Page 1 of 1
Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 4:10 am
by The Beam King
http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/m ... 3/33716739With serious interest registered from the Nets, Golden State, Houston and Sacramento, four teams with cap space and flexibility, the man who served as the glue for the Mavericks' 2011 NBA title could be slipping away -- but for reasons that go well beyond the uncertain free-agent market for Chandler himself.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 4:18 am
by KF10
Chandler is gonna get $10-$15 million. No chance he will get $20 million. Personally, I offer him ~$13 million. Any higher than that, I look somewhere else.
The thing that scares me the most is that Chandler may revert back to his sucktude self after he gets $$$$. Before arriving the Dallas, the Hornets wanted NO PART of Chandler and looked for any offers to ship him out. Now, if he signs with the Kings, does he really want to be here and compete? .
Or, he shows all the doubters wrong and competes every night and become a defensive anchor for whoever signs him.
I hope it's the latter.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 4:35 am
by bibby1023
hypothetically speaking we land tc, whose gonna be the player that throws him beautiful alley oops that kidd and paul threw to him all those years?
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 4:44 am
by OGSactownballer
It makes a MONSTER front court combo with DMC who can certainly pass and let's the guards and swings just completely go nuts.
I think we could do worse and it's a four year max with cap still open next year.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 5:07 am
by City of Trees
bibby1023 wrote:hypothetically speaking we land tc, whose gonna be the player that throws him beautiful alley oops that kidd and paul threw to him all those years?
Jimmer was throwing some nice alley oops at the GSC...
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 5:34 am
by gvsantiago
Imagine Chandler and DMC in the front court! Its like Gasol and Bynum, so I'd rather have Chandler than Sammy D if the Kings can afford to pay him around 11 to 13 MIL per year.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 6:57 am
by bibby1023
gvsantiago wrote:Imagine Chandler and DMC in the front court! Its like Gasol and Bynum, so I'd rather have Chandler than Sammy D if the Kings can afford to pay him around 11 to 13 MIL per year.
that's the only problem, tc wants 20 mil a yr
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 7:31 am
by rpa
The collective lack of a longterm memory from NBA GMs is absolutely mind boggling. Chandler sucks balls for years, all while consistently missing a HUGE number of games every year, and then he has a good year playing on a contending team and during his contract year and now GMs are lining up to offer this guy $15mil a year? Seriously? The same Chandler that NO was willing to trade for absolutely NOTHING only a couple years ago.
It just boggles my mind that a player can be considered a HORRIBLE contract for nearly half a decade, have a SINGLE good year, and then suddenly be worth an even bigger contract.
To put this from a different perspective, think of this like drafting for fantasy basketball. Every year there are guys ranked uber-high from the previous year. For instance, most people have Dorrell Wright as a 3rd/4th rounder this year. But drafting him as a 3rd/4th rounder means that he has very little upside (it's highly doubtful that he plays up to a 1st/2nd round value) but all the downside (chances of him repeating a stellar year). Same goes for Chandler. You pay him $15mil a year that gives him no upside to be worth more and you're assuming all the risk that he's even able to be worth that salary.
Just go and throw a near max offer at Marc Gasol or about 1/2 the max at Dalembert and be done with it.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 9:41 am
by Draino
$20k/year is way too much, and no he doesn't deserve it whatsoever. With that said, I LOVE TYSON CHANDLER, no homo, and I would love to see the dude come here and prove doubters wrong. He's not getting more than 13k/yr, everything above that is overpaying
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 1:37 pm
by _SRV_
KF10 wrote:Chandler is gonna get $10-$15 million. No chance he will get $20 million. Personally, I offer him ~$13 million. Any higher than that, I look somewhere else.
The thing that scares me the most is that Chandler may revert back to his sucktude self after he gets $$$$. Before arriving the Dallas, the Hornets wanted NO PART of Chandler and looked for any offers to ship him out. Now, if he signs with the Kings, does he really want to be here and compete? .
Or, he shows all the doubters wrong and competes every night and become a defensive anchor for whoever signs him.
I hope it's the latter.
Chandler had an amazing year with the Hornets after he was traded out of Chicago ( it was the 3rd year of his contract), it was followed later by 2 bad years in NO and Cha and then contract year in Dallas. He is a big risk, especially in the health department, but he had some good years in between.
The team needs veteran leadership, and Chandler is great at it, this is what makes the Kings better suiters for him than other team that wants him as a player only.
I'd offer him a big declining contract, he'll get his pay when the Kings have a lot to pay, and will adjust when extensions kick in.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 1:39 pm
by _SRV_
Draino wrote:$20k/year is way too much, and no he doesn't deserve it whatsoever. With that said, I LOVE TYSON CHANDLER, no homo, and I would love to see the dude come here and prove doubters wrong. He's not getting more than 13k/yr, everything above that is overpaying
Even I wouldn't wouldn't play for the Kings for 20K a year
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 8:03 pm
by ADoaN17
I much rather have Tyson than Dally. I know he became overrated last year but if he can change the defensive mentality on this young team that would be great. He just needs to stay health....
And because he won a ring and people are saying he is the reason for a championship, he will be respected and a better leader.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 8:12 pm
by OhioKingsFan
Paying Chandler this season would obviously not hurt the team too much. Heck, we have to spend at least an additional $17-18m, but I get worried about years 3-4 on the deal. I think by then we'd feel he's owed too much money and he'd hurt our roster flexibility.
I'm hoping to use our cap space to pick up expirings and picks, and give us time to evaluate our young roster. I'd look at players like Mehmet Okur, Kaman, Diaw, Martell Webster, Nocioni... guys that are in the last years of their deals, and whose teams may enjoy spending the salary elsewhere.
Let's not overpay. Get to the salary minimum wisely and prudently while keeping Marcus Thornton. Evaluate how the current team fits and how the young players are developing. Get one more lotto pick (in a potentially loaded draft), and let's see if we can make some noise in the trade market at the deadline and the FA market next summer when we'll have a better idea about our current players.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 8:50 pm
by kevin44
To get players to come here they will have to overpay them. I like Chandler a lot & would rather have him than Dally for sure. I can't see a guy like Chandler going from winning a ring to coming to one of the worse franchises in the league. It will be very hard for this team with no new stadium & maybe moving next year to get some real talent here. They have to build this team with the draft as much as possible for now. Be patient.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Tue Dec 6, 2011 11:23 pm
by pillwenney
rpa wrote:The collective lack of a longterm memory from NBA GMs is absolutely mind boggling. Chandler sucks balls for years, all while consistently missing a HUGE number of games every year, and then he has a good year playing on a contending team and during his contract year and now GMs are lining up to offer this guy $15mil a year? Seriously? The same Chandler that NO was willing to trade for absolutely NOTHING only a couple years ago.
It just boggles my mind that a player can be considered a HORRIBLE contract for nearly half a decade, have a SINGLE good year, and then suddenly be worth an even bigger contract.
To put this from a different perspective, think of this like drafting for fantasy basketball. Every year there are guys ranked uber-high from the previous year. For instance, most people have Dorrell Wright as a 3rd/4th rounder this year. But drafting him as a 3rd/4th rounder means that he has very little upside (it's highly doubtful that he plays up to a 1st/2nd round value) but all the downside (chances of him repeating a stellar year). Same goes for Chandler. You pay him $15mil a year that gives him no upside to be worth more and you're assuming all the risk that he's even able to be worth that salary.
Just go and throw a near max offer at Marc Gasol or about 1/2 the max at Dalembert and be done with it.
I don't disagree with your general point, but you're definitely remembering some things wrong. Chandler was a very good center his first two years in NO and wasn't considered a bad contract at all. Then he had consecutive bad years in NO and Charlotte. Also he was very good at times in Chicago (see 04-05). Looking at the pattern, it seems like if he can avoid injury, he plays well. But that's part of my concern. The reason NO was willing to trade him for peanuts was largely because they were really concerned about his injuries, and that's why he didn't pass his physical for OKC.
Over all, I'm on the fence here. He's had a very up and down career and it is always suspicious for a guy to have two bad years followed by a great contract year.
But I guess it's also the kind of thing where if you're going to go for it, you have to really go for it. If we decide we want him, going half-after him is an exercise in futility. We need to go hard, and as much as it sucks guys, we need to overpay. That's part of being a team that won 24 games last year in Sacramento. I wouldn't want to pay him more than 13mil a year either. But it might be necessary.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Wed Dec 7, 2011 2:55 am
by SacKingZZZ
Yeah, he was pretty good and then he had toe problems and it was that toe issue that killed the trade that sent him to OKC. Still, max!? No way, Ben Wallace showed why you only pay max money to superstars.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Thu Dec 8, 2011 6:51 pm
by dozencousins
It's all over twitter right now Chandler is likely going to the Knicks . If it happens Billips will be traded or amnesty.
I didnt post the link because so many writers are talking about it and I do not know who broke the news origionaly.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Thu Dec 8, 2011 7:03 pm
by The Beam King
If Billups get's amnestied, I'd hope the Kings put a nice bid in for him. He'd be a perfect 1 for a season(or more).
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Thu Dec 8, 2011 7:33 pm
by bibby1023
Would love to get billups on a 1 yr deal just to meet the min salary. That Would allow us to bring both jimmer and thornton of the bench, and make a push for the 7 or 8th seed. Doesn't hurt that billups would help direct traffic and spread the floor for reke and cousins as well.
Re: Tyson Chandler
Posted: Thu Dec 8, 2011 10:13 pm
by pillwenney
SacKingZZZ wrote:Yeah, he was pretty good and then he had toe problems and it was that toe issue that killed the trade that sent him to OKC. Still, max!? No way, Ben Wallace showed why you only pay max money to superstars.
That's different. Ben Wallace had been on a steady decline for years when he got that contract. He was a 32-year-old whose game relied almost entirely on athleticism. Chandler recently turned 29, doesn't rely as much on athleticism (because of his size) and just had the best year of his career.