A
AriesMar27
Guest
MATT BARNES....... why? lol....
Zyphen said:Everyone you disagree with don't watch games, or aren't real fans, or have some disability. Except Bricklayer of course. I watched 2 Kings games. Heard 4 on Audio League Pass (good for multitasking when I need eyes for something else). I use PPStream for my video needs. No TV at college.
Zyphen said:Where did I leave SAR out of the equation? I'm saying we picked up SAR because we needed to fill in a gap that should have been taken care of through trades. We wouldn't have needed to. What depth? Corliss doesn't play, Skinner barely does, and KT is producing less than Songaila. Webber is playing 40 minutes a game. Songaila provided more than enough. Shoring up the backcourt was more important to me.
We don't know yet. So far both to end last year and to start this year it hasn't looked good. We will see in a few months. We agree on everything except what would and will happen. We will see if you were right.G_M said:The "trade" isn't even a year old. I think perhaps 35-40 games into the season and certainly after the trading deadline would be a better time to analyze the team.
I think the problem is everyone defines success in their own terms. Is Webber playing well right now...YES...absolutely. How long will it last?? Would you bet 60 million on him being a quality player for at least two more years? Apparently...the Maloofs weren't willing to take that chance.
Looking at players who have had similar procedures I would be willing to bet that forty or fifty games into the season things might not be the same. But it's really just speculation based on past performances. Let's see how he plays tonight after playing 44 minutes last night. Will the same people that post his 28point and 16 rebound nights come on the board and post his 4-18 and 4 rebound nights? I mean really what's the point. If Webber misses 20 or 30 games and Skinner and Thomas both play well later in the season is it successful then? How well do they have to play? What if they play well but the Kings stink?. What if Webber plays well but Philly sucks? What if Thomas and Corliss are traded before the deadline?
The problem for me as a PROPONENT of ridding the organization of Webber's contract is that I believed we would rebuild the team. That's just the nature of sports(except maybe the Yankees). Teams build toward a goal, make trades, draft players, and sign free agents to try to achieve that goal. Unfortuantely, the Kings fell short of the goal and now THAT team is gone! Not just Webber but DC, and I think most importantly Vlade. How long can you realistically expect the team to play at that level?
As a fan I can ride out the "tough" stretches if I know the they are builidng toward something special. I didn't feel that way with Webber as an injured franchise player making twenty million a year. The problem is I still don't feel that way.
VF21 said:Bull. First, I do not accuse people of not being "real fans" if they disagree with me. People can and do disagree with me all the time. What I do demand, however, if I'm going to continue to debate with someone is that they have a basis in fact for their opinions.
If you don't watch the games, you aren't going to be SEE as much as people who do. Just like I don't see as much by watching on TV as those who are actually in attendance. Should I get mad at Kingsgurl because she was able to see something IN PERSON that wasn't covered by a camera? If not, then why should you assume I'm picking on people if they aren't willing to accept that people who DO watch the games are able to give a different viewpoint and perspective than those who simply follow box scores or listen to ALP?
What you - and others who depend on media sources other than TV broadcasts - don't always know about is the things the commentators don't comment on...and there are a lot of those things. It's not your fault, but it's certainly not my fault either, that you may not know about something because you didn't SEE it. And simply because you didn't hear it commented upon doesn't mean it didn't happen.
What Kevin Martin ALWAYS brings to the court is hustle. The young man is always moving, gets up and down the court incredibly well, and is NOT afraid to take a charge (something I wish I could say about some of our starters).
Zyphen said:I was in favor of the Webber trade with the caveat that we'll do something in the offseason with the pieces we got in return. Instead we stayed put and let players slip away for nothing, used our mid-level to plug a hole (albeit pretty effectively), and addressed none of our problems through signings.
nbrans said:Hmm... KT is producing less than Songaila? Songaila is playing 16 minutes and is averaging all of 3.9 points and 2.6 rebounds. He's had the opportunity to start and has been a major disappointment. KT has been playing poorly (for him) and still managed to average 5.3 and 4.3 in 15 minutes. Not exactly the stuff of legends, but he's an improvement over Songaila.
The backcourt is in fine shape. Hart showed some real promise last night and he deserves some time to get acclimated. (Don't forget the horrific start Bobby Jackson got off to last year.) And I'm with VF21. If you can't watch the games then you're probably not going to appreciate Kevin Martin. He's making solid decisions, playing good defense and not trying to force things too mcuh. He's not spectacular, but he's solid and will hopefully get better.
Zyphen said:No, you just assume that I don't see that and it never occurs to you that I do and still say he sucks. Mark Madsen has the same hustle. He sucks. Hustle is great but only gets you so much. Unless Martin has some conspiracy to only show his superhuman self when I'm not watching, I am comfortable with my assessment. It's possible that someone watching the same game will disagree with you. Get over yourself.
So are you saying you think our problems in the frontcourt have gotten better this year? Rebounding, interior D, ect.nbrans said:I know what you're saying and agree it's frustrating, I just think we traded our problems in the frontcourt for problems in the backcourt.
KP said:So are you saying you think our problems in the frontcourt have gotten better this year? Rebounding, interior D, ect.
Miller has to grab more boards. I think a wash would be a good description though I would tend to say they are maybe even a little worse in those areas, unless those improvements we are hoping for happen.nbrans said:At the worst I think it's a wash, and yeah, I think they've gotten slightly better. I think people have forgotten just how weak the Kings were up front at the beginning of last year. Songaila was a terrible rebounder and a poor defender, and he was basically the only guy coming off the bench. SAR gives up some size and is not quite the rebounder that Webber is, but he's a mobile help defender and a solid post defender. Miller is not the Miller of last year, which accounts for a lot of the rebounding deficiencies, but I'm hoping he'll recover. Skinner is an improvement over Ostertag in quickness and rebounding. And KT is a big improvement in defense and rebounding over Songaila. So overall, yes, even though the rebounding has suffered I think the defense is better. If Miller starts rebounding more I think it will be a clearer improvement.
VF21 said:tsa - Martin is a work in progress, just as Francisco Garcia is - all the hype not withstanding.
Both make a lot of mistakes, but hopefully BOTH will learn from those mistakes because they do have a lot going for them. If people don't believe that, fine... no skin off my nose.
I know what I see, both on TV and at the games and before them. Apparently my opinion isn't enough for Zyphen and that's cool. I just don't like seeing ANY player on the Kings bashed. Criticizing Martin is perfectly valid; Bricklayer has done a lot of it as have a lot of others. The blanket statements about dislike, however, just don't sit well. He's part of our team, just like Peja, just like Corliss, just like Sampson. Bashing our own just doesn't feel right...
But you and I have managed to butt heads innumerable times over this and we still exchange comments/opinions.
Peace to all...
Zyphen said:Anyways, I guess my point was that we blew our chance in the offseason and every day that passes becomes diminishing returns on whatever grand deal that will hopefully come in the future. It's harder to get quality trades mid-season and we can't implant doubt about the worth of our scrubs. I think the trade is so far a failure and its salveagability (hmm, probably not a word) lessens in value by the week. We're dependent on some team blowing up to get something good during the season. I think we'll have to wait to get that stud (*cough* Paul Pierce *cough*) next offseason or by showcasing scrubs at the expense of the team. Superstars demanding trades isn't that frequent an occurence.
I like our chances with Webber through one more year than the 3 guys we got who somehow survived the offseason. It's like we used a "late day" basically (college analogy). We lost a letter grade and the most we can get now is a "B" instead of that "A" if we turned in our stuff in the summer.
26, 11, and 4 on 12-19 shooting. Man he is washed up.G_M said:Let's see how he plays tonight after playing 44 minutes last night.
SacTownKid said:Webber is shooting 43% for the season. That is not good. Still a great player, and of course we got the short end of the stick talent wise.
I think this is a dumb issue. If the Sixers lose 5 in a row the reports are going to be, "Goeff Petrie is a genious for unloading Chris Webber!".
Give me a break.
But if Webber is still averaging 20 and 10 and the 3 scrubs are averaging a fraction of Webb's average, COMBINED. I would still think it was a ****** up trade.SacTownKid said:If the Sixers lose 5 in a row the reports are going to be, "Goeff Petrie is a genious for unloading Chris Webber!". Give me a break.
The knock on Webber (in the media, fans, etc.) hasn't been that he could get his 20 and 10 but that in the process he had to take too many shots to do it.VF21 said:43% shooting AND averaging close to 20/10/5 (I didn't check so I suspect the assist number might be lower, considering his different role in Cheeks' offense). The shooting % alone doesn't mean squat. You need to consider it within the whole scheme of things...
It's not a dumb issue. Let's say you have a race horse, an expensive race horse. He breaks his leg and MANY say he'll never run again. Your trainer says to have faith. You wait for him to partially heal and then enter him in some races. He doesn't win but he does pretty well. Still, he's a very expensive horse. So, you decide to get rid of him - telling yourself it's for the best, that he's washed up anyway and that you'll be lucky to break even on his cost.
The next year, the horse is fully healed and he starts winning races. Lots of races. Pretty soon, he's back to winning the same number of races he did before. Some people look at you and shake their heads, wondering why you didn't have a little more faith and patience...
The subject isn't going to go away for a very long time, if ever. And people are forever going to argue/debate/discuss about what really led to the trade, who made the ultimate decision to pull the trigger, and whether or not they've done any second guessing about it.
We - the fans - will most likely never know the whole story.