In Cycles

by Ziller on Feb 13, 2008 7:11 AM PST in Recaps Comment 26 comments

This will continue to happen until some plan gets etched and screamed from the mountaintops.

Two months ago, this team was a fun team, owing in large part to John Salmons.

Ladies and gentlemen... John Salmons:

No wonder John Salmons couldn't bear to look. Fifteen minutes after the buzzer sounded on the 107-94 loss to the Memphis Grizzlies amid the empty seats of the FedEx Forum, he was still in full uniform, even the headband, sitting hunched over in a chair and staring down at the carpet in front of his locker after most teammates had showered and some had already finished dressing.

He was asked if this was the low point of the season.

Silence.

About 10 seconds of silence.

"It's a tough loss," Salmons finally allowed.

It's not just our spirits being broken every other night -- the kids (relatively speaking) are dying out there. The uncertainty, it kills Ron Artest, it kills John Salmons, it is killing the team.

Honestly, who wouldn't rather have an overachieving, upbeat 35-47 team instead of a bipolar, talented but underachieving to their potential 41-41 team? Forget hoarding ping pong balls or playing Quincy Douby 30 minutes a night. The team without Artest and Bibby was more fun to watch! Trading either or both wouldn't be giving up today for a brighter tomorrow. It'd be making today a more palatable product.

This isn't to say last night's loss or Saturday's loss or last Wednesday's loss were the faults of Artest or Bibby; both played well last night, in fact. But it's the uncertainty which is stupefying John Salmons; it's the uncertainty that has Ron-Ron on the brink; it's the uncertainty that allofasudden has me questioning if Beno Udrih should ever be more than a backup.

There's been a rejection of "change for change's sake." Trading Ron for a pick and a matching contract wouldn't be "change for change's sake" at this point. It would vastly improve the spirit of this team by letting everyone breath, letting everyone know where they stand. It's no one's fault. But just do something already.

0 recs | Comment 26 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Theus Theus Theus

This tests Theus's ability to keep his team focused. I'm not one to put the world on a coach's shoulders; but I think this really is his burden. "Play for the moment folks! Who knows what tomorrow brings?" Anticipation of a dark future usually feels a lot worse than the dark future itself.

by NYCFan on Feb 13, 2008 7:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Amen TZ

I don't think it's any cooincidence that our play is getting more eratic the closer we get to the trade deadline. Do something Geoff!

by SavageBeast on Feb 13, 2008 7:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Couldn't have said it better TZ

Bravo. Pretty much sums up the situation to a T.

I've been losing interest in watching the games in the last few years, but this year I was actually excited to watch the games and not just follow the results . . . until recently that is.

Cleaning house would hopefully bring that excitement back (and if not, I'm hoping that the Trade Deadline just passing might be helpful).

Count me in for the exciting 35-47 team. I smell a poll for that question...

by smgmatt on Feb 13, 2008 8:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

With TZ

I want to watch the future of this franchise. I'm OK with Miller being the link from present to future as he does not stymie the growth of our youth. In fact he embellishes their growth. But Artest and Bibby need to go. They are not our future. This is not their fault, although if Ron were more emotionally reliable I'd invest in him in a heartbeat.

Mike and Ron need to be dealt. It's in their best interests and it's the Kings' best interests.

Geoff, please!

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Feb 13, 2008 8:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yep

Well said. I've been hoping for SOMETHING to happen for the last year and a half.

by Carl on Feb 13, 2008 10:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Good Stuff TZ

Totally agreed. Artest and Bibby don't gel. Why? I have no clue. I really don't completely understand why they don't but they don't. I am surprised that Salmons DOES seem to gel though since he plays similar to Artest in the sense that he needs to go 1-1 to score. Good thing about Salmons is that he doesn't take bad shots outside 15 feet. He does force the issue a bit too much sometimes with his driving but I would much rather see a forced lay-up than a forced fading away 22-footer that Artest AND Bibby are known for. Bibby worked on the 2001-2002 team because Vlade and Chris were such good passers and shooters that the defense couldn't leave one of them to bother Bibby's shot. With Artest and bibby on the floor there is no flow. Bibby is a pretty good passer ON THE BREAK but NOT in the half court offense. He can not break people down and doesn't move the ball well at all. I have NOT been liking when the line-up is Salmons, Artest, Bibby, Martin and Miller because other than Miller, there is nobody that shares the ball. Artest, Martin, Salmons and Bibby think shot first when they get the ball so having them ALL on the floor at once makes the ball movement grind to a halt. They are good enough players to keep the game close and sometimes if they are hot, they will win together, but overall it's all one-on-one or 2-man play that ends in a 20-ft jumper or a three that is not a good percentage shot. I like to see the line-up of Beno, Moore, Miller, Martin and Salmons. That is a fairly unselfish line-up that if needed (with Salmons and Martin) can go 1 on 1 if needed at the end of the shot clock.

It's time to trade Bibby and Artest. Let the excitement begin...again. Last night (and vs Seattle) was BAAAD!

He can shoot, and he looks great in a suit. Hey, everybody - It's REGGIE TIME!

by dalt99 on Feb 13, 2008 10:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

agreed

I think there are several of us that agree with your analysis of how Bibby and Artest affect the offensive flow. Really good point about the difference between Bibby's passing in the half court versus the break. He does a nice job, I think, of making good choices on the break. In the half court, though, you rarely see him set dudes up for dunks or layouts like we've seen Beno do on multiple occassions this year. The reason for this is that Bibby can't break down the defense and get to the basket like he once did.

by Kusian on Feb 13, 2008 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

last night

What really bothered me about last night was that - once again - Reggie's team can't seem to run offense against the zone. And, actually, Ron and Mike both play into this weakness: Ball hogs and black holes are the worst guys to have on the court when the other team is playing zone. What happened to ball movement and trusting your teammates? Instead, we get "pound the ball" and then "jack up a piece of crap shot."

And, since we spent yesterday singing his praises, isn't anybody going to mention how terrible Martin was in the 2nd half. And this guy has got to become a better defender. His athleticism and quickness should allow him to dominate both sides of the ball.

by Kusian on Feb 13, 2008 10:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

Martin's second half was not pretty. Missed the tough ones and the easy ones, and couldn't cleanly penetrate the lane (they packed it in on him, which should have opened it up for the midrange pull-up or the pass... but didn't).

by Ziller on Feb 13, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, he had a crappy 2nd half

but one could argue that he was the only reason we were up at the end of the 1st half.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 13, 2008 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

true

plus a little better ball movement

by Kusian on Feb 13, 2008 2:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Petrie

Despite the validity of the points you are making, it still wouldn't surprise me to see Petrie stand pat here unless he gets the deals he wants. He may be more inclined to deal Artest, but he may be thinking Bibby might be more valuable as trade bait next year as a big expiring contract. And he may be wanting to retain Miller to keep the team competitive enough to put some folks in the seats. Further underneath the radar, it will be interesting to see if Shareef is able to recover from his surgery and if there is anything left there.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 13, 2008 11:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

trade'em

I agree with your mentality, TZ. Petrie has to realize it's time to pick which players to invest in for the future and quickly (before the trade deadline) get rid of the ones who don't fit that future mold. It's taking a toll on the players, coaches, fans, and probably the internal organization itself as well. No one wants to be stuck in limbo.

I'd like to see Artest go first and have his minutes divided between Salmons and Beno. I'm not as ardent for trading Bibby right away because he's not crazy and he seems to gel better with the current team. Plus, as was said above, he could have very large value next year as an expiring contract and/or plug-in for a contender.

by thekangarooster on Feb 13, 2008 12:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yes

Also with Artest, he may opt out for next year and become a free agent which would leave us with nothing other than some money off the cap. If we could trade him for expiring and a possible young talent that would be better. Still, I don't like Bibby enough with this offense and team that Theus seems to want. I would hope that Theus lowers his minutes a bit and gives Beno and Garcia some more burn.

He can shoot, and he looks great in a suit. Hey, everybody - It's REGGIE TIME!

by dalt99 on Feb 13, 2008 4:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Count me in

It's painful to watch the "starters" play together most of the time. The stagnant offense, lazy defense and heavy reliance on isolation plays is ugly, win or lose.

I'd much rather end up under .500 and out of playoff contention by March 1 watching Beno, Salmons, Garcia and Douby than make the playoffs with Bibby and Artest on the floor.

Basketball is a game, and it's supposed to be fun to watch.

Waiting for the trade deadline this year is worse than waiting to go into labor. My bag is packed, I have the doctor on speed-dial, LET'S GO ALREADY!

TickTickTickTickTickTick

by LeaguePassAddict on Feb 13, 2008 4:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I see patience has run it's course yes?

Funny how things have changed for you TZ. Not saying you didn't disagree with trading them. I'm saying you thought Petrie's patience would get the Kings more. I hope you're right, but fear you aren't. Only Feb 21st will tell.

I am the stone that the builder refused I am the visual, the inspiration That made Lady Sing the Blues..I'm the spark that makes your idea bright...

by pookeyguru on Feb 13, 2008 5:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Cautiously Optimistic?

I think it's easy to be optimistic when there's a lot of time to work out a better trade (which has been the prevailing opinion of most people here - myself included), but as the deadline gets closer with no changes to the roster (especially with all the other movement around the league) that optimism is replaced with pessimism if not even a little panic.

For me, Pookey, some of your proposals have originally seemed a bit excessive or well short of generally perceived value, but as time goes by they look better and better. I think you're just ahead of your time with a lot of these ideas, and I mean that as a compliment.

by smgmatt on Feb 14, 2008 6:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Panic

The demand for action, any action, so we feel better NOW, may be a symptom of our society.

The team is not going to be a serious contender for a while, regardless of what Petrie does before the deadline. And he's probably of the opinion that doing a trade for trade's sake may feel good, but won't truly help the team going forward unless the Kings get value back.

The teams that are panicking are the teams that are chasing the Lakers' moves, not also-ran teams like the Kings. I think Petrie would rather be a beneficiary of that trend rather than a victim.

Bottom line: I don't think Petrie is going to satisfy the thirst for what many of the members of the group think would be addition by subtraction.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 14, 2008 9:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Definition of "Value"

If Bibby/Miller were traded for players with ENDING CONTRACTS, the "value" would be in the salary cap space that would be free this off-season. Even if the Kings could not land a big name free agent, they would AT LEAST be assured that they could resign Beno and keep him on the squad (if they chose to do so).

Who has more future value to this franchise, Bibby/Miller or Beno? Would it be worth trading Miller to keep Beno? These are the kinds of things that you need to think about (regardless of your final answer).

Similarly, trading Artest/Bibby opens up more playing time for the young players who will be a part of the future of the team, so this would also have "value" associated with it.

NOTE: As you may have noticed, Bibby falls under both categories I mentioned, which is why it would be prudent to trade him this year instead of waiting to use him as an "Ending Contract" chip.

by smgmatt on Feb 14, 2008 9:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The Real Questions

Who will be the difference makers in this roster going forward? Who will be the cornerstones that will compare with the top 3s other teams have assembled?

I really don't know where Beno falls in the future of this franchise, but unless he develops into a top-flight point guard, I don't think resigning him or not resigning him is going to turn out to be a big deal. And frankly I think you can say that about the entire roster.

Miller, in my opinion, has more value than Beno.

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 14, 2008 11:34 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I completely disagree with this post

Ask Kobe Bryant about Andrew Bynum's value. Ask him that question last summer, and ask him again today.
The point is, it's too early to tell for much of our roster. Assuming we aren't going to compete for a title for at least 2-3 years, here's my take on the value of players on our roster:

Reef: no value - he's 31 now, will be retired in 2-3
Artest: no value - except for what he brings in trade over the next week. No trade, he walks for nothing.
Bibby: no value - he's 29 and right now not the kind of PG I'd be lookin for. Can't see him being better in 2-3. And he takes PT from Beno making it harder to evaluate him.
Douby: unknown - only his second year.
Garcia: some value - At least a solid 6-7th man - still has room to improve.
Hawes: Unknown - dude's only 19
Jones: no value - end of bench guy on a 35 win team
Martin: excellent value: #6 scorer in league this year, only 25, has great work ethic and even at 11 mil a year, cheaper than every other top 10 scorer. He's already a solid 3rd guy, and has room to improve.
Miller: no value - Dude's already 31, don't see him being a huge factor in 2-3.
Moore: no value - See Miller above, but he's 32.
Salmons: some value - He's 28 now, but he's cheap, could still be a contributer when the team is ready.
Thomas: value black hole - nothing more to say
Udrih: some value - Only 25, room to grow. I think he's at least a decent backup and possibly more.
Williams: unknown - only 23, worth further investigation.

While I agree with your previous post about our society and panic reactions. And I fear Petrie will do nothing. I really don't understand that strategy. Too many unknowns on our roster and getting them next to no PT is not the best way to see what their future may hold. If we know a guy isn't part of the future, keeping him only holds back our youth and hurts our lottery chances, thus hurting our future.

Can anyone name me a team that used the languish in mediocrity(30-40 win territory year after year) method of developing a championship team? That's where we're headed, by standing pat.

I don't see making a move as "addition by subtraction", I see it as setting long term goals and striving for them. Ironically, the inability to do this effectively is another weakness of our society.

Note: some of the players listed as "no value" could be traded to bring "value" to our team in the form of picks, prospects, or cap space.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 14, 2008 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hidden Value - Leadership

I agree with most everything that you just said (especially about setting goals for the future), but I have to add that having veterans that won't be part of a later championship run can (and usually do) have value as mentors to younger players.

If the Kings were to run out a roster of kids, then some could flourish . . . but others could stagnate, or have problems dealing with adversity.

<related rant>
(Kind of off-topic, but not entirely)...
Remember that athletes in general are young, making the rookie/"young" player subset pretty much kids; kids who have been taken care of through HS & College by recruiters, coaches, agents, etc. Every professional league has classes for new players to teach them how to live on their own, handle money, etc. because this is the first time for many of them taking care of themselves. Add to this the fact that they're now millionaires and there are a plethora of hangers-on and people who want to take advantage of their situation.
</rant>

I'm not saying that any/all of the veteran players currently on the Kings are good leaders/mentors/examples for the young guys, but that is the type of veteran that you would want to have on a young, developing roster.

Ideally these veterans would either come off the bench or evenly split time with the youngsters, so that the kids would still have the playing time to develop their skills (which is not the case currently).

Corliss comes to mind as a great example of a veteran mentor, while Artest may be the counter-example.

by smgmatt on Feb 14, 2008 1:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Good point

This is the main reason I'm not sold on dumping Miller just yet. It might be bad for Hawes to play him 30-35 a game. Though I would like to see him playing 15-20.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 14, 2008 2:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hawes-Williams split?

Remember that even if Miller is traded, Hawes wouldn't have play big minutes if they'd give some of those minutes to Justin Williams as well.

They could find out what they had in BOTH guys at the same time in that scenario (with Moore/etc. out there at the 4).

by smgmatt on Feb 14, 2008 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

All 3 of those guys have trouble

with fouls. We might end up with Salmons playing center. We really need 1-2 more 4-5 guys on our 15 man roster as it stands. 4 bigs really isn't good, but assuming we get 1-2 roster filler bigs or a prospect thru the trades. I agree that could be good.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 14, 2008 2:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs