Trevor Ariza 2 years $25 mil

#33
Wow, we finally have not one but two real full-sized SFs that are all-around solid.
And both have had success in small ball units playing the 3/4. Arizas shot is very off and on but the Kings can really spread the floor for Fox now. It will be interesting to see if Walton attempts to run horn like he did in LA because this team is a total spread team, not a dual high post one now.
 

Entity

Hall of Famer
#44
Oh, I didn't realize you were the hall monitor around here. It's called an opinion and having one doesn't mean you aren't a fan. The Ariza deal makes some sense and if it's true that it's not a full 2 year deal then it's an easy out should it not work. Like I said in another thread. Defense at PG and SF will move the needle but I still think caution would have been wise considering the Kings last attempts at filling out the roster. I can still recall the excitement over Zbo and Hill. The Kings are certainly better positioned now than then to make these types of moves but realism and history should factor in at some point.
Zbo and hill were old starters. I don’t remember much excitement. Ariza was a stater just last year getting 14 pts 6 reb and shooting 52% and plays good defense. As a backup he might be the best we could have gotten for what we want and contract length
 
#46
Best part of this is it looks like we'd basically assembled our team for 2019-2020 ahead of the signing period without reaching for our plan B and C guys. Just feels like we are executing our vision. Hopefully it pays off.
Throughout his career, he has always looked good when he was the 4th or 5th option. When asked to be the 2nd or 3rd option, his numbers always take a steep drop.
 
#49
Zbo and hill were old starters. I don’t remember much excitement. Ariza was a stater just last year getting 14 pts 6 reb and shooting 52% and plays good defense. As a backup he might be the best we could have gotten for what we want and contract length
Yep, Zbo was basically polar opposite of Fox, Bagley, runnuning team.
 
#54
Zbo and hill were old starters. I don’t remember much excitement. Ariza was a stater just last year getting 14 pts 6 reb and shooting 52% and plays good defense. As a backup he might be the best we could have gotten for what we want and contract length

That's not true, you're looking at his efg%. His actual FG% for all of last season was very poor. It has been since the 2013-14 season.
 

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#56
Not for too long since it's now reported as a partial guarantee in the 2nd year. They are overpays on shorter deals. Like I said, makes sense if the plan is to reassess in 2 years.
I tend to agree. I think the short deals say a lot about the team's faith in the core of young players and the desire to get those young guys both experience on the tutors they need to move into the playoffs. I could make some comments about ariza's character but what I can't deny is his experience and ability.
 
#60
Oh, I didn't realize you were the hall monitor around here. It's called an opinion and having one doesn't mean you aren't a fan. The Ariza deal makes some sense and if it's true that it's not a full 2 year deal then it's an easy out should it not work. Like I said in another thread. Defense at PG and SF will move the needle but I still think caution would have been wise considering the Kings last attempts at filling out the roster. I can still recall the excitement over Zbo and Hill. The Kings are certainly better positioned now than then to make these types of moves but realism and history should factor in at some point.
People were alright with those, at first because it was sold as sort of a mentor ship/meritocracy program for the young guys. People were also alright with Vince Carter who absolutely wasn’t going to be a real on court contributer in a meaningful way. That didn’t last long but the circumstances and expectations were entirely different. Dedmond and Ariza are pieces that fill weaknesses from last year while still fitting into the identity the Kings have carved out for themselves. As for “overpay” I’m not seeing that really in any of the signings. These types of deal are pretty much the new mid level stuff...and overpaying implies we could’ve got a player of equal or greater value for less or that they wouldn’t have ended up with similar deals elsewhere.