Kurt Thomas

by JustAnotherWarrior on Dec 30, 2007 1:30 AM PST Comment 21 comments

Kurt Thomas is an expiring contract. I'm pretty sure Seattle would like to get something for him, before he walks away this summer. Our TPE gives us an opportunity to acquire him. Seattle wouldn't want any contracts back, besides nobody would give anybody good for an expiring veteran. Our draft pick combined with a TPE can be pretty enticing, and give us an edge over the most of the other offers.
I liked the role that Kurt Thomas played for Phoenix last couple of seasons. This year they are really strugglling with their half-court play, especially on the defensive end without Thomas. He is pushing 35, but I think he has couple of years left in him. The guy is a type of savvy veteran that still has game, that our team can defenitely use come playoff time.
He is tough,strong, big(listed at 235lb, but if you watch him play this year, he is at list 250lb). On the defensive end he is a strong defender overall,especially in the post, superb rebounder( rb/3min of PT), and he can block some shots for you too. On the offensive end, he has a real legit mid-range jumper, I can see him and Baron working the pick and pop. Plus he can grab some offensive rebounds, and set some solid screens for both Baron and Monta.
One knock on Thomas is that he is very slow. Somehow, it didn't stop him to succesfully play under D'Antnoni in Phoenix. He is definately not a starter in our system, but rather a closer(when we stop running and start jacking up 3s), and I would expect him to give us a good 18-22min a game, mostly at center(with Harrington at PF)and also depending on an opponent's frontcourt strength.
He won't make us a championship contender,but against teams like Utah or San Antonio he can be a real difference maker for this team, banging with Boozer and Duncan in the post. Plus he knows his role,and seems like a real professional.

Anybody else likes Kurt Thomas? Do you guys think he'll be a good fit?

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think...

...Thomas probably did things in Phoenix he couldn't do for us, because we rely so heavily on mismatches while Phoenix still maintains the formality of conventional positions.

by Zack Vank on Dec 25, 2007 1:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Not bad

I like this idea...

by WhatUSay on Dec 25, 2007 10:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

For the same reasons

that PHX essentially payed Seattle to take Thomas off their hands, I don't think he'd be a good fir for the warriors.

Having Thomas in the game helps our half-court defense and rebounding, but he'll also slow down the team. He's obviously not going to relieve the pressure on Baron or Jackson in terms of creating offense, and while he's a solid one-on-one defender, he doesn't force a whole lot of turnovers that we can turn into points either.

He doesn't fit the warriors style of play. Playing him would be a concession to San Antonio and Utah that we're playing their game, their tempo, etc. and I don't think you want to go there.

by BingBluNT on Dec 25, 2007 2:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Kurt Thomas

someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the primary reason for the Suns moving Kurt Thomas is because they'd currently be deep into luxury tax territory right now if they still had his contract on the payroll, and he was the biggest contract behind Nash/Amare/Marion, and obviously they didn't want to trade any of them away.

I think Kurt Thomas could add some solid post defense and rebounding to our squad. I think there might be other better ways of using our TPE, but trading some of it + a pick for Kurt Thomas is far from a horrible idea.

by jlagace on Dec 25, 2007 2:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Right

Kurt Thomas was traded in order to avoid the luxury tax, not because he wasn't needed in Phoenix.

I think grabbing him is an intriguing idea. It helps alieviate two of the Warriors weaknesses, rebounding and interior defense.

It would be funny if the Warriors ended up giving the TPE and a 1st for Thomas. Then Seattle would have landed THREE 1st rounders for him. Two from Phoenix for taking him and one for getting rid of him.

by San Francisco Slim on Dec 25, 2007 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Its correct

that they needed to shed salary but the fact that they chose to move thomas and not someone else is what we should focus on. if having a big who could compete in the halfcourt was essential to their championship run, they wouldn't have traded him.

the warriors need to add a player with size who can play their game. kurt thomas doesn't fit that description, and doesn't have roll in what the warriors attempt to do on either end of the court.

by BingBluNT on Dec 25, 2007 8:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Kurt

if having a big who could compete in the halfcourt was essential to their championship run, they wouldn't have traded him.

Not true. They are doing everything possible to avoid the luxury tax. Thomas was the most expendable player they had that would put them under the tax (not counting Diaw or Banks, who no one would take)

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Dec 26, 2007 10:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Look at the Suns payroll

Who else should they have moved instead of Thomas?

trade Nash? trade Marion? trade Amare? no way.

We should know as much as anybody that a player's production precedes his size. Kurt Thomas is only 6'9" but he pulls down an insane amount of boards and he's a strong, smart post defender.

by jlagace on Dec 26, 2007 10:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Diaw

they want to move Diaw but his BYC status and lengthy contract made that too difficult this offseaon

A Golden state of mind Indeed.

AIM: Jetforze

by OptionZero on Dec 26, 2007 4:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

No Thanks

I don't think this is a good idea. Thomas is too old and slow for this system. We may as well bring back ole' Creaky Knees - Dale Davis.

I do think Pietrus is trade bait to land a bigger body in the New Year, but Thomas isn't the answer.

by TolbertRules on Dec 25, 2007 3:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Regular season or playoff decision?

Thomas would absolutely help in the playoffs, and he's a known quantity to Nelson who would use him appropriately in the regular season to both keep our tempo and keep KT fresh for the second season. Can we do better with our TPE closer to the trade deadline? and what would we have to give Seattle? (Remember we're not 'trading' the TPE we're allowed to absorb the contract because of it.) If MP & a #2 did the trick, I'd pull the trigger but a #1 for Thomas means were putting all our chips in for this season and curtails our ability to keep building through the draft ...

by hardcore on Dec 25, 2007 4:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pietrus value

Pietrus can veto any trade for the rest of the year and any team acquiring him does not acquire Bird-rights. Seattle is deep in rebuilding. Pietrus, without Bird-rights does not help their cause long term or short term. To Seattle, I suspect he has no real value.

The Sonics are presently a disaster. Durant, as talented as he may be, has much, much, much to learn about the game. If he doesn't develop some semblance of accuracy in his shot on a more regular basis, he'll earn a ton of money as a high scoring player on a terrible team for the rest of his career. Green hasn't been worth anything yet either. Their front court has been atrocious, even when their only goal has been to get the ball to one of these two to see if they have some game.

I think that they're using this season to simply see what they have in Durant and Green. I'm not sure how further weakening their terrible front line helps them develop Durant or Green more, which at this point seems to be their only goal for the season.

by jae on Dec 26, 2007 9:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Once again...

...I wouldn't really be that interested in Thomas. In all honesty, I don't think he lends much that we couldn't get elsewhere, cheaper and younger (like if Nelson would play Patrick O'Bryant someday). I also disapprove of trading picks as a general rule.

by Zack Vank on Dec 25, 2007 7:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

Did you see a Seattle-Boston game today? Thomas played Garnett 1on1 in the post(they couldn't double team because Boston was good from a long range) and got him to shoot 8-22, matched his rebounding while playing 29 minutes vs 33 for KG, and also blocked 4 shots. Do you think Biedrins would be able to guard Garnett 1on1 and deny him post position, or we would just double team KG and let Boston hit wide open jumpers and 3s?

by JustAnotherWarrior on Dec 28, 2007 12:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank You

someone judging him based on his actual on-court value, rather than just looking at his player profile and seeing that he's only 6'9" or checking his career BPG of 0.8. The man can flat out rebound and defend the post, period.

by jlagace on Dec 28, 2007 1:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree Thomas is too slow for our style but...

so is Mbenga. Mbenga has a role on this team when our smaller guys simply cannot stop the other team's big. I think Thomas would be an upgrade over Mbenga and if we had him to take Mbenga's minutes we would be a better team.

It's almost like the Warriors have 6 guys out there... they always have a guy open! - Jon Barry commentating game 3 last year

by gsw4life on Dec 26, 2007 10:34 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

If no other bigs available

I don't see a lot of bigs like Thomas becoming available, so why not inquire on what it would take. Thomas would give us a good defender and make sure we don't have to play Al (except against Phoenix) at center.
We are not asking him to come here and play major minutes. Just come in, relieve some guys, and give us a legit player to go up against a big who usually kills us in the post.

by tangel29 on Dec 28, 2007 1:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'll throw my name

Into the "if Kurt Thomas is available, absolutely" pile.

Experienced but not old (just turned 35)
As Lagace points out, able to man up guys like KG and Boozer and at least keep them honest
Experienced in the uptempo game, having played the last two years in D'Antoni-ball
Expiring contract
Solid FT shooter (77% career)

Really, what more can you ask for in a backup 4/5? Young guys with his skills are either prohibitively expensive (in talent or $$) or simply not available. He's basically everything we want from Austin "KG 0.2" Croshere and a bag of chips. He doesn't have the long-range shooting, obviously, but we're not exactly lacking for chuckers, plus Croshere isn't actually a good perimeter shooter (the fact that he thinks he is is probably the single biggest flaw in his game).

I'd imagine replacing KG 0.2 with Kurt Thomas would be at least as much of an upgrade for this team as replacing Troy Hudson with Jason Williams. Root for the Sonics to keep losing and maybe we can make this happen. Or maybe expand the deal to include Ridnour or Watson....?

by Sleepy Freud on Dec 28, 2007 7:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

re

Some great points there.
And along these lines, like you said, maybe we get Ridnour or Watson thrown in for maybe another player.
I've seem rumors too that Ridnour is falling out of favor in Seattle.

by jtoj on Dec 28, 2007 2:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

35 is old by nba standards

I'd pass on Kurt Thomas. I like the guy but it's a no go for the Warriors.

by gswfanforlife on Dec 28, 2007 4:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Age

Most likely, he'd just be a rental for the second half of the season + the postseason, it's not like we'll be committing to him in any long contracts because his contract expires in the offseason. The age worry is kind of moot, unless we really believe his legs are just going to magically breakdown sometime in the next 4 months, just because he's no 35 years old.

If he was able to be a key contributor to the Suns uptempo system just a year ago, and his contract expires in the offseason, I see no risk involved in using the TPE or trading away players that only rack up DNP's on the end of the bench to acquire him. He can only help the team.

Unless, of course, there's a better way Mullin can think of to use the TPE. This idea is tops in my book.

by jlagace on Dec 29, 2007 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs