Boozer or Millsap??? Best Case to Rebuild...

by T$ on Dec 18, 2008 11:05 AM PST Comment 48 comments

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3777170

In 2010, the Kings and their cap-space will be akin to a small fish in a very big pond - just too much competition from major markets who are closer to a championship than the Kings will be.

If Petrie has an opportunity to move Miller and/or K9 this year to free up cap space in 2009, doesn't that give us the best chance at making a serious run at a free agent who can contribute?

Boozer (unrestricted) and Millsap (restricted) will both be free agents in 2009 and the Jazz likely will not be able to pay both. I can't imagine another realistic scenario that could help us our more than signing either one of these players.

A front court rotation of Hawes, Boozer/Millsap, Thompson, Salmons, and Garcia would be young, talented, and entertaining. We all know the 2guard spot is locked down for the next decade (assuming K-Mart still has 2 good ankles). We can use this years lottery pick on the PG of the future who can split time with Beno. The Kings would be one of the best young teams in the league...and I would be content.

One last comment on Beno - let's remember this guy is 26 and has been fairly impressive this year. Point guards are known for developing late as they learn to improve the players around them. Is it too far fetched to think that Beno could be a Steve Nash light in 2 yrs - maybe a stretch, but possible...

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

1 recs | Comment 48 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yes...

Yes, it is too far-fetched. But I’ll give you an “A” for wishful-thinking & fan-support. I remember Nash from his first go-round with the Suns (before Dallas), and he was good back then…Beno would have a looooonnnnggggg way to go.

by PhutureKings on Dec 18, 2008 11:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I agree. But for the sake of discussion:

Steve Nash didn’t break out until his 5th yr in the league when he was 26 & 27 with 15.6ppg and 7.3apg. Beno is in his 5th yr now, but won’t be 27 until the 2009 season. Isn’t it possible that with an improved team and his own on the job learning as a starting PG in the NBA that Beno could add 3.4ppg & 2.1apg to his averages next year?

Nash 1st 5 Seasons:
Team G MPG FG% 3P% APG TO PPG
PHO 65 10.5 0.423 0.418 2.1 0.97 3.3
PHO 76 21.9 0.459 0.415 3.4 1.29 9.1
DAL 40 31.7 0.363 0.374 5.5 2.08 7.9
DAL 56 27.4 0.477 0.403 4.9 1.82 8.6
DAL 70 34.1 0.487 0.406 7.3 2.93 15.6

Beno 1st 5 seasons:
Team G MPG FG% 3P% APG TO PPG
SAS 80 14.4 0.444 0.408 1.9 0.96 5.9
SAS 54 10.9 0.455 0.343 1.7 0.98 5.1
SAS 73 13 0.369 0.287 1.7 0.77 4.7
SAC 65 32 0.463 0.387 4.3 2.28 12.8
SAC 26 31.2 0.47 0.24 5.2 2.85 12.2

by T$ on Dec 18, 2008 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Some of what Nash did was also cuz he was a perfect fit

At the right time with a bunch of young players who could augment him. Some of that was just blind luck in the way it worked for Nash.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 18, 2008 2:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

very true

by KingsFanfromCentralEurope on Dec 19, 2008 2:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Looking at the Last 2 Seasons

Can Beno add 3 & a half points and 2 assists next season? Maybe. I guess it’s possible, but it could also not happen, too. So, it’s pure speculation.

But, look at the last 2 seasons for each guy (because those are the most similar in MPG) and there is some telling stats that kind of jump out.

Overall FG% is similar, but 3pt% is better for Nash.
Secondly, and most important, look at assists-to-turnover ratio for each guy. Nash’s again are quite a bit better. The increased 3pt% and A-t-TO ratio speaks to Nash’s floor vision and play-making ability.

I think Beno can get better. But, I do not think he can be anywhere near as good as Nash.

by PhutureKings on Dec 18, 2008 3:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Give it up

No more Beno to Nash comparisons. Nash is one of the best shooters in the history of the game, not to mention an excellent finisher and has all-time-great vision. Beno has none of these attributes.

by sactown on Dec 19, 2008 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Uhmmm

I think the point of the comparison was that you wouldn’t apply those attributes to Nash at the same timepoint in his career as Beno.

Seriously, there is about one chance in 1,000 that Beno could turn into Nash, who is really a pre-eminent player. But the argument is that Nash really blossomed after initially looking like an average player in the league. The potential is there for Beno to be much better down the road – a la Nash, Billups, or a guy like Avery Johnson.

Are we gonna live together? Together are we gonna live?

by otis29 on Dec 19, 2008 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

Boozer (unrestricted) and Millsap (restricted) will both be free agents in 2009 and the Jazz likely will not be able to pay both.

Actually, the Jazz COULD pay both, but are not likely to. Especially with Okur around. But, if I had to see one or the other going, it would definitely be Boozer. He’s had more problems there, and he’s older than Millsap. Millsap also has a great attitude, hasn’t even missed a game yet, and plays like he cares about the team. He’s also likely to be cheaper than Boozer is.

I don’t see Miami taking Boozer next year, even though they want him, but I do see it being possible they would want to make a deal for him.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 18, 2008 12:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Uh, right – my point was that the Jazz likely won’t want to pay both Boozer and Millsap (any team can go over the salary cap to pay their own free agents, I think that is common knowledge), but nice work on the semantics correction…

by T$ on Dec 18, 2008 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't see Beno as Steve Nash lite in two years, I see in as Steve Nash in two light years.

"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley

by Bluejohn on Dec 18, 2008 12:25 PM PST reply actions 3 recs

rec'd

nice.

The more you guys work the trade machine, the happier I am GP is our GM.

by ForThree on Dec 18, 2008 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Rec'd.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 18, 2008 12:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

FA

Perhaps it is really a good time to forget about 2010 FA, at least for now.

One option is to use the salary cap if possible on a 2009 free agents. There are not a lot of them and the Utah PF duo seems to be the most plausible target.

The other option is, I think to make a trade with teams who are badly trying to dump the salary with the aim to target FAs such as Lebron the similar way that GS and Clippers did the trade with NY (I’m not saying that we should take players such as Randolph or Crawford). Just an example (the msot interesting I have found) – Would be the Nets willing to trade Harris (with I think 5 years left and about 9-10M contract) to clear as much salary as possible to be able to sign James and possibly someone else? (I don’t think so as Harris might be the second option beside Lebron, but this the general idea).

I am not sure who else is actually there from teams interested in dumping the salary (maybe noone), but this might be the chance. Perhaps it is true that very few trades give profit to both sides, usually one takes more (for some reason). This might be the scenarion where Kings would actually profit.

by KingsFanfromCentralEurope on Dec 19, 2008 2:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

But I think we are far more likely to pick up a 2009 FA or RFA than to trade for one. My reason being that the very reason 2010 will be tough for us is that lots of teams will have free cash w/o trading anyone. And the teams that don’t have free cash naturally at that point are less likely to trade to get there when there will be so much competition. I think that 2009 could be our year for many, many reasons.

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on Dec 19, 2008 7:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, I concur

with everyone waiting in the weeds for 2010

There could be a real opportunity next year.

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 19, 2008 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

how Keynesian

buy when demand is low – bigger risk, bigger reward.

by betweentheeyes on Dec 19, 2008 4:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If Millsap was a realistic possibility

I would overpay to get him if need be, and forget about going after 2010 free agents.

Millsap is the prototype for what this franchise is starving for. A tough, focused, team player who can get ugly inside, play defense and grab lots of boards.

"When the going gets Weird, the Weird turn professional."
(Hunter Thompson)

by Mucho Moss on Dec 19, 2008 4:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Boozer technically isn't a free agent.

Checked out Shamsports and he has a 09-10 player option for 12.3 mil. In order to give Boozer an attractive offer, the Kings would need to get rid of Miller and K9 or Moore… (and that’s banking on the possibility that Boozer decides not to take his player option)

…However, signing Millsap does sound intriguing. He’s being paid about 800k right now and he’s unrestricted. …Though, the only contract the Kings could offer him is the MLE, if they choose not to get rid of Miller, Moore, or K9’s contract.

by CloudyEyes on Dec 22, 2008 3:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Boozer is opting out

It’s his best chance to make some real dough, but then again, I don’t think it matters. Boozer has FA options.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 22, 2008 1:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

...and what if we do end up trading off for cap space?

…As well as realistically nabbing the 1st pick in the draft?

Do we still go after Boozer, after picking up Blake Griffin? What if that did happen?

Udrih/Brown
Martin/Salmons/Garcia
Garcia/JT/Salmons
Boozer/JT/Hawes
Griffin/Hawes

Imagine having 2 Carlos Boozers on the post. What a formidable post that would make. Obviously, 2 of our SFs would need to be pushed out to make room for JT, though. I left out Jackson, cause we wouldn’t have enough cap to sign both him, Griffin, and Boozer.

Without Boozer and just Griffin:

Udrih/Brown/Jackson (if he gets re-signed)
Martin/Salmons/Garcia
Garcia/Salmons/Greene
Griffin/JT/Hawes
Hawes/Griffin

I feel like JT and Greene are going to get the short end of the stick in any event we pick up another PF, but the starting line-up still looks solid (with the exception at PG in both rosters).

I think the Kings should just wait it out and see what happens, rather than jumping into rash decisions this early in the season.

by CloudyEyes on Dec 22, 2008 10:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure the Kings would go after Blake Griffin

For some he’s the undisputed 1st overall pick. If it was Tim Duncan, we wouldn’t be arguing. But Griffin doesn’t have the juice that Duncan does. Never will, and that’s not a criticism of Blake Griffin.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 2:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I still have a problem with

‘realisticly getting the #1 pick’

But Pook is wrong on this one (has he watched Griffen play?)

If we got the #1 we’d pick Griffen of course. No one refuses to pick the consensus #1…..

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 10:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not wrong

But, okay, say you’re right. I don’t see where Griffin improves this team. Just like I didn’t see how Michael Beasley improves this team. (And I’d still rather have JT right now anyway.) I’m not comparing Griffin to Beasley, but, at the same time, I think Griffin putting up gaudy stats, and having the great body, doesn’t mean it will translate to the NBA either. I’m willing for someone to prove how great Blake Griffin is. Show me, and I’ll change my mind.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 10:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Try to catch an Oklahoma game

He’s better and bigger than Beasley

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

No I want reasons

You still haven’t given 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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Since

you’re the one arguing that the consensus #1 overall player in next year’s draft wouldn’t improve a 7-23 team, I think the reason-giving ball is in your court. The argument in favor of Griffin is obvious: dominates NCAA, has an NBA body already with a frame that looks like it will develop further, 19 years old, worked his butt off this offseason to step his game up, has raw talent to continue to improve, plays a role that the Kings have been struggling to fill for years.

What is your argument against him? (You left off at Duncan juice.)

And what – short of video of Griffin playing well in an NBA game – would “prove” to you that his game will translate to the NBA?

by furious.d on Dec 23, 2008 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually it's not that Blake Griffin doesn't have talent or is desirable

Both of those things are obvious, and I’ve never seen a game of his. (But, that’s not why I’m arguing against him.)

It’s that I don’t think his talent will A), transform the KIngs, and B) do anything but make fans a fan of him.

HIs defense is not there, and that’s ultimately what this team has. He’s the consensus #1 pick, now, but so was Michael Beasley right up until the eve of the draft. Then Rose got pushed to first overall after it was clear Chicago would take him. That left Pat Riley with the “consolation prize” in Beasley, and privately wishing he had Rose. That is not a high endorsement. Time will tell, and perhaps I’m wrong. I don’t think Beasley is a bad player, but I don’t think he’s a franchise caliber player either. Rose is.

Is Griffin a franchise player? No. Is he a step below that? Probably, and who knows really? I don’t really see this team missing players down low, as much as I see a team that is missing talent all together across the board, and the young talent here like Shawes, JT, Greene being a part of this group already. Pretty much I see Blake a duplicaition of talents, and as lttg noted above, I don’t really see why that does much for this team.

To improve a team you must find a way to add to the talent available without degrading it. That’s why I’m against Blake Griffin. He isn’t a shot blocker, and this team needs that. He also isn’t a game changing low post defender (not claiming JT or Shawes are) which is also something this team needs. He needs the ball in his hands to be effective, and he’s not a great passer. My suggestion is that as time goes on, alot of holes will be found in his game. Some of them will be curable; many probably won’t be. I watched that youtube clip that nbadraft provides, and frankly, it was all running of the floor and dunks. I didn’t see anything that said Griffin will be this next step player, and at the same time, I didn’t expect to.

Last but not least, since this thread started out with relation to Paul Millsap, and if you asked me whom I’d rather have 5 years down the line: Millsap or Griffin, I’d clearly answer Millsap. And that’s not because I’ve seen him play. (And I’m not really a big advocate of bringing Paul Millsap onto this team, even if there is some miracle that the Jazz let him go.)

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Another question I have

Is who would REALLY want Blake Griffin if they had the first overall pick? (Again, I don’t put Sacramento in that group. And I can think of other teams that wouldn’t necessarily mind having Griffin.)

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Everybody

You don’t pass up on that, both because its stupid to and second because of the potential value as trade bait.

You have the #1 pick – and suddenly stars become available.

Section’s comment below is well taken though

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 2:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You need a player who can dominate around the basket

(or at least life becomes much simpler)
Until one of the kids we have proves its him – you keep looking.

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 2:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

and 'Bigger and better'

than Beasley is a reason

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So you disagre

And, there’s no surprise there.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 2:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

At least I disagree

based on something other than taking a contrary position just to do it.

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

But you know

I’m enamored of Thabeet right now anyway and doubt we’ll get that chance at #1.

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And I'm not disagreeing to be arbitrary

I think you’re wrong on both Blake & Thabeet. But at some point it won’t matter. You’ll just call me a bitch again, and I’ll yawn and move onto something else. But I’m not disagreeing to disagree. So, whatever. And your new avatar is stupid btw.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually

I’ve NEVER used a swear word against you or anyone on the site.

You can’t say the same.

"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"

by lietothegirls on Dec 23, 2008 3:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And I don't pretend that is a big deal

So, in the end, your point means diddly squat, shit and whatever else you like to apply it with. I don’t care if you curse at me; therefore I don’t care if I curse at you.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 3:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh

And feel free to petition to whomever you like to see me banned. If I’m banned, I’m not coming back. And that decision is up to TZ as far as I can tell. But if you can convince him to do it, more power to you. But I’m not changing my behavior, and I don’t give a shit who likes it & who doesn’t.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 3:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Beasley

was the #1 consensus pick for almost all of last year, yet he didn’t go #1. These guys have four more months of ballin’ (before the pre-draft camps!) before we’ll know who the #1 guy might be.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 23, 2008 1:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for piggybackin off me bawse :P

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 23, 2008 1:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think it is a consensus that GP doesn't draft consensus picks

by betweentheeyes on Dec 23, 2008 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That is a very true statement

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 24, 2008 5:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

after watching milsap

i think hes what we need. boozer is good but he is just not loyal at all. look at how he jetted from Cleveland. milsap will be cheaper and a better fit for what we need from a big.

Hit the clutch, hit the gear, hit the gas and im GONE!!!

by Robby1987 on Dec 25, 2008 10:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Boozer is mercenary yes

but IMO all Professional players are – he is just open about it. They get traded at a whim and they get compensated ridiculously. The athletes play to get paid. Nothing wrong with it. You think Tim Duncan would have stayed a Spur if they didn’t pony up the jack?

I would take Boozer or Milsap, I think Milsap is a better bargain, but we haven’t seen him in pressure playoff situations where he is the go-to option; Boozer has proven himself there. Fun to talk about, I will be shocked to see either in purple and black.

by betweentheeyes on Dec 26, 2008 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The Jack was never the problem with Tim in SA

The GF issue, later the wife issue, was. She was in Orlando, and he wasn’t.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 26, 2008 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Milsap is cheaper, that's why Utah will resign him

Boozer will move and probably to Miami because they will have the cap space needed to sign Boozer after Marion’s contract expires. The only way Miami doesn’t sign Boozer is if Okur opts out, then Miami may go after him because they need a center more than a PF.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Dec 26, 2008 2:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Riley likes high post options

Especially when he has the opportunity to fire talented coaches, and coach the low post players himself.

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

by pookeyguru on Dec 26, 2008 9:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs