We need to drop a PG

[sqwalk]

Baja, great analysis. Even though you probably don't care, I want to give you props, as I always enjoy reading your posts. Thanks!

 

[swisshh]

Who was the Real PG? Bibby, Bobby J or Doug Christie?

KB

Don't ask me stupid questions.

Yes, I had a nicer reply, but I do put up with too much foolishness here.

 

[bajaden]

Baja:

I thought about saying something a little positive about Jimmer but I'm already married. He's all yours.

LOL! I don't think my wife would be into a threesome. So I'll pass...

 

[Hadlowe]

I voted Jimmer, both to force Smart into logical lineups and for Jimmer's development. Both Jimmer and IT have had a pretty good year so far in limited minutes, yet Smart keeps them both on pretty short leashes.

In any case, you can't ship them out without getting back a complementary piece for the Kings, so either a shot blocker or a full-size defensive three who can shoot 35% from the arc.

If you have to ship one of them out, George Karl has said good things about IT in the past, and he might fit in well as a backup to Lawson for a running Denver squad. Conveniently enough, Denver has a wealth of wing players.

With Jimmer, you might get some interest from a few contending teams who need to shore up their second unit, but I doubt you could get a real piece back to fill in that shot blocking or shooting hole here. You would probably end up with an Anthony Morrow type and a draft pick.

 

[KingMilz]

If you have to ship one of them out, George Karl has said good things about IT in the past, and he might fit in well as a backup to Lawson for a running Denver squad. Conveniently enough, Denver has a wealth of wing players.

There is no way in this world IT will ever get mins over Andre Miller in any team or league as a starter or back up, maybe when he retires, although I would be interested in getting Wilson Chandler

 

[King Baller]

Don't ask me stupid questions.

Yes, I had a nicer reply, but I do put up with too much foolishness here.

Aren't you the charmer. Hey everybody wants CP3 on their team. My point is that there are other ways for guards to be successful. The Adelman/Bibby/Christie/Bobby J Era Kings are but one example.

KB

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

Excellent post. Jimmer is one of the guys on this team I definitely want to keep. Would love to see more Reke/Jimmer in the backcourt. Jimmer brings elite shooting to the table... plus he's a gym rat so it's a safe bet that he's only going to get better and better over the next few seasons. I'd like to see what he can develop into as well.

Elite shooter?? Not sure about that..
good shooter, yes...but right now he's looking like the 2nd coming of Steve Alford, but that probably falls on Smart's rotational craziness. He may develop later after he's left the Kings.

 

[ESP47]

I don't really think we have to get rid of any of our point guards. Two of them are very cheap, and the other one, Brooks isn't very expensive either. Other than causing some possible desent on the team, I don't see a problem. However, if I have to choose one to depart, it would be IT. I think Brooks is a better all around player right now, and I think Jimmer has too much potential to trade without knowing exactly what you have. I want to read you some quotes from Draft Express.

"Not a factor defensively. Doesn't have good lateral quickness. Does poor job in help side, getting out of position and sagging into the paint. Has a hard time getting through screens. Forces his team to make strange defensive assignments to minimize his ineffectiveness on the defensive side of the ball"

Talking about Jimmer? No, talking about Steve Nash prior to the draft in 1996. Here's another quote from another site.

"His biggest weakness is his man to man defense. His average foot speed makes him an easy target for small, quick point guards to blow by. His lack of physical strength does not bode well for handling the bigger, stronger point guards in the NBA in the post."

Here is an excerpt about Nash and Fredette.

In a recent episode of the ESPN NBA Today Podcast with Ryen Russillo (a must listen), draft expert Chad Ford talked about the Phoenix Suns possibly taking Jimmer Fredette with the 13th overall pick in the 2011 NBA Draft. There's been oodles already written about Jimmer and the Suns, but this one struck me due to a bit of revisionist history by Ford when he was comparing Jimmer to Steve Nash coming out of college.
The point Ford was trying to make is that Nash, like Jimmer, wasn't considered a "true point" out of college but with some tutelage under the Canadian master, Jimmer could find his inner facilitator. It makes enough sense and is probably moot since Jimmer isn't likely to be on the board at 13 anyway.
"Nash was a very similar player coming out of college. People don't remember this, but out of Santa Clara he was more of scorer than a point guard, a guy who could really light it up.
The Suns played him off the ball for the start of his career, they traded him to Dallas in part because they weren't sold he could ever be a full time point guard and then he evolved into one of the greatest point guards ever."
It's true that Nash was scorer at Santa Clara (21.8 ppg / 4 apg his senior year) and like Jimmer was forced into that role based on the teammates around him. Nash also didn't pass much his first two years with the Suns and he did play off the ball. Of course, he was also teammates with a 30-year-old Kevin Johnson and a 24-year-old Jason Kidd. It's a wonder the Suns drafted Nash at all given their point guard depth.

Am I saying that Jimmer is the next Steve Nash? No, of course not! I have no idea how good he'll eventually be. But I do know that if he were here right now instead of Jimmer, some of you would want him traded. The Sun's fans booed when he was drafted, and the Sun's gave up on Nash way too early, and eventually managed to get him back. So what I'am saying is that we shouldn't give up on Jimmer until we know for sure exactly what we have.

Both players played in smaller conferences. Both players were known shooters, and both players had the rep of being bad defenders. Both players played on fairly bad teams and both became the focus of their teams offense. Neither was known as a playmaker in college, but both showed good court vision at times.

Freshman year:
Nash: 8.1 PPG - 42.4% FGP - 40.8% 3PP - 2.2 APG - 2.0 TO - 2.5 RPG
Fredette: 7.0 PPG - 40.7% FGP - 33.6% 3PP - 1.7 APG - 1.2 TO - 1.1 RPG

Senior year:
Nash: 17 PPG - 43.0% FGP - 34.4% 3PP - 6.0 APG - 3.6 TO - 3.5 RPG
Fredette: 28.9 PPG - 45.2% FGP - 39.6% 3PP - 4.3 APG - 3.5 TO - 3.4 RPG

Their sophmore and junior years were very similiar, so I won't bore you with those stats. Personally I think Nash was a little better ballhandler coming out of college, and he had mastered the art of changing speeds and getting by opposing PG's. Something that Jimmer has to work on. Changing speeds and hesitation moves gives the appearance of being quicker than your actually are.

Right now, IT and Jimmer are chump change investments, and it would be foolish to just throw one of them away. As Bricky said, decide which one you want in the rotation and ride that horse for a while. If need be, send the other one to the Developmental League for a while so he can get playing time.

I don't want to trade any of our PG's at this point. Especially Jimmer because we haven't given him time to develop and it's not like he's keeping us from winning or anything. It only seems like a log jam because Smart doesn't set rotations correctly. I don't see the logic in your Nash and Jimmer comparison though. Just because Nash improved doesn't mean Jimmer is going to improve. I'm sure there are a handful of hall of fame players that had scouting reports similar to Jimmer's. There are also thousands that never made it either. By that logic, we should keep every Quincy Douby, Justin Williams and Jon Brockman that we get our hands on because they could be the next ____ fill in the blank player.

You're taking a chance anytime you trade someone. We had no idea Peja would fall off the wagon so quickly after trading him. We also didn't think Webber had 2 and a half more solid years left in him where we could have contended for championships for a few years longer. Any time you trade a player or release them, you're taking a chance to an extent. You can only hope the team exhausts every opportunity to let the player succeed before letting them go. I'd venture to say most of our players would improve on most any other team. That's all on our coaching staff though.

 

[Kingster]

If you want to trade somebody, trade the guy whose value is the highest on this board as of this moment in time - Tyreke Evans. You'll actually get some value for him. I'd talk to Utah in particular, as he typically kills them. They have some very nice young bigs over there. If you want to trade IT, you should have done it last year when he was getting pt and playing great. If you want to trade Jimmer, wait until he has a string of games in which he is burying 3 point shots and there is Jimmermania everywhere.

Typically, this board wants to trade the player(s) with the least popularity on this board, usually because of the performances (or lack therof) of the last few games. It's as if there are GMs around the league just dying to pay up for the players this board doesn't like in the latest news cycle. Good luck with that. I say, think seriously about trading the players that are playing well. You might get somebody to overpay for that kind of guy, whereas if you trade the player that isn't playing well or getting little playing time, you're going to be very lucky to get back more than chump change.

 

[Padrino]

If you want to trade somebody, trade the guy whose value is the highest on this board as of this moment in time - Tyreke Evans. You'll actually get some value for him. I'd talk to Utah in particular, as he typically kills them. They have some very nice young bigs over there. If you want to trade IT, you should have done it last year when he was getting pt and playing great. If you want to trade Jimmer, wait until he has a string of games in which he is burying 3 point shots and there is Jimmermania everywhere.

Typically, this board wants to trade the player(s) with the least popularity on this board, usually because of the performances (or lack therof) of the last few games. It's as if there are GMs around the league just dying to pay up for the players this board doesn't like in the latest news cycle. Good luck with that. I say, think seriously about trading the players that are playing well. You might get somebody to overpay for that kind of guy, whereas if you trade the player that isn't playing well or getting little playing time, you're going to be very lucky to get back more than chump change.

it doesn't really matter how well an individual is playing when trade scenarios must account for matching salaries. shipping off unproven, second-year players like jimmer or thomas would net very little in return on their own, unless someone was willing to give up draft picks to get a guy who has so far underperformed according to his draft position, or a guy who has already outperformed his draft position. that said, any trade involving jimmer or thomas would likely be a consolidation of packaged-together and ill-fitting movable parts to obtain something that fits better...

of the kings' guards, tyreke evans obviously has the most trade value, then marcus thornton, then aaron brooks. of course, those three also have the most potential to carry this team forward, brooks' redundancy aside. because of that duplication of skills, i'd be willing to move brooks for a veteran point guard who can handle the ball, pass it efficiently, shoot with relative consistency from outside, and otherwise stay out of the way. funny how we had a guy like that not too long ago in beno udrih, though i'd say brooks is certainly a stronger defender than beno ever was for the kings...

all told, and considering the options out there, i'd rather just go with what has the potential to work well with a little massaging from the coaching staff: a primary guard rotation of evans, brooks, and thornton as sixth man. salmons will split time between the 3 and 2, jimmer gets limited minutes off the bench, and isaiah thomas gets relegated to towel-waver and good-guy locker room presence. that would be a bummer for IT, but every team needs capable deep bench players who can step in in the case of injury, and maintain a positive disposition despite the lack of playing time. thomas fits that bill perfectly...

 

[Bricklayer]

If you want to trade somebody, trade the guy whose value is the highest on this board as of this moment in time - Tyreke Evans. You'll actually get some value for him. I'd talk to Utah in particular, as he typically kills them. They have some very nice young bigs over there. If you want to trade IT, you should have done it last year when he was getting pt and playing great. If you want to trade Jimmer, wait until he has a string of games in which he is burying 3 point shots and there is Jimmermania everywhere.

Typically, this board wants to trade the player(s) with the least popularity on this board, usually because of the performances (or lack therof) of the last few games. It's as if there are GMs around the league just dying to pay up for the players this board doesn't like in the latest news cycle. Good luck with that. I say, think seriously about trading the players that are playing well. You might get somebody to overpay for that kind of guy, whereas if you trade the player that isn't playing well or getting little playing time, you're going to be very lucky to get back more than chump change.

Indeed, that is why the Lakers want to trade Kobe instead of Gasol.

And regarding trading the others: if you trade IT you do it ow before he glow from his rookie season has entirely faded. That's one of those things Geoff has never done. He always let's players rot on the vine before finally dumping them off. Ditto Jimmer, although the tiem would have been last year, hoping somebody still bought Jimmermania. Brooks you don't trade at the moment. Not only are he and Reke really clikcing, but his value rihgt now is far less thna it might be eventually. This was a near 20ppg scorer a coupe of years ago. If he reestablishes himself next to Reke he could have real value. Of course if he reestablishes himself next to Reke then his real value could be to us.

 

[Kingster]

Indeed, that is why the Lakers want to trade Kobe instead of Gasol.

And regarding trading the others: if you trade IT you do it ow before he glow from his rookie season has entirely faded. That's one of those things Geoff has never done. He always let's players rot on the vine before finally dumping them off. Ditto Jimmer, although the tiem would have been last year, hoping somebody still bought Jimmermania. Brooks you don't trade at the moment. Not only are he and Reke really clikcing, but his value rihgt now is far less thna it might be eventually. This was a near 20ppg scorer a coupe of years ago. If he reestablishes himself next to Reke he could have real value. Of course if he reestablishes himself next to Reke then his real value could be to us.

I didn't think I'd have to explain the obvious. But I guess I do. Throw in the provison that you won't trade proven All Stars. Nobody on this team is a proven All Star, much less HOFer. Ergo, what I said still stands.

 

[Bricklayer]

I didn't think I'd have to explain the obvious. But I guess I do. Throw in the provison that you won't trade proven All Stars. Nobody on this team is a proven All Star, much less HOFer. Ergo, what I said still stands.

Nobody on any young team is ever a proven All Star. Heck, the Hornets should trade Anthony Davis, he's not a proven All star either but might have some value.

 

[rainmaker]

I didn't think I'd have to explain the obvious. But I guess I do. Throw in the provison that you won't trade proven All Stars. Nobody on this team is a proven All Star, much less HOFer. Ergo, what I said still stands.

So, we should trade Reke.

GS should trade Curry/Klay.

Wash should trade Wall.

Minn should trade Rubio.

Cle should trade Kyrie.

Utah should trade one or more of Favors/Kanter/Gordon

and so on, simply because these guys aren't proven All Stars?

What? Going by that line of thinking, the large majority of current All Stars should have all been given up on and traded in their first 3-5 years, outside of Duncan, Lebron and Griffin and maybe Rose/Durant.

 

[spudfan]

Brooks you don't trade at the moment. Not only are he and Reke really clikcing, but his value rihgt now is far less thna it might be eventually. This was a near 20ppg scorer a coupe of years ago. If he reestablishes himself next to Reke he could have real value. Of course if he reestablishes himself next to Reke then his real value could be to us.

I like Brooks. I feel he is a solid player and expected him to come back from China and be just as potent as he was a few years ago. I agree that his value right now is far less than it will be eventually. I think that he probably agrees with that too, and his agent does as well. The two year contract, with the second year being a player option was such a weird contract to me. It is just screams that he expects some other team to want to pick him up and offer a larger contract. I hope we get to keep him for two years but I have my doubts. Not a fan of such short contracts, would be interested to know if that's the only way we could get him to sign... or if it was the longest contract we were willing to offer. Having it be a second year player option instead of a team option leads me to believe it was his choice.

My prediction is this offseason we have to go out and find another point guard. That could be in the form of offering a HUGE contract to either Brooks or Tyreke... or drafting someone. Maybe pick up a free agent. Brooks is only locked up this season, Tyreke wasn't offered an extension, IT is far from being a long term option in my opinion and Jimmer is a couple years away from being a starting point guard IF he continues to improve significantly (big if). So if Tyreke or Brooks keep playing well we will need to offer $$$ to keep them. Anyway you put it, we are not really in a position to be cutting point guards unless it's in the form of a trade for another that has a longer contract.

 

[tyreeeke]

Elite shooter?? Not sure about that..
good shooter, yes...but right now he's looking like the 2nd coming of Steve Alford, but that probably falls on Smart's rotational craziness. He may develop later after he's left the Kings.

To question Jimmer's elite shooting makes me think you're trying to rile up the Jimmer fans, lol. As you already know, Jimmer is an elite shooter.

 

[Padrino]

To question Jimmer's elite shooting makes me think you're trying to rile up the Jimmer fans, lol. As you already know, Jimmer is an elite shooter.

eighteen full seasons and thirteen games into his nineteenth season, posting percentages of 45% field, 40% 3pt, and 89% ft, ray allen is an elite shooter in the nba...

one lockout-shortened season and twelve sophomore games into his professional career, posting percentages of 40% field, 37% 3pt, and 84% ft, jimmer fredette is hardly an elite shooter in the nba. yet. he may become one, of course, but his shooting percentages were decidedly mediocre in his rookie season. he's certainly picking up his efficiency this year. however, it remains to be seen if he'll be able to sustain it once nba defenses begin applying the kind of pressure that's already managing to make a mockery of jimmer's ball handling abilities...

 

[tyreeeke]

eighteen full seasons and thirteen games into his nineteenth season, posting percentages of 45% field, 40% 3pt, and 89% ft, ray allen is an elite shooter in the nba...

one lockout-shortened season and twelve sophomore games into his professional career, posting percentages of 40% field, 37% 3pt, and 84% ft, jimmer fredette is hardly an elite shooter in the nba. yet. he may become one, of course, but his shooting percentages were decidedly mediocre in his rookie season. he's certainly picking up his efficiency this year. however, it remains to be seen if he'll be able to sustain it once nba defenses begin applying the kind of pressure that's already managing to make a mockery of jimmer's ball handling abilities...

Jimmer's an elite shooter, I don't care about a rookie campaign in which he had a change of coach and a shortened season. Ray Allen's first year's numbers are all below his average for his career as well. Jimmer's efg%, ts% and 3pt% are elite this season, period. Anyone with two eyes sees the form and consistency in his shot, the way he squares his body to the basket.

 

[Padrino]

Jimmer's an elite shooter, I don't care about a rookie campaign in which he had a change of coach and a shortened season. Ray Allen's first year's numbers are all below his average for his career as well. Jimmer's efg%, ts% and 3pt% are elite this season, period. Anyone with two eyes sees the form and consistency in his shot, the way he squares his body to the basket.

like any young player, jimmer is not elite until he is elite. its that simple, friend. he needs to sustain it. it takes years. i'm a big fan of tyreke evans, but i'm not proclaiming that he's jumped into elite company just because he's had four excellent games in a row after slumping in his two seasons prior. tyreke can be an elite slasher in the nba if he continues to round out his skill set to elevate that natural talent. likewise, jimmer can be an elite shooter in the nba if he rounds out his skill set to elevate that natural talent. but you act as if he has arrived, as if he's everything he might someday be already, and that does a disservice to the player you're such a massive supporter of. this habit you have for hyperbole concerning all things jimmer grows more and more tiresome by the day (i was weary of it on your registration date). but here's the deal: right now, jimmer's a pretty good shooter. i'll even grant you that he has the potential to be an elite shooter. but simply having the form and ability to shoot the ball very well does not make him an elite shooter. neither does shooting very well through thirteen games. j.j. redick has posted excellent percentages in his career as a spot-up shooter, but he's hardly in elite company. he's certainly no reggie miller. and neither is jimmer. yet.

 

[VF21]

Jimmer's an elite shooter, I don't care about a rookie campaign in which he had a change of coach and a shortened season. Ray Allen's first year's numbers are all below his average for his career as well. Jimmer's efg%, ts% and 3pt% are elite this season, period. Anyone with two eyes sees the form and consistency in his shot, the way he squares his body to the basket.

No, Jimmer Fredette is NOT an elite shooter IN THE NBA. His college stats are meaningless, about as relevant as Quincy Douby's (look him up if you don't know who he is). You continue to act as though it is we, the Kings fans, who are delusional about your hero. Until and unless Jimmer can prove to us - and the rest of the basketball world not blinded by Jimmermania - that he can survive and flourish he will be just what he is, a young player in his second season who has yet to make a name for himself.

Anybody with eyes not permanently tainted by myopia would step back and wait for his hero to prove himself instead of setting the bar so high for him that he (Jimmer) might never be able to reach it.