Kings roster:

[SacTownKid]

So let me get this straight. Your saying that if the Kings wanted Sergio they shouldn't have tried to snuker the Blazers. They should have been upfront about it and passed up the extra 1.2 mil and just made a trade for him.

If the Kings really were after Sergio, and history tells us that Petrie tried to aquire him before, and they were able to get the player they wanted plus 1.2 mil, I would think you would applaud the Kings for finally getting the better end of a deal.

Did they? That's the question. The only comparison player wise you can attach to the deal is the value of the talent available at 31 in relation to what the Kings eventually got. I like both Sergio and Brockman so I'm OK with the end result but a serious argument could be made that players like Sam Young, DeJuan Blair, DaJuan Summers, etc. would have been a tremendous addition in terms of talent and upside to this roster. If the Blazers could have traded Sergio for a better package, they would have, hence the only value you can attach to him is what he was traded for. The 1.2 million is great and all, but it does nothing to help this team cap wise, nor does it have any real tangible value. In fact trading for Sergio cut into the Kings potential cap space by about 2 million. That took the cap space to make a potential blockbuster trade at the deadline from about 7 million to 5 million, that's barely MLE level money right there.

 

[Kingster]

Well then they better START Beno and hope to heck he plays better than last year because I can tell you, if he's Evans' backup, he only gets traded if it's for a longer contract.

Don't be ridiculous and talk about starting Beno because you want to trade him. Evans starts, Sergio backs up, and Beno is Kenny Thomas II. Either that or he gets shipped out of here. Beno is a proven player - a proven losing player.

 

[HighTopKicks]

If Sergio commanded that kind of value on the Kings end the Blazers wouldn't have paid the Kings 1.1+ million more than his contract just to take him. Just doesn't really seem like a highly coveted player to me. I'm sure Geoff liked him, but for that kind of money why wouldn't he take him? The Kings had the space to facilitate the trade and were looking for cash and some talent return.

Portland didn't have a empty roster spot. They needed to move someone. They wanted Pendergraph so they gave the Kings someone we had had interest in the past. But, to make the deal, Portland had to make up the difference between what Sergio makes and what a 2nd round pick makes. So, they threw in some cash. Now that makes the trade equal money wise, but they had to thrown in their 2nd round pick to get the Kings to move down.

There's nothing out of the ordinary with the trade. The Kings got the pass first PG that they wanted. Now, if none of the players picked ahead of Brockman in the 2nd round ends up having a better career, than GP made one of his better trades. If either Pendergraph, Young, Summers or Blair turns into an all-star, then GP record as a shrewd judge of talent goes down in flames. As does his reputation as a great GM.

We'll know in two years which way it goes, or maybe sooner.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

If either Pendergraph, Young, Summers or Blair turns into an all-star, then GP record as a shrewd judge of talent goes down in flames. As does his reputation as a great GM.

Wait, seriously?

First off, the trade was completed before the draft, so Petrie had no way of knowing that those players would be available at #31. Blair for one was widely expected in the media (if not in the GM circles) to be a lock first-rounder.

Secondly, people have been complaining for a year that this was a weak draft, and you're ready to throw Petrie's "reputation as a great GM" out the window for trading down 7 spots in the second round if a high second-rounder shocks the world and becomes an all-star? Why wait? In 2002 we traded away the #28 pick with Boozer on the board. In fact, aside from the GMs of the Rockets (Yao), Suns (Stoudemire), and the Heat (C. Butler), nobody else should have passed on Boozer, so I guess we're left with no more than 2 good GMs/talent evaluators in the league: Carroll Dawson (retired), Bryan Colangelo, and Pat Riley.

 

[Warhawk]

Wait, seriously?

First off, the trade was completed before the draft, so Petrie had no way of knowing that those players would be available at #31. Blair for one was widely expected in the media (if not in the GM circles) to be a lock first-rounder.

Agreed.

 

[SacTownKid]

Don't be ridiculous and talk about starting Beno because you want to trade him. Evans starts, Sergio backs up, and Beno is Kenny Thomas II. Either that or he gets shipped out of here. Beno is a proven player - a proven losing player.

I didn't state anything on matter as my opinion, but that's exactly what I said will happen and I guess you're alright with that? I guess I won't see you as one of the ones complaining if it goes down then.

 

[SacTownKid]

Portland didn't have a empty roster spot. They needed to move someone. They wanted Pendergraph so they gave the Kings someone we had had interest in the past. But, to make the deal, Portland had to make up the difference between what Sergio makes and what a 2nd round pick makes. So, they threw in some cash. Now that makes the trade equal money wise, but they had to thrown in their 2nd round pick to get the Kings to move down.

There's nothing out of the ordinary with the trade. The Kings got the pass first PG that they wanted. Now, if none of the players picked ahead of Brockman in the 2nd round ends up having a better career, than GP made one of his better trades. If either Pendergraph, Young, Summers or Blair turns into an all-star, then GP record as a shrewd judge of talent goes down in flames. As does his reputation as a great GM.

We'll know in two years which way it goes, or maybe sooner.

I don't understand what you're saying. To make the deal work according to the CBA? 2nd round picks don't make any certain amount of money they simply traded the draft rights of those players I thought.

None of Blair, Summers, or Young have to go all the way to becoming an all-star to prove to be a loss in terms of potential for the Kings. If Sergio doesn't play and leaves in a year, and/or Jon Brockman isn't a part of the future, at least short term, you still end up with nothing of real basketball value.

 

[SacTownKid]

Wait, seriously?

First off, the trade was completed before the draft, so Petrie had no way of knowing that those players would be available at #31. Blair for one was widely expected in the media (if not in the GM circles) to be a lock first-rounder.

Secondly, people have been complaining for a year that this was a weak draft, and you're ready to throw Petrie's "reputation as a great GM" out the window for trading down 7 spots in the second round if a high second-rounder shocks the world and becomes an all-star? Why wait? In 2002 we traded away the #28 pick with Boozer on the board. In fact, aside from the GMs of the Rockets (Yao), Suns (Stoudemire), and the Heat (C. Butler), nobody else should have passed on Boozer, so I guess we're left with no more than 2 good GMs/talent evaluators in the league: Carroll Dawson (retired), Bryan Colangelo, and Pat Riley.

Maybe that's why waiting and seeing what's available is a better move because as it turned out, there were some serious names left on the board at that time.

Weak draft up top in terms of guaranteed superstars, yes, but this was a deep draft talent wise and clearly some of the teams that drafted high in the second round agree considering a good number of them have already signed those players to multi-year contracts.

Knowing there's a Boozer and shooting for a Boozer are two different things entirely, it's all a gamble, my point is when you are that high you have to at least play the game. You know there will be one or two in a given year, but wiping your butt with your 2nd rounder and throwing it away is not what you do when you are desperate for that type of potential pickup. Should Jon Brockman not be signed or fit in somehow, considering he is a "need" type of player, I consider that wasting a pick since it had no long term or short term value. I for one think Jon can and should stick and maybe Sergio too, but the fact that personnel might get in the way can't be ignored. I like the Brockman pick, I hope he is indeed signed and is here for a long time to come. He is a beast on the boards and this team has needed an "enforcer" for far too long.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Maybe that's why waiting and seeing what's available is a better move because as it turned out, there were some serious names left on the board at that time.

It's hard to argue with this philosophy. But it is entirely possible that Petrie valued Rodriguez (especially a nearly-free Rodriguez) more than the late-first/early-second players. I don't recall for certain, but I don't think we even brought Blair in for a workout, did we? It's also possible that Petrie had his eyes set on Brockman, would have taken Brockman at #31, but was certain he would fall to #38 and got some goodies in the deal.

I'm just saying that it's not immediately apparent that we would have taken someone like Blair at #31 anyway. He fell to #37 as it was.

You know there will be one or two in a given year, but wiping your butt with your 2nd rounder and throwing it away is not what you do when you are desperate for that type of potential pickup.

Yeah, well we may end up having to disagree on this one, but I just don't see that as an adequate metaphor for the trade.

Should Jon Brockman not be signed or fit in somehow, considering he is a "need" type of player, I consider that wasting a pick since it had no long term or short term value. I for one think Jon can and should stick and maybe Sergio too, but the fact that personnel might get in the way can't be ignored. I like the Brockman pick, I hope he is indeed signed and is here for a long time to come. He is a beast on the boards and this team has needed an "enforcer" for far too long.

Brockman will be signed tonight or tomorrow, per Amick. So that should alleviate some of your fears!

Playing time is another question altogether, for both Brockman and Rodriguez...

 

[HighTopKicks]

I don't understand what you're saying. To make the deal work according to the CBA? 2nd round picks don't make any certain amount of money they simply traded the draft rights of those players I thought.

None of Blair, Summers, or Young have to go all the way to becoming an all-star to prove to be a loss in terms of potential for the Kings. If Sergio doesn't play and leaves in a year, and/or Jon Brockman isn't a part of the future, at least short term, you still end up with nothing of real basketball value.

No CBA rule. Ellington who was 28th pick of 1st round signed for $1M, and Sam Young who signed 6th pick of 2nd round signed for $800K. So, Pendergraph will sign for about $875K - $920K. So, if the Kings kept that pick whoever they picked would cost about that much. Sergio makes $1.8M. So, now the Kings have an additional $900K - $1M in salary and they still haven't added Brockman. So, Portland had to throw in money because the Kings weren't going to move down and help free up a roster space for Portland without Portland picking up some of the additional salary that the Kings were acquiring in the deal.

That doesn't mean that the Kings weren't thrilled to get Sergio. And, I haven't heard who suggested the trade in the first place. But, my guess is Portland otherwise I don't believe they would have paid the money.

Your correct, if Sergio or Brockman don't contribute this year and don't return next year then the deal has no impact as far as the KIngs future is concerned. But, we'll never know who the KIngs might have picked with the 31st pick. And, that means we'll never know if that player would have contributed either.

 

[HighTopKicks]

Wait, seriously?

First off, the trade was completed before the draft, so Petrie had no way of knowing that those players would be available at #31. Blair for one was widely expected in the media (if not in the GM circles) to be a lock first-rounder.

.

In a roundabout way that's the point I was trying to make. That if GP really didn't want Sergio, then it would have been foolish to trade away the 31st pick. With the money thrown in. Sergio is going to cost the same as the 31st pick. And, there is no way of knowing what kind of talent might fall through to the 31st pick. So, it would be foolish to take on a guaranteed contract, instead of taking your chances and seeing who might fall through the cracks. Worst case is no one of value is available at 31 and you don't sign anyone and save the money.


I was being somewhat facetious about GP, since we really don't know who he would have picked at 31. There is no way of knowing if that player would have any more impact on the future of the KIngs then Sergio or Brockman. I guess I need to use more smiley faces.

 

[bajaden]

As an added note. As stated, Petrie had no way of knowing who would slide. Blair was thought to be a sure first rounder. Summer's and Young are both SF's. After picking Casspi in the first round, and with all the SF's we already have, its doubtful that Petrie would have drafted either one anyway. I wanted Young or Casspi with the 22nd pick. I was leaning toward Young more, simply because he's a tough player, but I'm not unhappy with the choice of Casspi.

I agree that Portland, knowing that Petrie had tried to aquire Sergio before, and needing roster room, approached the Kings with the proposal, and the deal was worked out.

As an aside. When you look at Blair, who I liked, and compare him to Brockman, they're very similar in style of game. Blair has more offense, but in reality, both are garbage offensive players. One has solid knee's, and the other doesn't. Blair may well turn out to be the better player. Or he may fight injuries throughout his career. We'll see...

 

[CruzDude]

Back to the roster thread.

According to Petri today and Amick's view, it appears the Kings roster is now set at 13 including Brockman when he officially signs. I don't expect the Kings to carry any more than the absolute minimum this year and if anyone new does break into the roster then someone currently on the roster goes out.

To me the only real bubble guy might be Greene especially if Omri plays really well. So here are the 13 (their positions are for reference only, not my picks):

PG - Evans, Udrih, Rodriquez
SG - Martin, Garcia
SF - Nocioni, Casspi, Greene
PF - Thompson, Brockman, Thomas
C - Hawes, May

 

[Bricklayer]

PG - Evans, Udrih, Rodriquez
SG - Martin, Garcia
SF - Nocioni, Casspi, Greene
PF - Thompson, 6'7" Brockman, 6'7" Thomas
C - Hawes, 6'8" May

we never learn

hence, we always suck

 

[HighTopKicks]

Back to the roster thread.

According to Petri today and Amick's view, it appears the Kings roster is now set at 13 including Brockman when he officially signs. I don't expect the Kings to carry any more than the absolute minimum this year and if anyone new does break into the roster then someone currently on the roster goes out.

To me the only real bubble guy might be Greene especially if Omri plays really well. So here are the 13 (their positions are for reference only, not my picks):

PG - Evans, Udrih, Rodriquez
SG - Martin, Garcia
SF - Nocioni, Casspi, Greene
PF - Thompson, Brockman, Thomas
C - Hawes, May

I disagree about Donte. He's got size & leaping ability (slam dunk contest winner among teammates). He showed improved defensive ability (going one on one against Randolph). And, improved rebounding while playing PF with JT at center during summer league. Plus, he still has the outside shot which JT doesn't have. Everyone agrees that he should have stayed in school another year, but now that year is gone. And, now is the time for him to really develop.

Obviously, Thomas will see fewer minutes than anyone so I wouldn't even consider him. Casspi gets the rookie grace period. As does Brockman. The guy that's really got the pressure on him to perform is May. He's the 3rd big on a team weak at that position, so he's going to get major minutes. If he can't play up to his pre-injury level, his career might end this year.

So, if May or Brockman can't do the job, I see Donte moving into the backup PF spot because of his size. Noc could do it but we don't need to repeat last years experiment in small ball. And, Noc can help the team more by playing his natural position.

The success of the entire season will depend on May, injuries, & foul trouble.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

The success of the entire season will depend on May, injuries, & foul trouble.

Yep. But always count on him missing at least half the season based on his track record. Even if he's healthy (relatively speaking of course), he's still another undersized scoring inside-outside guy with little leaping ability and defense, so if that's the case it would be similar to what we've had the past few years. I'm not terribly high on Brockman either, so Donte will definitely get some licks in at power forward and center in some capacity. It's not a make or break season for him, but it will go a long way in determining his future with the team, that's for sure (much like Douby). However, because we're quite lacking in rebounding apart from Thompson, maybe Brockman (if he even makes the team) might get some situational minutes to bring his one trick to the table.

 

[SacTownKid]

It's hard to argue with this philosophy. But it is entirely possible that Petrie valued Rodriguez (especially a nearly-free Rodriguez) more than the late-first/early-second players. I don't recall for certain, but I don't think we even brought Blair in for a workout, did we? It's also possible that Petrie had his eyes set on Brockman, would have taken Brockman at #31, but was certain he would fall to #38 and got some goodies in the deal.

I'm just saying that it's not immediately apparent that we would have taken someone like Blair at #31 anyway. He fell to #37 as it was.



Yeah, well we may end up having to disagree on this one, but I just don't see that as an adequate metaphor for the trade.



Brockman will be signed tonight or tomorrow, per Amick. So that should alleviate some of your fears!

Playing time is another question altogether, for both Brockman and Rodriguez...

Yep, sure did. In fact, earlier on draft day Westphal was on NBA-TV and said Sam Young and DeJuan Blair were options for them at #23 and if I recall said they were "looking" at them.

I think that's what happened with Brockman. Had a talent like Blair or Young been there at #38 I'm positive they would have taken them because according to Westphal they had interest in them as high as #23. I assume Petrie was going, "yes, yes, yes, NO!" just like a lot of other people on draft day when both were picked right above us. I assume we were the team with the promise to Brockman and planned to take him on draft day thinking neither Blair nor Young would be available.

 

[SacTownKid]

As an added note. As stated, Petrie had no way of knowing who would slide. Blair was thought to be a sure first rounder. Summer's and Young are both SF's. After picking Casspi in the first round, and with all the SF's we already have, its doubtful that Petrie would have drafted either one anyway. I wanted Young or Casspi with the 22nd pick. I was leaning toward Young more, simply because he's a tough player, but I'm not unhappy with the choice of Casspi.

I agree that Portland, knowing that Petrie had tried to aquire Sergio before, and needing roster room, approached the Kings with the proposal, and the deal was worked out.

As an aside. When you look at Blair, who I liked, and compare him to Brockman, they're very similar in style of game. Blair has more offense, but in reality, both are garbage offensive players. One has solid knee's, and the other doesn't. Blair may well turn out to be the better player. Or he may fight injuries throughout his career. We'll see...

Read my other post about Westphals comments earlier on draft day. Unless he was just blowing smoke, had Casspi been drafted higher (like they had expected) they were considering these two exact players at #23.

Brockman is a good substitute for Blair no question, but the talent advantage and potential alone goes to Blair. Now that doesn't mean Blair will be a better player or have more of an impact because I think one of Brockmans values is that you know exactly what you're getting, and he can be a valuable role player for any team. He's got good offensive and defensive fundamentals, rebounds the heck out of the ball, and is freakishly strong. In college he was probably one of the strongest guys I've seen just in terms of pushing people around regardless of size differential.

Another thing I need to add is that Brockman is more athletic and mobile. He has tremendous lateral movement and gets off the ground fast and can get up pretty high. Blair can't which is what a lot of his defensive deficiencies are tied to.

 

[SacTownKid]

we never learn

hence, we always suck

We don't suck because we have a couple of 6'7"/6'8" backups.

 

[Bricklayer]

We don't suck because we have a couple of 6'7"/6'8" backups.

Our lack of interior defensive presence for going on 7 years now has absolutely been a healthy component of our suck. Its been since 02-03, not coincidentally the best team in the Sacramento era, that we could stop my grandmother from driving the lane against us. And she passed away a decade ago:

Blocks/game
09-10: not looking good
08-09: 4.3 (25th in NBA)
07-08: 4.1 (26th in NBA)
06-07: 3.2 (28th in NBA)
05-06: 3.7 (26th in NBA)
04-05: 3.9 (26th in NBA)
03-04: 4.0 (26th in NBA)
---------------
02-03: 5.6 (12th in NBA)

Somehow I doubt Kenny Thomas, who has blocked 2 shots in the last two years (in 343 minutes), Sean May, who blocked 4 shots in 301 minutes last year, and John Brockman, who ratehr amazingly managed to block a grand total of 3 shots in 1036 minutes last year in college are going to help us finally break the spell.

 

[SacTownKid]

Our lack of interior defensive presence for going on 7 years now has absolutely been a healthy component of our suck. Its been since 02-03, not coincidentally the best team in the Sacramento era, that we could stop my grandmother from driving the lane against us. And she passed away a decade ago:

Blocks/game
09-10: not looking good
08-09: 4.3 (25th in NBA)
07-08: 4.1 (26th in NBA)
06-07: 3.2 (28th in NBA)
05-06: 3.7 (26th in NBA)
04-05: 3.9 (26th in NBA)
03-04: 4.0 (26th in NBA)
---------------
02-03: 5.6 (12th in NBA)

Somehow I doubt Kenny Thomas, who has blocked 2 shots in the last two years (in 343 minutes), Sean May, who blocked 4 shots in 301 minutes last year, and John Brockman, who ratehr amazingly managed to block a grand total of 3 shots in 1036 minutes last year in college are going to help us finally break the spell.

While interior defense is an important part of a teams success blocking shots isn't the end all be all of defense. If it were Golden State wouldn't block 6+ a game and still be right down there in the crud with us. 4 out of the top 5 shot blocking teams in the league posted a win percentage of .52 or below.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

Our lack of interior defensive presence for going on 7 years now has absolutely been a healthy component of our suck. Its been since 02-03, not coincidentally the best team in the Sacramento era, that we could stop my grandmother from driving the lane against us. And she passed away a decade ago:

Blocks/game
09-10: not looking good
08-09: 4.3 (25th in NBA)
07-08: 4.1 (26th in NBA)
06-07: 3.2 (28th in NBA)
05-06: 3.7 (26th in NBA)
04-05: 3.9 (26th in NBA)
03-04: 4.0 (26th in NBA)
---------------
02-03: 5.6 (12th in NBA)

Somehow I doubt Kenny Thomas, who has blocked 2 shots in the last two years (in 343 minutes), Sean May, who blocked 4 shots in 301 minutes last year, and John Brockman, who ratehr amazingly managed to block a grand total of 3 shots in 1036 minutes last year in college are going to help us finally break the spell.

Obviously the Kings brass is taking Jerry Reynolds' advice on drafting/signing any shotblokers.

 

[LPKingsFan]

While interior defense is an important part of a teams success blocking shots isn't the end all be all of defense. If it were Golden State wouldn't block 6+ a game and still be right down there in the crud with us. 4 out of the top 5 shot blocking teams in the league posted a win percentage of .52 or below.

Maybe the LSAT studying is getting to me, but sounds like you're mistaking necessity vs. sufficiency. Shotblocking is necessary for interior defense, but just having shotblocking on its own may not be enough.

 

[SacTownKid]

Maybe the LSAT studying is getting to me, but sounds like you're mistaking necessity vs. sufficiency. Shotblocking is necessary for interior defense, but just having shotblocking on its own may not be enough.

How so? Every teams blocks shots to some degree, now how they do it and how it effects their actual on court play may differ, but I think to simply say we don't block shots, therefor we suck is not entirely accurate.

I've given no indication of saying otherwise to either of those last two statements, but I do think it begs the question of how important the actual statistic of shotblocking is to a winning team. You have winning teams around the bottom of the league in this category, and some of the worst near the top. What else does it say? Pretty black and white to me. Now don't get me wrong, I think interior defense is obviously a large part of our downfall, but I think there are more factors leading us to that particular conclusion.

 

[Kingster]

I didn't state anything on matter as my opinion, but that's exactly what I said will happen and I guess you're alright with that? I guess I won't see you as one of the ones complaining if it goes down then.

You don't compound one error (signing Beno to a 5 year deal) by making another error (starting the "mistake" in lieu of a guy you drafted in the 4th slot of the draft).

 

[Kingster]

How so? Every teams blocks shots to some degree, now how they do it and how it effects their actual on court play may differ, but I think to simply say we don't block shots, therefor we suck is not entirely accurate.

I've given no indication of saying otherwise to either of those last two statements, but I do think it begs the question of how important the actual statistic of shotblocking is to a winning team. You have winning teams around the bottom of the league in this category, and some of the worst near the top. What else does it say? Pretty black and white to me. Now don't get me wrong, I think interior defense is obviously a large part of our downfall, but I think there are more factors leading us to that particular conclusion.

That we can agree on. If we talk about defense, we should also talk about exterior defense, not just interior defense. That's where Evans should help.

 

[SacTownKid]

You don't compound one error (signing Beno to a 5 year deal) by making another error (starting the "mistake" in lieu of a guy you drafted in the 4th slot of the draft).

I don't necessarily disagree, but if you do exactly that, Beno will become a contractual burden. Unless he can prove to be a solid backup, which could certainly happen. Which means Sergio most likely doesn't play of course (leading back to the original point of debate).

 

[fnordius]

4 out of the top 5 shot blocking teams in the league posted a win percentage of .52 or below.

Another, equally skewed way of looking at the same numbers: the top 24 shotblocking teams all won more games than we did, and all held their opponents to lower FG% than we did.

Reality is somewhere in between, I think. Shotblocking may not be everything, but it's definitely not nothing.

 

[Oprostaj]

common sense would say it at least will improve opposing FG% against... I will let a player shoot a jumpshot over a layup/dunk 10 out of 10 times, whether it be contested or not. But, good way to put it fnordius, I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[SacTownKid]

]Another, equally skewed way of looking at the same numbers: the top 24 shotblocking teams all won more games than we did[/B], and all held their opponents to lower FG% than we did.

Reality is somewhere in between, I think. Shotblocking may not be everything, but it's definitely not nothing.

Hahaha, and what does that say!? Heck, 29 teams won more games than we did!

I agree with the last statement 100%.