SAR: Is his career near an end?

[deNIEd]

So basically DENIED you would wast 8-8.5 million dollars of your money this year if you were running the kings for the hopes of getting rid of k9s bad 9 million dollar contract next year in a trade that is team and financial suicide thank god your not our GM and that PETRIE is !
I am not trying to be rude but you dont make good business sense at all .

This is a perfect time for the kings to kill 2 birds with 1 stone

a. get rid of artest now as he is becomming a huge problem and distraction now.
b. get rid og k9s bad contract & dead weight .

You take the guarantee now to rid yourself of these issues rather than waste another year in the hopes that you can finally dump k9 and then have wasted 8.5 million this year on k9 to sit on his dumb fat @ss !

Even if the kings went after nobody major in the 08/09 free agency market we have rid ourselves k9 off the books and can save the money for the 09/10 free agency season .

Wake up and smell the coffee Man !

Or I would use Artest solely in obtaining future players, like a Wright, Greene, Brooks, Thornton, etc. Something that will actually help our rebuilding process exponentially.

Getting rid of Thomas this year, is purely a financial move, which I understand. But it's not the best for the team. You can't argue that.

We have a very small talent pool on this team, trading Thomas with Artest will only decrease that pool. We should be maximizes all possible talent.

Beno/Martin/Garcia/Thompson/Hawes
is **** compared to
Bayless/Roy/Webster/Aldridge/Oden
Paul/Peterson/Peja/West/Chandler
even lower than
Bibby/Johnson/Williams/Smith/Horford

[dozencousins]

Actually DENIED i can argue that getting rid of kenny now is the best move basically what your implying is that keeping kenny is worth it so you cab aquire a guy like al thorton or others like him.

While thats all well and good the reality is simple

a. you dont know that to be what would happen or even likely to happen wich in my opinion would not happen !
b. you completely fail to realize that when you can save 8-9 million that money could easily afford a guy like thorton etc. we are not talking a guy/guys that would demand 14-20 million annually for us to be offering any player the 14-20 million we would be possibly doing something like that after the 09/10 season

business is business if i was an NBA GM if i see my team going deep into the playoffs having a solid chance to win the title or actually winning it i would spend the money needed to do that if i see little to no chance i would do everything i could do to save 8-9 million here and there you need to really realize the more cap flexibility you have and the more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ you have to spend puts you in great position for trades,free agency even allows you to get what you want through the draft etc.

I read alot of your posts etc. we are not a team that has a chance to win the title this year it is also not to likely we will make the playoffs though that would be nice and would leave all of us saying wow brighter days seem to be coming sooner than later i am being realistic with my expectations !

Usually when trades are made from teams for expirings the team trading for the expiring usually will get a veteran expiring who they believe will help them in the playoffs this could be teams trying to get an expiring like brad miller or mikki moore when thos contracts are in their final year but please dont tell me that any playoff teal will see value in k9 or reef that wont be the case it makes no sense holing onto k9 or reef if you see a good deal that helps the kings in the near future you make the deal as i would bet PETRIE will do !

[deNIEd]

Again, I know from a business standpoint, getting rid of Thomas is a good/needed move, but again, from a team's standpoint it hurts us more than if we were going to trade Artest alone. (For a team Port/Mav, I know this wouldn't be that big of a priority).

a) I know that whatever Artest can net, its going to be a lot lower when Thomas is added to the equation. Say Artest is worth 3 dollars. Thomas is worth negative 2. Meaning, when we trade, we'll likely be getting a package worth 1 dollar. Artest is a much better player than Howard or Odom. Meaning, if its Artest alone, we should be getting back more than just Odom, that more could be for the Lakers, Farmer or Bass for the Mavs. Throw Thomas into the mix, and we might have to give something else, say a 2nd rounder or Douby or Garcia.

b) Yes, we could go after those players I mentioned in free agency, but it helps the team so much more if we get them during their rookie contract. That way, we can maximize the possible talent on the team, while still being able to sign a good FA.


Again, I'm not against trading Thomas, I just don't think its as crucial as everyone else. I'm more concerned with adding talent to our pool, something that we currently need.

[dozencousins]

Denied again your wrong the bottom line is if any team wants artest they will have to eat k9's contract
I dont understand your point as it makes no sense nobody is going to offer a big named young talent for Ron and if you dont dump k9 in the deal you better get 2 # 1 draft picks for him wich i doubt we will get if you deal ron by himself he is just an expiring you better if your petrie dump a bad contract in the deal like k9's especially if your not getting draft pick wich even with those your rolling the dice that way .
If you dont dump k9 with Ron then k9 will be paid by the kings for this season and the next that is point less when if your getting rid of ron and every gm know this the only way to get rid of k9 is with ron.
You speak of the future well the future starts with every deal and move we made starting with bibby & signing beno and from this year and the next
the next 2 years will be critical in the kings getting towards were we need to be so forget the notion you need to hold onto k9 he has no value not today,not tommorow,not in the future k9 is nothing more than an overpaid,underachieved bloated scrub !

I am done its appearant you dont see the logic because what i have been saying is yes from a business standpoint but its also the future standpoint