Shareef in Sacramento (visiting)

[funkykingston]

I've never liked the "there's a reason his teams always lose" argument when discussing players. After all, Mike Bibby was on that same horrible Grizzlies team when the Kings traded for him. Chauncey Billups wasn't just on losing teams, but he was also bounced around the league before finding a home in Detroit. People seemed to have forgotten that Tracy McGrady was the supposed "star" on an Orlando team that nearly set a record for regular season futility and at one point lost 17 straight games.

I'm biased as a Cal alum, but I've always liked Reef. He's certainly no savior, but blaming him for being drafted by the Vancouver Grizzlies and traded to th Atlanta Hawks is a bit unfair.

 

[nbrans]

Because if he's a PF he's just about the softest in the league. There is a reason he has zero impact on the game and lsoes everywhere he goes. And no, his best years, the years when people were still interested and excited about him, were as a SF. He was a physical force there. An inside/outside threat that physically overpowered the people guarding him. Since becoming a PF his stock has dropped dramatically, and other than being an idiot, not sure why he can't make the connection himself.

People in Sacramento have been Peja-ized into thinking that SF = three point shooting. That doesn't have to be at all. As a PF Shareef is soft and plays small. His defense is atrocious, and he can be outbanged and outtoughed by every natural PF in the league. As a SF he's big and has a physical advantage. He can overpower SFs in the post, and on the other end isn't going to get embarrassed by being overpowered himself. He's a very good rebounder for a SF. He's a tweener, a perfect fit at neither spot. But if you give me a choice of a guy soft as butter at PF (at PF mind you -- should be the toughest S.O.B. on the whole damn team!) or a guy who's physically overpowering at SF, I'll take the overpowering SF thank you. The Spurs have expressed an itnerest in Reef (the World Champs) -- where do you think they are going to play him? 6th man SF/PF or pure SF as Bowen ages. If you're a serious team, that has to be where he fits.

Bricklayer, I'm really surprised to hear this coming from you of all people. It's fine to make the case that he's a soft power forward (I would say he isn't), but to say he's better at the SF? Because he has good post moves for a SF? When is he going to be playing in the post as a SF??

And when were his "best years" at the SF? Because to my knowledge he only played at the SF consistently his rookie year and with the Blazers. And those were statistically his worst years, both from a rebounding and a scoring perspective.

And how does he somehow go to the softest guy in the league to physically overpowering when he changes positions? When the coach tells him to go guard someone faster than him he turns into Superman?

Yes, the Spurs would play him at the power forward. They'd rotate him in at hte 4, moving Duncan to the center when he's in the game and subbing in Mohammad when Duncan's out. That's why they're offering Rasho for Shareef.

Bricklayer, don't fail me now!

 

[ParniValjak]

There is a reason he has zero impact on the game and lsoes everywhere he goes.

Oh please.

Lets not forget that Bibby was on that same Grizzlies team. The league is littered with players who are stuck on bad teams but turn good when they go to a good team.

So square losing on SAR's shoulders is being selective. Has he ever played for a decent team. I mean seriously, Grizzlies, Hawks and Trailblazers. C'mon!!!!!! Bibby was at Grizzlies with SAR yet they were crap. Had Bibby been playing for the same Atlanta and Portland teams that Sar has played for would they be any better off?????? I doubt it.

If he is such a career loser then why are the wordl champs after him?????? He is not going to replace Bowen in the starting line up because Bowden is there for a reason and that taking the best perimeter player from the opposition and shutting him out of the game. SAR can't do that. So do you think Spurs wouldn't play SAR as a PF and Duncan and Nazr as centers??????

This "career loser" point you bring up is just being selective. There are a lot of players out there that were on losing teams and came up huge when they moved to a good team. SAR can play and plays well as a PF. His weaknesses happen to be the weaknesses of our team (rebounding, defence, shotblocking) but that doesn't make him a bad PF as you appear to claim. For our situation, sure he is not quite the best fit but put him next to a Ben Wallace and you have a bloody good player whose weaknesses are covered by his side kick.

Of all the PFs out on the market, SAR would be the best one and the one more accessible than someone like Chandler.

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't see funkykingston's post before I posted this.

 

[SacTownKid]

Well, the talks of getting Shareef or Walker make sense from the standpoint of what Petrie is trying to create with this team. He is trying to get guys that are versatile, Reef and Walker both fit this discription.

 

[Bricklayer]

Its not hard to figure out why Reef's nto soft for SF -- many SFs are soft, they are small. Many are blown up OGs. You put Shareef in the post against them, he can eat them up. Too big, too strong, too athletic. He's no "harder" than he was as a PF. But he's a softy in amongst the softies. And a big one at that.

There is no rule that says you cannot post up your SF. Except in Kingsland because we haven't had a SF who can post this millenium. In particular on this team, with a center who can't post up a PG, there is all kinds of room in the post for anybody with the ability.

And Reef would have been basically a SF for his first three years in the league, as well as last year. And going back and looking at rosters, I would say that Reef was largely a SF right up until he hit Atlanta in '02 (actually longer than I thought), although he always played a bit of both. Vancouver rosters were always a mess, but the PF minutes are always largely taken up by a variety of (very) suspect players: Roy Rogers, Otis Thorpe, Tony Massenburg, Grant Long, Stromile Swift, Othella Harrington and various toehr crap.

P.S. And yes, career losers are normally not complete coincidences. Not just losers, but big time losers. Nine years, three franchises. Averaging less than 30 wins a season. Shareef is far from the reason, or at least the only reason, all those teams have lost. But he clearly has as much impact on the game as a wet noodle And here's the thing -- all of those teams -- ALL of them, have been awful defensive squads. The boy is soft. Soft = loser. Doesn't mean you can't join a winning team. But means they win and you'e along for the ride.

 

[Alacron]

And how does he somehow go to the softest guy in the league to physically overpowering when he changes positions? When the coach tells him to go guard someone faster than him he turns into Superman?

Imagine Shareef trying to post up Webber, or Duncan, or Garnett, or Amare, or Brand, or K-Mart. Sure he can do it. But how successfully?

Now imagine him posting on Peja, Sprewell, Darius Miles, Tayshaun Prince, Devean George, Mo Evans. Uh, yeah.

When does a SF get the opportunity to work in the low post you ask? When Brad Miller is your center.
~~

 

[Kev.in]

Shareef was definitely a small forward with the Grizzlies. He had some pretty good games against Corliss back then. If you watched any Kings-Grizzlies games in Shareef's last 3 seasons with Vancouver, how can you say that he was a power foward in those days? I can't recall him guarding Webber, or Webber having to guard him at all back then. He was playing the 3 about 99% of the time.

If you don't believe he was a small forward, go to basketballreference.com and look at some of the game logs from his days with the Grizz, see who started at the other forward spot in some of those games.

 

[Kev.in]

When Shareef was a small forward, everyone was calling him one of the most underrated players in the league and he was good for 20/9/3 a game. When he got traded to Atlanta he started transitioning to a power forward. After a few years as a combo forward, we've seen Shareef the power forward these past two seasons, he has impressed no one and been good for only 16 and 8.

 

[nbrans]

Imagine Shareef trying to post up Webber, or Duncan, or Garnett, or Amare, or Brand, or K-Mart. Sure he can do it. But how successfully?

Now imagine him posting on Peja, Sprewell, Darius Miles, Tayshaun Prince, Devean George, Mo Evans. Uh, yeah.

When does a SF get the opportunity to work in the low post you ask? When Brad Miller is your center.
~~

Honestly, this discussion is driving me insane. When your top reason for making the guy a small forward is that he can POST UP, something is wrong.

Do you care about defense at all? How can you expect a power forward to guard quick small forwards?? Look at Corliss, he's a defensive liability because he's just not quick enough to guard small forwards.

How can he rebound when he's out on the wing chasing a faster player?

And why in god's name do you even WANT him to be a SF, we HAVE a small forward??

 

[funkykingston]

And why in god's name do you even WANT him to be a SF, we HAVE a small forward??

Because I'd much rather have SAR at the SF for 6 million and the PF that Peja could bring back in trade than I would Peja at the SF for 11 or 12 million and whoever Petrie can get with the MLE or Cuttino at the PF.

Considering the inflated market, I am now very much in favor of dealing Peja this offseason. Whether Petrie will even consider it is another question.

 

[ParniValjak]

Honestly, this discussion is driving me insane. When your top reason for making the guy a small forward is that he can POST UP, something is wrong.

Do you care about defense at all? How can you expect a power forward to guard quick small forwards?? Look at Corliss, he's a defensive liability because he's just not quick enough to guard small forwards.

How can he rebound when he's out on the wing chasing a faster player?

And why in god's name do you even WANT him to be a SF, we HAVE a small forward??

Haven't you figured it out yet?????? This boards is in "Lets get rid of Peja" mode

 

[SacTownKid]

Imagine Shareef trying to post up Webber, or Duncan, or Garnett, or Amare, or Brand, or K-Mart. Sure he can do it. But how successfully?

Now imagine him posting on Peja, Sprewell, Darius Miles, Tayshaun Prince, Devean George, Mo Evans. Uh, yeah.

When does a SF get the opportunity to work in the low post you ask? When Brad Miller is your center.
~~

Well I don't know about Shareef but I remember Walker killed Webber last year in the post.

But Shareef is a very capable post player, no matter at PF or SF.

 

[Yoda]

But if you give me a choice of a guy soft as butter at PF (at PF mind you -- should be the toughest S.O.B. on the whole damn team!) or a guy who's physically overpowering at SF, I'll take the overpowering SF thank you. The Spurs have expressed an itnerest in Reef (the World Champs) -- where do you think they are going to play him? 6th man SF/PF or pure SF as Bowen ages. If you're a serious team, that has to be where he fits.

Totally disagree on Rahim here...
1) Sure he could be tougher as a SF, but one doesnt become tough by switching positions.

2) It would be nice if he could bang around SF, his defense as a SF was atrocious last year. He is too slow to gaurd that position.

3) You are asking the guy to play a position he as stated he is uncomfortable playing. He seems soft in this regard to me, he will have trouble changing what he has been comfortable doing. He stunk at the 3 in Portland this year.

 

[Yoda]

Haven't you figured it out yet?????? This boards is in "Lets get rid of Peja" mode

We just want what is best for the front of the jersey and many of us see a player who does not have the tenasity to bring us to that next level as the man (max deal). I wish Peja could be that player but I just dont think that will happen. Hence, entertaining new SF is beneficial.

Rahim...no thanks.

 

[nbrans]

Haven't you figured it out yet?????? This boards is in "Lets get rid of Peja" mode

Well good lord people, if we're going to get rid of Peja, don't you think we can do better than an out of position Shareef Abdur-Rahim at the SF???

Heck, maybe we could even get Yao Ming and play him at the point guard.

 

[Bricklayer]

Honestly, this discussion is driving me insane. When your top reason for making the guy a small forward is that he can POST UP, something is wrong.

Do you care about defense at all? How can you expect a power forward to guard quick small forwards?? Look at Corliss, he's a defensive liability because he's just not quick enough to guard small forwards.

How can he rebound when he's out on the wing chasing a faster player?

And why in god's name do you even WANT him to be a SF, we HAVE a small forward??

Shareef seems to find a way to rebound quite well as a SF -- something to the tune of 7.5 to 10 rebs a game in his SF career. Odd that he's able to do that since as we all know SFs are restricted to getting 4 rebs a game because they're kept too far from the hoop.

And if you care about defense at all, you can NOT have Reef at PF. That's the position where he's REALLY embarrassed. His SF defense isn't very good either, but it doesn't have nearly the spillover effect that having a soft defensive PF does. That's your last line of defense. If your PF is soft, you're crushed inside.

And again, you seem to be stuck in some universe where SFs are only allowed to play one way. There is more than one way to skin a cat. In particular in the upside down, inside out world of the Sacramento Kings. Our center is a jumpshooter. There is plenty of room in the post because of his abdication of that area on offense.

Fianlly, our SF is one-dimensional and set to earn a maximum contract. Sounds like Reef may be available for as little as the MLE. I am not a huge fan of picking up Reef, but there is certainly a very good argument to be made that you get far better bang for your buck by signign Shareef as a SF, and then using Peja to trade away for that top/tough PF we need. Let's see: Reef career = 19.8ppg 8.1rpg 2.7apg for the MLE, or Peja career = 18.5ppg 5.0rpg 2.0 apg for MAX. Surely you can see the argument?

 

[nbrans]

Shareef seems to find a way to rebound quite well as a SF -- something to the tune of 7.5 to 10 rebs a game in his SF career. Odd that he's able to do that since as we all know SFs are restricted to getting 4 rebs a game because they're kept too far from the hoop.

And if you care about defense at all, you can NOT have Reef at PF. That's the position where he's REALLY embarrassed. His SF defense isn't very good either, but it doesn't have nearly the spillover effect that having a soft defensive PF does. That's your last line of defense. If your PF is soft, you're crushed inside.

And again, you seem to be stuck in some universe where SFs are only allowed to play one way. There is more than one way to skin a cat. In particular in the upside down, inside out world of the Sacramento Kings. Our center is a jumpshooter. There is plenty of room in the post because of his abdication of that area on offense.

Fianlly, our SF is one-dimensional and set to earn a maximum contract. Sounds like Reef may be available for as little as the MLE. I am not a huge fan of picking up Reef, but there is certainly a very good argument to be made that you get far better bang for your buck by signign Shareef as a SF, and then using Peja to trade away for that top/tough PF we need. Let's see: Reef career = 19.8ppg 8.1rpg 2.7apg for the MLE, or Peja career = 18.5ppg 5.0rpg 2.0 apg for MAX. Surely you can see the argument?

It really seems odd to me that someone who is as obsessed with defense as you are would advocate Shareef Abdur-Rahim at the 3. I'm not worried about Shareef defensively at the 4, I think he'd be fine, and he'd be the best rebounder on the Kings since Webber blew his knee out.

And let's face it, you're not going to get Shareef at the MLE to the play at the 3, because his whole goal this offseason is to get back to the 4.

And I can't wait to hear everyone change their tune about Peja when he's averaging 25 points per game this season.

 

[Yoda]

And I can't wait to hear everyone change their tune about Peja when he's averaging 25 points per game this season.

and 18 ppg on 33% in the playoffs...in a first round exit.

 

[SLAB]

It really seems odd to me that someone who is as obsessed with defense as you are would advocate Shareef Abdur-Rahim at the 3. I'm not worried about Shareef defensively at the 4, I think he'd be fine, and he'd be the best rebounder on the Kings since Webber blew his knee out.

And let's face it, you're not going to get Shareef at the MLE to the play at the 3, because his whole goal this offseason is to get back to the 4.

And I can't wait to hear everyone change their tune about Peja when he's averaging 25 points per game this season.

Brick keeps saying he would be bad at the three, but awful at the four...

 

[Bricklayer]

And I can't wait to hear everyone change their tune about Peja when he's averaging 25 points per game this season.

And the true source of the objection comes out. Anything is possible. Although as usual it will be completely irrelevant as soon as we run into San Antonio, or Detroit, or any team with an athletic defensive SF who suddenly turns our putative star into a turnip.

As a further aside, given that Shareef in place of Peja would likely average a minimum of 20ppg and 7.5reb/game himself, even if Peja DID average 25ppg, there would STILL be a good argument that your team is better off with a 20ppg 7.5rpg postup SF for the MLE than a 25pt 5.5rpg jumpshooting SF for the MAX, and that's before we even get into the type of big man that Peja and change might be able to bring back into the system.

And how you could ahve watched Shareef play for the last few years as a PF can come to any other conclusion than soft, just pathetically soft, is beyond me. In fact when it comes to toughness, rebounding, even defense, our current undersized PF is probably superior to Reef.

 

[nbrans]

Let me try and understand the logic going on here.

Shareef Abdur-Rahim is a small forward. Why? Well, because he can post up and he's not the toughest power forward in the world. Nevermind that if you ask him he'll tell you he's a 4, that he was an All-Star as a four, scored 50+ points in a game as a 4, wants to get back to the 4 and his momma calls him a 4.

We care about defense only when it comes to the power forward position. All other defense doesn't matter.

Trade Peja. For whom? A power forward!! And which power forward? Hmm... haven't gotten that far yet.

I think I'm starting to understand.

 

[Bricklayer]

Let me try and understand the logic going on here.

Shareef Abdur-Rahim is a small forward. Why? Well, because he can post up and he's not the toughest power forward in the world. Nevermind that if you ask him he'll tell you he's a 4, that he was an All-Star as a four, scored 50+ points in a game as a 4, wants to get back to the 4 and his momma calls him a 4.

We care about defense only when it comes to the power forward position. All other defense doesn't matter.

Trade Peja. For whom? A power forward!! And which power forward? Hmm... haven't gotten that far yet.

I think I'm starting to understand.

Let me try to understand -- Shareef plays SF for the entire first half of his career, but now he's a PF because his momma says so? He puts up better numbers as a SF, was last a desirable commodity as a SF, but we want him as a PF?

And let's just take a trade proposed by another member -- sign Shareef as a SF, and then trade Peja for Tyson Chandler. Maybe get a little something thrown in on the side, who knows. You DON'T think that would make us DRAMTICALLY better on defense and the glass? Peja's man defense is fine, his team defense sucks. You don't keep him for his defense. What he could bring back in trade is an impact defender, which he is not.

 

[Yoda]

Shareef plays SF for the entire first half of his career

I dont think so

 

[Bricklayer]

I dont think so

I do -- looked it up. Numbers in a second.

 

[nbrans]

Let me try to understand -- Shareef plays SF for the entire first half of his career, but now he's a PF because his momma says so? He puts up better numbers as a SF, was last a desirable commodity as a SF, but we want him as a PF?

And let's just take a trade proposed by another member -- sign Shareef as a SF, and then trade Peja for Tyson Chandler. Maybe get a little something thrown in on the side, who knows. You DON'T think that would make us DRAMTICALLY better on defense and the glass? Peja's man defense is fine, his team defense sucks. You don't keep him for his defense. What he could bring back in trade is an impact defender, which he is not.

Well, you don't have to take my word for it, Bricklayer, as far as I can tell this board is the only place in the world where Shareef is a SF. I can't find anyone else advocating this switch besides a few people here living in a bizarro world. The world champs want him as a 4, and we all know that they're terrible judges of talent....

As for Peja and Tyson Chandler... yeah, I'd think about it.

But the bottom line is that Shareef is not coming to the Kings as a SF for the MLE or any other price, so the point is completely moot. If you want to talk about trading Peja for Tyson and acquiring a legitimate SF, then let's talk. Shareef is not that guy, it's just not realistic.

 

[Yoda]

I do -- looked it up. Numbers in a second.

http://www.basket-stats.info/nba/2000-2001/teams/west/vancouver.htm
Wow, you are right.
Grant Long PF
Big Country C
Rahim SF

Ick!

 

[Bricklayer]

Here we go, year by year from looking at minutes and box scores (sampling):
* all stats etc. from basketballreference.com databases


Vancouver 96-97: (SF/PF)
Rookie year - began season as the PF alongside a variety of suspects. By midseason, has shifted to SF as Roy Rogers takes over starting PF position.

Vancouver 97-98: (SF)
Starts season alongside Otis Thorpe as the SF. As season progresses, also paired with Massenburg (PF) and Michael Smith (PF/SF).

Vancouver 98-99: (SF)
Goes whole season as SF alongside Cherokee Parks (PF) and Massenburg (PF).

Vancouver 99-00: (SF)
Goes whole season as SF alongside Othella Harrington (PF).

Vancouver 00-01: (SF)
Goes whole season starting alongisde Harrington (PF) Grant Long (PF) and Massenburg (PF)

So his first 5 years as a SF, and most of the last year and a half too. It wasn't until '01-'02 when he went to Atlanta that he became a PF. And even there, he was not orignally SUSPOSED to be a PF -- It was susposed to be Theo Ratliff, Nazr Mohammed and Rahim as the SF. But Theo got hurt for the whole year and Nazr and Shareef ended up shifting up to C and PF.

 

[nbrans]

Here we go, year by year from looking at minutes and box scores (sampling):
* all stats etc. from basketballreference.com databases


Vancouver 96-97: (SF/PF)
Rookie year - began season as the PF alongside a variety of suspects. By midseason, has shifted to SF as Roy Rogers takes over starting PF position.

Vancouver 97-98: (SF)
Starts season alongside Otis Thorpe as the SF. As season progresses, also paired with Massenburg (PF) and Michael Smith (PF/SF).

Vancouver 98-99: (SF)
Goes whole season as SF alongside Cherokee Parks (PF) and Massenburg (PF).

Vancouver 99-00: (SF)
Goes whole season as SF alongside Othella Harrington (PF).

Vancouver 00-01: (SF)
Goes whole season starting alongisde Harrington (PF) Grant Long (PF) and Massenburg (PF)

So his first 5 years as a SF, and most of the last year and a half too. It wasn't until '01-'02 when he went to Atlanta that he became a PF. And even there, he was not orignally SUSPOSED to be a PF -- It was susposed to be Theo Ratliff, Nazr Mohammed and Rahim as the SF. But Theo got hurt for the whole year and Nazr and Shareef ended up shifting up to C and PF.

You're right about Vancouver, he definitely had his time at SF, which I wasn't aware of.

However, he was intended to be a PF in Atlanta, it was supposed to be Kukoc, Abdur-Rahim and Ratliff at C. Nazr is the one who benifitted from Ratliff going down. I would say Abdur-Rahim flourished, scoring 50 points against Detroit and getting named to his first all-star game.

But look, this is all in the past. Like I said, the bottom line is that he's signing up as a PF. There's a reason he wants out of Portland. The Nets, Spurs or whoever else signs him are doing so as a PF. End of story.

 

[funkykingston]

Shareef is not that guy, it's just not realistic.

If Abdur-Rahim really is adamant about being a starting PF, then no, it isn't realistic.

That still doesn't change my opinion that he was best early in his career when he WAS playing SF. A budding all-star and a potential 20-10 guy at the 3 gradually became a bench player with limited options and an MLE level salary demand after becoming a 4.

Of course, almost none of what we are discussing this summer is very realistic. Cat for Nene? Not realistic. Petrie shopping Peja for frontcourt help/defense? Not realistic. The Kings sign-and-trading for Walker? I certainly hope that's not realistic.

To be honest, I'm halfway expecting a virtually unchanged roster in October. I don't see the Kings getting much for Cuttino (I think it's most likely that someone signs him outright, maybe for the MLE) and I would guess that Petrie will try to bring back Darius and Mo, but only end up with one of them.

I'd like to be wrong, but I'm not going to worry about it either way. I don't think there's much reason to get into a big argument about a guy's position when there's only a very slight chance of him becoming a King in the first place.

 

[Padrino]

But look, this is all in the past. Like I said, the bottom line is that he's signing up as a PF. There's a reason he wants out of Portland. The Nets, Spurs or whoever else signs him are doing so as a PF. End of story.

what i'm trying to figure out is how any player "signs up" at a position. if he were to come to sacramento, expectations of starting as a power forward, but then the kings pull off trading peja for tyson chandler (for example), and adleman moves rahim to SF, what's he gonna do? cry about it? not if he wants to start. we all know adelman loves small ball, but the point is not what position rahim wants to play, its what position a team decides to utilize him at. if the kings decided he's better used at SF, he'll play the SF. if they think he's a better PF than SF, then he'll play PF. individual team analyzation of its players and needs is what determines which players play where. history plays a small part, but each team looks at its players in a different light. detroit would figure out the best way to utilize rahim's limited defensive abilities. sacramento would find the best way to insert rahim into the offense. the spurs would most likely attempt to create a balance of both aspects. each team is different, but no team gives a **** what rahim wants. he'll play where he's best suited to meet a particular teams needs.