What would we have to do to get a 2nd top 10 pick?
by HighTops on Dec 30, 2008 12:59 AM PST
Email
PrintHaving watched every game since preseason started, with and without alcohol it seems pretty obvious that we need more help than what most people believed before the season started. We knew with the trading of Bibby and Artest that the rebuilding was beginning, but the timeframe and extent of the drop in the quality of the basketball that we would have to watch was hazy.
We knew we'd be getting two 1st rounders next year, and by 2010/2011 we'd get another, but more importantly we'd gain cap space and hopefully a top tier FA with the end of MIller and K9's contracts. What we didn't expect was a 7 & 24 start to the season, and a possible season of only 20 wins. Now, things are different and people aren't so willing to wait. First it's fire Theus, and now fire Natt. Trade Miller, Salmons, & even Martin. Even the most holy of holys has seen the wrath of the populace, GP has seen his skills and past transgressions questioned.
The FIXES are plentiful at least as far as the many post here seem to imply.
Trade Miller & or Salmons for 1) cap space from 09 expiring; 2) young projects plus expiring; 3) Wallace or any number of other named players.
Then the draft fixes, 1) Draft (enter name here) starting PG; 2) Draft a big (ie Thabeet, Griffin, Hill, Monroe...)
The truth of the matter is that unless JT makes enormous progress before next season, we need to upgrade the Center/ PF & PG position just to make it bareable to watch this team next year. And, if Donte can't at least give us 15mpg next year we'll need another 2/3 guy. So, what are the odds that we can fill all three of our needs with one high and one low 1st round pick, and one high 2nd round pick. I"m guessing not good, at least not with players that can come in an contribute right away.
That's why I've been against any trade that doesn't give us cap space next year. Because the Draft is like a box of chocolates, you never know what your going to get. So, you never know what your going to need. As my cheap uncle says, save your money because you never know when you're really going to need it, plus it's fun to play with.
With cap space, if we get the PG we want in the Draft, we won't be forced into using our second 1st rounder on a questionable big because we still have Free Agency to fall back on. Instead maybe we draft Martin's replacement or that deadly 3pt shooter we so desperately need.
So, what does this have to do with the headline of the post, you might ask? Well, the one drawback that I see to the MIller for Wallace trade is the uncertainty of drafting for our needs. Now, if we could guarantee getting a Big & a PG that can contribute right away, then I see no reason for not doing the Wallace deal. So, what would it take to move our second 1st rounder up into the top 15 or even better top 10.
Who would it take, Salmons or Martin , plus draft choices for this year and next year? Everyone seems to agree that this year is a weak draft except for PG, so someone might like one of our guys over a upper mid pick. How high could we move if we offered Martin, Houston's pick, and our 2nd rounder for this year & next?
(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)
53 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting stuff HT (Not surprising there--I may not agree with everything you say, but it's usually well thought out & presented)
I don’t think Petrie is easilly replacable, or at all, but I don’t think he’s above criticism. If you can’t criticize him, then what’s the point? Some of what has transpired IS Petrie’s fault regardless of whom is willing to admit the very fact. Is it all his fault? No. It is all any one party’s fault? No.
I wouldn’t trade Martin, the Houston pick & the high 2nd rounder for another top 10 pick. You might value at the bottom of the draft the same way you might value a top 10 pick if you believe this team has many holes. If there are many holes, then it’s going to take multiple things to fill them. Maybe having 3 draft picks is EXACTLY what this team needs.
I wouldn’t trade Kevin Martin. He’s worth what he’s getting paid (when he’s healthy—and if he isn’t healty, he doesn’t have trade value—and trading him this off-season will be difficult because his BYC status is still applicable—ditto with Garcia’s PPP & impending BYC status next season), and it’s just as simple as that.
Beyond all of that, I’m not convinced the FA route is the way to go. The Kings basically went that route with Beno, and it’s hurt them. Ditto with the contracts given when players they value a great deal (Webber, Bibby, Miller especially) are always higher than what other teams give. Petrie is not going to quibble over 5 million dollars over a length of a contract if he feel the player is worth retaining. That’s just not his style. So, in a sense, another bad contract could cripple this team if the talent isn’t a right fit, and unlike any player they’ve brought in, this is not a championship caliber team so the feeling surrounding this team was not what it was circa 2001-2004.
Interesting thoughts, and interesting positions, and while I disagree about JT & Donte (I think it’s too early to worry about whether they will pan out), and while I wouldn’t trade Martin for anybody other than a superstar, I liked your post HT.
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
agreed
Martin only for someone already better. Though, that list was getting narrower by the day till his injury.
Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'
And it will only make it hard to come up with reasonable Brandon Roy comparisons also
Before there were some; now not so much.
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
yeah
but Roy has been on a freaking tear. I’m hoping Martin can get back soon and start owning the ball much the way Roy is.
83 or bust.
Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'
by iashwash on Dec 30, 2008 7:06 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd for 83 or bust
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
Good stuff HT
I feel like you read my mind. I agree with much of your post. The only part I am not sure about is trading Martin. Like many fans I am bummed that Kev is injured and I am worried that he may be the dreaded “injury prone” but I think it’s too early still to give up on him. After all, it is only an ankle sprain. Serious one it may be, but it’s still (as far as we’ve been told) just a sprain. Martin is a possible 25+ points per night guy for the rest of his career so I think it’s way too early to think about trading him. Unless it’s for LeBron, Wade or somebody like that of course. Shooting or another top 10 pick in the draft is a good idea if the Kings feel there will be someone there that they want but I don’t think you move up to, say the 8th pick just to say you have two top 10 picks. Like you said, the draft is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get so why would you trade Martin for a pick unless you (1) knew who you wanted to draft or (2) were getting back a player in return that is better than Martin for this team.
"Oh, boy! This website is very good. Hey, let's talk about the Raiders!" - "Peaches" Napier
Agreed
I think the idea of going after another high pick is a great one, but I think that it would be a huge mistake to trade Martin for a pick at this point (not saying “never”, just not now).
I’d like to see some examples of deals that might net us another high pick, with/without using Houston’s pick in the process. Is it even plausible?
At this point, here are the other nine Top 10 draft positions:
OKC, MIN, WAS, GSW, LAC, MEM, CHA, IND, TOR
CHA & TOR deals have been discussed, but the problem with them is that any deal that improves those teams also moves them farther away from the top of the draft. The idea would be to stay in the lottery at the very least, so the question remains: “What does it take to get another Top 10 pick?”
I don't think OKC or MIN can drop out of top 5
I think the worst position in their actual ranking plus 3 spots, so if OKC and MIN end up 1 & 2 as far as worst record is concerned then the worst then would end up with the lottory is 4 & 5. But, maybe I’m wrong.
But, OKC need a lot of help and they have the cap space to pick up Martin’s contract without us taking anything back. So, maybe for Martin and 3 more draft picks they give up #4. MIN might not have enough cap space for the deal, but they might be willing to do a Martin for MIke Miller trade and swap draft choices if we throw in additional compensations. WAS & GSW are over the cap limit in 09, so I don’t know what kind of deal we’d have to make with them. MEM could possibly take on $10M, but if we’re doing the Wallace deal with CHA maybe their the ones to swap. We give CHA Miller & Martin & Houston’s 1st for Wallace and their 1st plus players to make the salaries come out right.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
To restate
I don’t think the Kings should trade Martin for a pick at this point. The earliest I could see that being beneficial is after the Lottery, when the draft order will be set in stone.
The draft is enough of a risk to begin with, I see no reason to trade a known quantity in Martin for an unknown quantity in “a Top 5 Pick”. It would need to be at least known who would be available, and even then the player would need to be one that would advance the franchise beyond what Martin already provides.
For example, trading Martin for the Rose pick could have been a worthwhile trade, but would it have benefited the franchise to trade Martin for Westbrook/Love? To look at this year’s draft, I’d only trade Martin for THE guy that pushes the team forward (be that Griffin/Rubio/etc.) . . . but I think it’s far too early to to know who that player is now, and what team will hold the pick required to draft him.
Certainly waiting till after the Lottery would be the safest.
But if your going to play it safe then we really need to avoid all pre trade deadline TRADES that don’t free cap space. Teams may be willing to trade down in the draft now because they aren’t guaranteed of getting THE guy that they want. If we wait there may be no one willing to deal later after the picks are determined. And, then our only recourse would be Free Agency.
Martin is GREAT. But, we are at the same position Portland was in 4years ago. Do we hang on to Martin for 4 years in hopes of becoming a contender. Or, do we trade for prospects that can help us now, and develop into stars later? Gambling Big sometimes returns Big profits.
We are definitely in need of Help, and there will definitely be enough Bigs & PGs in the top 10. My Big might be Monroe and yours might be Griffin or Thabeet or Hill or Clark or Mullens, but one should be available. And, depending whether or not Rubio enters they’ll be Holiday, Jennings, Lawson, & Curry available. So, I don’t see where we couldn’t fill both need position with two top 10 picks. So, we get better immediately, and have 3 more years to find our new starting SG.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Thanks, and Martin wasn't my first choice either
It’s hard to let go of the one player that you know you can depend on, but Martin can’t win on his own either. If we are going to trade Miller this year, we’re going to need a lot more out of our two rookies than they seem to be able to give right now. And, PG also seems to be a weak area. So, I tried to think outside the box, and the only way I could come up with to improve both areas was Draft + FA, or Draft + Draft.
Now, we can do Draft + FA, in 2010/2011 for sure, but there will be a lot of bad basketball played between now and then. We might be able to do Draft + FA in 09, if we can trade Brad for 09 expiring. But even then, will the player we really want be available thru FA or Trade. So, I came up with Draft + Draft. And, even though there are no guarantees in the Draft, the potential of getting a Star in the top 10 makes the gamble seem more worthwhile.
So, here’s my thinking. We end up with a top 5 pick which should guarantee our choice of a Big even if Rubio doesn’t enter this year. So, say we get Thabeet or Monroe, two players that can come in and produce right away and have great potential. Now, we move up to 5-10 by trading Martin, Houstons 1st, and two seconds. Now we can get Holiday, Jennings, or Mills. Now, we can move Miller for Wallace + cap space.
We end up with Hawes, JT and either Thabeet or Monroe as our bigs, Wallace & Greene at the 3, Salmon & Cisco at the 2, and NEW PG ( enter name here), Beno, & BB at the 1. If we end up with Thabeet we have improved defense at all 5 positions, Wallace at the 3, and Salmon at the 2, and hopefully at the 1 with our new PG. And, though we’ll miss Martins offense, improving the defense of 4 of 5 positions might win us more games. Plus I think SG is a lot easier to replace than a Big or PG.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
I agree that Martin can't win on his own
then get him help instead of trading him. Why no trade Salmons who’s value is fairly high right now?
and get back what?
expiring contract isn’t worth it because he’s a bargain,
only a very high (low – whatever) 1st rd pick would make sense, and I’m not sure then. A top 3 pick gets 3 or 4 mil$ – no?
Salmons only making 5.4 or something.
There must be someone else to trade, say to OKL with our later 1st rd pick, they need a lot of bodies….
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 30, 2008 3:00 PM PST up reply actions
Need a Big
OKC might be a possibility if they lose the Griffin sweepstakes, but my guess is that they’ll hold on to their pick until they know they can’t get him. If they lose out, then you might be on to something…
Westbrook, Salmons, Green, Durant, Houston #1(e.g. Jerome Jordan?)
vs
Rubio/Jennings/etc., Westbrook, Green, Durant, ?
I just don’t know.
Remember, Already empty seats there in Okl
they might get anxious and an opportunity may happen
Minn may also be getting desperate
burn up the phones GP!!
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 30, 2008 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
Would you do
Salmons and Douby for Brian Cardinal and Minny’s first round? It works
Brian Cardinal’s contract sucks but that could net us another top ten pick. Worth it?
Yes
I would do that deal in a heartbeat.
Cardinal is garbage, but we just wait him out with K9 and the return would be well worth it, in my opinion.
I don’t think Minny does this deal, not even with Houston’s #1 . . . although I think that would make them at least wait to call back to decline it.
Not sure on the Minny side either
but remember they have like 4 first rounds (or something like that) this coming draft
Wow, that's true
I didn’t even realize this. According to Draft Express:
* Minnesota receives Boston’s 2009 1st round draft pick, top 3 protected, as part of Kevin Garnett trade.
This is practically a 2nd, but still.
* Minnesota owns Miami’s first round pick, top 14 protected in 2008, top 10 protected in 2009, top 6 protected in 2010, and unprotected after that.
Miami drafted 2nd in 2008, meaning that Minny will likely get their pick this year, since they probably won’t be getting a Top 10 pick.
* Minnesota, via Philadelphia, receives a first round pick from Utah, as part of the Kyle Korver trade. Pick is protected 1 through 22 in 2009, 1 through 15 in 2010, 1 through 17 in 2011, 1 through 16 in 2012 and 1 through 16 in 2013. (Ross Siler, Salt Lake Tribune)
Another near-2nd, since they only get it at 23+.
I think that this is even more reason for them not to want Houston’s #1, as they’ll likely be looking to consolidate their picks to move up, not acquire more.
Minnie
needs a big man but also would like to move Mike Miller from what i heard somewhere. Would you take Mike Miller back? He’s having a poor season but is a great ‘catch and shoot’ guy (doesn’t play great D though)
How about Mikki + Salmons for Miller + thier 1st 1st rd pick?
There are some other opportunities there as well, several combinations I think.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 30, 2008 6:18 PM PST up reply actions
I'm down for that one
I’m just trying to look at it from Minny’s perspective. If they are going to give us something good (a first rounder) then we better give them something good (Salmons) and take something they really don’t want. If they really want to get rid of Miller I would do it. We could try to fit him here. If not, there’s always a market for a catch-and-shoot player with crazy range
Yea, & Millers contract expires in 2010
I still don’t think Salmons enough even with Moores expiring because Minni is $10M under the cap in 09.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Um
I don’t think there’s a chance at all of this happening, but I’d be thrilled if it did, and GP would be crazy not to pull the trigger if it was offered.
I’d even go a step further and offer Miller & Salmons for Miller, Cardinal, and their pick. It works, too, not that I think it’s any more likely to happen.
Why?
Minnie doesn’t want MMiller, MMiller doesn’t want Minnie, Salmons is a bargain.
I agree that we probably wouldn’t get thier first #1 though – but what about thier 2nd? package that with ours or with our Houston pick?
Hmmmmmm
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 30, 2008 11:14 PM PST up reply actions
But on your 2nd suggestion
They might even be willing to take K-9 and still be ready for 2010.
Question: would you swap our Houston pick for thier Phil or Miami pick, whichever higher, in that case?
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 30, 2008 11:23 PM PST up reply actions
Not sure
In my second option, I was offering two starters to Minny for two players (we’re assuming for the sake of this conversation) they simply don’t want, for the sole purpose of getting back their pick.
I don’t think the Kings can get their pick an still hold on to their own pick, but I was trying to think of something close.
As for their other picks, I don’t know what it would be worth giving them to get the Miami, Utah (via Philly, it’s not Philly’s pick), or Boston pick.
The Boston pick will obviously be worse than Houston’s come draft time. Utah/Miami/Houston is might be a toss-up (Houston’s is the worst of the three at the moment), so I don’t know if it’s worth trading Salmons for those kinds of options . . . but perhaps for one of those picks without including the Houston pick?
I’d trade Salmons for Miller & a pick, even if it wasn’t their good one.
You'd have to add something from us
Miller makes 9 mil this yr and next, Salmons makes 5.2 or something. Question: would you rather have Miller for a year and a half or G Wallace for four yrs at the same pay? Charlotte’s pick may be available if Brown has anything to do with it, he’s too old to mess around with rookies – and has never liked to anyway.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
Miller makes 11.5 million this season
He hasn’t made 9 million probably since his first season here.
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
Mike Miller
We were talking about Minnie
You should read it first
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
I should have
My bad.
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 have often been guilty myself
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
I knew you were guys were talking about
Mike Miller, and I forgot it. Part of the reason I forgot is I really would rather not go after MM. But, you are fond of the shooters, and so be it, everybody’s entitled to what they like.
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'm just not fond
of too many dribblers on a team. Which I think is part of our problem. I don’t want a whole team of shooters, just a starter and a bench guy or two.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
Hmmm
I’m not fond of over dribbling either, but at the same time, I don’t think this team is even anything close to a playoff team yet, and those are quibbles I think better reserved for a team on the cusp of making the playoffs.
Besides, Kevin Martin is a quality outside shooter by any definition.
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
Salmons and Speed are both
basically penetrators. Though KM is definately a better spot up shooter. I think the ideal swing-mate to KM would be a spot-up guy. I’d love to see Speed with a guy he can consistantly kick it out to at the perimeter. Its never too soon to get a better balanced offense, play-off team or not.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
It would help the kids
understand what a good offense looks like. All the best teams do it, SA, LA, Boston, Orlando….
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
Thats why I think
you probably trade salmons. Best defender or not. For who? I don’t know, but someone who fits that description.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 12:12 PM PST up reply actions
Beno is also
a penetrator, but I think we’re stuck with him for a year or so.
So salmons is what he is, KM is more versatile but mostly relies on penetrating/drawing contact etc, that leaves very little variety for defenses to prepare for. Which is part of why we struggle down the stretch of games IMO.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Dec 31, 2008 12:16 PM PST up reply actions
I'm toying with the idea of
that the KIngs should draft James Hardin. We’ve already established you like Blake Griffin, and I don’t want him, but I think Hardin is a player the Kings should make room for if they get a top 3 pick, SG or not.
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
Only if we we're guaranteed a Big
One of the downsides to trading Martin to move up is that IMO teams would rather have Harden than Martin. So, I agree if Harden is there you have to consider taking him at #2 or #3.
But, imagine the stock pile of talent we’d have at the 2 & 3 if we went ahead and did the Wallace for MIller trade.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Unless that 2 or 3 is Kobe or LeBron
Having a stockpile of wings is nice, but not everything in the L. Just one of things I’ve observed. But, by the same token, if Hardin is that game changing player the Kings need, you take him. You can find a way to play Hardin & Martin together.
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
MM's plain or peanut
Mikie and Mikki.
Make it stop.
by betweentheeyes on Jan 1, 2009 8:31 PM PST up reply actions
It's not Miller
The meat of the deal was the draft pick, not Miller.
Miller just made it easier to part with Salmons, because Garcia could still come off the bench (which is where he is most valuable, in my opinion).
Interesting
That the posts stop getting narrower at this point. I guess they would have to stop somewhere. But I never really thought about it before.
Makes them hard to read.
Coming to you live from the land of interim coaches.
by LeaguePassAddict on Jan 2, 2009 2:35 PM PST up reply actions
Is Salmons worth a top 10 draft choice?
I’m not sure if even TOR would be willing to do that unless we took back some bad contract of theirs. But we would be limited by how much cap space we had. Martin is closer to being an all star so he’s more valueable so we wouldn’t have to take back bad contracts. But, to us, Martin is a 30 ppg player on a losing team. I’d rather have top 10 players that can improve the team immediately, and get better over the next 4 years.
We certainly can keep Martin and slowly add talent through the Draft and Free Agency a little each year. But, as we get better we move further and further down the Draft. We may not get another top 5 pick (hopefully) and top 10’s maybe twice in the next 3 years. I’d rather not watch bad to mediocre basketball next year.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
one big missing ingrediant to all trades
Who is coaching this team of hype and hope?
by betweentheeyes on Dec 30, 2008 10:53 PM PST up reply actions
Martin can't be traded until next year anyway
Unless he’s traded to a team with cap space, Martin’s a BASE YEAR COMPENSATION (BYC) player, and cannot be traded (he’s only worth HALF his contract value on one side of a potential trade, and FULL value on the other, so cap space is needed to make a deal work). That limits the teams that can acquire him, not to mention what his recent injury may have done to his value.
Let’s keep the Martin speculation confined at least within those parameters, since there’s no point in talking about deals that are literally impossible (which are almost as bad as the K9 & Mikki for LBJ types).
That said, I still don’t see the value in trading Martin even for the Memphis pick . . . I just don’t see equal return there.
Yes!
Salmons is a still yyoung proven NBA starter. I think most teams would easily give up a top 10. Thats barring (perhaps) a real stud at #1`prospect….
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 2, 2009 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
28-29 years old is young?
Am I missing something?
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
-1
If “most teams” would give up a Top 10 pick for Salmons, I think Petrie would have pulled the trigger on a deal already.
As it has been mentioned countless times, Swing players are the easiest to find (and GP’s had plenty of success drafting them late in the first . . . Houston’s #1 perhaps?).
I just don’t see it.
I've mentioned it a bunch of times
I don’t see anybody else saying that. Hello Donté Grééné? Remember that talented kid? What pick was he drafted at again? I mean, cmon now, duh!
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
Agreed
Mitch Richmond = 3 pick
Ray Allen = 5 pick
Jason Richardson = 8 pick
John Salmons = 18 pick?
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
If the Kings are lucky
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
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Shane Battier knocks Greg Ostertag
- A preview of Tom Thibodeau’s All-Star coaching style
- The Three-Point Shootout participants have been named
- Jeremy Lin finally gets a new apartment, and a place in NBA history
- Wizards owner Ted Leonsis takes a needless swipe at his team’s fan bloggers
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.
