Kings Inquire About Sessions

[Chupacabra]

Simple. Remember how Douby was going to play PG for us? Sometimes these things work out, sometimes they don't. Some posters here would rather play it safe.

As for saving up for a major star, it's hardly a sure thing that they'd want to come to Sac over someplace like Miami, LA or NYC. Some of us are feeling cautious in that regard, too, and wondering why we should wait, save up cap space, and put all of our hopes on a deal that might never happen. If we spend a little money prudently, we may be able to make the team quite a bit more attractive. Then, if we want to pursue a star, they might actually be interested. And, if they're not, we still have a better team.

I've read enough of your posts that I don't expect you to agree with any of the above at this stage, but surely you can understand it without agreeing. It's not that difficult to grasp.

While i dont think its as simple as likening Quincy Douby to Tyreke Evans, i can understand the idea of making the team more attractive in general. I also looked at all the contracts the Kings currently have and noticed after the 09-10 season both Kenny Thomas and SAR come off the books. With those two off the payroll there will be around 15mil to spend. I change my mind on acquiring Sessions. However, I would FULLY expect to to have Sessions come off the bench as point guard. I think the Idea of having to move Martin is silly.

 

[VF21]

SAR is off the books as far as his regular contract goes, if memory serves. We got relief because of the injury retirement clause. He's working for the Kings now in an assistant coach capacity.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Having followed Sessions from UNR till now, I'm one of his biggest fans. I started beating his drum a couple of months ago. Its just that now the whole scene is somewhat confusing. If that quote is true, then the Kings must have something else up their sleve.

I love Sessions game. He's a true point guard and he can play defense. Add into the mix that he's very young, and I can't find anything wrong with the picture, other than we already have three points guards on the team.

Hey, for all we know, the inquirys could have been made prior to the draft. Only the shadow knows....

I could care less about having a PG glut at this stage of our rebuilding; however, I do think it would be hard to have both Sessions and Tyreke on the court for a lot of minutes together as neither can shoot well from the outside. We'd be openly inviting some zone defenses. Pack the paint and don't lose sight of K-Mart.

 

[bajaden]

SAR is off the books as far as his regular contract goes, if memory serves. We got relief because of the injury retirement clause. He's working for the Kings now in an assistant coach capacity.

El Correcto!!

 

[fnordius]

We would have the toughest back court with Evans and Sessions, but where would our 3pt shooting come from? Just realized they both suck.. Clog the middle and you got our back court solved

How about a 3-man G rotation of Evans, Sessions and Martin? Sessions plays PG 2/3 of the time, Martin plays SG 2/3 of the time, and Evans splits his time between the two? Then we have everything we want at least some of the time, and Evans can try his hand at learning PG without being under extreme pressure. Coach can see which combinations work out best against what sort of matchups, and everybody not named Beno lives happily ever after.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

we just traded 4 sergio. i think we should hold what we have and see if it meshes. who knows, this combination might be better than trading. i actually like having martin next to reke. kevin's presence helps spread the defense and keep them honest. if we don't have solid 3 point threat, the defense will sag onto reke and eliminate his best asset which is breaking down the defense.

 

[Bricklayer]

we just traded 4 sergio. i think we should hold what we have and see if it meshes. who knows, this combination might be better than trading. i actually like having martin next to reke. kevin's presence helps spread the defense and keep them honest. if we don't have solid 3 point threat, the defense will sag onto reke and eliminate his best asset which is breaking down the defense.

The 3pt shooting is nice, but Cisco could provide that if that is all that matters. The concern with Evans/Martin is that the ballhandling has the potential to be awful, and the assistmaking pathetic. Generally I am assuming that Evans is the PG next year and we try to develop him there to take advnatage of his overwhelming size/strength advantage. But Sessions is a very interesting young player, and one perhaps interesitng enough to change the plan if you can get him for cheap. If you just look at his stats, he should have been the premiere PG in this free agency period, not Kidd, not Miller, this guy. As a starter last year he averaged 15.1pts 7.6ast 4.2reb 1.3stl, he's very young, and he's got solid size for a PG. If you could just trust those numbers to hold up, and to matter for a good team...would be quite tempting. Make an offer for him at the MLE, hope you do not get burned again, and potentially have a bargain for a long time. Meanwhile free up your best asset (Kevin) for a major trade at another position. If you trust those starting numbers (39 games) you would be foolish not to at elast examine the idea. talent on nthe cheap, and adjust the roster around the signing.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

How about a 3-man G rotation of Evans, Sessions and Martin? Sessions plays PG 2/3 of the time, Martin plays SG 2/3 of the time, and Evans splits his time between the two?

But...but...but...don't you know you can't have three guys split time at two positions without completely screwing up the rotation?

/sarcasm

 

[bajaden]

The 3pt shooting is nice, but Cisco could provide that if that is all that matters. The concern with Evans/Martin is that the ballhandling has the potential to be awful, and the assistmaking pathetic. Generally I am assuming that Evans is the PG next year and we try to develop him there to take advnatage of his overwhelming size/strength advantage. But Sessions is a very interesting young player, and one perhaps interesitng enough to change the plan if you can get him for cheap. If you just look at his stats, he should have been the premiere PG in this free agency period, not Kidd, not Miller, this guy. As a starter last year he averaged 15.1pts 7.6ast 4.2reb 1.3stl, he's very young, and he's got solid size for a PG. If you could just trust those numbers to hold up, and to matter for a good team...would be quite tempting. Make an offer for him at the MLE, hope you do not get burned again, and potentially have a bargain for a long time. Meanwhile free up your best asset (Kevin) for a major trade at another position. If you trust those starting numbers (39 games) you would be foolish not to at elast examine the idea. talent on nthe cheap, and adjust the roster around the signing.

Ditto that!

 

[AriesMar27]

sessions would be worth the gamble but having beno on the team is an issue. if we could somehow trade him to a third team and do a sign and trade for sessions instead of trading kevin that would be awesome. how much capspace do we have? 6 million? what teams might need a overpaid back up pg?

 

[Warhawk]

But...but...but...don't you know you can't have three guys split time at two positions without completely screwing up the rotation?

/sarcasm

Oh, no, you didn't......

 

[Sptsjunkie]

we just traded 4 sergio. i think we should hold what we have and see if it meshes. who knows, this combination might be better than trading. i actually like having martin next to reke. kevin's presence helps spread the defense and keep them honest. if we don't have solid 3 point threat, the defense will sag onto reke and eliminate his best asset which is breaking down the defense.

I wouldn't be too worried about Sergio. He's a low risk, high reward acquisition. If he thrives here that's great, but I wouldn't turn down the chance at a very promising young prospect just because he is on the roster.

 

[LPKingsFan]

sessions would be worth the gamble but having beno on the team is an issue. if we could somehow trade him to a third team and do a sign and trade for sessions instead of trading kevin that would be awesome. how much capspace do we have? 6 million? what teams might need a overpaid back up pg?

Actually, you could consider Beno's contract less of a problem if you can get a deal for Sessions. Having $12 committed to your point guard rotation isn't the end of the world--just pretend you are paying the starter $9 million and the backup $3 million

 

[gunks]

Haha, there you go!

Sessions has already had a 20/20 game and a triple double against the Lakers in his young career. Those are some flashes of potential right there.

Beno has.....averaged 15ppg one month like a year and a half ago?


I will be very happy if we end up with Sessions.

 

[rainmaker]

I would have no problem acquiring Sessions and bringing Tyreke off the bench as our 6th man. This wouldn't be a long term solution, but we would get a good idea of where we want to go with the Tyreke vs Martin situation. It would take some pressure off Tyreke, and if he looks like he could be a successful 2 guard, see what we can get for Kevin.

Personally, I believe Tyreke will be a fulltime 2 guard within 3 yrs. Not a knock on his pg potential, but I think he will have a higher nba ceiling as a 2 guard.

 

[Bricklayer]

I would have no problem acquiring Sessions and bringing Tyreke off the bench as our 6th man. This wouldn't be a long term solution, but we would get a good idea of where we want to go with the Tyreke vs Martin situation. It would take some pressure off Tyreke, and if he looks like he could be a successful 2 guard, see what we can get for Kevin.

Personally, I believe Tyreke will be a fulltime 2 guard within 3 yrs. Not a knock on his pg potential, but I think he will have a higher nba ceiling as a 2 guard.

I find Sessions intriguing, but I do find some irony to the Kings FINALLY, after half a decade of garbage philosophy, making a move to finally be bigger, tougher, stronger than opponents at a position, and the first perverse instinct of the fanbase is to give it away so we can get back to being undersized as quickly as possible.

 

[bajaden]

I find Sessions intriguing, but I do find some irony to the Kings FINALLY, after half a decade of garbage philosophy, making a move to finally be bigger, tougher, stronger than opponents at a position, and the first perverse instinct of the fanbase is to give it away so we can get back to being undersized as quickly as possible.

Well, I wouldn't call Sessions undersized at the point. He's just under 6'4" in shoes. However, I do get your point.

 

[rainmaker]

I find Sessions intriguing, but I do find some irony to the Kings FINALLY, after half a decade of garbage philosophy, making a move to finally be bigger, tougher, stronger than opponents at a position, and the first perverse instinct of the fanbase is to give it away so we can get back to being undersized as quickly as possible.

While I agree that we have made moves to become bigger and tougher, which I appreciate, I don't think potentially acquiring Sessions would change that philosophy. A backcourt of Sessions and Tyreke could be tougher and more physical in the future compared to a Tyreke/Martin backcourt.

With a Martin/Tyreke backcourt, I don't like Martin matching up defensively with other top 2 guards in the league. If Tyreke is assigned to defend other 2 guards, which I think he will part of the time, then Kevin will get beaten off the dribble repeatedly by pg's.

I'm excited to see what Tyreke and Martin will be able to do together, but ultimately I think a Sessions/Tyreke backcourt would be more physical, and better defensively.

 

[fnordius]

I find Sessions intriguing, but I do find some irony to the Kings FINALLY, after half a decade of garbage philosophy, making a move to finally be bigger, tougher, stronger than opponents at a position, and the first perverse instinct of the fanbase is to give it away so we can get back to being undersized as quickly as possible.

Forgetting somebody?

 

[Chupacabra]

I find Sessions intriguing, but I do find some irony to the Kings FINALLY, after half a decade of garbage philosophy, making a move to finally be bigger, tougher, stronger than opponents at a position, and the first perverse instinct of the fanbase is to give it away so we can get back to being undersized as quickly as possible.

Im right there with you. We finally have adequate-above average size at every position except for the 3spot.I dont think i like the idea of having a logjam at the point guard spot. Point guard is the most oversaturated position in the league in terms of talent. I think we might have a hard time moving 1 or 2 of them to another team if we acquire sessions.
Anywho, its no coincidence that the two teams that were in the finals had HUGE size in their starting lineups.

 

[bajaden]

Im right there with you. We finally have adequate-above average size at every position except for the 3spot.I dont think i like the idea of having a logjam at the point guard spot. Point guard is the most oversaturated position in the league in terms of talent. I think we might have a hard time moving 1 or 2 of them to another team if we acquire sessions.
Anywho, its no coincidence that the two teams that were in the finals had HUGE size in their starting lineups.

Oversaturated in terms of quanity, but not quality. I understand where your coming from. And to a certain extent, I agree. But if you think that you have a chance to aquire a point guard of the same ilk as Andre Miller, I believe you have to seriously think about it. Yeah, I happen to be a big Miller fan, and if you look at his record, he's been one of the most consistant pt guards in the league for some time now.

 

[Chupacabra]

^ Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Tony Parker,Steve Nash, Gilbert Arenas, Chauncey Billups, Jason Kidd,Allen Iverson, Baron Davis, Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo, Devin Harris, Nate Robinson, Jameer Nelson, Mike Bibby, Russell Westbrook, Raymond Felton, Andre Miller, TJ Ford... about 20 or so. All Quality players.

 

[HighTopKicks]

Im right there with you. We finally have adequate-above average size at every position except for the 3spot.I dont think i like the idea of having a logjam at the point guard spot. Point guard is the most oversaturated position in the league in terms of talent. I think we might have a hard time moving 1 or 2 of them to another team if we acquire sessions.
Anywho, its no coincidence that the two teams that were in the finals had HUGE size in their starting lineups.

Log jam at PG? First off Sergio is in the last yr of his rookie contract, so next yr is his QO year. If we have too much talent at the 1, we simply don't resign him. Reke is a combo who handles well enough to play PG. Plus it's his rookie season, so why push him into the starting role right away. Let the coaching staff work on improving his jumper before we send him into the hall of fame. Lastly, we have Beno who's a decent backup PG with a slightly overpriced contract.

If you can get a 20/10 starting PG for Mikki Moore type money you do it. Then you work out the rotation later. Also, I don't believe you can call Greene at 6'10 and 240 or Casspi at 6'9" and 230 undersized for 3's.

 

[Chupacabra]

^ Isnt Garcia the Starter? I still think its mandatory that the team with the previous worst record has to start their draft pick. Good to know about Sergio.

 

[bajaden]

^ Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Tony Parker,Steve Nash, Gilbert Arenas, Chauncey Billups, Jason Kidd,Allen Iverson, Baron Davis, Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo, Devin Harris, Nate Robinson, Jameer Nelson, Mike Bibby, Russell Westbrook, Raymond Felton, Andre Miller, TJ Ford... about 20 or so. All Quality players.

Well this is subjective. So your opinion of quality and mine are two different things. There are some guards that you listed that I would love to have on my team. The rest possibly not. Do all those listed have talent? Yes! But I wouldn't call all of them point guards that make their teammates better.

I'm not going to go through them one by one and get into endless arguments with whomever. Lets just say the I would list Paul, Williams, Harris, Rose, Rondo, Parker, Billups and maybe Nelson, who I think is a little overrated, as players I would to have running my team. In the second group, because of age I would list Nash, Kidd, and Miller, but knowing that their time is running out. Westbrook isn't really a point guard yet. He may eventually become one, but I wouldn't bet the house on it. I like Felton, but I wouldn't call him an upper tier point guard just yet. The rest are players that either, I simply don't like their game, or their too injury prone, or their too old.
Let me put it this way. If I had a free choice of this group of, Iverson, Kidd, Nash, Felton, Westbrook, Robinson, Davis, Arenas, Bibby, Ford, and Sessions. I would choose Sessions. Now I know a lot of people will think I'm crazy, and there's not doubt that perhaps some of these guys would have a more immediate impact on the team. But for the long term, I would prefer Sessions. Because thats how good I think he can be. The Kid is an assist machine, and more importantly, he hardly ever, ever turns the ball over. Something the Kings need.

Hey, I've been wrong as many times as I've been right. Well almost. Just my opinion..

 

[AriesMar27]

Well this is subjective. So your opinion of quality and mine are two different things. There are some guards that you listed that I would love to have on my team. The rest possibly not. Do all those listed have talent? Yes! But I wouldn't call all of them point guards that make their teammates better.

I'm not going to go through them one by one and get into endless arguments with whomever. Lets just say the I would list Paul, Williams, Harris, Rose, Rondo, Parker, Billups and maybe Nelson, who I think is a little overrated, as players I would to have running my team. In the second group, because of age I would list Nash, Kidd, and Miller, but knowing that their time is running out. Westbrook isn't really a point guard yet. He may eventually become one, but I wouldn't bet the house on it. I like Felton, but I wouldn't call him an upper tier point guard just yet. The rest are players that either, I simply don't like their game, or their too injury prone, or their too old.
Let me put it this way. If I had a free choice of this group of, Iverson, Kidd, Nash, Felton, Westbrook, Robinson, Davis, Arenas, Bibby, Ford, and Sessions. I would choose Sessions. Now I know a lot of people will think I'm crazy, and there's not doubt that perhaps some of these guys would have a more immediate impact on the team. But for the long term, I would prefer Sessions. Because thats how good I think he can be. The Kid is an assist machine, and more importantly, he hardly ever, ever turns the ball over. Something the Kings need.

Hey, I've been wrong as many times as I've been right. Well almost. Just my opinion..

i agree with you on this one 100%, if we had the choice; sessions would be the guy to pick. though i love tj ford's game he is injury prone like none other. oddly enough before the draft back when we all though that we were getting the number 1 pick; these were the types of threads that took over this site.

 

[fnordius]

I'm not going to go through them one by one and get into endless arguments with whomever.

And, accepting the list for purposes of argument, it's still a cinch to make an even larger list of SG or SF types, since those are pretty much everyone in the NBA between 6'3" and 6'8" who can make some baskets. I see the extremes (1, 5, and to a lesser extent, 4) as the harder positions to fill well, since they have additional major job requirements, and most NBA players don't meet them.

 

[HighTopKicks]

^ Isnt Garcia the Starter? I still think its mandatory that the team with the previous worst record has to start their draft pick. Good to know about Sergio.

New year, new coach, & new players so who starts is probably up in the air until after training camp. At 200lbs Cisco isn't exactly the heaviest SF but 6' 7" isn't exactly short for a SF.

 

[bajaden]

New year, new coach, & new players so who starts is probably up in the air until after training camp. At 200lbs Cisco isn't exactly the heaviest SF but 6' 7" isn't exactly short for a SF.

I would guess that the average height for a SF in the league is right around 6'7". Thirty-five or forty years ago, the two forward positions were almost interchangable. And although they're more defined today, I'm sensing a move back toward more flexability between the positions. Where one player can play 2 or sometimes 3 different positions.

 

[rhythmless]

Log jam at PG? First off Sergio is in the last yr of his rookie contract, so next yr is his QO year. If we have too much talent at the 1, we simply don't resign him. Reke is a combo who handles well enough to play PG. Plus it's his rookie season, so why push him into the starting role right away. Let the coaching staff work on improving his jumper before we send him into the hall of fame. Lastly, we have Beno who's a decent backup PG with a slightly overpriced contract.

If you can get a 20/10 starting PG for Mikki Moore type money you do it. Then you work out the rotation later. Also, I don't believe you can call Greene at 6'10 and 240 or Casspi at 6'9" and 230 undersized for 3's.

Who is this 20/10 pg you speak of? Do you know exactly what a 20/10 pg even is? CP3, Deron, and Nash... now wait for it... IN THE LAST DECADE. Please stop stat dropping random numbers that sound good and let's use some objective thinking before we annoint Ramon Sessions as not only an all star for the next decade, but someone who would be a shoo in for HOF. Seriously, that is what 20/10 means.