Oh good lord -- Chandler/Nene/Gasol $$

This makes me apprehensive about Dalembert. One of the teams willing to greatly overspend on one of those three and who loses out on them might be willing to change gears and give Sammy ridiculous money.

But more importantly it solidifies in my mind that NBA owners can't help but trip over their own feet.

We saw it last year with Rudy Gay getting an $80 million deal from the Grizzlies despite seemingly bidding against themselves for anything more than the MLE.

I know he was integral to the Mavs championship run but $20 mil a season for Chandler? Even if he doesn't get it, the asking price itself is ludicrous. He averaged 10.1 ppg, 9.4 rpg and 1.1 bpg. And he's 29 with a lot of tread on his tires to the point that he failed a physical after a potential trade to OKC.

And I like Nene's game but are you telling me he's worth a third of a team's cap as a center who pulls down less than 8 boards a game?

It's hard to feel any sympathy at all for owners who complain about losing money when the first opportunity they get they drop $100 million contracts on guys like Rashard Lewis and Gilbert Arenas. Or $80 million on Rudy Gay. Or crazy money on Chandler or Nene.

Apparently they really needed a hard cap to prevent them from themselves. Sheesh.
 
The word "overpay" needs definition. I read an article about 5 years ago that calculated the average salaries by position. The highest paid were centers and the lowest paid were point guards, believe it or not. The other positions lined up in order of height. I thought that was fascinating. Big guys get big salaries is the conclusion I came away with. After reading a lot of the recent notes and throwing in a whole lot of my bias, I think Dally is a great fit. Is he the best center in the league? No. I'd rather have Howard playing next to Cousins and that would be a fine fit. :) But, looking at the rest of the bigs that are available and factoring in the immense firepower the Kings have, or at least the number of shooters we have, we need Dally. He is the perfect fit. To me, it comes down to a two part equation: #1 how much is he worth and #2 how much is he worth to the Kings.

#2 is the clincher for me. He is central to our defense being the last line of whatever defense we put on the floor. Everybody knows this. I don't know how much we need to pay to reach the minimum but I will not scream no matter what Petrie chooses to offer. That doesn't mean there isn't a cap on what should be paid but that cap will be determined between Petrie and Dally's agent.

I want the guy. Let he and Cuz have another 5 years together.
 
Glenn said:
The word "overpay" needs definition. I read an article about 5 years ago that calculated the average salaries by position. The highest paid were centers and the lowest paid were point guards, believe it or not. The other positions lined up in order of height. I thought that was fascinating. Big guys get big salaries is the conclusion I came away with. After reading a lot of the recent notes and throwing in a whole lot of my bias, I think Dally is a great fit. Is he the best center in the league? No. I'd rather have Howard playing next to Cousins and that would be a fine fit. :) But, looking at the rest of the bigs that are available and factoring in the immense firepower the Kings have, or at least the number of shooters we have, we need Dally. He is the perfect fit. To me, it comes down to a two part equation: #1 how much is he worth and #2 how much is he worth to the Kings.

#2 is the clincher for me. He is central to our defense being the last line of whatever defense we put on the floor. Everybody knows this. I don't know how much we need to pay to reach the minimum but I will not scream no matter what Petrie chooses to offer. That doesn't mean there isn't a cap on what should be paid but that cap will be determined between Petrie and Dally's agent.

I want the guy. Let he and Cuz have another 5 years together.
Click to expand...

Good points.

I'm not as afraid of overpaying for Daly as some are. I'd also much rather overpay a shotblocking center, who has that reputation league wide, and therefor could most likely be moved at a future date if desired, then for a guard or backup.

It's also about how money is allocated. With Cousins/JT/Hickson/Whiteside already here, I'd rather pay Daly 12M per, then pay let's say Hayes 7M, and Battier 5M. Money is still the same(discounting length of deals), but we'd get much more bang for our buck with a guy like Daly solidifying our defense and complimenting Cousins, compared to spending that money on role players.

So if hypothetically we're going to offer about 18M in contracts, I'd MUCH rather offer Daly 12M, and Thornton 6M, rather then say 6M to Thornton, 6M to Barea, and 6M to Hayes.
 
Čarolija said:
In related news



https://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA/status/143975133143511040


That's $8 million per season for DeAndre Jordan. Another example that defensive big man are pricey asset because they matter a great deal in the scheme of things
Click to expand...

I'm glad the market is going to begin sorting itself out. If we can get Dalembert pegged to the standard $10-$12 mil big shotblocker numbers, and then make that offer to him while other teams are still saving their money tryng to snag Nene/Chandler/Gasol, then we may be able to bring him back and get out of the market before anythign crazy happens.

P.S. as an aside, Ken Berger today for the first time mentioned as one one of the teams heavily pursuing Chandler. We were just part of a list of teams, there was no elaboration, and it may have just been filler. But its literally the first time i have heard us mentioned as a pursuer by the national media. Who knows.
 
Čarolija said:
In related news



https://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA/status/143975133143511040


That's $8 million per season for DeAndre Jordan. Another example that defensive big men are a pricey asset because they matter a great deal in the scheme of things
Click to expand...

So, if you think that Dalembert is 10% better than Jordan going forward, then Dalembert is worth $8.8 million. At 20% better, $9.6 million. And at 30%, $10.4 million. You'd have to think Dalembert is 50% better to pay him $12 million.
 
Kingster said:
So, if you think that Dalembert is 10% better than Jordan going forward, then Dalembert is worth $8.8 million. At 20% better, $9.6 million. And at 30%, $10.4 million. You'd have to think Dalembert is 50% better to pay him $12 million.
Click to expand...

All you have to think is that Dalembert is the proven entity who's been doing it for years while Jordan is a new kid with one good year and who's restricted status likely dampens his market.

You also have to think about how there aren't enough of these guys to go around, so you are inevitably going to end up paying one of them $8mil+ if you are lucky enough to get one at all.
 
Maybe my view of the market is off, but I think Jordan is a more valuable player to a lot of teams than Dalambert right now.

I mean, unless your a contender ( or the Kings ) Jordan seems like the better fit to me. If you give him 4 or 5 years you can pretty much guarentee he'll be effective in all of those years... Dalembert could break down towards the end of his next long term deal. I'd even say Jordan was a better fit for us if I didn't see Dalembert work here with my own two eyes.

But for a team like the Clippers .. or Houston, Denver, Golden State, New Jersey, Indiana, and New Orleans I can see Jordan being the better long term solution. None of those teams are contending and Jordan can get better. With Dalembert you pretty much know what you are going to get.

So I guess my point is that seeing a 8mil a year offer to Jordan makes me a little more optimistic that this Dalembert thing won't get out of control. Of course, this is probly on the lower side of offers from Jordan because he is restricted, and this is just the first offer out there ... but it is good news.
 
Bricklayer said:
All you have to think is that Dalembert is the proven entity who's been doing it for years while Jordan is a new kid with one good year and who's restricted status likely dampens his market.

You also have to think about how there aren't enough of these guys to go around, so you are inevitably going to end up paying one of them $8mil+ if you are lucky enough to get one at all.
Click to expand...

The restricted status of Jordan dampens his market value, but the age of Dalembert dampen his, especially if the contract is longer than three years. Based on Jordan's contract, Dally should be in the $8 mill - $10 mill range imo.
 
Here's an idea; instead of spending a bunch of money on a big man why don't we just use whiteside. He's got the shotblocking ability that everyone craves. Best of all..he's already on our team! Doesn't anyone realize this?! I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!
 
Chupacabra said:
Here's an idea; instead of spending a bunch of money on a big man why don't we just use whiteside. He's got the shotblocking ability that everyone craves. Best of all..he's already on our team! Doesn't anyone realize this?! I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!
Click to expand...

well...you MIGHT be taking crazy pills if you think we can rely at all on a 2nd round draft pick with 2 minutes of NBA action under his belt who missed most of last season with injury. :p

Whiteside MIGHT be the answer, or an answer, but there is no way to know right now, and it might be years. And the thig gis we are not talking about just having a shotblocker on the roster just to have one on the roster, we are basically talking about here a shotblocker not only as part of the rotatin, but one so good we can throw him out there in the starting lineup alongside Cousins to cover for him defensively. While Whiteside could show well and could end up in our rotation, the odds start getting more and more remote that he's just going to be able to walk out and suddenly become a major minute starter for us.

Besides there's no rule you can only have one. Two is nice. One to start, one to develop.
 
All I've heard about Whiteside is he's rough, and his is nowhere near mature enough. To me that translates to, "He has ability, but he will get outsmarted by almost every player and committ a butt load of fouls because of it."
 
What is this crap? Kings don't want to pay Daly 10M per? If Daly would resign for 10M per, which it doesn't say he will, but implies that's the neighborhood he's looking for, I'd make an offer ASAP. From Amick

While sources say the Kings want to keep Dalembert, there is a significant gap to bridge on the economics and Sacramento appears willing to lose Dalembert should the financial number remain in the territory of $10 million per year. While the Rockets might not be willing to pay Dalembert at that rate, either, the absence of state taxes in Texas offers a slight edge over California and Houston may see Dalembert as an attractive and cheaper alternative to Nene or Chandler.
Click to expand...

If true, then I say it's ridiculous the Kings, after saving all these years, and having this much cap room, and telling us they wer going to spend this year, are appearing to not be willing to spend what I definitely think is a fair market price. Thought we were ready to spend.

I do know it's early, and this could all be false, but we don't have much to go on, and this at the least isn't encouraging.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/12/06/nene.tyson.chandler/index.html

To put it into perspective, Chandler is reportedly asking for 4/50, "According to one source close to the situation, Chandler's deal from whoever wins the race to sign him will be at least $50 million over four years." via ESPN, and h asked LAC for 12M per, so what exactly do the Kings expect to pay for a player of Daly's importance and impact in such a FA class?
 
Last edited:
rainmaker said:
What is this crap? Kings don't want to pay Daly 10M per? If Daly would resign for 10M per, which it doesn't say he will, but implies that's the neighborhood he's looking for, I'd make an offer ASAP. From Amick



If true, then I say it's ridiculous the Kings, after saving all these years, and having this much cap room, and telling us they wer going to spend this year, are appearing to not be willing to spend what I definitely think is a fair market price. Thought we were ready to spend.

I do know it's early, and this could all be false, but we don't have much to go on, and this at the least isn't encouraging.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/12/06/nene.tyson.chandler/index.html

To put it into perspective, Chandler is reportedly asking for 4/50, "According to one source close to the situation, Chandler's deal from whoever wins the race to sign him will be at least $50 million over four years." via ESPN, and h asked LAC for 12M per, so what exactly do the Kings expect to pay for a player of Daly's importance and impact in such a FA class?
Click to expand...


I saw that too ... not terribly surprising, but kind of dissapointing. Even at 10 mil Dalembert will be overpaid, but based on the fact that we need to spend money and we know he can work here we can swallow that pill. The problem is that if Houston also offers him 10 mil, a team he seems to like better and money that will not be taxed... then we will have to offer him even more than that.

To pry him away from other teams we may need to go as high as 12 or so million, and at that point we may be better off looking at other options. I've always been under the impression that Dalembert wanted to play somewhere else, and I think that will be what eventually causes us to lose him. If the money is close, he'll sign with another team.

The fact is that we need to reach the salary floor, so I'm not going to get upset until I see what we do with our cap room.
 
rainmaker said:
What is this crap? Kings don't want to pay Daly 10M per? If Daly would resign for 10M per, which it doesn't say he will, but implies that's the neighborhood he's looking for, I'd make an offer ASAP. From Amick



If true, then I say it's ridiculous the Kings, after saving all these years, and having this much cap room, and telling us they wer going to spend this year, are appearing to not be willing to spend what I definitely think is a fair market price. Thought we were ready to spend.

I do know it's early, and this could all be false, but we don't have much to go on, and this at the least isn't encouraging.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/12/06/nene.tyson.chandler/index.html

To put it into perspective, Chandler is reportedly asking for 4/50, "According to one source close to the situation, Chandler's deal from whoever wins the race to sign him will be at least $50 million over four years." via ESPN, and h asked LAC for 12M per, so what exactly do the Kings expect to pay for a player of Daly's importance and impact in such a FA class?
Click to expand...

Maybe the thinking is that if he wants 10 they may as well just spend 12 or 14 and get Chandler. if that's the case I'd say it's a good move. but if it's just good old Maloof frugality rearing it's ugly head again, that effing sucks!
 
MassachusettsKingsFan said:
I saw that too ... not terribly surprising, but kind of dissapointing. Even at 10 mil Dalembert will be overpaid, but based on the fact that we need to spend money and we know he can work here we can swallow that pill. The problem is that if Houston also offers him 10 mil, a team he seems to like better and money that will not be taxed... then we will have to offer him even more than that.

To pry him away from other teams we may need to go as high as 12 or so million, and at that point we may be better off looking at other options. I've always been under the impression that Dalembert wanted to play somewhere else, and I think that will be what eventually causes us to lose him. If the money is close, he'll sign with another team.

The fact is that we need to reach the salary floor, so I'm not going to get upset until I see what we do with our cap room.
Click to expand...

We can offer a 5th year. Everyone else can't. So 5/50 or 4/40? I think we' still have a good shot, if we're willing to anti up what I think is fair.
 
RookieOfTheDay said:
Maybe the thinking is that if he wants 10 they may as well just spend 12 or 14 and get Chandler. if that's the case I'd say it's a good move. but if it's just good old Maloof frugality rearing it's ugly head again, that effing sucks!
Click to expand...

We'll find out. But if we don't go after Chandler hard, and simply aren't willing to spend...
 
I didn't see the link to Amick's article before I posted in the FA thread!

If this is true then its absolutely ridiculous. Its a very fair market value for Dalembert and we are not prepared to pay it?!

This better mean that we are confident of getting Chandler or we will really screw this up. I love Chandler and what he brings when he is healthy but I have serious reservations about his ability to stay healthy and last through the duration of that contract. As a 29 year old he has missed a lot of games. With Chandler there is a risk of his longevity and also how would he fit with Cousins but he would bring great leadership and veteran presence to the locker room and on court.

Dalembert on the other hand is not much worse, cheaper, an iron man that does not miss games but might not have the leadership qualities that Chandler would bring.

We simply much get one of these guys if we are serious about being genuine contenders.
 
Čarolija said:
I didn't see the link to Amick's article before I posted in the FA thread!

If this is true then its absolutely ridiculous. Its a very fair market value for Dalembert and we are not prepared to pay it?!

This better mean that we are confident of getting Chandler or we will really screw this up. I love Chandler and what he brings when he is healthy but I have serious reservations about his ability to stay healthy and last through the duration of that contract. As a 29 year old he has missed a lot of games. With Chandler there is a risk of his longevity and also how would he fit with Cousins but he would bring great leadership and veteran presence to the locker room and on court.

Dalembert on the other hand is not much worse, cheaper, an iron man that does not miss games but might not have the leadership qualities that Chandler would bring.

We simply much get one of these guys if we are serious about being genuine contenders.
Click to expand...

And yet i have a nagging feeling we are going to come out of free agency with thornton, hayes or kwame and either barea or young. They've been selling this rebuild and wait til next free agency period to see us spend for too long.

We know we need to spend. We know what we need to spend it on. What we need actually happens to be available and we can position ourselves to make more attractive offers than almost anyone in the league. This isnt complicated. Cmon kings.
 
I'm trying to figure out when Dalembert became the end all be all of the Kings. 10 million a year? No thanks.
 
SacTownKid said:
I'm trying to figure out when Dalembert became the end all be all of the Kings. 10 million a year? No thanks.
Click to expand...

Who are we going to put into center when he leaves?

Kwame? Yuck.
JT? No thanks, he is more of a PF and isn't the defender we need.
Whiteside? Has no experience whatsoever, you can't throw him into the lineup.
Hickson? He is an offensive PF.
Cousins moved to C? Cousins is our PF and not a defensive presence.

We need a defensive roleplayer force for our center position for this lineup to make sense. Our options? Dally or Chandler. Chandler won't come here (unless we pay 15 mil), and Dally is demanding 10 and we're getting upset about it? Come on now. That is a VERY fair price for a very rare breed of player.
 
One thing I could think on why we're not going gaga with signing Dalembert is if Westphal believes that Cousins would be more effective playing Center instead of PF. There are no more Yao or Shaq in the league and the average height of Centers I believe is now at 6'11". Cousin could easily become one of the best offensive Cs in the game. He's already years ahead of Howard on post up moves, btw.

Hickson at his A-game could actually play a very good defensive PF(based on a few games I saw him play with the Cavs).

So maybe the game plan now either get Chandler or have Cousins at Center full-time and sign rotation bigs like Kwame Brown.
 
xyrin said:
Who are we going to put into center when he leaves?

Kwame? Yuck.
JT? No thanks, he is more of a PF and isn't the defender we need.
Whiteside? Has no experience whatsoever, you can't throw him into the lineup.
Hickson? He is an offensive PF.
Cousins moved to C? Cousins is our PF and not a defensive presence.

We need a defensive roleplayer force for our center position for this lineup to make sense. Our options? Dally or Chandler. Chandler won't come here (unless we pay 15 mil), and Dally is demanding 10 and we're getting upset about it? Come on now. That is a VERY fair price for a very rare breed of player.
Click to expand...

Haven't you heard?!

We will trot out the defensive monsters in Cousins and Hickson as our front court. No chance anyone makes a lay up there but just in case it goes pear shaped (as everyone has off days) we would have super high quality veterans in Hayes and Kwame "superman" Brown that will shut down the lane and guard opposition's best front court player.

I love it how people whine about how overpaid defensive, shot blocking, rebounding big man are but its funny how so many teams are prepared to offer big money to them and its even more funny how you can find that type of big men in every championship winning team. But people must be right, they are overpaid. I am sure Cuban cried himself to bed when he needed to write out a cheque for $13million to Chandlder last year
 
Čarolija said:
Haven't you heard?!

We will trot out the defensive monsters in Cousins and Hickson as our front court. No chance anyone makes a lay up there but just in case it goes pear shaped (as everyone has off days) we would have super high quality veterans in Hayes and Kwame "superman" Brown that will shut down the lane and guard opposition's best front court player.

I love it how people whine about how overpaid defensive, shot blocking, rebounding big man are but its funny how so many teams are prepared to offer big money to them and its even more funny how you can find that type of big men in every championship winning team. But people must be right, they are overpaid. I am sure Cuban cried himself to bed when he needed to write out a cheque for $13million to Chandlder last year
Click to expand...


Must have missed when the Kings were a defensive force inside with Dalembert last year too. The Kings were around dead last in points in the paint allowed last year.
 
Čarolija said:
Haven't you heard?!

We will trot out the defensive monsters in Cousins and Hickson as our front court. No chance anyone makes a lay up there but just in case it goes pear shaped (as everyone has off days) we would have super high quality veterans in Hayes and Kwame "superman" Brown that will shut down the lane and guard opposition's best front court player.

I love it how people whine about how overpaid defensive, shot blocking, rebounding big man are but its funny how so many teams are prepared to offer big money to them and its even more funny how you can find that type of big men in every championship winning team. But people must be right, they are overpaid. I am sure Cuban cried himself to bed when he needed to write out a cheque for $13million to Chandlder last year
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I think it's important that we get a defensive big man, but I don't recall the Lakers having any real defensive big in their last 2 championships.
 
mac said:
Don't get me wrong, I think it's important that we get a defensive big man, but I don't recall the Lakers having any real defensive big in their last 2 championships.
Click to expand...

wha??? Um...Bynum?

the fact is that essentially every single NBA champion since Jordan retired has had a great defensive big. Actually it was an absolute notorious necessity back then too, but Jordan/Pippen offered the same alternative vision LeBron/Wade did, get multiple all league defensive studs at the wings, then team it with a great defnsive big like Rodman/Grant. If for soem reason Bynum gets exlcuded youcan always claim the Lakers did it with Kobe/Artest in the same way.

In any case for decades its been one long uninterrupted string of Tyson Chandlers, Andrew Bynums, Kendrick Perkins, Tim Duncans, Shaqs, Big Ben Wallaces, Admirals etc. Beyond the existence of a HOF level star, which even the '04 Pistons defied, the defensive lane clogging big is by far the most prominent marker of the elite title team.

Its an odd thing reall, so compeltely necessary, and I find them far more fun to watch than chucking guards and whatnot, but so very very hard for most fans to see. I don't understand really.
 
mac said:
Don't get me wrong, I think it's important that we get a defensive big man, but I don't recall the Lakers having any real defensive big in their last 2 championships.
Click to expand...

wha??? Um...Bynum?

the fact is that essentially every single NBA champion since Jordan retired has had a great defensive big. Actually it was an absolute notorious necessity back then too, but Jordan/Pippen offered the same alternative vision LeBron/Wade did, get multiple all league defensive studs at the wings, then team it with a great defnsive big like Rodman/Grant. If for soem reason Bynum gets exlcuded youcan always claim the Lakers did it with Kobe/Artest in the same way.

In any case for decades its been one long uninterrupted string of Tyson Chandlers, Andrew Bynums, Kendrick Perkins, Tim Duncans, Shaqs, Big Ben Wallaces, Admirals etc. Beyond the existence of a HOF level star, which even the '04 Pistons defied, the defensive lane clogging big is by far the most prominent marker of the elite title team.

Its an odd thing reall, so compeltely necessary, and I find them far more fun to watch than chucking guards and whatnot, but so very very hard for most fans to see. I don't understand really.
 
Bricklayer said:
wha??? Um...Bynum?

the fact is that essentially every single NBA champion since Jordan retired has had a great defensive big. Actually it was an absolute notorious necessity back then too, but Jordan/Pippen offered the same alternative vision LeBron/Wade did, get multiple all league defensive studs at the wings, then team it with a great defnsive big like Rodman/Grant. If for soem reason Bynum gets exlcuded youcan always claim the Lakers did it with Kobe/Artest in the same way.

In any case for decades its been one long uninterrupted string of Tyson Chandlers, Andrew Bynums, Kendrick Perkins, Tim Duncans, Shaqs, Big Ben Wallaces, Admirals etc. Beyond the existence of a HOF level star, which even the '04 Pistons defied, the defensive lane clogging big is by far the most prominent marker of the elite title team.

Its an odd thing reall, so compeltely necessary, and I find them far more fun to watch than chucking guards and whatnot, but so very very hard for most fans to see. I don't understand really.
Click to expand...

I would give more props to Ariza/Artest than to Bynum. Sorry if you feel differently but I don't exactly consider Bynum to be in the same league defensively as Dalembert, Chandler, Howard, Duncan, even Perkins. He's big ... kinda ends there to me. He contributes to the overall team defense by being big and taking up space, perhaps intimidating smaller players. He also rebounds well for them. But IMO he's not the defensive big that the rest of the guys you mentioned are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

VF21
Final Power Rankings...for those who care
Replies
11
Views
1K
Jerryaki
Jerryaki
Back
Top