Think we have different thoughts about contribution. And why do you say Hill, Flynn, Daye are no starters? When did I say the rookies I mentioned have to start? I guess you would've started Diogu over Griffin last year because he's a vet and spent more time in the NBA. That rookie-vet point just doesn't make any sense. And Jimmer a poor man's JJ, really? Please... And now you goin to the Game 1 season opener start? Damn, I thought we talked about the season? Back to Bud, a guy that is a one-dimensional shooter is a big time contributor when he gets assisted on 82% of his shots and only makes 42% fg and 32% 3pt? This is not what I define as a reliable scoring option or contributor. When he brings in defense okay, I accept if Ariza or Artest shoot poorly but defend the opponent's scorers. But Bud isn't a great option on both ends.
What are you talking about? They are not starters because they do not start. Secondly, that is what this entire conversation is about- rookies starting over veteran players. We have a different opinion of what defines success is in the NBA.
Ehem, you say I fail at comprehension but couldn't read past the 1st sentence? My post said "And why do you say Hill, Flynn, Daye are no starters? When did I say the rookies I mentioned have to start?" and you think I doubt that they are not starters? What? 2nd, this conversation is mostly about who should get more minutes on a team, rookie or vet. Don't narrow it down to the "starter" thing.
Ok, that explains the disagreement then...you don't know what conversation you are involved in.... This is what started the conversation- A rookie starting over a veteran on a preseason depth chart
^^ Argument is pretty pointless regarding the rockets since whoever outperforms the other will start regardless of years in the league. So the depth chart is: ??/?? ??/?? ??/?? ??/?? ??/?? As far as we know. I believe most likely only lowry and Martin are a lock for starting gigs(maybe scola) but the PF position will be the most interesting battle for the starting between scola, 2pat, and hill
I dont believe that. I think that if Pat had starter minutes he would have put better production on the floor including defense then Scola does.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=86uo4uq What about something like Scola for Thompson and Honeycutt? Thompson is the athletic TALL center we could use and Honeycutt a SF that we can try out, the more we have the better chance we have at finding a serviceable one. Also knocks down salary. Get to start Patpat and give him more minutes to get himself better. Thompson can give minutes in both PF and C spot giving a Hayes, Pat and Thompson a rotation to work around. Then you got Honeycutt who either beats over the other SF or becomes an asset.
I don't think Morey would make that trade. Not enough return for Scola. The Rockets are not going to dump salary unless and until it becomes apparent that they will, in fact, be able to land a star player with the room created by clearing salary. On a related note, once the lockout ends and throughout the 2012 season, the Sacramento Kings are going to be VERY popular potential trade partners with the rest of the league. Since the pre-existing $58M salary cap maximum will be in effect for Years 1 and 2 of the new CBA, it stands to reason that the ~$43.5M salary cap MINIMUM will also stay in effect (although that figure could possibly be lowered somewhat). But let's just assume for a moment that the figure will remain at $43.5M. The Kings currently have just over $31M in salary commitments for next season (and that's assuming they give the maximum possible salary to Jimmer Fredette). Their only free agent of note is Samuel Dalembert. That leaves about $12.5M or so that the Kings will HAVE to spend next season (prorated to account for the shorter season, of course) or otherwise have to pay a penalty to the league in the amount of this difference. They're not giving that much to re-sign Dalembert, so they're going to have to add salary elsewhere, either via free agency or trades. And considering that not many prime free agents are going to want to sign a long-term contract with the Kings, trades may be the Kings' best way to meet this minimum team salary level. Hence, if ever there was a viable "salary dump" trade partner, the Kings would be it. That said, I wouldn't expect the Kings to be willing to take on any long-term deals unless it was a very good (and preferably YOUNG) player. Large expiring deals would probably fit the bill here. Hence, unless Geoff Petrie and the Maloofs are enamored with a guy like Luis Scola, I'm not so sure they would want him in such a trade. Bottom line: I fully expect several teams to explore trades with the Kings prior to amnesty cutting any player with only 1-2 years left on his deal.
bleh I tried to be realistic in terms of not giving us all the favor like the usual postings on here, heh ;(
Nah, I hear you. Nice attempt and (as you correctly pointed out) better than the vast majority of random trade proposals on this BBS.
I still like the Scola for Granger or maybe Scola for P. George and G. Hill sounds intriguing although thats lopsided toward us maybe?
To Rockets: Chris Bosh To Heat Goran Dragic Luis Scola Omer Asik To Bulls Courtney Lee NY or Hou 2012 #1 (whichever is lower)
With the league's latest proposal offering to increase the minimum cap next season to 85% of the salary cap maximum, and with the salary cap maximum guaranteed to stay at $58M for next year, this makes Sacramento's position even more precarious. Now, they'll have to meet a minimum payroll of at least ~$49.3M, meaning that the Kings will have to spend/trade for an additional $18.3M in salary or face an equivalent fine from the league! Don't think opposing GMs haven't taken notice of the "hole" the Kings have dug themselves.
What about years on a contract? Can they do a one-year deal? What is the minimum length of the contract in all probability?
My guess is that the Kings will only want expiring contracts from other teams to tread water until (a) their top players' rookie deals run out and need to be re-signed to larger contracts and/or (b) the cap gets lower in two years. For anyone who thinks guys like Chris Kaman will get amnesty cut, you're crazy. Even if the Clippers couldn't trade him for some good value (which I think they could), I bet the Kings would take him off their hands for at least a second round pick. No need to amnesty cut a $12M player AND pay his salary. In case you haven't noticed, Donald Sterling doesn't do that crap.
$33M (counting Pooh Jeter) actually You probably got your number from Shamsports, who hasn't updated the salaries yet. Remember, the Kings traded for Salmons & JJ Hickson. Also, don't forget Marcus Thornton as their other FA of note. Kings fans & managementseem high on him. I think he'll get at least $5M. You do have a point though. The Kings will have to some salaries. I'd be happy to gift-wrap them Thabeet, in case a FA of note wants to sign with us.
