Now that utah has favors, big al, and milsap

[pupsingh]

do you remember that game he had in miami where he straight dominated and put up 46 and 9, im jus sayin you have to be a stud to do that, landry could never do that. and if its a no.6 pick i dont see why it would be so crazy to think about it. maybe for milsap + something

 

[Showtime]

I'm not saying the Kings should heavily pursue Millsap because he's the answer for the team and will get them in the playoffs. I'm just saying that comparing him to Landry is beyond ignorant IMO.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

How many times do I have to point this out? There's a difference between being undersized, and being short. Millsap doesn't lack the size or strength to play the position, despite being 6'7". His height and size is only relevant if it hinders production and effectiveness, which it doesn't in his case. His body size and effort compensate for anything lacking in height.

That's like somebody being stupid enough to say they wouldn't want a prime Ben Wallace because he's too undersized to play the C position. If a player finds ways to produce instead of being a liability, then it doesn't matter.

Jazz fans:

"he can guard guys at the 4. He has a defensive toughness a lot of guys don't have."

"He is very efficient and rather consistent. He shoots over 54% from the floor, and many of those shots are 16 - 18 foot jumpers. He has great touch, is a solid finisher in traffic and very rarely takes a bad shot. The fact that he always plays hard gives him an advantage in that he is ready anytime his opponent lets up."

"There's times where [height liability is] the case, but as a general rule? No. He'd be better off playing with a true center, as opposed to Al, but Millsap's defensive issues are overstated. And on offense, size is rarely ever an issue for him. Dude just has a knack for getting the ball up around the basket."

Again, saying that Landry is undersized, so they don't want Millsap is essentially saying that Landry's struggles of being consistently productive because of his height are the same issues Millsap has, only Millsap doesn't have issues being productive, as he's one of the most productive and efficient players at his position in the entire league.

undersized

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

For the record, most of the league gets wrecked by the Lakers and Boston, because they are two of the most talented teams in the league and championship contenders. The only way your point has any relevance is if the Kings were attempting to overcome either of those teams in a playoff series. Most of the PF's in the league that spend most of their time at the 4 spot are around 6-9ish, and Millsap has proven not to have trouble being productive.

Isn't the entire point of it to strive to beat teams like the Lakers and Celtics? You say 90% of the league can't compete with them. Why would you allow yourself to settle along with that 90 percent? Why wouldn't you get personnel that would put you into that elite 10 percent? Hell, I have my eyes for this team set on the top 1 or 2 percent in a few years. Milsap doesn't allow you to do that, especially alongside Cousins because of the aforementioned defensive issues, which you have to admit are there.

Show me the defensive stopper the kings have currently at the PF position. Oh wait...

A C is supposed to make up for defensive deficiencies. That's part of the position as the last line of defense. But since the Kings don't have a good defensive PF anyway, they might as well get one who can put up close to 18/10 every night as a role player instead of what they have now.

So because we don't have a good defender there right now, we should just throw our hands up and just take a mediocre defender there? Tough to argue with logic like that. No, literally, I can't do it. With a young team that is far from set in stone, why not address those deficiencies effectively and definitively, while you're still bad enough and have the resources to do it (draft picks and cap space)?

Just look at Orlando. They have an incredible "last line of defense" -- the best in the game -- and because everyone else out there is a mediocre defender, they're a weak defensive team. Isn't defense why most of this board was ready to ship out Carl Landry with a Lexus-sized bow on his head?

 

[Showtime]

undersized

nope.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

nope.

you win. he's not undersized, he's un-durr-cized

why are the jazz sending their SG to defend gasol?

 

[Showtime]

Isn't the entire point of it to strive to beat teams like the Lakers and Celtics?

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".

You say 90% of the league can't compete with them. Why would you allow yourself to settle along with that 90 percent? Why wouldn't you get personnel that would put you into that elite 10 percent? Hell, I have my eyes for this team set on the top 1 or 2 percent in a few years. Milsap doesn't allow you to do that, especially alongside Cousins because of the aforementioned defensive issues, which you have to admit are there.

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.

So because we don't have a good defender there right now, we should just throw our hands up and just take a mediocre defender there? Tough to argue with logic like that.

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.

No, literally, I can't do it. With a young team that is far from set in stone, why not address those deficiencies effectively and definitively, while you're still bad enough and have the resources to do it (draft picks and cap space)?

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.

 

[Bricklayer]

nope.

Uh yeah he is.

Bigger than Landry though. I've always liked his skills and was a fan even before he busted out -- you could see right from his rookie year he had uncommon skills for a big. But he IS short and stubby, adn that has defesnive consequences, as well as strictly limiting him ont he postion he can play. If you had a big defensive center to cover him that might work. Or if you could afford to play such an expensive guy in abencvh role behind a very tall pair of starters (let's say Daly/JT). But just starting a 6'8" PF with little lift means you are in defensive peril along your frontline. There is a reason Utah has never went far these last few years, and that reason is defense. And its been keyed by guys like Williams, Boozer, Milsap, Okur etc. No length, no verticality. And when a team like the Lakers faced them, jsut went right over them.

 

[Showtime]

you win. he's not undersized, he's un-durr-cized

why are the jazz sending their SG to defend gasol?

Take away Big Baby's and Kendrick's rings, because they are clearly too undersized to be big men. And while you're at it, go tell Horford he can't make it at C.

 

[Showtime]

Uh yeah he is.

Bigger than Landry though. I've always liked his skills and was a fan even before he busted out -- you could see right from his rookie year he had uncommon skills for a big. But he IS short and stubby, adn that has defesnive consequences, as well as strictly limiting him ont he postion he can play. If you had a big defensive center to cover him that might work. Or if you could afford to play such an expensive guy in abencvh role behind a very tall pair of starters (let's say Daly/JT). But just starting a 6'8" PF with little lift means you are in defensive peril along your frontline. There is a reason Utah has never went far these last few years, and that reason is defense. And its been keyed by guys like Williams, Boozer, Milsap, Okur etc. No length, no verticality. And when a team like the Lakers faced them, jsut went right over them.

One of the major reasons they haven't won more in the playoffs is injuries. But I'll bite on your argument. Let's say the only reason why they didn't get past the Lakers is defense. Millsap isn't responsible for that, because they lacked the defensive presence from the C position, and it's not a PF's job to stop Kobe. Also, listen to what you are saying: a quality player on a playoff team isn't good enough for the 14-41 kings. Does that make sense to you? Why would a guy who has proven his worth to a top western team that is consistently been in the playoffs is suddenly compared to Carl f%&^*ing Landry? WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS FORUM?

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Take away Big Baby's and Kendrick's rings, because they are clearly too undersized to be big men. And while you're at it, go tell Horford he can't make it at C.

boozer is undersized

 

[Showtime]

boozer is undersized

Yeah, and it's clearly prevented him from playing effectively as a big man and producing. Oh wait, he's been a 20/10 guy nvm. BRB, watching him with the Bulls fight for the top seed in the east. Double BRB remembering the fans here wanting Boozer a few years ago when he was in Utah.

Seriously, wtf is wrong with the fans on this forum? If a player isn't elite and perfect, they aren't worthy of playing here? Size is irrelevant if it doesn't hinder production and effectiveness.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

One of the major reasons they haven't won more in the playoffs is injuries. But I'll bite on your argument. Let's say the only reason why they didn't get past the Lakers is defense. Millsap isn't responsible for that, because they lacked the defensive presence from the C position, and it's not a PF's job to stop Kobe. Also, listen to what you are saying: a quality player on a playoff team isn't good enough for the 14-41 kings. Does that make sense to you? Why would a guy who has proven his worth to a top western team that is consistently been in the playoffs is suddenly compared to Carl f%&^*ing Landry? WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS FORUM?

because, the opposite of full size

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Yeah, and it's clearly prevented him from playing effectively as a big man and producing. Oh wait, he's been a 20/10 guy nvm. BRB, watching him with the Bulls fight for the top seed in the east.

LMAO, doesn't change the fact he's unnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn--------daaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr--------ciiiiiiized

 

[Showtime]

LMAO, doesn't change the fact he's unnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn--------daaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr--------ciiiiiiized

First off, he isn't.

Second, I'll play along. Let's say Boozer is small for a PF in whatever fantasy land you conjure up. Explain how that matters if it doesn't impact production.

 

[Bricklayer]

One of the major reasons they haven't won more in the playoffs is injuries. But I'll bite on your argument. Let's say the only reason why they didn't get past the Lakers is defense. Millsap isn't responsible for that, because they lacked the defensive presence from the C position, and it's not a PF's job to stop Kobe. Also, listen to what you are saying: a quality player on a playoff team isn't good enough for the 14-41 kings. Does that make sense to you? Why would a guy who has proven his worth to a top western team that is consistently been in the playoffs is suddenly compared to Carl f%&^*ing Landry? WTF IS WRONG WITH THIS FORUM?

I don't think "quality player on a playoff tema!" is going to get you very far in a league where more than half the teams make the playoffs. Derek Fisher won a ring last year. Mike Bibby has started for a team that consitently gets as far as Utah. And Milsap has proven he is skilled, but he hasn't really proven much more than that. He was Boozer's backup, Mehmet's backup. His team kept on geting dismissed byt the powers. He was taking passes from one of the league's best PGs, being coached by a HOF coach. He has skills, but is he a guy who makes you win? Especially when you consider our personnel going forward? Defensively he and Cousins are hopeless together, so does he go back to being a 6th man?

 

[Showtime]

because, the opposite of full size

Please list what size a player has to be, at minimum, for you to feel they are adequate for the PF and C positions.

 

[Showtime]

I don't think "quality player on a playoff tema!" is going to get you very far in a league where more than half the teams make the playoffs.

Then be happy with Jason Thompson and hoping for 20 wins every year.

Derek Fisher won a ring last year. Mike Bibby has started for a team that consitently gets as far as Utah.

I'm not talking about any player on the roster. I'm talking about one of the most consistently productive players on the team and at his position in the entire league. I must have said that at least 3 times already. HE'S. NOT. LANDRY.

And Milsap has proven he is skilled, but he hasn't really proven much more than that. He was Boozer's backup, Mehmet's backup. His team kept on geting dismissed byt the powers. He was taking passes from one of the league's best PGs, being coached by a HOF coach. He has skills, but is he a guy who makes you win? Especially when you consider our personnel going forward? Defensively he and Cousins are hopeless together, so does he go back to being a 6th man?

He wasn't playing behind anybody this season, because he was the reason the Jazz decided to let Boozer go. And the Jazz were/are in the playoff hunt prior to this blow-up with Sloan and the Deron trade. So he was a top 3 player, along with Deron and Big Al, on a team that was fighting for the 5th best record in the west. And that's not a player that is contributing to making the team better? That's not a guy who would help make the Kings better? Again, it's like with you guys, if the guy isn't perfect and elite, he's useless.

 

[Bricklayer]

Please list what size a player has to be, at minimum, for you to feel they are adequate for the PF and C positions.

You would like 6'9" with length or hops as a bottom. 6'10"+ preferably. Certainly by the time you start getting deep into the playoffs you are going to run into near 7-footer after near 7-footer there with Pau, Duncan, Dirk, KG etc. Its not by accident. If you're just tall enough to suck on their nipple as they drive by, you're probably not advancing.

 

[Bricklayer]

Again, it's like with you guys, if the guy isn't perfect and elite, he's useless.

Not useless, but not the guy you target and spend your assets and money on. You don't want to end up like Utah anyway.

 

[Showtime]

Not useless, but not the guy you target and spend your assets and money on. You don't want to end up like Utah anyway.

Never said he was.

 

[rainmaker]

LMAO I stopped reading right there. How about "this from...the last few years of him actually playing"? I'll take that over combine comments. How about you tell me how disadvantaged Millsap is at the 4 spot? Or do you just look at his height and say that without watching him play?

There's a difference between saying a guy is undersized, and saying a guy is short. Paul is 6'7", but he's not undersized. He can effectively play the PF position, and has no trouble doing so. Barkely was 6'5" and had no problem. The problem comes when a player's size makes him a liability and limits effectiveness. Millsap has flourished at the 4 spot, and no Jazz fan would say he's a liability to his team instead of an asset. You would know this if you watched him play instead of looking at a draft express profile and making conclusions.

I watch him plenty. I never described his offensive game. Quit making crap up. I was obviously talking about, and referring to him being undersized, and not a good defender. I never said he wasn't talented.

Seriously, what the hell are you talking about? I say he's undersized. You say he's not. I provide his draft measurements AFTER you told me his weight. YOU brought up dimensions, not me.

So where in that dialogue does his offensive talent/capability come in exactly? I never talked about offense.

What conclusions did I make by posting his draft express height, except for making the point that he's undersized, after YOU responded TO ME with his weight? Are you having a conversation with yourself? Seriously, quit putting words in my mouth.

I say he's undersized, and post his height, and now you're attacking me for not including something I wasn't talking about in the first place? Are you high?

 

[Showtime]

I watch him plenty. I never described his offensive game. Quit making crap up. I was obviously talking about, and referring to him being undersized, and not a good defender. I never said he wasn't talented.

Seriously, what the hell are you talking about? I say he's undersized. You say he's not. I provide his draft measurements AFTER you told me his weight. YOU brought up dimensions, not me.

The term "size" and "height" are not mutually exclusive. They mean different things. Frye is 6'11", and could probably be boxed out by Pooh Jeter. Ben Wallace is 6'7", yet won rebounding and block titles along with DOPY as a C because he was a bull of a man. Millsap may be too short for your liking, but he doesn't lack the body size to compete at that position. So, the point that he lacks "size" isn't the same as he lacks "height".

So where in that dialogue does his offensive talent/capability come in exactly? I never talked about offense.

You made comments about his entire value as a player, and equated him to Landry, despite the massive difference of production and consistently between the two. Here is what you said: "Neither plays defense. Both are somewhat undersized. Milsap is similar to Landry. No thanks." That's an incredibly simplified and ignorant conclusion about his value as a player. Landry is nowhere near Paul's level, so comparing them as equals is foolish.

What conclusions did I make by posting his draft express height, except for making the point that he's undersized, after YOU responded TO ME with his weight? Are you having a conversation with yourself? Seriously, quit putting words in my mouth.

See above.

I say he's undersized, and post his height, and now you're attacking me for not including something I wasn't talking about in the first place? Are you high?

I'm attacking your points by their basis. You brought up height because you think it negatively impacts his value as a player. I'm arguing the basis to that. I'm arguing that unlike Landry, his lack of height hasn't prevented him from being consistently productive, therefore they shouldn't be compared based on height alone.

 

[Tetsujin]

I'm attacking your points by their basis. You brought up height because you think it negatively impacts his value as a player. I'm arguing the basis to that. I'm arguing that unlike Landry, his lack of height hasn't prevented him from being consistently productive, therefore they shouldn't be compared based on height alone.

Carl Landry wasn't exactly unproductive either, he just sucked at defense and rebounding. While Milsap may be a better player overall, he is still deficient in size (Kenny Thomas, Brian Skinner, Corliss Williamson, and Carl Landry among others say hi) and mostly unable to guard a gourd on a nightly basis.

 

[Showtime]

Carl Landry wasn't exactly unproductive either,

But he's nowhere near comparable to Millsap. Last season, Paul made Boozer replacable, and this year so far he's averaged 17 PPG 8 REB on 53% shooting playing next to an all-star calibre big in Al Jefferson, on a playoff team that was fighting for 5th place before the blowup. The only time Landry has produced like that is after getting dealt to the kings where he was a top option next to Evans for the last 28 games of the season where they went 7-21. So Millsap went from consistent backup to consistent starter on a playoff team, whereas Landry went from consistent back to inconsistent starter who couldn't hold a starting job and struggled on one of the worst teams in the league.

While Milsap may be a better player overall, he is still deficient in size (Kenny Thomas, Brian Skinner, Corliss Williamson, and Carl Landry among others say hi) and mostly unable to guard a gourd on a nightly basis.

Please answer this question, because nobody else has in this entire debate: what's the point of bringing up his size if it's not preventing him from consistently producing? The only relevance to his height that people keep bringing up is if it's making him a liability as a player, but it's not, therefore it's irrelevant. If the guy is putting up numbers on a regular basis and outplaying his peers at his position, then it doesn't matter what size he is.

There are plenty of guys 6'10" + who aren't good defensive players. Defense isn't about size from the PF position.

I'm tired of arguing this point, so I'm done for now. Millsap is not the same as Landry. They are not comparable, and their deficiencies are not comparable because one guy's size limits him, and the other's doesn't. Period. Millsap > Landry.

 

[Tetsujin]

But he's nowhere near comparable to Millsap. Last season, Paul made Boozer replacable, and this year so far he's averaged 17 PPG 8 REB on 53% shooting playing next to an all-star calibre big in Al Jefferson, on a playoff team that was fighting for 5th place before the blowup. The only time Landry has produced like that is after getting dealt to the kings where he was a top option next to Evans for the last 28 games of the season where they went 7-21.



Please answer this question, because nobody else has in this entire debate: what's the point of bringing up his size if it's not preventing him from consistently producing? The only relevance to his height that people keep bringing up is if it's making him a liability as a player, but it's not, therefore it's irrelevant.

His size makes him a defensive liability in that he cannot effectively guard most other big men in the league (see Carl Landry and Kenny Thomas, who actually would have been a pretty damn good defender if he wasn't two inches shorter than just about anybody he was matched up against.)

And I'm pretty sure Carlos Boozer's vagabond ways and desire to make himself a villain to the citizens of every city that he played for had more to do with the Bulls signing Boozer than Paul Millsap did, hence the Jazz trading for Big Al to replace Carlo Boozer.

 

[Showtime]

His size makes him a defensive liability in that he cannot effectively guard most other big men in the league (see Carl Landry and Kenny Thomas, who actually would have been a pretty damn good defender if he wasn't two inches shorter than just about anybody he was matched up against.)

Incorrect. He can effectively guard most other PF's. There's only a few he has trouble with. And height doesn't make a player a good defender. There's plenty of 6'10"+ players who are mediocre or downright bad defensive players. This is where the logic of this forum breaks down. If a shorter player automatically = bad defender, then a taller player should = better defender. Well, that's not the case.

And I'm pretty sure Carlos Boozer's vagabond ways and desire to make himself a villain to the citizens of every city that he played for had more to do with the Bulls signing Boozer than Paul Millsap did, hence the Jazz trading for Big Al to replace Carlo Boozer.

Boozer wanted to get paid, and Millsap made him expendable, because they didn't need to spend a ton of money when their backup could step up and produce at a similar rate. They re-signed Millsap to a reasonable deal and let Boozer go..

 

[steelevt]

Seriously, wtf is wrong with the fans on this forum? If a player isn't elite and perfect, they aren't worthy of playing here? Size is irrelevant if it doesn't hinder production and effectiveness.

dont take it personal. it seems arguing on behalf of any legit player in the nba is an uphill battle here. some kings fans wouldnt want lebron, carmelo or even steve nash here due to various reasons. everyone will find something wrong with even the best players in the nba and will quickly dismiss them from playing on our mighty 14-41 team. we over value most of our own players yet under value better players on other teams. i've learned that you just state ur arguement then move on. is milsap undersized compared to other PFs? yes, but is he a good PF and better than landry or any of our other PF at the moment? definitely. sorry to say no one will ever be good enough for our team and tyreke evans is the only answer. oh also learned here that apparently arron afflalo is the best player in the nba not in a kings uniform

 

[Showtime]

dont take it personal. it seems arguing on behalf of any legit player in the nba is an uphill battle here. some kings fans wouldnt want lebron, carmelo or even steve nash here due to various reasons. everyone will find something wrong with even the best players in the nba and will quickly dismiss them from playing on our mighty 14-41 team. we over value most of our own players yet under value better players on other teams. i've learned that you just state ur arguement then move on. is milsap undersized compared to other PFs? yes, but is he a good PF and better than landry or any of our other PF at the moment? definitely. sorry to say no one will ever be good enough for our team and tyreke evans is the only answer. oh also learned here that apparently arron afflalo is the best player in the nba not in a kings uniform

It's baffling. Anybody under 6'9" is unable to guard a mailbox, and yet anybody who looks around at the rosters and teams can see that is painfully incorrect. Unfortunately, most kf posters know little about other nba teams and players other than what Grant tells them on sportsline.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

First off, he isn't.

Second, I'll play along. Let's say Boozer is small for a PF in whatever fantasy land you conjure up. Explain how that matters if it doesn't impact production.

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?