Hakim Warrick!

[SacKingZZZ]

yup. Like others have said, he's just too repetitive here for it to be worth it. Decent young player, but this would pretty much guarantee that Brockman and Greene don't see the floor.

What would signing Oberto have done? At least with a player like Warrick there is a definite gain in terms of youth and potential. Maybe it gives the team the opportunity to send guys like Casspi, Greene, and Brockman to the D-league considering more than a few of them won't play anyway.

[KF10]

Because there is no perpetuating the problem, the only issue should be picking up assets. There are no players out there that are going miraculously "fix" the problems this team has. The biggest problem/weakness this team has is an abundance of youth and lack of expendable assets. It's both a positive and a negative in a way. A lot of good young talent, but not enough to consolidate it into need for immediate improvement yet.

If he fits better than some other players stylistically speaking he'll play.

Really?

So, how is our interior defense, perimeter defense, defense in general, rebounding, assists, assist/to ratio, assists in general, turnovers and blocks going? They are in the bottom five if I could recall.

Warrick does not help us in neither statistical category in need. Why use up part of our cap space to bring a player that is above average at best in an area that we don't need? It redundancy at its best.

I understand there is no player that can fix these problems overnight but sooner or later we need to focus on our problem of need. Warrick does not address nothing of our deficiencies.

[pillwenney]

What would signing Oberto have done? At least with a player like Warrick there is a definite gain in terms of youth and potential. Maybe it gives the team the opportunity to send guys like Casspi, Greene, and Brockman to the D-league considering more than a few of them won't play anyway.

Given the team added depth. That's all. Last year he got 12.5MPG on a team without really any frontline depth, and from what I can tell, he had plenty of DNP-CDs. That's the entire idea--just to have somebody else with some real size on the team that knows how to play.

[sl1mshad33]

I will preface by saying that I haven't seen him play since he was at Syracuse. That being said, I don't thin he is the kind of player that the Kings need.

1) He hasn't shown any statistical improvement since 2nd season in Memphis. So what we've been seeing out of him for the last 3 seasons, might indicate that he's peaking.

2) As has already been mentioned, he's not much of a defensive player (going by number alone). His career averages are: 0.5SPG, 0.3BPG and 0.7APG. Last season, those numbers were 0.6SPG, 0.5BPG and 0.8APG.

3) He's also not much of an offensive player. His career scoring average is 10.2PPG (and last year, it was 11.6PPG). His career shooting percentages are: 50% FG, 22.8% 3PT, and 72.5% FT. Last year, he shot: 49.1% FG, 21.7% 3PT, and 71.1% FT. And as mentioned, he's not much of a passer (0.7APG career average vs. 1.30 TO's per game over his career).

4) In terms of rebounding, he averages only 1.4 offensive rebounds per game for his career (vs. 2.9 defensive rebounds per game).

5) In Warrick's defense, he has also only averaged 21.7 min/game for his career. HOWEVER, in last 3 seasons (years 2-4), he has averaged 26.2min/game, 23.4 min/game, and 24.7 min/game. So lack of playing time can't explain his underwhelming production.

I know that there are some players whose value can't be measured just by numbers (Shane Battier), but as far as I know, Hakim Warrick isn't a Battier type player. He's just a freak athlete who can make nice dunks. He might get the Kings a few more spots on Sportscenter, but I doubt he's going to help them win more games.

[SacKingZZZ]

Really?

So, how is our interior defense, perimeter defense, defense in general, rebounding, assists, assist/to ratio, assists in general, turnovers and blocks going? They are in the bottom five if I could recall.

Warrick does not help us in neither statistical category in need. Why use up part of our cap space to bring a player that is above average at best in an area that we don't need? It redundancy at its best.

I understand there is no player that can fix these problems overnight but sooner or later we need to focus on our problem of need. Warrick does not address nothing of our deficiencies.

And will only improve with experience. Hell, just look at the last couple of years as an example that you aren't going to bring in a defensive player or two and automatically become a defensive force. We had Ron Artest leading the way defensively and STILL SUCKED.

I'll repeat this again. If you pick up a player that could potentially become an asset you can potentially use that asset to help fill the categories of need down the road. It's much better IMO than taking a poor man's version of what you need, that will get you nowhere in the end.

[SacKingZZZ]

I will preface by saying that I haven't seen him play since he was at Syracuse. That being said, I don't thin he is the kind of player that the Kings need.

1) He hasn't shown any statistical improvement since 2nd season in Memphis. So what we've been seeing out of him for the last 3 seasons, might indicate that he's peaking.

2) As has already been mentioned, he's not much of a defensive player (going by number alone). His career averages are: 0.5SPG, 0.3BPG and 0.7APG. Last season, those numbers were 0.6SPG, 0.5BPG and 0.8APG.

3) He's also not much of an offensive player. His career scoring average is 10.2PPG (and last year, it was 11.6PPG). His career shooting percentages are: 50% FG, 22.8% 3PT, and 72.5% FT. Last year, he shot: 49.1% FG, 21.7% 3PT, and 71.1% FT. And as mentioned, he's not much of a passer (0.7APG career average vs. 1.30 TO's per game over his career).

4) In terms of rebounding, he averages only 1.4 offensive rebounds per game for his career (vs. 2.9 defensive rebounds per game).

5) In Warrick's defense, he has also only averaged 21.7 min/game for his career. HOWEVER, in last 3 seasons (years 2-4), he has averaged 26.2min/game, 23.4 min/game, and 24.7 min/game. So lack of playing time can't explain his underwhelming production.

I know that there are some players whose value can't be measured just by numbers (Shane Battier), but as far as I know, Hakim Warrick isn't a Battier type player. He's just a freak athlete who can make nice dunks. He might get the Kings a few more spots on Sportscenter, but I doubt he's going to help them win more games.

Per minute his production is actually better than or close to most of the players we have at SF and PF right now. Difference is, we would be much better in the athleticism department and I think he could fit really, really well next to Donte Greene. Both are huge at SF, can shoot, and are pretty athletic.

[KF10]

And will only improve with experience. Hell, just look at the last couple of years as an example that you aren't going to bring in a defensive player or two and automatically become a defensive force. We had Ron Artest leading the way defensively and STILL SUCKED.

Experience? Maybe.

But the last statement of you comment is completely wrong though. But it is not a huge deal in the topic on hand.

I'll repeat this again. If you pick up a player that could potentially become an asset you can potentially use that asset to help fill the categories of need down the road. It's much better IMO than taking a poor man's version of what you need, that will get you nowhere in the end.

If you are content of Warrick being a filler in trades, be my guest.