John Salmons

[VF21]

We will agree to disagree, Slim. I'm not ready to throw in the towel and let Garcia have major minutes on the assumption we're dead in the water anyway...

It's not about Jackson, Hedo or Wallace. It's not about the Kings having a history of not giving time to young players. You are, IMHO, making this way too complicated.

What it is really about is Garcia not learning the lessons he needs to learn. When he's put on the court, he's supposed to do certain things. When he does them, he's rewarded with more minutes. When he doesn't or when he does stuff he's not supposed to do like committing multiple fouls in very short periods of time, he's going to be pulled back out.

As far as your comment about players having a history of going elsewhere and blossoming, I can only think of ONE player that actually fits that description.

You and I do not see this from anything close to the same perspective. So, my friend, I will respectfully agree that we disagree and leave it at that.

Merry Christmas.

 

[Kingzrool]

I am glad GP picked Salmons up. Think he is overpriced, what if Bonzi had accepted GP's second offer (or first for that matter), than we would really be hearing some crying. I see this as a move where GP truly showed all the naysayers.

 

[KINGSFAN-FROM-L.A.]

how is salmons a more pollished version of garcia??? they play nothing alike... the only thing that they have in common is that they can play the same position... true it is kind of redundant to have both of them because of the fact that we have like 3 or 4 sf's but to say that salmons is a more polished version of garcia is beyond me.

 

[cfechter]

After having read VF's comments on John Salmons, I just have a few comments of my own.

I hated his signing when it happened because I thought there would be players who would be just as good available for much less money. While it's only 1/4 of the way through the season, and while it's also easy to praise a player who just had a triple double, I think Salmons' first 20 games are much better than what I expected as a whole. He certainly has lived up to his contract, if nothing else. This signing also affirms what I always say when talking about the kings: "In Petrie we trust!"

 

[PieceOfStrange]

Salmons is better right now, but based on the signs that I've seen from Garcia's play, I still think that he has more upside. T

What exactly has Garcia done to show more upside? Salmons is "hands down" a better player, it is not even up for debate.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

What exactly has Garcia done to show more upside?

Salmons' strentghs are defense and passing. Garcia is longer and quicker, and has better court vision.

I really don't see what's so hard to understand: their games ARE similar. They share the same strengths: they're each good at what the other guy is best at, it's just that Salmons is much more experienced, and much more ready to contribute right now. Their career numbers are virtually identical; in fact, Garcia's numbers right now are right where Salmons' numbers were at before he started to get playing time.

Salmons is "hands down" a better player, it is not even up for debate.

It wasn't up for debate in the first place. Salmons is a better player... but that's only true right now. And sure, right now it seems like a no-brainer to play the more polished and experienced Salmons over Garcia... just like it was a no-brainer to play Rasheed Wallace over Jermaine O'Neal... just like it was a no-brainer to play Ray Allen over Michael Redd... hell, just like, at the beginning of last season, it was a no-brainer to play Bonzi Wells over Kevin Martin.

I think that, when both their careers are over, Garcia is going to turn out to be better than Salmons. But, you know what? Even if it turns out that he's only "just as good," but does it somewhere else, then it's still a bad move, because that'll mean that we spent $25M and wasted Salmons' prime on a bad team, while simultaneously mortgaging away the future of one our own.

 

[Wheeler03]

On this point I must agree with VF21. IMO there is simply no comparison as to who is the better fit for this years Kings team. John Salmons brings many assets which we are in dire need of having. First, when he forces shots he is usually attacking the rim. Lately, most of his shots have been within the 7-10 foot range. This is something we despereatly need, especially when Reef is not on the floor. Outside of SAR, Salmons is the only King capable of getting consistent and quality shots in the paint. He seems more than capable of posting up most off-guards in the league. And the more quality shots the Kings can get the better off they will be. I know most people on the board disagree with my reasoning, but the Kings will not succeed if they rely on jumpers. Furthermore, if we must take jumpshot after jumpshot, we should atleast dump into the post and take the jumper after the ball is kicked out. Shooting percentages are much, much higher under this offensive philosophy.

 

[kingsfan101]

I know most people on the board disagree with my reasoning, but the Kings will not succeed if they rely on jumpers.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The point Slim is making is that by signing Salmons, we are slowing Cisco's growth. Since we are not competing for a championship, it makes more sense to develop a young guy like Cisco. Based on his game itself, Salmons has quieted many doubters who thought he was overpaid at the beginning of the season (myself included).

Regarding the move to sign him, the recent statement from Petrie was the first I have heard that rebuilding from scratch can be considered. So far, at least the feeling I got was that the aim was to remain competitive and make the playoffs. Given the arena vote, doubt the owners would have wanted a very shoddy product on the floor, and Salmons signing fit in with that.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

On this point I must agree with VF21. IMO there is simply no comparison as to who is the better fit for this years Kings team. John Salmons brings many assets which we are in dire need of having...

:: sighs ::

People keep bringing this up as though I've been arguing against this point, and I haven't. Yeah, Salmons is the better fit for this year's Kings team, but it's not a question, in my mind, of who's the better fit in 2006-07, it's more of a question of who's the better fit in 2011-12. This team isn't going anywhere this year, no matter how optimistic we want to be. And, five years from now, Salmons' contract will be up, and Garcia could very well be doing what Salmons is doing for us now with another team.

If it turns out that way (and, for some reason, I have a sinking suspicion that it will), I'd have rather kept Garcia; I'm sick of watching our young players go elsewhere and become better.

 

[VF21]

:: sighs ::

People keep bringing this up as though I've been arguing against this point, and I haven't. Yeah, Salmons is the better fit for this year's Kings team, but it's not a question, in my mind, of who's the better fit in 2006-07, it's more of a question of who's the better fit in 2011-12. This team isn't going anywhere this year, no matter how optimistic we want to be. And, five years from now, Salmons' contract will be up, and Garcia could very well be doing what Salmons is doing for us now with another team.

If it turns out that way (and, for some reason, I have a sinking suspicion that it will), I'd have rather kept Garcia; I'm sick of watching our young players go elsewhere and become better.

I can only think of one that we shouldn't have let go. I know how you feel about Gerald Wallace, though, so I don't think we need to discuss him again...

Trades happen all the time; Hedo was part of the deal that brought us Miller. Who am I forgetting about that has made such a big impact somewhere else?

If Salmons continues to do well, and Petrie and Co. still feel there is enough potential to keep and develop Garcia, he - Salmons - has trade value.

 

[BigWaxer]

This is going to be harsh but...

I still have no like for Salmons and his game.

Actually maybe I need to seperate the two. So far he is showing to be a nice role player... However we have 13 role players right now, so not really Salmons fault. So far so good for him, just something about him I do not like.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I can only think of one that we shouldn't have let go. I know how you feel about Gerald Wallace, though, so I don't think we need to discuss him again...

That's one...

Trades happen all the time; Hedo was part of the deal that brought us Miller...

Looking back at that trade in hindsight, I'd have rather kept Teko. That's two...

Who am I forgetting about that has made such a big impact somewhere else?

Do you dispute that Williams made an impact in Memphis? He might not have been their star, but he certainly had something to do with their turnaround. That's three, by my count.

And you know what? Let's just suppose it had been only one... why isn't one enough? If Wells hadn't pulled his groin last year, we could very well be faced with the possibility of losing Martin, too.

If Salmons continues to do well, and Petrie and Co. still feel there is enough potential to keep and develop Garcia, he - Salmons - has trade value.

I think you have too much faith in this organization to develop young players... they're not even willing to admit that they're rebuilding yet...

 

[VF21]

You have the luxury of looking back in hindsight, but that doesn't make keeping Hedo any more logical now than it did then. We had Peja; Hedo was never going to get the time he needed to flourish. In moving him, we got the center we figured to use post-Divac. So, sorry, but that's not two. We're still at one...

Jason Williams was pretty much out of control in Sacramento. He was at least a couple of years away from being the point guard we would need to make our run for the title. Look at the results of the 02-03 and 03-04 Kings. We made a good trade to bring Bibby in as our floor general. Had things gone just a little differently we would have been celebrating. So, we're still at one.

I'm not even going to address the "possibility of losing Martin"... that one has nothing going for it. And just because the fan base hadn't seen what Kevin was capable of, you have to remember that Petrie drafted him for a reason.

I think you have too jaded a view. And to whom are they supposed to announce this rebuilding? If you read the Voisin article, there's a pretty telling quote from Petrie.

 

[SacKings384]

I'd have liked to keep Mo Evans... But I guess at this points beggars can't be choosers.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You have the luxury of looking back in hindsight, but that doesn't make keeping Hedo any more logical now than it did then. We had Peja; Hedo was never going to get the time he needed to flourish. In moving him, we got the center we figured to use post-Divac. So, sorry, but that's not two. We're still at one...

Two. We'd have been better off with Turkoglu than with Stojakovic... you don't think that we could have gotten a better deal with Stojakovic and Pollard than with Turkoglu and Pollard? We probably could have gotten Miller and somebody else and/or draft options.

Jason Williams was pretty much out of control in Sacramento. He was at least a couple of years away from being the point guard we would need to make our run for the title. Look at the results of the 02-03 and 03-04 Kings. We made a good trade to bring Bibby in as our floor general. Had things gone just a little differently we would have been celebrating. So, we're still at one.

Three. I never said that it was a bad trade, I said that he got better playing for Memphis, and that he was a part of their turnaround. I said that I'm sick of watching our young players get better elsewhere, which is exactly what he did. Not only that, but without Webber, that trade doesn't look like the no-brainer that it did at the time.

I'm not even going to address the "possibility of losing Martin"... that one has nothing going for it. And just because the fan base hadn't seen what Kevin was capable of, you have to remember that Petrie drafted him for a reason.

Petrie allegedly drafts all these guys for a "reason." He drafted Garcia for a "reason," too... hell, he even drafted Douby for a "reason." But bad luck for Wells turned into good luck for Martin, and he was given the chance to prove his worth. Garcia, by comparison... hasn't.

I think you have too jaded a view. And to whom are they supposed to announce this rebuilding? If you read the Voisin article, there's a pretty telling quote from Petrie.

I read Voisin's article; what it told me was that Petrie still thinks that this team can win, and he's going to keep tinkering with it until we reach some undetermined "zero barrier" when he finally realizes that it ain't working, and only THEN will he commit to a rebuild... that might be by the trade deadline, or it might not be until a season or two from now... and what will Garcia be worth to us then?

 

[Kingzrool]

But bad luck for Wells turned into good luck for Martin, and he was given the chance to prove his worth. Garcia, by comparison... hasn't.

I know you are not saying that if given the chance, Garcia would shine like Martin has, are you?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Maybe he would, and maybe he wouldn't... do you have an intelligent argument to explain why you don't seem to think that there's any way he could? Fifteen posts ago, you were praising Petrie's alleged brilliance... am I supposed to believe that the "genius" that drafted Martin and signed Salmons just flat-out dropped the ball on Garcia?

Because, if he didn't, and this guy goes and develops elsewhere, how is that not a bad move?

 

[Kingzrool]

Maybe he would, and maybe he wouldn't... do you have an intelligent argument to explain why you don't seem to think that there's any way he could? Fifteen posts ago, you were praising Petrie's alleged brilliance... am I supposed to believe that the "genius" that drafted Martin and signed Salmons just flat-out dropped the ball on Garcia?

Because, if he didn't, and this guy goes and develops elsewhere, how is that not a bad move?

Not saying that GP was not onto something with Garcia, I agree with your assesment of him and we all saw some great play from him late last year. Does not mean that I think he will ever be as great as Martin is right now much less will be. Just looking for clarification and your "Maybe" answers my question.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Not saying that GP was not onto something with Garcia, I agree with your assesment of him and we all saw some great play from him late last year. Does not mean that I think he will ever be as great as Martin is right now much less will be. Just looking for clarification and your "Maybe" answers my question.

The issue isn't whether or not Garcia will ever be as good as Martin, it's whether or not he'll ever be as good as Salmons. I contend that he will be. And, if I'm right, then signing Salmons and thereby forfeiting the opportunity to develop Garcia in a Kings uniform will be a bad move.

 

[Kingzrool]

The issue isn't whether or not Garcia will ever be as good as Martin, it's whether or not he'll ever be as good as Salmons. I contend that he will be. And, if I'm right, then signing Salmons and thereby forfeiting the opportunity to develop Garcia in a Kings uniform will be a bad move.

I see how that makes sense, but GP has clearly stated that he is still attempting to put together a playoff team, hence the move to get Salmons. GP and the Maloofs are obviously not ready to go into complete rebuilding mode. If they gave Garcia time to improve that would certainly do well for our lottery chances. We can only guess, but I think Salmons still has growth potential and thus will end up with a better overall career then Garcia.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I see how that makes sense, but GP has clearly stated that he is still attempting to put together a playoff team, hence the move to get Salmons. GP and the Maloofs are obviously not ready to go into complete rebuilding mode...

Then they are clearly misguided, and obviously wrong.

... We can only guess, but I think Salmons still has growth potential and thus will end up with a better overall career then Garcia.

And we most certainly disagree there; I honestly believe that Salmons is as good right now as he's ever going to get.

 

[BigSong]

the bright side is that Salmons has appeared to improve over the course of his career, the not so bright side is that hes really inconsistent. So if he improves on his consistency hell improve as a player. Im not sure where the argument here is, theyre both about the same age, so we should barring any trades be able to keep these guys for the majority of their "quality" years.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

They're two years apart; two years is a LONG time in professional sports. In my estimation, this team isn't going to be competitive for anything worthwhile for at least another four years; in four years, Garcia will be twenty-nine, and still in his physical prime, whereas Salmons will be thirty-one and, based on trends, most likely on his way down.

 

[loopymitch]

I was happy when we got Salmons and I still am. I knew once he got away from that ballhog he'd be productive for us.

 

[rumpled]

Weird I thought this thread was going to be about Salmon's triple double. Great signing, that Salmons. Looking like a 6th man of year type (not that we'd be in the running for any kind of award of course) candidate to me and 5 million a year or whatever isn't a bad deal to lock up a very useful player.

I keep hearing Cisco could do this or that but to me its all fantasy, the reality is that Cisco doesn't help the team enough to be worth having on the floor, in the games I've seen anyway. He may have this or that skillset but doesn't seem to be able to translate his talents into effective NBA minutes, and that's the bottom line. It's not impossible he could someday turn into a decent bench player but I don't really mind giving up on him because I personally think that's about his ceiling, he _might_ one day become a poor man's John Salmons.

It's not an issue to me if it turns out we whiffed on the Cisco pick either. It happens, most of the guys drafted wash out eventually. It's not at all the same as a Gerald or a Hedo, both those guys showed all the signs out there of developing into a Gerald and a Hedo, respectively. Cisco shows me all the signs of maybe being a decent garbage-time guy someday. Nothing against him, and I hope I'm wrong. But everyone is so in love with the magic of potential these days that they ignore the reality of the situation, which is that there's no point even comparing Cisco to Salmons at this point in their careers. Cisco is still just potential and Salmons is solid NBA minutes.

Go Salmons go!

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

The insistence by some fans for instant gratification is utterly depressing.

 

[VF21]

As is the need for some fans to always find the dark lining to even the smallest silver cloud...



Come on, Slim. Fans have a right to find something to rejoice about. Lately this place has made a morgue look giddy in comparison. Some fans don't always want to look at the big picture. They want to be able to find something to celebrate. A reason to dig deep into their pockets and pull out enough money for those tickets to a game...

Merry Christmas.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I fail to see why being satisfied with Salmons' play and wanting to develop Salmons have to be mutually exclusive. I mean, it seems that they are, but I don't know why.

 

[AriesMar27]

if petrie trades artest for a young big we wouldnt be arguing about this.... i love artest but damn... garcia could be a great roleplayer for the kings... kinda like how luke walton is on the lakers... he doesnt dominate but he gets good numbers really easily....

 

[Kingzrool]

I fail to see why being satisfied with Salmons' play and wanting to develop Salmons have to be mutually exclusive. I mean, it seems that they are, but I don't know why.

Did you mean Garcia?

I thought you were dissing the Salmons pick up because Garcia does not get enough time to develop.