RealGM

I think that one of the Kings' strongest assets is their team chemistry. Not to mention all of the individual talent that this team has. But it seems like a lot of people here are eager to bring in a superstar or a high-lottery draft pick. I don't get this thinking, to be honest. This is a team that is in on an upwards trajectory and I think in large measure, this is due to the team's chemistry. I think that there's no reason why a core of Evans-Martin-Casspi-Thompson along with guys like Beno and Brockman and Cisco and Donte can't become one of the better teams in the league. The talent is mostly there (especially judging by how competitive the Kings have been in their games against the league's top teams). But they need a chance to gel together. I think what the kings need is a productive, consistent defensive-minded big-man who doesn't need to take a lot of shots on offense to be effective (and ideally, who can also help pass/move the ball on offense). The problem with bringing a superstar a top lottery pick to the Kings is that they might disrupt the team's chemistry and might try to dominate the ball, which would negate the strength's of Sacramento's 'team game'. Offense for the Kings won't be a problem; low-post defense, though, is a different issue.

Plus, if K-mart, Evans and Casspi can learn to play together on offense (i.e., K-mart would have to share some of his shots with Tyreke and Omri), they would be a matchup hell for any team in the NBA. Between K-mart's and Casspi's 3pt shooting, they would stretch the floor wide open on offense, giving Evans and JT even easier baskets.

Getting rid one ONE player isn't blowing up a team.

I disagree. It depends on: a) what his role was on the team and more importantly, b) who is going to replace him. I don't think that getting rid of a player would necessarily hurt the team; but as I said, I think adding a star or a ball-dominant player might screw up the team's chemistry, which would be the worst thing possible, in my opinion.

Well...we can't take your opinion away.

Likewise. I guess the feeling is mutual.

But then again none of our opinions matter since Petrie is the one calling the shots and thankfully he seems to be a really good GM.

I digress. Trading LeBron, Kobe, Garnett, Duncan, insert your all star player here is the only way moving ONE player is blowing up a team. Kevin Martin isn't that good!

I only see it as blowing up the team if we get rid of a young player who is actualy playing. As far as im concerned, Martin and Gracia are both outsiders and could almost be treated as a kind of free agent. Personally I think Garcia fits this team so he should be brought on assuming we can dump nocioni.

Im not sure about Martin. I see him as a guy that could give us a better back court than the billips-hamilton back court. Martin just likes to shoot and go for the pump fake to get fouled. Right now we have great passing and team play and im worried martins shoot first menatlity could hurt the chemestry if he is not used right. Either way, I would be more than open to tradiing him for another big man. something like martin and maybe hawes for brook lopez and courtney lee or an equivilant type of offer.

Blowing up isn't the best choice of words, I admit. I apologize for my English (which isn't my mother tongue). I agree with your last comment ICMTM regarding 'blowing up' and 'Kobe, KG, etc.' I just think that the Kings have potentially something very good going on here and I think that they just need to be careful about the kinds of players they add, to make sure that they won't have a deleterious effect on team chemistry/productivity. The only reason why I would be uncomfortable with adding a superstar is because they are likely going to want their 35-45 min. per night and 20-25 shot attempts per game, which could be either good for the team or disastorous.

I think a guy like Tyson Chandler could be great for the team.

artest420 wrote:I only see it as blowing up the team if we get rid of a young player who is actualy playing. As far as im concerned, Martin and Gracia are both outsiders and could almost be treated as a kind of free agent. Personally I think Garcia fits this team so he should be brought on assuming we can dump nocioni.

Im not sure about Martin. I see him as a guy that could give us a better back court than the billips-hamilton back court. Martin just likes to shoot and go for the pump fake to get fouled. Right now we have great passing and team play and im worried martins shoot first menatlity could hurt the chemestry if he is not used right. Either way, I would be more than open to tradiing him for another big man. something like martin and maybe hawes for brook lopez and courtney lee or an equivilant type of offer.

I agree with you about Martin. You probably know his game much better than I do (I only know that he's a good shooter and scorer), so I'll take your word on him. If he can be incorporated into the 'team'/'sharing the ball' mindset, then I think he could be a tremendous asset. But if he's going to disrupt the balance of the team, then I think he's more of a liabiltiy than an asset. In a worst case, at least K-Mart probably has good trade value for the Kings.

I'm eager to see what this team can do when Martin comes back.
I wouldn't call Martin a "selfish" player, but a great scorer who was told to shoot the ball more by virtue of him being the team's best (and sometimes ONLY) scorer. The offense was pretty much run through him all the time, which would explain his number of shot attempts. Playing without Martin has given this team the opportunity to develop their OWN offensive skills for a change, and therefore, Martin should not NEED to be called upon to do quite as much shooting as he has in years past (which might also improve his durability). But then again, Martin never really NEEDED a whole lot of shot attempts to score a lot of points anyway, so I believe he can STILL be just as dangerous as he always has been, just in a slightly reduced role. Just think - with Martin's extra scoring punch added to our already stacked, skilled roster, there is a chance that some of these close games that we've been losing as of late may not be quite as close next time around. You never know...

sl1mshad33 wrote: I think what the kings need is a productive, consistent defensive-minded big-man who doesn't need to take a lot of shots on offense to be effective (and ideally, who can also help pass/move the ball on offense). The problem with bringing a superstar a top lottery pick to the Kings is that they might disrupt the team's chemistry and might try to dominate the ball, which would negate the strength's of Sacramento's 'team game'. Offense for the Kings won't be a problem; low-post defense, though, is a different issue.

That is the general consensus on this forum. The last thing that the Kings need is another ball dominant player to pair with Tyreke. And, I don't think there is really anyone on here calling for that. A defensive minded big who can finish consistently on the offensive end is the Kings' greatest need.

If Petrie thinks that trading Kevin in order to get a player that helps us in that department needs to happen, then so do I. No one is trying to blow up the Kings. Some fans are just suggesting that a player like Kevin (who has become expendable) could be moved to address that need.

When your second best player is playing the exactly same position like your best player it's reasonable to think that a trade might be a good ideea.

sl1mshad33 wrote:I think that there's no reason why a core of Evans-Martin-Casspi-Thompson along with guys like Beno and Brockman and Cisco and Donte can't become one of the better teams in the league.

I'll tell you why.

Defense.

That team is horrible on defense. We have some solid defenders, but Thompson at best, can hold his own ground...but nothing more. Hawes is...well Hawes just sucks at defense, same with KMart. We need either a better defender at the SG position, or an defensive anchor at the PF/C position.

A core of Evans/Martin/Casspi/Thompson is a great core. It'll get you to the playoffs every year. However, it is unlikely that this core will get to a contending level. There is a huge difference between playoff teams, and contending teams. One has an actual shot at winning (LAL/Bos/Cle/Orl) vs one that isn't really going to do anything significant and everyone knows it (Mia/Uta/Hou/Tor/Chi).

We either need to get better via trade, draft someone significant, or sign someone significant.


To me, although we are still young, the talent on this team is simply a team that is missing 1 more key piece. What is LAL w/o Gasol, or Orl w/o Lewis, or Bos w/o Rondo, or Cle w/o (joke..everyone on that team is a scrub minus King James)

I'm standing by the fact that Spencer's D is underrated in some respects. I really don't think he is that bad at guarding the rim. In fact I think he's quite solid at it. His biggest problem is really that both he and JT just play too far out on the perimeter at times, and they can't get back to the basket in time to block shots.

His post D even seems to improving. It's still pretty bad right now, but it shows some level of promise--at least by comparison.

Hawes is a better defender than Brad Miller ever was, I'll give him that.

Wolfay wrote:Hawes is a better defender than Brad Miller ever was, I'll give him that.

Even Brad's first year here?

I'm not too sure about that. I thought Brad in that year (2003-2004) was pretty respectable on defense.

KF10 wrote:

Wolfay wrote:Hawes is a better defender than Brad Miller ever was, I'll give him that.

Even Brad's first year here?

I'm not too sure about that. I thought Brad in that year (2003-2004) was pretty respectable on defense.

To be honest I don't remember, but wasn't it around that time that the Kings started to get the reputation as a poor defensive team?

Wolfay wrote:
To be honest I don't remember, but wasn't it around that time that the Kings started to get the reputation as a poor defensive team?

All I remember is that the previous year (2002-2003), we were one of the best defensive teams in the NBA in terms of opposing FG% and after that year (when we acquired Brad), we lost our defensive role players i.e. Keon, Pollard, Funderburke and Jimmy; our defense suffered a lot.

I think Hawes was pretty close of what Brad did on the defensive side. People tend to forget that Brad was very good on defending the post entry passes and holding his position against others. Hawes is the better shotblocker though.

The team's D plummeted from 02-03 to 03-04. Part of it was losing some defensive role players, but another part of it was replacing them with considerably worse defenders, such as Miller and Songaila. Nearly everybody got worse defensively that year. Bobby was starting to lose a step, Doug pretty much already had, Peja had to focus more on offense, and of course Webber went from above average defensively to pretty much horrible with the knee injury.

mitchweber wrote:I'm standing by the fact that Spencer's D is underrated in some respects. I really don't think he is that bad at guarding the rim. In fact I think he's quite solid at it. His biggest problem is really that both he and JT just play too far out on the perimeter at times, and they can't get back to the basket in time to block shots.

His post D even seems to improving. It's still pretty bad right now, but it shows some level of promise--at least by comparison.

I'm standing by the fact that a Kevin Martin/Spencer Hawes SG/C combo will never be successful, simply because the defensive is so awful. Both are average to below average defenders at best, but combined they are awful. Personally, I think having one weak player in a lineup is okay, so either we move Martin or we need a better post defender.