I don't know it's gotta be close because neither of them are NBA quality players today imo. MAYBE Ben has more value but we're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here and even then I'm not sure because he's older and 4 years in and will cost a team more to add to their roster. I'm sure they wanted J. Brown but he went top 3 so we never had a chance at him.
2017 Team Discussion and Possible Trades
- Thread starter CyKings
- Start date
Oh but he is. A 19 year old project big who has 3.5 more years on his rookie contract during s time when the salary cap will sky rocket vs. a player who will be expiring/off the rookie scale and has disappointed for 3.5 years now.
You're obviously very biased against Papa as you like to bring it up time and time again, but Papa hasn't looked too shabby in the D-League as a 19 year old...
Per36: 55% TS% / 52% FG% / 74% FT% / 15.2 PPG / 9.6 RPG / 0.5 APG / 0.8 SPG / 3.0 BPG / 1.9 TOPG
Like I said before, I'd rather take a chance on an unknown than a player who has proven he is bad time and time again.
You're obviously very biased against Papa as you like to bring it up time and time again, but Papa hasn't looked too shabby in the D-League as a 19 year old...
Per36: 55% TS% / 52% FG% / 74% FT% / 15.2 PPG / 9.6 RPG / 0.5 APG / 0.8 SPG / 3.0 BPG / 1.9 TOPG
Like I said before, I'd rather take a chance on an unknown than a player who has proven he is bad time and time again.
K
A late first rounder/early second, like we did for Marco. Rudy has the most value, followed by Collison, then Kosta, WCS and Richardson. I cannot see anyone giving anything for papa. Stauskas was a top ten pick who actually played in games and look what we got for him. You honestly think papa would get more? I agree to disagree
No. They would rather have a player who has a better shot at becoming a good player in this league. McLemore has been one of the worst SGs this season. His RPM is 93rd out of 97 SGs. 93rd! That's straight garbage.
Who the f*** cares if he plays 20 minutes per game? The guy hurts the team and aids in the team losing year after year but yet you would rather value him more than someone who "could" help a team one day? That's foolish. That's out right foolish.
Papagiannis may never amount to anything, but you take the chance 10 out of 10 times when compared to a player who has been bad for 3.5 years.
Who the f*** cares if he plays 20 minutes per game? The guy hurts the team and aids in the team losing year after year but yet you would rather value him more than someone who "could" help a team one day? That's foolish. That's out right foolish.
Papagiannis may never amount to anything, but you take the chance 10 out of 10 times when compared to a player who has been bad for 3.5 years.
K
Not at all...I think papa will go down as one of the many draft mistakes in the history of the Kings and I don't think ANY team would trade ANYTHING for him right now. I just don't want to go back and forth with you over and over about a guy that doesn't even play for the Kings because he is in the minor leagues blocking shots of crap players
AGAIN, based on what? He's looks good up in Reno so far. I could understand if he was stinking it up but he's not. And what does it even matter what other teams would offer for him he's not on the block unless some other GM insisted on him being included in a package that Vlade couldn't turn down and if that's the case that's his value right there. As for Ben I sure as heck hope your right because if I was in the GM seat and someone offered me a late 1st rounder like Cleveland for example then SOLD.
As for Vlade yea that Philly deal was crappy but the rest is still unwritten. It's still possible that deal only cost us a late 1st as well.
As for Vlade yea that Philly deal was crappy but the rest is still unwritten. It's still possible that deal only cost us a late 1st as well.
No, it's not. You want to know what's more important when evaluating a person's growth?...Growth. McLemore has not been making strides in his game. If you're not getting better from ages 16 to 19, you don't look at the kid and say "well he's 19 so let's ride him out." No, what you do is you give up on that said player because if he can't even make marginal improvement over that large amount of time, he's more than likely be close to the player he is today.
Cauley-Stein had a promising rookie season, and has struggled this season. The potential factor is still there as all players who enter the league should be given ~3 years to adjust to the speed & strength of the NBA. McLemore had 3.5 years to catch on. Cauley-Stein has had 1.5 years. The fact that they are the same age is not a big deal to me. McLemore has had ample time to practice with the best, be coached by the best, and play against the best this world has to offer. The fact that bigs tend to take a little more time to catch their stride than wings is also a factor to consider. Lastly, there is the contract situation. A team can keep Cauley-Stein on their roster for dirt cheap giving them a low risk/high reward type player whereas someone like McLemore who will be off the rookie scale won't be as an attractive of risk.
No, no, no. Not "team" boards. "NBA" boards. Team boards can end up being a bunch of homers who value their players too much and don't get a good contrast to how other teams value players around the league and how they value certain types of players. I literally bang my head against a wall reading some of the trade proposals that are posted around here. So many are heavily in the Kings favor. I find myself & @CelticsFan being the ones who are trying to keep this place realistic
Thank you.
And yeah, I think my rotations would be better. Does that mean I could do all of the other things he does? Hell no, but I think he has made some obvious mistakes in the lineup. He is far from the first coach to make rotation mistakes, and he definitely won't be the last one. To think these coach's are immortals is unrealistic and silly. If you can't think for yourself and thus let a coach's decision be your "evidence" or "reasoning" you're being lazy in my book. If you have a good reason that goes along with one of the coach's decisions, VOICE IT! Unfortunately, you're either holding back or, more likely, you have no reasoning.
K
Well, moving past Papa, I think our biggest challenge is the only teams willing to trade now are contenders trying to get better. They will be looking for Rudy, Collison, Ben, Kosta etc. but without giving up too much trade value. Our best bet is to go after draft picks with those guys IMHO because we won't get much in players unless we can land like a Payne or Knight
There's 0 way that Orlando trades Ibaka+Payton for Gay+Collison. Ibaka has been Orlando's 2nd best player this season. They traded a lot for him. They are not going to in turn, throw him away for 1/2 year rentals of Rudy Gay and Darren Collison.
They also traded away a player that was really similar to Rudy, but not as talented, much younger, and long-term guy in Tobias Harris. They basically gave him away for free, so I have trouble on seeing why they would trade for Gay who's an older version of him.
They also traded away a player that was really similar to Rudy, but not as talented, much younger, and long-term guy in Tobias Harris. They basically gave him away for free, so I have trouble on seeing why they would trade for Gay who's an older version of him.
Again, the reading comprehension fails you. Where did I mention Papagiannis in that post? Seriously, where?
You said contenders would be looking for guys like McLemore to which I replied hell no! They don't want players who are going to make them worse. What the hell does this have to do with Papa? When you know your argument is beat, you try to make it seem like that poster has a belief they have not stated and you attack it. That's lunacy.
You said contenders would be looking for guys like McLemore to which I replied hell no! They don't want players who are going to make them worse. What the hell does this have to do with Papa? When you know your argument is beat, you try to make it seem like that poster has a belief they have not stated and you attack it. That's lunacy.
His rotations aren't nearly as bad as you make them out to be. I don't understand the obsession people (not just you) have with people starting over others? It's about 1) Who plays the most and 2) who plays in crunch time. I'm going off your complaints of Ben starting over Temple as why I'm making this argument.
The Kings have been very good in close games this year whereas in previous seasons I've watched if the game was close at the end, you knew the Kings would likely lose. The people who you want to start in the other thread are getting the most time late in the game. Temple plays way more than Ben does and takes basically all of his 4th quarter minutes. Tolliver plays more late in games. Lawson plays more later in games. A lot of the wins the Kings have is because of good rotations/combinations late in games. Have the Kings had as many late game comebacks as they have had this year? Last year it was a dream to comeback in games like Minnesota and Utah.
Ben and WCS, arguably 2 of the worst key members on the team, are not playing late or are getting minute reductions while players who are playing better (Tolliver was barely playing at the start of the year and Temple has received around 30 minutes compared 20 earlier in the season).
The "X starts over Y" complaints are annoying. That's lazy arguing instead of looking at the whole picture.
The Kings have been very good in close games this year whereas in previous seasons I've watched if the game was close at the end, you knew the Kings would likely lose. The people who you want to start in the other thread are getting the most time late in the game. Temple plays way more than Ben does and takes basically all of his 4th quarter minutes. Tolliver plays more late in games. Lawson plays more later in games. A lot of the wins the Kings have is because of good rotations/combinations late in games. Have the Kings had as many late game comebacks as they have had this year? Last year it was a dream to comeback in games like Minnesota and Utah.
Ben and WCS, arguably 2 of the worst key members on the team, are not playing late or are getting minute reductions while players who are playing better (Tolliver was barely playing at the start of the year and Temple has received around 30 minutes compared 20 earlier in the season).
The "X starts over Y" complaints are annoying. That's lazy arguing instead of looking at the whole picture.
Last edited:
No, not really. For the most part, I don't have a problem with how he ends games, but that doesn't mean he can't make the rotations better. That's like preventing one caterpillar from becoming a butterfly because the other caterpillar already turned into a butterfly. You can maximize the rotations the entire game not just at the end. I've already given my thoughts on what adjustments I would make and why I would make them in the "What's Your Preferred Starting Lineup?" thread, but I quoted myself below: