Do We Want Gay That Badly?

[hrdboild]

The problem here is that you dismissed an entire body of evidence just because you said so.

Fact: Salmons/Gracia/MbM/DWill/Outlaw highlights the fact that finding a SF in a SF depleted league is tough and even below average SFs are getting paid. That's what I'm getting at, and you don't seem to get it.

Does it though? We drafted Garcia and then signed him to an extension. We traded for Salmons as part of a draft day trade to get a player we apparently were targeting. We also had little cap space available at the time to consider signing a free agent instead. Mbah a Moute was always depth not a featured player (not to discredit him, because I think he was a lot more valuable to this team than Salmons was). Williams started 15 games for us, I'm not ready to write him off as a failure yet. Signing Outlaw was always a joke. None of this past history PROVES that we are incapable of finding a league average SF on the open market. It simply proves that Geoff Petrie failed to do so for a long period of time. In related news, he no longer has the job.

Fact: with or without Gay, the Kings still need a SF and one isn't coming.

Agree with the first part, the second part sounds an awful lot like your opinion. Personally, I'm not frightened by the idea of giving Derrick Williams more of a shot as the starter.

Fact: signing Gay is not emotional, it's logical - even scrub SFs are getting paid money and no respectable SF is coming our way but we already have a very good SF that we can keep for a little more money than most are comfortable with. So what's the logical move here? Let our SF walk or keep the SF? That's the logical conclusion I hope I could have lead you to with by citing the evidence above, but you seem to take it to a completely different realm.

I posted stats which call into question how good Rudy Gay actually is. In light of those stats, I think the conservative estimate of what it would cost to re-sign Rudy Gay (let's say it's 12-13 million per year) is still too much. If you want to take issue with the stats like Brick did, that's one thing. I personally think PER and WS/48 are fairly good barometers of a player's offensive aptitude though and I haven't seen anyone yet claim that Rudy's defense is good enough to make a stronger case than his offensive stats. Other teams making dumb signings also doesn't make it any smarter for us to pay "scrub SFs" or pay average ones like All-Stars so as to avoid the inevitability of signing "scrub SFs". If anything I'm less inclined than most to let the "curse of a small market" force our hand into decisions which don't make financial sense otherwise.

Fact: No one is talking about giving Gay $119M!!! No one.

We don't have a choice, Rudy has a player option. The option year is $19,317,325 according to basketball-reference. I don't see how this is refutable. If we're asking him to opt in than $19 million is exactly what we're talking about. Oh wait, I didn't see the extra digit in there. You're referring to the Joe Johnson example? Well I never said that was in play, just that it was a monumentally stupid signing some other team made because they didn't want to lose a guy for nothing and didn't see any better options out there. Do you see why that example is relevant? The number is astronomical but their reasons for over paying were the same ones you were suggesting in your argument. I would estimate the total of our extension offer to be 4 years and 50 million. That's best-case scenario and I would pass on that.

Fact: Thornton has very little body of work before he got that contract, he did NOT demonstrated that he could play with our franchise player and a lot of that contract was based on faith. Gay has a long body of work and he HAS shown that he can play alongside our franchise player. The Thornton is NOT the same as the Gay situation.

Not the same, no. Just similar. I watched a lot of games this season. Only briefly did the thought occur to me that I'd love to see Rudy Gay playing alongside Cousins for the next 5 years. It lasted for about one road trip of approximately 80% shooting and then reality set in. But this is a subjective opinion. Technically he can play alongside Cousins. And he does have a long body of work -- but that makes those questionable stats that much more compelling for me.

Oddly enough, you are now claiming that Gay doesn't produce wins. When he was an integral part of the playoff bounded Memphis team.

I'm not claiming it so much as I'm citing the stats which claim it. WS/48 is adjusted every year so that .100 is considered to be league average. Rudy Gay's career WS/48 is .081. That includes the 2 years he played on playoff teams in Memphis. His career average in 7 playoff games (he was injured in 2011) is .085. This season it was .021 in Toronto and .114 in Sacramento for a combined total of .091.

Essentially this means that Rudy Gay is producing less wins in his time on the floor than a league average player. And going a step further it means that scoring a ton of points doesn't always help your team if it takes you too many shots to do it and you're not contributing enough in other areas to offset your inefficiency.

...

I'm also not trying to attack you personally. I came off as a little snarky in my first reply as I incorrectly believed you were making your comments somewhat tongue in cheek. It was never my intention to offend, so I apologize for that.

 

[Livinthedream]

I agree with those who've said that this whole thing is about getting Gay to sign long term. We don't necessarily want him to opt into $19mil. We want him to opt out and then sign a new long term deal. One that will allow us to go out and get another free agent, or trade for a high priced player. The value in Gay staying is not just that we need a small forward. It's that we need a recognizable name that can help to attract other free agents to come here. So if we "overpay" for him, it's because keeping him serves a dual purpose that is worth that contract. The Kings can wine and dine Gay all they want though. If PDA doesn't have a coherent plan to get us in the playoffs in the next year or two, Gay is not signing here long term. Push comes to shove, ask Gay to opt in, so he gets his $19 mil, with the promise that we'll try to trade him to a playoff caliber team.

 

[hrdboild]

For comparison's sake, just so you don't think I'm making this stuff up or assigning it more value than it's worth, here are the WS/48 this season for all of the players who made the All-Star game (I excluded Kobe's 6 games of data):

Kevin Durant .295
Blake Griffin .205
Kevin Love .245
Stephen Curry .225
Lamarcus Aldridge .144
Anthony Davis .212
James Harden .221
Dwight Howard .161
Damien Lillard .157
Dirk Nowitzki .199
Tony Parker .141
Chris Paul .270

Carmelo Anthony .172
Paul George .178
Lebron James .264
Kyrie Irving .128
Dywane Wade .149
Chris Bosh .152
DeMar DeRozan .141
Roy Hibbert .108
Joe Johnson .091
Paul Millsap .129
Joakim Noah .190
John Wall .128

Notable snubs -- DeMarcus Cousins .166, Goran Dragic .186, Kyle Lowry .197, Al Jefferson .146

Only one of them didn't make the .100 mark and most are way above that. Is Rudy Gay a good player? If your standard for "good" is just slightly below league average over the course of a career than I suppose so. There is an argument to me made for sticking with what you've got over the uncertainty of trying to find a replacement. But if I told you we were rolling out the red carpet for a player who is statistically below league average wouldn't you have a problem with that? That's where I'm coming from on this. There is a price point where Rudy Gay is valuable even for me, but it's south of $10 million a year and I don't see him taking that. I'm prepared to move on but it appears PDA and Vivek may have other ideas. Win Shares were equally unkind to Tyreke Evans by the way, so I'm confused by this apparent shift in strategy.

 

[beb0p]

Does it though? We drafted Garcia and then signed him to an extension. We traded for Salmons as part of a draft day trade to get a player we apparently were targeting. We also had little cap space available at the time to consider signing a free agent instead. Mbah a Moute was always depth not a featured player (not to discredit him, because I think he was a lot more valuable to this team than Salmons was). Williams started 15 games for us, I'm not ready to write him off as a failure yet. Signing Outlaw was always a joke. None of this past history PROVES that we are incapable of finding a league average SF on the open market. It simply proves that Geoff Petrie failed to do so for a long period of time. In related news, he no longer has the job.

Yes, exactly; we WERE incapable of finding a good SF on the open market; and that includes the new guy PDA, who failed to attract Andre Iguodala. History keeps repeating itself, at some point, one has to realize that this is a pattern, not a one-off.

For that matter, I want more than just "a league average SF."

Agree with the first part, the second part sounds an awful lot like your opinion. Personally, I'm not frightened by the idea of giving Derrick Williams more of a shot as the starter.

I AM very frightened by the thought of Derrick Williams as the starter. I don't know the metrics, but if Gay scored low in that metric then I'd imagine DWill's score must be atrocious. I have not seen anything from him that tells me he is more than a garbage time player. Imo, DWill and Outlaw are at the same tier. Not to mention I am not convinced DWill is a SF. I see his ceiling as a Leon Powe/Ryan Gomes type off-the-bench energy combo forward.

I posted stats which call into question how good Rudy Gay actually is. In light of those stats, I think the conservative estimate of what it would cost to re-sign Rudy Gay (let's say it's 12-13 million per year) is still too much. If you want to take issue with the stats like Brick did, that's one thing. I personally think PER and WS/48 are fairly good barometers of a player's offensive aptitude though and I haven't seen anyone yet claim that Rudy's defense is good enough to make a stronger case than his offensive stats. Other teams making dumb signings also doesn't make it any smarter for us to pay "scrub SFs" or pay average ones like All-Stars so as to avoid the inevitability of signing "scrub SFs". If anything I'm less inclined than most to let the "curse of a small market" force our hand into decisions which don't make financial sense otherwise.

I'd gladly sign Gay to $12-13M a year. Considering that Landry Fields got roughly $6M/yr, Gay is worth more than two Landry Fields, imo

We don't have a choice, Rudy has a player option. The option year is $19,317,325 according to basketball-reference. I don't see how this is refutable. If we're asking him to opt in than $19 million is exactly what we're talking about. Oh wait, I didn't see the extra digit in there. You're referring to the Joe Johnson example? Well I never said that was in play, just that it was a monumentally stupid signing some other team made because they didn't want to lose a guy for nothing and didn't see any better options out there. Do you see why that example is relevant? The number is astronomical but their reasons for over paying were the same ones you were suggesting in your argument. I would estimate the total of our extension offer to be 4 years and 50 million. That's best-case scenario and I would pass on that.

$50 millions to lock up the SF spot for the next four years? Deal.

The thing is, what is the alternative? We sign (name of average SF) to 4 years and $25M? And then had to live with mediocrity again? We go into next summer still needing to plug the SF hole but is $25M poorer?

Not the same, no. Just similar. I watched a lot of games this season. Only briefly did the thought occur to me that I'd love to see Rudy Gay playing alongside Cousins for the next 5 years. It lasted for about one road trip of approximately 80% shooting and then reality set in. But this is a subjective opinion. Technically he can play alongside Cousins. And he does have a long body of work -- but that makes those questionable stats that much more compelling for me.

I don't think Rudy is the perfect fit, but don't let perfect be the enemy of good. I think once the team is rounded out with consistent outside shooting to stretch the floor and a better quality PF, Gay will shine as the team's #2 or #3.

I'm not claiming it so much as I'm citing the stats which claim it. WS/48 is adjusted every year so that .100 is considered to be league average. Rudy Gay's career WS/48 is .081. That includes the 2 years he played on playoff teams in Memphis. His career average in 7 playoff games (he was injured in 2011) is .085. This season it was .021 in Toronto and .114 in Sacramento for a combined total of .091.

I like stats but I also believe in the eye test. I see Gay as a level below the elite SFs but better than most.

I'm also not trying to attack you personally. I came off as a little snarky in my first reply as I incorrectly believed you were making your comments somewhat tongue in cheek. It was never my intention to offend, so I apologize for that.

Don't worry, none taken.

 

[hrdboild]

Yes, exactly; we WERE incapable of finding a good SF on the open market; and that includes the new guy PDA, who failed to attract Andre Iguodala. History keeps repeating itself, at some point, one has to realize that this is a pattern, not a one-off.

I AM very frightened by the thought of Derrick Williams as the starter. I don't know the metrics, but if Gay scored low in that metric then I'd imagine DWill's score must be atrocious. I have not seen anything from him that tells me he is more than a garbage time player. Imo, DWill and Outlaw are at the same tier. Not to mention I am not convinced DWill is a SF. I see his ceiling as a Leon Powe/Ryan Gomes type off-the-bench energy combo forward.

The thing is, what is the alternative? We sign (name of average SF) to 4 years and $25M? And then had to live with mediocrity again? We go into next summer still needing to plug the SF hole but is $25M poorer?

I don't think Rudy is the perfect fit, but don't let perfect be the enemy of good. I think once the team is rounded out with consistent outside shooting to stretch the floor and a better quality PF, Gay will shine as the team's #2 or #3.

I like stats but I also believe in the eye test. I see Gay as a level below the elite SFs but better than most.

I'm not going to respond to everything, just the main points. We did fail to sign Iguodala this summer but the number we were prepared to offer him was a substantial overpay. It's probably a good thing there was a gut check on that. I think Petrie was handicapped though not just by the market but a lack of resources, specifically cash assets, during the last half of his tenure. And PDA hasn't even had a full year yet to make a mark. I acknowledge the possibility that Gay may be the best player we can get in our market. I find that rather depressing though, so I'm trying to pretend otherwise. I have to believe that a charismatic owner, well-liked coach, and brand new arena will make some kind of difference down the line.

I do believe in the eye test too. If my impression of Rudy Gay's game was substantially different than what the advanced metrics show, I would consider that. For me the two reinforce each other. Which leads me to Derrick Williams who I do like despite his pedestrian numbers. And the difference for me is that Williams is still a relative unknown (86 starts, 23 min per game) and his problem is mainly that he's not forcing his will on the game. He hasn't done anything awful, he just hasn't done anything period either for lack of confidence or some other reason. I see talent in there though waiting for the right coach. He's very close to squandering his opportunity though. If he can't show it this season, there's no reason to commit to him beyond that. Rudy Gay has started 555 NBA games and averaged 36 minutes per game and more than 15 shots per game. We know exactly who he is and there is more than enough data on him to draw some pretty reliable conclusions.

So while I don't hate the idea of bringing back Rudy Gay in the right context (as the second/third option in a lineup filled with great defenders) I think his opinion of himself is such that he's going to demand star player money. As a #1 option he's clearly failed. I don't think he cuts it as a #2 option either on a top 5 team. That's where I lean on the WS/48 numbers. So how much are we really going to commit to a guy who's maybe a #2 or #3 and most likely not an All-Star? It's just not worth breaking the bank for in my opinion. Keep him if you like but by all means don't kill yourself to do it (figuratively). The alternative is to find a cheaper stopgap and remain financially flexible to commit to the right player when they do come along.

 

[gunks]

Poo poo on Rudy... He's fools gold. Gets destroyed by every decent sf, puts up stats against scrubs. If we ever make the playoffs again, he's going to be a liability with his streaky offense and bad defense. I'd much rather we go for Deng, or even Ariza.

Edit: that being said.... If we lose IT, it would probably behoove us to keep Rudy. I just don't really want us giving a 3rd option talent 1st option money. Dude is just mad overrated.

 

[rainmaker]

Edit: that being said.... If we lose IT, it would probably behoove us to keep Rudy. I just don't really want us giving a 3rd option talent 1st option money. Dude is just mad overrated.

Rudy is a top 5-7 SF in this game. There's the top tier, an exclusive club containing the top two players in the world. After that, there's a 2nd tier with two guys just below Lebron/Durant. That's Melo and George. After that, there's the 3rd tier, with Batum, Parsons, Leonard and Iggy.

Rudy fits somewhere within that group. Can make various arguments dependent on need but he's a better scorer and all around offensive threat than all in that tier. He's the 5th best offensive SF in the game. With us needing a 2nd option, he's better than all the 3rd tier guys. If we had a clear 2nd option as a PG/SG, then the four 3rd tier guys would probably make more sense.

 

[ParniValjak]

Bloody oath we do! In an ideal world he opts out and re-signs with us on a longer team deal for less money BUT we do not live in a perfect world. If he opts in, it gives us a chance to try and put a better team around him and Cousins and hopefully convince him to stay with us in the long term.

Like him or not, he is one of the best SFs in the league and you just don't let that talent walk, especially if you are in our position.

 

[Albatros]

If he opts in the FO will have to get very creative to put a better team around him.

If he takes a longer term deal here he will know it will be 2/3 years before the team is "ready" (in an ideal world) to make a noise, just a noise, in the playoffs.

he wants to "win now," he said that himself, barring an amazing blockbuster trade he knows it will require patience here, does he have it?

 

[ParniValjak]

If he opts in the FO will have to get very creative to put a better team around him.

If he takes a longer term deal here he will know it will be 2/3 years before the team is "ready" (in an ideal world) to make a noise, just a noise, in the playoffs.

he wants to "win now," he said that himself, barring an amazing blockbuster trade he knows it will require patience here, does he have it?

Well that really might not be the case. The reason I say this is directly linked to our owners' willingness to psa luxury tax and to what extent. By the sounds of it, the team is willing to pay luxury tax. Maybe not to the extent that the Brooklyn Nyets are but still. If the owners are comfortable with paying the luxury tax provided they have a winning team, then the FO can pull off all sorts of trades and signings to put a play off calibre team on the floor.

Lets for arguments sake say that Vivek and co. are willing to spend and PDA has a green light to go out ang get the team for play offs for next season then PDA could easily trade pick 8 and another contract to Bucks for Knight and Sanders. Re-sign IT and use the MLE to sign a productive SG and give McLemore back up minutes.

All of a sudden you have a team good enough to make the play offs next year:

Cousins
Sanders
Gay
Sefalosha
Knight

IT
McLemore
JT or Landry or both
Plus the rest of the bench.

All of a sudden that team has a very different defensive make up (Knight, Sefalosha, Sanders) and serious injectionof bench scoring in IT.

You know than in Cousins and Gay you have two 20ppg players that play well together.

Remeber this season we were .500 team with both IT/Gay/Cousins all playing and that is with real lack of defensive role players and a whole bunch of mis matched pieces.

Pull off a couple of decent moves and signings and all of a sudden the team has a very different feel to it. It all depends on how much the ownership is willing to spend

 

[Kingster]

In general sign-and-trade deals haven't ever returned anything of consequence. In essence it's a way for a team about to lose a free agent to get something in return but they have no leverage to get a player or players of real value. In the past they've either been a way for a departing free agent to get a bigger contract from the new team than they could offer based on the CBA rules granting home teams a higher max number or a way to entice a team to deal a free agent to the team of his choice using the threat of signing with a third team who has the cap room to sign him outright. And occasionally it's used with restricted free agents where teams are not looking to match an offer and the S&T just helps grease the wheels a bit to make the deal go through.

In any event Gay's situation is different from Tyreke's. Gay is currently under contract for $19 million next season. Not using his opt out is not the same as him signing a contract so he can't be signed-and-traded. And if he DOES opt out he would be an unrestricted free agent whereas Evans was restricted. He could possibly be signed-and-traded at that point but my guess would be that he'd just leave outright.

If Gay DID opt out and signed with a new team the Kings would be just slightly more than $15 million under the projected salary cap but that's without their draft pick or resigning Isaiah Thomas. Should they keep the #8 pick they'd be down to $12 million. Resigning IT would likely leave them between $4 and $6 million in cap room which is less than the MLE and not enough to sign anyone of value.

Outside of guys with player options the best unrestricted free agents are guys like Luol Deng, Pau Gasol, Lance Stephenson and maybe Trevor Ariza. The best restricted FAs are guys like Eric Bledsoe, Greg Monroe, Gordon Hayward and Chandler Parsons. The first two guys are going to be matched at any dollar amount leaving the Kings in a position of letting IT go in order to have the cash to overpay for the likes of Parson, Hayward or Deng.

Rudy Gay is overpaid by about $10 million at his projected salary for next season. But the Kings have put themselves in a position where having him walk likely hurts more.

And what if Gay stays at $19 mill? How much do you have to spend on resigning IT, or a new starting pg? It seems like if Gay goes, you potentially keep IT but don't get the marquee sf. If Gay stays at $19 mill you have your starting sf, but then how much do you have to spend for your new starting pg? Seems like no matter how you cut it, there's a net talent loss.

 

[Kingster]

That's my point though -- everyone seems to be basing their enthusiastic reaction to Rudy Gay off of the near 50% he shot from the field with us this season. Drop that back down to the .450 range and the 16+ shots per game and 3 turnovers really become a problem. If you look past the counting stats, the shooting numbers and TOs kept his PER down in the 16-17 range for most of his career (19.6 with us this season) and his WS/48 below league average in 6 out of 8 seasons. It was an astoundingly bad .021 in Toronto last season before the trade and he was still putting up 20, 7, and 2 just killing his team while he did it. Small sample size and all that, but the entire season before it was .072. Even if you account for different personnel allowing him to score more efficiently, some level of regression is to be expected and at .114 he wasn't that far above league average with us even despite the All-Star PER number.

The stats aren't everything, but considering his value is primarily tied to his offense (he's really not that good of a defender and his DWS were even inflated a bit playing with good defenders in Memphis) the numbers aren't all that encouraging. They say Rudy Gay in most years is a league average player or even a little bit below that being paid (and treated) like an All-Star.

I don't have the time to do the statistical research, but I have the distinct memory that Gay started off like a ball o' fire with the Kings and got worse and worse statistically with the Kings as the season progressed. I don't like the fact that he ended the season on a down note. By the way, it was just the opposite of McLemore, who ended on an up note.

 

[Kingster]

Originally I was thinking along the same lines as Padrino. Convince him to stay for next season and all of a sudden we have a huge trade chip, a $19 million expiring contract can garner many assets in return. However from everything we have been hearing from the team it seems that they want Rudy Gay to stay for the long-term. They are rolling out the red carpet at the airport along with showing him 3-D renditions of the new arena which doesn't even open until 2016-17. These are not things done to keep a player for one year, I think they are working on a long-term deal.

If this is true, let's hope that we can get some outside shooting this offseason. Rudy Gay is a ball dominant player whose best work is done within 10 feet of the basket. This description also fits DeMarcus Cousins. The only way we can build a team around these two players is to spread the floor with just about every other position out there.

Agreed.

 

[funkykingston]

And what if Gay stays at $19 mill? How much do you have to spend on resigning IT, or a new starting pg? It seems like if Gay goes, you potentially keep IT but don't get the marquee sf. If Gay stays at $19 mill you have your starting sf, but then how much do you have to spend for your new starting pg? Seems like no matter how you cut it, there's a net talent loss.

If Gay stays at $19 million then the Kings are over the cap. The only money available to sign a new starting PG would be the MLE which under the new CBA is around $5.2 million for non tax paying teams. But since IT is a restricted free agent and the team holds his Bird rights the Kings can match any offer if they choose and exceed the cap to resign him.

Where the issue comes in is whether the Kings are willing to exceed the luxury tax level which is projected to be around $77 million. Were Gay to not exercise his option and the team to pick up Acy's option (for $915,000 or so next season) they would be around $67,400,000 in payroll. If the Kings kept the 8th pick that would bring the total to around $70,000,000 leaving the team $7,000,000 under the luxury tax level. That might be enough to retain IT but it's a lot of money to spend to essentially bring back the same 28 win team with one rookie added. I would expect other moves would have to happen. And it also leaves the team one player short of a full roster though they could remedy that with an Aaron Gray or Willie Reed type signing.

And of course the team would still potentially have $37 million coming off the books as expiring contracts after next season including Gay, Williams, Terry, Outlaw, Evans and Acy. Personally I'd like to see them use those expiring contracts to land another piece but then that leaves the team even less wiggle room financially unless they can move guys like Thompson and Landry while taking back shorter term contracts.

Again, this is going to be a really interesting summer where D'Alessandro either proves his worth as a GM or proves that he's mired the team in yet another cycle around the NBA drain.

 

[funkykingston]

I don't have the time to do the statistical research, but I have the distinct memory that Gay started off like a ball o' fire with the Kings and got worse and worse statistically with the Kings as the season progressed. I don't like the fact that he ended the season on a down note. By the way, it was just the opposite of McLemore, who ended on an up note.

While it's true that Gay played his best basketball just after the trade it's not really true that he got worse and worse statistically.

In fact a quick glance at his averages over the course of the year makes him look incredibly consistent, even when he was with the Raptors to start the season. Gay's monthly totals from November to April show between 19.0 and 21.7 ppg, between 5.2 and 7.4 rebounds per game and between 2.3 and 3.8 assists per game. And those numbers don't show any trends. He averaged over 7 boards in November and February and a bit over 5 in every other month. He averaged over three assists in January, February and April and under three in the other months. And his scoring never varied much.

But with Gay the key is to look at how efficiently he got his numbers. In 13 games in January he shot 57.5% from the field, 46.9% on 3's and 89.8% from the Free throw line with a true shot percentage of 66.5% which was outstanding. It explains why he had his scoring average high in January despite playing 32 mpg which was the lowest monthly average of the season.

After January his numbers returned to earth but I wouldn't say he got progressively worse. He simply returned to being close to what his career numbers have been excluding his rookie season and his horrendous start in Toronto this year.

It is worth noting that overall his FG%, EF% and TS% in his time with Sacramento were career highs. And I don't think that was a fluke. Rudy Gay seems to do best when not asked to carry the load and worst when he takes it upon himself to be the man. When not in high volume chucking mode he's a very consistent and fairly efficient second scorer which is why I do like the fit next to Cousins. However, over his career his three point percentage has varied from 31% to just under 40%. I think he needs to be a 36% or better shooter from distance and/or the team needs to bring aboard additional shooters to clear space for both he and Cuz to do damage close to the basket.

 

[Gary]

Well that really might not be the case. The reason I say this is directly linked to our owners' willingness to psa luxury tax and to what extent. By the sounds of it, the team is willing to pay luxury tax. Maybe not to the extent that the Brooklyn Nyets are but still. If the owners are comfortable with paying the luxury tax provided they have a winning team, then the FO can pull off all sorts of trades and signings to put a play off calibre team on the floor.

Lets for arguments sake say that Vivek and co. are willing to spend and PDA has a green light to go out ang get the team for play offs for next season then PDA could easily trade pick 8 and another contract to Bucks for Knight and Sanders. Re-sign IT and use the MLE to sign a productive SG and give McLemore back up minutes.

All of a sudden you have a team good enough to make the play offs next year:

Cousins
Sanders
Gay
Sefalosha
Knight

IT
McLemore
JT or Landry or both
Plus the rest of the bench.

All of a sudden that team has a very different defensive make up (Knight, Sefalosha, Sanders) and serious injectionof bench scoring in IT.

You know than in Cousins and Gay you have two 20ppg players that play well together.

Remeber this season we were .500 team with both IT/Gay/Cousins all playing and that is with real lack of defensive role players and a whole bunch of mis matched pieces.

Pull off a couple of decent moves and signings and all of a sudden the team has a very different feel to it. It all depends on how much the ownership is willing to spend

^^
This.. That team is one I wouldn't mind seeing gel for a couple years. Heck, it could even be a .500 team this year.

 

[beb0p]

I'm not going to respond to everything, just the main points. We did fail to sign Iguodala this summer but the number we were prepared to offer him was a substantial overpay. It's probably a good thing there was a gut check on that. I think Petrie was handicapped though not just by the market but a lack of resources, specifically cash assets, during the last half of his tenure. And PDA hasn't even had a full year yet to make a mark. I acknowledge the possibility that Gay may be the best player we can get in our market. I find that rather depressing though, so I'm trying to pretend otherwise. I have to believe that a charismatic owner, well-liked coach, and brand new arena will make some kind of difference down the line.

Was Petrie handicapped by the Maloofs? That's the popular belief but I don't think so. Petrie was given the green light to go after AK47, and the amount being thrown around was right up there. He tried to court Ryan Anderson. He tried to trade for Okafor. Not to mention, he gladly took on Salmons' bloated contract. Those are not moves you make if you are not given the resource. The truth is he didn't get any good players because there were no good players to be had. No one wanted to come here. That was the hard truth.

Yes I think a charismatic owner, well respected coach and brand new arena will make a little tiny bit of difference, but only to one or two players with Vlade Divac like vision. At the end of the day players care about three things: money, wins, and big-market; not owner, coach, and arena.

 

[Dreadnought]

I don't see what everyone is complaining about. Who cares if he is being overpaid for ONE (1) season? It's a single season, it's hardly a hindrance. I'd rather have Gay at 19 million than sign a random bad players at 25 million for 5 or 6 years.

My view of it is this: if it doesn't work out, it's just one year. I value Rudy at the 10-12 million area, but there is absolutely no one we could realistically sign this season anyway.

 

[Letsgokings13]

Well that really might not be the case. The reason I say this is directly linked to our owners' willingness to psa luxury tax and to what extent. By the sounds of it, the team is willing to pay luxury tax. Maybe not to the extent that the Brooklyn Nyets are but still. If the owners are comfortable with paying the luxury tax provided they have a winning team, then the FO can pull off all sorts of trades and signings to put a play off calibre team on the floor.

Lets for arguments sake say that Vivek and co. are willing to spend and PDA has a green light to go out ang get the team for play offs for next season then PDA could easily trade pick 8 and another contract to Bucks for Knight and Sanders. Re-sign IT and use the MLE to sign a productive SG and give McLemore back up minutes.

All of a sudden you have a team good enough to make the play offs next year:

Cousins
Sanders
Gay
Sefalosha
Knight

IT
McLemore
JT or Landry or both
Plus the rest of the bench.

All of a sudden that team has a very different defensive make up (Knight, Sefalosha, Sanders) and serious injectionof bench scoring in IT.

You know than in Cousins and Gay you have two 20ppg players that play well together.

Remeber this season we were .500 team with both IT/Gay/Cousins all playing and that is with real lack of defensive role players and a whole bunch of mis matched pieces.

Pull off a couple of decent moves and signings and all of a sudden the team has a very different feel to it. It all depends on how much the ownership is willing to spend

send this in to PDA AND VIVEK!!

 

[pdizo916]

Was Petrie handicapped by the Maloofs? That's the popular belief but I don't think so. Petrie was given the green light to go after AK47, and the amount being thrown around was right up there. He tried to court Ryan Anderson. He tried to trade for Okafor. Not to mention, he gladly took on Salmons' bloated contract. Those are not moves you make if you are not given the resource. The truth is he didn't get any good players because there were no good players to be had. No one wanted to come here. That was the hard truth.

Yes I think a charismatic owner, well respected coach and brand new arena will make a little tiny bit of difference, but only to one or two players with Vlade Divac like vision. At the end of the day players care about three things: money, wins, and big-market; not owner, coach, and arena.

I think all six of those things tie together; however, I believe that you're right when you say money, wins, and a big market are the biggest factor.

 

[twslam07]

And what if Gay stays at $19 mill? How much do you have to spend on resigning IT, or a new starting pg? It seems like if Gay goes, you potentially keep IT but don't get the marquee sf. If Gay stays at $19 mill you have your starting sf, but then how much do you have to spend for your new starting pg? Seems like no matter how you cut it, there's a net talent loss.

If Rudy opts-in and the Kings cut ties with Acy, we'll have $10.65 mil in cap space to resign Thomas before we hit the luxury tax. I'm not sure what's causing you to make these assumptions.

 

[pshn80]

In answer to the question- YES.

 

[funkykingston]

If Rudy opts-in and the Kings cut ties with Acy, we'll have $10.65 mil in cap space to resign Thomas before we hit the luxury tax. I'm not sure what's causing you to make these assumptions.

But to be fair that excludes the money that will be tied up in the #8 pick (should the Kings keep it) and I don't see why they would let Acy go when the team would then still need to fill two roster spots and Quincy comes quite cheap. As I mentioned above I think if Rudy opts in the Kings will likely have around $7 million to offer IT before hitting the luxury tax threshold.

That's of course assuming the team doesn't make other moves which is a tenuous assumption to say the least.

 

[jdbraver]

Yes, we can't bleed talent. We will not get equal talent back in FA.

 

[LPKingsFan]

^^
This.. That team is one I wouldn't mind seeing gel for a couple years. Heck, it could even be a .500 team this year.

Part of me hopes that Rudy opts in and IT takes a one-year deal to become an unrestricted free agent next season. That would give the team another full season (or, at least until the trade deadline) to see if the progress the group seemed to make was real or not. And, if not, the team would have a ton of cap flexibility in 2015 to make other moves.

 

[Kingster]

But with Gay the key is to look at how efficiently he got his numbers. In 13 games in January he shot 57.5% from the field, 46.9% on 3's and 89.8% from the Free throw line with a true shot percentage of 66.5% which was outstanding. It explains why he had his scoring average high in January despite playing 32 mpg which was the lowest monthly average of the season.

After January his numbers returned to earth but I wouldn't say he got progressively worse. He simply returned to being close to what his career numbers have been excluding his rookie season and his horrendous start in Toronto this year.

It is worth noting that overall his FG%, EF% and TS% in his time with Sacramento were career highs. And I don't think that was a fluke. Rudy Gay seems to do best when not asked to carry the load and worst when he takes it upon himself to be the man. When not in high volume chucking mode he's a very consistent and fairly efficient second scorer which is why I do like the fit next to Cousins. However, over his career his three point percentage has varied from 31% to just under 40%. I think he needs to be a 36% or better shooter from distance and/or the team needs to bring aboard additional shooters to clear space for both he and Cuz to do damage close to the basket.

Yeah, we'll agree he returned to earth, or you might say, he wasn't as good during the latter part of Kings tenure as the first part. The TOs he made doing ISO ball were of concern to me.

 

[Kingster]

If Gay stays at $19 million then the Kings are over the cap. The only money available to sign a new starting PG would be the MLE which under the new CBA is around $5.2 million for non tax paying teams. But since IT is a restricted free agent and the team holds his Bird rights the Kings can match any offer if they choose and exceed the cap to resign him.

Where the issue comes in is whether the Kings are willing to exceed the luxury tax level which is projected to be around $77 million. Were Gay to not exercise his option and the team to pick up Acy's option (for $915,000 or so next season) they would be around $67,400,000 in payroll. If the Kings kept the 8th pick that would bring the total to around $70,000,000 leaving the team $7,000,000 under the luxury tax level. That might be enough to retain IT but it's a lot of money to spend to essentially bring back the same 28 win team with one rookie added. I would expect other moves would have to happen. And it also leaves the team one player short of a full roster though they could remedy that with an Aaron Gray or Willie Reed type signing.

And of course the team would still potentially have $37 million coming off the books as expiring contracts after next season including Gay, Williams, Terry, Outlaw, Evans and Acy. Personally I'd like to see them use those expiring contracts to land another piece but then that leaves the team even less wiggle room financially unless they can move guys like Thompson and Landry while taking back shorter term contracts.

Again, this is going to be a really interesting summer where D'Alessandro either proves his worth as a GM or proves that he's mired the team in yet another cycle around the NBA drain.

So if Gay opts in at the $19 mill the Kings can sign IT while going over the cap (and have no penalty), but have nothing left over?

 

[hrdboild]

Rudy is a top 5-7 SF in this game. There's the top tier, an exclusive club containing the top two players in the world. After that, there's a 2nd tier with two guys just below Lebron/Durant. That's Melo and George. After that, there's the 3rd tier, with Batum, Parsons, Leonard and Iggy.

Rudy fits somewhere within that group. Can make various arguments dependent on need but he's a better scorer and all around offensive threat than all in that tier. He's the 5th best offensive SF in the game. With us needing a 2nd option, he's better than all the 3rd tier guys. If we had a clear 2nd option as a PG/SG, then the four 3rd tier guys would probably make more sense.

Career WS/48 of the guys you mentioned:

Lebron .243
Durant .205
----------
Carmelo .138
P George .149
-----------
K Leonard .177
Batum .124
Iguodala .124
Parsons .117

In your third tier, three of those guys are very good defenders as well as contributing on offense. Parsons is a 47% career shooter from the floor. All of them come out way ahead of Rudy Gay on WS/48.

Other current SFs with better career WS/48 than Rudy Gay (.081):

Danilo Gallinari .129
Mike Dunleavy .104
Matt Barnes .104
Demarre Carroll .103
Marvin Williams .097
Trevor Ariza .096
Josh Smith .091
Draymond Green .086

And then there's the young guys who haven't reached their peak yet -- Barnes, Kidd-Gilchrist, Harkless, Williams, Wiggins and Parker. Do you still think he's a top 5 SF in the league? By what measure?

As for our inability to replace his production, here are some upcoming free agents in 2014/2015 who also have better career WS/48 than Rudy Gay.

Paul Millsap .152
Jimmy Butler .143
David West .140
Rajon Rondo .130
Greg Monroe .126
Luol Deng .120
Omer Asik .118
Samuel Dalembert .116
Wesley Matthews .116
Nikola Vucevic .116
Thaddeus Young .110
Jeremy Lin .106
Dorrell Wright .100
Tobias Harris .098
Chase Budinger .093
JR Smith .093
Thabo Sefolosha .091
Gordon Hayward .089
Marcus Thornton .089 (yes, really)
Tristan Thompson .088
Caron Butler .087
Landry Fields .084
Klay Thompson .082

You can talk about selling tickets, attracting free agents to Sacramento, filling that SF spot on your fantasy team or all sorts of other reasons for keeping Rudy Gay on the Kings with a contract starting at $10 million to $12 million per year but in an objective basketball sense, is it a smart thing to do? The numbers say no. If they're not producing .120 win shares per 48 minutes they're not worth more than $10 million per year. It's true for everyone else on this list, why wouldn't it be true for Rudy Gay too?

 

[funkykingston]

Yeah, we'll agree he returned to earth, or you might say, he wasn't as good during the latter part of Kings tenure as the first part. The TOs he made doing ISO ball were of concern to me.

Yes, but that first part only accounted for a total of 13 games in the first full month after the trade. Guys go through streaks and guys tend to play well after they've been traded. My larger point is that while Rudy Gay had a good stretch he didn't exactly go in the tank. If anything he's incredibly consistent which is encouraging. I wouldn't expect him to have a major drop off next season. With Gay you're pretty much always going to get a smooth scoring SF who averages 18 or 19 ppg, 5 or 6 boards and 2 or 3 assists on solid percentages, especially near the hoop.

I was concerned with how much ISO ball the Kings offense utilized in general. It leads to stagnation and turnovers from everyone in addition to being relatively easy to stifle in the playoffs (should the King improve enough to get there) but in fairness to Rudy his TOs didn't really increase as the season went on. In fact for the 5 games he played in April he only averaged 2 per game, lowest of any of his monthly averages last season.

So if Gay opts in at the $19 mill the Kings can sign IT while going over the cap (and have no penalty), but have nothing left over?

Yes.

And if Gay opts in and they choose not to match offers or re-sign IT at all they'll only have the MLE (a bit over $5 million) to sign a new starting PG assuming they don't draft or trade for one.

For better or worse, the Kings don't have a lot of cards to play this offseason and may be best off just bringing back Thomas and Gay, and counting on trades (expiring contracts, JT, Landry, the #8 pick) or the draft (if they keep the #8) to add pieces to improve.

 

[Bricklayer]

You know, those extended WS stats are really not showing how poor Rudy gay is so much they are showing how poor WS is as a stat.