Dallas-Mavs.com Forums - View Single Post

NVDA · 08-23-2003, 12:50 AM

Reposted from here

Honestly, since when has being a deep team been a bad thing for the Kings? I think we all realize that the Kings were a Chris Webber injury away from having the best shot out of any team at the 2003 NBA Championship. And I definitely know that everyone here realizes the Kings were one Horry 3 away from being 2002 NBA Champions. How would the Kings have survived last season without a deep bench? Does anyone here honestly believe Webber will play 82 games this year?

What I think happened was that Petrie got impatient; he was getting tired of burning money without getting a title, and had to drop players like flys to clear the cap this year. Dropping Hedo, Pollard, JJ, Keon, and some draft picks for what the Kings got this offseason is losing out.

Kings bench is as follows:

1) Bobby
2) Miller
3) Massenburg
4) Peeler
5) Wallace
6) Songalia
7) Funderburke

Clearly Bobby is Bobby, and is the Kings best player by far, and 6th man last year so he's still the cornerstone of the Kings bench.

Miller was voted an All Star last year but let's face it, being voted an All Star is a popularity contest (Shaq throwing a fist at Miller is probably the only reason anyone even remembered to vote Miller as a C in the Eastern Conference ballot). And of course, Miller certainly didn't deserve it based on his numbers last season (13 ppg, 8 rpg, and 0.5 bpg is hardly All Star). The fact that he's one of the best centers means nothing because of the extreme depletion of skilled centers in the NBA. IMO, Keon is just as good as Miller, and certainly a much much better blocker. To pay as much as the Kings did for Miller isn't sensible, despite the C depletion in the league. However, Miller's definitely a good big body bench player, especially as a C. Certainly better than the vast majority in the league on the bench.

Massenburg means nothing, basically a big body worth throwing in for 10 minutes a game. But giving up Pollard for this dude is totally ridiculous. Keon would be playing this spot as well, and it's definitely idiotic to give him up for Massenburg.

Peeler is a good shooter and decent defender, despite his age. However, JJ is a much bigger offensive threat and so Peeler is a downgrade. However, JJ's defense is only mediocre compared to Peeler. Peeler was a good pickup, but overall I'd say the Kings lost out on JJ.

I actually think Wallace is quite good, he has some potential. But obviously Hedo or basically anyone else the Kings had last year can rebound and shoot better than this guy. He especially needs to improve his shot.

Funderburke is another big body the Kings kept, but I'd rather have any of the players the Kings shipped out this offseason than Fundy.

Don't know much about Songalia, doubt he'll make a noticeable impact either way.

What do you guys think? (I'd post this on a Kings board but they ban the vast majority of their Laker fans...).

08-23-2003, 12:50 AM	#1
NVDA Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 8	Kings Bench Wiped Out Reposted from here Honestly, since when has being a deep team been a bad thing for the Kings? I think we all realize that the Kings were a Chris Webber injury away from having the best shot out of any team at the 2003 NBA Championship. And I definitely know that everyone here realizes the Kings were one Horry 3 away from being 2002 NBA Champions. How would the Kings have survived last season without a deep bench? Does anyone here honestly believe Webber will play 82 games this year? What I think happened was that Petrie got impatient; he was getting tired of burning money without getting a title, and had to drop players like flys to clear the cap this year. Dropping Hedo, Pollard, JJ, Keon, and some draft picks for what the Kings got this offseason is losing out. Kings bench is as follows: 1) Bobby 2) Miller 3) Massenburg 4) Peeler 5) Wallace 6) Songalia 7) Funderburke Clearly Bobby is Bobby, and is the Kings best player by far, and 6th man last year so he's still the cornerstone of the Kings bench. Miller was voted an All Star last year but let's face it, being voted an All Star is a popularity contest (Shaq throwing a fist at Miller is probably the only reason anyone even remembered to vote Miller as a C in the Eastern Conference ballot). And of course, Miller certainly didn't deserve it based on his numbers last season (13 ppg, 8 rpg, and 0.5 bpg is hardly All Star). The fact that he's one of the best centers means nothing because of the extreme depletion of skilled centers in the NBA. IMO, Keon is just as good as Miller, and certainly a much much better blocker. To pay as much as the Kings did for Miller isn't sensible, despite the C depletion in the league. However, Miller's definitely a good big body bench player, especially as a C. Certainly better than the vast majority in the league on the bench. Massenburg means nothing, basically a big body worth throwing in for 10 minutes a game. But giving up Pollard for this dude is totally ridiculous. Keon would be playing this spot as well, and it's definitely idiotic to give him up for Massenburg. Peeler is a good shooter and decent defender, despite his age. However, JJ is a much bigger offensive threat and so Peeler is a downgrade. However, JJ's defense is only mediocre compared to Peeler. Peeler was a good pickup, but overall I'd say the Kings lost out on JJ. I actually think Wallace is quite good, he has some potential. But obviously Hedo or basically anyone else the Kings had last year can rebound and shoot better than this guy. He especially needs to improve his shot. Funderburke is another big body the Kings kept, but I'd rather have any of the players the Kings shipped out this offseason than Fundy. Don't know much about Songalia, doubt he'll make a noticeable impact either way. What do you guys think? (I'd post this on a Kings board but they ban the vast majority of their Laker fans...).