is rahim a dissapointment?
- Thread starter tyrant
- Start date
News bulletin:
Local basketball historians have discovered a startling fact about the Sacramento Kings. They actually existed and did quite well before the arrival of Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Reports coming out of the Standford Research Institute, while still under wraps, are revealing that it is highly possible the Sacramento Kings will also exist and probably do well at some point in the future with or without Shareef Abdur-Rahim.
...end of bulletin...
Local basketball historians have discovered a startling fact about the Sacramento Kings. They actually existed and did quite well before the arrival of Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Reports coming out of the Standford Research Institute, while still under wraps, are revealing that it is highly possible the Sacramento Kings will also exist and probably do well at some point in the future with or without Shareef Abdur-Rahim.
...end of bulletin...
Did Shareef PAY you to stick up for him no matter what? You're acting like he owns the team and he's the master and the rest of the players are the disaster. You get mad every time someone even says something half way negative about him and it's getting old. Maybe people have said negative things about him for a reason? Maybe his teams have lost consistently for a reason? What is so bad about saying the Sacramento Shareef?
D
That is about all I need to read to get the underlying gist of your completely biased posts. You're wanting to give all this credit to SAR and place all the blame on everybody else, which is totally ridiculous. How can anybody give SAR much credit for anything? What has he ever really accomplished? I'm not saying he's to blame for all the poor teams he's played for, but you better believe that he contributed his fair share to their losing.
You're trying to compare him to Brand before this season and Webber before he came to Sacramento which is laughable. Those two players are true PFs in which you could build a team around. Just because Brand never made the playoffs, everybody knows he is a legit all-star, which is more than I can say for SAR.
He's a nice player but by no means a first or second option. He doesn't have a big enough inside presence or rebound well enough to play PF, nor is he quick enough or shoot well enough to play SF. Tweeners belong coming off the bench; he could make an excellent 6th man and there is no shame in that, and that is why he is getting paid the MLE. To think that the Kings should build around him and add players that compliment his skills is so ridiculous and outrageous.
KT is also a tweener, but apparently he plays better as a starter, so I think for now it is wise to keep him starting and bring SAR off the bench when he comes back. Plus KT is a better rebounder which is something the Kings sorely need, hell I wouldn't even be opposed to starting Skinner at the PF.
You're trying to compare him to Brand before this season and Webber before he came to Sacramento which is laughable. Those two players are true PFs in which you could build a team around. Just because Brand never made the playoffs, everybody knows he is a legit all-star, which is more than I can say for SAR.
He's a nice player but by no means a first or second option. He doesn't have a big enough inside presence or rebound well enough to play PF, nor is he quick enough or shoot well enough to play SF. Tweeners belong coming off the bench; he could make an excellent 6th man and there is no shame in that, and that is why he is getting paid the MLE. To think that the Kings should build around him and add players that compliment his skills is so ridiculous and outrageous.
KT is also a tweener, but apparently he plays better as a starter, so I think for now it is wise to keep him starting and bring SAR off the bench when he comes back. Plus KT is a better rebounder which is something the Kings sorely need, hell I wouldn't even be opposed to starting Skinner at the PF.
Last edited by a moderator:
