Good great God Naismith, I hope not.
Rudy Gay to Sacramento!!!
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
Good great God Naismith, I hope not.
Thanks for the post. Larry Coon is one of those "basketball minds" I truly respect.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Quite frankly, I question any member of the media who thinks this is more about Gay and Cuz and how they fit. There's plenty of shots for both. There's plenty of ways to incorporate both and get them the ball in their spots. Cuz being able to facilitate a high or low post offense makes that possible. MLM fills an off the ball role anyway. As a 3rd option getting 8-12 looks per game mostly off the ball or slashing is a good role for him and hopefully one he grows into. But he won't impede on Cuz/Gay. Doesn't have the skillset to do so even if he wanted.
The question should be, can IT as a starting PG play with those two. It's not Cuz vs Gay, it's IT vs Cuz/Gay. One thing is for certain and that is there's nowhere near enough shots for IT to average close to 17 PPG. Is he willing to step back and average single digit FGA's going forward as an off the ball player? Next question is how valuable will IT be as an off the ball, non-aggressive PG? We'll be asking him to basically put a stop to what he does best. Malone just said a few days ago IT isn't a pass first PG and he always has an aggressive, scoring mindset. This is the biggest question. It's the PG's role now to make sure Cuz gets his 17-20 FGA's, Gay gets somewhere around 15 FGA's, and MLM rounds out as the 3rd option getting 8-12 FGA's, and another key is MLM is likely to get better looks off the attention/doubles both Cuz and Gay draw, not off IT penetration, so going beyond Cuz/Gay and how they relate to IT, MLM also likely will be better served if those two have more of the ball and he plays off them.
Will be interesting. I'm curious as to why the "we need a pure PG" crowd who's been here for years isn't upset Vasquez has been traded and we're replacing him with a gunning 6th man.
The question should be, can IT as a starting PG play with those two. It's not Cuz vs Gay, it's IT vs Cuz/Gay. One thing is for certain and that is there's nowhere near enough shots for IT to average close to 17 PPG. Is he willing to step back and average single digit FGA's going forward as an off the ball player? Next question is how valuable will IT be as an off the ball, non-aggressive PG? We'll be asking him to basically put a stop to what he does best. Malone just said a few days ago IT isn't a pass first PG and he always has an aggressive, scoring mindset. This is the biggest question. It's the PG's role now to make sure Cuz gets his 17-20 FGA's, Gay gets somewhere around 15 FGA's, and MLM rounds out as the 3rd option getting 8-12 FGA's, and another key is MLM is likely to get better looks off the attention/doubles both Cuz and Gay draw, not off IT penetration, so going beyond Cuz/Gay and how they relate to IT, MLM also likely will be better served if those two have more of the ball and he plays off them.
Will be interesting. I'm curious as to why the "we need a pure PG" crowd who's been here for years isn't upset Vasquez has been traded and we're replacing him with a gunning 6th man.
ANYBODY can write blogs, articles and tweets. It's social media, definitely different that traditional mainstream media.
Actual sports media encompasses more than just the talking heads you refer to. True sports reporters are a dedicated lot and know their stuff. You disparage them unfairly.
Bottom line, though, isn't this argument. The bottom line is that you made an initial post stating that the "national media" considered this trade to be a total coup for Toronto. And you based that on a few random tweets. That was my original objection. A lot of comments are saying this was a good trade for both sides, with the scale tilting slightly in the Kings favor. Considerably different take than what you initially presented, don't you think?
Derrick Williams is the type of guy we need for a role player if nothing else. I don't think he's going anywhere right away. It costs us virtually nothing to keep him around and see just how good he can be, especially if Gay doesn't pan out.
No to Bang City. I'd rather they call the team something like Flight School.
macadocious
Starter
Except for that recent Larry Coon tweet, I have yet to have seen a tweet (not from sacramento) that thinks this is a good trade.
Would love to see them, but they have all been anywhere from meh to LOL @ anyone taking Gay.
That's where our perceptions of Twitter differ. I follow very few people on there and don't bother reading stuff if the tweeter is a self-proclaimed "expert" with his/her own blog but little else in the way of proper credentials.
I guess I'll just agree to disagree with you about the national media opinion of this trade...at least for now.
The team needs a point guard, but Vasquez wasn't the answer. He was too limited defensively to have any future as the starting point guard. He got abused every night. Whether or not Gay fits with the team is up to him, but I think he can fetch you more assets next year than a combo of Hayes, Patterson and Salmons.
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
Maybe because it was obvious that GV was not going to what we needed going forward, so moving him out of the way while getting better talent...and opening up room to develop other prospects, is an immediate positive
I'm very interested in what you think a combination of Salmons, Hayes, Patterson and Vasquez can get you.
K
KingMilz
Guest
We also have to brace ourselves for the #Gay Cousins jokes now lol
macadocious
Starter
That's where our perceptions of Twitter differ. I follow very few people on there and don't bother reading stuff if the tweeter is a self-proclaimed "expert" with his/her own blog but little else in the way of proper credentials.
I guess I'll just agree to disagree with you about the national media opinion of this trade...at least for now.
I think twitter is great for sports news, especially the ability to get other perspectives. Remember what it was like when all we had was the Sac Bee, USA today and watching ESPN? We got almost zero outside opinion on the Kings. So it was either locals who had rose colored glasses or those were always pessimistic. It's great to see how others who have no skin in the game perceive the moves.
It obviously doesn't change anything. What is done is done. But I think it tempers enthusiasm in some instances and helps the naysayers.
bajaden knows the game. Is he the media, too?
They have to have media credentials to be considered media.
A blog? A blog? My dad has a blog. Twitter isn't the media, it's a social networking tool, that is occasionally used by members of the media.
Look, I understand that this is 2013, and you no longer have to go to Journalism School in order to have a media career, but you still have to have qualifications. And being smart, or "respected," and having 36K+ followers on Twitter is not one of them. The problem I have with your argument is the same problem I have with people who like to use the "T-Word." You throw around the word "media" like it's "da kine," like you're using it as some kind of catch-all to encapsulate something which you think is nebulous, when it really describes something quite specific.
If Voulgaris is in the media, then who issues his media credentials? Does he have media access at sporting venues? Is he a member of the Writer's Union? Or the Broadcaster's Union? What's the name of his EIC? Or his EP?
Being able to break down players doesn't make you the media, or else assistant coaches would be media, too.
jcwkings
All-Star
That would have been like Sixer fans being upset they traded Kenny Thomas, Corliss Williamson and Brian Skinner for Chris Webber. At least our journeymen mob got us an all star level SF in his prime while C Webb was done do to injuries.
Dude, you're the ONLY one fixated on what has been said about this trade. Most of us seem perfectly able to draw our own opinions. I'm not trying to be pedantic or rude, but I don't see anyone else showing a dampening of enthusiasm because of what some guy who doesn't even have a real name has said on Twitter.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
These are the risks franchises like the Kings must take. First swapping a very good role player for potential and now swapping a mixed bag for an over paid starting 3. The risk reward leans in our favor on these.
We went from lacking scoring in the starting unit to potentially having too much. Let's hope IT Cuz and Gay can play well together.
We went from lacking scoring in the starting unit to potentially having too much. Let's hope IT Cuz and Gay can play well together.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
You weren't a member when what I'm referring to happened.
After the fact, obviously GV wasn't the answer, but after the fact also isn't what my post was directed at.
I don't know who the "we need a pure PG" crowd is, but I'm upset. Not at getting rid of Vasquez, so much as starting Thomas. But that discussion really belongs in one of the Thomas threads, any way.
I'm not convinced we're gonna see him as a starter. I personally would start Thornton if it meant I could keep IT's production off the bench at its current level. Thornton can at least bring the ball up the court. I'm still harboring the inkling of an idea about RayMac starting. As we've been saying, it's not about who starts - it's about who's out there when the game is on the line.
One thing I think everyone will agree about is that things just got a lot more interesting.
macadocious
Starter
Wait, so you give them automatic clout if they get media credentials? I go based off of years of being correct on things. I really don't care what their credentials are. And yes, if a bunch of assistant coaches were to talk about this trade I would probably listed.
Gay, Cousins, and The Bang Bros.
It's quite interesting. We spent a majority of this year saying how the players we traded for should never see another minute for the team. Now people have mixed feelings that they are gone.
I didn't say **** about clout. I didn't say **** about who should be more "respected." I'm talking about qualifications and credentials, no more and no less.
EDIT - If you want to say that people who know basketball and are respected for their opinions are trashing the trade online, then say that. But that's not what you said. If you had actually said that, we wouldn't be having this conversation. What you said was that the media was trashing the trade, and that's true, or even close.
Last edited:
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
We've improved our talent a lot and we're probably going to start our most talented point guard. Things could certainly be a lot worse at this point
macadocious
Starter
Actually, I just made a passing comment, then I got sucked into a who is the media debate and the anti twitter argument.
I am trying to see what others are saying. I have not watched a minute of Rudy Gay this year. I assume most here have not watched too much of him either, so I want to see what others who have are saying.
Two years ago Hollinger shipped him out to Toronto and Memphis arguably got better and Toronto has gotten worse. He is shooting at an extremely high usage rate with a very low FG%. I want to know why. I have friends who live in Toronto that are ecstatic to see him go. They said this year he is just dribbling up court and firing off balanced 20 footers while double teamed early in the shot clock. So while I trust they have seen that, they are just fans and not people who break down games for a living. I want to hear what those people say.
macadocious
Starter
Why? What does it matter if you don't care.
Similar threads
- ClutchPoints | Sacramento Kings News
- Kings News Links
- NBC Sports Bay Area & California
- Off the Court
- Associated Press
- Kings News Links
