Did I miss something?
Hello everyone - I've been a silent observer of Sactown Royalty for a little over a year now, but when I saw today that the Kings resigned Beno for 5 years and 32 million I had to break the silence to bring you this important message:
Ugh.
The first time I heard that Beno was seeking 5 years at the MLE, and that chances were good he would recieve it from someone, I immediatly thought whatever teams signs that contract will regret it. Not because I think Beno is bad - in my mind he's a solid young point guard that will likely improve with another season or two of steady time at the position. And not because of the money - 6 million a year is not huge especially by current salaries.
But 5 years????
Basketball teams change a lot in 5 years time, take a look at our roster from 5 years ago and that truth becomes painfully clear. What baffles me most about this signing is how it fits in with the rebuilding process. Do the Kings see Beno as a championship contender starting point guard? Personally I don't - and San Antonio (who happen to be pretty good judges of talent) didn't even see him as a championship calibur back-up.
Let me present this scenario; what if instead of signing Beno the Kings signed....nobody. Seriously. In this stacked western confrence does Beno vault us into the playoffs? Nope. If we have Beno as opposed to a Singletary, Garcia, Douby platoon will we win more games? Of course, my guess would be anywhere from 4 to 7 games. Just enough to get us another crappy lottery pick. Next year's pick could bring us our very own Derrik Rose. I'm sure people will argue that if that were to happen we could use Beno as a great backup, but will Beno be happy to sit on the bench after finally being a starter? Here's another question: If one of the Bayless, Augustine, Westbrook group fell to us in the draft would this contract have happened? I don't think it would have which makes me think this was a panic move. But as with most panic moves, this one wont hurt until we get a couple years down the road and have some cap room. Six million isn't huge, but it can easily keep us from landing our free agent of choice in 2010 or 2111.
I don't like that my first post is a negative one, but would love to hear what everyone else thinks. Hopefully 4 years from now someone will be digging up this post to show me what an idiot I am as Beno hoists the Finals MVP trophy.
(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 |
48
comments
Comments
Nice first post
I’m still trying to decide how I feel about the signing, but I can certainly appreciate your views. The only thing I’m not sure I agree with is that this wouldn’t happen if we’d drafted Bayless, Augustin, Westbrook, etc. I agree that it becomes less likely, but part of me still thinks that it may have happened. Our team doesn’t have a whole lot of money for free agents, so the MLE seems far more important to us. It is a key piece of the roster puzzle for many teams. But we just used the MLE to lock up a starter. Plenty of teams use the MLE just to get some stopgap player who isn’t worth much at all (Mikki Moore anyone?).
"Matt Lauer, up on NBC. You look like a girl, don't talk to me" -Ron Artest
by Exhibit G on Jul 1, 2008 6:55 PM PDT 0 recs
Welcome
I see your point about the whole thing with Beno. I figure most people would agree about the length of the contract, more than any single thing about it. But that was probably necessary to keep him short term, and that’s just the bitch of the whole thing.
(I’ve written much longer comments on Posts in the past. Much Much longer. It’s not that big of a deal trust me.)
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 Jul 1, 2008 7:18 PM PDT 0 recs
question
If Artest and somebody else get moved before the trading deadline wouldn’t that possibly free up more cap space then what they just locked up in Beno? to me the 6 mil a year is not a huge commitment for a starter. If a top young PG gets drafted next year the contract would not be a cap killer, IMO three years would have been much better but if the market called for 5 years the Kings did what they had to do. Honestly I did not like any of the other options that were availabe in free agency.
by Beagle12 on Jul 1, 2008 7:30 PM PDT 0 recs
No you won't get cap space until the end of the year basically
The NBA requires you to take almost as much (or more in many cases) than it requires you to give 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
by pookeyguru on
Jul 1, 2008 7:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
as much money^
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
Jul 1, 2008 7:43 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree that a 2 or 3 year contract would have been perfect but it’s clear he was getting offered better than that. I also agree with the thinking that there aren’t really any better point guards available to us than Beno (but I was loving the Arenas pipe dream short as it was). I guess my point is this: So what. If another team wants to lock him up for 5 years because he fills their needs then let them. And if we dont fill the spot and our point guard position blows for the next year or two big deal. I don’t feel that Beno is a one in a million player that will make us kick ourselves years from now because he got away. A year ago I didn’t even know who Beno was – think about all the options that will be there in a year or two that we can’t see from right here.
This whole episode taps into my loathing of the NBA economy in general. Too many GM’s let the movements of other teams distract them from the goal. I honestly dont think Petrie wanted Beno for 5 years and had we landed an upper tier pg in the draft he could have justified walking away. I know that a lot of people would probably hate it if the Kings didn’t sign anyone for this year, but I think it would have put us in a much better position in the long run
Is there anyway we can get Isiah Thomas a job with the Lakers?
by Punchbowl on Jul 1, 2008 8:29 PM PDT 0 recs
If Jason Thompson becomes a good player
then in essence you have two decent starters for about $7-8 million a year. So it becomes Thompson and Udrih vs. Bayless-Augustin and Mikki Moore, at least in the short term, for about the same money.
by coolcatreportdotcom on
Jul 6, 2008 11:56 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't think it's a bad move...
...I think 6 mil is about the market for Beno’s production.
If he ends up being injury prone for most of the contract (ala Shareef), then Petrie made a mistake. If he grows into the job and becomes an even better player, then Petrie did well. Furthermore, I don’t think Petrie sees Beno necessarily as the point guard of the future, but he can play, and should we draft/trade for a star point guard in the next few years, Beno provides us with a someone who can help ease the learning curve and be a valuable player in our guard rotation (similar to Bobby Jackson’s role).
Also, I get the feeling Petrie doesn’t subscribe to the “blow it all up” theory as being the best way to rebuild. He’s had numerous chances to tear this sucker completely apart and go for the top pick in the draft, but he’s passed, choosing rather to slower filter bad contracts and veteran players out, while slowly (too slow in some cases) bringing along young talent he has found later in the draft.
Part of that thinking, I believe, is that a losing team creates a losing culture that is very hard to turn around (see Sacramento circa ‘85-’99). No one wants to play for you even if you have cap space. Players opt out of contracts, hold out, refuse trades, quit playing hard, fights erupt in the locker room, etc. I believe Petrie is trying to rebuild without having Sacramento having to endure one (or several) of those 18, 19 or 20 win seasons that Memphis and Minnesota are playing through.
And Beno’s signing is part of that thought process. He is a player that is going to keep the team moving forward, which wouldn’t have happened if we had started a 2nd round pick as our point guard, and at 25 years old, he is a player that can be productive in 3-4 years when we really are trying to compete for a championship.
by R-Man on Jul 1, 2008 10:45 PM PDT 0 recs
Nicely thought out and presented post
I’m curious, what NBA championship teams were built without first becoming very bad? Celts(No), Spurs(No), Heat(No), Pistons(No), Lakers(sort of 31 wins in 98-99), Bulls(No), Rockets(No), Pistons(We’re in the 80s now).
Doesn’t look good for Petrie’s plan. I’m just sayin.
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
Jul 1, 2008 10:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
but look at the celtics
they didn’t win a championship because they got really good draft picks from being very bad, they won a championship because they went out and got 2 all stars in the offseason. That they were very bad in the recent past is (mostly) inconsequential to their championship.
by Viliphied on
Jul 1, 2008 11:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If they hadn't been very bad
they wouldn’t have had a #5 pick to get Allen and they wouldn’t have had the young talent to get Garnett. So in fact them being bad for a long time directly led to their championship.
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
Jul 2, 2008 4:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The Celtics historically were on top in Auerbach's era
Because he got lucky (in a dispersal draft acquiring Cousy), making a trade for Bill Sharman, trading Ed Macauley and Cliff Hagan (two unknown players now, but Hagan was a quality role player and MacAuley was a legitmate HoF of the early NBA) for Bill Russell, drafting KC Jones, Sam Jones, John Havlicek in later rounds, as well as drafting Tommy Heinsohn with a territorial pick (which is why Russell had to be traded for), and using an unknown drafting rule to draft Larry Bird. The Celtics dynasty was built based on most other teams trying to beat them at their own game, and not recognizing how they were doing it.
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
Jul 2, 2008 5:14 AM PDT
up
0 recs
inconsequential
agreed. The fact that they tanked was offset by the fact that they then traded 80% of that tanking team to Minn. They swapped their losing culture for KG’s winning ways.
by misterbrister on
Jul 2, 2008 6:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The same KG who played on 2 lottery teams prior to that?
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
Jul 2, 2008 6:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't know that I agree completely
The Spurs were a decent team and only had one really bad year, when The Admiral was hurt. They won the lottery and got Duncan, and have been good ever since.
The Heat were in the playoffs with Lamar Odom before they got Shaq and won the Championship, but they were bad enough to get the #5 pick (Dwayne Wade) before that, so I don’t know where I’d rank that.
I don’t recall the Pistons being terrible, aside from paying Grant Hill when he was hurt, but they traded Hill to Orlando for Ben Wallace, got Rip Hamilton from Washington & Rasheed Wallace in that crazy Portland-to-Atlanta-to-Detroit with an assist from Boston, and I believe Billups was a FA acquisition. The Darko pick (that they absolutely BLEW in the deepest draft in recent history) was a trade-acquired pick. They didn’t build through the draft.
The Lakers were a playoff team before Shaq signed and they traded for Kobe, so I don’t see how they fit the mold at all (94-94 & 04-05 were the only years they didn’t make the playoffs in the last two decades, so neither the pre-Shaq nor the Kobe-led Lakers were bad for long). In your 98-99 example they had a .620 winning % (31-19).
The Bulls I have no comment on. They were terrible before MJ and they were terrible after.
As for the Rockets, I don’t know how bad they were (or for how long) before getting Hakeem and winning a title, so I won’t speak to that, and I also don’t remember the Pistons before their run in the 80’s, so I’ll pass on that as well.
I guess where I disagreed was in your definition of “very bad”. I don’t consider a team “very bad” when they only have one or two bad seasons (especially if it’s just one in the case of the Spurs, Lakers, etc). I do however, agree that most good teams are good because of high draft pick “assets” putting them over the top.
For the record: I feel that rebuilding teams need a little bit of luck to turn things around, but sometimes luck is what you make of it. To continually draft in the 10-15 range while trying to rebuild just seems to make rebuilding that much harder than it would be otherwise. I think that a team should always play their best, but I also think that holding on to pieces that will not benefit the future of the franchise is not necessarily the best way to go. Right now, I think that the Kings should be looking to move the pieces that will be gone soon anyway to get pieces that will contribute to the next Kings run. Of course I’m talking about Artest, Moore, K9 & SAR (they’ll just come off the books, or be used as Expiring Contracts in a trade), & Miller (I have no problems with keeping him until the deadline to continue his mentoring).
by smgmatt on
Jul 2, 2008 8:26 AM PDT
up
0 recs
The Rockets weren't bad either
Cuz they had Moses Malone and Ralph Sampson before they drafted Hakeem. And the Rockets made the 81 & 86 finals, the first with Moses & Ralph, and the 2nd with Ralph and Dream.
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
Jul 2, 2008 8:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, forgot about the lockout with the Lakers
They are still an aberration because the Shaq signing couldn’t happen today, because of rule change. The Spurs were bad enough to get 2 #1 picks for Robinson and Duncan. The Pistons were 32-50 in 00-01, but it didn’t really lead to their success. So they are an exception. Of course they are also an exception to the “need a superstar to win the title” rule. Strangely enough the 89-90 Pistons teams were built the same way. Miami won 25 games in 02-03 netting Wade. The Rockets won 14 games in 82-83 and 29 games in 83-84 getting back to back #1s netting Sampson and Hakeem(that’s bad enough) took 10 years to win after that but that gave them The Dream and we traded Thorpe for Sampson no?
But yes draft picks are what counts, and good picks are what matters. And a bit of luck, as we know a #1 doesn’t guarantee success(damn you Pervis!). But that doesn’t change the need to find a way to obtain those top players. The Lakers’ model doesn’t work anymore and probably never would have in Sac. So Detroit is the only historical hope for the path we are currently taking.
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
Jul 2, 2008 2:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Look for it
Some of those things will be done, probably Miller at the deadline once he’s had another 1/2 season to mentor Hawes and Thompson some, and pray to GOD we find a way to move K-9 (but I doubt it). SAR will I hope take medical retirement and clear off the books.
Artest? I have no idea what they’ll do with him but near the deadline he’ll have REAL value to a contending team that thinks he can get them that ring.
(I’ve said before that I think he’s still young enough to be a part of our next championship run if we could keep him happy – but I’m a voice in the forest on that)
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 2, 2008 4:41 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The Lakers made the WCF in 99
31 wins was I believe good enough to place them 3rd or 4th in the West that year. Remember it was only a 50 game season, and Utah and San Antonio were at top of the standings with 33 or 34 wins.
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
This has been pointed out and answered
The post you are responding to is almost a day old and it has been pointed out and answered already(See Smgmatt’s post above and my response). Why bring it up again?
I guess I should answer it again:
Yeah, forgot about the lockout with the Lakers
They are still an aberration because the Shaq signing couldn’t happen today, because of rule change.
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:40 PM PDT
up
0 recs
My fault---You did point it out--Again my apologies
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:47 PM PDT
up
0 recs
No worries
I was a bit harsh. 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
Jul 2, 2008 9:52 PM PDT
up
0 recs
It's fair--I've snapped at people today when it wasn't appropriate
You know the sayings about if you can’t take it then don’t dish it and all that. If I can criticize others for doing so, then I should be subject to the same standards.
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Don't get me wrong...
...having the #1 pick is nice and if you get a once in a generation player with it like Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan, or LeBron (as opposed to a Bargnani, Bogut, K. Brown, or Olowakandi), it certainly helps expedite the rebuilding process. It’s just not the only way to do business, and it’s not a mortal lock (as Pervis Ellision proved) to make you a contender. Plus, you have to really suck for at least a year to get that pick, and that can be detrimental (especially in a small market) to it’s image and overall marketability.
That being said, if you look at the teams that have won in the last few years, I would argue that only the Spurs and Rockets had a home grown top 5 pick draft pick that became the cornerstone of the franchise. Everyone else traded for a star or brought someone in through free agency that helped them turn the corner. Lakers, Heat, Pistons, Celtics, etc all made trades or signings that put them over the top. Bottom line: blowing it up for a top 5 pick isn’t the only way to win.
Lastly, look at how Petrie built our last successful team. It was done primarily through trades.
For our team to really move forward, we need to leverage what we have and trade well. If we get good value back for Ron Ron and Brad Miller and sign a big free agent in 2010, we are not that far off.
by R-Man on
Jul 2, 2008 9:39 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Kind of agree
Lastly, look at how Petrie built our last successful team. It was done primarily through trades.
Webber was obtained for Richmond who we got for Billy Owens(a #3 pick). And Bibby(a #2) for Williams (a #7 I believe). It’s hard to trade for those superstars if you don’t have quality assets to trade. And you get those quality young assets through the draft.
Lakers, Heat, Pistons, Celtics, etc all made trades or signings that put them over the top. Bottom line: blowing it up for a top 5 pick isn’t the only way to win.
The Heat were bad enough to draft Wade. The Pistons are unique in that they won without a superstar. The Celtics were bad for a long time and had a lot of young pieces to trade for Garnett and a #5 to trade for Allen. The Lakers just get lucky. Kobe for Divac, Gasol for the Kwame pu-pu platter and signing Shaq in a steal that forced a rule change. So other than Detroit and the Lakers, I still think history says you need to get bad to get good(not 5th seed good, but “we got our ring” good).
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:52 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Truthfully the tampering rule was in effect when Shaq signed in LA
But the reason the NBA didn’t enforce it because they chose to address the problem by the next CBA which happened to be 1998-99.
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Also Shaq wasn't the only one tampered with
Juwan Howard and Alonzo Mourning to the Heat were clear cases of tampering.
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Point taken
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
Jul 2, 2008 10:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Lakers
The Lakers picked 24th in the 1996 draft, and before the draft Kobe had said publicly that he wouldn’t play for anyone other than the Lakers. Charlotte drafted him at 13 so that they could trade with LA.
Had Kobe not made his threats, he probably would have been drafted higher (KG was drafted 5th the year before).
by smgmatt on
Jul 2, 2008 10:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Good point
Lucky bastard Lakers
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
Jul 2, 2008 10:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Good point
Lucky bastard Lakers
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
Jul 2, 2008 10:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Great Post
That would have fit well in the current Ron Artest thread.
by coolcatreportdotcom on
Jul 6, 2008 11:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree, punchbowl
Beno is a nice player and can help the team, but the Kings are years away from contention, Beno’s never going to be The Answer at point and yeah, that’s a long contract.
It particularly baffles me because for the past two years or so Petrie has been focused like a laser on clearing cap room and getting more flexible. I don’t think this necessarily blows that process out of the water, but it sure doesn’t help.
Maybe it’ll turn out to be not that big of a deal once K9 and Miller are off the books. But if this keeps Petrie from being able to sign a player who actually would be a difference maker (and I’m talking about two to four years down the road when the Kings rebuilding project is hopefully almost complete) we’re gonna regret his signing.
"When the going gets Weird, the Weird turn professional."
(Hunter Thompson)
by Mucho Moss on Jul 1, 2008 11:02 PM PDT 0 recs
Piece by piece
[from R-Man] ‘Petrie doesn’t subscribe to the "blow it all up" theory as being the best way to rebuild. He’s had numerous chances to tear this sucker completely apart and go for the top pick in the draft, but he’s passed,’
and neither do I. As I’ve said a nausous # of times. Unless you get the #1 or #2 (and even not then – look at Toronto ect..) there is no guarantee at all. They basically get paid MLE money as well.
Take a look at S Williams on our roster – a #5 pick baby.
No guarantees
Thats why its ‘usually’ better to sign young veteran players that you KNOW can play and think are about to become stars.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on Jul 2, 2008 4:35 PM PDT 0 recs
The irony
The teams you mention that didn’t maximize their high draft picks didn’t have someone with GP’s record drafting for them.
The irony is that GP’s philosophy prevents him from ever getting a high pick like that.
by smgmatt on
Jul 2, 2008 5:53 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Bryan Colangelo has an excellent record actually
But being a GM for Sarver hurt his overall record, and so did the Jason Kidd affair. But I agree with you about most GM’s not being as savvy as Petrie most of the time. Or I would have 2 years ago. Today, I don’t know.
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
Jul 2, 2008 5:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Good point
Colangelo does have a pretty good record.
by smgmatt on
Jul 2, 2008 6:41 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree top picks don't guarantee a superstar player
but without them it’s pretty tough to win a ring. Yeah, Williams is a bust at 5, but what about Shaq(#1) and his rings, Duncan(#1) and Robinson(#1) and their rings, Billups(#3) and his ring, Jordan(#3) and his rings, and Hakeem(#1) and his rings. And that covers every title winner since 1990 except the 08 Celts(and KG is a top 3 talent who went later because he was a HS player). While it’s true that Shaq, Billups and Garnett weren’t drafted by the teams they won rings with, only Shaq was signed as a FA(with LA traded to MIA). The Shaq FA signing couldn’t be done today because of a rule change.
So while it’s true that having top picks don’t guarantee success, not having a top pick quality player on your roster pretty much guarantees no ring.
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
Jul 2, 2008 6:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Good post!
I’ve been meaning to do this, but just kept forgetting when I had the time to look it all up.
Great work, Kfan!
Regarding the ‘08 Celtics, since you mentioned Williams (#5) as a bust, why don’t Kevin Garnett (#5) and Ray Allen (#5) count? Billups (#3) & Jordan (#3) didn’t go much higher, and I think it makes your point even stronger (i.e. no team has won a championship since 1990 without a Top 5 pick leading their team). The only other difference I see is that I believe everyone else on your list was a Finals MVP (since Pierce (#10) won it for the ‘08 Celts).
by smgmatt on
Jul 2, 2008 7:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I stand corrected
why don’t Kevin Garnett (#5) and Ray Allen (#5) count?For some reason I thought Garnett was an 8th pick and didn’t look him up, and I had no idea Allen was a 5, I figured him to be a 10-15 guy, so I didn’t look him up either. Thanks for cleaning up my point.
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
Jul 2, 2008 8:31 PM PDT
up
0 recs
He was traded for Marbury who was drafted 4th overall
Marbury was actually drafted by Milwaukee and traded to Minnesota for the rights to Ray Allen. (I’m really not sure why Milwaukee didn’t just draft Allen at 4 and let Starbury at 5, but I’m sure Starbury’s agent had alot to do with it.)
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
Jul 2, 2008 8:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Why does ANYONE make a trade like that?
To get extra players/picks!
June 26, 1996:
Minnesota Timberwolves get: draft rights to Stephon Marbury
Milwaukee Bucks get: draft rights to Ray Allen and 1st round pick
Emphasis mine.
Ironically, the Wolves just did the same thing with a player some consider to be Marbury 2.0 and got Mike Miller as the added value with the player they allegedly loved in the first place.
P.S. Sorry for the terrible pun.
by smgmatt on
Jul 2, 2008 8:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I never remember the 1st round pick being part of the deal
But then again, I’m not surprised it happened that way. Talent wise, other than Kobe, Marbury had more talent than anyone in that draft.
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
Jul 2, 2008 9:30 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If he'd gone to a big school
and not that State school to help out his dad. Then I’d have figured him as a top 5 guy. ;p
Obviously I just had no idea where Allen was drafted and didn’t look him up. Don’t know why I thought 8 for Garnett, just getting old I guess.
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
Jul 2, 2008 8:54 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I disagree
Your premise about 5 years being too long is incorrect. If the Kings decide to go a different direction all they have to do is trade Beno. The only thing that matters is whether the contract is a good deal or not. If Beno begins tanking and is not worth the 6 mil a year then nobody will want to trade for him. But if Beno steps up it’s a different story.
by KingsFan on Jul 3, 2008 7:59 AM PDT 0 recs










