If you could only keep one, which would you keep? Right now I might actually lean towards Hickson. I wonder if we could do a sign and trade with Batum or we could only afford to keep one and still have a max contract to offer to someone like Deron Williams.
Hickson. Swing players with some of batums skillset are easier to find. Batum wants more money than he is worth too. Who knows what hickson wants, but id be happy to give him 5 to 6 per year.
I really like what Hickson has done so far, but part of me can't shake the feeling that he's busting his ass for his next contract ... That's a tough question, especially since we don't know how realistic getting Deron actually is.
That's funny, all of me thinks he's busting his ass for his next contract. I'm willing to make the bet he continues to play well once we give it to him, though. I don't think the bidding war will be too much, IOW one half a shortened season shouldn't change a lot of opinions about him.
Nic. More potential, and little fear that he's just playing well for a contract unlike Hickson. And considering the lack of quality wings (as well as the plethora of good PFs) around the league, we have to hold onto the good ones.
I guess a better question would be: Is it worth the pipe dream of Deron Williams to give up on either Hickson or Batum?
I would choose hickson because he's probably a 5-6 mil per player, while Batum will probably ask and get offers of 9-10 mil per. I still think we could get both and d will too. Hell we could keep Flynn, Babbitt, Aldridge, Matthews, e will, hickson, pryzbilla and Batum; while offering max to d will.
I guess some of you haven't seen the posts on Sac forums about how bad Hickson was with the Kings. They have the same vitriol for him as we do for Felton. I watched JJ extensively in CLE with Bron, and he looked to be a great role player, and nothing more. He absolutely tanked it in Sac once he realized he had competition at his position. He's making the most of his opportunity here, but how much of that effort is just because he wants $$$? And what's the guarantee that he will still be as good after he gets his?
The reason I disagree is why wasn't he busting his ass in sac town? I mean that was his money year too. I think he was a product of a bad system, just like Felton was in Portland. Hell look at the Knicks once d antoni left. Sometimes certain players need to be in a good system. Pairing him with a sharing Aldridge, instead of teams filled with ball hogs will help your game.
The guy is still really young and it's not like people are talking about offering him big money. He can't afford to get a new deal and then completely suck balls. We're not talking about Darius Miles here.
I really like what Hickson has been doing, and Batum has frustrated me. But in terms of talent, Batum has oodles more. And the knock on Hickson has always been that he plays no defense, so I want a larger sample size in games that actually matter.
I'm guessing this is a comment about the dangers of falling in love with a guy that we picked up for peanuts in a tiny stretch of games? (Because Ratliff and Hickson have totally different games.)
You know I read that knock as well, but watching the games in PDX so far; he's been playing damn good D. The one thing that impresses me the most is his ability to score in the post and rebound. I haven't been bitching about teams winning the boards like I have in the past. Most of that is because Hickson is boxing out well and rebounding the ball with efficiency. Also, Hickson's offensive game is giving Aldridge some room. Teams can't lag off of Pryzbilla, Thomas or Camby now; which is helping Aldridge have better options in the paint.
Theo was an awesome Center during his early years; which ironically is Hickson. So if you say Hickson is like Theo in terms of talent; then I am ecstatic!
No, I'm saying be careful throwing a ton of money at a player after he plays 10 good games for us........
I doubt we toss tons of money at Hickson. We will let the market dictate his value. I'm thinking 5-7 mil at most.
