Petrie saying all the things I want to hear

[funkykingston]

Encouraging article on RealGM today. Almost missed it because I'm so focused on the drama around today's announcement, but clearly Geoff has identified all the same needs most of us have.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/213452/Kings_Hope_To_Be_More_Active_In_Free_Agency_Trades

Obviously it hinges on the Maloofs allowing him to spend money, but ballhandling, shooting, another big to upgrade from Jackson and most of all veteran leadership are all the things I want to see him go after too.

 

[rainmaker]

If we don't get a top 2 pick, I think Petrie will strongly consider trading that pick. This quote doesn't sound like Petrie is looking to just add young talent which will take time to mature. I agree with that.

"That's going to play a factor, but I think for us to start building additional value with the roster, basically for the last two or three years, we've tried to draft it," said Petrie. "But for us to accelerate building value in the roster, we have to come out of hibernation in competing for free agents and trade for value … I think at some point that has to happen, and hopefully coming out of this next offseason, we'll get back to being able to do some of those things."

 

[funkykingston]

I think Petrie is looking for veteran help regardless, but I agree that trading the pick might be the best option depending on what can be had in return. This team should be reaching the point of not wanting to wait for yet another 19 or 20 year old to develop and moving towards acquiring guys that will help them win now AND for the next 4 or 5 years.

Personally, even with a top 2 pick I'm not incredibly enthused by the options. I like Irving, but not for this team. Williams could be the guy but he'd have to play most of his minutes at SF and be more perimeter based and I'm not sure that's the best use of his skills. Personally I think he's much more of a tweener in the Beasley mold.

In any event, I'd love to see Geoff finally get aggressive in his moves with the money to make things happen. Should be fun if the Maloofs are really up for it.

 

[Glenn]

I absolutely agree about trading the pick if it does not land us Williams. Lot's of reasons some of which disagree with others but we need th vet or two. Only a sure fire star shouold be picked and we aren't in that position.

 

[bajaden]

I absolutely agree about trading the pick if it does not land us Williams. Lot's of reasons some of which disagree with others but we need th vet or two. Only a sure fire star shouold be picked and we aren't in that position.

Here's the thing. Drafting a player or signing a freeagent, can or cannot be mutually exclusive of one another. Its all about value. The player you draft, may give you more value than whomever you might trade for, depending on the value placed on the draft pick by the other team. In other words, if its just a throw in to sweeten the deal, you might be losing value.

After you get past the first two players in the draft, there's an admitted dropoff. I and most scouts think that both Irving and Williams have a chance to be stars in the league. And I disagree that Williams is more of a tweener than Beasley. Williams has more skills than Beasley had coming out of college. He's a much better outside shooter than Beasley was. Beasley has become a better shooter, but wasn't originally. Williams has a better post game than Beasley did. I watched JT outplay Beasley in their only meeting in college. That one game probably got me more excited about JT than I should have, but thats another story.

There are similarities though. Both played PF in college, and both are better suited to playing SF in the NBA. By the way, Beasley was a terrible rebounder at the PF position, but he's adequete at the SF position. But I digress.

I believe that if you can land someone significant by adding in the draft pick, then fine! But I wouldn't do it for just another good journeyman. In that case I'd rather use the pick on someone thats raw, but with a lot of upside. Like a Biyombo or Faried. Maybe take a gamble on Fredette. Curry was pretrayed almost exactly as Fredette is being pretrayed now. Good shooter! Not a true point guard. Not a good athlete and will be a poor defender. Well, he's not a good defender so far, but he's passable, and his other qualities more than make up for his weaknesses. I think it can be argued that a lot of folks on the fourm wouldn't mind having him on the team.

My point is, that some of the guys taken beyond the 2nd pick will end up being better than projected. And while I agree, that we really don't need anymore 19 year olds to help the team. I look at them as depth for the future, which the team will need at some point.

 

[Bricklayer]

The thing is, while this summer is unquestionably a time when we need to wake up and make those consolidating/hole filling moves, its NOT a time when we need a newly proactive Petrie running around making big deals. How many major team changing deals did OKC make the summer before they blew up? How many major team chaning moves did the Grizzlies make this summer? The team is already here. Its needs some support, some targeted acquisitions, but it doesn't need big trades right now, no matter how exciting for fans. Its actually disappointing to hear Petrie sound disppaointed his prized MLE was taken from him the last few years. We are depending on him having a feel for the subtelty of what needs to be done right now.

 

[pupsingh]

i posted this in another thread but what do u think? balanced starting lineup deep bench, kind of goes with what petrie was saying, vet, good shooter, i guess not so much the ball handling tho


1st/casspi for Granger

Move Thornton to the bench to give the bench some explosive offense and the starting unit some balance by starting beno with reke which seemed to work

Evans
Beno
Cousins
Dalembert
Granger

Thornton
Cisco
JT




Greene
Whiteside

the starting unit has a good balance of offense and defense as tyreke dalembert and granger are good defenders. Cousins could become a good defender. BEno, well, is bad at defense but his facilitating abilities make up for it.

the bench has an instant offense guy in thornton and solid bigs in JT and whiteside(if he steps up), and a vet sf in Cisco and greene who i thought was starting to turn the corner.

seems like a balanced team to me, only problem is would indy do that trade and can we afford it, and is that trade worth it to you guys?

 

[Glenn]

bajaden, rip this apart because I am not versed in either guy. Shoving the issue of the SF aside, I'd like Kanter or Fredette (assumes no Irving or Williams). Kanter because another big never hurts and he gives us a good player and 6 fouls in that last line of defense. Even last year, as good as I thought our front three rotation worked, we still occasionally had both Dally and Cuz in foul trouble and needed something more than JT. Kanter would allow everyone to play without much concern for fouls. 4 guys.

Petrie seems focused on three point shooting as one need and who's better than Fredette? I cannot put into words why I think a standard PG won't fit. I presume the fact he would come off the bench is my main issue. I am talking of THIS team and not normal teams. Tyreke is unique in good and bad ways and that influences what I think we need. We need firepower.

I don't consider Fredette a PG in the classical sense nor would I see it as his role. A good off the bench boost of energy and firepower is what he is. I think he would be content with that role while some other real PGs might not be happy. For THIS team, doesn't he fit?

How was the desert? Ick!

 

[Section 101]

bajaden, rip this apart because I am not versed in either guy. Shoving the issue of the SF aside, I'd like Kanter or Fredette (assumes no Irving or Williams). Kanter because another big never hurts and he gives us a good player and 6 fouls in that last line of defense. Even last year, as good as I thought our front three rotation worked, we still occasionally had both Dally and Cuz in foul trouble and needed something more than JT. Kanter would allow everyone to play without much concern for fouls. 4 guys.

Petrie seems focused on three point shooting as one need and who's better than Fredette? I cannot put into words why I think a standard PG won't fit. I presume the fact he would come off the bench is my main issue. I am talking of THIS team and not normal teams. Tyreke is unique in good and bad ways and that influences what I think we need. We need firepower.

I don't consider Fredette a PG in the classical sense nor would I see it as his role. A good off the bench boost of energy and firepower is what he is. I think he would be content with that role while some other real PGs might not be happy. For THIS team, doesn't he fit?

How was the desert? Ick!

Irving
Williams
Knight
trade it

 

[funkykingston]

The thing is, while this summer is unquestionably a time when we need to wake up and make those consolidating/hole filling moves, its NOT a time when we need a newly proactive Petrie running around making big deals.

Agree and disagree. I'm looking for an aggressive Petrie. Considering that he's about the most nonchalant GM in the game that's not saying much. He's always been content on draft day to wait until his team was on the clock and either pick the highest rated player on his board or trade for a future pick. He's not a gambler and I LIKE that aspect of his approach.

Sure, he might take a risk on guy like Webber and his attitude and injury history but he traded an small for big AND old for young by dealing Richmond to get him. From a talent standpoint that deal was hugely lopsided in the Kings favor. Especially when the best deal everyone thought we'd get was Mashburn and Ike Austin.

True, this isn't 1999. We don't need to sign a Vlade, trade for a Webber and draft a Jason Williams. But clearly Geoff knows what this team needs and nas articulated as much. While I'm not super high on this year's draft crop, I absolutely trust Petrie's drafting acumen. And when cost concerns aren't the primary motivation he very rarely is on the wrong end of a trade. Signing free agents is one area that worries me a bit. While he bargain shops very well and DID sign Vlade, he also tends to overpay, especially when retaining his own guys.

That said, if Geoff really has the freedom to approach this offseason how he wishes, I envision a MUCH improved team next season (provided there is one) with very solid talent added to a talented and young core.

This is the first offseason in a long time where I'm not just hopeful but legitimately excited at what can be done.

 

[Bricklayer]

bajaden, rip this apart because I am not versed in either guy. Shoving the issue of the SF aside, I'd like Kanter or Fredette (assumes no Irving or Williams). Kanter because another big never hurts and he gives us a good player and 6 fouls in that last line of defense. Even last year, as good as I thought our front three rotation worked, we still occasionally had both Dally and Cuz in foul trouble and needed something more than JT. Kanter would allow everyone to play without much concern for fouls. 4 guys.

Petrie seems focused on three point shooting as one need and who's better than Fredette? I cannot put into words why I think a standard PG won't fit. I presume the fact he would come off the bench is my main issue. I am talking of THIS team and not normal teams. Tyreke is unique in good and bad ways and that influences what I think we need. We need firepower.

I don't consider Fredette a PG in the classical sense nor would I see it as his role. A good off the bench boost of energy and firepower is what he is. I think he would be content with that role while some other real PGs might not be happy. For THIS team, doesn't he fit?

How was the desert? Ick!

You can't shoot threes from the bench, and that is the problem wiht picking up any guard to shoot your 3s -- our 3 guard rotation could easily eat up all 96 guard minutes next season. You could get a guy like Kapono for spot duty, but then that is not a consistent night in night out help. By far the most open spot on the roster for a three point shooter to fit is at SF.

I do think though while we're shy one 3pt shooter, after Thronton arrived we had some balance there. Thronton is a 3pt shooter. Beno is not, but he can hit them. So 2 of the 3 guards are 3pt guys and really all you need is a realy steady/good one in that SF rotation and you are fine.

 

[funkykingston]

I don't consider Fredette a PG in the classical sense nor would I see it as his role. A good off the bench boost of energy and firepower is what he is. I think he would be content with that role while some other real PGs might not be happy. For THIS team, doesn't he fit?

Prior to the acquisition of Thornton I'd say yes. Now? We'd be starting one undersized scoring combo guard and bringing another one off the bench. Not saying it can't work, it might - especially since the team could ride whichever guy had the hot hand - but I don't know that you'd play them together which give Jimmer a relatively narrow niche with this team.

Just my opinion.

Personally, I'm not big on Irving for THIS team and so I'd hope for Williams and if not him then gamble on a player with potential, especially a big. Bismack Biyombo, Jonas Valanciunas, Donatas Motiejunas, Enes Kantner etc.

Biyombo and Motiejunas provide great compliments to Cousins in different ways. Kantner (who I like a lot) and Valanciunas aren't as obvious a fit but could develop into very good bigs who can either add to team depth or be great trade bait down the line.

 

[Glenn]

Finally someone who agrees with my position or non position on the PG position. I certainly didn't mean Jimmer would be on the court with Thornton but from what I know, he'd be OK with Tyreke. I just don't want a standard PG.

It seems odd to be discussing this team as having too much talent at certain positions but I think it's true. We don't need to be 12 deep but with Hassan hanging about, there's a lot of talent or potential. A two for one trade is one way of taking care of that.

 

[DesertFox]

Agree and disagree. I'm looking for an aggressive Petrie.
This is the first offseason in a long time where I'm not just hopeful but legitimately excited at what can be done.

Exactly.
I remember trying to (unsuccessfully) convince myself a Martin/Hawes/JT core could somehow work.

 

[bajaden]

i posted this in another thread but what do u think? balanced starting lineup deep bench, kind of goes with what petrie was saying, vet, good shooter, i guess not so much the ball handling tho


1st/casspi for Granger

Move Thornton to the bench to give the bench some explosive offense and the starting unit some balance by starting beno with reke which seemed to work

Evans
Beno
Cousins
Dalembert
Granger

Thornton
Cisco
JT




Greene
Whiteside

the starting unit has a good balance of offense and defense as tyreke dalembert and granger are good defenders. Cousins could become a good defender. BEno, well, is bad at defense but his facilitating abilities make up for it.

the bench has an instant offense guy in thornton and solid bigs in JT and whiteside(if he steps up), and a vet sf in Cisco and greene who i thought was starting to turn the corner.

seems like a balanced team to me, only problem is would indy do that trade and can we afford it, and is that trade worth it to you guys?

Well for starters, if we think our first round pick is not worth keeping, then why would another team place anymore value on it than we do. But that aside, there is no way in the world that the Pacers would trade Granger for what you offered. Granger is probably the best player on their team. And while that may speak volumes about their team, it also means that he's probably untouchable. And if they would consider trading him, it would take a lot more than Casspi and our 1st round pick.

That said, I'm a firm believer in starting the best players at all starting position. To my mind, Thornton is a better player than Beno. Now thats not a knock on Beno, its just a fact. So once again, to my mind, Thornton starts. I liked the way the rotation was working at the end of the season, so I see no reason to tinker with it (although I'm sure Westphal will consider it). With Cousins, Evans, and Thornton in the starting lineup, I don't see a big need for Granger. Not that I wouldn't love having the problem. As Bricky said, we just need some solid depth, coming from more experienced players. But role players, that are used to being role players.

 

[SacTownKid]

Well for starters, if we think our first round pick is not worth keeping, then why would another team place anymore value on it than we do. But that aside, there is no way in the world that the Pacers would trade Granger for what you offered. Granger is probably the best player on their team. And while that may speak volumes about their team, it also means that he's probably untouchable. And if they would consider trading him, it would take a lot more than Casspi and our 1st round pick.

That said, I'm a firm believer in starting the best players at all starting position. To my mind, Thornton is a better player than Beno. Now thats not a knock on Beno, its just a fact. So once again, to my mind, Thornton starts. I liked the way the rotation was working at the end of the season, so I see no reason to tinker with it (although I'm sure Westphal will consider it). With Cousins, Evans, and Thornton in the starting lineup, I don't see a big need for Granger. Not that I wouldn't love having the problem. As Bricky said, we just need some solid depth, coming from more experienced players. But role players, that are used to being role players.

The pretense would be that said team may be looking to get younger, shed salary, and get a return now for a player that maybe isn't going to necessarily take them where they want to go. It gives the other team options moving forward. For the Kings obviously the idea would be to get better now by picking up a player more advanced in their development or maybe even in the midst of their "prime".

I agree with Brick, now isn't necessarily the time to go bust on all that cap space and/or change the roster from top to bottom. Obviously there are two pieces here that are the focal point, actually, hopefully three with Marcus coming back! Any moves should be made with the intention of finding complimentary players for their sake. As they go, so do the Kings.

As for the Beno/Thornton debate. I don't think anyone is going to argue with you on that one.

I'd be totally happy coming out of this summer with a Prince, Battier, or maybe AK-47 to fill that hole at SF, a re-signed Thornton and Daly, should he come somewhat cheap, a young prospect with some talent via the draft to fill out the frontline or backcourt (Knight, Walker, Kanter, Vesely, T. Jones, etc.), and only if a package of Thompson, Casspi, and the pick land a Granger level player do you throw a wrench into the gears. If we can land a legit star with that package, and it's possible, I think you have to do it regardless of anything.

 

[bajaden]

The pretense would be that said team may be looking to get younger, shed salary, and get a return now for a player that maybe isn't going to necessarily take them where they want to go. It gives the other team options moving forward. For the Kings obviously the idea would be to get better now by picking up a player more advanced in their development or maybe even in the midst of their "prime".

I agree with Brick, now isn't necessarily the time to go bust on all that cap space and/or change the roster from top to bottom. Obviously there are two pieces here that are the focal point, actually, hopefully three with Marcus coming back! Any moves should be made with the intention of finding complimentary players for their sake. As they go, so do the Kings.

As for the Beno/Thornton debate. I don't think anyone is going to argue with you on that one.

I'd be totally happy coming out of this summer with a Prince, Battier, or maybe AK-47 to fill that hole at SF, a re-signed Thornton and Daly, should he come somewhat cheap, a young prospect with some talent via the draft to fill out the frontline or backcourt (Knight, Walker, Kanter, Vesely, T. Jones, etc.), and only if a package of Thompson, Casspi, and the pick land a Granger level player do you throw a wrench into the gears. If we can land a legit star with that package, and it's possible, I think you have to do it regardless of anything.

Yeah, I understand the concept of trading a 1st round pick. My response was related to Granger in particular, and how much value the Pacers would put on that pick. Here's how I look at it. If trading the pick involves a no brainer, then fine, do it. But with the 5th pick in the draft, we'll get a good player. Maybe not one thats ready to play right now, but in some ways, thats a good thing. It gives said player time to develop with little or no pressure. And if you've picked wisely, you've added depth for the future. Now that has value. If not to us, then someone else in the future. It also gives you insurance at whatever position that player plays. And the cost is extremely reasonable as investments go.

So when you throw in that pick as part of a trade, like the proposed one of Casspi plus pick for Granger, your trading two players for one. In this case, it would certainly be a worthwhile trade for us. But in the case of Casspi and a 1st round pick for Jared Dudley, not so. Here's the thing. I don't think we have a need to trade our 1st round pick. I think we can fill our needs through freeagency, or simply trade Greene or Casspi in a lopsided deal financially, by taking back more salary than we're trading away. Thats the beauty of being so far under the cap. Trades don't have to be financially equal.

 

[TheWileyVet]

Is trading Casspi + our 1st to move up and take Derrick Williams out of the relm of possibility? Seems that's more feasible than trading for Granger or Batum.


Then resign Thorton, Dalembert, and sign a vet SF for leadership and that's a darn good offseason.

 

[vikinginferno]

Is trading Casspi + our 1st to move up and take Derrick Williams out of the relm of possibility? Seems that's more feasible than trading for Granger or Batum.


Then resign Thorton, Dalembert, and sign a vet SF for leadership and that's a darn good offseason.

Whoever gets the first pick isn't trading Derrick Williams for the 5th/6th pick and Casspi. I highly doubt there is anyone outside of Demarcus or Tyreke that could get us Derrick Williams assuming we don't get first (and maaaybe second) pick.