I'm mad at Petrie because...
- Thread starter Fresno King
- Start date
No particular order
1. Signing Mikki Moore
I'm not the biggest Mikki fan, but bleh to this deal, it's only fully guaranteed 1 more year, right? We have made a mockery of the PF position post-Webber.
2. Not trading Shareef Abdur-Rahim
6. Not trading Thomas
No one wants these guys. Please opt out Kenny.
4. Trading Bibby
Needed to happen. Hopefully Shelden will be a good roleplayer. An extra pick for Lue would have been nice.
5. Not trading Miller
I didn't hear anything except for him + Garcia for a bunch of Orlando's expirings and "best shooter in basketball history" JJ freakin' Redick. No thanks.
7. Releasing Justin Williams
He didn't really impress me. Whatever.
3. Not trading Artest
Eh. It depends.
I guess I'm mad at Geoff because I want to have some semblance of a plan. It honestly appears to me that our plan is for our bad contracts to expire and our few young players to become stars while we necessarily (because of the vet contracts) stay above the cap, stopping along the way to sign MLE FAs every other year or so. Perhaps in their last years Miller, KT and Reef will be traded as expirings, possibly bringing more salary. Ron and Kevin will be the leaders of the team.
If 3 or more of Garcia, Douby, Hawes, Shelden and our pick this year become great players, we'll contend. If not, we'll probably be between 35 and 45 wins.
This makes me want to see the other plan.
Fun last couple games though.
1. Signing Mikki Moore
I'm not the biggest Mikki fan, but bleh to this deal, it's only fully guaranteed 1 more year, right? We have made a mockery of the PF position post-Webber.
2. Not trading Shareef Abdur-Rahim
6. Not trading Thomas
No one wants these guys. Please opt out Kenny.
4. Trading Bibby
Needed to happen. Hopefully Shelden will be a good roleplayer. An extra pick for Lue would have been nice.
5. Not trading Miller
I didn't hear anything except for him + Garcia for a bunch of Orlando's expirings and "best shooter in basketball history" JJ freakin' Redick. No thanks.
7. Releasing Justin Williams
He didn't really impress me. Whatever.
3. Not trading Artest
Eh. It depends.
I guess I'm mad at Geoff because I want to have some semblance of a plan. It honestly appears to me that our plan is for our bad contracts to expire and our few young players to become stars while we necessarily (because of the vet contracts) stay above the cap, stopping along the way to sign MLE FAs every other year or so. Perhaps in their last years Miller, KT and Reef will be traded as expirings, possibly bringing more salary. Ron and Kevin will be the leaders of the team.
If 3 or more of Garcia, Douby, Hawes, Shelden and our pick this year become great players, we'll contend. If not, we'll probably be between 35 and 45 wins.
This makes me want to see the other plan.
Fun last couple games though.
That is flat out wrong. It was only after Phillips (Bonzi's agent at the time) had made it abundantly clear Wells would NOT accept the offer on the table that Petrie moved on. It was NOT up to Petrie - or anyone else, for that matter - to try and get past Phillips to Bonzi to determine if, in fact, anything else was possible. Teams deal with agents. Period.
Bonzi later regretted listening to his flake agent but by that time it was TOO LATE. You may not agree with signing John Salmons but that's different than saying Salmons was chosen over Wells. The Wells ship had sailed and crashed on the rocks before Salmons was ever in the picture.
Bonzi later regretted listening to his flake agent but by that time it was TOO LATE. You may not agree with signing John Salmons but that's different than saying Salmons was chosen over Wells. The Wells ship had sailed and crashed on the rocks before Salmons was ever in the picture.
I beg to differ. What was predictable was nobody having the money to offer Bonzi what he wanted. We offered him a lot of money, he declined, and spent the rest of the summer getting no offers from anyone else. We gave Salmons the full MLE completely eliminating our ability to negotiate with Bonzi, not to mention creating a logjam at the SF/SG positions. I remember thinking at the time Salmons was signed "there goes Bonzi" and I know I'm not the only one who was doing the math and wondering where Bonzi was ever going to get the kind of money he wanted.
If Salmons was going to make the difference in us competing for a championship than it makes sense to jump on signing him but he's a journeyman player. Salmons has pretty much been exactly what he was expected to be so far, if you ask me. Yeah he can score but how does he fit on a winning team? Like the Mikki Moore signing it does more to ensure mediocrity than move us in any progressive direction.
If Salmons was going to make the difference in us competing for a championship than it makes sense to jump on signing him but he's a journeyman player. Salmons has pretty much been exactly what he was expected to be so far, if you ask me. Yeah he can score but how does he fit on a winning team? Like the Mikki Moore signing it does more to ensure mediocrity than move us in any progressive direction.
Beg to differ all you want - you are still wrong. Bonzi (OK, his agent working on his behalf) flat turned down more $$$ than anyone else would give him and we are supposed to just sit all summer waiting for him to change his mind? We already had missed out on getting other free agents waiting for Bonzi, and were LUCKY Salmons backed out of his deal and was there for us to pick up.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/4223357.html
Wells had been considered one of the summer's top free agents, particularly after an extraordinary performance in the Sacramento Kings' playoff series against the San Antonio Spurs. But when he turned down a five-year, $37 million offer from the Kings, they instead filled the roster spot with John Salmons and Wells quickly ran out of high-dollar options.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/04/13/what-went-wrong-for-bonzi-wells/
Bonzi Wells' recent troubles have allowed me to consider exactly how he went from the highs of his awesome playoff performance with Sacramento Kings last season, to the lows of his recent troubles with the Houston Rockets this season. The short answer: he had a terrible agent. I don't want to say terrible, because I don't know the guy personally. But Bonzi Wells' former agent broke rule number one of being an agent: In negotiations, never try to look out for yourself more than you look out for your client.
Wells, a player that had struggled to find a home over the years, had seemingly found one with the Kings. Last season, Wells had a break out playoffs, as the wing combination of he and Ron Artest proved to be difficult to defend. Or as Jeff Van Gundy put it: the pairing was advantageous to Wells because "he was guarded by two-guards there because (Ron) Artest was guarded by threes." Wells averaged 23 points and 12 boards over the Kings six game series against the San Antonio Spurs. Coming off of that performance, it seemed certain that the Kings and Wells would come to an agreement on a long term deal. That is, until the Phillips got overzealous and turned down the Kings five year, $36 million offer. After declining the offer, Phillips was quoted saying:
But of course, Wells was Phillips only major NBA client, and he was going to find a way to sign and trade broker a sign and trade deal with someone else. I mean that's what he'd seen successful agents like Arn Tellem and Aaron Goodwin do in the past with their clients, so I guess he thought he could get away with the same. The only difference is that unlike big time agents, Phillips didn't have other prominent clients, and thus really didn't have the influence with GMs to get such a deal done. The smart move was to take the Kings money and run. When Wells and his former agent hesitated, Kings GM Geoff Petrie went to plan B and signed free agent John Salmons. Now the Kings had no need for Wells, and with most of the teams either already out of their midlevel money or not willing to go over the luxury tax threshold to sign Wells it was obvious that Wells and Phillips had shot themselves in the foot.
http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14278&page=8
(and it's funny to read some comments there)
After 12 days of quiet for the Kings in the free agency period, they signed four-year small forward John Salmons on Monday.
The move means free agent shooting guard Bonzi Wells will not return. Wells and his agent, William Phillips, had been in negotiations to return since July 1.
http://dwb.sacbee.com/content/sports/story/14281358p-15089541c.html
After 12 days of quiet for the Kings in the free agency period, they signed four-year small forward John Salmons to a five-year, $25.5 million contract on Monday.
Kings president of basketball operations Geoff Petrie said the move means free agent shooting guard Bonzi Wells will not return. Wells and his agent, William Phillips, had been in negotiations to return since July 1, but Petrie said talks regarding the continuation of Wells' career with the Kings broke down 10 days ago. "It seemed clear that we just weren't going to get to that (financial) territory that (Wells and his agent, William Phillips) thought was necessary, and I told them that," Petrie said. "I said, 'It's just not going to happen, and we're going to have to go out and start being more aggressive, trying to find out what else we might be able to do.'"
*snip*
Even with Salmons' signing, Phillips said he was still pursuing a sign-and-trade deal through the Kings that could give Wells the money he so desires from another team and aid the Kings' cause with players in return. But within the past few days, word had spread that the talks between the Kings and Wells' representation were not going well and had perhaps ended. Wells, who was reportedly offered a five-year $36 million offer by the Kings at the start of negotiations, clearly wants a bigger payday than the Kings could offer. "The Kings never really improved their offer," Phillips said. "And quite frankly, we didn't believe it was fair."
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/4223357.html
Wells had been considered one of the summer's top free agents, particularly after an extraordinary performance in the Sacramento Kings' playoff series against the San Antonio Spurs. But when he turned down a five-year, $37 million offer from the Kings, they instead filled the roster spot with John Salmons and Wells quickly ran out of high-dollar options.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/04/13/what-went-wrong-for-bonzi-wells/
Wells, a player that had struggled to find a home over the years, had seemingly found one with the Kings. Last season, Wells had a break out playoffs, as the wing combination of he and Ron Artest proved to be difficult to defend. Or as Jeff Van Gundy put it: the pairing was advantageous to Wells because "he was guarded by two-guards there because (Ron) Artest was guarded by threes." Wells averaged 23 points and 12 boards over the Kings six game series against the San Antonio Spurs. Coming off of that performance, it seemed certain that the Kings and Wells would come to an agreement on a long term deal. That is, until the Phillips got overzealous and turned down the Kings five year, $36 million offer. After declining the offer, Phillips was quoted saying:
"We just didn't get to the number (Wells wanted)," said Phillips, not offering details. "I believe we can still get to that number."
According to published reports, Wells originally wanted Phillips to land him a $50 million deal. But even if that were the case, it was up to Phillips to advise Bonzi that he wasn't commanding that type of money on the open market, therefore the Kings weren't going to be dumb enough to overpay for him. And besides, similar playoff breakout performers such as Tim Thomas and Vlad Radmonovic were garnering the same type deals on the open market. As well, all the teams that wanted to sign Wells were over the cap (meaning they were only going to be able to sign him to a mid-level deal similar to the numbers the Kings were offering). That should have given Wells and Phillips all of the info they needed to know that the deal with the Kings was going to get no better. But of course, Wells was Phillips only major NBA client, and he was going to find a way to sign and trade broker a sign and trade deal with someone else. I mean that's what he'd seen successful agents like Arn Tellem and Aaron Goodwin do in the past with their clients, so I guess he thought he could get away with the same. The only difference is that unlike big time agents, Phillips didn't have other prominent clients, and thus really didn't have the influence with GMs to get such a deal done. The smart move was to take the Kings money and run. When Wells and his former agent hesitated, Kings GM Geoff Petrie went to plan B and signed free agent John Salmons. Now the Kings had no need for Wells, and with most of the teams either already out of their midlevel money or not willing to go over the luxury tax threshold to sign Wells it was obvious that Wells and Phillips had shot themselves in the foot.
http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14278&page=8
(and it's funny to read some comments there)
After 12 days of quiet for the Kings in the free agency period, they signed four-year small forward John Salmons on Monday.
The move means free agent shooting guard Bonzi Wells will not return. Wells and his agent, William Phillips, had been in negotiations to return since July 1.
http://dwb.sacbee.com/content/sports/story/14281358p-15089541c.html
After 12 days of quiet for the Kings in the free agency period, they signed four-year small forward John Salmons to a five-year, $25.5 million contract on Monday.
Kings president of basketball operations Geoff Petrie said the move means free agent shooting guard Bonzi Wells will not return. Wells and his agent, William Phillips, had been in negotiations to return since July 1, but Petrie said talks regarding the continuation of Wells' career with the Kings broke down 10 days ago. "It seemed clear that we just weren't going to get to that (financial) territory that (Wells and his agent, William Phillips) thought was necessary, and I told them that," Petrie said. "I said, 'It's just not going to happen, and we're going to have to go out and start being more aggressive, trying to find out what else we might be able to do.'"
*snip*
Even with Salmons' signing, Phillips said he was still pursuing a sign-and-trade deal through the Kings that could give Wells the money he so desires from another team and aid the Kings' cause with players in return. But within the past few days, word had spread that the talks between the Kings and Wells' representation were not going well and had perhaps ended. Wells, who was reportedly offered a five-year $36 million offer by the Kings at the start of negotiations, clearly wants a bigger payday than the Kings could offer. "The Kings never really improved their offer," Phillips said. "And quite frankly, we didn't believe it was fair."
Not true at all. From the Bee:
http://www.sacbee.com/100/story/718745.html
and from the Rocky Mountain News:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/feb/22/nuggets-near-deal-for-blazers-green/
Other teams DID want to make a deal for Artest, the Rockets and Nuggets for sure were investigating this. How do I know this other than "rumours"? Because it makes sense for each team based on the makeup of their roster and the fact that each is trying to keep up in a very rough playoff race in the west where the top contenders just went out and made huge deals.
It is true however that we will never know for 100% sure exactly what was being offered, and that does make a difference as to whether Petrie made the right decision or not. Still, the facts remain that our leverage to trade Artest will never be higher. In the days/weeks leading up to the trade deadline we saw several of the top teams in the west make major trades to help try to push them over the top to a championship. This left other playoff teams that will have to face teams like the Lakers or Mavericks wondering how they will keep up. Our only leverage this offseason will be having Artest's bird rights and being able to sign and trade him for more than the MLE, which still doesn't prevent him from walking away to a team well under the cap or deciding to go to a title contender for the MLE.
http://www.sacbee.com/100/story/718745.html
and from the Rocky Mountain News:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/feb/22/nuggets-near-deal-for-blazers-green/
Other teams DID want to make a deal for Artest, the Rockets and Nuggets for sure were investigating this. How do I know this other than "rumours"? Because it makes sense for each team based on the makeup of their roster and the fact that each is trying to keep up in a very rough playoff race in the west where the top contenders just went out and made huge deals.
It is true however that we will never know for 100% sure exactly what was being offered, and that does make a difference as to whether Petrie made the right decision or not. Still, the facts remain that our leverage to trade Artest will never be higher. In the days/weeks leading up to the trade deadline we saw several of the top teams in the west make major trades to help try to push them over the top to a championship. This left other playoff teams that will have to face teams like the Lakers or Mavericks wondering how they will keep up. Our only leverage this offseason will be having Artest's bird rights and being able to sign and trade him for more than the MLE, which still doesn't prevent him from walking away to a team well under the cap or deciding to go to a title contender for the MLE.
1. The Webber trade.
2. Leaving Gerald Wallace unprotected
3. Failing to rebuild the team from the ground up (IE: choosing to "rebuild on the fly")
4. Signing Mikki Moore
5. Signing John Salmons (Don't get me wrong Salmons is a decent player and probably worth about what he is making. Just not on this team, a rebuilding team has no need for someone like him coming off the bench making what he is making)
6. Not being able to get rid of Kenny Thomas
Ever since Webber got hurt Petrie has done next to nothing helpful to the team. Only thing he has done right since then is draft Kevin Martin, and I believe that was more dumb luck then skill.
2. Leaving Gerald Wallace unprotected
3. Failing to rebuild the team from the ground up (IE: choosing to "rebuild on the fly")
4. Signing Mikki Moore
5. Signing John Salmons (Don't get me wrong Salmons is a decent player and probably worth about what he is making. Just not on this team, a rebuilding team has no need for someone like him coming off the bench making what he is making)
6. Not being able to get rid of Kenny Thomas
Ever since Webber got hurt Petrie has done next to nothing helpful to the team. Only thing he has done right since then is draft Kevin Martin, and I believe that was more dumb luck then skill.
1. The Gerald Wallace Fiasco. I will always believe tenhis was a planned salary dump on our side. It is hard to fathom that Petrie was the one GM who did not understand the expansion draft.
2. The Job Barry trade. When Peja was hurt instead of coming back I think that we would have been better served by having the guy who led the league in 3pt% that year. And don't forget that pick that was included with Barry we could have had Kendrick Perkins, Barbosa or Josh Howard.
3. The Nick Anderson trade that precipitated the JB trade. Yes I do have a long memory.
4. Eric Mussleman. In retrospect I don't think any coach would have been worse. Even Whisenant would have hopefully lost 3 more games, then maybe we would have ended up with Durant.
5. Not getting anything out of the second round ever. For some reason 2nd rounders and Undrafted Rookies have a 2 year shelf life on this team. (Darius, Barnes, Williams, Price, etc.)
6. Signing marginal MLE players. No team ever gets better through the MLE. The only one that worked was Keon Clark and that was a 2 year deal and we had to get out of the 2nd year.
7. Lost opportunity. This was the year to try to win a championship with no clear favorite. Now I have to live with the Lakers being the Favorite.
2. The Job Barry trade. When Peja was hurt instead of coming back I think that we would have been better served by having the guy who led the league in 3pt% that year. And don't forget that pick that was included with Barry we could have had Kendrick Perkins, Barbosa or Josh Howard.
3. The Nick Anderson trade that precipitated the JB trade. Yes I do have a long memory.
4. Eric Mussleman. In retrospect I don't think any coach would have been worse. Even Whisenant would have hopefully lost 3 more games, then maybe we would have ended up with Durant.
5. Not getting anything out of the second round ever. For some reason 2nd rounders and Undrafted Rookies have a 2 year shelf life on this team. (Darius, Barnes, Williams, Price, etc.)
6. Signing marginal MLE players. No team ever gets better through the MLE. The only one that worked was Keon Clark and that was a 2 year deal and we had to get out of the 2nd year.
7. Lost opportunity. This was the year to try to win a championship with no clear favorite. Now I have to live with the Lakers being the Favorite.
He's Looking for a Fool
Here is ther Petrie MO:
(1) grab a player that you like, period. It doesn't matter what the circumstances, whether you're team is rebuilding or not, whether he is redundant or not, just grab him. See Miki Moore. See SAR. See Salmons. Underlying this penchant of his is the belief that you can leverage this asset into a bigger asset down the line. How? By finding a fool to trade with.
(2) Undervalue the draft. He's never traded up. He doesn't care about getting better draft position; that's evident from his quest for mediocrity (SAR and Miki) and his failure to instruct Muss and Theus to play the young guys over the old guys.
(3) Overvalue FA and trades.
(4) Trade for guys with baggage (Artest/Webber).
(5) A belief that there is always going to be some fool to bail either bail you out of your own foolishness - Artest - or to land you the whopper that can take you to promised land - Webber.
Simply put, I don't like his MO. First, he's running out of fools; every GM knows about Petrie. He's dealing with a more perfect market in that regard. Now Petrie is the fool who is left with Artest. Secondly, you never get a great FA. Good, yes. Great, no. Third, virtually the only way you get a great player is through the draft, but he undervalues the draft, so that doesn't look promising. Fourth, I can't stand getting guys with baggage. I don't believe they can take you to a championship, at least if they are part of the core. All in all, Petrie's MO will yield a good, maybe a very good team if he can find a fool, but it's very doubtful in my mind that his MO will ever yield a championship team.
Here is ther Petrie MO:
(1) grab a player that you like, period. It doesn't matter what the circumstances, whether you're team is rebuilding or not, whether he is redundant or not, just grab him. See Miki Moore. See SAR. See Salmons. Underlying this penchant of his is the belief that you can leverage this asset into a bigger asset down the line. How? By finding a fool to trade with.
(2) Undervalue the draft. He's never traded up. He doesn't care about getting better draft position; that's evident from his quest for mediocrity (SAR and Miki) and his failure to instruct Muss and Theus to play the young guys over the old guys.
(3) Overvalue FA and trades.
(4) Trade for guys with baggage (Artest/Webber).
(5) A belief that there is always going to be some fool to bail either bail you out of your own foolishness - Artest - or to land you the whopper that can take you to promised land - Webber.
Simply put, I don't like his MO. First, he's running out of fools; every GM knows about Petrie. He's dealing with a more perfect market in that regard. Now Petrie is the fool who is left with Artest. Secondly, you never get a great FA. Good, yes. Great, no. Third, virtually the only way you get a great player is through the draft, but he undervalues the draft, so that doesn't look promising. Fourth, I can't stand getting guys with baggage. I don't believe they can take you to a championship, at least if they are part of the core. All in all, Petrie's MO will yield a good, maybe a very good team if he can find a fool, but it's very doubtful in my mind that his MO will ever yield a championship team.
I think there are some grains of truth in this, but on the whole I don't really agree with you. I think Petrie's strategy, across the board, is to find value where others don't see it. He always looks for situations where a player, for whatever reason, is available cheaply or is overlooked or maligned. So this means:
1) he'll take on suspect characters (examples: Webber, Jason Williams, Vernon Maxwell, Artest) -- A team with only a couple of suspect characters rarely implodes, no matter how crazy they are. People tend to over-dramatize how much of a cancer one player can be. He's pushing this theory to the ultimate limit with Artest, one of the most volatile and disruptive characters on and off the court in the history of the game. But people undervalue these players because they're nervous about them.
2) he drafts against the grain (examples: Peja, Hedo, Martin, Garcia, Douby) -- he was one of the first to draft foreign players, then, when GMs got on that bandwagon he switched back to college players who were overlooked. He's always one step ahead on this.
3) he swoops in when deals are falling apart (examples: SAR, Salmons) -- another situation where a player might be undervalued because of the chaos surrounding a situation. We kind of lucked into these guys, and until he was injured, SAR was a bargain.
I think his greatest strength is that he really does find good values and he's a stellar talent evaluator. But what is problematic is that this is sort of a knee-jerk, opportunistic strategy that doesn't necessarily amount to an overarching vision. I think his MO is to kind of hang around on the edges of being competitive, hoping that his skill at finding value will result in things kicking up to the next level. I think he believes that if he hangs around long enough and makes more good moves than bad we'll be in a place to win.
But as you say, we're probably not going to find a dupe to give us another Chris Webber. I'm hopeful that the Bibby trade is a sign he's adapting his strategy to get us a free agent star by 2010. But we shall see.
1) he'll take on suspect characters (examples: Webber, Jason Williams, Vernon Maxwell, Artest) -- A team with only a couple of suspect characters rarely implodes, no matter how crazy they are. People tend to over-dramatize how much of a cancer one player can be. He's pushing this theory to the ultimate limit with Artest, one of the most volatile and disruptive characters on and off the court in the history of the game. But people undervalue these players because they're nervous about them.
2) he drafts against the grain (examples: Peja, Hedo, Martin, Garcia, Douby) -- he was one of the first to draft foreign players, then, when GMs got on that bandwagon he switched back to college players who were overlooked. He's always one step ahead on this.
3) he swoops in when deals are falling apart (examples: SAR, Salmons) -- another situation where a player might be undervalued because of the chaos surrounding a situation. We kind of lucked into these guys, and until he was injured, SAR was a bargain.
I think his greatest strength is that he really does find good values and he's a stellar talent evaluator. But what is problematic is that this is sort of a knee-jerk, opportunistic strategy that doesn't necessarily amount to an overarching vision. I think his MO is to kind of hang around on the edges of being competitive, hoping that his skill at finding value will result in things kicking up to the next level. I think he believes that if he hangs around long enough and makes more good moves than bad we'll be in a place to win.
But as you say, we're probably not going to find a dupe to give us another Chris Webber. I'm hopeful that the Bibby trade is a sign he's adapting his strategy to get us a free agent star by 2010. But we shall see.
I don't really see the disagreement. Yes, he is good at drafting - more's the pity that he doesn't acquire more #1s or ever trade up in the draft. Yes, he does find good values. Yes, he buys those good values regardless of the life cycle of the team (SAR & Miki on a team on the downhill slide) or whether there is a redundancy (Salmons). He reminds me more of a collector who will acquire anything to put in his living room as long as it as good deal, even though the end result is room full of "nice pieces" but still a hodgepodge with no design or purpose, hoping that someone will buy the right pieces and sell the right pieces so that eventually it all makes sense.
By far the biggest miss by Petrie has been the Webber trade - and not because Webber was so great after he left, but because of the ripple affect that the trade cause for the team.
I assume that because of that trade:
1) We have Kenny Thomas for two years after this summer
2) We signed SAR that next summer which we also have for another 2+ years
3) We signed Mikki Moore to fix the fact that KT AND SAR didn't work out and have him for a while
The grand total is 3 pieces that cost as much as Webber, can't play at a high level, are old, have no future with us, and are absolutely killing our cap for the next 2 and a half years. On top of this huge mistake he has not been able to find a way to fix the problem, which I blame him for less than creating the problem.
I appreciate that Petrie is a solid but not spectacular drafter and doesn't get duped into contracts like Rashard Lewis and caving in to Bonzi a couple of years ago. All in all though, that Webber decision just hosed up until 2010.
I assume that because of that trade:
1) We have Kenny Thomas for two years after this summer
2) We signed SAR that next summer which we also have for another 2+ years
3) We signed Mikki Moore to fix the fact that KT AND SAR didn't work out and have him for a while
The grand total is 3 pieces that cost as much as Webber, can't play at a high level, are old, have no future with us, and are absolutely killing our cap for the next 2 and a half years. On top of this huge mistake he has not been able to find a way to fix the problem, which I blame him for less than creating the problem.
I appreciate that Petrie is a solid but not spectacular drafter and doesn't get duped into contracts like Rashard Lewis and caving in to Bonzi a couple of years ago. All in all though, that Webber decision just hosed up until 2010.
I went back over some news and fan reactions about the acquisition of SAR. There was no mention of knees. There was mention that this was a bargain to get a guy who on average was a 19/8 player and an all star. The fan reaction was unanimously happy.
He was 29 and paid $5 mil or so. His prior year he was paid $14.6 million.
That's the way it was back then.
Addendum: Admittedly I didn't search the entire internet. There undoubtedly were people who said, dang, we got a 6'10" past all star capable of 20 points per game for $5 million a year
He was 29 and paid $5 mil or so. His prior year he was paid $14.6 million.
That's the way it was back then.
Addendum: Admittedly I didn't search the entire internet. There undoubtedly were people who said, dang, we got a 6'10" past all star capable of 20 points per game for $5 million a year
Last edited:
wait, what was the medical reason that jersey backed out of the deal, then?
They were unwilling to take on Shareef's salary because of knee surgery in 1993. They were afraid his knee would become arthritic. The question is then is the risk worth $5 million per year?
He was to get a 6 year contract for $38 million with the Nets So you are right as to the concerns. Kidd wanted him bad and the theory was that the Nets were gun shy because they had been burned by getting Mourning.
I think it is a typical Petrie move. Take a shot at getting a bargain that others won't touch. This didn't work although I would not be surprised if SAR played quite a bit for us next year. We can wait and see.
Last edited:
What I was reading at the time made it seem not the result of his medical history, but rather of the pre-signing physical exam given to him.
I don't know why/if our team doctor would have come to different conclusions. Maybe our doctor bungled it. Maybe our doctor said his knees were shot, but the FO didn't care. As is almost always the case with such things, we don't know for sure who is to blame. All we know is that it was a risky move that seems unlikely to end well.
I don't know why/if our team doctor would have come to different conclusions. Maybe our doctor bungled it. Maybe our doctor said his knees were shot, but the FO didn't care. As is almost always the case with such things, we don't know for sure who is to blame. All we know is that it was a risky move that seems unlikely to end well.
I was willing to give him a chance. I didn't think he was the superstar some were touting him to be but I didn't think he was going to be a total bust either. The main reason for some objections, IIRC, was the sudden appearance of some off-the-wall SAR fans who were proclaiming him to be the next Chris Webber.