??? Resign McCants

  • Thread starter Thread starter sactownfan
  • Start date Start date
S

sactownfan

Guest
what are the odds this guy gets brought back? if we don't draft a SG i think i'd be down with resigning McCants.

Theres no doubt in my mind hes a special player. He could be the new Bobby Jacking/energy/scoring off the bench plus hes actually a SG not a Scoring PG. He hits the 3 and can burn past people to the hole, all around talent.

Obviously the red flag is character and its a big one... im a bit sketchy on this guys influence on such a young team. However sacramento isn't exactly party central like LA or NY. Plus with the amount of good character guys we do already have maybe he could keep himself together... I think that although Westphal seems soft spoken he wont tolerate any foolishness... Part of the Suns turnaround was getting the team under control.

anyway how bout a 2 year deal for McCants? with only the first year guaranteed and the 2nd year a team option.

I think McCants would keep it together if it was only a one year deal.
 
Garcia and his long extension need those minutes behind Martin, and Greene would ideally get some of the time at 3.
Figure Beno would also play a little 2 in small ball with the new PG, and McCants is not needed at all. He wouldn't get any playing time, so that money and roster spot would be better used on a developing rookie.

The only way bringing McCants back makes sense is if they trade Martin, then McCants/Garcia could suffice production-wise at the 2.
But I think McCants is an ***, so I personally don't care for him.
 
I actually kind of liked McCants down the stretch -- tougher, more physical guard than I tihought we were getting, and played physical defense too. His biggest problem is that at his size he can only play the one positon -- SG (he really showed no potential at all as a PG). And we already have a guy ahead of him who only plays that one position as well (Kevin). If something were to happen with Keivn, or with Cisco -- something to effect our depth at the position, then I would certainly be interested. But if we're 100% healthy and stickng with our awesome 17 win combo I am not sure where the minutes come from.
 
The guy can certainly score--that's why he's in the league, and he's reasonably efficient in doing so. He uses a lot of possessions and will score without turning the ball over. But the reason he's not gaining much traction is that he doesn't have an all-around game to make up for it. He does get to the line decently for someone whose three point shot is a decent part of his game (only Eric Gordon, Manu Ginobili, and JJ Redick? have better rates), but he just doesn't look to pass that often, especially for a player with such a high usage rate. He played surprisingly well with us in the 24 games after the trade, but that might be a fluke--they were quite off his usual stats, and he might be playing for the contract.

In terms of potential, I don't think there's much growth left. Yes, he's only 24, but his numbers have fluctuated up and down and he's probably looking to only improve his scoring efficiency and not much else. But there's no denying that he's a very useful player even if his numbers deviate back to their norms--the guy can score in a variety of different ways, and has proven he can do it reasonably effectively, and that and his sometimes physical brand of D can earn him a place in the league. I have to wonder, with his sometimes-penchance for taking bad shots and with past temper problems, whether he's designed to be on losing teams. He doesn't have the all-around game or namesake to get an MLE type deal, but the biannual or slightly higher should do it for a couple of years, if we want to keep him.
 
Last edited:
I also really liked McCants... I actually like his game more than Garcia's...(although Garcia is a leader and solid character guy) I think Garcia is expendable... He's widely considered to be a solid player now around the league and his trade worth might be about as high as it will get... Honestly I think if we ended up trading any of our players in a package of some sort I think it would be Garica going.
 
sactownfan said:
I also really liked McCants... I actually like his game more than Garcia's...(although Garcia is a leader and solid character guy) I think Garcia is expendable... He's widely considered to be a solid player now around the league and his trade worth might be about as high as it will get... Honestly I think if we ended up trading any of our players in a package of some sort I think it would be Garica going.
Click to expand...


I like mccants also, and i alaso think that garcia should be traded if we do end up in fact trading someone.
 
sacgirl88 said:
I like mccants also, and i alaso think that garcia should be traded if we do end up in fact trading someone.
Click to expand...

It depends on your tastes--Garcia's older than McCants (and nearing 30), and he's probably already stagnated. He's a preferred jumpshooter, and has shot 39% from threes the past two seasons even though he decreased his rate of attempts this season--a pretty efficient scorer overall, and he's not the possession hog McCants is. His athletic markers are actually in a mild decline--his rebound rate has dropped significantly to the point where he's actually an average rebounder even for SG standards, and his free throw rate has dipped very slightly every year. What's most impressive to me, actually, is his high rate of steals and blocks for both wing positions--only five other wing players have done better than him in that combination, and he's done that ever since he came into the league. The good thing about him is, as he's going into his 30s, he can sustain his level of play as well--he relies much more on his length than his athleticism in his stealing/blocking shots, and his jumpshot can easily sustain.

My opinion actually is that I prefer Garcia over McCants--but that's if we were actually a contending or playoff team; I think Garcia, with his ability to hit threes and play reasonable defense, can be a decent cog guy. But in our current state, I don't think it really matters--we're still years away, Garcia's nearing his 30s, and it probably would help him if we could trade him to a playoff team while we stash up on picks and young players--after all, he does have value. But the problem is that now his hefty contract dictates our perception of him rather than his actual play--he has the talent and game to be a useful player, but it's just not worth that amount of money/years, especially since he's getting up there. The year we paid him, he just commanded a higher usage rate and increased his scoring efficiency as opposed to rounding out his game, so he was just making himself a more effective role player. One thing about Garcia--he can handle the ball and doesn't turn it over, but I was sort of disappointed why his assist rates are so low--he's even an average passer for SF standards, especially since he showed some reasonable PG potential out of Louisville. But minor gripe anyhow.
 
Last edited:
I like McCants a lot. It is nice having a guy on the bench who can come in and play tough, physical defense while still having the ability to score. What I worry about is the price. I have a feeling though, that he won't be all that expensive to keep.

And while I like Garcia and what he brings to the game, I also think he is a piece that could used to make a trade work. Not that I have anything in mind, just throwing it out there.
 
Maybe if we move Martin for a top pick I'd be down to resign him. Let Evans/Hardin and McCants platoon at the SG for us.

If we keep Kevin, I dont think we need to keep McCants.
 
Well I'm not sure how we got into this either, or situation. To me its apples and oranges when talking about McCants and Garcia. McCants is a shooting guard. And thats pretty much it. He's not a point guard and never has been. So if you want to sign him as a backup to Martin, I'm fine with that.

Garcia on the other hand can play the shooting guard position and the SF position. At times, with the right matchups, he can play a little point, and at worst, play point forward, as in the triangle offense. In other words, he's more versatile. He's a poor mans Scotty Pippin. With emphasis on poor.

But if it had to come down to an either/or. Then I would take Garcia. He simply brings more to the table.
 
One last note on McCants. Some questions have been asked pretaining to his contract status with the Kings. Unless the Kings make a qualifying offer, which is $3,644,874.00, he becomes a freeagent. If the Kings do make a qualifying, then a cap hold is placed on the Kings until McCants future is decided, one way or another. What that means, is that $7,860,378.00 will count against the Kings salary cap until the Kings actually resign McCants, or he signs with someone else and the Kings decide not to match the offer.

If the Kings relinquish the rights to McCants and all of the other free agents from last year (which I think they will do), they will be around $7mil under the salary cap. Which brings me to the MLE. Its an either/or situation. You can either have the $7 million under the cap, or you can have the MLE, but you can't have both. In other words, you can't use the $7mil to sign a freeagent and then turn around and use the MLE to sign another player.

The MLE was instituted for teams that are over the salary cap. The cap space is more valuable than the MLE, for several different reasons. Number one is obvious. Its a larger amount than the MLE. Number two, it can be combined with a player to bring back a player of greater dollar value. For instance. The Kings could trade Kenny Thomas (and ending contract) who makes around $8 mil this year with their $7mil under the cap to bring in a player that makes $15 mil in salary. To the best of my knowledge, the MLE can't be used the same way. Its merely a sum that can be offered.
 
I think the Kings should keep him around if at all possible. His presence makes it easier trade Martin (who I still think is out most trade-able piece because he is likely to net us our biggest return). It seems to me that Rashad has under-achieved in his young career, but I really liked what I saw from him this past year in a Kings uni.
 
I still can't understand why people think the organization is going to trade Martin. We don't trade our stars UNLESS:

1. They're discontented and pretty much demand to be released...Mitch Richmond
2. They're pulling down more money than any three other players, have bad knees and can bring us flexible pieces back...Chris Webber
3. They're starting to break down, there's a chance to get a defensive juggernaut and they're going to demand a huge contract/extension within the next year...Peja Stojakovic

I just do not understand the idea that we need to trade someone - this times it's Kevin - because their value is high. Their value is high because they're good. I do not see the rationale in trading him away just because we can. Kev can be a pretty nice piece with the right surrounding players. I think we need to look at some of those improvements before we go for the old "grass is greener" approach.
 
VF21 said:
I still can't understand why people think the organization is going to trade Martin. We don't trade our stars UNLESS:

1. They're discontented and pretty much demand to be released...Mitch Richmond
2. They're pulling down more money than any three other players, have bad knees and can bring us flexible pieces back...Chris Webber
3. They're starting to break down, there's a chance to get a defensive juggernaut and they're going to demand a huge contract/extension within the next year...Peja Stojakovic

I just do not understand the idea that we need to trade someone - this times it's Kevin - because their value is high. Their value is high because they're good. I do not see the rationale in trading him away just because we can. Kev can be a pretty nice piece with the right surrounding players. I think we need to look at some of those improvements before we go for the old "grass is greener" approach.
Click to expand...


The theory behind trading Kevin is preciely because there are few realistic ways back up from a hole this deep in any sort of reasonable time frame. You can't just poo poo everything and sit around clutching a 17 win roster to your chest hoping to incrementally improve via the draft year after year. We need a big score of some type. Maybe getting the #1 would have been that big score, but in this draft, maybe not, and of course we didn't get it. So we still need a major upgrade from some point, and we have limited assets that can really be spun into that. And as this past year has rather dramatically proven, Kevin by himself is not worth many wins at all. Doesn't mean he has to be traded. Doesn't mean he will be traded. But seizing upon one our few major assets, and our biggest salaried one as well, as a way of doing something bold to turn this thing around is an idea that has to be very much in play.
 
Kevin is still a base year compensation player according to RealGM. Which makes him difficult to trade unless both teams involved are under the cap. I'm not sure when that expires... the earliest could be June 30th if 2008-2009 was the first year of his contract. Sometimes that CBA FAQ makes my head spin.
 
VF21 said:
I still can't understand why people think the organization is going to trade Martin. We don't trade our stars UNLESS:

1. They're discontented and pretty much demand to be released...Mitch Richmond
2. They're pulling down more money than any three other players, have bad knees and can bring us flexible pieces back...Chris Webber
3. They're starting to break down, there's a chance to get a defensive juggernaut and they're going to demand a huge contract/extension within the next year...Peja Stojakovic

I just do not understand the idea that we need to trade someone - this times it's Kevin - because their value is high. Their value is high because they're good. I do not see the rationale in trading him away just because we can. Kev can be a pretty nice piece with the right surrounding players. I think we need to look at some of those improvements before we go for the old "grass is greener" approach.
Click to expand...

There is a fourth reason. If you can get the better of someone in a deal and do a serious upgrade. I'm an old school guy. I like familiarity in my team. I like going to the arena or ball park and knowing that the guys I've come to know and love, vicariously of course, are going to be there. I also like to win. And sometimes that means sacrafice.

I'm by no means advocating that we trade Martin. But there is always a deal that you can't refuse, so I think you have to be open to it. This is just a thought, but maybe the reason people are so willing to trade Martin, is that he just doesn't have the fan appeal that guys like Vlade and Webber did. He's not Mr. Personality if you know what I mean. At least not publicly. I think its harder for fans to identify with players like Martin, and as such, there's not much remorse if he gets traded. No blame there. He is who he is.

Personaly I would like to see one year from him when healthy, before deciding what his future should be with the Kings.
 
bajaden said:
One last note on McCants. Some questions have been asked pretaining to his contract status with the Kings. Unless the Kings make a qualifying offer, which is $3,644,874.00, he becomes a freeagent. If the Kings do make a qualifying, then a cap hold is placed on the Kings until McCants future is decided, one way or another. What that means, is that $7,860,378.00 will count against the Kings salary cap until the Kings actually resign McCants, or he signs with someone else and the Kings decide not to match the offer.

If the Kings relinquish the rights to McCants and all of the other free agents from last year (which I think they will do), they will be around $7mil under the salary cap. Which brings me to the MLE. Its an either/or situation. You can either have the $7 million under the cap, or you can have the MLE, but you can't have both. In other words, you can't use the $7mil to sign a freeagent and then turn around and use the MLE to sign another player.

The MLE was instituted for teams that are over the salary cap. The cap space is more valuable than the MLE, for several different reasons. Number one is obvious. Its a larger amount than the MLE. Number two, it can be combined with a player to bring back a player of greater dollar value. For instance. The Kings could trade Kenny Thomas (and ending contract) who makes around $8 mil this year with their $7mil under the cap to bring in a player that makes $15 mil in salary. To the best of my knowledge, the MLE can't be used the same way. Its merely a sum that can be offered.
Click to expand...

If they don't give a qualifying offer they still retain the bird rights and can go or be over the cap to resign them.

The MLE is a slotted amount that counts towards the cap until it is renounced. Teams can't use money under the cap until the MLE is renouced.

Let McCant pass the ball go unless he hasn't signed with anyone after all the other deals are done.
 
Bring Ike back before McCants, but I'd like both to be brought back. They might both turn out to be cheap, high value signings that could make a trade package all the more appealing.
 
VF21 said:
I still can't understand why people think the organization is going to trade Martin. We don't trade our stars UNLESS:

1. They're discontented and pretty much demand to be released...Mitch Richmond
2. They're pulling down more money than any three other players, have bad knees and can bring us flexible pieces back...Chris Webber
3. They're starting to break down, there's a chance to get a defensive juggernaut and they're going to demand a huge contract/extension within the next year...Peja Stojakovic

I just do not understand the idea that we need to trade someone - this times it's Kevin - because their value is high. Their value is high because they're good. I do not see the rationale in trading him away just because we can. Kev can be a pretty nice piece with the right surrounding players. I think we need to look at some of those improvements before we go for the old "grass is greener" approach.
Click to expand...

Let me be clear, I do not think that the Kings will trade Martin. All moves so far make it look as though the FO is treating Kevin as the piece we are building around.

However, I would look at trading him because:

1) I think we all agree that while he is a very nice #2 guy, we need a #1 guy and he is not it. He is probably our best asset to get the #1 that we need.

2) He plays very poor defense.

3) He misses a lot games due to injury (50 games in the past 2 years)

4) and back to the topic of this thread, going from Martin to McCants may not be that big of a drop-off.
 
kupman said:
4) and back to the topic of this thread, going from Martin to McCants may not be that big of a drop-off.
Click to expand...

Yes because replacing a top 10 scorer/borderline all star with a guy who couldn't last in MINNESOTA (of all places!! :eek:) makes so much sense. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
bajaden said:
There is a fourth reason. If you can get the better of someone in a deal and do a serious upgrade.
Click to expand...

I won't argue with that at all but I do not believe that moving Martin for a draft pick in this year's draft (unless it involved sending him to the Clippers) is getting the better of a deal and a serious upgrade.

I've argued Martin's merits for a very long time against some incredibly stiff competition, starting when it was asserted that he wouldn't ever be a starter, he wouldn't ever contribute to the team, he wouldn't ever get a second contract, etc.

Quite frankly, it's gotten old over the years. Martin is a good player; he's a valuable asset and one helluva scorer. People can twist the statistics all they like, say he's one-dimensional and point fingers at his ability to get to the line, but it doesn't change the fact that he's a success in the NBA and the Kings (and the fans) are lucky to have him.

Trading him away for a draft pick is ridiculous, at least IMHO. People can theorize about doing it all they like but there is NO WAY in hell it will happen. None.

/rant
 
I haven't made up my mind about Mccants. He has moments where he is very impressive, both on offense and defense. But he can also turn into a blackhole with any warning, and can kill any ball movement wh might have. Of course, that might change with Westphal running the ship insead of Natt.

I just don't think we really need him. Kevin takes most of the minutes at the 2, and I want to see Donte consistently in the rotation at the 3. I like Noc, although some here don't. I want Donte backing up Noc. So, IMO, it comes down to Garcia or Mccants. Either stick with Garcia and let Mccant walk, or include Garcia in a trade, which I wouldn't mind, and bring Mccants back with a 1-2 yr deal.
 
VF21 said:
I won't argue with that at all but I do not believe that moving Martin for a draft pick in this year's draft (unless it involved sending him to the Clippers) is getting the better of a deal and a serious upgrade.

I've argued Martin's merits for a very long time against some incredibly stiff competition, starting when it was asserted that he wouldn't ever be a starter, he wouldn't ever contribute to the team, he wouldn't ever get a second contract, etc.

Quite frankly, it's gotten old over the years. Martin is a good player; he's a valuable asset and one helluva scorer. People can twist the statistics all they like, say he's one-dimensional and point fingers at his ability to get to the line, but it doesn't change the fact that he's a success in the NBA and the Kings (and the fans) are lucky to have him.

Trading him away for a draft pick is ridiculous, at least IMHO. People can theorize about doing it all they like but there is NO WAY in hell it will happen. None.

/rant
Click to expand...

As I said, I'm not advocating trading him. Especially for the trade that was proposed. I was merely saying that there are possible reasons that I might trade him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top