One of our wings need to go...

[BLNINJA #81]

We are in bad need of a PF, and currently... I just don't see it working out having 3 pretty good wing players when you can't play them all.

This situation tonight is a result of this, and it will only continue to get worse until a way is found to balance this roster.

 

[SLAB]

Salmons.

Already upset.

And will soon return to the 6/3/3 player we all know and love.

 

[fnordius]

We've had 3 good wing players before, and it was no problem at all. Rick just told everybody that bringing glory to the team would make everyone on the roster look good. And it did. Maybe you sat on the bench, but you were still a King. Our problem now is that nobody wants to be on the bench, because the franchise has no glory to convey. The players make their own glory, or else they are benchwarmers on a bad team.

And there's the real problem. It's not having 3 good wings, it's that we don't have 3 good guys at any other position. Miller-Hawes-Williams makes 3 adequate guys at 2 positions. Bibby-Udrih-Greene makes one mystery yoyo at one position, plus an injured guy and someone who belongs in the NBDL. We get slaughtered at 2-3 positions every game, and as long as that's true, we're going to have some unhappy players.

 

[Jerichoholic]

We actually have 4 good wings (Martin, Garcia, Salmons, & Artest) and I agree that one needs to be moved simply because there aren't enough minutes or shots for all of them. Add that to the fact that they are all the same type of player, Hawk players. This is what Theus said in an interview, they are guys who are all shoot first players who mostly drive to the basket or shoot threes but don't pass enough.

We actually have a golden opportunity here to pick up a draft pick, some young players, or at least dump some salary. Salmons' value is higher than it will ever be right now and he seems to be the most upset with his role. We need to move him before his stats fall back to what we're used to.

 

[nbrans]

Move Salmons? Seriously? The guy who until now has kept his head down and has shown he can score, is the best on the team at getting a bucket when you need one, can defend and oh yeah, score 20 ppg?

You move Artest. Period. Salmons has shown he's a quality starter. Artest is, and always will be a ticking time bomb. Salmons isn't as talented as Artest, but he's not the guy you move when you're rebuilding.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

how about RONRON? or send one of the younger guys to the nbdl so they get some actual playing time to develop their game?

 

[Jerichoholic]

Move Salmons? Seriously? The guy who until now has kept his head down and has shown he can score, is the best on the team at getting a bucket when you need one, can defend and oh yeah, score 20 ppg?

You move Artest. Period. Salmons has shown he's a quality starter. Artest is, and always will be a ticking time bomb. Salmons isn't as talented as Artest, but he's not the guy you move when you're rebuilding.

I'd be happy to move Ron if we could get anything decent back in return. Although next game I'd like to see him start at PF and see what happens. The Kings went up against Al Jefferson last night, one of the game's best PF and is an actual old school post up player. Most PF in the league are either shooters and/or not strong enough to be effective post players which are the ones that will give Ron trouble.

Either way Salmons starts at SF but we probably will still have the problem of Martin, Salmons, and Artest all wanting to do the same thing out there.

 

[Gary]

Artest has the most value. Move him. Salmons did a hell of a job getting to the line. Artest always wants to shoot 3s. With Garcia, Salmons, and Martin you had three different type of players out there.

Garcia is the slasher that is pretty deadly running and spotting up.

Salmons is the inside 17ft threat who will occasionally hit an open 3. He gets to the line pretty much at will with his inside play.

Martin is the leader of the trio in points, and efficiency. He gets to the line at will, and hits open jumpers, creates for himself, and is deadly when it comes to getting you off your feet and drawing the foul.

Artest is the best on defense, but it's wasted because the rest of the team does not help him. Artest is like a mix of Salmons and Garcia offensively. He can slash, play inside, hit a 3, and create for himself. Not terribly efficent though. He seems to avoid contact.


Artest is the one with the most value at the time imo. Getting rid of him won't make the team and worse or any better. We have a couple players hat would thrive with him off the team and make up for the offense.

 

[Cal-Kings]

If Reggie had only started Artest at the 4 and Salmons at the 3 like I suggested....

 

[fnordius]

If Reggie had only started Artest at the 4 and Salmons at the 3 like I suggested....

Artest played at the 4 for quite a few minutes in the second half.

Moving Ron always sounds like a good idea, but now he's not just perceived as damaged goods, but also as a $7.8M ender. Some team who believed that they were one good SF away from a championship might be interested, but it's hard to think of who else would be willing to take a chance on Ron for what might only be a few months of benefits. Maybe the Lakers, if they were in the mood to placate Kobe. Then we're looking at a potential return of Turiaf and a late second rounder, or something like that. A deal which wouldn't give us anything exciting in return. We'd get rid of the ticking, and we'd maybe be a little better prepared for the Rose competition, but we wouldn't get anything which would directly help our future. I'd be OK with that, but I'm not sure that Petrie would.

So I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Gary]

Artest played at the 4 for quite a few minutes in the second half.

Moving Ron always sounds like a good idea, but now he's not just perceived as damaged goods, but also as a $7.8M ender. Some team who believed that they were one good SF away from a championship might be interested, but it's hard to think of who else would be willing to take a chance on Ron for what might only be a few months of benefits. Maybe the Lakers, if they were in the mood to placate Kobe. Then we're looking at a potential return of Turiaf and a late second rounder, or something like that. A deal which wouldn't give us anything exciting in return. We'd get rid of the ticking, and we'd maybe be a little better prepared for the Rose competition, but we wouldn't get anything which would directly help our future. I'd be OK with that, but I'm not sure that Petrie would.

So I'm not holding my breath.

There will be about 5-8 teams in both the west,a nd the east who think they are one player away from contending come the trade deadline, so I can see us trading him around that time.

Bibby is probally less likely since we don't really have a PG outside of Udrih right now who really isn't THAT experienced.

 

[fnordius]

There will be about 5-8 teams in both the west,a nd the east who think they are one player away from contending come the trade deadline, so I can see us trading him around that time.

Agreed. But we need a Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bynum, David Lee or Tyrus Thomas, and we're not going to get one of those. Even the Udonis Haslems and Theo Ratliffs are probably beyond our reach. So it's fine to talk about trading Ron away at the deadline, but it would be a mistake to link that to our PF issues, because all we'd get would be YET ANOTHER very lukewarm PF, making our roster even dumber than it is now. Salmons probably has higher trade value at the moment, but trading him would leave the ticking, rid us of one of the few contracts we have which doesn't suck, and, since he's a player without an established rep as a starter, we could only expect something similar in return. NOT a promising young starter. Then Ron would leave, and we'd be looking at starting Garcia at SF, because he'd be all we had left. Garcia would be in the last year of his rookie contract, so then we'd have to decide whether to extend him, despite his age and limits.

So I'm not seeing anything in this which relieves our PF/C problems, unless it's to dump Ron for a bag of chips and hope that gets us Beasley or Arthur or Hibbert in the draft.

 

[G_M]

I would start Ron play him 36-40 mins per game to help his stats.

Trust me, if (I know it's a BIG if) Ron stays sane and puts up quality numbers on both ends of the floor I for one believe his trade value will greatly increase by the trading deadline. I think a decent player or ending contract may not be out of reach as some teams begin to either panic or believe that he is the missing piece.

 

[Gary]

Agreed. But we need a Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bynum, David Lee or Tyrus Thomas, and we're not going to get one of those. Even the Udonis Haslems and Theo Ratliffs are probably beyond our reach. So it's fine to talk about trading Ron away at the deadline, but it would be a mistake to link that to our PF issues, because all we'd get would be YET ANOTHER very lukewarm PF, making our roster even dumber than it is now. Salmons probably has higher trade value at the moment, but trading him would leave the ticking, rid us of one of the few contracts we have which doesn't suck, and, since he's a player without an established rep as a starter, we could only expect something similar in return. NOT a promising young starter. Then Ron would leave, and we'd be looking at starting Garcia at SF, because he'd be all we had left. Garcia would be in the last year of his rookie contract, so then we'd have to decide whether to extend him, despite his age and limits.

So I'm not seeing anything in this which relieves our PF/C problems, unless it's to dump Ron for a bag of chips and hope that gets us Beasley or Arthur or Hibbert in the draft.

Than I say we sit on Artest for this year unless we can get a project PF.. We really only need a PF. Only team that really comes to mind is Miami w/ Haslem. But he is undersized by western conference standards. But he does rebound.