Why is John Salmons starting?

[Lafayette]

If I had to pick one player to start at the 3 it would be Garcia. How bad does Green look when he's in there and Salmons is just crap on offense. Outlaw needs to not shoot the ball, just not that great at that position.

 

[beb0p]

That thread is about the youth of the team, not Salmons.

Salmons was a pariah around here from years back. About the best compliment he received upon arriving is that he was maybe better than what we had. Maybe. I was having to tell people to put down the pitchforks. That I could see the theory, if not the wisdom.

That thread was about the rebuilding of the team, which definitely includes Salmons... and Hickson too for that matter.

Calling Salmons a great man defender and exactly what this team needs and a huge upgrade is a strange way of telling people to put down the pitchforks. Aside from the fact that there was only one or two persons holding the pitchfork and a pack of people ready to celebrate.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Aside from the fact that there was only one or two persons holding the pitchfork and a pack of people ready to celebrate.

"Celebrate"? Don't be ridiculous. There were certainly people who thought Salmons was an upgrade over the Casspi/Greene/Garcia trio we trotted out last year. But if you insist on being hyperbolic to try to score some sort of points or something, don't be surprised when people call you out on it.

 

[beb0p]

"Celebrate"? Don't be ridiculous. There were certainly people who thought Salmons was an upgrade over the Casspi/Greene/Garcia trio we trotted out last year. But if you insist on being hyperbolic to try to score some sort of points or something, don't be surprised when people call you out on it.

What was said under the thread:

1. Salmons is a great defender and a great fit for the team.
2. Kings have accumulated great size and a much improved defense.
3. Hickson is comparable to Al Jefferson.
4. Petrie really knows what he's doing with the trades.
5. Big pieces for a Championship contending team are here.

And there's more...

You're telling me with statements like that, the mood was not approving, happy, and celebratory? Maybe if you read them again with the rose-colored glasses off...

 

[Glenn]

Why is this important except to stroke ones own ego?

I can tell you what I thought: I thought Salmons must have changed or they wouldn't have traded for him. He was awful when he was here before and the fact now is evident, he is the same old John. It was a bad trade.

I didn't know Hickson but certainly wouldn't compare him to Al Jefferson. As I understood it, he was placed in a position he couldn't handle in Cleveland or wherever he came from and that was as a #1 or#2 option on a team that had few options.

I was angry that the Kings had not accumulated size. A person would have to be blind to think this was a tall team with no pick up of Daly and a short SF.

The comment about Petrie is absurd.

I thought the summer's acquisition's pickups were an absolute failure.

Peerhaps I didn't post on that thread but I will guarantee you it is not worth the effort to find the exact comments stated as some seem manufactured especially the one about team height. Some peopel seem to have such an inordinate need to have their egos stroked that they stroke their own. This discussion is nothing more thatn about who was right IN THE PAST and who was wrong. Who cares?

 

[ESP47]

Because we don't have anyone better to come off the bench.

Garcia can't defend against anyone. He gets weak side blocks once in a while but gives up 8 points per block he gets.

Outlaw can't shoot to save his life.

Donte is too inconsistent. One game he looks great and the next game he'll get 3pts with 0reb and 0ast.

 

[beb0p]

Why is this important except to stroke ones own ego?

I can tell you what I thought: I thought Salmons must have changed or they wouldn't have traded for him. He was awful when he was here before and the fact now is evident, he is the same old John. It was a bad trade.

I didn't know Hickson but certainly wouldn't compare him to Al Jefferson. As I understood it, he was placed in a position he couldn't handle in Cleveland or wherever he came from and that was as a #1 or#2 option on a team that had few options.

I was angry that the Kings had not accumulated size. A person would have to be blind to think this was a tall team with no pick up of Daly and a short SF.

The comment about Petrie is absurd.

I thought the summer's acquisition's pickups were an absolute failure.

Peerhaps I didn't post on that thread but I will guarantee you it is not worth the effort to find the exact comments stated as some seem manufactured especially the one about team height. Some peopel seem to have such an inordinate need to have their egos stroked that they stroke their own. This discussion is nothing more thatn about who was right IN THE PAST and who was wrong. Who cares?

First of all, everything quoted by me can be found in the thread. It's factual, all of them.

I think it's important to differentiate between "stroking one's ego" and setting the record straight. There's one very simple step to make this discussion go away - Stop bringing it up!

Different posters kept referring back to it and making revisionist history. All I did was point to the facts and let it speaks on its own.

Let's us all get back to the topic shall we? No one enjoys digging thru old threads and pinpointing old posts. Even when such action is necessary.

 

[mac]

What was said under the thread:

1. Salmons is a great defender and a great fit for the team.
2. Kings have accumulated great size and a much improved defense.
3. Hickson is comparable to Al Jefferson.
4. Petrie really knows what he's doing with the trades.
5. Big pieces for a Championship contending team are here.

And there's more...

You're telling me with statements like that, the mood was not approving, happy, and celebratory? Maybe if you read them again with the rose-colored glasses off...

But this is about Salmons ... the overall mood, opinions on Hickson etc. have nothing to do with whether the majority of fans here liked the Salmons trade, as you keep claiming. The majority of fans here thought Salmons would be an upgrade at the SF spot over Casspi - in no way did they love the trade and go all crazy over Salmons. And picking out one or two posts is pointless, since you're claiming that the majority loved it. IF the majority loved Salmons how come the thread that Brick linked to showed almost everyone being rather unhappy with the trade?

If anything I think the mistake that most of us made was assuming that Jimmer would pick up not far from where Beno left off, and in doing so the trade seemed pretty decent. A slight upgrade at the SF spot, and save money in drafting Jimmer who would replace Beno. I was a huge Beno supporter and was sad to see him go, but I could see that Jimmer had the potential to be better than Beno. I was however, mistaken that Jimmer would at least be able to hold his own, because right now he isn't making shots, is getting attacked on defence by the opposing teams and is turning the ball over. I can't seem to understand Jimmer's fascination with jumping to pass the ball.

 

[IfAt1st]

This isn't about ego - this is about retconning what prominent KF's were arguing, and who's position was right.
That would be about ego, if those prominent KF's members didn't have the power to ban members for their critical opinions.
So finding out whether the "negative-opinioned members" were right after all, is pretty important when we are attacked with ad hominems repeatedly and threatened with being banned for upholding them.

IF the majority loved Salmons how come the thread that Brick linked to showed almost everyone being rather unhappy with the trade?

Brick cherry-picked that thread, like usual.

He ignored the over 10 posts that he has made which are VERY clear : every time someone questioned Salmons talents, he posted statistics and opinions about his defensive prowess and career shooting. There is NO WAY for him to back away from his consistent statements touting Salmons' defense and 3 pt shooting. Further, it is a point of history that after they traded for Salmons, the Kings did NOT get a more solid vet SF.
Brick was wrong. Heck, I don't see why he'd have trouble admitting that at all. All of us make mistakes. They're guesses. Based on our perceptions.
I GUARANTEED that the Kings would sorely miss Beno's steadying, veteran reliable guard play this year. Guess what? I happened to be right on that. I also guaranteed that Jimmer would not be as good on defense as Beno was last year. I've been right about that - SO FAR.
I've been wrong so far about how well Jason Thompson has been playing - I'm glad JT's picked it up and played better - we need that consistency desperately on the court. If we had traded him for a box of donuts (like I repeatedly requested just to get him off the team) than we would be looking for a spot-minute big man desperately right now.
And if by the end of the year, Jimmer blossoms to be better than Beno was last year, than I'll admit it and be willing to entertain the argument that getting rid of Beno prematurely MAY have been worth the losses this year to speed up Jimmer's career.

What I don't get, is why are positive perceptions based on optimistic projections more accepted on KF's than critical observations based on what is on the court?

 

[mac]

This isn't about ego - this is about retconning what prominent KF's were arguing, and who's position was right.
That would be about ego, if those prominent KF's members didn't have the power to ban members for their critical opinions.
So finding out whether the "negative-opinioned members" were right after all, is pretty important when we are attacked with ad hominems repeatedly and threatened with being banned for upholding them.
Brick cherry-picked that thread, like usual.

He ignored the over 10 posts that he has made which are VERY clear : every time someone questioned Salmons talents, he posted statistics and opinions about his defensive prowess and career shooting. There is NO WAY for him to back away from his consistent statements touting Salmons' defense and 3 pt shooting. Further, it is a point of history that after they traded for Salmons, the Kings did NOT get a more solid vet SF.
Brick was wrong. Heck, I don't see why he'd have trouble admitting that at all. All of us make mistakes. They're guesses. Based on our perceptions.
I GUARANTEED that the Kings would sorely miss Beno's steadying, veteran reliable guard play this year. Guess what? I happened to be right on that. I also guaranteed that Jimmer would not be as good on defense as Beno was last year. I've been right about that - SO FAR.
I've been wrong so far about how well Jason Thompson has been playing - I'm glad JT's picked it up and played better - we need that consistency desperately on the court. If we had traded him for a box of donuts (like I repeatedly requested just to get him off the team) than we would be looking for a spot-minute big man desperately right now.
And if by the end of the year, Jimmer blossoms to be better than Beno was last year, than I'll admit it and be willing to entertain the argument that getting rid of Beno prematurely MAY have been worth the losses this year to speed up Jimmer's career.

What I don't get, is why are positive perceptions based on optimistic projections more accepted on KF's than critical observations based on what is on the court?

Again, why are you harping on Brick's posts, when the original poster claimed said "the facts is that, like you said, many on this board thought at the time that Salmons was a very good addition. My recollection is that more than half thought that". There's a difference between thinking that Salmons was an upgrade and that he was a very good addition.

And I don't see what Beno has to do with anything.

What I don't get, is why are positive perceptions based on optimistic projections more accepted on KF's than critical observations based on what is on the court?

And these positive perceptions are what, that Salmons is the solution at SF? That Jimmer is currently playing well? I'm getting sick and tired of a group of posters here acting as if they are the only ones on the board who are objective and criticize the players, and act as if everyone else just ignores how badly they are playing. Do you not read the grades thread? Does grading Salmons an F and Jimmer a D somehow suggest that we think they've been playing good games? It's about seeing the big picture. Which is why you don't ****ing trade Tyreke Evans despite his recent poor play.

For the record, given how Salmons has played I'm with you on the Beno trade being a bad one. The team right now could use Beno's steadying presence, seeing as Jimmer really hasn't stepped up to the game. Oh snap did I just criticize our play?