He can play whatever role the Kings need him. I would rather the Kings move Artest and Thomas, then Miller, and then Moore if they can. Otherwise, what would be the point?

These two are going to get early run just to make sure they are Euro League/CBA players.

It seemed pretty clear to me that Shelden was in the dog house from the beginning. He only played double-digit minutes four times between the trade and the beginning of April, when the Maloofs essentially threatened Theus to play the young guys. I seem to remember Theus saying something to the effect of “We know what Shelden and Quincy can give us” when those two weren’t playing. Not a ringing endorsement.

I maintain that the coaching staff have made up their minds on both Qunicy. I’m not sure they’re right about either guy, but there’s a reason they get paid to evaluate talent and I don’t. I would just as soon see Shelden cleared out to open up playing time for Thompson.

Playing more mins matter if it was 3-5 mins more. But it was something like a whole extra minute. I don’t think that’s that big of a deal. Especially since JT ended up averaging .6 more mins a game. That is not a big deal in any way.

doesn’t really affect my point either way, as you noted by calling it a quibble.

It might cost the Kings luxury tax this season to include him in a potential Lamar Odom trade with Ron Artest.

Williams might be a 12-15 man but his contract expires and K-9’s does not. Let’s not give the Lakers any hand outs, right now the deal is simple- if you want Ron you have to take Kenny Thomas.

I realize both are good players in their own way, but I think it’s a reach that either could come to Sacramento without paying a hefty price.

I included Moore, Miller and Artest as 3 starters that are not in our long term plans(thus blocking the progress of our younger players). And I think it’s safe to say Artest is not in our long term plans. If he was Petrie would not have taken the chance that he might opt out and walk for nothing. He’d have signed him to an extension. You’ll notice I didn’t include Martin or Beno who I consider a part of our future, since they have the youth and the contracts that say this is so.

The point is, if you are contending you have to sacrifice development of youth(see Gerald Wallace). Maybe trade your youth and draft picks, or let them sit at the end of the bench because you have a greater more immediate goal. If you’re rebuilding I think your focus has to be less “What can we do this season” and more “How can we contend next season, or 2 seasons down the road”.

Maybe Douby, Williams and Salmons are not part of our future either, but I think there is at least some question about that for those three. No question, Moore, Miller and Artest are not.

Yeah, if Moore is on the team he will start. If you read the original post, you’ll see I have him down as a starter.

The debate is whether to win five games a year more each year until you (hopefully) become a champion or whether to tank/go into full-on rebuilding mode, then win 10-20 more games each year until you (hopefully) become a champion. No guarantees in any case.

In either case we are probably 2-5 years away, and that’s if a lot of variables bounce our way, no matter what approach you take.

Barring a trade, Mikki Moore will be the opening night starter at PF. I don’t think many will argue that point. However, I think that your other comment is oversimplifying a more complicated issue.

Playing your youth while trading or cutting veterans is just plain stupid.

If the Kings miss the playoffs this year, will it make a difference if it is by 4 games or 14?

Moore (along with Miller & Artest) will most likely be gone next year (the year after at the latest), so playing him (or them) big minutes for 82 games only stagnates younger players who could be around longer (Garcia, Salmons, Hawes, Thompson, and even Williams). I think that there is a time and a place for playing veterans (mainly when you’re a contending franchise), but there is also a time for trading/cutting veterans to develop your future core for the next run at contention.

Your statement implies that there is no time nor place for a team to roll the dice with an eye on the future, and that kind of thinking could lock a team into mediocrity for a long, long time.

I agree he’ll be the starter. Barring injury, I have zero doubts.

SAR is scheduled to make $6.6M next season, so if he opted out and took the Vet Minimum from a contender, he’d probably only be out about $5M or so. Considering the money he’s made in his career, it wouldn’t be out of the question to give up $5M for one last run.

Personally, I don’t think it’ll happen, but it’s not out of the question.

So, Artest = Kobe, Thompson develops into a perimeter Bynum, we trade K-9 and Reef for Dwight Howard, and all our rookies develop better than we expected, then shit – 2011 championship here we come! yes, ccrdc, you have made me see the light! I am a believer, yes I am!

the Lakers traded Shaq.

95% or your post would not apply, much better.

That’s therapist.

Darrell Hammond as Sean Connery flashback – classic.

Correct!

get a dictionary.

“He’s right and I don’t want to admit it, so I’ll call him a name.”

Give those young bigs a chance to see what level of NBA material they are.

This si the year we need to learn some things about them. They might succeed tremendously.

MM is unfortunately in the way of us finding out.

But we’ve assumed Petrie is not done before and he was, so this isn’t a guarantee as much as we would like it to be.