SAR coming to the Kings discussion (merged)

[SacTownKid]

Actually I am also interested to see what the answer is to this one. Every one who is against us getting SAR hasn't given us a reasonable and realistic answer to this question.

Well, some people are just set on KG or Duncan. I don't blame them, but hey, Shareef being soft or not, I am more worried about this TEAM being soft or not.

As far as fitting into the system. I think that some peoples complaints are that he fits it too well. He'll be another softy piled on top of the other softies.

I still truly believe that getting a guy like Tyson Chandler, or any other defensive role player, while a great addition, is only smoke and mirrors covering up the still existing defensive non-existence (yes I just said that ). So our only option is...yes you all know it...realize it...accept it...

Everyone on the team needs to make a committment to defense

 

[PixelPusher]

Is anybody listening to 1140 right now? If so, have they said anyting on the SAR front?

It's been all "Terrell Owens get's kicked out of summer camp" so far.

 

[PFFFT!!]

NO, NO, NO!!! For some reason you seem to consistently post that the Kings could or should use the one time exception. Using the one time exception on KT would do the Kings no good. First of all, they would still be on the hook for his entire salary for the entire period of his contract (5 more years) without the possibility of ever, ever getting rid of it. Why use the exception on a guy who is productive and is healthy and can be traded? Not going to happen. Look at those players that have been released under the exception (Anderson, Christie, Grant: all players who have at the most 2+ years left on their contract and all have injury problems). Plus, teams will only use the exception if they are above the salary cap and the Kings are trying to get below it (approx. 61 mill this season). Secondly, if SAR comes aboard that doesn't mean the end of Skinner by any means. I agree that KT may in fact be gone, but I don't think it will be Skinner.

You make a great point, but if we do trade KT, dont expect to get back a quality player. We might get perhaps a 2 or 3 players in return for him, all bench players with expiring contracts. Im hoping we can package KT up with someone (perhaps a core player) and get an east all star for him

 

[D-Mass]

Actually I am also interested to see what the answer is to this one. Every one who is against us getting SAR hasn't given us a reasonable and realistic answer to this question.

I'm personally tired of trying to explain other people's views. I'll say this for myself: I like SAR...he's a good player and the price is right (we think). I'm happy with this move as long as: (a) it provides for a future move that addresses more of our needs and/or (b) all other means of meeting our needs this season were exhausted. Are we better than last year? Yes. Are we closer to a championship? Only if (a) is true...only time will tell. I just don't like it when this point of view is somehow seen as SAR-hating. Again, let's all relax and realize that these are just two different opinions on ways to reach the same goal: a Kings championship.

 

[D-Mass]

As far as fitting into the system. I think that some peoples complaints are that he fits it too well. He'll be another softy piled on top of the other softies.

That's exactly it.

 

[SacTownKid]

I'm personally tired of trying to explain other people's views. I'll say this for myself: I like SAR...he's a good player and the price is right (we think). I'm happy with this move as long as: (a) it provides for a future move that addresses more of our needs and/or (b) all other means of meeting our needs this season were exhausted. Are we better than last year? Yes. Are we closer to a championship? Only if (a) is true...only time will tell. I just don't like it when this point of view is somehow seen as SAR-hating. Again, let's all relax and realize that these are just two different opinions on ways to reach the same goal: a Kings championship.

I don't know, I understand what everybody is saying, but if the Kings have the opprotunity to pick up a guy like SAR then you have to.

I just get a little miffed b/c of, what at least seems like, non-stop negativity regarding the situation. I mean, can we talk about the positives for a change.

PG: Bibby / Hart / Price
SG: Bonzi / Martin / Garcia
SF: Peja / Corliss
PF: Reef / Thomas
C: Miller / Skinner / Sampson

That looks like a pretty good lineup to me. We now have two post players that can take it inside and do it very well. We are DEEP, versatile, and still have moveable pieces. If the other guys are "soft", at least we have one of the "hardest" guys out there in Bonzi Wells. Maybe he'll provide the same spark a guy like Doug did and add some toughness we've never had before.

If this is the team we go into next season with, I won't be too dissappionted. I think it could provide some exciting basketball moments and have a great shot to bring us a championship if they give it there all on both ends of the court.

And if we don't land Shareef, I still think we have a great shot.

 

[Kings113]

I highly doubt Thomas will be here next season. It's clear he won't be starting, and is not likely to come off the bench. I think we'll trade him to get more depth and balance for our bench.

If we don't get SAR, we'll get R. Evans/Griffin/Boozer/Nene/E. Thomas.

 

[nbrans]

Cant keep saying this point as fact. It is debated and a number of peeps dont agree with you.

I've yet to see a good explanation as to why people think he's a 3, besides pointing to his stats in Vancouver, which were inflated because he was the only offensive option. He's a POST PLAYER, he says he's a power forward, and I for one believe him. I think it tells you something that the Nets and Bucks and Kings were all planning on using him as a 4. I think it's about as close to a fact as you can get.

By the way, if you want to use stats, look at his stats last year -- the worst of his career playing at the 3 after several years at 19/9 as a 4. I think that's a little more relevant than what he did in Vancouver 7 years ago.

 

[D-Mass]

I highly doubt Thomas will be here next season. It's clear he won't be starting, and is not likely to come off the bench. I think we'll trade him to get more depth and balance for our bench.

That's why I'm fine with this move for SAR...as a replacement for KT. I'd love to see us get rid of KT's contract. He won't want to be coming off the bench, and would be paid too much to do so.

 

[Kings113]

Yeah, exactly D-Mass.

 

[Diabeticwonder]

You make a great point, but if we do trade KT, dont expect to get back a quality player. We might get perhaps a 2 or 3 players in return for him, all bench players with expiring contracts. Im hoping we can package KT up with someone (perhaps a core player) and get an east all star for him

I completely agree about KT. Either get expiring contracts, picks, or some servicable bench players. However, if KT is not here next year the team needs either Darius or some other proven PF who can back up SAR.

 

[thesanityannex]

With the pick ups of Hart, Garcia, Wells, and possibly SAR, they Kings are looking 10X better than at the end of last year.



If Bonzi is ever on this board, he is loving that all the talk has shifted to SAR.

 

[Kings113]

I completely agree about KT. Either get expiring contracts, picks, or some servicable bench players. However, if KT is not here next year the team needs either Darius or some other proven PF who can back up SAR.

R. Evans or E. Thomas, both could be had for Songaila.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I've yet to see a good explanation as to why people think he's a 3...

You mean besides the fact that he's played as a SF for 67% of his pro career?

... besides pointing to his stats in Vancouver, which were inflated because he was the only offensive option. He's a POST PLAYER...

He's a post-up small forward; they do have those, too, you know. post player =/= PF necessarily. Corliss Williamson is a post player, and he's not a PF, either.

... he says he's a power forward...

Again, so does Williamson; they're both wrong.

... I think it tells you something that the Nets and Bucks and Kings were all planning on using him as a 4...

I think it says more that the Nets and Bucks play in the eastern conference, where you can get away with a soft, undersized PF. And, of course the Kings have come to epitomize soft in recent years, so I don't consider that to be a very compelling argument, either.

... By the way, if you want to use stats, look at his stats last year -- the worst of his career playing at the 3 after several years at 19/9 as a 4...

And, by "several," you mean two and a half.

... I think that's a little more relevant than what he did in Vancouver 7 years ago.

And I think that the six-and-a-half years that he's played as a SF is a little more relevant than the two-and-a-half he's played as a PF.

 

[SacTownKid]

He's a post-up small forward; they do have those, too, you know. post player =/= PF necessarily.

Corliss Williamson is a post player, and he's not a PF, either.

Actually I look at it like this. Corliss IS a PF. Unfortunately he is a 6'5" PF. SAR is 6'9".

 

[bye_bye_bjax24]

Does Kenny Thomas have ANY trade value? Or any willing takers? I am guessing "highly unlikely". I think as much as we wanted to get rid of C-Webb contract, the 76ers were glad to get rid of KTs. Who wants a 6'7" power forward with an iffy attitude scheduled to make over 35 million dollars and signed through 2010?

Asssuming we land SAR and re-sign Darius, KT becomes immediately expendable. But we may be stuck. KT can be an effective off the bench contributor, but like other posts have stated, he may be reluctant to accept this role. In my personal dream world scenario, we send him to the Bobcats for newly re-signed Chris Anderson, a perfect 4/5 to complement our core group.

Another idea would be re-acquiring Hedo Turkolu. Scanning the salaries over @ hoopshype.com, he is scheduled to make the same dollars for the same amount of years as KT. I like Hedo, though he has never really tapped his full potential. He should be a much more consistent ball player given his skill level.

 

[nbrans]

You mean besides the fact that he's played as a SF for 67% of his pro career?

He's a post-up small forward; they do have those, too, you know. post player =/= PF necessarily. Corliss Williamson is a post player, and he's not a PF, either.

Again, so does Williamson; they're both wrong.

I think it says more that the Nets and Bucks play in the eastern conference, where you can get away with a soft, undersized PF. And, of course the Kings have come to epitomize soft in recent years, so I don't consider that to be a very compelling argument, either.

And, by "several," you mean two and a half.

And I think that the six-and-a-half years that he's played as a SF is a little more relevant than the two-and-a-half he's played as a PF.

First of all, I think recent history is a little more relevant than his years Vancouver. That was four years ago. This is now.

And Corliss is a really poor example. Corliss is 6'6". SAR is 6'9". Moreover, Corliss has never scored 20 points per game as a power forward. Corliss is a true tweener. Abdur-Rahim is not. Just because Shareef Abdur-Rahim CAN play the SF doesn't mean he is one naturally.

And yeah, two and a half years is a pretty good sample, especially when his numbers dropped of precipitously when Portland asked him to play out of position.

You can get away with a soft PF in the East? Huh, tell that to Jermaine O'Neil, Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor and Chris Bosh. And to Tim Duncan and Amare Stoudamire as well, since it's not as if an Eastern PF doesn't have to face them.

Bottom line is that when a player is 6'9" and is very skilled posting up, and has proven that he can post up top power forwards, you are not gaining a single thing by sticking him out on the perimeter where he's not as effective. I agree with you that he CAN play SF, but to say that's his natural position just doesn't make any sense.

 

[BigWaxer]

I think the bottom line for all this is until we get a true superstar we won't see a ring. The Pistons are not the norm. Well they did have the best coach in BBall IMO.

Every other team that has ever won a ring had a true superstar by definition. A player that can take over a game in the last seconds, A player that truely makes everyone better.

Webber was the nearest we got to a superstar, but I have always said he never was a true superstar and partly because of injuries.

SAR is an improvement but SAR will not bring us a ring. Guess it just depends on what you want. I still as said a few pages back by someone else, want to be marching down J street with tears in my eyes going crazy because we just won it all.

And as I said and most here have that this trade does improves us. Hopefully in the future we can trade/package SAR. Unless we got a superstar player we are not getting a ring anyway. And no SAR will not be a superstar, I will go on record saying that.

 

[ForlornKing]

I think the bottom line for all this is until we get a true superstar we won't see a ring. The Pistons are not the norm. Well they did have the best coach in BBall IMO.

Every other team that has ever won a ring had a true superstar by definition. A player that can take over a game in the last seconds, A player that truely makes everyone better.

Webber was the nearest we got to a superstar, but I have always said he never was a true superstar and partly because of injuries.

SAR is an improvement but SAR will not bring us a ring. Guess it just depends on what you want. I still as said a few pages back by someone else, want to be marching down J street with tears in my eyes going crazy because we just won it all.

And as I said and most here have that this trade does improves us. Hopefully in the future we can trade/package SAR. Unless we got a superstar player we are not getting a ring anyway. And no SAR will not be a superstar, I will go on record saying that.

I definately agree. But we WILL not have a superstar on our team this year if we have SAR or not. You just have to look at the bright side of that SAR is a big improvem over Kenny Thomas,

 

[Ryan]

I think the bottom line for all this is until we get a true superstar we won't see a ring. The Pistons are not the norm. Well they did have the best coach in BBall IMO.

SAR is an improvement but SAR will not bring us a ring. Guess it just depends on what you want. I still as said a few pages back by someone else, want to be marching down J street with tears in my eyes going crazy because we just won it all.

Who says we don't have a superstar? Last time I checked in 2004 Peja was a contender for MVP. Mike, Bonzi, Peja, SAR and Miller is a damn good starting line up, maybe in the top 5. Not to mention NONE of those starters (well, maybe Peja) are in their prime. While I agree with your that we need someone better than SAR, with him I still think we have a legit shot at a ring.

 

[captain bill]

Does Kenny Thomas have ANY trade value? Or any willing takers? I am guessing "highly unlikely". I think as much as we wanted to get rid of C-Webb contract, the 76ers were glad to get rid of KTs. Who wants a 6'7" power forward with an iffy attitude scheduled to make over 35 million dollars and signed through 2010?

Asssuming we land SAR and re-sign Darius, KT becomes immediately expendable. But we may be stuck. KT can be an effective off the bench contributor, but like other posts have stated, he may be reluctant to accept this role. In my personal dream world scenario, we send him to the Bobcats for newly re-signed Chris Anderson, a perfect 4/5 to complement our core group.

Another idea would be re-acquiring Hedo Turkolu. Scanning the salaries over @ hoopshype.com, he is scheduled to make the same dollars for the same amount of years as KT. I like Hedo, though he has never really tapped his full potential. He should be a much more consistent ball player given his skill level.

Thomas averaged 15/9/3 in Sac. Those numbers aren't phenomenal, but they're nothing to sneeze at. He was about dead in the middle of PFs in the NBA- maybe 10 or 12 better and 10 or 12 worse than he is. Certainly there are teams out there with good PFs who won't want Kenny, but there are lots of teams without even a decent PF. New York, Washington, New Orleans, Atlanta, Golden State, Toronto, Milwaukee...New Jersey, too. Those teams aren't exactly world-beaters, but that doesn't mean that they are comletely lacking of parts that we could use. And they all have holes at the PF position, where K9 would actually be a big upgrade for them. So we won't get anything from San Antonio, Minnesota, Detroit or Dalllas, but I don't think Petrie is so stupid as to offer Thomas to them. Offer him to a desperate team, however, and we could find ourselves in possession of some very nice complementary pieces.

 

[captain bill]

Who says we don't have a superstar? Last time I checked in 2004 MVP was a contender for MVP. Mike, Bonzi, Peja, SAR and Miller is a damn good starting line up, maybe in the top 5. Not to mention NONE of those starters (well, maybe Peja) are in their prime. While I agree with your that we need someone better than SAR, with him I still think we have a legit shot at a ring.

What?

Agree about top 5 lineup-we have an immensely talented bunch. But not contenders, not yet. As I said, it will depend on the bench. Add 2 good defenders, and we could be right there again, assuming SAR and Bonzi mesh with the system well.

 

[Gary]

What about a team that is deep at 2, and 4 want KT as their 3? Not all teams live and die by the 3pt shot, and might benefit from a powerful 3 that is good mid range, and can muscle against the SFs of the league?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

First of all, I think recent history is a little more relevant than his years Vancouver. That was four years ago. This is now.

Wrong. It is relevant when you're trying to argue that Abdur-Rahim is accustomed to playing power forward, when historical evidence does not agree with you. History indicates that he is more accustomed to playing small forward.

... And Corliss is a really poor example. Corliss is 6'6". SAR is 6'9"...

Height has nothing to do with it. Ben Wallace is 6'6". Dennis Rodman is 6'6". Charles Barkley is 6'4". Abdur-Rahim isn't a SF because he's short; he's a SF because he plays small, relative to other PF's.

And yeah, two and a half years is a pretty good sample, especially when his numbers dropped of precipitously when Portland asked him to play out of position.

His numbers dropped off precipitously because Portland asked him to take half as many shots as he's accustomed to taking. You just got done pointing out that Abdur-Rahim's numbers were "inflated" in Vancouver because he was the only offensive option. Well, why do you think that his numbers were "deflated" in Portland? Because he was no longer the primary option, that's why.

Abdur-Rahim's career stats indicate that he needs to average around 15+ shots per game in order to put up good numbers, compared to the fewer than 11 that he's averaged in Portland. His lower numbers aren't a function of him playing as a SF; they're a function of Zach Randolph being the man in Portland, and Abdur-Rahim being considerably less effective as a #2.

And, not for nothing, but it bears noting that Abdur-Rahim shot a career best from the field in Portland... as a SF...

You can get away with a soft PF in the East? Huh, tell that to Jermaine O'Neil, Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor and Chris Bosh.

Or maybe I'll tell Maurice Taylor. Or Drew Gooden. Or Kenyon Martin (yes, I know he's not in New Jersey anymore). Or Antawn Jamison. Yeah, they're not soft. Not at all...

 

[nbrans]

Wrong. It is relevant when you're trying to argue that Abdur-Rahim is accustomed to playing power forward, when historical evidence does not agree with you. History indicates that he is more accustomed to playing small forward.

Height has nothing to do with it. Ben Wallace is 6'6". Dennis Rodman is 6'6". Charles Barkley is 6'4". Abdur-Rahim isn't a SF because he's short; he's a SF because he plays small, relative to other PF's.

His numbers dropped off precipitously because Portland asked him to take half as many shots as he's accustomed to taking. You just got done pointing out that Abdur-Rahim's numbers were "inflated" in Vancouver because he was the only offensive option. Well, why do you think that his numbers were "deflated" in Portland? Because he was no longer the primary option, that's why.

Abdur-Rahim's career stats indicate that he needs to average around 15+ shots per game in order to put up good numbers, compared to the fewer than 11 that he's averaged in Portland. His lower numbers aren't a function of him playing as a SF; they're a function of Zach Randolph being the man in Portland, and Abdur-Rahim being considerably less effective as a #2.

And, not for nothing, but it bears noting that Abdur-Rahim shot a career best from the field in Portland... as a SF...

Or maybe I'll tell Maurice Taylor. Or Drew Gooden. Or Kenyon Martin (yes, I know he's not in New Jersey anymore). Or Antawn Jamison. Yeah, they're not soft. Not at all...

First off, I'm not sure where you're getting your height numbers, but Ben Wallace is 6'9".

Second of all, who were those big offensive scoring options that SAR was deferring to in Portland? The fact is that he just wasn't as effective at the small forward position. And of course he took less shots -- he's not an outside shooter, he's not a slasher. How was he going to get his shots on the perimeter? Small forwards don't have as many post-up opportunities as power forwards, especially when the team already has a power forward.

You still haven't told me how Shareef Abdur-Rahim's game makes him more suited for the small forward position. And you can't! Because he's a post-up power forward, and a good on at that, and he's (hopefully) going to finally give the Kings the low post threat they haven't had since Webber's injury. But I suppose he's better suited out on the perimeter, where he can... well.... not as much.

 

[jay dubb]

Hey did Koz say anything about SAR on the radio today?????????

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

First off, I'm not sure where you're getting your height numbers, but Ben Wallace is 6'9".

Program height. Wallace isn't 6'9" any more than Barkley is his program height of 6'8", or Rodman is his program height of 6'10". Hell, I know a guy who spent a cup of coffee in the NBA that was billed at 6'3". He's 5'10". The point being that the NBA will say that a player is as tall or as short as they want you to think he is.

Second of all, who were those big offensive scoring options that SAR was deferring to in Portland?

Did I say that there were "big offensive scoring options" in Portland, or did I say that he was no longer the primary scoring option?

The fact is that he just wasn't as effective at the small forward position.

How do you make the case that he wasn't as effective when he shot a higher percentage? Wasn't as effective according to what?

And of course he took less shots -- he's not an outside shooter, he's not a slasher...

Funny you should say that... because, according to 82games.com, Abdur-Rahim scored fifty-four percent of his shots from the perimeter as small forward. Do you know how many of his shots came on jumpers as a quote-unquote "power forward" in Atlanta?

Sixty-five percent!


For a supposed "post-up" player, he sure doesn't seem to like to spend a lot of time in the post...

 

[Entity]

maybe we can agree on this. SAR is better than KT. Look at how well KT did as a king and imagine how well SAR could do. For some reason the Kings style has a knacke for maximizing the PF's abilities. So if you have a PF coming in with better abilites than your existing PF then you go with it. Until something better comes along I am all for SAR.

 

[Kev.in]

You know its funny how Kings fans totally rip Shareef apart. You should see how the Nets fans are taking the whole situation. They act like they just lost the second coming of Air Jordan.

Context is everything. He's a better fit with the Nets and getting him would be a huge upgrade over Jason Collins. Instead, they get to trade future picks for Marc Jackson. In Sacramento we had it hyped up last night as something as big as the Webber deal and it turns out to be Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Better than Kenny Thomas, but how much better? Not that much better and not as big as we were expecting.

 

[Diabeticwonder]

Context is everything. He's a better fit with the Nets and getting him would be a huge upgrade over Jason Collins. Instead, they get to trade future picks for Marc Jackson. In Sacramento we had it hyped up last night as something as big as the Webber deal and it turns out to be Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Better than Kenny Thomas, but how much better? Not that much better and not as big as we were expecting.

Not that much better than KT? You have got to be kidding. Don't get me wrong, SAR is no first team all NBA player, but he's head and shoulders better than KT.