To those that always include Thornton in their trade deals

[Anthony1]

Do you have any idea what kind of contract we have this guy signed to? This guy is the perfect player, with a perfect contract. He's extremely aggressive, fearless, yes he can be a black hole, and his defense could be much, much better, but peeps are way too quick to throw the Baby out with the bath water. If MT sees the slightest opening, he's quick to attack the basket, and has a lot of good floater type moves driving to the basket. He's a very, very solid SG to roll with.

We have this guy signed for the prime of his career, to a very, very nice contract. If we give him up, he better bring something MAJOR back in return. We can't just be giving him away for scraps.

 

[JMelho]

I just joined this forum. Viewed a few threads and did notice Thorntons name comes up a lot in potential trade wants. I didn't get to watch the Kings that much where I live but Thornton is a good offensive player. SGs like him are hard to find. I'd rather pair Evans and Thornton on the court together at the PG and SG than trade Thornton.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

U just said it. Hes a blackhole. Hes a shot muncher, a chucker, a fearless shot munching chucker. More shots should be going to dmc

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I agree for the most part. People are all too comfortable with trading away Marcus. That being said ... you have to give something to get something. I'm not actively looking to trade him, but if something good comes along, take it. I'd say the same thing about Tyreke, by the way.

The biggest issue is that even if you may be someone who prefers Thornton over Evans we just CANNOT go into next year with Thomas and Thornton as our starting guards (this is assuming an Evans trade) they would get murdered every single night, and I wouldn't even blame them. Both undersized for their positions.

I don't want to see Thornton go. Not at all. I feel comfortable calling him our most complete offensive player. Just does everything you want in a scorer... and he's not afraid to take the big shot or get his hands dirty for the tough baskets. He's a gamer. But if dealing him improves the team, you deal him.

 

[pshn80]

I'm very comfortable with trading away Thornton. I hope he is traded for significant value. I wish him well. If we had talented big people around him other than Evans, I could see him starting. We don't so he can't start for me, and if he can't start I'm concerned that he would be satisfied with coming off the bench. If he goes it will make putting together a better team much easier. It ain't money.

 

[Anthony1]

If somehow we end up with Beal, I think that Thornton would be the perfect 6th man candidate. He can get all the shots he wants when the 2nd team offense is on the court. Reke would be the guy to deal.

 

[KingsCitizen]

If somehow we end up with Beal, I think that Thornton would be the perfect 6th man candidate. He can get all the shots he wants when the 2nd team offense is on the court. Reke would be the guy to deal.

I think a lot of people overlooked Smart's comments near the end of the season to move Evans back to the PG spot. So if we get Beal, Thornton is the odd man out since he'll be the guy with a better trade value. The big elephant in the room is named Outlaw, Salmons, and Garcia. If Petrie can trade the big elephant, Thornton is real keeper.

We're a very good example of how bad contracts handicap a team to even resort to trading better pieces move on.

 

[Gary]

I think a lot of people overlooked Smart's comments near the end of the season to move Evans back to the PG spot. So if we get Beal, Thornton is the odd man out since he'll be the guy with a better trade value. The big elephant in the room is named Outlaw, Salmons, and Garcia. If Petrie can trade the big elephant, Thornton is real keeper.

We're a very good example of how bad contracts handicap a team to even resort to trading better pieces move on.

Smart also said at one point that Evans is our PG going forward then he switched to IT. I wouldn't hold Smart to what he says. I don't care who's playing SG, it's not a good idea to move Evans to PG.. Keep him at SG where he belongs.

I don't care if Evans handles the ball a lot as a SG, but I want a guy out there that when the game slows down knows how to run an NBA offense and get players decent shots. That's not Evans.

As for Thornton, I don't mind trading him if we got something decent in return.

 

[rainmaker]

The problem is, if you trade Reke most likely for a SF or PF, you're stuck with an IT/MT backcourt, which can't happen. Just terrible defensively. If MT is your man at SG, then you need a larger, much better defender than IT next to him. We have a guy who can do that, but most don't want him at PG, and the Reke/MT back court wasn't given much of a chance under Smart.

I'm hesitant about a Reke/MT backcourt in the first place, as even though I do think Reke can play point in this league, I'd prefer having a guard next to him who can handle a lot better than MT, as well as a better defender as MT has trouble with most SG's, but even more if he gets switched onto a PG.

Ideally, we get an NBA size PG who doesn't mind playing off the ball, isn't a constant mismatch on defense, and can spread the floor. Guys like Chalmers or Lowry come to mind, and move Reke to SG, with MT being perfectly happy and embracing the 6th man role. Or, Reke moves back to point, and next to him is a full size SG who can handle the ball, but also play well off it, while being a good defender. In that scenario, MT also embraces the 6th man role.

Of course IT in that scenario gets spot duty as a backup point. Does anyone think IT or MT would go for that? I sure as hell don't. But trading Reke instead of one of those two leaves you with the worst defensive back court in the league, which a surprising number of kingfans are more than ok with.

 

[mac]

If somehow we end up with Beal, I think that Thornton would be the perfect 6th man candidate. He can get all the shots he wants when the 2nd team offense is on the court. Reke would be the guy to deal.

The difference between Reke and Thornton is that teams don't ever double Thornton, or even put their best defenders on him, let alone set up their entire defense to take away his offense. They do that for Tyreke, who can't even shoot.
anyway, First you have the problem of Thornton accepting coming off the bench. Then you have a problem where he's getting his shots, but not involving anyone and just going iso 1 on 1. But you must be okay with that. Who's gonna run the offense and call plays to set MT up? Jimmer?

 

[bluntsnbball]

Smart also said at one point that Evans is our PG going forward then he switched to IT. I wouldn't hold Smart to what he says. I don't care who's playing SG, it's not a good idea to move Evans to PG.. Keep him at SG where he belongs.

I don't care if Evans handles the ball a lot as a SG, but I want a guy out there that when the game slows down knows how to run an NBA offense and get players decent shots. That's not Evans.

As for Thornton, I don't mind trading him if we got something decent in return.

i agree. I'm fine with reke playing some point, but the guy does not know how to run an offense. ive never seen someone waste so much of a play clock and force the rest of the team into a quick shot.

Thornton can score the ball. Nothing more, nothing less. But he isnt always the most consistent shooter and he completely disappears on D. I like the guy but i dont see anything that special in him. I dont find him that rare, and i dont think anyone will give us a major player for a package around him.

 

[KingsCitizen]

i agree. I'm fine with reke playing some point, but the guy does not know how to run an offense. ive never seen someone waste so much of a play clock and force the rest of the team into a quick shot.

Thornton can score the ball. Nothing more, nothing less. But he isnt always the most consistent shooter and he completely disappears on D. I like the guy but i dont see anything that special in him. I dont find him that rare, and i dont think anyone will give us a major player for a package around him.

That's highly exaggerated statement. Reke has been setting up his teammates but we didn't have any spot-up shooter except Jimmer. That's why Barnes would greatly improve Reke's game. Reke also exploded in assists,btw, when Smart implemented the run-and-gun system.

 

[Glenn]

I don't agree with the comment that Tyreke uses up the clock. He didn't do it this last year except when given the ball in late 4th quarter in do or die situations and THAT is appropriate.

As to Thornton, he is one of the best 4th quarter men we have had in awhile. He has ice water in his veins. That said, I think we need to trade a guard and as he is of little use on defense and he has a LOT of value, I say trade him. Perhaps couple him with one of our SFs. The idea to trade him is not to get rid of him but to fill a crucial spot at SF or PF. The reason to trade him is BECAUSE he is good. The normal trade doesn't necessarily make a team better on paper but is used to correct an imbalance in the team makeup. There is an imbalance at the guard position.

 

[ParniValjak]

I would trade MT for Batum in a heartbeart....before I could even blink.

MT is a great scorer but the problem is he is undersized, blackhole and a terrible defender. Its the other areas of his game that makes him a difficult fit because to cover up for him, you need a big PG who can guard SGs and PGs consistently. You also need a great defender at SF to also cover for him. If you are going with IT and MT backcourt, you WILL have scenarios like this year when Thornton is guarding Prince or someone who is is significantly mismatched against.

He would be a phenomenal 6th man scoring machine but the problem is his ego won't be able to handle it. If you choose Thornton as you SG of the future, you are going to have a VERY difficult time to find a PG and SF that will cover for him defensively. Simple as that.

 

[beb0p]

MT is being mentioned because most of the rest of the guys are untradeable. Cousins is off the table and most people don't want to trade Tyreke (yet). This team has so many holes and so many duplicate at one position (SG) that someone needs to go. Ideally that someone are Salmons and Outlaw but we all know that's not going to happen. Meanwhile other positions sit vacant and there is a logjam at SG. The logical thing to do is to unjam the logjam and use that piece to fill other positions. Easier said than done but I guess part of the fun is dreaming what MT can bring back.
.

 

[gunks]

Thornton is a selfish, inefficient chucker, who plays horrible defense (maybe worse on team), is extremely one dimensional, and happens to play the same position as a far superior player in Reke...Oh, and he will probably turn malcontent if asked to come off the bench.


Ship this dude out while he still has some value.

 

[pshn80]

That's highly exaggerated statement. Reke has been setting up his teammates but we didn't have any spot-up shooter except Jimmer. That's why Barnes would greatly improve Reke's game. Reke also exploded in assists,btw, when Smart implemented the run-and-gun system.

Don't think bluntsnbball exaggerated at all. Reke, while playing PG, did not set anyone up unless he went for the basket. Then he would set up others. He has shown no aptitude for running an offense otherwise. A bit of a problem. But gime hin three or four more years running the offense the way he does and he may improve.

 

[Warhawk]

Smart also said at one point that Evans is our PG going forward then he switched to IT. I wouldn't hold Smart to what he says.

You know as well as I that the IT push was by the Maloofs for ROY publicity. I'm not saying he didn't play well, mind you, but Evans was playing well under Smart until that publicity play. And I am NOT trying to sidetrack this conversation into an IT vs. Evans discussion. We just know that MSE, while not paying to put a product on the floor, will do anything publicity-wise to put butts in the seats.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

U just said it. Hes a blackhole. Hes a shot muncher, a chucker, a fearless shot munching chucker. More shots should be going to dmc

I get that you're a DCuz fan (he's my favorite player too), but you are being a bit hypocritical with these comments.

Take last season as an example;

Thornton: 15.75 shots per game (803 FGA in 51 games played) and 43.8% shooting.
Cousins: 15.61 shots per game (999 FGA in 64 games played) and 44.8% shooting.

So MT only took .14 shots per game than did Cuz. If MT is a what you described, then isn't DMC too??

Also factor in that Cuz only bested MT by 1% on his overall shooting percentage despite the fact that MT had 296 more 3pt FGA's and, as a SG, generally takes shots further away from the basket. Additionally, MT averaged more assists between the two.

As I've already stated, Cousins is my favorite player on the team, but lets not ignore the hard cold facts. DMC was jacking up almost an identical amount of shots per game last season. And there's no argument that Cuz's overall shooting percentage should be much, much higher than a mere 1% above our SG. Considering the positions they play and their current percentages, I think DeMarcus is more deserving of the "chucker" monicker at this point in time.

He needs to get that % closer to .500 next season, if not higher, in order to justify more shots.

 

[TyFreak Evans]

Do you have any idea what kind of contract we have this guy signed to? This guy is the perfect player, with a perfect contract. He's extremely aggressive, fearless, yes he can be a black hole, and his defense could be much, much better, but peeps are way too quick to throw the Baby out with the bath water. If MT sees the slightest opening, he's quick to attack the basket, and has a lot of good floater type moves driving to the basket. He's a very, very solid SG to roll with.

We have this guy signed for the prime of his career, to a very, very nice contract. If we give him up, he better bring something MAJOR back in return. We can't just be giving him away for scraps.

I think you "answered" your question, or counter-argued your initial argument with that last little bit. While I agree with you that a lot of people are jumping the gun way too often with MT in trade ideas, I think those same people would not mind seeing Marcus moved for the right pieces. Unfortunately, for those people who are jumping the gun, almost none of their ideas involve the right pieces...

 

[hrdboild]

I think Thornton is a bargain under his current contract, but a bad fit for this team. Jimmer/IT/Thornton/Tyreke was a terrible mistake on Petrie's part. I might be wrong about this, but based on what I saw this year two of those guys have to be replaced for this team to play cohesive team basketball. And they need to be replaced by someone who gives us what we need (long range shooting, court vision and/or passing ability, and defense).

If we can make it work, a Tyreke Evans/Terrence Williams backcourt with Thornton off the bench has long-term potential I think, but that's unlikely to happen with our current coach. If it makes you feel better, I'd prefer to trade Geoff Petrie and Keith Smart than Marcus Thornton. But I don't think we'll get much for them.

 

[bluntsnbball]

That's highly exaggerated statement. Reke has been setting up his teammates but we didn't have any spot-up shooter except Jimmer. That's why Barnes would greatly improve Reke's game. Reke also exploded in assists,btw, when Smart implemented the run-and-gun system.

Theres a difference in setting guys up and running an offense. He got his assists cause he's a good player, but he just isnt a point guard. I dont exactly know how to explain it, but there's definitely a difference

That said, i think even w/out an outside shot, he's fare superior to Thornton, making thornton expendable

 

[mac]

Don't think bluntsnbball exaggerated at all. Reke, while playing PG, did not set anyone up unless he went for the basket. Then he would set up others. He has shown no aptitude for running an offense otherwise. A bit of a problem. But gime hin three or four more years running the offense the way he does and he may improve.

Umm what offense? We don't have one. I didn't see some massive screening and Isaiah Thomas running a pick and roll and then kicking it to a wide open 3 point shooter anymore than i did see Tyreke do that. Isaiah Thomas' assists = 50% in transition/fast breaks, 30% just running pick and pops with Cousins that really even Jimmer Fredette could run (and Tyreke did the exact thing with Cuz. Cuz just started hitting them more consistently after Tyreke was moved to SF), and the remaining 20% finding cutters like JT when they're going to/ under the rim.

It's that last 20% that Thomas does a lot better than Tyreke. He also passes better on the break, but that isn't something that is miles ahead of Tyreke. Everybody can see and knows that Thomas is a better and more natural passer/ playmaker than Tyreke, there's no denying that. But given that we don't actually run well set plays, someone who can create wide open shots or dunks for others off penetration (Tyreke) can be just as valuable as a guy who gets people to certain spots and executes plays to get them the ball. Which is why I'm an advocate for having Tyreke at the 2 and IT at the 1, or moving Tyreke back to 1 and having MT at 2 (since Tyreke was showing some progress at PG before being moved to SF).

At the end of the day though, we can argue all we want about who's the better point guard for our team and it won't matter because we either have no good offensive system or have terrible defense, or worst yet, both.

 

[mac]

Theres a difference in setting guys up and running an offense. He got his assists cause he's a good player, but he just isnt a point guard. I dont exactly know how to explain it, but there's definitely a difference

That said, i think even w/out an outside shot, he's fare superior to Thornton, making thornton expendable

I agree with you (see my previous post). That said, I personally feel we don't even have an offense set up for Tyreke or IT to run. It's similar for Thomas - he's getting his assists because he's a good passer and we're just running and running. When you keep running people will get open, and Thomas is able to find those guys. But he isn't running an offense the same way Steve Nash or Tony Parker runs an offense. You can tell the difference based on how good your second/ third options are after the initial attack is cut off. When DMC doesn't hit the shot on a pick and pop, or they crowd him inside our offense doesn't go anywhere.

 

[Glenn]

Theres a difference in setting guys up and running an offense. He got his assists cause he's a good player, but he just isnt a point guard. I dont exactly know how to explain it, but there's definitely a difference

That said, i think even w/out an outside shot, he's fare superior to Thornton, making thornton expendable

Why can't you and hrdboild have names that are easy to spell and remember? Anyway your notes inspired this question. Do you consider TWill more of a PG than Tyreke? I do. TWill's problem would come if the other team put on a full court press. If you start a backcourt of TWill and Tyreke, give the ball to Tyreke when there is pressure. He has the handles. As a PG, I think TWill has the natural feel for the game. Surprisingly, I might add.

Why not big ball and not small ball. It even sounds more masculine. Let us say we get that defensive minded SF or if we are lucky, Salmons gets his act together. Let us say we have Cousins and Drummond. If the Salmons comment makes you choke, what if we trade Thornton and get us a bonafied starting SF. Wouldn't we then have a guy who can direct traffic in TWill, another special purpose type guard who can pull off some athletic moves seldom seen in the NBA, and we have the offensive minded center and defensive minded center both of whom are excellent basketball players.

All of this is possible and can be done this year if the cards fall right and people shy away from drafting Drummond. Why not? Or at the least, why not have this kind of lineup available for the special team that would have no answer for two huge guards.

Call it thug ball. I'd love it.

 

[gunks]

I'm definitely on the Reke/Twill backcourt bandwagon. Mismatches on both ends of the court. Those guys showed some chemistry too.


Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh....Too bad we dont have a real coach in town (or real owners).

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm definitely on the Reke/Twill backcourt bandwagon. Mismatches on both ends of the court. Those guys showed some chemistry too.


Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh....Too bad we dont have a real coach in town (or real owners).

The shooting is the issue of course. But there is no doubt that in spurts it caused havoc last year.

 

[gunks]

The shooting issue is why I'd be OK with us taking Barnes at 5 and hoping for the best! (or maybe GP can do his job for once and bring in a vet SF that doesnt suck).

If we can finally get some consistency from the 3 and stretch the floor a bit....Reke/TWill can be the new RonRon/Bonzi!

Never going to happen with our coach (and whatever scrub the Magoofs replace him with midway through next season), but its fun to think about the possibility of playing a big roster instead of a small one. As Glenn said: Thug Ball.

 

[hrdboild]

Why can't you and hrdboild have names that are easy to spell and remember? Anyway your notes inspired this question. Do you consider TWill more of a PG than Tyreke? I do. TWill's problem would come if the other team put on a full court press. If you start a backcourt of TWill and Tyreke, give the ball to Tyreke when there is pressure. He has the handles. As a PG, I think TWill has the natural feel for the game. Surprisingly, I might add.

Why not big ball and not small ball. It even sounds more masculine. Let us say we get that defensive minded SF or if we are lucky, Salmons gets his act together. Let us say we have Cousins and Drummond. If the Salmons comment makes you choke, what if we trade Thornton and get us a bonafied starting SF. Wouldn't we then have a guy who can direct traffic in TWill, another special purpose type guard who can pull off some athletic moves seldom seen in the NBA, and we have the offensive minded center and defensive minded center both of whom are excellent basketball players.

All of this is possible and can be done this year if the cards fall right and people shy away from drafting Drummond. Why not? Or at the least, why not have this kind of lineup available for the special team that would have no answer for two huge guards.

Call it thug ball. I'd love it.

I was going to go with Glenn but it was taken, so I went for my second choice. In all seriousness though, you can put the missing vowels back in if you want. I'll still know what you mean. As for easy to remember... just think of Chow Yun Fat playing the clarinet:

Cause it don't get much cooler than that, amIright?

Back to the topic at hand, I don't consider TWill a more natural PG because his ballhandling isn't at that level, but he's got both the aptitude and the willingness to play set-up man for his teammates. That along with his defense make him a good sidekick for Tyreke I think. Tyreke can do what he does best -- attack the defense -- but we're not limited to him as our only playmaker. The only problem with that scenario, as Brick just pointed out (appropriately enough ) is that neither of them is a consistent three-point threat. Barnes was inconsistent in his college career but he looks the part of a knockdown shooter. He could help create space for Tyreke and Williams.

Or we could just ignore the three point line altogether and load up on defense with Kidd-Gilchrist at SF to create a nightmare of long arms and quick feet for the other team's guards. Batum presents a good middle ground as he's a solid defender and also an emerging 3 point threat. Get him and Drummond, like you proposed, and now we have our 3 options in the offense with Tyreke's dribble-drives, Batum's spot-up shooting, and Cousins' post dominance alongside two fill-in-the-gaps guys in Williams and Drummond who are both good passers and defensively inclined. That's pretty much a dream scenario for me.

 

[bluntsnbball]

f it, no point in arguing anymore,here is my philosophy- the team is a talented mess, and the best way to make strides at cleaning up, is to get a coach who knows what he's doing, then hope everything else falls into place. Until then i don't think we will see much progress, no matter who's on the roster