Now that utah has favors, big al, and milsap

[bajaden]

LMFAO what planet are kings fans on?

Not only is Millsap better than any big man currently on the roster (as in, today), but he's far more productive and talented than Landry, and I would deal anybody on the kings not named Cousins or Evans to get him and it would be worth it.

The guy has had to share the ball with two other scorers in Williams and Big Al, and still has been a productive scorer getting 18 PPG on 53% shooting. He's also a bigger body than Landry, so he doesn't get punished inside like Landry often does. He also gets a good number of steals and blocks. He's a better rebounder than Landry as well. Dude has an overall game.

By bigger I assume that you don't mean taller, because Landry is an inch and a quarter taller than Milsap. Body wise I don't think there's that big a difference. Where Millsap has the advantage is that he's a better athlete than Landry.

 

[Gary]

Doesn't change the fact Millsap is undersized, and gets abused on defense. Doesn't pass either. Plenty of similarities to Landry. If you want to add an undersized pf who can't play defense be my guest. Good thing Petrie looks to be going in the opposite direction.

Milsap's game is nothing like Landry.. Ok maybe a little bit.. Milsap plays a power game, and has longer arms which isn't as big of a deal when being undersized.. As for Defense, he isn't terrible, but he's not good either. He doesn't get "abused" as you put it. He might get abused if he tried to lock someone down on D, but he's not terrible.

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

It is for playoff contenders. Not for teams trying to dig themselves out of the lottery. When a guy is productive and effective against just about every team except one or two you play a couple times a season, is that really the killing blow for him as a player, even if he's better than anybody else on the team? I really don't get that logic. "He doesn't dominate everybody, therefore he's useless".



LMFAO improvement is a process. Before you start building a contender, you first have to get to the playoffs. The Kings are nowhere near that level, and Millsap has proven to be a quality player on a playoff team. And again, just because Millsap isn't the guy who will get them to elite status doesn't mean he has no place on a team that could. He's not a Landry-level player. He's legit.



Even if he's a considerable improvement at that position and will help the team win more games? Listen, fans on KF want the perfect fit, no exceptions. You want an all-defensive team PF, well keep dreaming because it's not going to happen. You aren't getting KG, so you wouldn't even except anything less? Anything less than the best is equally useless? Tough to argue with logic like that.



It is addressing the position, because he's better than anything they have. Maybe you missed the entire crux of my argument. Here it is: Millsap is not the same as Landry. Period. He's better. He's more consistent. He's more productive. Their respective sizes can't be compared because the impact on their effectiveness is not the same. Landry's size negatively impacts his consistency and production, whereas Millsap's size has not prevented him from being one of the most consistently productive players at his position.

You're so irrational at this point. I say we need a good defensive PF and you go off on some deluded tangent about ALL OF KF ALL THESE JOKERS ON THESE FORUMS WANT THE PERFECT ALL NBA DEFENSIVE TEAM PF. What? Dial it back a little. People disagree with you -- sorry if that ruined your plans. You admit that he probably isn't the guy to get us to the level of teams like the Lakers and the Celtics. So why is it so bad that some feel that if we're going to make an investment in a player for the future that said player should eventually be able to make enough of an impact on the defensive end to bring us to their level?

Milsap doesn't have that kind of potential. Why intentionally get a player who won't take you over the top in the future? Some people are just willing to wait and invest in a young player who can become that PF that we really need while we're still at a stage where we can afford to be that patient. I'm not holding out for perfect like you're so quick to assume. Holding out for "good" on defense, which Milsap doesn't qualify under.

It's crucial to get that spot right because he needs to directly compliment the cornerstone that we have up front, Cousins. You keep overlooking the fact that Milsap compliments Cousins as well as Landry does. Which is not at all. What's the point of all that firepower on offense if you're giving up just as much the other way? We don't need that much offense out of the PF position anymore. We need a defender who can stretch the paint for our real stud down low. Milsap is not that guy. No need to trash all who disagree with you. You and that steel guy are so irrational right now.

 

[pupsingh]

when i made this thread i didnt mean milsap to be our superstar! but a solid roleplayer which he obviously is. AN upgrade to JT, which im sure everyone can agree on. Milsap to start and JT off the bench would be a lot better than what we have now, its just a matter of the price. Milsap is a better rebounder than landry, shoots a higher percentage and is better defensively even if not by much. Plus milsap has shown flashes of being dominant ( see game at miami), but cuz and reke is the core milsap is certainly not a bad third option or even fourth option if casspi steps it up. isnt jeff greene undersized? david west? scola? their teams are still good. why? cyz they arent the main option.

 

[Showtime]

So according to your argument, Cousins shouldn't be a cornerstone because he's a weakness at C on defense. That's a more important position defensively than a PF is. Therefore, if you want the team to be a playoff contender, it's not going to be with Cousins at C.

And again, Millsap isn't a weakness defensively. I could carve that into your forehead and you still wouldn't get it. He doesn't get abused. He doesn't get consistently exploited. He's a capable, average defensive player, not a weak defensive player. Please show me your idea of a good defensive PF, because there aren't that many at all in the league. Even star PF's like Aldridge or David Lee or Blake or West or Dirk are not "good" defenders. So I guess you don't want them either.

Millsap = average defender, not poor defender who is better than Landry and better than any PF the kings have. Period.

 

[vikinginferno]

So according to your argument, Cousins shouldn't be a cornerstone because he's a weakness at C on defense. That's a more important position defensively than a PF is. Therefore, if you want the team to be a playoff contender, it's not going to be with Cousins at C.

Cousins is full sized. He may not be a "good" defensive player right now, but he has potential to be a good defensive player. Lose some of the fat, gain some muscle, learn some more about how to play defense in the NBA, and he can be a solid to pretty darn good defender.

 

[Showtime]

Cousins is full sized. He may not be a "good" defensive player right now, but he has potential to be a good defensive player. Lose some of the fat, gain some muscle, learn some more about how to play defense in the NBA, and he can be a solid to pretty darn good defender.

He's got the potential to improve, but he's a weakness defensively. So, why is it not a good idea to have an average defensive PF because it's a "bad fit" next to Cousins, but it's ok to have a weakness at the C position in the first place? Doesn't seem like a solid argument to me. Even if the Kings got Haslem, one of the best defensive PF's in the league, it wouldn't make the C position stronger and the team would still have that major weakness that can be exploited by teams like Boston and LA, so it seems the logic of the posters here doesn't hold up.

 

[Showtime]

you are missing the point. look at boozer, he is undersized at 6'8 and next to him you have the talented yet PF position millsap who is 6'7. is there any question they were ousted annually because of their lack of size? i watched the jazz and lakers in the playoffs and rooted for the jazz. at the end of the day, you could see the huge disadvantage of having talented midgets against talented full sized players. the point of this game is to eventually win the championship or collect talented midgets and get ousted in the 1, 2 round of the playoffs?

Guess what: if Okur was healthy, he was going to get dominated by LA's frontline anyway. BEING 7'0"+ DOESN'T MAKE A GUY A GOOD DEFENDER. Even their mammoth inside right now in Fresenko isn't consistent enough to stay in the game. Why is this such a difficult concept for you to grasp?

 

[AleksandarN]

Guess what: if Okur was healthy, he was going to get dominated by LA's frontline anyway. BEING 7'0"+ DOESN'T MAKE A GUY A GOOD DEFENDER. Even their mammoth inside right now in Fresenko isn't consistent enough to stay in the game. Why is this such a difficult concept for you to grasp?

It is all about defensive potential. Also Cousins is 20 years old so he has untapped potential where as Milsap does not and does not have the size or the hops to make up him being short.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

It is all about defensive potential. Also Cousins is 20 years old so he has untapped potential where as Milsap does not and does not have the size or the hops to make up him being short.

lol he love underdog players and teams thats why he keeps referencing them. you aim low, you get short results.

 

[TaxMan]

He's got the potential to improve, but he's a weakness defensively. So, why is it not a good idea to have an average defensive PF because it's a "bad fit" next to Cousins, but it's ok to have a weakness at the C position in the first place? Doesn't seem like a solid argument to me. Even if the Kings got Haslem, one of the best defensive PF's in the league, it wouldn't make the C position stronger and the team would still have that major weakness that can be exploited by teams like Boston and LA, so it seems the logic of the posters here doesn't hold up.

My goodness....you are really stretching far to try to win this "argument". I think all people are saying is that mixing the two of them together is not a great fit (at least given Cousin's current defensive issues). Are you trying to say that's not an issue? Are you saying we should just throw in the towel and not worry about how players fit into our current roster? To come back with an argument that suggests we're being too easy on Cousins for his defensive problems is just silly. He's a 20 year old with the potential to become the most dominant center in the game. Until he's got a longer track record, of course you try to fit peices in with him that complements his game. Now if you're having this discussion in 5 years and cousins offensive dominance doesn't eventually outweigh any defensive lialibities, you may have a point. "Period".

 

[Big Cuz 15]

My goodness....you are really stretching far to try to win this "argument". I think all people are saying is that mixing the two of them together is not a great fit (at least given Cousin's current defensive issues). Are you trying to say that's not an issue? Are you saying we should just throw in the towel and not worry about how players fit into our current roster? To come back with an argument that suggests we're being too easy on Cousins for his defensive problems is just silly. He's a 20 year old with the potential to become the most dominant center in the game. Until he's got a longer track record, of course you try to fit peices in with him that complements his game. Now if you're having this discussion in 5 years and cousins offensive dominance doesn't eventually outweigh any defensive lialibities, you may have a point. "Period".

don't mind him, hes just trying to increase his post count