.... He is a poor man BJ ... I think it is his reality, if not maximum.
If Douby desires he will become a "true" point guard and not the "dwarf" shooting guard he wants himself to be, then the Kings might regret letting him go. Honestly, I believe Douby is capable to be one of the best point guards in the NBA with the kind of talent he has. But sadly, I don't see him wanting to be a 'true" point guard. He was given several chances already and the dude just don't want to be great.
.
.
Douby has some great physical talent, no doubt, but true point guards are born. Either you are one, or you are not. Based on what he showed us, he's not. He's always going to suffer from the 'not tall enough to be a shooting guard, not creative enough to be a point guard' syndrome. Gerald Wallace was a completely different kind of player. When we left him unprotected over Anthony freaking Peeler, many of us Kings Fans were upset, because we knew he had the skills to be a solid scrappy (and athletic) small forward. But, at the time, he wasn't going to start over Peja, and he seemed to be one of those guys who only flourished in a starting role.
Wallace, in the very few minutes that he did play, was an impact player that made a positive difference on an elite team.
Douby was not that and did none of that, and he had his chances. If we kept him for the rest of his career here he would not become that. Even if he does develop an NBA quality game, he wouldn't have developed it here.
So of all the players we traded away, I think the Kings will miss Douby the least.
Douby was not that and did none of that, and he had his chances. If we kept him for the rest of his career here he would not become that. Even if he does develop an NBA quality game, he wouldn't have developed it here.
So of all the players we traded away, I think the Kings will miss Douby the least.
Not chance -- Gerald was always one of hte premier physical specimens in the league at his position, he just needed the game to catch up. Given that Quncy will never be a PG and is instead a 6'3" 175lb OG, he is one of the worst physical specimins at his position and would have to blow up to even become a consistent bencher.
If the Knicks, sith their coach and system, aren't willing to sign him and give him a role of significance, not sure who will.
If the Knicks, sith their coach and system, aren't willing to sign him and give him a role of significance, not sure who will.
We had to expose somebody, and the rest of the guys on our roster were pretty integral to our hopes of a championship. There was some talk about a Webber gambit - leaving Chris exposed and daring the Bobcats to take on his big contract - but that obviously never panned out (and would have been very risky).
I've come to realize that maybe Petrie's biggest blunder of all was made the offseason of 2003. Knowing that the expansion draft was upcoming the following summer, Geoff should have been looking at the roster and thinking about whom we had to protect. As it turned out, we had enough expiring contracts that we could have protected all of our players were it not for the rule that you have to expose at least one guy. We really didn't want to expose any of them, so why not sign Rodney Buford to a 2-year deal instead of a 1-year deal (he would have been basically at the minimum) with the intent of dangling him instead of our commodity players at the expansion draft. We could still have Wallace had he just done that. And hey, even if Buford knew the score, it's not like he'd turn down that second year on his contract.
I've come to realize that maybe Petrie's biggest blunder of all was made the offseason of 2003. Knowing that the expansion draft was upcoming the following summer, Geoff should have been looking at the roster and thinking about whom we had to protect. As it turned out, we had enough expiring contracts that we could have protected all of our players were it not for the rule that you have to expose at least one guy. We really didn't want to expose any of them, so why not sign Rodney Buford to a 2-year deal instead of a 1-year deal (he would have been basically at the minimum) with the intent of dangling him instead of our commodity players at the expansion draft. We could still have Wallace had he just done that. And hey, even if Buford knew the score, it's not like he'd turn down that second year on his contract.
As it turns out, we should have. But at the time we were hoping - nay we fervently believed against all evidence - that he would be the Webb of old coming off of his knee injury.
In hindsight, it's easy. Expose Webber, and if Charlotte takes him you just got bailed out of a big, long contract for a guy with no knees without having to cope with KT's "flexible" contract until the end of time. But it wasn't that simple at the time, and giving up your franchise player when he's still your franchise player is absolute suicide. It would have been one of the biggest PR disasters in sports history, fans would have abandoned the team, season tickets would have been dumped...no way. We could not have exposed Webber if there was any chance Charlotte would take him. I'm telling you, Charlotte takes Chris Webber and it's the Oklahoma City Kings drafting Spencer Hawes and Jason Thompson.
In hindsight, it's easy. Expose Webber, and if Charlotte takes him you just got bailed out of a big, long contract for a guy with no knees without having to cope with KT's "flexible" contract until the end of time. But it wasn't that simple at the time, and giving up your franchise player when he's still your franchise player is absolute suicide. It would have been one of the biggest PR disasters in sports history, fans would have abandoned the team, season tickets would have been dumped...no way. We could not have exposed Webber if there was any chance Charlotte would take him. I'm telling you, Charlotte takes Chris Webber and it's the Oklahoma City Kings drafting Spencer Hawes and Jason Thompson.
Last edited:
You're close. Exposing Webber would have us dealing with what the Broncos are dealing with Jay Cutler right now. Except Webber meant more to us than Cutler will ever mean to to Denver. You'd have a fanbase screaming that the office cares more about financials than fans and winning, and a superstar that could care less about the team. Exposing him would have been just as bad, since I doubt they would have spun the "An expansion team wouldn't have taken a chance on an aging, just coming off career altering surgery big man that has a monster contract to boot" PR story.
But Gerald Wallace wanted to leave Sacramento. His agent was telling the Bee: trade him or he would be walking away in year.
Why protect a guy that will be leaving anyway? In a perfect world we get to keep him, but when a guy didn't want to be here, it's probably best to remove him sooner rather than later.
Now, maybe we could have traded GW. But it's debatable what we can get in return for an unproven and still raw young player.
Why protect a guy that will be leaving anyway? In a perfect world we get to keep him, but when a guy didn't want to be here, it's probably best to remove him sooner rather than later.
Now, maybe we could have traded GW. But it's debatable what we can get in return for an unproven and still raw young player.
To be honest with you, the Bobcats wouldn't have come near Webb with a ten foot pole. Not that he wasn't still good (in relative terms), but he's coming off microfracture surgery, he's still due to make $50 million plus on the remainder of his contract, and your team has a $30 million salary cap. I don't think there's any chance that they touch Webber. They had already declared that they weren't going to be looking at any high-priced players.
And, as a preemptive strike, you sit the guy down and tell him that you're leaving him exposed in the expansion draft because you have no reason to believe that he'll be selected by the expansion team because of his salary, but you don't want to lose Gerald Wallace. Hurt ego aside, I think Webb would have been okay with that if it was done right.
Problem is that I don't think the Kings were really high on Wallace at the time. He didn't fit Petrie's idea of a swingman (read: couldn't shoot), had built up a good amount of tension between himself and Rick Adelman, and the plan at that time was to press on with the 25ppg Peja Stojakovic starting at the three-spot. I don't think they expected him to become the player that he is now.
And, as a preemptive strike, you sit the guy down and tell him that you're leaving him exposed in the expansion draft because you have no reason to believe that he'll be selected by the expansion team because of his salary, but you don't want to lose Gerald Wallace. Hurt ego aside, I think Webb would have been okay with that if it was done right.
Problem is that I don't think the Kings were really high on Wallace at the time. He didn't fit Petrie's idea of a swingman (read: couldn't shoot), had built up a good amount of tension between himself and Rick Adelman, and the plan at that time was to press on with the 25ppg Peja Stojakovic starting at the three-spot. I don't think they expected him to become the player that he is now.
Yeah, he was in Adelman's doghouse because he [reportedly] wasn't working hard in practice, and because he pulled himself out of the Dallas game over a minor injury and refused to go back in. I don't think he was really in the plans, and there's no guarantee that he would have developed into the player he has if he were buried on the bench behind Peja.
