John Salmons And The Tell-Tale Heart
by section214 on Jun 23, 2011 9:31 PM PDT
in Commentary
Email
Print
Another example of annoying and excessive dribbling.
(Editor's Note - I posted this 2 years and 8 months ago. I thought that I would re-post it for grins. I hope you enjoy. - section214)
Using a similar pathology as the murderer in Edgar Allen Poe’s “The Tell-Tale Heart,” John Salmons gives the Kings offense the “vulture eye,” kills the offensive flow, then cuts up the remains and buries them under the hardwood of ARCO Arena. The sound of Salmons dribbling basketball against floor replicates the sound of the dismembered but still beating heart. Salmons takes the ball at the top of the key and dribbles left. Thump-thump. Thump-thump. Thump-thump. Finding no lane, he dribbles back to the right. Thump-thump. Thump-thump. Thump-thump. The shot clock and my patience winding down, he forces himself to the middle. Thump-thump. Thump-thump. Thump-thump. By the time he (perhaps) gets the shot off, the result matters little to me. John Salmons has already driven me to the Poe house.
John Salmons baffles me. His good games look exactly like his bad games. I swear! I have to look at the box score after the game to determine whether or not he played well. He is perhaps the Kings’ best defender, but that’s a lot like saying you have the best hand shake in the leper colony. And though his offensive game is needed (and often effective), it is completely out of sync with the rest of the team’s philosophy. John Salmons is where offensive flow and cohesion goes to die. Thump-thump. Thump-thump.
Now, my comments are meant as more of a reflection than a pure damnation. John Salmons has taken and made some big shots for the Kings when in the role of starter (reserve player, er, not so much). And when he’s on, he’s pretty efficient from baseline to baseline. But thrilling John is not. If John Salmons were ice cream, he would be vanilla…light…ice milk…soy…substitute.
And maybe that’s why I am becoming less and less enamored with John Salmons. He’ll do things to help a team win, but how excited can you get when that may be the difference between 30 and 35 wins? His jump shot has no aesthetic beauty, he doesn’t defy gravity, and he has seen the top side of the rim less than Brad Miller. His jersey number should be an active shot clock, as you always have to keep one eye on the damn thing whenever Salmons has the ball. Thump-thump. Thump-thump.
It’s certainly not his contract that has me perturbed. Salmon will make $5.1/$5.5/$5.8 million over the next three years (if he does not opt out of the last year), which is pretty cheap these days for a player of his caliber. But quick show of hands – who would rather see Cisco and Donte’ Greene get his minutes? See? That’s what I’m talking about (OK, you can put your hands down now). John Salmons is a good player, a good guy, a good teammate, a guy that does a lot of the little things that help you win games…and I am losing interest in watching him ply his craft.
Maybe it’s just me. The Kings are coming off of a lackluster preseason and I’m looking for an infusion of excitement, but instead I can’t get John Salmons out of my mind. The Kings are the elevator, John Salmons is the Muzak, and I’m afraid that I’m going to get the shaft.
Thump-thump. Thump-Thump. Thump-thump.
158 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Funny Shite
I say as soon as Cisco is back and in shape we trade John. Of course I said that last season too, except substituting Martin’s return for Cisco’s.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
Who's going to want to take Salmons in a trade? We're stuck with him.
by boredwiththeUSA on Jun 23, 2011 9:39 PM PDT up reply actions
He posted that two and a half years ago...
Head Editor of JaguarsBlog
Follow me on Twitter
by CaliforniaJag on Jun 23, 2011 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I wonder if that's a record
for longest delay in a response on StR
"DMC and Purple Jesus are gonna run shit very very soon" - "Gavin Maloof" commenting at probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/07/fear-demarcus-cousins-for-he-is-a-beast.php
I bet Chicago would take him
HERE WE STAY
THIS IS OUR TEAM
by kangsfan on Jun 23, 2011 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Then they'd probably try trading him to the Bucks.
I know we're gonna lose but I still think we're gonna win.
The Kings will be needing a SF about then I think.
:-(
"Live Long and Prosper." - Spock
I sure hope we don't get him back at any point
Especially after someone gives him a stupid contract after performing well for half a season.
That's unthinkable.
Why would anyone pay him more than that?
I know we're gonna lose but I still think we're gonna win.
I'd take him back...
…as long as we don’t give up a better, cheaper, more well-liked player and move down in the draft (thereby causing us to miss out on a PG who would unexpectedly be available to us at out original draft position) to do it.
Oh, NEVER-FUCKING-MIND!
Check out my comedy website, where you can access video clips of my stand-up @ here
"Put Kobe or Lebron in a wheelchair, and I can GUARANTEE Tyreke would demolish either. You might want to rethink what you just said." - MarcusC.
"I never read those trade threads. They seem to be mainly populated with the sports equivalent of people who think the Rapture is imminent." - andy sims.
by PhutureKings on Jun 23, 2011 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions
*our, not out
Check out my comedy website, where you can access video clips of my stand-up @ here
"Put Kobe or Lebron in a wheelchair, and I can GUARANTEE Tyreke would demolish either. You might want to rethink what you just said." - MarcusC.
"I never read those trade threads. They seem to be mainly populated with the sports equivalent of people who think the Rapture is imminent." - andy sims.
by PhutureKings on Jun 23, 2011 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions
It's too bad how little he was utilized in Philly
He’d be a great player if he had been used early in his career.
Kevin Martin, line 1 holding for you. Your destiny is calling. - Section214
Damn, we're up to Salmons now?
I can’t wait for the season to start, so that the endless dissection of games that matter might impede the ongoing litany of who to blame for the fact that the Kings have sucked, do suck, and will suck for the next few years.
So, Salmons gets us from 30 to 35 wins. That’s all? I suppose if all roster players were worth five wins, we’d win 65 games. I can’t argue your assertion, because it comes from one of my most-used resources, The Big Book of Statistics That I Yanked Out of My Arse.
Salmons gets to the basket. He forces defenses to collapse so that the marksmen can get clean shots. Sometimes the guy dribbles into a brick wall, but who else is mixing it up in there? Our bigs are merely talls, skilled though they may be. I like Francisco, the guy plays hard, but Salmons all-around game is still superior to Garcia’s at this point. When Cisco gets his game a bit more under control, he’s going to be a real asset, but he’s going to have to improve his already decent ability to get to the hoop, especially by eliminating those inevitable hyperspeed headlong rushes in the general direction of the rim. Unless something unimaginable happens in his game, Garcia is no more a long-term solution at the 3 than Salmons is.
Salmons is not an all-star, and will not be. He’s a guy who can score and play defense. He’s a bargain. And yeah, you trade him when someone else takes over as starter at SF. He can’t play off the bench. At this stage of rebuilding, I’m glad he’s out there. The only way I lose the guy is if a decision is made to make Greene or Thompson the starter, and let the chips and the wins fall where they may.
I can put up with an 18-win season if it means worthwhile playng time for the kids. Can anyone else?
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
by andy sims on Oct 24, 2008 8:20 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I don't disagree with a word that you have written
other than the fact that I said that Salmons may get us from 30 to 35 wins, not that he would get us from 30 to 35 wins. I wouldn’t mind if I were misquoted or taken out of context by Peaches, but I’ve come to expect more from you, Simsy.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Hah! Mistake number one:
Expecting more from me.
But you’re right, it’s a misquote, although I don’t think it makes either of our assertions any less butt-pulled.
(puts wig and mascara on)
“LEAVE JOHN SALMONS ALONE!!!”
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
Mine was not an assertion
It was merely an opinion…a 100% “butt-pulled” opinion.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
No real difference between an assertion and opinion
I just think my word works better with the newly-minted adjective “butt-pulled.”
You can really taste the first three letters…
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
No effing way
I can put up with an 18-win season if it means worthwhile playng time for the kids. Can anyone else?
I’m sorry but I cannot accept winning just 18 games under any circumstances. Reggie Theus’ job rests on the ability to make this team competitive and find ways to help the Kings make the playoffs.
I know the odds of making the playoffs in the Western Conference with the roster currently constructed are extremely long but that’s Theus’ job.
I don’t want the organization to lose games for the sake of developing players. Losing does hurt your pride and when your favorite team can win consistently, it’s more fun to wear a Kings jersey out here in Maryland.
That’s just me.
BOOK IT!
I can put up with an 18-win season if it means worthwhile playng time for the kids. Can anyone else?
Yes, if it means getting a potential superstar that can carry the team over the next 10 years.
Shut up and Coach
I could put up with an 18 win season
if we only had the “young” talent to win 18 games. But that is not the case. If we only win 18 games, I would have to put it directly on the head of Reggie. I believe that even if we started Beno, Martin, Garcia, JT, and Hawes, we still have enough talent on the floor to win more than 18 games. The thing is, people tend to associate playing time with players getting better in the NBA. Look at how many young players have been crushed by playing on teams that lose constantly. Our youngs won’t get better by playing 40 minutes a night and losing. They will get better by working their way into the rotation and learing how to win. (Now if a player like LeBron/Oden was out there in next year’s draft I would be tempted.)
"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke
Name one
I see this argument a lot, but have yet to see examples. I tried to think of a player that looked like he had the talent coming into the league, and became a loser because he started too early. I can’t think of one off the top of my head. Was Reef a loser because he started his career with the Grizzlies? How a bout Bibby?
I’d like to seem some examples that we could discuss. Then we can try and figure out if the problem was starting too early or being around a losing tradition or if the player just wasn’t that talented or driven to excel.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 27, 2008 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
There are lots of examples.
The problem is, it is easy to look at a player who started with a bad franchise and became great. But when you look at a player who was supposed to be good and did poorly on a bad team, there is no way to prove whether it was the chicken or the egg. Was the player bad—making the team even worse? Or did the bad team pull the player down? Let’s name just a few guys who came out of college as top draft picks, were given big minutes with bad teams immediately, and have gone nowhere.
Michael Olowokandi, Dajuan Wagner, Rafael Araújo, and our own Pervis Ellison. These are all guys who were given big minutes on bad teams, coming out of college with high expectations. And there are hundreds more. Confidence is a huge factor in sports. If you loose that early, sometimes you can never get it back. On the other hand, you’ve got someone like Speed Racer who earned his way into the rotation and totally bloomed.
My point is that a younger player who is talented enough to bloom on a bad team (Carlos Boozer, Pau Gasol) will earn minutes no matter what. But shoving a guy who may not be ready into heavy minutes can kill his confidence and ruin his career.
"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke
I agree with the premise
that a young player has to be ready for the minutes he can handle as a rookie before he’s ready to convince a coach he can play them.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Sorry to comment on my own post
But I think Douby is another great example. Not of getting too many minutes early on a bad team. But of having his confidence shot. He was played at the wrong position, until he didn’t believe in himself anymore. You know the guy can shoot. But now, even when he is played at the two, he is streaky at best.
"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke
I agree it's not a provable point
The four you listed don’t make your argument at all. I wouldn’t cite them as examples. I’d be more likely to accept Kwame Brown and or Tyson Chandler.
Especially Chandler, may have been thrown in the fire too soon lost his confidence and has finally started to reach his potential after getting a second chance in a better environment.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 28, 2008 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions
And?
Not sure I understand your point? But hey, I had to sleep in a tent last night in late October in Utah, to help my son get his Arrow of Light for Cubs, so I am still a little slow.
"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke
Hope the Long Johns were comfy
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
the funnest part of this thread is the posts from 2008
So we had those bad seasons, were they worth what we got from the draft (roughly)??:
Tyreke Evans
Demarcus Cousins
Omri Caspi
Where's my pie
by TheFifthMookie on Jun 24, 2011 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions
I love the optimism
It might make the difference between a 30-35 win team??
More kick out
Reggie liked to use Ron Ron because he drew the double team. So, it’s ok for John to attack the rim and draw the double/ triple team because he is the new Ron Ron. But, now he has to learn to kick out so we can swing the ball around to Martin for an open shot.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
PASS THE BALL
Yes, I concur.
If he was just a LITTLE quicker to pass it, kick it out . . . . .
I watch and at least five times a game find myself chanting (or shouting) pass it now, pass it now, pass it now -
(sigh)
Maybe being a full time starter will help him figure that out [?] (hope, hope, hope)
Salmons is a Veeery good, Veeery skilled player – but that hole in his game is pretty huge.
Cisco? Cisco? CISCO!!!! #*$!%! !
by lietothegirls on Oct 25, 2008 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Brilliant!
You kill me with your wit and intelligence while your writing just keeps getting better and better.
I call it the Salmons Effect, the guys just doesn’t get it sometimes and I think you hit it on the head when you said that there is really no visual difference between a great Salmons game and a bad Salmons game. Salmons has an issue with tunnel vision similar to Ron Artest. I think it might be a learned trait brought on by years of playing alongside Allen Iverson. Hopefully John embraces the opportunity to be a full time starter and doesn’t force himself into a good player on a bad team/stat filler role.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
Salmons kind of reminds me of K-9
It always looks like Salmons is just going through the motions, or playing without heart, just to boost his own stat sheet. That’s why I place Garcia hands down over Salmons.
Yay!
We hate Salmons and Kenny Thomas now!
You’re next, Bobby Jackson…
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
Like K-9?
Oh come on!
Thats just meeean!
Cisco? Cisco? CISCO!!!! #*$!%! !
by lietothegirls on Oct 25, 2008 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
In terms of mentality
Sure, Salmon’s skill set is a whole lot higher than what K9 has shown at this point, but a team needs to be full of players with a common goal, chemistry, and unselfishness to win. That’s what made the 02 Kings so great…team Basketball is the way the game is supposed to be played. It shouldn’t be a bunch of players playing their own games.
That’s a bit why I’m excited to see the upcoming crop of players on the Kings. They’ll develop that chemistry and loyalty to the Kings’ franchise, just like what happened to the Spurs or Pistons.
That’s what made the 02 Kings so great…
Well, all of those things and also being demonstrably better at every position than the current team, save possibly Martin. I still love me some Doug Christie.
They had a better coaching staff, and a deeper bench, too. BJax was still in his 20s then.
Chemistry, shmemistry. Kobe & Shaq won three rings together. Talent wins out, and we had it in bunches back then. The chemistry was there, but the only thing it does for a team lacking in talent is turn losers into lovable losers.
If the team lacks a common vision, that’s entirely on the coach.
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
Better at every position? Lacking in talent?
what do you hate the whole team now?
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 25, 2008 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm a Kings fan
I’m also a realist. Let’s run it down:
Bibby > Beno
Vlade > Miller
Webber > Moore
Peja > Salmons
Martin & Christie? I’m a huge DC fan, and he was one of those guys that made his teammates better. Martin is a bigger offensive talent, but I’m trying to imagine Martin as he is now in DC’s place in ‘02, and I don’t know if the team is better, worse, or just different.
That aside, my feelings on the current players, which is largely hopeful and optimistic, is still one of harsh pragmatism. You may have noticed that I’m pretty much the only one in here defending Thomas, and now Salmons.
Aim that ad hominem “why do you hate our Kings” stuff at the ones who take endless cheap shots at the aforementioned and others. My pointing out that this team doesn’t hold a candle in talent to the 2001 squad is just simply an observation of fact. Further noticing that the current batch may not be competetive this season or next isn’t a slam, or even negative. I’m just calling it as i see it, and while I wear glasses, they are not rose-colored.
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
by andy sims on Oct 25, 2008 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
You damn pragmatic practical independent Kings fan
How dare you not criticize John Salmons for being a talented, albeit consistent, and flawed, swingman at a position the Kings are 3 deep in talent 27 or younger for the next 5 years? I mean, what are ya, a pragmatist? (Great stuff.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
I was being sarcastic
You’ve been pretty harsh on those that have a negative opinion of Thomas and/or Salmons, yet your opinion here is basically the same. If we’re not very good, and I agree that we aren’t, then moves should be made to change that. Thomas, Miller, Moore and probably Salmons are either too old or will likely be too old to help the team by the time we’re competitive, so I don’t see why wanting to move any of the above would be a bad thing. But that’s the feeling I’ve gotten from your other posts.
Anyway I just thought it was funny after your strong defense of players on the team to then say they aren’t very good. Guess it wasn’t very funny. And my sarcasm wasn’t very clear. Sorry.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 25, 2008 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm doing my best here
Mikki Moore is not as good a player at PF as Chris Webber was. That is not to say that Moore sucks, and that I think I could dunk on him. The man plays hard, but he is no Chris Webber. Most of the 4s in the league ain’t Chris Webber. We were spoiled by having one of the greats play here in his prime.
Mikki isn’t the team’s future at the 4 any more than Salmons is at the 3. Again, these are both good players, but statistically, below average at their position. Offering them seperately or together as trade bait doesn’t make that fact any less apparent to other GMs.
On the plus side, neither costs that much. On the down side, they have long deals, and allowing optimistically that Thompson and Greene may be the long-term solutions in those positions, we’re going to have a couple of guys in Moore and Salmons making decent money to play off the bench.
I think Salmons can play himself into decent trade bait. He can score, and he’s active on defense. Someone looking for that will be interested as the season rolls on, and maybe we get an expiring contract out of it. Moore is going to be here awhile, and that’s fine, too. Assuming anyone steps up at PF, I believe Mikki will do well coming off the bench. I like the guy. But when he’s starting for your team at PF, you have an obvious disadvantage.
I’m merely looking at this from all sides, and as a cold-eyed realist. I’m rooting for them, but to expect a lot of wins is unfair to the entire team. All I want to see this year is improvement, especially from the under-25 crowd. That’s on Theus.
And the damned Maloofs need to guarantee he’ll be around for 2009-2010 so that he can feel comfortable enough to teach these kids and give them minutes.
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
I totally
agree with everything except the last paragraph. I think they could just let him know that they will be evaluating his performance on the progress of the youngsters and not on wins and losses and it would accomplish the same thing. It would also leave us an out if he fails. Again, sorry about the poor joke.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 26, 2008 4:11 AM PDT up reply actions
They have long deals?
I’m confused
On the plus side, neither costs that much. On the down side, they have long deals, and allowing optimistically that Thompson and Greene may be the long-term solutions in those positions, we’re going to have a couple of guys in Moore and Salmons making decent money to play off the bench
Did Mikki sign an extension? I thought next yr was his last , with a $2M buyout. John’s contract ends in 10/11, but that’s an ETO. He’s only scheduled to make $5.8M. If he puts up any kind of numbers like he did last year, he probably opt out after next season.
How do you consider 1 & possibly 2 years long deals?
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The same way
you consider that Martin is entering his 6th season?
Just kidding.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
A watched pot...
How do you consider 1 & possibly 2 years long deals?
How much longer does Kenny Thomas have on his contract?
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
So it's not how long your contract is -
It’s what you do with it.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
I agree
But everytime I see Kenny Thomas I see Chris Webber, and am thrilled the KIngs didn’t have to walk the route that Philly did with Webb.
Everything is perspective S214.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
What?
I’m sorry, but the humor or sarcasm of your statement is too sophisticated for me.
IMHO, Moore will be traded this year or at least before the start of the season next year. And, if they can’t trade him they’ll buy him out. Under the current cost cutting economy, the Kings won’t pay $6.2M for Moore.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
I agree
I think MM is moving on this year
Cisco? Cisco? CISCO!!!! #*$!%! !
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2008 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with everything you say except Mikki Moore
He has next year which is only guaranteed of about 2-3 million which would be half his total salary if the option were to be picked up.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
You forgot Miller
Section just finished up with Miller yesterday where he did say that Salmons should grab a bat because he’s on deck.
Didn't we trade the Black Hole....twice
I swear I was sitting in Section’s seats at the last preseason game and was thinking Ron-ron was still on our team. John just doesn’t pass the ball…Kevin was open on the wing at least three times when Salmons had the ball and he chose to drive into traffic every time! He’s killing me Whitey!
You got to be kidding
Donte Green taking Salmons minutes? If you think John should be traded, at least give us, your readers, the common courtesy of suggesting for who.
The difference between opinion and analysis
The Miller piece offered both sides of the argument, and I offered my opinion at the end, which was to hold on to him unless we got viable pieces for the future. So I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that I hate Brad Miller, but to each his own, I suppose.
In this piece, I (thought that I) was clear that this was purely my opinion. It was not based in statistical analysis or rationale. It was me stating that John Salmons can be painful at times to watch, more so than most of his teammates. And my comments were that many would prefer to see Garcia and Greene get those minutes at SF, not just Greene.
As far as brokering a trade, I don’t ever recall saying that he should be traded, so I will leave that to you. Please don’t put words in my mouth. Between my own words and Geoff Petrie’s penis, there is little room for much else.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Fair enough
But Garcia can be painful too. Between his frequent bonehead rookie like mistakes and his occasional air balls I have a feeling if Garcia were starting he would also be “on deck”. And don’t get me started on Donte Green. If there is one bust from the off season moves he is looking to be it.
Greene
I have not made my mind up on Greene, but has he looked any worse than Martin did as a rookie? That said, he has looked no better than Quincy Douby as a rookie, either. But dude is only 20, for crying out loud. And if he does not pan out, we still got rid of Artest and picked up another draft pick, so I’m not sure that you’ll be able to calculate that deal as a “bust” for some time.
(Sorry if that was a bit muffled – GP was nestled between my cheek and gum while I was responding.)
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
I have not made my mind up on Greene, but has he looked any worse than Martin did as a rookie?
Exactly. Kevin Martin was HORRIBLE as a rookie. He didn’t look like he even had the potential to be an NBA player. People are judging guys like Donte way, way too soon.
Shut up and Coach
Not so sure
I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to expect a first rounder even the 30th pick to be able to contribute something. Expecially on a team that every sports writer is projecting to be one of the 5 worst teams in the league.
How much time is enough? Will or can the team wait 6 yrs like they did with Martin. Or, will they give up and let him walk like Wallace
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Martin
was averaging 20+ ppg in his third year…but we are still waiting for him?
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
And
Martin scored 11 ppg in his second year. It was clear he was at least a productive bench player by his second year in the league.
How long do you wait? It depends on how much progress the player makes. Jermaine O’Neal wasn’t good until his fifth year in the league. It took Gerald Wallace until his third year.
Clearly eight preseason games is not enough.
Shut up and Coach
by Carl on Oct 25, 2008 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I didn't finish my thought
I meant to says “Can we wait 6 years for him to be a Star”.
But as to your original statement
People are judging guys like Donte way, way too soon.
I stand by my first statement;
I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to expect a first rounder even the 30th pick to be able to contribute something. Expecially on a team that every sports writer is projecting to be one of the 5 worst teams in the league.
So, eight preseason games isn’t enough, for just him, some first rounder, all first rounder, late first rounders, guys learning to play under Reggie,or what criteria do we use. The draft pundits judged him after a couple of rookie draft camps,, and one yr of college. Just when can I say he wasn’t first round material.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
So, eight preseason games isn’t enough, for just him, some first rounder, all first rounder, late first rounders, guys learning to play under Reggie,or what criteria do we use. The draft pundits judged him after a couple of rookie draft camps,, and one yr of college. Just when can I say he wasn’t first round material.
Eight preseason games isn’t enough for any drafted player, ever to demonstrate that he can’t play in the NBA. That may be enough time to say that you CAN play in the NBA, if your name is LeBron James.
Again, you could have said Jermaine O’Neal wasn’t even NBA material for FOUR YEARS and looked right. You could have said the same about Gerald Wallace for THREE YEARS.
You can say what you want. I’m just going to disagree. I think it’s ridiculous to write a guy off after eight preseason games when NBA stars have taken years to develop.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to expect a first rounder even the 30th pick to be able to contribute something. Expecially on a team that every sports writer is projecting to be one of the 5 worst teams in the league.
Kevin Martin contributed absolutely nothing in his entire first season. The lesson is that the first season is not meaningful.
Shut up and Coach
Whoa there big guy
Don’t go putting words in my mouth, I have a wife that does that ;)
I never said he wasn’t an NBA player or wouldn’t be a star.
I did say that IMHO, a 1st rounder should be able to contribute, and on that basis I suggested that he may not have been 1st round material.
Personally I wish we had gotten the guy Houston traded to get Donte, Darrell Arthur but that a whole different discussion. Also, I don’t know how it will eventually turn out but PE Jr. had a pretty good game in the last Knicks game. I’m not looking for LeBron. I’m looking for contributors.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Whoa again
Just read where PE Jr. got waived. I guess having a good game does really mean too much.
And, on a different note, the lakers waived Coby Karl.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Don’t go putting words in my mouth, I have a wife that does that ;)
Fair enough. That wasn’t my intent.
I did say that IMHO, a 1st rounder should be able to contribute, and on that basis I suggested that he may not have been 1st round material.
I agree that a first rounder should be able to contribute. I don’t agree that teams should expect every first rounder to contribute right away. Some players just take longer to develop. Kevin Martin didn’t contribute his first season. Bottom line – if Donte Greene doesn’t make any progress by April 2010, I’ll be worried.
Shut up and Coach
Donte' Green
Is not close to ready yet.
It doesn’t look like he could stay on the floor even if you did give him the minutes.
Lets get real.
Cisco? Cisco? CISCO!!!! #*$!%! !
Donte Greene
Is a rookie but he has shown flashes of good play this preseason against Portland and and at Houston (at least statistically).
But by no means is Donte ready to help contribute to the Kings in terms of winning basketball games.
That is what the offseason is for. For players to get better.
BOOK IT!
Thats what the Dev league is for
and we should send him.
Cisco? Cisco? CISCO!!!! #*$!%! !
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2008 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Not to be a dick or anything (I definitely am that too)
But this has the mark of “idle hands are the devil’s playground”. Where would we be if Section hadn’t wrote this? Arguing over ESPN’s suckiness still?
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Wow, Pook! It feels like I haven't heard from you in like two or three years.
m*****f***ing c***s***ing peanut butter and jelly!! f*** f*** f***!!!
I know we didn't win the championship last season but...
I also know that John Salmons started in 41 games (38 mpg) and averaged:
17,5 points – 5.4 rebounds - 3.4 assists – 1.6 steals
I’m sure our record in these 41 games wasn’t that great but these numbers are very close to players like Iguodala, Crawford, Roy, Durant, Ellis etc. John’s FG% was 49%, one of the best among SGs/SFs. I’m not talking about upside, talent or anything like that. Apart from being a Kings fan, I’m a fantasy basketball nerd and although numbers are only a reflection of what’s happening on the court, I know that Salmons is a very very efficient player and also very underrated.
Andy Sims
Nice writing.
I’m not sure what the value of comparing the current team to our 2001 team is, no doubt they are not as good but very few were that season,
Beno is not Bibby of 2001 but he is surely better then the Bibs we saw the prior two seasons.
With regard to John Salmons I agree with Section. Many nights the only way to tell if he had a good game or not is to look at his line. What we saw in the last preseason game was Salmons dribbling into a collapsing defensive wall and dribbling until he lost the ball 8 feet from the net. On his good nights he makes that shot just before the defense collapses on him or like a runningback running right up the gut and bouncing through he makes it through the defense and makes the shot.
There’s a lot of things that are right with his game. If he was kicking the ball back out and moving the ball more instead of dribbling to nowhere he’d be getting a lot of props here.
Greene is way to raw to even begin to evaluate. At the end of the season we should have something to talk about. For the most part with the exception of the top 5 or 6 ,rookies don’t contribute much. For the most part with the rooks being 19 and having 1 year of college experience they just aren’t ready.
The player I’m expecting to see improvement and growth from is Cisco. If he is still shooting airballs and making too many bonehead decisions we are going to have problems.
"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley
Reality
It really bites, but I am glad it is beginning to set in.
The conversations on this board are significantly different now than the ones right after Artest was traded, when many said with a straight face the team would be as good without him or at least not much worse.
The take then was that Salmons was almost as good as Artest. Now, if the pundits are right, it might turn out the difference in wins for the team with/without Artest could be 15 or more. Interesting.
The majority of posters on this board wanted a young, tanking team. You got it. Enjoy.
by coolcatreportdotcom on Oct 26, 2008 5:19 PM PDT reply actions
Thanks for grouping an entire boards comments together
Then summing it up, incorrectly at that, and basing it off the assumption.
Personally, I don’t care whether the team is worse. It’s pleasing to see the team not be caught in limbo without Artest.
I’d tell you go back to hiding, but that’s back biting, and defeating the purpose of having a blog such as this one to garner opinions, like-able/reasonable or not, about the Sacramento Kings. I disagree with many of your opinions, but unfortunately, and I wish I was Dick Cheney and shot people who disagreed with me, but I agree with your right to say what you want.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Maybe a necessary evil
I agree the situation with Artest had run its course and it was time to move on. My only point was the unrealistic attitude of many here after the deal was done that the team would not be much worse without him.
It’s also nice to see the loan guy come around on Salmons. He’ s done a 180 in a few months. I guess it’s better late than never.
Theus has a challenge on his hands as he tries to turn this team into a competitive squad that can play hard night in and night out, even if wins don’t materialize from those efforts.
by coolcatreportdotcom on Oct 27, 2008 3:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Your reading comprehension needs some work
I mentioned that John Salmon is perhaps the Kings best defender, he has been a big shot taker and maker, he is a very good baseline to baseline player, he is a fair value to bargain at his price, he’s a good player, a good teammate, and does the little things that help you win games – I just find his style of play painful to watch, especially in this offense.
This piece has as much to do with Ron Artest as it has to do with Nate Archibald. But it’s nice to have you back. I was afraid that your pyramid had collapsed on you.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
You may be right
I know you’re right on one point — that you’re going to get the shaft.
by coolcatreportdotcom on Oct 27, 2008 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions
The point that you seem to be missing
is that the things we don’t like about Salmons are the things we hated about Artest. Ball hog, selfish, not a big rebounder. I would rather watch this team win 12 games than a team with Ron-I run the team-Artest win 35. In case you haven’t been watching, by the way, Ron is still taking more shots than anyone on his team.
"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke
by SavageBeast on Oct 27, 2008 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions
You're right
I haven’t been watching much, it being prefreakingseason and all, but I bet he’s making a fair share of those shots, too. Right?
by coolcatreportdotcom on Oct 27, 2008 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions
He always has
Which is great if you want him to be the main piece of your offense. He wants demands to be your Kobe. And if you want him to be your Kobe are willing to live with him hogging the ball, that’s great. If you don’t want him to be, you have problems. It will be interesting to see how long T-Mac and Yao are willing to be the second and third options.
"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke
Or how long Bill will maintain the deception
of “wanting” to be the 3rd option.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Um, not really
Of all the Rockets, Artest took the second most shots behind Brooks, which is fair, because the only player who had more minutes was also Brooks.
Artest shot 28-73 for 38.4.
Brooks shot 38-83 for 45.8.
Artest had the second lowest FG% in the pre-season. He had the second most turnovers.
Comparing Artest to Salmons-
FG 28-73 vs 35-89
FG% 38.4 vs 39.3
3pt% 39.1% vs 50%
Reb 3.1 vs 3.6
Asst 2.1 vs 2.7
TO 1.86 vs 2.1
PPG 12.6 vs 14.4
For the record, Salmons took the most shots of anyone in pre-season starting at the three at every game. Second was Hawes who started four games and missed one.
I’m looking for the serious drop-off from Artest to Salmons, and I’m not seeing it.
Let's go home.-Kevin Martin
by LeaguePassAddict on Oct 28, 2008 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions
The majority of posters on this board wanted a young, tanking team. You got it. Enjoy.
I will, thanks. I say the same thing I said then. You have to get worse before you can get better. I’ll gladly suffer through a terrible season or two if the team ends up with a game-changing talent in return. I just want to see the team play hard and make progress.
Shut up and Coach
15 games worse?
Who said that? I just don’t see it – though it could be a rocky start.
(remember, I’m part of the ‘Save Ron Artest!’ crowd and I have real reservations about who on this roster gets the team excited ‘Brings the Fire’)
Cisco? Cisco? CISCO!!!! #*$!%! !
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2008 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny. Turns out it was a 21 win drop-off. 38 down to 17
There were many factors of course. But I’ll admit to being wrong on that one. Though, I’m still very glad we moved Ron and finally got started on the rebuild.
by Kfan in Korea on Jun 24, 2011 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I hope you never change your screen name.
m*****f***ing c***s***ing peanut butter and jelly!! f*** f*** f***!!!
Blaming group think since 2008
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
by edm7 on Jun 24, 2011 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
He is Luther Head with a much worse contract.
He is EXACTLY what this team does not need. At least Beno’s contract expires sooner.
Yay, a time machine!!!! WHEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!
Sound the trumpets, Raise the drawbridge, and drop the Oldsmobile
Guh.
And we’re going to end up paying MORE for Salmons this time, for a WORSE Salmons. GUH.
Author of the Pick and Scroll and NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
I'd rather give Honeycutt some playing time.
Cisco and Donte have had their chances. :P
I know we're gonna lose but I still think we're gonna win.
I wonder how the conversation is going to go
when John Salmons asks DMC for his #15 back. Fist fight?
"That might've been a little push, but that was a major flop. That would make Vlade Divac very proud." - Jerry Reynolds
Salmons can wear it after Cousins fouls out
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Jun 23, 2011 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions 7 recs
Red Flags!
"Contraction, I didn't say anything about contraction. I'm talking about shrinking the league." - Lebron James
Thanks Lebron, for reminding me how miserable my life is.
I just don't get it.
I don’t hate Salmons as a player. I don’t even think that this is a terrible trade. I simply don’t understand what the front office saw in Salmons this time around that they didn’t see when they traded him away. We got him later in life for more money. He isn’t THAT much better of a player.
Then we trade a very efficient 6’3" combo guard for a 6’1" version of the same player (with a supposedly better but NBA-unproven deep shot) who will be required to distribute the ball, even though we don’t know he can do it, while the player we just traded could DEFINITELY do it.
I don’t HATE the Jimmer pick, but between the events of today, I will say that if Salmons doesn’t fit comfortably, and Jimmer is unremarkable, I DEFINITELY think Petrie should be fired. In my opinion, this is his last experiment. Anything other than good results and he should be gone.
If I find that the Parker deal was there to be made, and they did this instead, I may abandon the Kings until the Maloofs and Petrie are gone. I really think this draft movement has been very strange – not in a good way. It seems to me that reacquiring Salmons is either a mistake now, or admitting to a past mistake. Either way it is underwhelming.
by Hoops Mike on Jun 23, 2011 10:16 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
We simply wont know what Parker deal was or wasn't available
So there’s not much point in us thinking that Petrie “should” have taken that instead. We don’t know the parameters and never will.
We simply have to evaluate this trade on it’s own merits not compare it to other deals that may or may not have been available.
Of course, that said…. It still sucked ;)
by Sam Pandora on Jun 23, 2011 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I was under the impression that we traded Salmons away to get rid of Brad Miller.
i.e. In order to be willing to take on Miller’s contract, the Bulls demanded that we also give them John Salmons.
So, in that respect, it’s not a matter of what we see in Salmons’ game that we didn’t see then.
"Where hope goes to die"
Perhaps.
If they liked him enough to bring him back, then it was DUMB to get rid of him to begin with. I can’t recall, but I don’t think Miller’s contract was ever that hugely cumbersome.
Hard to say
but I think San Antonio was using diff teams to get the best deal. And they finally found a better one by trading with Denver.
I believe the Kings also talked to Denver abt Raymond Felton for the 7th pick, and that trade fell through cause Denver was able to get their man in Parker.
But I do believe that Petrie’s job should be on the line if both Jimmer and Salmons doesn’t pan out. The Kings are stuck with Salmons for at least another 2 yrs. Petrie must really love this guy to pick up the remaining 3 years.
by sf drift king on Jun 23, 2011 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions
So many people want to get rid of Petrie
Who are the Kings going to hire as GM who can do any better? Petrie is a proven quality GM who is respected all around the league.
THe best part about this is reading all the comments from 2008
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
Yeah, if there is one consistency to my posts,
it’s that the threads are always better.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
So funny side note...
while some were here bemoaning the fact that we didn’t get brandon knight, seemed like everyone on the pistons board hated that they drafted him. interesting anyway.
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
Another blast from the past:
I’ve heard it said that Salmons is better than our other options at the 3 (Garcia, Casspi, Greene, and now Honeycut). But how much better? About as much as Mikki Moore was than K-9, Brad, and Shareef?
That’s right, welcome the newest member of your Sacramento Kings, the Spawn of the Hydra of Mediocrity! Cower in terror as it mulls over which village to terrorize, then ends up losing its chance to some boneheaded error because of poorly channeled enthusiasm and a lazy offseason work ethic!
by twasserm on Jun 23, 2011 10:46 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Salmons
It’s like deja vu, all over again – just like this thread.
Salmons is an upgrade on Beno, though, but I don’t like the extra year.
"His D was a difference at the end."
i disagree with this.
salmons has been on the decline. beno has been much more consistent.
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
Salmons is a slight upgrade at the SF position
There’s no way he’s an upgrade on Beno. Beno’s a more productive NBA player, making 11 million dollars less.
"Grant is a genius." - section214 - 5/17/11
Using the 11 million number is deceptive
Everyone keeps saying Salmons is 11 million more but that is very deceptive because of the extra year of contract. I understand that it is one more year of commitment but it is different. This year it is about 1 million different (not that much) and next year it is about 1 million different (not that much). The third year he will be an expiring contract and there are always teams looking for cap relief so he may not even be with us.
All I am saying is to be fair we shouldn’t say it is an 11 million difference when it isn’t that clear. To be fair we should ask ourselves what he would be worth three years from now. 3 million? 5 million? So if he is worth these amounts then we are really looking at a wasted 3 to 5 million.(Example: 8 mill – 3 mill = 5 mill Or 8 mill – 5 mill = 3 mill) I may not have the exact contract numbers for Salmons last year but I hope it gets my point across.
In the end I don’t think it is as bad as people think. I understand people not liking it but it isn’t that bad.
by Passive Sloth on Jun 24, 2011 7:27 AM PDT up reply actions
How do you disallow the extra year of the contract?
It’s there, it’s tangible, it’s part of the deal. And I seem to recall all of us getting excited about Kenny Thomas being an expiring contract, right up to the point it expired.
It’s an $11 million difference in total on the contract. That affects the value of Salmons in a trade at this point in time.
Again, if you were an NBA GM, and you were holding John Salmons’ contract – Geoff Petrie calls you and asks if you want to deal Salmons for Beno straight up. How fast does it take you to say “yes”?
Then the same GM asks if you want to move up three spots in the draft on top of it. Do you wait and do the happy dance before you sign off on the deal?
Petrie got hosed on this deal, there’s no two ways around it.
"Grant is a genius." - section214 - 5/17/11
I agree totally.
I think Beno got a BAD rap here based upon 2 years ago when he did have a bad season. He has been worth EVERY penny the past two seasons.
I see this move as another cost-cutting move actually.
The team can now say that we have filled our SF position for three years, and we drafted for need at PG/SG – at the rookie scale. I’ll be VERY interested in what we do with Dalembert (whom I wouldn’t go over 8 mil per for) and Thornton – whom we HAVE to resign.
I’ll be shocked if we pursue any big player in FA.
I am not saying it was a great deal
All I am saying is that it is not as horrible as people think. And I am not saying the 11 million is not relevant but that we need to look at it in context. People throw the 11 million around as if it were paid over the 2 year period of Beno’s contract.
I think we agree for the most part here but i just don’t think it is as bad as some are saying. Bad but not that bad.
by Passive Sloth on Jun 24, 2011 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions
It's bad in that it's nonsensical
The trade was a negative when you speak of just Beno and Salmons. Then you offer to move down in the draft as well?
It feels almost like something Petrie did to help Charlotte and Milwaukee so they owe him a favor. Only problem is, this team shouldn’t be in the business of playing the sucker so other franchises can facilitate three team deals.
"Grant is a genius." - section214 - 5/17/11
I'm looking at the trade, trying to figure out how it could've worked out a little better
The phone call with Charlotte should have gone as follows “We’ll take our guy at 7, no problem. You’re the team that needs to move up to get who you want. You need to either take Salmons or convince Milwaukee to give us Ilyasova or Mbah a Moute. Goodbye”
"What the fuck did I do?" - McNulty
I'd have rather they taken on Richard Jefferson
If you’re going to overpay for a guy, but he brings Tony Parker with him – that, I’m down with.
"Grant is a genius." - section214 - 5/17/11
You are singing my tune completely.
The overwhelming negative I heard about the Parker deal was that we couldn’t possibly take on Jefferson’s deal. That was only 6 million more than what we got, but we also didn’t get Tony Parker and his BARGAIN contract for 4 more years. We got Fredette instead.
We actually preferred Salmons and Jimmer to Parker and Jefferson??? Now I agree that we don’t know for sure that the deal was there to be made (although the reports sure make it sound like it), but if it was and THIS is what we got …… our front office should be fired. This is a poor, poor substitute.
When I said above that I still thought we are salary-saving, this is exactly what I was talking about. We didn’t take on Parker’s deal (even though it is great, it is still 50 mil), and we only brought on 11 million dollars while ‘addressing’ (sort of) our needs. This was a bargain basement way to appear that the team is interested in improving. We are still miles under the cap, and I’ll be willing to bet that we don’t take on any meaningful salary. We have to resign Thornton, but otherwise I suspect that we let Dalembert go if the bidding goes beyond 8 mil per.
If only that Parker deal was real...
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Jun 24, 2011 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions
The Kings trade Beno for Salmons...
- And trade down the the 10th pick …
The Sacramento Kings select Jimmer Fredette
Its Jimmer Time.
The key to any game is to use your strengths and hide your weaknesses.
-Paul Westphal
PF
We need power forwards, who would you guys like to see the kings go after?
Millsap
Utah now has Favors, Kanter, Jefferson and Millsap. They are thin at the wing and in the backcourt, and they may have cap issues. Casspi for Millsap?
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Kirilenko?
The Kings need more frontcourt depth and that means both toughness, rebounding. Shot blocking would be nice as well. Kirilenko is 6’11" and all of those things. His durabiity is not good at all, however
More important question: Who is the leader of this team? Who is the veteran presence on the floor (I will give Cisco locker room cred). This is one of the reasons Iggy was so high on everyone’s list of wants. Is Milsap that guy? I don’t see AK47 in that role.
by betweentheeyes on Jun 23, 2011 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions
wouldnt it be better to do what san antonio did with duncan and play DMC (our center) at PF?
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
i never thought the day would come where
i would have the same idea as you.
Is cowboyron a chiropractor?- Wallywagon11
its questions like these that make STR oh so lovely.
have faith
Look everyone, I am just as pissed about the trade. But I have to trust GP. This is not the first time I’ve disagreed with a move that turned out fine. He obviously sees something in Salmon unless this was done just to piss off the Maloofs for making them take Jimmer. I’m going to look at it like this. We loaded up on our weakest position next to Center, depending on Bur, and made Sf the most competitive position on the court. Salmon is a great locker guy who defends pretty well and can shoot 3’s, well kinda… 1 thing for sure, he will make guards and SF’s work harder in practice. I know, not worth 35million. But between Salmon and Honeycutt, we really upgraded defense and added scoring. And with Jimmer, more scoring. So I talked myself off the cliff and started to see the big picture. And believe me we are not going keep 5 sf’s…another trade is coming but don’t expect a blockbuster. We have to resign the young guys as time goes on and with the new CB and the arena, we will not be spending too much on players. And Jimmer will sale tickets, this was a P.R. move to help put people in seats and sale merchandise, remember everyone, we need an arena. Also you are going to fall in love with Honeycutt, soon to be a crowd favorite and our starting sf. Think a more athletic Doug Christy.
This is a huge blast of nostalgia
Old Section post. John Salmons. A completely pointless comment from me (hasn’t changed). And motherfuckin’ coolcatreportdotcom!!!
"What the fuck did I do?" - McNulty
As usual
The guy absolutely nailed it.
Reality
It really bites, but I am glad it is beginning to set in.
The conversations on this board are significantly different now than the ones right after Artest was traded, when many said with a straight face the team would be as good without him or at least not much worse.
The take then was that Salmons was almost as good as Artest. Now, if the pundits are right, it might turn out the difference in wins for the team with/without Artest could be 15 or more. Interesting.
The majority of posters on this board wanted a young, tanking team. You got it. Enjoy.
by coolcatreportdotcom on Oct 26, 2008 5:19 PM PDT reply actions
"His D was a difference at the end."
Blind squirrel, I'd like to introduce you to acorn
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Jun 25, 2011 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
The blind
were the folks that thought the team would play at roughly the same level without Artest. Unfortunately, Geoff Petrie was one of those folks. Instead, they went from a 38-win team to a 17-win team.
"His D was a difference at the end."
Yes,
because the Artest trade was the only deal that took place over that time period, and there were no injuries or coaching turnover, so we can safely conclude that the team went from 38 wins to 17 wins solely because of the presence of Ron Artest. Man, that’s epic.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
It was the only move made prior to Theus being fired
So a slightly sub .500 team morphed into a .250 ballclub overnight. So Theus took the fall, but the rest of the season showed it was a much lousier ballclub. Feel free to spin it however you want.
"His D was a difference at the end."
Again, this tells about 1% of the story
Does not talk about injuries, Theus losing the team, the soon-to-be-dealt veterans throwing in the towel. But that’s fine. If you are convinced that Artest was that kind of franchise-turning talent, rail on, live well and prosper.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
I'm not so sure Theus "lost the team"
There really wasn’t much of a team to lose. I think he had already lost the GM and the owners were all to happy to crown him the scapegoat.
I don’t think my version is 100% of the story, but I think it’s clearly well above 1% of the story. Artest and Martin were a decent duo; clearly Martin missing a lot of games in November and December didn’t help, but they were only 12-39 in the games he did play.
"His D was a difference at the end."
by NewEraKings on Jun 26, 2011 11:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Also, the caption for the pic needs to be changed
Something along the lines of “How a baby is conceived in the Section214 household”
"What the fuck did I do?" - McNulty
Different Poe take: Once upon a draft night yearly, while I pondered weak and weary over a quaint and curious player of forgotten lore
….. I hoped, in regards to John Salmons to say “nevermore”.
by betweentheeyes on Jun 24, 2011 3:17 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
lol
my wife would appreciate this for some reason.
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Jun 24, 2011 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
