John Salmons

[ssspence]

Sounds like he's available. He's a solid defender whose pretty good off the dribble and can create his own shot. He can play and defend either to the 2 or the 3. His 3 point shooting has improved.   And he's not grossly overpaid.

You could base a trade around either TA or Scal (salary wise) because TA is a BYC you have to plug in more players around him than Scal. So I say you'd do Scal, Baby and either Walker or Giddens. But again, mix and match here as you wish. Point is we could put together a combo of some interest.

I've been pushing for Nocioni here and I still believe in trying to get him, but Salmons may be a better solution. He'd add a new element to our bench, while maintaining the defensive integrity. He and TA together on the wing would be really tough defensively and going to the basket.

Thoughts?

[makaveli]

He's playin' good because wright now, he's on the worst team, and he is # 1 or 2 option.
I don't think Sac would accept a trade for Scal and Tony

[cordobes]

Point is we could put together a combo of some interest.

No, we can't.

[indeedproceed]

John Salmons would be a great sixth man for us but he's good enough to start and be a second or third option on 25 other teams out there, and we don't have the pieces to afford that kinda guy.

[crownsy]

Point is we could put together a combo of some interest.

No, we can't.

cor is right here, i'm continualy fasinated by the over valuing of TA and the rookies by those making trades.

TA was avalable, at very cheap money, to ANY TEAM IN THE NBA. why would they now trade away peices to aquire him as the "talent" part of the TA+SCAL dumpathon people want to dish off on these teams?

and why would sac value two rookies who have yet to play any NBA minutes at all?

our only marginal (and i do mean marginal) pieces to entice teams with are leon and baby.

[RebusRankin]

cor is right here, i'm continualy fasinated by the over valuing of TA and the rookies by those making trades.
[/quote]

Wait, are you saying my TA/Gabe/Giddens and Walker for Kaman and Gordon is a non starter? 

[Roy Hobbs]

Point is we could put together a combo of some interest.

No, we can't.

I love Salmons, and unfortunately, I agree with you.  I think they'll only trade him if they can get some legit players back, and Tony Allen + a handful of unproven second rounders probably isn't going to get it done.

[Finkelskyhook]

John Salmons would be a great sixth man for us but he's good enough to start and be a second or third option on 25 other teams out there, and we don't have the pieces to afford that kinda guy.

What am I missing?  Salmons seems like the posterchild case of a person putting up big numbers for a bad team.  Good enough to start on which 25 other teams?  He's a career backup.  He's also putting up the current numbers when their best player is out.  The fact that their best player plays the same position makes Salmons tradable.  But the strange infactuation for somebody who has had, at best, a pedestrian career for losing teams is strange.

Reminds me of the strange blog infactuation for the same type of player (big stats on bad teams) who is Salmons'former teammate.  Shareef Abdur-Rahim.

[lon3lytoaster]

I've always liked Salmons and thought he was both underrated and underused. We just missed the boat for him, though. The time to get him was maybe 2-3 years ago when he was a journey man. I was hoping the C's could have got him in free agency over Dan Dickau, but I doubt at the time he wanted to be here.

[ssspence]

I'm not overvaluing TA, to the contrary. I'm talking about salaries that add up to the NBA's needless matching guidelines. Anyway Veal makes more sense or else we'd have to trade at least one additional guy and it becomes likely too lopsided. Too bad, because I'd almost prefer to keep him over TA if we're adding a guy like Salmons.

Did anyone else see SAC play Sunday night? They're awful, and officially rebuilding. I say there's a chance they'd consider some combo (two) of Walker, Leon, Baby, Giddens or Pruitt, plus Scal. Walker, for example, could be an excellent project for them at the 3 next to KM, and might help sell tickets as he starts to develop.

I say there's some value there, the question is what we're willing to give up.

[crownsy]

I'm not overvaluing TA, to the contrary. I'm talking about salaries that add up to the NBA's needless matching guidelines. Anyway Veal makes more sense or else we'd have to trade at least one additional guy and it becomes likely too lopsided. Too bad, because I'd almost prefer to keep him over TA if we're adding a guy like Salmons.

Did anyone else see SAC play Sunday night? They're awful, and officially rebuilding. I say there's a chance they'd consider some combo (two) of Walker, Leon, Baby, Giddens or Pruitt, plus Scal. Walker, for example, could be an excellent project for them at the 3 next to KM, and might help sell tickets as he starts to develop.

I say there's some value there, the question is what we're willing to give up.

to rebuild, you need prospects to develop. what can they develop out of

Scal- Not an NBA everyday player

TA- bench enigma with huge injury history

two second round picks (JR is a second) they didn't want to draft on draft day, and have shown nothing?

Baby- a 2nd round guy who's currently struggling to earn minutes ina  9 man rotation.

any of those are horrid decisions for them. the only guy they'd be remotly intersted in, IMO, is leon, and he's to valuable to our bench at the moment.

[winsomme]

big fan of Salmons myself too...

the thing that is very difficult to assess right now is the value of Walker and Giddens. for all we know, either of these guys could end up being as good or better than Salmons.

they both seem to be playing well in the D-League and have enticing elements to their games, they just aren't ready to be getting minutes on our team right now.

the reason to trade Salmons is that big contract that he got. now that SAC seems to be moving more and more towards rebuild mode, they will want short term contracts, prospects and picks...

depending on how other teams look at Giddens and Walker, i think that is a package that we could put together as long as the targeted player isn't making too per year because the one thing we don't have is matching salaries..

[indeedproceed]

John Salmons would be a great sixth man for us but he's good enough to start and be a second or third option on 25 other teams out there, and we don't have the pieces to afford that kinda guy.

What am I missing?  Salmons seems like the posterchild case of a person putting up big numbers for a bad team.  Good enough to start on which 25 other teams?  He's a career backup.  He's also putting up the current numbers when their best player is out.  The fact that their best player plays the same position makes Salmons tradable.  But the strange infactuation for somebody who has had, at best, a pedestrian career for losing teams is strange.

Reminds me of the strange blog infactuation for the same type of player (big stats on bad teams) who is Salmons'former teammate.  Shareef Abdur-Rahim.

I think you're missing that Salmons is legit talent. Just because he plays for a bad team doesn't mean anything. Paul Pierce played for a bad team and put up good numbers for a long time but I think he's proved he's a legit talent. The case is Salmons plays behind Kevin Martin, who is a top tier scorer, so he's a backup. But Salmons would start for teams like Orlando, New Orleans, I think he's better than Batum, who starts for the blazers. Thats just a few teams. I could go on.

[winsomme]

I'm not overvaluing TA, to the contrary. I'm talking about salaries that add up to the NBA's needless matching guidelines. Anyway Veal makes more sense or else we'd have to trade at least one additional guy and it becomes likely too lopsided. Too bad, because I'd almost prefer to keep him over TA if we're adding a guy like Salmons.

Did anyone else see SAC play Sunday night? They're awful, and officially rebuilding. I say there's a chance they'd consider some combo (two) of Walker, Leon, Baby, Giddens or Pruitt, plus Scal. Walker, for example, could be an excellent project for them at the 3 next to KM, and might help sell tickets as he starts to develop.

I say there's some value there, the question is what we're willing to give up.

to rebuild, you need prospects to develop. what can they develop out of

Scal- Not an NBA everyday player

TA- bench enigma with huge injury history

two second round picks (JR is a second) they didn't want to draft on draft day, and have shown nothing?

Baby- a 2nd round guy who's currently struggling to earn minutes ina  9 man rotation.

any of those are horrid decisions for them. the only guy they'd be remotly intersted in, IMO, is leon, and he's to valuable to our bench at the moment.

Giddens, Walker and Pruitt are all interesting prospects, crown....i'm not sure why you are so down on them.

the thing that makes a prospect a prospect is because they haven't really shown what they can do yet, but we certainly have seen flashes of Pruitt and Walker and Giddens seem to be playing well in the D-League..

they're not "prime" prospects, but then again, we're not targeting "prime" players in trade.

i think it is very difficult to know what other teams think of those three guys...

[Chris]

John Salmons would be a great sixth man for us but he's good enough to start and be a second or third option on 25 other teams out there, and we don't have the pieces to afford that kinda guy.

What am I missing?  Salmons seems like the posterchild case of a person putting up big numbers for a bad team.  Good enough to start on which 25 other teams?  He's a career backup.  He's also putting up the current numbers when their best player is out.  The fact that their best player plays the same position makes Salmons tradable.  But the strange infactuation for somebody who has had, at best, a pedestrian career for losing teams is strange.

Reminds me of the strange blog infactuation for the same type of player (big stats on bad teams) who is Salmons'former teammate.  Shareef Abdur-Rahim.

I somewhat with you on this.  Clearly his stats are greatly exagerated because of the team he is playing on.  He is kind of like Tony Allen right before his knee injury.  When you are given the green light, a lot of guys can put up good numbers in the NBA.

However, unlike Allen, Salmons has shown in the past that he can be a very efficient player within a team system.  This makes him a very valuable commodity.  

Anyone expecting him to come in, and be a star would be sorely disapointed, but I think he could come on to many teams in the league and be a heck of a sixth man (or a 5th starter), and basically be the guy we want Tony Allen to be.