ImageImageImageImageImage

Mason Close to Deal with Kings

Moderators: KF10, codydaze

wheresbrody
Junior
Posts: 434
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 27, 2004

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#41 » by wheresbrody » Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:10 am

I like this signing. We're obviously going to play small ball this season (unless some sort of trade goes down). And since he's only signed for a year I can see a contender wanting to trade for him for a last playoff push.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,434
And1: 5,537
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#42 » by KF10 » Sun Sep 20, 2009 8:30 am

Mason was on Petrie's mind since mid/late 2005 when the Bucks offered Mason for K9. And Petrie refused the deal because K9 (believe it or not) was an integral part for that team at the time. Averaging roughly 15/9 a game. And Mason had one of his best years during that period. So, I can see why Petrie may signed Mason in this respect.
User avatar
rsavaj
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,863
And1: 2,767
Joined: May 09, 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#43 » by rsavaj » Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:42 pm

I dunno I actually think you guys would have been better off letting your young guys getting minutes.

TZ explains it much better: http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2009/9/18 ... son-really
User avatar
_SRV_
Analyst
Posts: 3,030
And1: 4
Joined: Jun 30, 2005
Location: brew for breakfast

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#44 » by _SRV_ » Fri Sep 25, 2009 5:09 pm

kingsfan10 wrote:Mason was on Petrie's mind since mid/late 2005 when the Bucks offered Mason for K9. And Petrie refused the deal because K9 (believe it or not) was an integral part for that team at the time. Averaging roughly 15/9 a game. And Mason had one of his best years during that period. So, I can see why Petrie may signed Mason in this respect.


IIRC it was the other way around, and Petrie was trying to sucker the Bucks into swapping KT for Mason.
xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:Kobe gets bailed out more than Wall Street.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#45 » by SacKingZZZ » Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:24 pm

_SRV_ wrote:
IIRC it was the other way around, and Petrie was trying to sucker the Bucks into swapping KT for Mason.



I don't really know who offered. I remember hearing that they had interest in Kenny Thomas for a long time and had been rebuffed by Petrie before. Believe it or not it was actually a pretty fair deal back then. Kenny was putting up around 14 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 3.5 apg and we were actually doing pretty decent.
User avatar
pillwenney
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 48,887
And1: 2,603
Joined: Sep 19, 2004
Location: Avidly reading pstyousuck.blogspot.com/
Contact:
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#46 » by pillwenney » Sat Sep 26, 2009 1:25 am

rsavaj wrote:I dunno I actually think you guys would have been better off letting your young guys getting minutes.

TZ explains it much better: http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2009/9/18 ... son-really


This is like other signings that I have been in favor of--he gives the young guys an obstacle. It's certainly not an insurmountable obstacle, but he's there. And if you can't earn minutes over Desmond Mason at this point, you don't deserve minutes in the NBA. It's that simple. If he is really as bad as this guy seems to think, he'll sit on the end of the bench and hopefully provide a veteran presence.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,434
And1: 5,537
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#47 » by KF10 » Sat Sep 26, 2009 1:30 am

_SRV_ wrote:
IIRC it was the other way around, and Petrie was trying to sucker the Bucks into swapping KT for Mason.


I'm pretty sure it wasn't like that. Thomas was pretty damn solid at that time (before he was riding the pine) Thomas was our best rebounder and best post defender.
User avatar
pillwenney
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 48,887
And1: 2,603
Joined: Sep 19, 2004
Location: Avidly reading pstyousuck.blogspot.com/
Contact:
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#48 » by pillwenney » Sat Sep 26, 2009 1:31 am

kingsfan10 wrote:
_SRV_ wrote:
IIRC it was the other way around, and Petrie was trying to sucker the Bucks into swapping KT for Mason.


I'm pretty sure it wasn't like that. Thomas was pretty damn solid at that time (before he was riding the pine) Thomas was our best rebounder and best post defender.


But still, at the time, most saw his contract as regrettable at best. Kenny was never much more than a MLE-level player.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,434
And1: 5,537
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#49 » by KF10 » Sat Sep 26, 2009 1:44 am

mitchweber wrote:
But still, at the time, most saw his contract as regrettable at best. Kenny was never much more than a MLE-level player.


Maybe so. But Thomas played at the level of his contract for a period of time (half a season haha). Thomas was essentially the perfect role player. He didn't demand the ball under Adelman. He was a double-double threat at a nightly basis plus providing very solid post defense.

I do agree his contract was bad when he was in the doghouse under Mussleman, Theus/Natt.
User avatar
pillwenney
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 48,887
And1: 2,603
Joined: Sep 19, 2004
Location: Avidly reading pstyousuck.blogspot.com/
Contact:
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#50 » by pillwenney » Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:12 am

kingsfan10 wrote:
mitchweber wrote:
But still, at the time, most saw his contract as regrettable at best. Kenny was never much more than a MLE-level player.


Maybe so. But Thomas played at the level of his contract for a period of time (half a season haha). Thomas was essentially the perfect role player. He didn't demand the ball under Adelman. He was a double-double threat at a nightly basis plus providing very solid post defense.

I do agree his contract was bad when he was in the doghouse under Mussleman, Theus/Natt.


No, he was never worth his contract. After Rick left he went from overpaid to unmovable.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,434
And1: 5,537
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#51 » by KF10 » Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:30 am

mitchweber wrote:
No, he was never worth his contract. After Rick left he went from overpaid to unmovable.


Well, Thomas signed a 7-year contract with the Sixers at age 25/26. At the time, Kenny was very solid and productive. Most people believed that Thomas can elevate his game at a higher level i.e. 1st year in Sacramento (14/9) at a yearly basis. He did had that potential. But IMO the duration of his contract was terrible. No one gives 7-year contracts to role player. No matter how good the role player is. At most he would have gotten a 4-5 year deal at 7-8 million/year. Which totals roughly around $28 million to $40 million.

If the Kings never signed Shareef and Thomas wouldn't have gotten injured, I think Thomas would have been widely more accepted than he is today. But it isn't the case, is it?

The point is that most people tend to forget how integral and solid Thomas was in his first season here.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#52 » by SacKingZZZ » Sat Sep 26, 2009 9:07 am

Yeah, I think people forget how quickly Kenny became acclimated to Ricks system. He was playing like Webber "lite" for us. His jumper was probably even more consistent than C-Webbs at the time. Both he and Brian Skinner played really well for us after the trade, Corliss too.
User avatar
pillwenney
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 48,887
And1: 2,603
Joined: Sep 19, 2004
Location: Avidly reading pstyousuck.blogspot.com/
Contact:
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#53 » by pillwenney » Sat Sep 26, 2009 7:20 pm

I remember perfectly well how well Kenny played. I also still remember nobody really wanting his contract around for his production--even at his best.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#54 » by SacKingZZZ » Sat Sep 26, 2009 7:42 pm

mitchweber wrote:I remember perfectly well how well Kenny played. I also still remember nobody really wanting his contract around for his production--even at his best.



Houston was interested enough to offer a shorter deal in Stromile Swift. Geoff should have bit on that one, but I myself was in the "DON'T DO IT!" camp at the time. What a difference a few years makes.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,434
And1: 5,537
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#55 » by KF10 » Sat Sep 26, 2009 10:16 pm

mitchweber wrote:I remember perfectly well how well Kenny played. I also still remember nobody really wanting his contract around for his production--even at his best.



I just remember that Petrie was offered for Thomas were Mason (I clearly remember that Petrie refused the deal at the time) and a few others.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#56 » by SacKingZZZ » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:48 am

KF10 wrote:
I just remember that Petrie was offered for Thomas were Mason (I clearly remember that Petrie refused the deal at the time) and a few others.


Hindsight's a b*tch!!! :banghead: Hahahaha.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,434
And1: 5,537
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Mason Close to Deal with Kings 

Post#57 » by KF10 » Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:59 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:
Hindsight's a b*tch!!! :banghead: Hahahaha.


haha yeah.

The part I don't get that he seemed to completely lost his jumper from the key/elbow. I just don't know how to explain that haha.

Return to Sacramento Kings