Resign McCants (split from Petrie grade thread)

[Krunker]

I'd like McCants a lot more if he would pass the ball to open players. I read somewhere that we'd have to pay $3.64M for a qualifying offer. That's the max I would go.

 

[rainmaker]

I'd like McCants a lot more if he would pass the ball to open players. I read somewhere that we'd have to pay $3.64M for a qualifying offer. That's the max I would go.

3.6M for one year is all I would do. I'm still not convinced he is'nton his best behavior because its a contract year. Anything more than one year is too risky IMO.

 

[TheFifthMookie]

The Kings simply can't re-sign McCants in my opinion. The Kings can't keep on nickel and diming themselves, or they won't have the big money to pay the right person when the opportunity presents itself.

Dingdingdingdingding! we have a winnar!

This summarizes my sentiments as well. Its not that McCants can't contribute, its that in order to create something special, we need to have room to find the special pieces. McCants is probably a serviceable player who fills some of the Kings inadequacies, but adding him won't help the team become a contender or any sort anytime soon.

 

[VF21]

Dingdingdingdingding! we have a winnar!

This summarizes my sentiments as well. Its not that McCants can't contribute, its that in order to create something special, we need to have room to find the special pieces. McCants is probably a serviceable player who fills some of the Kings inadequacies, but adding him won't help the team become a contender or any sort anytime soon.

Hear, hear!

 

[SacKings7]

Dingdingdingdingding! we have a winnar!

This summarizes my sentiments as well. Its not that McCants can't contribute, its that in order to create something special, we need to have room to find the special pieces. McCants is probably a serviceable player who fills some of the Kings inadequacies, but adding him won't help the team become a contender or any sort anytime soon.

There's that argument, then there's the we're a rebuilding team that shouldn't let any decent young talent walk away for nothing argument. Not that I want to re-sign him at any cost, but if he can be had for cheap, then there's really nothing to lose other than a small bit of cap room

 

[VF21]

We got rid of John Salmons, who seems to have pretty much the same flaws as McCants. Why would we want to simply replace one with the other, especially when McCants doesn't seem to possess anything close to the defensive presence Salmons had?

 

[beb0p]

Should McCant leaves, somehow I don't think it'll be that difficult to replace an undersized SG with no PG skill and a little baggage. In fact, I think it'll be rather easy to replace such a player.

The question for me is: why would you want an undersized SG with no PG skill and little baggage in the first place?

 

[kingsnation]

I do like McCants, but I don't think we should resign him. We have too many players at that position that are more important than him.

And at PG? He is neither a long term or short term solution.

 

[KF8]

Knowing Petrie he'll probably overpay for McCants. I'll be ok with McCants if we didn't pay him too much. The thing I like about McCants is that he seems to be one of the more physical and better defenders on the Kings. We need more players with defense.

 

[Bricklayer]

We got rid of John Salmons, who seems to have pretty much the same flaws as McCants. Why would we want to simply replace one with the other, especially when McCants doesn't seem to possess anything close to the defensive presence Salmons had?

One significant difference is that McCants plays well, quite well actually, off the bench. Another is that he is young. And a third is that he hasn't yet showed the locker room problems, complained about touches, pouted, or that kind of stuff. Now on the third, he might yet. This was a player with a troubled rep coming over. But we've got a long history of taking on those kinds of players, and sometimes they work out.

Wish we had more than a half a year to evaluate here. But McCants is a pretty potent scorer, and unusual amongst small OGs in that he can hold his own in there better than our taller less physical guys. A bit like a bigger Bobby. If you told me there was a star PG available out there, I would go so far as to suggest that you could swap Kevin for the star OG, and have McCants and Cisco man the OG, and be better overall for it. Alas unless you are a Rubio true believer that star PG is probably not oout there for the taking.

 

[HighTopKicks]

One significant difference is that McCants plays well, quite well actually, off the bench. Another is that he is young. And a third is that he hasn't yet showed the locker room problems, complained about touches, pouted, or that kind of stuff. Now on the third, he might yet. This was a player with a troubled rep coming over. But we've got a long history of taking on those kinds of players, and sometimes they work out.

Wish we had more than a half a year to evaluate here. But McCants is a pretty potent scorer, and unusual amongst small OGs in that he can hold his own in there better than our taller less physical guys. A bit like a bigger Bobby. If you told me there was a star PG available out there, I would go so far as to suggest that you could swap Kevin for the star OG, and have McCants and Cisco man the OG, and be better overall for it. Alas unless you are a Rubio true believer that star PG is probably not oout there for the taking.

As well as McCants might play, his only true position is as Martin's backup. We already have Cisco who can fill that position, especially with Noc & Donte playing the SF & PF. If we really need another SG, there are a few available in the 2nd round that can fill the need for a lot less than McCants will get. Guys like Danny Green, Jodie Meeks,Terence Williams, & Dionte Christmas just to name a few.

If we get the playmaking PG that can penetrate into the paint, draw double teams, and kick out to spot up shooters, McCants ability to score around the rim isn't necessary.