Vivek's continued involvement should worry everybody...

Can this team succeed with Vivek pulling the strings?


  • Total voters
    48
#1
This has been touched upon somewhat in other threads but not really discussed independently. What we know:
-Vlade himself said he brought several deals to Vivek for approval.
-Vivek coveted Buddy, both during the draft, as well as subsequent conversations (per Buddy).
-Additionally, Vlade himself said that they were not interested in other deals, implying this WAS the deal they wanted, which would explain the need to make the deal during that weekend instead of holding out.
-Cousins just revealed Vivek texted him about potential trade deals and wanted feedback on specific player(s).

We know he was offered two first rounders, but before he could get approval to trade Cousins, his agent told NOLA he wouldn't re-sign, so NOLA yanked that offer which was why Vlade only had the conditional pick. He saw the deal's value declining, as he stated, so they made the deal. This was the "better offer" he mentioned, and also explains his negative comments about agents working against him.

Now, regardless of it was indeed the best deal isn't the issue here, nor is moving Cousins. The issue is that, at every step, Vivek was involved. He involved himself in the draft, he involved himself by only agreeing to the deal that included Buddy (second time around, as Vlade didn't get his approval fast enough, contradicting his claim that he has authority to make all decisions), he involved himself by directly contacting their franchise player about potential deals, etc. Despite his publicly low profile recently, all indications are that he's still very much a part of front office decisions, and that has me very concerned for the future of this team.

This issue is arguably more relevant than ever if this team does indeed keep their two picks in this draft, which is one of the strongest in years. If they disregard the expertise of their scouts and real GM, and Vivek is calling the shots, that is something that can seriously hamper this team's growth.
 
#3
I hate the trade because I love Boogie.
I hate the trade because of the way it was handled (#SacramentoProud anyone ?).
I hate the trade because the return value is very poor.
I hate the trade because it's a complete turnover with the moves Divac made before and it reveals that there is no long term coherent strategy.
And above all, I hate the trade because it means that Vivek is still way too involved in basketball decisions.

After all the turmoil/drama these last 4 years, Divac was really my only hope. Knowing now that he is not hand free has made me lose any faith in this franchise's future. I'm with Brickie on this : I am now convinced that there won't be anything good for the Kings and its fans while Vivek is in charge.
 
#4
Ummm ya. It will turn that we made a good deal trading cousins. We got Hield, Evans and a first round pick for a guy never won more than 33 games. If Cousins learns from this and becomes a defender then he might improve. But probably not. He never would have if was still a King. I don't have a problem with Vivek. The problem on this team is gone.
 
#5
Jeannie Buss fired Mitch Kupchak and her Brother for not keeping her in the loop on trade deals. When it comes down to it the owner is the one with the MONEY.

That said I think the Owner needs to let the Basketball people make the Basketball decisions. The money decisions.........all bets are off.
 
#6
Ummm ya. It will turn that we made a good deal trading cousins. We got Hield, Evans and a first round pick for a guy never won more than 33 games. If Cousins learns from this and becomes a defender then he might improve. But probably not. He never would have if was still a King. I don't have a problem with Vivek. The problem on this team is gone.
I DO have a problem with Vivek. He should have the final say but until it is yes or no, he should leave it to the ones he says 'are smarter than him.' Take Cousins out of the picture, he is gone. Now the constant that has been under Vivek's tenure as controlling partner is lack of patience, no consistent path and rash decisions. Stability starts at the top and that is entirely on him.

Vivek IS a problem.
 
#7
I DO have a problem with Vivek. He should have the final say but until it is yes or no, he should leave it to the ones he says 'are smarter than him.' Take Cousins out of the picture, he is gone. Now the constant that has been under Vivek's tenure as controlling partner is lack of patience, no consistent path and rash decisions. Stability starts at the top and that is entirely on him.

Vivek IS a problem.
I agree. But the main problem is, that he didn't hire people, that are necessarily smarter than him. How so? He doesn't really have the skills and knowledge to determine, if someone is very smart when it comes to basketball.
Making personell decisions in a market you don't know anything about seems a pretty difficult task for me.
 
#8
I agree. But the main problem is, that he didn't hire people, that are necessarily smarter than him. How so? He doesn't really have the skills and knowledge to determine, if someone is very smart when it comes to basketball.
Making personell decisions in a market you don't know anything about seems a pretty difficult task for me.
It was in response to a quote that he made when he first hired PDA. It was one of his many smug condescending quotes he's made, like it's our team 'cause he sure hasn't acted that way.
 
#10
This issue is arguably more relevant than ever if this team does indeed keep their two picks in this draft, which is one of the strongest in years. If they disregard the expertise of their scouts and real GM, and Vivek is calling the shots, that is something that can seriously hamper this team's growth.
I don't think the last 2 drafts were Vivek's call.

I think Vlade picked WCS, Bodgan, Papa, Malichi, and Skal on his own. I don't think it was Vivek's call at all.

As for big trades of your franchise player? I think definitely, the owner should have a say in the final approval of any deal.
 
#11
I don't think the last 2 drafts were Vivek's call.

I think Vlade picked WCS, Bodgan, Papa, Malichi, and Skal on his own. I don't think it was Vivek's call at all.

As for big trades of your franchise player? I think definitely, the owner should have a say in the final approval of any deal.
If the comment to Buddy from Vivek that 'they'll get him yet' was true maybe Vlade only got his picks because Vivek couldn't get his. The man doesn't make it being a fan of the team (the players and coaches) any easier.
 
#12
If the comment to Buddy from Vivek that 'they'll get him yet' was true maybe Vlade only got his picks because Vivek couldn't get his. The man doesn't make it being a fan of the team (the players and coaches) any easier.
Buddy was gone before the Kings picked.

The rumor before the draft was the Kings wanted either Dunn or Hield, but both were gone, before the Kings picked. I'm sure the F.O. probably liked the same players, Thus all the trade downs for Bogdan, Papa, Malichia, and Skal.
 
#13
We know he was offered two first rounders, but before he could get approval to trade Cousins, his agent told NOLA he wouldn't re-sign, so NOLA yanked that offer which was why Vlade only had the conditional pick. He saw the deal's value declining, as he stated, so they made the deal. This was the "better offer" he mentioned, and also explains his negative comments about agents working against him.
As far as this is concerned, this is on the agent trying to deter a trade and having DMC lose $30 million in the process. Which is the agents job to do.

Before any big trade like this, N.O. would want some re-assurances from the player or his agent that he would re-sign. That is normal protocol. No matter how fast Vivek would have agreed, N.O. would have asked DMC's people and they would have pulled the 2nd 1st rounder anyways, because DMC wouldn't commit to re-signing.
 
#14
Buddy was gone before the Kings picked.

The rumor before the draft was the Kings wanted either Dunn or Hield, but both were gone, before the Kings picked. I'm sure the F.O. probably liked the same players, Thus all the trade downs for Bogdan, Papa, Malichia, and Skal.
That was my point. I guess I didn't make it too well. Did the kings want Hield because the "Kings" wanted Hield or more importantly because Vivek wanted Hield? Why would a owner tell a player that they're going to get him unless he is fixated on him? And if he was available, and knowing what we think we know now would you still claim that it wasn't Vivek's call. Not even going into the tampering issues.
 
#15
As far as this is concerned, this is on the agent trying to deter a trade and having DMC lose $30 million in the process. Which is the agents job to do.

Before any big trade like this, N.O. would want some re-assurances from the player or his agent that he would re-sign. That is normal protocol. No matter how fast Vivek would have agreed, N.O. would have asked DMC's people and they would have pulled the 2nd 1st rounder anyways, because DMC wouldn't commit to re-signing.
Not so sure about this. Normal protocol? Cousins was still under contract for nearly a year and a half. The normal maximum contract length is only four years. If he was an expiring then yes you could make a legitimate claim that it would be "protocol" to see if he would re-sign. He wasn't and it would be your job to convince him to re-sign in the nearly season and a half that you would have had him.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#16
That was my point. I guess I didn't make it too well. Did the kings want Hield because the "Kings" wanted Hield or more importantly because Vivek wanted Hield? Why would a owner tell a player that they're going to get him unless he is fixated on him? And if he was available, and knowing what we think we know now would you still claim that it wasn't Vivek's call. Not even going into the tampering issues.
Putting fixation on a player aside, I don't think there's proper tampering here. Here's the relevant section from the NBA constitution, taken from an NBA memo:

Article 35A of the NBA Constitution states that it's a violation of the league's anti-tampering rule for any person affiliated with an NBA team to directly or indirectly (i) entice, induce, or persuade, or attempt to entice, induce or persuade, any player, coach, GM or other person under contract to any other NBA team to enter into negotiations for or relating to that person's services or to negotiate or contract for such services, or (ii) otherwise interfere with the employment relationship between that employee and the other NBA team.
The bolding is mine. There's really no particular reason to think that Vivek was trying to get Buddy to negotiate with the Kings by saying that - Buddy can't even negotiate at all for three and a half more years. Telling a player "I really like you and I want to eventually find a way to get you on my team" while the player is warming up on courtside is not exactly the same as calling an impending free agent before the free agent period begins and trying to negotiate with them. All the examples I can quickly find of the NBA declaring tampering (including one from the Kings when Malone was first introduced as coach) involve comments about impending free agents, or actual negotiation with executives currently employed by another team. If Hield were an impending free agent, there would be a better argument for tampering.

At any rate, Larry Coon says the following in his FAQ:

...the league's practice has been to wait until a team lodges a complaint before investigating...
I don't think the Pelicans are going to be lodging a complaint.
 
#18
Interesting. I was going by reports indicating that is was a no-no. And no, I don't think they're going to be lodging a complaint either.
 
#19
I hate the trade because it's a complete turnover with the moves Divac made before and it reveals that there is no long term coherent strategy
I agree with most of what you wrote (although I'm not convinced at this point that there were significantly better deals out there....we will never know); however I do think there was a contingency plan last offseason this this. That is why we loaded up with draft quantity/foreign prospect, and generally signed short term deals. Looking back, also likely why vlade took a swing at papa in the draft....not that I agree with all those moves, but does seem like two paths forward they were preparing for.
 
#20
If the comment to Buddy from Vivek that 'they'll get him yet' was true maybe Vlade only got his picks because Vivek couldn't get his. The man doesn't make it being a fan of the team (the players and coaches) any easier.
Just because Vivek wanted buddy didn't mean others in the organization weren't also high on him. Could very well be that vivek fell in love BASED on the opinion of their scouting department and vlade. Look, he was picked 5th overall and thus far one of the better performing rookies in the draft, it's not like they were completely unfounded in their admiration. I'm not trying to defend Vivek and Vlade around the trade, but I'm not convinced it was some sinister plot all along to land Vivek's favorite player of all time.
 
#21
I got off blasting Vivek & Vlade in the immediate post-trade aftermath, but if there are some teams that will trade away their Franchise Player without the owner signing off I'd like to know which teams they are?

Also, it is ironic to me that the people killing Vivek the hardest are the ardent DeMarcus supporters. If the consensus narrative is to be believed, Vivek has personally swum against the tide of all his advisers in clinging to DeMarcus this long. Vlade etc have wanted him gone for a long time but Vivek was stubborn. Vivek has been the "ride or die with DMC" guys' best friend.

Watching Vlade's body language and interactions with the team, there is NO WAY that Vlade was in the "keep DMC" camp and Vivek ordered him to make a rash trade to get rid of him for Heild. And there is no proof that a better offer existed outside a previous better offer from the Pels.
 
#23
Not so sure about this. Normal protocol? Cousins was still under contract for nearly a year and a half. The normal maximum contract length is only four years. If he was an expiring then yes you could make a legitimate claim that it would be "protocol" to see if he would re-sign. He wasn't and it would be your job to convince him to re-sign in the nearly season and a half that you would have had him.
If your are going to basically trade 3 1st round picks (This year's Hield, 2017 first and 2019 first), it would be a fire-able offense if you didn't ask for permission to speak to the player's or agent and get a feel if they would stay with you past 1 year and 25 games. That would be a lot to give up for a rental and a hope that you can get them to stay. In fact, a lot of times, an extension is discussed, before the trade is actually made.
 
#24
Does anyone know for sure if the Sixers 2017 second was a replacement to the 2019 first, or was it already on the table? I feel like everyone is sleeping on that chip in the trade, if the draft is as deep as everyone is saying. That pick around #35 maybe better if Sixers tank yet again.

Was the original deal:

Heild + Pels 2017 first + 2017 Sixers second + Pels 2019 first

or

Heild + Pels 2017 first + Pels 2019 first


In other words, was the Agent Interference Tax a whole first rounder, or just a downgrade from a 2019 first (from a presumed playoff team) to a 2017 second (from a high lottery team)?
 
#25
however I do think there was a contingency plan last offseason this this. That is why we loaded up with draft quantity/foreign prospect, and generally signed short term deals. Looking back, also likely why vlade took a swing at papa in the draft....not that I agree with all those moves, but does seem like two paths forward they were preparing for.
Good points.

If you look at all the moves since Vlade became GM, he always had one finger on "blow it up (Vlade's Camp)" and one finger on "let's try to make if work with DMC (Vivek's camp)", problem is, you can't go half-way on this decision. Either "blow it up" and rebuild or build around DMC.

For all the Vivek bashers who are DMC supporters, I think Vivek was the one that wanted to keep DMC all along and Vlade and the FO wanted to blow it up.

Thus, this rushed trade, when Vivek finally had his moment of weakness and approved a DMC trade. Vlade had to pull the trigger.

For better or worse, we are in the "blow it up" phase, but Vlade at least planned ahead and has some young talent to build around in Buddy, WCS, Skal, Malichi, Bogdan and Papa.
 
#26
I got off blasting Vivek & Vlade in the immediate post-trade aftermath, but if there are some teams that will trade away their Franchise Player without the owner signing off I'd like to know which teams they are?

Also, it is ironic to me that the people killing Vivek the hardest are the ardent DeMarcus supporters. If the consensus narrative is to be believed, Vivek has personally swum against the tide of all his advisers in clinging to DeMarcus this long. Vlade etc have wanted him gone for a long time but Vivek was stubborn. Vivek has been the "ride or die with DMC" guys' best friend.

Watching Vlade's body language and interactions with the team, there is NO WAY that Vlade was in the "keep DMC" camp and Vivek ordered him to make a rash trade to get rid of him for Heild. And there is no proof that a better offer existed outside a previous better offer from the Pels.
Since I have been giving Vivek a lot of grief on the board today, especially this thread, I don't think you can put me in the category of ardent Demarcus supporters. I want him to succeed and I want the Kings to succeed. The next team that trades away their Franchise Player without the owner signing off will be the first one.

And I do not believe the consensus narrative. Too many similarities to how the Malone firing went down and the spin that followed.

And for the third point, Vlade wanting him gone (or preparing for that eventuality) and Vivek making a rash trade to get rid of him for Heild are not mutually exclusive. Both could be true.
 

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#27
Ummm ya. It will turn that we made a good deal trading cousins. We got Hield, Evans and a first round pick for a guy never won more than 33 games. If Cousins learns from this and becomes a defender then he might improve. But probably not. He never would have if was still a King. I don't have a problem with Vivek. The problem on this team is gone.
I don't know how we switched to Cousins. Vivek has been a meddler from day one. It seems difficult for him to let Vlade have autonomy. Granted, Vlade is a youngster at the GM game but just the same, he has the mental tools and experience. Let him fly, Vivek, let him fly. Let other GMs know who is in charge (Vlade) and that any negotiation is NOT dependent on the blessing of Vivek. They are talking to the decision maker.
 
#28
If your are going to basically trade 3 1st round picks (This year's Hield, 2017 first and 2019 first), it would be a fire-able offense if you didn't ask for permission to speak to the player's or agent and get a feel if they would stay with you past 1 year and 25 games. That would be a lot to give up for a rental and a hope that you can get them to stay. In fact, a lot of times, an extension is discussed, before the trade is actually made.
If Cousins agent was talking to potential trade destinations then I have to believe Cuz was well aware he could be traded.

Fegan had millions of $ of motivation to try and drive down Cousins trade value to get the Kings to keep him and sign him to that mega-max extension this off-season. Telling teams that Cuz wouldn't sign an extension (whether he would or not) would drive his trade value down making it less attractive to the Kings to trade him. I find it interesting that Cuzco is saying publicly that he is open to re-signing when days ago reports were the opposite.

I don't know how this all went down but it appears that there wasn't much honesty from either side.
 
#29
Since I have been giving Vivek a lot of grief on the board today, especially this thread, I don't think you can put me in the category of ardent Demarcus supporters. I want him to succeed and I want the Kings to succeed. The next team that trades away their Franchise Player without the owner signing off will be the first one.

And I do not believe the consensus narrative. Too many similarities to how the Malone firing went down and the spin that followed.

And for the third point, Vlade wanting him gone (or preparing for that eventuality) and Vivek making a rash trade to get rid of him for Heild are not mutually exclusive. Both could be true.
ok. but I am positive deep to my core... having watched Vlade up close throughout the Nuggets game - he was having a personal moment of triumph on how this all turned out. He's not a mere puppet/yes man in this... it was very plain that I was watching a guy who was rejoicing that HIS plan was off to a good start. No doubt about it.
 
#30
whozit said:
If the comment to Buddy from Vivek that 'they'll get him yet' was true maybe Vlade only got his picks because Vivek couldn't get his. The man doesn't make it being a fan of the team (the players and coaches) any easier.
Just because Vivek wanted buddy didn't mean others in the organization weren't also high on him. Could very well be that vivek fell in love BASED on the opinion of their scouting department and vlade. Look, he was picked 5th overall and thus far one of the better performing rookies in the draft, it's not like they were completely unfounded in their admiration. I'm not trying to defend Vivek and Vlade around the trade, but I'm not convinced it was some sinister plot all along to land Vivek's favorite player of all time.
My comment had nothing to with the trade but that little details have now slipped out that he may not be as removed from the basketball decisions has we had been led to believe/hoped. Final say? Yes, he pays the checks. Sinister plot? No, but still the irritant.