breaking news garcia signs 5 years 29.8 million

[_SRV_]

Garcai isn't Kevin Martin though...

martin got his extension after putting up one heck of a season. garcia's was pretty average.

And Garcia is getting half what Martin got.
The point is, for us Kings fan, we were in the same situation last year, and we were told Kevin MArtin's extention's was overpaying, and it could wait, look at what happened to the same draft class, all of them got more than KMart whole proving less, or still haven't signed.
The same was told about Salmons contract and I doubt any one can say his contract is overpaying.
We believe Garcia is worth the MLE, and maybe more, he showed a lot last season and this season he's given a bigger stage with Artest gone.

[_SRV_]

I am not saying Garcia is a bad player. I think he is a good role player. But SAC signed him and Udrih both for 5 year and 30 million. They invested 60 million in these two players for the next 5 years. That is not good management of the cap, IMO.

The Detroit Pistons were built with ~MLE signings (Billups, Corliss, McDyess) and late draft picks (Okur, Prince), the rest of the champions had a once in 5 years stars.
A team lacking talent can't afford to let talent go, this is just dumb, all stars can be had through free agency or smart drafting and good players on good contracts are assets and not burdens.
The Kings have their 1-2-3 rotation for less than 30 millios/yr, they can get the star they want in the rest of their cap, the way it's looking right now, we'll have plenty of cap in '10 or alternatively a plenty of expirings next year.

[RapsGM]

This is a great deal for Garica, but for the kings, its a different story. They definitely overpaid for dukes, no doubt about that.

[a-rod]

Garcia is poor man james posey, he can play defense and he can hit big shots, hes also a versatile player who can play multiple positions, every team has at least one utility player that can play a multiple positions...

Ehh, I wouldn't say that. They're kind of similar, but Posey has never been the ballhandler or passer that Cisco is and Cisco isn't as proven in playoff situations as Posey.
The best comparison I can think of is Doug Christie, only less controlled in running an offense (but about as talented with PG skills), not quite as good defensively, and a much more talented scorer.

It seems to me his game is far more similar to posey , defensively, he and posey both use their size, athleticism and length (wingspan) harass their opponents, and offensively, both can spot up and hit the 3 pt shot with regularity, and both can hit clutch shots....

While Doug uses his quickness and good hands and great anticipation to harass his opponents, which creates steals for him or a teammate. and offensively, Doug has excellent vision and top level passing skills have allowed him to excel in the open court. While garcia is good ballhandler and passer, he tends to make poor decisions and force the ball on occasion, and that doesn't sound like Doug Christie..

[realball]

I think Garcia is worth it. A lineup of Martin, Salmons, and Garcia is a really good SG/SF rotation. Salmons and Garcia make about $11 million combined. I think of it this way: the cap is at $58 million or so, which gives about $11-$12 million to spend on each position. They solidified their SG/SF spots for a pretty good price. I'm wondering though, who would start, Salmons or Garcia?

I didn't like the Udrih signing though. Udrih isn't that talented, he didn't deserve that big of a contract.

[Walton'sBeard!]

Seems like the going rate for a guy like Garcia. Martell Webster will probably fetch about the same next summer.

[Prospect Dong]

A team usually gets a bit of a discount if they're willing to offer an extension a year in advance. To the extent that Petrie has accurately pegged his value, I'd expect to see guys at the same level as Garcia get a little more if they actually make it to FA.

[a-rod]

I'm wondering though, who would start, Salmons or Garcia?

John Salmons averaged 18 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists, and shot 50% from the field in 41 games as a starter last season, i think its save to say he got the starting job.

I didn't like the Udrih signing though. Udrih isn't that talented, he didn't deserve that big of a contract.

Udrih averaged 14 points, 5 assists, in 51 games as a starter last season, without training camp, thats not bad for first time starter...

Watch This Video You might change your mind

[chriswebb86]

I think Garcia is worth it. A lineup of Martin, Salmons, and Garcia is a really good SG/SF rotation. Salmons and Garcia make about $11 million combined. I think of it this way: the cap is at $58 million or so, which gives about $11-$12 million to spend on each position. They solidified their SG/SF spots for a pretty good price. I'm wondering though, who would start, Salmons or Garcia?

I didn't like the Udrih signing though. Udrih isn't that talented, he didn't deserve that big of a contract.

Yeah I agree with the fact that you can spend about 11 to 12 million on each position. So I think the Kings have spent great money on their SF and SG roation.

At frist I was kinda ifiy about the resiging of Udrich, but the guy is 25 years old, showed a lot of promies last year and in the end if he ends up becoming a back up he will still be a very effective one. The one thing the Kings have lacked in the past 5 of years is someone who can get the ball to other players with out having to shot first. Also, they have lacked someone that can break the defense down by getting to the hoop. Beno does both of those things fairly well and thats why I have no problem with paying him 6 million dollars.

[Prospect Dong]

See, the thing is, guys don't just start playing well when they start, often, they get to start when they are playing well. So a lot of the time, saying "check out his stats as a starter" is the same as saying "check out his stats when he was on a hot streak". A few years back we had bulls fans hyping Jamal Crawford because he posted great stats during the part of the year when he started. Last offseason it was Boston fans telling us how great Gerald Green was as a starter. Sometime it's an indication of what a player is capable of doing full time, sometimes it's just what they can do when they get hot.

If a guy's fg% is lower as a reserve, playing against backups, than as a starter, like Udrih and Salmons, that's a pretty good warning sign that when they weren't starting it was because they weren't playing well. I know fans like to talk about confidence and rhythm, but, honestly, most "as a starter" stats are more about cherry-picking.

Edit: That's probably not as fair in relation to Udrih, who presumably only got his chance once Bibby was gone, but it applies to the Garcia and Salmons numbers being thrown around.

[Prospect Dong]

I love what Petrie's done as a GM, and I'd root for the Kings against 90% of the teams in the league, but bottom-line, the Kings are paying to keep together a core that was, with the help of one of the best two way players in the NBA and a resurgent Brad Miller, and a partial season from Mike Bibby, 11th in West.

With none of those guys projecting to help in the future, you've got to hope for a lot of internal improvement just to get back to last season's record, and while the guys you're re-signing are still the right side of 28, it's not like we're talking about 21 year-olds just starting to scratch the surface of their potential either. You're basically betting on Petrie hitting it out of the park a couple of times running on late-lotto picks, or attracting a couple of marquee free agents for sub-max money. Petrie's great, but it strikes me he's tying one hand behind his back with these signings.

[chriswebb86]

See, the thing is, guys don't just start playing well when they start, often, they get to start when they are playing well. So a lot of the time, saying "check out his stats as a starter" is the same as saying "check out his stats when he was on a hot streak". A few years back we had bulls fans hyping Jamal Crawford because he posted great stats during the part of the year when he started. Last offseason it was Boston fans telling us how great Gerald Green was as a starter. Sometime it's an indication of what a player is capable of doing full time, sometimes it's just what they can do when they get hot.

If a guy's fg% is lower as a reserve, playing against backups, than as a starter, like Udrih and Salmons, that's a pretty good warning sign that when they weren't starting it was because they weren't playing well. I know fans like to talk about confidence and rhythm, but, honestly, most "as a starter" stats are more about cherry-picking.

Edit: That's probably not as fair in relation to Udrih, who presumably only got his chance once Bibby was gone, but it applies to the Garcia and Salmons numbers being thrown around.

For the most part I would agree with you. However, I think some players skills and mind set are better when they start then coming off the bench. John Salmons is one of the players. He looked competely different when he was starting. I do not think it was because he was on a "Hot Streak," I think it was more because he was more confortable on the floor. With Cisco, yeah he did put up great numbers as a starter, but I like him coming off the bench more. He brings a spark to this team. In the end though, it really doesnt matter who starts, its all about who finishes the game.

[pillwenney]

Yeah, I'm with the birdman. Nothing wrong with the price tag, but you sign your championship-roleplayer-off-the-bench guys once you've got your championship core in place.

The Kings are a couple of all stars away from contention, and maybe Petrie can land them with the 10th/12th/27th pick guys he's been adding, but I wouldn't bet on it, even with his track record. The worst place you can be in the NBA is stuck in mediocrity, and even if the individual pieces are fine, this, along with Udrih and Salmons, strikes me as that kind of signing.

I see the point you guys are making a little bit more. But fortunately, we're still in very good shape cap-wise for where we want to be. With everything factored in, we should still have over 20million in cap space in the '10 offseason, and possibly more (I mean that's assuming that we extend QO's to both Douby and Williams and that we don't trade Salmons).

Also, there is the mentality that if Petrie's drafting record stays as good as it has been, we'll at least get a lot of really good players, if no great players. And while that alone may not lead to championships (assuming it all doesn't fall together perfectly like in Detroit), it could lead to some really good teams that could often be "1 piece away", which isn't a bad place to be when you've got a good GM.

While Doug uses his quickness and good hands and great anticipation to harass his opponents, which creates steals for him or a teammate. and offensively, Doug has excellent vision and top level passing skills have allowed him to excel in the open court. While garcia is good ballhandler and passer, he tends to make poor decisions and force the ball on occasion, and that doesn't sound like Doug Christie..

I think defensively, Cisco is kind of hybrid of the two, but that's besides the point for me. I think Cisco is just as skilled as Doug was in ballhandling/passing and he has great instincts, I just don't think he's the decision-maker Doug was, and I think that's one area where he still has room for improvement.

See, the thing is, guys don't just start playing well when they start, often, they get to start when they are playing well. So a lot of the time, saying "check out his stats as a starter" is the same as saying "check out his stats when he was on a hot streak". A few years back we had bulls fans hyping Jamal Crawford because he posted great stats during the part of the year when he started. Last offseason it was Boston fans telling us how great Gerald Green was as a starter. Sometime it's an indication of what a player is capable of doing full time, sometimes it's just what they can do when they get hot.

Salmons didn't get to start when he was playing well, he got to start when Ron or Kevin got injured. He was thrown in and out of the starting lineup pretty randomly throughout the year, and almost every time, he just looked like a different player. He just seemed to feel more comfortable and was much more aggressive. And it's not even too much about "getting hot" either because Salmons is a player that thrives so much on penetration. So it was really more a matter of getting touches and being aggressive. And you can call it "a stretch" all you want, but it was half the season.

I love what Petrie's done as a GM, and I'd root for the Kings against 90% of the teams in the league, but bottom-line, the Kings are paying to keep together a core that was, with the help of one of the best two way players in the NBA and a resurgent Brad Miller, and a partial season from Mike Bibby, 11th in West.

Keep a couple of things in mind. First, we have a few young players who still have a lot of room to improve and look to be have really, really nice potential. Secondly, I don't think any of us are really expecting to match last year's record, and that's okay.

You're basically betting on Petrie hitting it out of the park a couple of times running on late-lotto picks, or attracting a couple of marquee free agents for sub-max money. Petrie's great, but it strikes me he's tying one hand behind his back with these signings.

Why "sub-max"? We're going to have more than enough space to offer a max contract in a couple years.

[ponder276]

Garcia is a 6'7" swingman, with a well-rounded offensive game (mostly a shooter, but can drive as well, and is an OK playmaker), who plays solid defense, and who put up the following per-36-minute stats last year:
16.7 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.2 apg, 1.6 spg, on very efficient .462/.391/.779 (a great TS% of .575)

To say he "is what he is"/"has no more potential" is also somewhat rediculous - he's 26, but he's only played 3 seasons in the NBA, and his overall stats and per-36-minute stats have improved dramatically every season. I'd love to have him on the Raps, and would easily give him this kind of money. He should be an excellent 6th man for Sacramento, and with Artest gone, they should be able to find him plenty of minutes, something like:
SG - Kevin Martin (35 mpg), Francisco Garcia (13 mpg)
SF - John Salmons (31 mpg), Francisco Garcia (17 mpg)

[Prospect Dong]

Why "sub-max"? We're going to have more than enough space to offer a max contract in a couple years.

I'm assuming the Kings are a couple of guys away from serious contention, unless that one guy is Lebron James. The draft picks/FA summary aren't an either/or proposition - you could go with a little of each, but a (normal) max-FA isn't, on his own, going to do much more than replace Artest.

I guess it depends a lot how much you like last year's and this year's picks. I'm a bit of a skeptic, at least as far as any of them turning into more than above-average starters. And a bunch of average-to-above-average starters gets you somewhere between a 12-seed and an 8-seed.

[SacKingZZZ]

I think what Petrie is doing is building a solid team and in a few years, either through the draft or FA, he will add (or one of the young players now will develop into) the player the Kings need. This way the team will be basically finished by 2010 with some developed chemistry along the way.

[Prospect Dong]

But I think you have to sort out your stars first and your role-players later. Right now the Kings are basically locked-in to what they have at the 1, 2 and 3, without having any true all stars at any of those positions - though Martin is obviously close. That makes adding the missing pieces pretty tough, because you're restricted to 4's and 5's, and all-star 5's are like gold-dust.

Short of snagging an MVP-level 4, a prime Duncan/Dirk/Garnett type, I don't see how you lift this team from 30-some wins to high-fifties any time in the next 4 years.

[pillwenney]

But I think you have to sort out your stars first and your role-players later. Right now the Kings are basically locked-in to what they have at the 1, 2 and 3, without having any true all stars at any of those positions - though Martin is obviously close. That makes adding the missing pieces pretty tough, because you're restricted to 4's and 5's, and all-star 5's are like gold-dust.

Short of snagging an MVP-level 4, a prime Duncan/Dirk/Garnett type, I don't see how you lift this team from 30-some wins to high-fifties any time in the next 4 years.

I don't think we're necessarily locked into anything. As long as all guys perform near what their contract warrants, they'll be movable. I expect that to probably happen since Petrie usually has the best eye for perimeter talent out there. If we get an opportunity to add a great PG or SF or whatever, we'll still be able to. And if we need to make space, guys should be movable. If Beno becomes a nice starter (and there's no reason he shouldn't--he was a decent starter last year despite being thrown with the team at the beginning of the year and never getting major minutes), he'll be worth his contract. Salmons is already quite movable and could soon be movable for something of value. I'd bet the same will be true of Cisco. In the mean time, it's probably a good call to keep the good players you've got.

Also, there is the whole factor of how Thompson and Hawes develop. They will be what really make the difference for how good this team will be. I specifically try to not overrate them because I know it's natural for all fans to do that, but both have shown some great, great flashes of the players they could become. And while that's not uncommon for young players and certainly doesn't guarantee anything, it's still very encouraging.