What do you think is available for 1 year of IT at a million bucks? If he isn't in the long turn plans one year is inconsequential to us. At worst it holds us back from getting playtime to a player the see us using in the future. At best, we'll, it doesn't do anything to the goals of the franchise.
How to situate our backcourt...
- Thread starter Bosnian Diehard
- Start date
What do you think is available for 1 year of IT at a million bucks? If he isn't in the long turn plans one year is inconsequential to us. At worst it holds us back from getting playtime to a player the see us using in the future. At best, we'll, it doesn't do anything to the goals of the franchise.
I've never been a fan of IT getting major minutes/control of the offense but I think he's a huge bargain and could help tip a trade to get rid of some of our less desirable pieces. If you tacked him one with any of the other guys we'd like to move, you may find someone willing to bite.
rhythmless
Starter
Whether you wnat IT starting, or on the team even, is inconsequential to his production relative to our ability to sign him at the option.
IT is a bargain. You don't let bargains walk. Even if you don't want them. You accept the option, then you trade him for pieces you do want. If you can't find a piece, you trade him for a 2nd to someone and wipe your hands clean. That's called keeping your options open. Why anyone would advocate declining a 2nd round option on a player who has started in the league is beyond me. It's incomprehensible.
IT is a bargain. You don't let bargains walk. Even if you don't want them. You accept the option, then you trade him for pieces you do want. If you can't find a piece, you trade him for a 2nd to someone and wipe your hands clean. That's called keeping your options open. Why anyone would advocate declining a 2nd round option on a player who has started in the league is beyond me. It's incomprehensible.
Like I asked, what do you think you are going to get for a player with one year left on his contract that is worth less than a million? I honestly don't know. Of course you want to get something for him if you can but I don't see anyone offering much for him.
Just one second round pick, is that the value you see him commanding?
Just one second round pick, is that the value you see him commanding?
Because this forum refuses to see how productive he actually is and is fine calling him "selfish" and a "chucker". Neither of which are true, but thats besides the point.
And are you kidding? We'd have 15 teams ready to take IT off our hands for a 1st round pick. Or you use IT as an incredibly cheap asset to sweeten the pot in a larger deal. Or we use IT to unload a Hayes or Salmons to free up cap room.
You would give up a first round pick to get a player with one year left on his contract? Interesting. You see teams willing to take on a bad contract/help unload a player for a one year rental? Also interesting.
Again, what is the value of a player with one year left on his under 1 million dollar contract? What would you give to get him?
Glenn
Hall of Famer
I think the pick of McCallum is a huge signal that IT will not be with the Kings next year. Whether he is signed and traded or just let go makes no difference to me. I suppose it makes sense to let him battle it out with McCallum but it isn't enough to get heated about. Not for me.
Pretty sure his contract is guarenteed for this coming season.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
I thought we had to exercise a team option but I sure don't know for sure. I have been operating with the assumption that we have a team option. I still think McCallum was chosen specifically because THIS FO found IT lacking.
Pete likes RMC(Ray McCallum) so much, so RMC could come off the bench. he likes Reke and Ben, too.
though of three guard rotation(Reke, Ben and RMC) make sense
MT is a great scorer, that is all he can do as well. paying 8M to the 3rd guard option(even 4th option) is crazy, not make sense.
Kings has to trade him for something, maybe SF or backup big, whatever.
though of three guard rotation(Reke, Ben and RMC) make sense
MT is a great scorer, that is all he can do as well. paying 8M to the 3rd guard option(even 4th option) is crazy, not make sense.
Kings has to trade him for something, maybe SF or backup big, whatever.
Last edited:
Glenn
Hall of Famer
This could be wrong, http://www.hoopsrumors.com/2013/02/isaiah-thomas-201314-contract-now-guaranteed.html no idea.
Here's this too http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/kings.jsp
Which do I believe?!?!
Which do I believe?!?!
I think the bigger issue is that he's a UFA after next season. You wouldn't give up a 1st round pick just to rent him for a year at a good price and then pay him more after that. You'd just wait for a year and then sign him as a FA. No?
Flopi
Bench
Assuming Tyreke is kept as a point guard (and that's a IF), I would go with this backcourt :
Starters : T. Evans & B. McLemore
Bench : T. Douglas & R. McCallum
I see Tyreke spending a lot of minutes as a 1/2 so, behind him and McLemore, there would be no many minutes left at the 2 spot. Salmons can fill in if needed (injury).
Point guard sub duty would be split between McCallum and Toney Douglas (very good D, good shooter, cheap).
I think this backcourt would be versatile :
Evans/McLemore => size and offense
Douglas/Evans => defense
Douglas/McLemore => shooting
McCallum/Douglas => small ball
Thomas, Thornton & Fredette have value and should be dealt for a SF (ideally good at defense and passing for helping Evans managing the offense).
Starters : T. Evans & B. McLemore
Bench : T. Douglas & R. McCallum
I see Tyreke spending a lot of minutes as a 1/2 so, behind him and McLemore, there would be no many minutes left at the 2 spot. Salmons can fill in if needed (injury).
Point guard sub duty would be split between McCallum and Toney Douglas (very good D, good shooter, cheap).
I think this backcourt would be versatile :
Evans/McLemore => size and offense
Douglas/Evans => defense
Douglas/McLemore => shooting
McCallum/Douglas => small ball
Thomas, Thornton & Fredette have value and should be dealt for a SF (ideally good at defense and passing for helping Evans managing the offense).
Last edited:
This one is usually most reliable.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
I see no scenario in which we wouldn't at least pick up ITs option to use him in trade. Regardless of whether he is in the plans, he's just about the best value in the NBA with that micro salary. Having to pay him after next year would be a different story.
ParniValjak
All-Star
I am pretty sure that we already picked up IT's option for next season before Vivek bought the team. I recall reading somewhere that we have done this!
For me, I would got Tyreke - McLemore backcourt with IT as the change of pace guard off the bench that can play with either of them and get his 20-25 minutes each game (which is close to his current minutes average). It also gives McCallum a year to get adopted to life in the NBA with a view to take over from IT if we decide not to pay him next year!
Thornton was expandable regardless, even more so now and a chip to use to address the SF and/or the shot blocking/defense at PF.
That is how I would go but I get the feeling the front office is planning on life without Reke!
For me, I would got Tyreke - McLemore backcourt with IT as the change of pace guard off the bench that can play with either of them and get his 20-25 minutes each game (which is close to his current minutes average). It also gives McCallum a year to get adopted to life in the NBA with a view to take over from IT if we decide not to pay him next year!
Thornton was expandable regardless, even more so now and a chip to use to address the SF and/or the shot blocking/defense at PF.
That is how I would go but I get the feeling the front office is planning on life without Reke!
jalfa
Starter
I agree with this. just letting IT walk would be insane. dunnot what his value is precisely but he does have some in a trade (which seems kinda inevitable at this point).
MassachusettsKingsFan
All-Star
Generally I prefer MT over IT, but Thomas sure looks like the better fit now. Just a better ball handler than MT, and that's what you need with Evans/McLemore.
That being said, MT is going to be harder to move. It and Jimmer should be moveable.
Evans/McCallum
McLemore/Thornton
And Salmons, if he's here, can backup both spots. If this is the route we take, I'd still look at signing Beno and have McCollum ride the bench this season. Udrih would be a great backup plan if something bad happens.
That being said, MT is going to be harder to move. It and Jimmer should be moveable.
Evans/McCallum
McLemore/Thornton
And Salmons, if he's here, can backup both spots. If this is the route we take, I'd still look at signing Beno and have McCollum ride the bench this season. Udrih would be a great backup plan if something bad happens.
Yes, that is true.
Also, one should note, Sham has very specific contract details if you hover your mouse over IT's name. In this he details that if IT played at least 50 games last year and averaged 15 minutes in the 50 that he had the highest minutes, his contract would be automatically picked up. I don't know why Deeks, who appears to have the best contacts in the business, would make up or get falsely fed such specific contract details. I would say odds are very strong that Sham is right and IT's contract has been automatically renewed for next year.
Gary
All-Star
The first part of the season if everything remains the same as it is now (which I don't think it will);
PG: IT - Evans - McCallum
SG: Evans - MT - McLemore
Of course this changes once McLemore gets more experience, and it could happen as early as the end of pre-season. But as it stands now, the picks are the last guys on the depth chart for now. I really do like the McLemore pick though.
PG: IT - Evans - McCallum
SG: Evans - MT - McLemore
Of course this changes once McLemore gets more experience, and it could happen as early as the end of pre-season. But as it stands now, the picks are the last guys on the depth chart for now. I really do like the McLemore pick though.
Last edited:
Rockmeister
All-Star
I know we have had many, many discussions with Tyreke being PG, however, he is not a true PG.
Last edited:
Dime Dropper
All-Star
It's a great thing for us then that true PGs pretty much never win titles, isn't it?
ParniValjak
All-Star
Rockmeister
All-Star
We need a PG that doesn't slow the offense down and Tyreke did that alot last season. I want to keep Tyreke at SG. I really don't care if people don't agree with me. It's just MY opinion.
Similar threads
