Biggest positive takeaway/biggest disappointment

Moderators: City of Trees, KF10, codydaze

User avatar
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,717
And1: 1,313
Joined: Sep 19, 2004
Location: Avidly reading

Re: Biggest positive takeaway/biggest disappointment 

Post#61 » by pillwenney » Sat Mar 30, 2019 1:12 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:
pillwenney wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
That didn't need to be the case, but I'm sure that at some point during Shumps tenure his future was discussed along with possible landing spots. Shump is a free agent this summer and after making the Barnes trade he would obviously have been in a position where his minutes and role were going to drastically decrease since he got most of his minutes from the SF position. Houston was the rumored team for too long for there not to be some sort of plan and with that came a guaranteed playoff push for him.

And Burks was never used in a way to get anything out of him in the first place. He was put in that classic role of wow us without having anything called for you or else and even if you do you get one F up. If given a full shot he might not have worked but his game log since coming to Sacramento looks like swiss cheese. He's never taken more than 4 shots in a game since coming here.

Shump is getting 18.7mpg in Houston. He'd be getting at least that here. Joerger liked playing him. Yes, his role would have decreased, just as it HAS decreased in Houston. That's about what his role should be. He's not a starting caliber player.

Houston wasn't even that damn far up on his in the standings at the time of the trade. I'm not saying he's not happy he was traded there. But he for damn sure wasn't asking out, and therefore it's kind of a weak favor. It's not worth hurting the team unless it's a real demand, and I don't buy that it was.

I agree about Burks. My point is that we shouldn't have traded for him, because we didn't need him at all.

But Shump is on a bonafide contender that might be playing all the way to the end. They struggled earlier in the year but they were never out of it by a long shot and injuries played a part there as well. And I agree, I don't think he asked out, but I think Vlade knew what the score was when it came to moving him. He wasn't in the long term plans and now he's on a team that might have the intent on keeping him long term. For someone like Shump being on a team that wants to retain him means a lot because that means he might not have to fight though the MLE gauntlet or grasp at a teams remaining cap space.

Yeah, it's worked out that way (well as much as anyone but GS is a "bona fide" contender), but the point is that it hurt our team this season, and that's not worth going way overboard to do a favor for a guy who isn't asking for one.
Posts: 2,707
And1: 1,365
Joined: May 22, 2014

Re: Biggest positive takeaway/biggest disappointment 

Post#62 » by bleeds_purple » Sat Mar 30, 2019 2:01 am

A trade for a SF absolutely had to happen. The trading of Shump is a separate story. Certainly Burks didn't work out. Maybe the thinking was he would bring more play-making. Either way, if I was making the decisions I would be calling Shumpert on the first day of the off-season and offering him a 2-3 year deal. If he turns it down I tell him call me when you get a better offer and we may match.
Posts: 3,523
And1: 763
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
Location: In my office

Re: Biggest positive takeaway/biggest disappointment  

Post#63 » by simonbampfield » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:27 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:
simonbampfield wrote:
pillwenney wrote:I just can't believe that, with his relationship with the team this year, that any part of Shump was like, "Hell yeah, please trade me. That would be a gift to me." Maybe Vlade thought he was doing something nice, or even necessary, but I don't think he was that right, and certainly not enough to justify hurting the current team.

And like, of course Burks didn't work out, and of course he hasn't been able to show what he can do. He's essentially a worse Bogie. what use did we have for that?

Agree absolutely with this. With how tight Shump was with this playing group, the opportunities he had, not only this season, but to grow with this group was far bigger than anything else.

I'm of the opinion Burks should have been given an opportunity to succeed which he hasn't. At least this last run to the end of the season why not just shut down Bogie? Heck I would have been tempted to just shut down Fox/Bogie/Bagley and tell them to get some rest and come back better next year. They would absolutely hate that, but it would be best for the long term.
Hand the team over to Hield/Giles for 7 games and give Burks and Ferrell an opportunity to play a bigger role. If anything the guys that have contracts for next year it might raise an eyebrow or two of other teams and raise their value.

Where does he play after the Barnes pick up? If Shump went to some lotto team in a pick deal I'd question it, but he went to the exact team you would expect.

Yes his role would have changed. No disagreement there. I think if he was getting 15-17mpg at the backup 2/3 with Bogie getting 1/2 back up and Barnes playing the 4 a little more then it would have been ok. He could have even signed a 2 year deal worth more than market value this coming off season.
I don’t think anywhere is going to be offering Shump more time on the court and role than that and that would mean he would have played an integral part in bringing Sacramento from the sewer to relevance. In 2 years time he can either choose to stay on to play for a championship or leverage what he has done with the Kings in resurrecting his career for a bigger payday.
Right now, I don’t think it’s a shoe in he gets a contract next season.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app
Sacramento Kings
Sydney Kings

Return to Sacramento Kings