Getting Salmons means losing Garcia?

[HaraWish]

Just my speculation.

When I heard about getting Salmons, I was embarassed. Because we have a lot of ball handlers, or who may set up the offense, Price, Douby, and Garcia (not caring about whether they're ready for the league or not).

And ANOTHER ball handler?

Salmons can dribble, pass, slash, and steal. I read someone told Salmons as 'Garcia without shooting' in this forum.

So I'm very embarassed. Suddenly we have TOO MANY ball handlers at our backups.

Then I checked our roster, and could recall that we signed Loius Amundson, the undrafted rookie forward who shined at LVSL as 10.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg. When we signed Amundson, I couldn't understand. Because I guess Amundson will usually play more as a SF than as a PF, and we have Garcia. So I couldn't understand. There's so much similar roles.

However, with Salmons and Amundson together... there's no shared roles.

With small lineup, Salmons can play SF.
With large lineup, Amundson can play SF. (Hopefully.)

So I think Garcia gets losing his position more. I like Garcia a lot, and don't want lose him. However, if Amundson is good enough to play at the league, Garcia will not have his own space between Salmons and Amundson.

Maybe, the team plans to use Garcia as a trading chip? I think Garcia is attractive to many teams.

Only KT, or only salary fillers (Potapenko, Williamson) is not attractive to other teams. But how about KT+Garcia or Salary+Garcia? I guess it's much more attractive.

Well, as I said above, it's just all my speculation. I wonder your thoughts.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm thinking/hoping not, but who knows.

1) Cisco can play SF. Kevin really can't, Salmons shouldn't, and Douby + Price obviously not. Maybe Admundson can, but the scouting reports about his lack of perimeter skills make that a question mark. Of course there is always the old reliable Corliss if we sit on that contract rather than moving it, but Cisco remains the only true backup swingman type.

2) If Kevin doesn't step up, Cisco might well be a better option to log heavy minutes at OG than either of our tweener PGs or Salmons who, well is limited offensively.

3) Salmons is mostly a PG. At least in theory. Although he usually played at OG. In any case, a 1/2 really, or 2/1. But not a 3.


SOMEBODY is going to get squeezed again, but that's the story every year with us it seems. But I could certainly see Ron/Kevin/Mike starting with Cisco at 2/3 and Salmons at 1/2 as the backups. Squeezes the little guys out, but like I say, somebody is getting squeezed. Not sure what happens with Corliss.

In any case, losing a quality vet like Bonzi from that 2/3 spot makes me think that we should really be consciously trying to hold onto our remaining talent at those positions rather than further diluting it. But who the hell knows what Petrie is thinking on the subject.

 

[startingtohurt]

3) Salmons is mostly a PG. At least in theory. Although he usually played at OG. In any case, a 1/2 really, or 2/1. But not a 3.

i've never seen salmons play, did we sign him to be our backup PG? i know he can play 3 spots, but is PG where he's most comfortable at?

 

[HaraWish]

i've never seen salmons play, did we sign him to be our backup PG? i know he can play 3 spots, but is PG where he's most comfortable at?

You know, he played at 76ers. That means he played with AI. And that means he have to move the ball, and to distribute the ball. On defense he defense opponent's SG. I heard he is quite good with man-to-man defense. He has no decent jumper, usually slash to the rim. ... Well, I guess he is the poor man of Doug Christie.

I heard Salmons' ballhandling is quite good, and his court vision is also good. Although he made turnover sometimes, his leading may be OK.

 

[Diabeticwonder]

I could definately see Cicso being included in a deal if it was the right move. Right now if I'm Jason Hart I'm packing my bags and if I'm Cisco I'm trying to remember where I put my bags.

 

[DocHolliday]

I don't see why they'd get rid of Garcia because they have salmons. The kings are building a team it seems with people at least in the back cour that hvae versatility.

You have Douby to back up 1 or 2, but they have Salmons so Douby doesn't have to forced in to soon.

Salmons can back up the 1 2 or the 3

Garcia can back up the 1 2 or the 3.

Price is more than likely still your 3rd string PG.

Hopefully Jason goes in some kind of trade as filler. I dn't see why they'd get rid of him.

 

[nbrans]

Losing Bonzi makes Garcia more likely to stay, but I wonder if the Kings are hedging their bets on Garcia with Salmons.

 

[Smills91]

I think the msot accurate comparison of John salmons is probably a version of Marquis Daniels without any real opportunity yet.

 

[k 1 n g 5]

hey, im new to the boards but long time reader... Anyways I think that Salmons is a poor man's Christie that is a little more versatile, cann't shoot the lights out, but he can slash to the rim(which we definitely need).

 

[bajaden]

I see Salmons as KM's back-up for the most part. With the departure of Bonzi, I don't think they wanted to leave the back-up 2 spot in a rookie's hands. Meaning Douby. As far as Amundson, he played center in college as well as Power forward. His only position with the Kings will be at PF. I think Cisco become's the primiry back-up to Artest, as well as filling in at the 2/1 positions. We still need help at the center position. I like Justin Williams, but will be surprised if he makes the team. As far as I know, the bucks still haven't moved Magg's. Maybe we have a deal in place with them. Thats more of a prayer than a hope.

 

[Bricklayer]

I think the msot accurate comparison of John salmons is probably a version of Marquis Daniels without any real opportunity yet.

Oh enough of that already. John Salmons has had opportunity after opportunity. He has played a LOT of minutes in the NBA. More in fact than Marquis Daniels. Over the last three years Daniels has gotten 18.6, 23.5 and 28.5min, Salmons 20.8, 17.1 and 25.1 (Salmons played in more games and had an additonal year, hence more minutes).

The difference between the two is talent, not opportunity. Or particularly in Salmons case, as a guy who shows flashes but never puts it together, in realization of talent. Daniels always puts up considerably better numbers, and if he is generally viewed as an underacheiver since his rookie year, not sure where that leaves Salmons. Guess it depends on your view of how good he is.

 

[nbrans]

I see Salmons as KM's back-up for the most part. With the departure of Bonzi, I don't think they wanted to leave the back-up 2 spot in a rookie's hands. Meaning Douby. As far as Amundson, he played center in college as well as Power forward. His only position with the Kings will be at PF. I think Cisco become's the primiry back-up to Artest, as well as filling in at the 2/1 positions. We still need help at the center position. I like Justin Williams, but will be surprised if he makes the team. As far as I know, the bucks still haven't moved Magg's. Maybe we have a deal in place with them. Thats more of a prayer than a hope.

I do think he will back up Martin, but I also think you'll see Salmons bringing up the ball with Bibby as a SG, and same with Douby. The trend with the Kings seems to be small shooting guards and big ballhanders.

 

[nbrans]

Oh enough of that already. John Salmons has had opportunity after opportunity. He has played a LOT of minutes in the NBA. More in fact than Marquis Daniels. Over the last three years Daniels has gotten 18.6, 23.5 and 28.5min, Salmons 20.8, 17.1 and 25.1 (Salmons played in more games and had an additonal year, hence more minutes).

The difference between the two is talent, not opportunity. Or particularly in Salmons case, as a guy who shows flashes but never puts it together, in realization of talent. Daniels always puts up considerably better numbers, and if he is generally viewed as an underacheiver since his rookie year, not sure where that leaves Salmons. Guess it depends on your view of how good he is.

Salmons and Daniels is not a bad comparison, even if Salmons' numbers aren't as good. They function in a similar role and it's possible Salmons wasn't utilized well because he was in an offense with AI. As others have pointed out, he did well when AI was out.

I don't know if people are trying to say that Salmons is as good as Daniels, but the comparison is helpful to envision what kind of role he might have on the Kings.

 

[Warhawk]

hey, im new to the boards but long time reader... Anyways I think that Salmons is a poor man's Christie that is a little more versatile, cann't shoot the lights out, but he can slash to the rim(which we definitely need).

Welcome.

I think as long as he can bring the ball up, defend, and make a few assists he's doing what we need out of him. I understand the first two are things he does, and the assists are something he can work on. The slashing to the rim part is becoming more and more important in today's NBA.

 

[Kings113]

Salmons and Daniels is not a bad comparison, even if Salmons' numbers aren't as good. They function in a similar role and it's possible Salmons wasn't utilized well because he was in an offense with AI. As others have pointed out, he did well when AI was out.

I don't know if people are trying to say that Salmons is as good as Daniels, but the comparison is helpful to envision what kind of role he might have on the Kings.

Agreed.