yeah well the rashard lewis deal is one of the worst deals in NBA history so yeah pretty much any deal compared to that one is good. Giving Kirilenko a near max or max deal was better than the Lewis deal. outside of allan houston, whose injuries killed him so it made the deal even worse and juwan howard how many worse deals have there been when compared to Lewis?
You do what you gotta do. He's 24-years-old, just had an impressive breakout year and was due a contract extension. That mix usually equates to something juicy for the player. He was the only 20 PPG scorer (or more) this year to not be making the big bucks. It's a necessary move if you're Sacramento.
That's a nice comparison in terms of style of play. I assume you brought up Hamilton though by making an argument that he's the quickest 2 in the league. Rip is almost 30 while Martin is just now coming into his prime at the ripe age of 24. Martin hasn't even fully blossomed yet.
I don't think he's worth 11 a year, but i could easily see him getting 9ish. So it's not horribly overpaying, I guess.
As of now he's probably the only exciting player to watch on that team and their only bright light for the future. If they lost him, I'd be bathing in my own tears.
I'll be honest - giving a large contract to a guy who had a breakout year on a bad team - that's never going to backfire.
It's too much, but they couldn't really do anything else. The guy was gonna get the money somewhere or another. He's 24 years old and I'm assuming he's a fan favorite. Tough position for the Kings to be in...
So is it trendy now to just bash signings for no reason at all? A 20ppg scorer on a bad team in of itself is no big deal. But how does this apply to Kevin Martin? The guy was not just scoring, but scoring very efficiently. He shot 47% from the field, 38%(in 300+ attempts, so he does shoot quite a few of them) from behind the arc, and 85% from the FT line. For a 24 year old, those are some eye-popping stats.
I don't think he is overpaid.Look if he becomes superstar (something that Kings beliave) 11 milion $ per year is good for Kings.He has to become a leader of the team and he'll prove doubters about this salary.
He's a good player and was going to get that type of money sooner or later, might as well keep him. He's just not a superstar to build your team around, kinda like Michael Redd.
Well, it's not like he is getting superstar money. He is getting half. He will will be making about $9 million in 2008/2009. Superstars will be getting about $17-18 million and higher. He's getting half, which is a fair deal.
It's kinda hard to tell how much a player is worth when he's on a bad team. However, if they didn't resign him the Kings would be even worse. I'm sure they would have rather signed a big man for that money, but none we're available.
This is not drastically overspending. Gerald Wallace got a similar contract, Jason Richardson has a similar contract and their numbers are about the same as Martin's. Plus he is much younger and did his scoring on a bad team, but not where he was the number one option (Bibby, Artest). It doesnt appear either of those two are in the long term plans of the Kings, so locking up Martin for 5 years at nowhere near max type money isnt a horrible signing.
Yeah good comparison. he's a slightly lower-tier Michael Redd but he has enough upside to reach Redd. Martin is all mid-range game at this point but he's definitely getting better. Also he has some size and once he bulks up some more he'll definitely be a good player. I'd rather give Kevin Martin 55 million then give Michael Redd a max contract. Really not a bad move at all, provided the Kings can move some of their dead weight.
