Fire Christie
- Thread starter SufferingKingsFan
- Start date
He hasnt been given an opportunity. I know you want to push he's bad in practice or whatever, but the game film we do have on him greatly suggets he deserves a real nba role. We'd see it in his g league performance if he straight up just wasnt a pro caliber player.
Frankly, its ridiculous a #13 pick on a horrible team still has a hard time finding his way on the floor. Its a flat out dumb strategy from Doug and Perry. If he does suck, why not make sure on the NBA floor? Let's see what his development looks like over 20, 30, 40 games, similar to the progression we've seen from the 3 rookies. Theres no baseline with Carter, which is a massive problem considering we used a lotto selection on him.
Even the small sample of 391 minutes we had last year had the defense being 3.2 better with him on the floor. Just one small sample data points, but thats something you should fully flush out, especially as a horrible defensive org.
Padrino
All-Star
Yeah, I can find no worthy justification for the complete abandonment of Devin Carter in the Kings' plans. He hasn't even been prioritized in garbage time minutes. It just makes no sense at all, and it's a really unfortunate look for an organization that finds itself with the need to look to the future. Many of us have been clamoring for a rebuild for some time now, but the Kings currently find themselves staring down the barrel of a long-term rebuild whether they want to or not.
I mean, it's not as if they're in No Man's Land, hovering around .500 and fighting for play-in positioning. They're one of the worst teams in the NBA. By win/loss record. By offensive rating. By defensive rating. By net rating. Worse still, they're one of the worst teams in the NBA while orienting their gameplan around aging former All-Stars. It's rare to be so bad and so old at the same time.
For a minute there, the Kings could share their embarrassment with the Los Angeles Clippers, who were also a very old team stuck in the basement. But the Clips have managed to remember they're a professional basketball organization. What's the Kings' excuse, beyond poor roster construction and antiquated coaching?
I'm not pushing anything beyond the fact the most plausible explanation for his lack of playing time is he is not good. I also find it more plausible they are hiding his liabilities from potential trade partners when they are in showcase mode right now rather than hiding his skillset from trade demand. I do think if he is here after the deadline he might be given a chance. Believe me nobody wants him to work out more than me.
Srzly
Bench
You’ve just got to see it from the org’s POV here. They have priorities.
If Carter got run, how would Russ be able to break records and boost his standing in all-time stats? He needs to be on the floor 35-40 minutes per game.
Plus, Russ is already Top 10 this year in turnovers per game and I think if we keep up his playing time he might be able to catch Luka.
Srzly
Bench
I’m not even high on Carter, but people were saying Max wasn’t ready and needed to spend a year in the G-League at first.
Without the Domas injury, he’d probably still be there.
I think it’s a disservice to everyone to not get him run in a meaningless season. I don’t think he is going to hurt his stock much at this point even if he sucks.
Nope this one's on Perry for adding a guard glut on a team that didn't need it. We can properly blame him here
We have a guard glut and we're trying to clean it out. We literally had no options at forward/center.
I think it's pretty clear from Summer League that Devin is NOT a point guard. People can pout about us adding two actual point guards all they want. We didn't have any. One of the stupider parts of the Fox deal was throwing McLaughlin into it.
Why is it clear he's not a PG? What's he shown on an NBA floor to make that determination?
Also, we have the 29th ranked offense currently with the guard glut that Perry created. So instead of letting Carter develop and grow into a playmaker, we are letting a 32 year old and 37 year old "PGs" lead us to a near league worst offense.
Without a doubt if Domas and Eubanks stayed healthy all year, that we never would have seen Max or Cardwell.
Srzly
Bench
My point is, how do you know for sure?
Everyone, including people that know ball like Deuce & Mo, were pretty positive Max wasn’t NBA ready and he didn’t look great early, but look what consistent opportunity did for him after the staff was forced to play him.
I don’t personally believe he is capable of being a starting PG but I’m not ready to write him off as a backup yet.
I just want to see what would happen if he got run for 30 games because I’d much rather watch him than Russ play for stats as a one-year rental in meaningless season.
Because we had to have Clifford play lead ball handler when he was in.
We have 5 players in front of him at SG and 3 want to start (including DDR who is a horrible fit on this team at the 3 or 4).
I'm not contesting anything about Maxime's role. But the issue is specific to the position that Carter played and why the f Monte even drafted him in the first place.
ShastaKingsFan
Hall of Famer
That's the answer to "how do we know for sure"? That they may never find out what their #13 pick is fully capable of during a gap year, because there are other guards that want to start? Yikes
If he is still here after the deadline maybe we will see. We're talking in circles here. Monk, DeMar and Zach are always ahead of him. Keon is clearly ahead of him. Nique is ahead of him.
Tough spot to be in if you can't show you belong in practice or elsewhere.
My point is we all know he was the #13 pick and the choice to keep him instead of trade the pick had some disastrous consequences even if it is not Carter's fault. But those consequences would lead almost anyone to say "well we better see what we got". I don't think anyone in the org is any different except maybe Perry who has no attachment to the decision. Doug and Vivek I am sure would like to see. And thus far he hasn't been able to get more than spot minutes.
I'm not going to keep going on about it, it is what it is. I want him to succeed. I consider it a massive blunder on Monte's part and would like more than anything to salvage anything out of that choice. But it is also just entirely possible it was a terrible pick by a mediocre GM.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
Perry, Christie, Sabonis all seemed to think they needed to go out and add two PGs. Ask them.
eleventy
G-League
Two points:
1) What IS a point guard (in TODAY'S NBA?
Is Luka a point guard? Or is he a forward who runs the offense and the ball starts in his hands because you want the ball to end up in his hands?
You might say, "Aren't you describing Magic?" but the difference is that Magic wanted the ball to wind up in different hands (than his own)
I watched the Rockets-Spurs game on Tuesday night. I could not tell who the Rocket point guard was.
It seemed like Sengun (and Wemby to a lesser extent) brought the ball upcourt as much as anyone else
(in the OLD NBA, the centers rebounded (defensive board) and then looked for the point guard on the wing and got the ball to him in the backcourt)
Perhaps the "speed" of today's game dictates that the big guys need to "rebound and run" (with the ball)
So, it seems like point guards (today) need to be as much a "scorer" as a "distributor"
That describes Carter.
When you say, "he's not a point guard", i say, "neither is Reed Sheppard"
#2 always seeking conspiracies, i wonder whether or not the Kings think that Carter is just here until he can go somewhere else, a foolish pick who is not worth developing.
Might that somewhere else be Memphis, where I believe his dad is still an assistant coach?
Might he be taking more advice from his dad than his (current) coach?
I remember when the Kings had Ricky Berry - they brought his dad in as an assistant coach (he was quite qualified, having been head coach at SJ State) - that didn't work out so well.
Vlade was wrong about SO many things, but one thing he was RIGHT about was not wanting Luka because HIS dad would be second guessing all the advice Kings coaches would be giving.
(personally, I would have drafted Luka and made his dad the lead assistant coach - his skills are THAT good).
I notice Luka's dad is at every Laker game. A team like the Lakers can handle that but maybe in Dallas, there was no one to say, "get out of the gym - I'M the one coaching your son, not you"
On a thread I started (which was moved to "Personnel"), i named some players we should be looking at (in trade deadline deals).
One of my main targets was Santi Aldama of Memphis. This guy is a 7 footer with point guard skills. I don't know if he will become a "star" (he was the last player drafted in the first round in his year), but they have given him a three year deal at "Monk Money" and I believe that on the right team, he could be an "Alfred" (third best player on the team) and I'd love to see the Kings be that team.
What I posited (on the Personnel thread) was that to get Saldama, we would probably have to be willing to take Ja. I posited a trade that I think would work (by NBA rules): Ja and Saldama for Zach and Schroeder.
I assumed that they would want a point guard who could start or come off the bench for Memphis, so i said "Schroeder" but this thread has me thinking, "If we aren't going to use Carter, why not offer him to Memphis as part of a Ja/Zach package.
It's just possible that by indicating that we have no future for Carter, that Memphis might think, "They are going to trade Carter - how can WE get him?
For whatever reason, the Kings don't see Carter as a part of their future, so, maybe he isn't.
ShastaKingsFan
Hall of Famer
Most of this board was excited and in favor of Carter being picked, when it happened. Hindsight is 20/20
eleventy
G-League
thanks for this... looked 'em up and van gundy brought a second rounder, kidd brought two second rounders and rivers brought a first rounder...
ShastaKingsFan
Hall of Famer
and the plausibility of someone trading draft capital to have Doug Christie as their head coach?
QWERTYLICIOUS
Starter
Yeah...I doubt a competent GM is gonna be like, "You know what, Doug is worth giving up a potentially valuable draft pick for. Let me send Sacramento a 2nd round pick for Doug Christie!!!"and the plausibility of someone trading draft capital to have Doug Christie as their head coach?
Well so was I, at the time. Then we found out he was going to miss at least half the season, then we added DeMar and shipped Barnes (plus a bunch of other players) and were left without a health front court. Then we saw players selected after Carter that play the front court blossom. And we saw the pick immediately after Carter traded for Deni who many of us had seen as a target and who is breaking out right now in Portland. He thus far hasn't provided the FO any confidence he can run the point and therefore is buried behind all the other SGs. A problem of Monte's creation. We did try Malik as full time PG last year and it was deemed not a path forward.
It was a perfectly terrible situation to come into, and the opportunity cost for the Beam Team was fatal. But I don't fault the team for not installing him at PG just because.
ShastaKingsFan
Hall of Famer
If you were in favor of the pick at the time, then how do you blame McNair for taking who he and apparently you....and many others thought was the best player available? This is hindsight
He was never projected to be a point guard. Monk was never going to work as pg, along side Zach Lavine. With Keon he looked solid
I did not say I was in favor of the pick, I was excited about Carter as a player, but I went in to that draft wanting a big wing or PF to put between Keegan and Domas to cover up Domas's weaknesses on defense. Which we somehow managed to make even worse by moving Keegan to that spot to shove DDR into the 3 spot.
I also thought he'd be playing on day one, at the time. Which as we all know wasn't the case although I am a little unclear if that was known before drafting him or not.
eleventy
G-League
qwerty said, "Yeah...I doubt a competent GM is gonna be like, "You know what, Doug is worth giving up a potentially valuable draft pick for. Let me send Sacramento a 2nd round pick for Doug Christie!!!"
once again, you misunderstand.. . -
first, this subject arose because i opened some possibilities and people said, "The NBA would never allow a coach to be traded" and the captain pointed out that they have allowed such a trade three times this century - but no one is suggesting that Doug is in the class of Doc or Jason (maybe Van Gundy)
this is not about someone giving the Kings a second rounder to hire Doug (although that possibility exists)
,
this is about a General Manager (NOT Doug) making a deal with Kings Gm, which deal would be:
"You are free to hire Doug as your coach (even though he is under contract with us) provided that you (as the GM of an expansion franchise) agree to draft the player of OUR choosing in the expansion draft" - but there would have to be "agreement" - it's not like the Kings could say, "You have to draft Dario Saric" - there would need to be negotiations and both sides would need to agree on WHO they would select..
For instance, let's say the Kings can protect eight but they have a ninth (and maybe even a tenth) player that they don't want to lose.
So they agree that when Seattle selects, the Sonics agree to choose, let's say, "Devin Carter" (and teams can only lose one of their exposed players), so, in essence, the Kings get to protect ten and lose their 11th best player, not their 9th (in return for allowing Seattle to select Doug as coach. After negotiations, maybe we also throw in a 2032 second round pick.
Or, in the alternative, perhaps the Kings GIVE Seattle one or two second round picks (AND the right to hire Doug) and in return, Seattle agrees to take Zach LaVine (and his salary) in the expansion draft (and the Kings leave him unprotected).
In that case, the Kings get off a bad contract and have additional millions to sign a better, younger player but still stay under the cap.
Anything can be negotiated and actually Doug does not HAVE to be involved - maybe it's just "we give you two seconds and you draft Zach". (Doug would be a "bonus" given to Seattle because THEY were WILLING to take a guy we couldn't get rid of any other way).
BTW, this is if the expansion draft were next week. By the time it rolls around, we may have a different "Zach type" whose salary we want to rid ourselves of.
Expansion is an opportunity and the Kings should be ready,
once again, you misunderstand.. . -
first, this subject arose because i opened some possibilities and people said, "The NBA would never allow a coach to be traded" and the captain pointed out that they have allowed such a trade three times this century - but no one is suggesting that Doug is in the class of Doc or Jason (maybe Van Gundy)
this is not about someone giving the Kings a second rounder to hire Doug (although that possibility exists)
,
this is about a General Manager (NOT Doug) making a deal with Kings Gm, which deal would be:
"You are free to hire Doug as your coach (even though he is under contract with us) provided that you (as the GM of an expansion franchise) agree to draft the player of OUR choosing in the expansion draft" - but there would have to be "agreement" - it's not like the Kings could say, "You have to draft Dario Saric" - there would need to be negotiations and both sides would need to agree on WHO they would select..
For instance, let's say the Kings can protect eight but they have a ninth (and maybe even a tenth) player that they don't want to lose.
So they agree that when Seattle selects, the Sonics agree to choose, let's say, "Devin Carter" (and teams can only lose one of their exposed players), so, in essence, the Kings get to protect ten and lose their 11th best player, not their 9th (in return for allowing Seattle to select Doug as coach. After negotiations, maybe we also throw in a 2032 second round pick.
Or, in the alternative, perhaps the Kings GIVE Seattle one or two second round picks (AND the right to hire Doug) and in return, Seattle agrees to take Zach LaVine (and his salary) in the expansion draft (and the Kings leave him unprotected).
In that case, the Kings get off a bad contract and have additional millions to sign a better, younger player but still stay under the cap.
Anything can be negotiated and actually Doug does not HAVE to be involved - maybe it's just "we give you two seconds and you draft Zach". (Doug would be a "bonus" given to Seattle because THEY were WILLING to take a guy we couldn't get rid of any other way).
BTW, this is if the expansion draft were next week. By the time it rolls around, we may have a different "Zach type" whose salary we want to rid ourselves of.
Expansion is an opportunity and the Kings should be ready,
QWERTYLICIOUS
Starter
And I don't think a competent GM is going to be all like, "You know what, Sacramento, yeah, we will take a clearly unqualified coach for our head coach position AND agree to take 'player x' off of you in the expansion draft"...Your take is ludicrous, is essentially what I am trying to say.
ShastaKingsFan
Hall of Famer
Of all the qualified candidates that would likely be interested in the first head coaching job for a new team, owner, and GM, why would Doug Christie be near the top of that list? Simply because he's from the Seattle area?
Does he live in Seattle in the offseason or spend a lot of time there? I don't tend to view him the way I do Jamal Crawford to where if you could have any job you want it would be in Seattle. I kinda thought the Kings were that for him.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Haha, yeah the PG's sure made the difference huh! lol. Carter has shown an aptitude in creating in pick and roll and has looked to have improved year over year already. He's changed his free throw stroke. He's in shape. This is a very, very bad example the Kings are setting and yes, it will be taken note of by agents around draft time.