Tony Parker for 7th

[RookieOfTheDay]

Am I the only one who doesn't think we need another guard on our team? I think we can add a swingman guard, but not someone at the 1/2 position. I like Reke/Beno/Thornton there, and I think if we add a starting caliber swingman and put him at the three, then back him up with Donte, we'd be fine there. Unless you're talking about an elite level player, I don't think we should take on significant salary for a player that doesn't make us a playoff contender. I like Parker and think he's better than any other guard we have, but he's also expensive, and comes with another expensive player, and I don't think that move makes us any better than a 40 win team. Plus, it restricts our flexibility moving forward.

That would all depend on Evans and Cousins. If you ad Parker and Evans, Thornton, and Cousins all play great next year, you'd be one of the top five teams in the west.

 

[Superman]

I'm largely in the same boat. However, I think you'll still need a guard who is pretty consistent from the outside and can create for others as well, (like drafting Jimmer). There should always be someone on the floor who can hit an open three - it doesn't give the opposing defense a chance to rest.

I think we can target some elite SFs through a trade since we'll have the cap space to bring someone in. I don't know about drafting a SF because I don't see any of them as "Day 1 Ready". There are good players, sure, but I don't know if the FO or the fans have the patience to wait for them to develop.

This is why I like Hamilton. He can hit shots from anywhere on the floor, and he doesn't impact the 1/2 guard rotation, which I really like. I'm not sold on any of the guards in the draft as being star prospects that you can't pass on. As a matter of fact, I see them all as being similar to the players we already have. I like Reke and Thornton more than the top three guards in the draft. Don't know why we'd want to interrupt what we're doing at the guard spots for a rookie who isn't projected to be any better than what we already have.

I still think we should trade down for Hamilton and maybe take back a swingman prospect in the deal, and let it be what it is. I don't think Tony Parker is good enough to make us a playoff contender in the Western conference, and I don't think his presence would improve our shooting either. If we're looking to add shooting, I think it should be at the three spot, someone who can score off the ball and grab some defensive rebounds. The Pacers reportedly want Alec Burks, and are shopping Brandon Rush. Swap picks with the Pacers, and get Rush back, draft Hamilton at #15, and we'll have added two outside shooters with athleticism and ball-handling.

 

[Superman]

That would all depend on Evans and Cousins. If you ad Parker and Evans, Thornton, and Cousins all play great next year, you'd be one of the top five teams in the west.

I think you're being overly optimistic. I think Parker fixes one issue for us, and that's execution. I think we're already looking at being a 35 win team next year, assuming we keep Thornton and Dalembert. Parker is good for another 10, maybe 15 wins, if we're being bullish. That's 45-50 wins, which is either good for anywhere from 9th to 5th in the west. Again, being bullish.

The problem is that we're stuck if we do that. We're perpetually a 45-50 win team, barring significant developments. And we'd be right up against the cap, with a more restrictive CBA on the way.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I think you're being overly optimistic. I think Parker fixes one issue for us, and that's execution. I think we're already looking at being a 35 win team next year, assuming we keep Thornton and Dalembert. Parker is good for another 10, maybe 15 wins, if we're being bullish. That's 45-50 wins, which is either good for anywhere from 9th to 5th in the west. Again, being bullish.

The problem is that we're stuck if we do that. We're perpetually a 45-50 win team, barring significant developments. And we'd be right up against the cap, with a more restrictive CBA on the way.

That may be true but I don't really see any other options on the table that will be better. 50 wins sounds pretty good to me right now.

 

[Kingsguy881]

It's a good thing some of you are not the GM of the Kings. Good Lord.

 

[bajaden]

Am I the only one who doesn't think we need another guard on our team? I think we can add a swingman guard, but not someone at the 1/2 position. I like Reke/Beno/Thornton there, and I think if we add a starting caliber swingman and put him at the three, then back him up with Donte, we'd be fine there. Unless you're talking about an elite level player, I don't think we should take on significant salary for a player that doesn't make us a playoff contender. I like Parker and think he's better than any other guard we have, but he's also expensive, and comes with another expensive player, and I don't think that move makes us any better than a 40 win team. Plus, it restricts our flexibility moving forward.

I think most of the guard talk comes as a response to what Petrie said he was looking for, either in the draft or through freeagency. He made the statement that he wanted to add a guard that could handle the ball and shoot the ball. Thats one of the reasons that I keyed in on Fredette, Walker, and Knight. Not necessarily because I wanted those guys, but I thought that was the direction Petrie was leaning. Not that I don't like them, but I like others as well.

 

[bajaden]

I think you're being overly optimistic. I think Parker fixes one issue for us, and that's execution. I think we're already looking at being a 35 win team next year, assuming we keep Thornton and Dalembert. Parker is good for another 10, maybe 15 wins, if we're being bullish. That's 45-50 wins, which is either good for anywhere from 9th to 5th in the west. Again, being bullish.

The problem is that we're stuck if we do that. We're perpetually a 45-50 win team, barring significant developments. And we'd be right up against the cap, with a more restrictive CBA on the way.

If everyone remained static and didn't improve, you'd probably be right. But you have to assume that Cousins is going to improve over last season. You have to assume that Evans is going to improve over an injury filled season. You'd have Thornton for an entire season, which could make a huge difference. Then you add a proven PG, that has also proven to be very successful in clutch situations, something the Kings lacked last season, and your just going to win more games than you suggest. Look at how many games the Kings lost last season, due to poor execution in the final seconds of the game.

So our jump may on be to 45 or 50 games at first, but as the team comes together and melds, those wins should go up. Remember, teams like the Spurs, Lakers, Sun's etc. aren't getting any younger, and games that used to be automatic losses, will start to become wins.

 

[Warhawk]

Yes!

The Kings are in a position to spend wisely and people just want to spend it all in one shot for the sake of spending. We've waited years for this point, and we know what our targets are:

Thornton
Dalembert
FA SF

Which will STILL leave us with money to spend - I think. There's a reason so many teams are floating their overpaid players at us. They're hoping we'll bite to help them relieve their own cap issues. We can afford to be wise spenders, especially with the potential of a new CBA or lockout. We play it right, we'll get younger players, or even vets that are better fits.

You don't just jump on an offer because you have capspace. That's what gets you in further troubles, just as Atlanta. It's not our job to save the other teams.

It's not our job to save the other teams.


BTW, I would still have Dalembert on this team than Bosh.

I agree 100%.