honeycutt: ** (He hasn't had much of a chance, but I wish his name was Parsons)
Cisco: ** (Sorry Cisco, but your a good sub on a bad team, not a good team)
Outlaw: ** (Goodbye)
Greene: ** (Too little too late. Four years later, and I'm still not sure what you are)

Now this is all subjective, and you can agree or disagree. I know there are those that love Greene, and still hold out hope. I'm done with hoping on a 4 year player. But assuming you accept my judgement, it leaves us with only three players on the roster that are starting material on a contending team. And in my opinon, two of those players play the same position.

From Whiteside on down, you either have young inexperienced players with potential, or players that just aren't good enough to be on a contending team. So in my humble opinion, anytime you can plug in another player with talent, and remove one without, you've made progress. If you can fill a need at the same time, so much the better.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I think the Kings resigning Thompson is a done deal. He's just too valuable to the team. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Ilyasova and Anderson. I'm totally befuddled as to why they wouldn't be a good fit on our team. But then I guess I'm always surprised when people think that a player thats good enough to play on a contender, isn't good enough to play on our team. I suspose fit can come into play, but I'm not sure how either of those players doesn't fit. Both are pretty good man defenders. Both are decent to good passers. Both are good rebounders, and both are good shooters.

Now I'll agree that neither are shotblockers, but if thats the requirement for being on our team, we're doomed from the beginning. I think people are obbsessed with shotblocking. Who was the great shotblocker on our team with Webb, Vlade etc ? Don't get me wrong, I think having one is terrific, but its not the be all to end all. You still have to have quality players on your team. Who are those quality players that are presently on our team. Here's a list with a star rating. 5 stars = possible starter on a contending team. 4 stars = possible rotation player on a contending team. 3 stars = possible bench player on a contending team. Anything below that, I don't want on my team. And by contending, I mean a team that is a serious contender for a championship.

Cousins: *****
Evans: *****
Thornton: *****
Thompson: ****
Thomas: **** (based solely on what I've seen so far)
Hayes:****
Salmons: **** (This is a hard one for me. Not worth the money, but he is talented)
Williams: **** (Jury is still out, but so far, so good)
Whiteside: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Fredette: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Honeycutt: ** (He hasn't had much of a chance, but I wish his name was Parsons)
Cisco: ** (Sorry Cisco, but your a good sub on a bad team, not a good team)
Outlaw: ** (Goodbye)
Greene: ** (Too little too late. Four years later, and I'm still not sure what you are)

Now this is all subjective, and you can agree or disagree. I know there are those that love Greene, and still hold out hope. I'm done with hoping on a 4 year player. But assuming you accept my judgement, it leaves us with only three players on the roster that are starting material on a contending team. And in my opinon, two of those players play the same position.

From Whiteside on down, you either have young inexperienced players with potential, or players that just aren't good enough to be on a contending team. So in my humble opinion, anytime you can plug in another player with talent, and remove one without, you've made progress. If you can fill a need at the same time, so much the better.

Just popping in to say I agree with your assessment.

Aside from Donte Greene, of course I agree that he is a two star caliber player, possibly even one star, but I disagree with the premise that you do not want anyone under three stars.

At worst, Donte is a teams 10th-12th man, and I think he is good at that. In a pinch he can spot you a few minutes at multiple positions, and he can really help against certain players. He is a very good team guy, a good community guy, and I actually think he is an asset to the Kings name. Its funny, really, because he isn't a great player. But for the past 4 years every time the Kings media guys interview a potential draftee after a workout, they say "Well, of course I know Donte". He's popular, and in the NBA, popularity counts for something.

Just to reiterate, I don't need him to be part of the rotation, but I like him as part of the team. This is exactly how I felt about Jon Brockman at the time, and it still bugs me that he isn't here.

 

[Spike]

I guess where you and I are differing, is in how we're looking at Ilyasova. Your looking at him as a SF, and therefore seeing Batum as a better player. And at the SF position, I agree. I'm looking at him as a PF, where we desparately need depth, and quality depth.

Ah, yes. I agree with you there. I guess I'm only thinking about SF.

 

[Gilles]

Now I'll agree that neither are shotblockers, but if thats the requirement for being on our team, we're doomed from the beginning. I think people are obbsessed with shotblocking. Who was the great shotblocker on our team with Webb, Vlade etc ? Don't get me wrong, I think having one is terrific, but its not the be all to end all. You still have to have quality players on your team.

Hello, Jerry!
That team didn't have a great shotblocker. What they had was excellent team defense played by players with good/great length that were willing to work on the defensive end moving their feet and were able to effectively switch if need be. But Kings were never true elite defensive team until Keon Clark arrived.
Current Kings team have moments of excellent defense but then they may go to sleep the very next posession. Despite numerous assurances that it's imminent the culture of taking pride in playing defense on every posession hasn't still arrived.

 

[bajaden]

Ah, yes. I agree with you there. I guess I'm only thinking about SF.

I went and did a little research on Ilyasova, and he does spend more time at the SF position than the PF position. About 65% to 35%. He even spent some time at the Center position. About 3 or 4 %. And his stats vary according to what position he's playing. For instance, at the SF position he has very few blocked shots. But at the PF position he averages 1 block per game, and at the center position he's up to around 1.3 blocks per game. Offensively, he's very efficient from either position.

Here is a small sampling of his production this year. From Feb 7th to March 7th.

17.1 PPG, 11.1 RPG, 51.3% FGP, 41.2% 3PP, 86.8% FTP, 1.6 APG, 1.1 TPG, and 1.0 BPG. This covers a 15 game period. I've watched enough of him to know he's a team player, and a hustle guy that will get you garbage points as well as points off plays. He's still young, and would automaticly become the 4th or 5th best player on the team. Thereby pushing someone at the bottom off the bench.

 

[Section 101]

I think the Kings resigning Thompson is a done deal. He's just too valuable to the team. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Ilyasova and Anderson. I'm totally befuddled as to why they wouldn't be a good fit on our team. But then I guess I'm always surprised when people think that a player thats good enough to play on a contender, isn't good enough to play on our team. I suspose fit can come into play, but I'm not sure how either of those players doesn't fit. Both are pretty good man defenders. Both are decent to good passers. Both are good rebounders, and both are good shooters.

Now I'll agree that neither are shotblockers, but if thats the requirement for being on our team, we're doomed from the beginning. I think people are obbsessed with shotblocking. Who was the great shotblocker on our team with Webb, Vlade etc ? Don't get me wrong, I think having one is terrific, but its not the be all to end all. You still have to have quality players on your team. Who are those quality players that are presently on our team. Here's a list with a star rating. 5 stars = possible starter on a contending team. 4 stars = possible rotation player on a contending team. 3 stars = possible bench player on a contending team. Anything below that, I don't want on my team. And by contending, I mean a team that is a serious contender for a championship.

Cousins: *****
Evans: *****
Thornton: *****
Thompson: ****
Thomas: **** (based solely on what I've seen so far)
Hayes:****
Salmons: **** (This is a hard one for me. Not worth the money, but he is talented)
Williams: **** (Jury is still out, but so far, so good)
Whiteside: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Fredette: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Honeycutt: ** (He hasn't had much of a chance, but I wish his name was Parsons)
Cisco: ** (Sorry Cisco, but your a good sub on a bad team, not a good team)
Outlaw: ** (Goodbye)
Greene: ** (Too little too late. Four years later, and I'm still not sure what you are)

Now this is all subjective, and you can agree or disagree. I know there are those that love Greene, and still hold out hope. I'm done with hoping on a 4 year player. But assuming you accept my judgement, it leaves us with only three players on the roster that are starting material on a contending team. And in my opinon, two of those players play the same position.

From Whiteside on down, you either have young inexperienced players with potential, or players that just aren't good enough to be on a contending team. So in my humble opinion, anytime you can plug in another player with talent, and remove one without, you've made progress. If you can fill a need at the same time, so much the better.

You realize Donte is 1 year older than Jimmer? How would Donte have looked with 3 more years of college vs 3 years of Theus/Natt/Westfail?

 

[ParniValjak]

I think the Kings resigning Thompson is a done deal. He's just too valuable to the team. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on Ilyasova and Anderson. I'm totally befuddled as to why they wouldn't be a good fit on our team. But then I guess I'm always surprised when people think that a player thats good enough to play on a contender, isn't good enough to play on our team. I suspose fit can come into play, but I'm not sure how either of those players doesn't fit. Both are pretty good man defenders. Both are decent to good passers. Both are good rebounders, and both are good shooters.

Now I'll agree that neither are shotblockers, but if thats the requirement for being on our team, we're doomed from the beginning. I think people are obbsessed with shotblocking. Who was the great shotblocker on our team with Webb, Vlade etc ? Don't get me wrong, I think having one is terrific, but its not the be all to end all. You still have to have quality players on your team. Who are those quality players that are presently on our team. Here's a list with a star rating. 5 stars = possible starter on a contending team. 4 stars = possible rotation player on a contending team. 3 stars = possible bench player on a contending team. Anything below that, I don't want on my team. And by contending, I mean a team that is a serious contender for a championship.

Cousins: *****
Evans: *****
Thornton: *****
Thompson: ****
Thomas: **** (based solely on what I've seen so far)
Hayes:****
Salmons: **** (This is a hard one for me. Not worth the money, but he is talented)
Williams: **** (Jury is still out, but so far, so good)
Whiteside: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Fredette: *** (Still too early to tell final outcome)
Honeycutt: ** (He hasn't had much of a chance, but I wish his name was Parsons)
Cisco: ** (Sorry Cisco, but your a good sub on a bad team, not a good team)
Outlaw: ** (Goodbye)
Greene: ** (Too little too late. Four years later, and I'm still not sure what you are)

Now this is all subjective, and you can agree or disagree. I know there are those that love Greene, and still hold out hope. I'm done with hoping on a 4 year player. But assuming you accept my judgement, it leaves us with only three players on the roster that are starting material on a contending team. And in my opinon, two of those players play the same position.

From Whiteside on down, you either have young inexperienced players with potential, or players that just aren't good enough to be on a contending team. So in my humble opinion, anytime you can plug in another player with talent, and remove one without, you've made progress. If you can fill a need at the same time, so much the better.

I agree with your post for the most part. However, the fit is really important here. Anderson is just about the perfect fit next to Howard because he complements him really well. Dwight operated under the basket, has to face up game and is a rebounding and shotblocking monster who is a DPOY material. Next to him, you want a player like Anderson and Ilyasova to spread the floor with their shooting and provide the little extra rebounding. They also give Dwight space to operate in.

Cousins is our main guy. His offensive game is far more diverse than Dwigth's but he is no where near the defender that Dwight is and he will never be. So we have to be a bit more selective with the type of guy we put next to Cousins. He he were a better defender and a shotblocker, Anderson and Ilyasova become much better fits. Since Cousins is never going to be a paint protector the guy next to him simply has to be for us to be a contender. Otherwise we are wasting our time and Cousins' time.

Those guys are difficult to find so here is where I am hoping that Whiteside develops into that dude or we get Davis. Ibaka would be a perfect fit but no way in hell OKC will let him go.

 

[bajaden]

Hello, Jerry!
That team didn't have a great shotblocker. What they had was excellent team defense played by players with good/great length that were willing to work on the defensive end moving their feet and were able to effectively switch if need be. But Kings were never true elite defensive team until Keon Clark arrived.
Current Kings team have moments of excellent defense but then they may go to sleep the very next posession. Despite numerous assurances that it's imminent the culture of taking pride in playing defense on every posession hasn't still arrived.

Thanks for the compliment! And, I'm glad we're in agreement. Look, I've always been an advocate of team defense. You can have the best shotblocker in the world, and still have a terrible defensive team if they don't play good team defense. What a good shotblocker does, is put the icing on the cake. He can be the difference maker. He can make a good team, a championship team, if the chips fall the right way. So I'm not anti-shotblocker! But I'am against going into freeagency or the draft with a single minded purpose, and feel that the outcome is a failure if your not able to aquire that perfect player.

There just aren't that many of them. Doesn't mean you don't try, but you have to have reasonable expectations. Would I rather have Hayes instead of Dalembert? No! I was disappointed when we didn't resign Dalembert. At the same time, I realize that Dalembert, while bringing some of the things I want next to Cousins, also had some flaws I didn't want. So he was a compromise. But a good compromise.

When I look at that freeagent list, I just don't see anyone thats unrestricted, that completely fills our need. But I do see players that would help. Like a Kaman. No one can tell me that our team wouldn't be better with him on it. Would it make us a championship team? No! But his addition and a couple of other additions could propell us into the playoffs. We're not going from the bottom to the top overnight. But we can certainly take a step into the upper level of the NBA.

 

[bajaden]

I agree with your post for the most part. However, the fit is really important here. Anderson is just about the perfect fit next to Howard because he complements him really well. Dwight operated under the basket, has to face up game and is a rebounding and shotblocking monster who is a DPOY material. Next to him, you want a player like Anderson and Ilyasova to spread the floor with their shooting and provide the little extra rebounding. They also give Dwight space to operate in.

Cousins is our main guy. His offensive game is far more diverse than Dwigth's but he is no where near the defender that Dwight is and he will never be. So we have to be a bit more selective with the type of guy we put next to Cousins. He he were a better defender and a shotblocker, Anderson and Ilyasova become much better fits. Since Cousins is never going to be a paint protector the guy next to him simply has to be for us to be a contender. Otherwise we are wasting our time and Cousins' time.

Those guys are difficult to find so here is where I am hoping that Whiteside develops into that dude or we get Davis. Ibaka would be a perfect fit but no way in hell OKC will let him go.

OK, lets say I agree with your scenario. That there's just one type of player thats the perfect fit next to Cousins! So what happens if we can't aquire that player? I personally don't see anyone thats unrestricted in freeagency that fits that model. We could go after a restricted freeagent, but there's no guarantee his team won't match. If he's truely that valuable, they probably will. So then what? Do we just do nothing? Do we close up the books and go home because we can't aquire that perfect player? Or, do we try and upgrade the roster by adding quality depth? And thats my argument! Maybe Anderson or Ilyasova aren't the perfect fit next to Cousins, but what they might do is add quality to the bench by either coming off the bench instead of Donte Greene, or by forcing Thompson to the bench, and thereby improving its quality.

If we were to play Ilyasova at the SF position, wouldn't he be better than Greene or Outlaw? Look, my hope is to somehow find the perfect player next to Cousins for the future. Maybe we get lucky and get Davis. But if that happens, I would still like to sign someone like Anderson, or Ilyasova. I'm sick and tired of seeing guys that are borderline NBA players sitting on our bench. This isn't an either/or to me. Signing one of those guys, doesn't automaticly mean I give up on the other idea. Its about replacing quanity with quality.

Having a good perimeter shooter like Ilyasova would help both Cousins and Evans. He would help spread the offense and keep the lane from getting cluttered. Cousins is a more versatile player offensively than Howard. He can score in the post, or he can face up the basket. While Cousins likes to take that 15 footer, he's also good at putting it on the floor and driving to to the basket. Having players that spread the floor can only help his offensive game.

I too have hope for Whiteside, but he's a long way from a finished product. Maybe adding someone like a Marcu Camby for a year or two, might get the job done in the short term.

 

[GoodOldDouwe]

How about Lamar Odom? He's not a free agent, but still worth to mention him. I'd trade for him, he's a smart guy, a playmaker and can defend the 3s and 4s in this league. If the Mavericks want to get rid of him I'd try to get him here.

 

[Gilles]

Camby as 25 minutes starter while he's still alive is actually decent idea if Kings don't land frontcourt project in this draft. Two-year deal at $5-$6 million per year is a decent stopgap. Problem is Maloofs are not gonna go above salary cap floor.

 

[bajaden]

Camby as 25 minutes starter while he's still alive is actually decent idea if Kings don't land frontcourt project in this draft. Two-year deal at $5-$6 million per year is a decent stopgap. Problem is Maloofs are not gonna go above salary cap floor.

Sadly, I agree with both parts of your statement. This is the same route that George Shinn took and he was eventually forced out. Unfortunately, the force out came after he moved the team. As for Camby, he seems to be drinking the same liquid that Steve Nash is drinking. He never seems to age. If the Maloofs are willing, then picking him up on a reasonable two year deal would be a good short term fix. Even if we were to aquire Davis, it would be nice to have him come off the bench for a year and then reverse the order the following year. Less pressure on the kid that way.

 

[Kingster]

OK, lets say I agree with your scenario. That there's just one type of player thats the perfect fit next to Cousins! So what happens if we can't aquire that player? I personally don't see anyone thats unrestricted in freeagency that fits that model. We could go after a restricted freeagent, but there's no guarantee his team won't match. If he's truely that valuable, they probably will. So then what? Do we just do nothing? Do we close up the books and go home because we can't aquire that perfect player? Or, do we try and upgrade the roster by adding quality depth? And thats my argument! Maybe Anderson or Ilyasova aren't the perfect fit next to Cousins, but what they might do is add quality to the bench by either coming off the bench instead of Donte Greene, or by forcing Thompson to the bench, and thereby improving its quality.

If we were to play Ilyasova at the SF position, wouldn't he be better than Greene or Outlaw? Look, my hope is to somehow find the perfect player next to Cousins for the future. Maybe we get lucky and get Davis. But if that happens, I would still like to sign someone like Anderson, or Ilyasova. I'm sick and tired of seeing guys that are borderline NBA players sitting on our bench. This isn't an either/or to me. Signing one of those guys, doesn't automaticly mean I give up on the other idea. Its about replacing quanity with quality.

Having a good perimeter shooter like Ilyasova would help both Cousins and Evans. He would help spread the offense and keep the lane from getting cluttered. Cousins is a more versatile player offensively than Howard. He can score in the post, or he can face up the basket. While Cousins likes to take that 15 footer, he's also good at putting it on the floor and driving to to the basket. Having players that spread the floor can only help his offensive game.

I too have hope for Whiteside, but he's a long way from a finished product. Maybe adding someone like a Marcu Camby for a year or two, might get the job done in the short term.

If you want the perfect player next to Cousins, call up Utah and offer Tyreke for Favors. Of course they concur. Easy peezy. Now you have your power forward.

 

[bajaden]

If you want the perfect player next to Cousins, call up Utah and offer Tyreke for Favors. Of course they concur. Easy peezy. Now you have your power forward.

Nice thought, but I doubt the Jazz would do it. Not that they wouldn't like to have Tyreke, but they really don't have a need for him. So why give up Favors, who I would love to have, for a player you really don't need. They've been playing Burks at the SG position, with Raja Bell. They have Gordon Hayward at the SF position along with C.J. Miles. They have around 4 PG's on the team with Delvin Harris and Earl Watson.

 

[matthi3205]

Would you give up Evans for Ryan Anderson?

 

[rainmaker]

Would you give up Evans for Ryan Anderson?

Anderson is a FA. How would that work? And if he wasn't a FA? Not a chance.

 

[bajaden]

Anderson is a FA. How would that work? And if he wasn't a FA? Not a chance.

Well, he is a restricted freeagent, so if they were to match your offer, then the only way to aquire him would be to trade for him. And to that end, my answer would be no! And I like Anderson!

 

[LPKingsFan]

Bumping this thread to avoid depressing draft and trade Tyreke talk: anyone noticed the play of Ilyasova lately? Put up 19 and 15 tonight after 17 and 17 last game. I know we can't keep piling SFs upon SFs, but I definitely like him.