Since Evans is our "star" player now...

SacTownKings4Life · Post #1 » by **SacTownKings4Life** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:59 am

How come people are STILL sour on Kevin Martin and are still adament about trading him? Now that Evans is shining, people think this is the perfect opportunity to trade K-Mart because "we don't need him since Evans is scoring now". But um... what exactly is wrong with having TWO guards who can carry the scoring load individually or together at any point in any given game? We've actually got options now! People can guard K-Mart or Evans, but can they stop K-Mart AND Evans? We have a back court that puts up half of our season scoring average BY THEMSELVES, and you want to break that up? Why? Because the rebuilding process is taking a little longer than you expected, and you wanna contend NOW?

Some people say we should package him for a superstar (who would most likey be on the first plane out of here once his contract is up), while some people say we should just dump him for prospects and/or draft picks. How long can you rely on the POSSIBILITY of landing a superstar player or deliberately tanking seasons to TRY to get a #1 pick? (and how well did THAT plan turn out? The Kings still ended up #4 despite being last place, though they still made the most of it)
And also, why would you trade a proven scoring machine for more prospects and draft picks that will need EVEN MORE time to develop, and possibly might not even pan out to anything at all?
Sooner or later, you have to let your young guys develop and most importantly GROW TOGETHER AS A TEAM. Don't act like we DON'T have good young talent. And have you forgotten how unstable the last several years have been for this team? This year is probably the first year that they're actually starting to play well together AS a team.

You say that K-Mart is not a team leader, but a complimentary player. Well now we probably HAVE that team leader now. So why on earth CAN'T K-Mart settle into that "complimentary" role as the firepower guard? He's like the best offensive 2 we've had since Mitch Richmond. I've never seen a guy that can put up anywhere from 25-50 points on any given night and STILL get bashed as much as he does. You site his defense. Exactly how many great defenders have passed through Sacramento in the last 10 years anyway? Doug Christie? Ron Artest? And........? One player is not to blame for an entire team's defensive deficiencies (which have been the norm of this team for many many years). It must be a team effort. (see Spurs, Pistons, Lakers) What exactly do you people want? No really. What DO you want?
Since you guys consider yourselves such great GMs, what is your 100% foolproof plan to bring the Kings a championship WITHIN the next 5 years? Who EXACTLY do we trade K-Mart for that will INSTANTLY and single-handedly bring a trophy to Sacramento? Who is THE guy who will be our savior and carry us on his back to the promise land?
I'd like to hear this...

Geoff35 · Post #2 » by **Geoff35** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:30 am

in short I agree... we need to keep K-Mart. Anyone who can drop 50 should not be so readily thought of to trade/get rid of..

darkadun · Post #3 » by **darkadun** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:54 pm

Agreed.

JSrose115 · Post #4 » by **JSrose115** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:44 pm

but any person who can score 50 and give up 50, should be given a thought of being traded. kevin martin needs to go.

RoyalCourtJestr · Post #5 » by **RoyalCourtJestr** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:13 pm

JSrose115 wrote:but any person who can score 50 and give up 50, should be given a thought of being traded. kevin martin needs to go.

Kevin's defense is nothing to brag about, but it isn't that horrific. Show me the last time an apposing guard at SG scored 50 while being guarded by Martin. :roll:

rpa · Post #6 » by **rpa** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:12 pm

I think a lot of people are on one of the extreme ends. It's either:

1) Trade him trade him trade him !
or
2) Keep him !

Me personally, I think that any vet left on a 17-win team should be made available for the right price. Should we go and trade Martin for expiring contracts & a 2nd rounder? No, but I think that if we have the chance to trade Martin for what has a good chance to be a younger and more talented player a couple years from now, you do it. For instance, if you were sure that the Knicks pick that the Jazz hold will be top 5, why WOULDN'T you trade Martin for it?

In my mind, Martin's just slightly out of the year range for players that should be in our core group. If we could trade him and get a guy who's extremely talented and only 21 or 22 (or even younger) then I say do it. On the other hand, if the best we can get for him is a collection of crappy expiring contracts and the 15th pick in the draft (for instance) then it makes no sense to deal him.

wiltchamberlain · Post #7 » by **wiltchamberlain** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:56 pm

I agree with rpa for the most part, as far as caution goes. I feel like Martin is a special case as far as trades go. His contract is so cheap, relatively speaking, I think that when the deadline rolls around he could be a pretty nice commodity for a team looking to get rid of a star player and rebuild, or just in general a team who can't afford the players on it's roster a la New Orleans. I don't think the team should rush into anything, just wait for the right moment. Assuming that moment even appears.

down_el_road · Post #8 » by **down_el_road** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:59 pm

Ill say one thing, if kevin martin werent injured right now we wouldnt be seeing Reke play this well.

Post #9 » by **pillwenney** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:02 pm

Lightning Strike wrote:
JSrose115 wrote:but any person who can score 50 and give up 50, should be given a thought of being traded. kevin martin needs to go.

Kevin's defense is nothing to brag about, but it isn't that horrific. Show me the last time an apposing guard at SG scored 50 while being guarded by Martin.

Seriously, the idea that Kevin is some horrible defender is just wrong. He ranges from below-average to solid, depending on the matchup. And he'll most certainly get better when he doesn't have to be the offensive centerpiece. He'll also become a better rebounder (there is past evidence to support this).

Like with any (and I mean any) player, it all depends on the circumstance. In the right circumstance, I would easily ship Kevin. In general, when he gets back from injury, I would probably like to at least give it the rest of the year to see how he fits with Tyreke.

artest420 · Post #10 » by **artest420** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:54 am

Im 100% for trading Martin, but only for a deal that gets us better. I cant see anything that would be worth it so we might as well make it work with him until something happens. What could we really get? Granger, Carmelo, Durant would be perfect, but wil never happen. Again its just another year of hoping Martin becomes more complete and another year of probably being dissapointed with one dimentional scorer.

JSrose115 · Post #11 » by **JSrose115** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:34 am

artest420 wrote:Im 100% for trading Martin, but only for a deal that gets us better. I cant see anything that would be worth it so we might as well make it work with him until something happens. What could we really get? Granger, Carmelo, Durant would be perfect, but wil never happen. Again its just another year of hoping Martin becomes more complete and another year of probably being dissapointed with one dimentional scorer.

agreed, although i see the notion of trading martin, i just feel like we don't need a shoot first sg. what kevin does, and his assist ratio is unacceptable, of course he is the best shooter on our team, and scorer, but we have other players to commit to that with evans, thompson, noc, etc. the reason being for our losses, was that martin was the center piece of our offense, almost all of our plays were run through him. as you can tell, we had minimal ball rotation when kevin was in our lineup, that needs to change. i'm just waiting for kevin to come back and start losing again, as much as i hate to say that, but if we do continue to win, thats a good thing, but calling martin a franchise player, is absurd.

Post #12 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:54 am

JSrose115 wrote:
artest420 wrote:Im 100% for trading Martin, but only for a deal that gets us better. I cant see anything that would be worth it so we might as well make it work with him until something happens. What could we really get? Granger, Carmelo, Durant would be perfect, but wil never happen. Again its just another year of hoping Martin becomes more complete and another year of probably being dissapointed with one dimentional scorer.

agreed, although i see the notion of trading martin, i just feel like we don't need a shoot first sg. what kevin does, and his assist ratio is unacceptable, of course he is the best shooter on our team, and scorer, but we have other players to commit to that with evans, thompson, noc, etc. the reason being for our losses, was that martin was the center piece of our offense, almost all of our plays were run through him. as you can tell, we had minimal ball rotation when kevin was in our lineup, that needs to change. i'm just waiting for kevin to come back and start losing again, as much as i hate to say that, but if we do continue to win, thats a good thing, but calling martin a franchise player, is absurd.

Nobody is saying that the offense should run through Kevin or that he is a franchise player. Nobody anywhere is saying that.

That doesn't mean that he can't still come back and return to being the off-the-ball scorer he once was. There is simply no reason to believe that.

Fola314 · Post #13 » by **Fola314** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:03 am

^JSRose, I strongly disagree the martin was the reason for our losses. If you want to blame anyone for poor ball movement, its Westphal's fault for trying that Mason/May lineup that everyone knew wouldn't work. We got killed in first quarters and we lost those games. If we had started Evans/Martin/Noc/Thompson/Hawes from the get go, one could make the argument that we could be 6-3 or 7-2 right now.

I like Westphal and everything he's done with our team so far, but honestly that lineup experiment was a mistake and had pretty much everyone on these boards scratching their heads. I'm sure he had his reasons, and I am happy that Westphal is open minded and didn't stubbornly stick to that miserable lineup.

Waiting for Martin to comeback so we can start losing again? Don't even know what to say to that. Fact is we are going to start losing again probably some time in December, because eventually our schedule isn't going to be so favorable. Martin or no Martin we will start losing again.

I agree with the part about him not being a "franchise player".

Website · Post #14 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:53 am

Ya everyone enjoy this winning record, because who knows how long it will be there

SacTownKings4Life · Post #15 » by **SacTownKings4Life** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:07 am

rpa wrote:I think a lot of people are on one of the extreme ends. It's either:

1) Trade him trade him trade him !
or
2) Keep him !

Me personally, I think that any vet left on a 17-win team should be made available for the right price. Should we go and trade Martin for expiring contracts & a 2nd rounder? No, but I think that if we have the chance to trade Martin for what has a good chance to be a younger and more talented player a couple years from now, you do it. For instance, if you were sure that the Knicks pick that the Jazz hold will be top 5, why WOULDN'T you trade Martin for it?

In my mind, Martin's just slightly out of the year range for players that should be in our core group. If we could trade him and get a guy who's extremely talented and only 21 or 22 (or even younger) then I say do it. On the other hand, if the best we can get for him is a collection of crappy expiring contracts and the 15th pick in the draft (for instance) then it makes no sense to deal him.

Vet? Since when did 5 years in the league make you a vet? You act like Martin is 35 or something!
So let me get this straight... You wanna trade Kevin Martin, who is a sure 25 ppg IN HIS SLEEP, for talented high potential PROSPECT? My goodness! What are you going to say 5 years from now? Trade Evans for a prospect because HE'S too old? And how young does this team need to remain anyway? Do we need to clean out the ENTIRE ROSTER every 5 years to make sure that nobody's ever older than 21?
AND you want to trade Martin for a pick? Which is merely a CHANCE at a potentially great (most likely just good) player some time in the future? Hopefully? Exactly how long do you wish this team to suck? Perpetual instability is NOT the answer.
Just curious, were you by any chance ever on the "trade Chris Webber" bandwagon also? If so, how did that work out for you?

Again I ask you, exactly how young does this team need to be? Should we trade Thompson and Hawes 5 years from now if this team is not WCF bound? Cause ya know, they wouldn't be all that young anymore either...
Also, I asked for specific NAMES of players that we would actually have a legitimate shot of aquiring. Not just, "let's trade Kevin for some unnamed guy who MIGHT be extremely talented". You want to hurry up and pull the trigger, yet you have no plan. Who is this masked superstar who's going to lead us to vistory? I hear about him an awful lot, but I have yet to SEE him.

I'm glad fans aren't GMs, or else we would be the Golden State Warriors right now. GIVING away talented player after talented player after talented player for nothing but pipe dreams, and remaining in the NBA cellar for all eternity.