Kings @ Warriors Gameday Thread

[Bricklayer]

They did promise to spend and they're been putting a lot of offers out there. They didn't promise to overpay just for the sake of spending, though. I just have a problem with letting role players dictate their price to the degree that you overpay them. I could see overpaying to keep your stars but giving north of 10$ million for an 8 and 8 center who just turned 30 doesn't make much sense to me. It would be one thing if he was a great passer or a leader like Divac was but he isn't. As far as I can tell you'd basically be paying 10$ million for someone to defend and block shots.

Precisely. Which is that that skill costs. The Clippers are paying $10 mil for a 7 and 7 version because they are trying to get serious. The Thunder got lucky by trading for an $8mil version when they got serious. The Knicks just paid for a $15mil version when they decided to get serious. the Bulls are paying I think $11mil for their version because they are serious. The Lakers are paying something like $14 for theirs. Dallas lost their main one, and are now onto their $7mil backup? And of course want to make a run at the ultimate one next year. The Heat have no money but are so aware of the neeed they continue to play maybe the worst version in the whole league in Joel Anthony (only the shtoblocking part, can't even rebound).

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

As to your last sentence, "yes."

Maybe if it weren't for the fact that many of his "blocks" are goaltends, he takes lots of ill-advised shots, seems to have a low Bball IQ, etc. I could see it. Having watched him all last year, though, I just didn't see a player that was worth a 10$ million dollar (possibly even more) salary.

 

[Bricklayer]

Usually centers that get that much are good offensive players too.

Not at all. Don't know where you've been the last decade or so, but the defensive specialist centers all get paid in that range.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Precisely. Which is that that skill costs. The Clippers are paying $10 mil for a 7 and 7 version because they are trying to get serious. The Thunder got lucky by trading for an $8mil version when they got serious. The Knicks just paid for a $15mil version when they decided to get serious. the Bulls are paying I think $11mil for their version because they are serious. The Lakers are paying something like $14 for theirs. Dallas lost their main one, and are now onto their $7mil backup? And of course want to make a run at the ultimate one next year. The Heat have no money but are so aware of the neeed they continue to play maybe the worst version in the whole league in Joel Anthony (only the shtoblocking part, can't even rebound).

The Clippers had to give 7$ million Brown to reach minimum salary. Noah and Bynum are far better than Dalembert. He doesn't even warrant a comparison to them.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Not at all. Don't know where you've been the last decade or so, but the defensive specialist centers all get paid in that range.

OK, name them then. excluding Chandler who just signed for 15$ million, what are some other centers with comparable offensive abilities to Dalembert who are/have made 10$ million plus.

 

[rainmaker]

I don't get the argument against offering AK or Daly 10M per. Does not signing either, and instead spending 16M this year on Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a better use of money? No. No way. Have yet to see an argument that is the least bit persuasive.

A large portion of this board said spending 10M per on either Daly or AK is a complete waste, yet they rarely acknowledged the flipside of that, which is that the money will go somewhere, to someone. So instead of anchoring our defense with Daly, or ensuring our defense doesn't slide too much, and getting a huge upgrade at sf in AK, we are throwing 16M per at the above three. Also had the opportunity to amnesty Cisco, who I love in the lockerroom, but if we're short on cap space, and that is why we're not offering AK or Daly more, should have been amnestied.

So I'll actually fix my post. We agreed to pay Cisco/Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a combined 22M this year, because going after AK or Daly, hard, would have been a waste. Idiotic if you ask me.

So I'll say, have said, and will stand by, the excuse of Daly or AK being too expensive doesn't carry any weight whatsoever, when we have 22M is salary going to the above four. The funny things is, I don't see near the uproar about paying those four a combined 22M this year, as there was when the topic of offering Daly or AK an extra 3M came up.

 

[sdballer]

The Clippers had to give 7$ million Brown to reach minimum salary. Noah and Bynum are far better than Dalembert. He doesn't even warrant a comparison to them.

Really man. It would take you about 30 seconds searching the web to discover you are wrong. Okafor, chandler, biedrins, dally, jordan are the other shotblocking bigs not on rookie deals and they all make 9million or more. Its what you pay if you want an inside defensive presence.

 

[sdballer]

I don't get the argument against offering AK or Daly 10M per. Does not signing either, and instead spending 16M this year on Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a better use of money? No. No way. Have yet to see an argument that is the least bit persuasive.

A large portion of this board said spending 10M per on either Daly or AK is a complete waste, yet they rarely acknowledged the flipside of that, which is that the money will go somewhere, to someone. So instead of anchoring our defense with Daly, or ensuring our defense doesn't slide too much, and getting a huge upgrade at sf in AK, we are throwing 16M per at the above three. Also had the opportunity to amnesty Cisco, who I love in the lockerroom, but if we're short on cap space, and that is why we're not offering AK or Daly more, should have been amnestied.

So I'll actually fix my post. We agreed to pay Cisco/Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a combined 22M this year, because going after AK or Daly, hard, would have been a waste. Idiotic if you ask me.

Its like some members on this board think going 4 deep at each position, regardless of the talent and fit of those payers is preferable to having the best 8-9 man rotation possible. The maloofs bragging about their spending this offseason confirms their lack of basketball knowledge. Its not about spending. Everyone has to spend to the minimum. Its about spending on the right guys even if that means an extra million or two to get them

 

[Glenn]

Maybe if it weren't for the fact that many of his "blocks" are goaltends, he takes lots of ill-advised shots, seems to have a low Bball IQ, etc. I could see it. Having watched him all last year, though, I just didn't see a player that was worth a 10$ million dollar (possibly even more) salary.

Marc Gasol just signed a $17 mil per year contract. Is that being "over paid?" Last year he averaged 7 rbds and 11.7 pts and 1.7 blks. Daly had 8.2 rbds and 8.1 pts and 1.5 blks in a year where he was injured and didn't get regular minutes until the last half of the season. You tell me why Gasol is worth $17 mil per year.

I'm done. You have no intention of reading and comprehending and are in your typical "I'll argue until I drop dead but god help me if I change my mind" mode that I have become accustomed to.

BTW, how many posters that disagree with you does it take before you will even consider that you might be wrong?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Really man. It would take you about 30 seconds searching the web to discover you are wrong. Okafor, chandler, biedrins, dally, jordan are the other shotblocking bigs not on rookie deals and they all make 9million or more. Its what you pay if you want an inside defensive presence.

Everyone you named is either just flat out better than Dlembert or are much younger. You're proving my point, really. Show me a single center that averages 8 points a game for their career that signed a multi-year deal for 10$ million per after they were on the wrong side of 30.

 

[sdballer]

Everyone you named is either just flat out better than Dlembert or are much younger. You're proving my point, really. Show me a single center that averages 8 points a game for their career that signed a multi-year deal for 10$ million per after they were on the wrong side of 30.

Honestly, i dont know why anyone trys to debate with you. Show me a player comparable to dally and what he gets paid. Oh wait, we already did.

 

[rainmaker]

OK, name them then. excluding Chandler who just signed for 15$ million, what are some other centers with comparable offensive abilities to Dalembert who are/have made 10$ million plus.

So you'd much rather pay Cisco/Salmons/Hayes/Outlaw a combined 22M this year, than Daly 10M? I mean, that's what you're arguing about. Not that the 22M in salary owed is a waste, but that saving 12M of that, and offering Daly 10M instead, would be a bigger waste.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Marc Gasol just signed a $17 mil per year contract. Is that being "over paid?" Last year he averaged 7 rbds and 11.7 pts and 1.7 blks. Daly had 8.2 rbds and 8.1 pts and 1.5 blks in a year where he was injured and didn't get regular minutes until the last half of the season. You tell me why Gasol is worth $17 mil per year.

I'm done. You have no intention of reading and comprehending and are in your typical "I'll argue until I drop dead but god help me if I change my mind" mode that I have become accustomed to.

You're making a straw man argument. I never said Marc Gasol is worth 17$ million, (he didn't get that much anyways though). I believe he actually signed for around 14.5$ million. Is he worth that? That's debatable. What's not debatable is that he's a much better basketball player than Samuel Dalembert.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Honestly, i dont know why anyone trys to debate with you. Show me a player comparable to dally and what he gets paid. Oh wait, we already did.

No, you didn't. You showed players that are better/younger or both.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

So you'd much rather pay Cisco/Salmons/Hayes/Outlaw a combined 22M this year, than Daly 10M? I mean, that's what you're arguing about. Not that the 22M in salary owed is a waste, but that saving 12M of that, and offering Daly 10M instead, would be a bigger waste.

Sigh. I didn't say I'd rather do anything, much less that. I think the Hayes deal was a good deal but Cisco and Salmons are overpaid too. Outlaw sounds like a bargain at 3$ million, though. What I'd rather do is give that 10$ million to AK47 who's a much better all around player than Dalembert.

 

[Glenn]

Answer my last ****ing question: how many posters that disagree with you does it take before you will consider that you may be wrong?

I think the vast majority would be willing to sign Daly for a contract of averaging $10 mil per year. We are all wrong. Does that satisfiy you?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I don't get the argument against offering AK or Daly 10M per. Does not signing either, and instead spending 16M this year on Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a better use of money? No. No way. Have yet to see an argument that is the least bit persuasive.

A large portion of this board said spending 10M per on either Daly or AK is a complete waste, yet they rarely acknowledged the flipside of that, which is that the money will go somewhere, to someone. So instead of anchoring our defense with Daly, or ensuring our defense doesn't slide too much, and getting a huge upgrade at sf in AK, we are throwing 16M per at the above three. Also had the opportunity to amnesty Cisco, who I love in the lockerroom, but if we're short on cap space, and that is why we're not offering AK or Daly more, should have been amnestied.

So I'll actually fix my post. We agreed to pay Cisco/Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a combined 22M this year, because going after AK or Daly, hard, would have been a waste. Idiotic if you ask me.

So I'll say, have said, and will stand by, the excuse of Daly or AK being too expensive doesn't carry any weight whatsoever, when we have 22M is salary going to the above four. The funny things is, I don't see near the uproar about paying those four a combined 22M this year, as there was when the topic of offering Daly or AK an extra 3M came up.

Just for the record, I'm not against giving AK 10$ It's a little steep but I could swallow it. I could accept giving Dalembert 8$ but that's my ceiling. You gotta draw the line somewhere. Y'all need to chill. I simply don't think he's as valuable as the rest of you do. It's all right to have a different opinion, no?

 

[rainmaker]

Sigh. I didn't say I'd rather do anything, much less that. I think the Hayes deal was a good deal but Cisco and Salmons are overpaid too. Outlaw sounds like a bargain at 3$ million, though. What I'd rather do is give that 10$ million to AK47 who's a much better all around player than Dalembert.

I have to assume you'd rather pay the above four, a combined 22M per, rather than Daly 10M, since that is what you keep bringing up, not the 22M. it's not just you though, There were a number of people saying offering Daly an few extra M per year was a waste, and a bad idea, yet I don't hear much, if anything, from those same people regarding the 22M owed to those four players.

 

[sdballer]

No, you didn't. You showed players that are better/younger or both.

He's older than biedrins, okafor, jordan but he's easily better than all those guys other than okafor (who i still wouldnt choose over dally for this team). So 3-4 years older, even though dally is extremely consistent and injury free means he shoud be paid what. If those guys get 10m+, dally gets 2m less? Just give him the extra 2m and dont pay for outlaw, who is 3rd or 4th on the sf rotation. Whats hard to understand about this?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Answer my last ****ing question: how many posters that disagree with you does it take before you will consider that you may be wrong?

I think the vast majority would be willing to sign Daly for a contract of averaging $10 mil per year. We are all wrong. Does that satisfiy you?

What question? You didn't even have your figures right. This isn't about right or wrong. It's just a matter of a difference of opinion. I'm sorry that you're all a bunch of babies who can't handle someone having a different opinion.

 

[Bricklayer]

OK, name them then. excluding Chandler who just signed for 15$ million, what are some other centers with comparable offensive abilities to Dalembert who are/have made 10$ million plus.

Well that's kinda tough given that you are somewhat irrationally convinced Dalembert is worse on offense Manute Bol.

Let me just note however that Disagna Diop gets paid $7mil a year. So does Gortat, although that was signed as a backup. Perkins gets paid $8. Brendan Haywood, Anderson Varejao, Andris Biedrins and Camby get paid $9. DeAndre Jordan is getting paid $10. Noah $12. Chandler $15. Okafor $13. Dalembert himself was getting paid $12 last year.

 

[rainmaker]

Just for the record, I'm not against giving AK 10$ It's a little steep but I could swallow it. I could accept giving Dalembert 8$ but that's my ceiling. You gotta draw the line somewhere. Y'all need to chill. I simply don't think he's as valuable as the rest of you do. It's all right to have a different opinion, no?

Why do we need to chill? You state your opinion. I disagree and state mine. Why would I, or anyone else need to chill? It's a disagreement. So you can state your opinion, yet if we disagree, we can't state ours? A debate is a two way street my friend. I'm not being hostile.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I have to assume you'd rather pay the above four, a combined 22M per, rather than Daly 10M, since that is what you keep bringing up, not the 22M. it's not just you though, There were a number of people saying offering Daly an few extra M per year was a waste, and a bad idea, yet I don't hear much, if anything, from those same people regarding the 22M owed to those four players.

That's a false dichotomy. i'd rather do neither.

 

[Glenn]

What question? You didn't even have your figures right. This isn't about right or wrong. It's just a matter of a difference of opinion. I'm sorry that you're all a bunch of babies who can't handle someone having a different opinion.

Answer my question and quit the shuckin' and jivin'. I can handle a person with a differernt opinion and have proven that. You keep shifting topics to avoid what someone else is saying. It was a direct question.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I don't get the argument against offering AK or Daly 10M per. Does not signing either, and instead spending 16M this year on Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a better use of money? No. No way. Have yet to see an argument that is the least bit persuasive.

A large portion of this board said spending 10M per on either Daly or AK is a complete waste, yet they rarely acknowledged the flipside of that, which is that the money will go somewhere, to someone. So instead of anchoring our defense with Daly, or ensuring our defense doesn't slide too much, and getting a huge upgrade at sf in AK, we are throwing 16M per at the above three. Also had the opportunity to amnesty Cisco, who I love in the lockerroom, but if we're short on cap space, and that is why we're not offering AK or Daly more, should have been amnestied.

So I'll actually fix my post. We agreed to pay Cisco/Hayes/Salmons/Outlaw a combined 22M this year, because going after AK or Daly, hard, would have been a waste. Idiotic if you ask me.

So I'll say, have said, and will stand by, the excuse of Daly or AK being too expensive doesn't carry any weight whatsoever, when we have 22M is salary going to the above four. The funny things is, I don't see near the uproar about paying those four a combined 22M this year, as there was when the topic of offering Daly or AK an extra 3M came up.

No, you need to chill because you aren't acting like this is about opinion. You're acting like this is about the majority being right and that i should shut up and accept "defeat" because i'm outnumbered. Not you specifically, you're generally pretty cordial, but some others are not.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Answer my question and quit the shuckin' and jivin'. I can handle a person with a differernt opinion and have proven that. You keep shifting topics to avoid what someone else is saying. It was a direct question.

LOL. I'm not shifting topics. I simply don't know what you're asking me. You asked me if Marc Gasol was worth a certain amount based on a figure that isn't even what he actually makes. WTF am I supposed to say to that?

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Well that's kinda tough given that you are somewhat irrationally convinced Dalembert is worse on offense Manute Bol.

Let me just note however that Disagna Diop gets paid $7mil a year. So does Gortat, although that was signed as a backup. Perkins gets paid $8. Brendan Haywood, Anderson Varejao, Andris Biedrins and Camby get paid $9. DeAndre Jordan is getting paid $10. Noah $12. Chandler $15. Okafor $13. Dalembert himself was getting paid $12 last year.

I think the problem here is that you guys think I'm saying Dalembert is worthless just because I don't think he's worth 10$ million. I think he's worth 8$ million, just not 10$ million.

 

[Glenn]

LOL. I'm not shifting topics. I simply don'y know what you're asking me. You asked me if Marc Gasol was worth a certain amount based on a figures that isn't even what he actually makes. WTF am I supposed to say to that?

Look at my note. If you can't make that effort, I am done. This is supposed to be a sharing of info and you have us all spinning our wheels while you have no intention of even considering the accuracy of a differing opinion but are more interested in finding a way of poking a hole in the other opinion. I am sure you can't see that and will, in fact, poke a hole in what I just said.

 

[rainmaker]

No, you need to chill because you aren't acting like this is about opinion. You're acting like this is about the majority being right and that i should shut up and accept "defeat" because i'm outnumbered. Not you specifically, you're generally pretty cordial, but some others are not.

C'mon, you just called me out personally, and said it wasn't me specifically in the same post.

I get it now, though. You're welcome to come on here and argue about whatever it is you want, but if someone disagrees, they need to chill. Your second sentence is a complete fabrication. I never hinted at you needing to shut up or suggest defeat.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

He's older than biedrins, okafor, jordan but he's easily better than all those guys other than okafor (who i still wouldnt choose over dally for this team). So 3-4 years older, even though dally is extremely consistent and injury free means he shoud be paid what. If those guys get 10m+, dally gets 2m less? Just give him the extra 2m and dont pay for outlaw, who is 3rd or 4th on the sf rotation. Whats hard to understand about this?

Who said anything is hard to understand? You think that because I don't agree with you that I just must not understand? I'd simply rather save that money to overpay a better player down the road.