I am mixed on this one. I think we need another SG like we need a hole in the head. You could play him at SF some I guess. I would have to take a guess that if Portland did this, it would mean Martell is not coming back this year, which many of us have surmized anyhow.
Re: John Salmons Deal in the woks? Agreed. On an elite team, Salmons would be a great backup SG/SF player. As a starter? No way.. the Kings right now are maximizing his abilities and they stink. I'm not a fan of his game.
So Caesar's is tanking? Wynn's tanking? Circus Circus and MGM are tanking? Bellagio? Maybe they are and I didn't hear about it...wouldn't be the first time. Nevermind...post hijack.
Tanking? No. Taking serious hits? Yes. Remember, Las Vegas was in the middle of another building boom when the recession hit. Now all of those new gigantic properties (City Center, Echelon, Fonteanblue) are sitting half-finished and in financial limbo. Harrahs and MGM stocks are at their lowest levels in decades. Las Vegas these days is corporate-ville, and the bean-counters are all in a tizzy because their normal double-triple digit profit margins arent there anymore. I can imagine that an off-strip property like The Palms is faring worse, since at least the Strip properties have some self-promotion built in.
I have read in a couple of spots that this may not be a 3 way, that this is a possibility to happen if Miami doesn't trade Marion to Sacramento, with Portland being interested in both Miller and Salmons. There are little blurbs out there, one on ESPN. No idea of level of truth. But now that I think about it, Brad Miller is intriguing, and here is my reasoning. Brad Miller is still a serviceable player, and one of the better passing big men in the league. He is also an excellent shooter from about the same spot Lamarcus gets a lot of shots, but probably a better entry passer. If you bring him in, and play him as backup PF (Going twin towers a lot of the game) you would have a pretty mean front line with a ton of depth and size.
i like the idea of getting miller, primarily because it means we might REALLY be going after someone huge in 2010.
He also ads some veteran poise and toughness. The only downside is that he is not part of the long term plan. But, maybe that isn't important by the time that he and Salmons fade, Batum and another young big (selected by KP) will be in the wings.
Take Hollinger's scouting report for what it is: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/players/hollinger?playerId=1726 Aside from my own limited observations of Salmons in a the 20 or so games I've seen him in over the years, you can see maybe why KP would have an interest in the guy. I'll be honest, I think Batum is the small forward of the future, but that future is probably still a good two years+ from coming to fruition -- he's just so up and down on offense and he needs to get stronger, and even as the starter on this team he logs 18 minutes a game or so because can't be relied on to hit the open shot or know when to drive. Salmons gives this team another player with a diverse skill-set (shooting, slashing, decent passing and defense) at a position of need and he's pretty goddamn cheap at $5 million a year, so if things don't work out exactly as you envision he shouldn't be too hard to move if needed. I'm frankly kind of shocked that so many people here are pooh-poohing the idea.
Agreed. He adds some veteran experience and can easily be moved if Batum is ready to start in a year or two. He fits perfectly with this young team that needs some scoring in the starting 5.
I think I like this trade. If we stockpile enough good players we can trade for a LJ or someone of similar skill and have a multitude of players to offer. Makes sense to me. Plus we likely get to the playoffs this year and maybe even get past the firs round.
You know how it is. It all matters who is going out, and who is coming back in. Provided that part is a good deal, and it improves the team, great. The one thing I would remind folks, is that IMO Batum has been overmatched a lot lately, and he has sometimes been a big part of those scoring problems in the first quarter. He needs time to learn. He did a great job while thrown into the fire early, but the offensive problems seem to be surfacing a lot more lately.
Yes but the one point they left out, was Fred Jones going off on Steve Blake was a big reason that those guys weren't getting shots. Why work that matchup when you have another one to exploit. If you doubt what I say, go back and watch the game footage, and you will see Blake getting burned over and over and over again.
primarily yes, or sign/trade. although i'm not convinced we won't go after one of the main guys through FA before roy and LA's deals kick in. assuming joel is traded or opts out it's not impossible.
Salmons just isn't that good of a player, though. Look at his seasonal PERs: 2002-03 9.41 2003-04 10.68 2004-05 9.72 2005-06 10.70 2006-07 12.69 2007-08 14.29 2008-09 16.31 That's terrible, and this is a guy who's primarily an offensive player. Even his "career" year this season isn't particularly impressive. Clearly there's more to live and defining a player than PER, but coupled with his inability to start on less-than-impressive NBA rosters, I just don't see him being much, if at all, an upgrade over what we have. Ed O.
