Rebuilding Around Cousins

#61
Well who are you waiving? Skal? Malaki? There's no point waiving Morrow and Collison unless you have a plan to replace them.
Take another look at our roster and try again. It's pretty concerning that you can't identify these players. Put forth a little effort and read what my post is about. The fact that you think Skal or Richardson would be top on my list makes me think you struggle with your reading comprehension.

And if we want to be nit picky (which obvously is your intention), it's "Malachi" not "Malaki"
 
Last edited:

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#62
Take another look at our roster and try again. It's pretty concerning that you can't identify these players. Put forth a little effort and read what my post is about. The fact that you think Skal or Richardson would be top on my list makes me think you struggle with your reading comprehension.

And if we want to be nit picky (which obvously is your intention), it's "Malachi" not "Malaki"
I don't think it's exactly nit-picky to point out that a proposed trade won't work.

The problem here is that you are trying to make trade #1 work by waiving Morrow and Nick Collison on the incoming end. That is not allowed by rule. For a team to trade two players and receive four, they must have two empty roster slots in order to make the trade happen. The team cannot create these roster slots by waiving the incoming players as they arrive - by rule.

Now, you didn't appear to take into account that since OKC is about $8.5M under the salary cap, they can actually absorb contracts into their cap space rather than having to fit everything into a traded player exception. It turns out that if the Kings were to send Gay and Lawson, that the Thunder would be able to abide by salary cap rules by sending only three players back - Payne, Christon, and one of either Morrow or N. Collison. That still only half solves the problem, because the Kings would have to cut one player in order to make that trade as well.

There would appear to be no clever way to get the exact trade you have suggested done. If the Thunder were to drop additional salary by making another trade before the trade with us, we could eventually come up with a two-trade solution, which would involve us first trading Gay and Lawson into the Thunder's (now larger after their unspecified trade) cap space for Payne and N. Collison. We could waive Collison after that trade (because we had a roster spot for him when he was incoming) and then trade a protected second-round pick for Christon. However, that does require that OKC find an additional deal to make, which is certainly a complicating factor.
 
#63
I don't think it's exactly nit-picky to point out that a proposed trade won't work.

The problem here is that you are trying to make trade #1 work by waiving Morrow and Nick Collison on the incoming end. That is not allowed by rule. For a team to trade two players and receive four, they must have two empty roster slots in order to make the trade happen. The team cannot create these roster slots by waiving the incoming players as they arrive - by rule.

Now, you didn't appear to take into account that since OKC is about $8.5M under the salary cap, they can actually absorb contracts into their cap space rather than having to fit everything into a traded player exception. It turns out that if the Kings were to send Gay and Lawson, that the Thunder would be able to abide by salary cap rules by sending only three players back - Payne, Christon, and one of either Morrow or N. Collison. That still only half solves the problem, because the Kings would have to cut one player in order to make that trade as well.

There would appear to be no clever way to get the exact trade you have suggested done. If the Thunder were to drop additional salary by making another trade before the trade with us, we could eventually come up with a two-trade solution, which would involve us first trading Gay and Lawson into the Thunder's (now larger after their unspecified trade) cap space for Payne and N. Collison. We could waive Collison after that trade (because we had a roster spot for him when he was incoming) and then trade a protected second-round pick for Christon. However, that does require that OKC find an additional deal to make, which is certainly a complicating factor.
The nit picky part is focusing on that little detail as if it derails the idea when it really doesn't. It'd be one thing to bring it up without there being another possible solution but there are plenty. Hence he/she has wasted not only my time but your time as well.

There are 4 players that could be easily waived instead: McLemore, Afflalo, Tolliver, and Rondo (if we make the Bulls trade first). Again, it's just lack of vision that causes us to have to discuss such irrelevant details when the main idea is still easily possible.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#64
The nit picky part is focusing on that little detail as if it derails the idea when it really doesn't. It'd be one thing to bring it up without there being another possible solution but there are plenty. Hence he/she has wasted not only my time but your time as well.

There are 4 players that could be easily waived instead: McLemore, Afflalo, Tolliver, and Rondo (if we make the Bulls trade first). Again, it's just lack of vision that causes us to have to discuss such irrelevant details when the main idea is still easily possible.
With all due respect, it's those little nit picky things that keep trades from getting done at times. You can't just throw out a trade that doesn't work, and then get your britches in an uproar because someone points out that it won't work. Your basically saying that it's not your job to make the trade work after your the one that proposed it.
 
#65
With all due respect, it's those little nit picky things that keep trades from getting done at times. You can't just throw out a trade that doesn't work, and then get your britches in an uproar because someone points out that it won't work. Your basically saying that it's not your job to make the trade work after your the one that proposed it.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying we have 4 other guys to choose from that can be cut to make the trade legal, so why are we wasting everyone's time?

I'd rather people comment on the idea rather than a technicality that was resolved in a matter of 30 seconds.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#66
I'd rather people comment on the idea rather than a technicality that was resolved in a matter of 30 seconds.
First of all, 30 seconds? You made the original post on Friday morning at 12:53 AM. After having it pointed out that the trade didn't work as proposed, it took you until 11:49 PM on Sunday before you actually named potential players you might cut to make the trade work. That's not 30 seconds. That's almost 71 hours.

Second, you seem to want people to discuss a trade that originally proposes keeping Afflalo, McLemore, Rondo, and Tolliver even though in order to made the trade as suggested, two of those four actually have to be gone. You seem to think the absence of two of those guys in the final roster doesn't matter - despite the fact that you have Rondo listed as our #1 PG in our depth chart after the proposed trades. You literally went from "Rondo is our #1 PG after this trade" to "Who cares, we can cut Rondo" and you seem to think this doesn't affect discussion of said trades?

Face it. You messed up and proposed a trade that didn't work by league rules. No big deal, it happens. When people point this out, don't try to deflect your mistake onto them for "disrupting the conversation" - especially when the conversation such as it is has to be fundamentally different because now the final roster is different - just fix it, re-propose a trade if it still makes sense to you, and move on.
 
#67
First of all, 30 seconds? You made the original post on Friday morning at 12:53 AM. After having it pointed out that the trade didn't work as proposed, it took you until 11:49 PM on Sunday before you actually named potential players you might cut to make the trade work. That's not 30 seconds. That's almost 71 hours.
Yeah, I might have overestimated. It was more like 10 seconds.

The fact that you think time stamps on posts dictate backup plans or how easy it was to come up with a remedy is weak to say the least. You of all people should know better.

Second, you seem to want people to discuss a trade that originally proposes keeping Afflalo, McLemore, Rondo, and Tolliver even though in order to made the trade as suggested, two of those four actually have to be gone. You seem to think the absence of two of those guys in the final roster doesn't matter - despite the fact that you have Rondo listed as our #1 PG in our depth chart after the proposed trades. You literally went from "Rondo is our #1 PG after this trade" to "Who cares, we can cut Rondo" and you seem to think this doesn't affect discussion of said trades?
I see no problem in cutting any of those 4. The point is to keep our pick this year. Cutting any of them doesn't change the idea in the slightest.

Face it. You messed up and proposed a trade that didn't work by league rules. No big deal, it happens. When people point this out, don't try to deflect your mistake onto them for "disrupting the conversation" - especially when the conversation such as it is has to be fundamentally different because now the final roster is different - just fix it, re-propose a trade if it still makes sense to you, and move on.
I'll be thbe first to admit that the trade was illegal, but my point is that it doesn't stop the idea in the slightest. Instead of talking about the idea, we're wasting everyone's time talking about technicalities when in the end, it doesn't matter. Swap in Rondo, Afflalo, McLemore, or Tolliver and we're good to go.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#68
Yeah, I might have overestimated. It was more like 10 seconds.

The fact that you think time stamps on posts dictate backup plans or how easy it was to come up with a remedy is weak to say the least. You of all people should know better.



I see no problem in cutting any of those 4. The point is to keep our pick this year. Cutting any of them doesn't change the idea in the slightest.



I'll be thbe first to admit that the trade was illegal, but my point is that it doesn't stop the idea in the slightest. Instead of talking about the idea, we're wasting everyone's time talking about technicalities when in the end, it doesn't matter. Swap in Rondo, Afflalo, McLemore, or Tolliver and we're good to go.
When I make a mistake on this forum, and I have made many over the years, I either apologize, if its needed, or I admit my mistake and move on. The dumbest thing you can do is circle the wagons around an ill conceived plan. No one, including myself wants to be wrong, but to defend the undefendable makes you lose credibility, especially when you become borderline contentious with others that have credibility on this forum. Remember, there's a difference between fact and opinion. Opinions are never wrong, but facts can be.
 
#69
Yeah, I might have overestimated. It was more like 10 seconds.

The fact that you think time stamps on posts dictate backup plans or how easy it was to come up with a remedy is weak to say the least. You of all people should know better.



I see no problem in cutting any of those 4. The point is to keep our pick this year. Cutting any of them doesn't change the idea in the slightest.



I'll be thbe first to admit that the trade was illegal, but my point is that it doesn't stop the idea in the slightest. Instead of talking about the idea, we're wasting everyone's time talking about technicalities when in the end, it doesn't matter. Swap in Rondo, Afflalo, McLemore, or Tolliver and we're good to go.
They are in the 8th spot. 3 games from .500. The goal is the playoffs not keeping the draft pick.
 
#70
When I make a mistake on this forum, and I have made many over the years, I either apologize, if its needed, or I admit my mistake and move on. The dumbest thing you can do is circle the wagons around an ill conceived plan. No one, including myself wants to be wrong, but to defend the undefendable makes you lose credibility, especially when you become borderline contentious with others that have credibility on this forum. Remember, there's a difference between fact and opinion. Opinions are never wrong, but facts can be.
Did I not just say that the trade I originally proposed is illegal? Is that not admitting I was wrong originally? Your post loses purpose with that knowledge being public...
 
#72
What the goal is and what is best for the team are two different things...
What's best for the team is winning , putting fans in the seats and getting season ticket holders to renew. The team wont admit it, but they are in a corner right now. They wont be selling out on season tickets next year at the current situation. They need a playoff run to boost sales. Plus the extra revenue playoff games generate is huge.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#73
Did I not just say that the trade I originally proposed is illegal? Is that not admitting I was wrong originally? Your post loses purpose with that knowledge being public...
You posted that while I was writing my post, and then posting it. I had not seen the post your referring to. Just bad timing on my part. Sorry!
 
#75
What's best for the team is winning , putting fans in the seats and getting season ticket holders to renew. The team wont admit it, but they are in a corner right now. They wont be selling out on season tickets next year at the current situation. They need a playoff run to boost sales. Plus the extra revenue playoff games generate is huge.
But do they need to boost sales? Many owners don't become owners because of the money. In fact, it can be detrimental to a team if your owners are relying on profits to support themselves (as we saw with the Maloofs).

The goal of an NBA team is to ultimately win a championship. Losing our 1st round pick in a draft that has been labeled the strongest in the past decade is a big price to pay, especially when you're a team that immensely struggles with being able to bring in any type of talent in through FA.

Cousins will need another star talent next to him and our best chance to land that player is either through the draft, developing the young guys we have, and/or by trading for some young players that could potentially develop into a star player.
 
#76
Why not go for broke and go after John Wall or Bradley Beal? Neither like each other so maybe there is a chance we can play into that.... I would prefer Wall as Cousins and him have that bromance.

Rudy, Collison, WCS for Wall and Oubre? I would pretty much trade anyone on the roster minus Cousins. Wizards would essentially get 20 million to work with this offseason and get a young big in the process.
 
#77
Why not go for broke and go after John Wall or Bradley Beal? Neither like each other so maybe there is a chance we can play into that.... I would prefer Wall as Cousins and him have that bromance.

Rudy, Collison, WCS for Wall and Oubre? I would pretty much trade anyone on the roster minus Cousins. Wizards would essentially get 20 million to work with this offseason and get a young big in the process.
Doubt they trade one of their stars for a couple of expirings and a bust. Their fans would riot.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#78
What's best for the team is winning , putting fans in the seats and getting season ticket holders to renew. The team wont admit it, but they are in a corner right now. They wont be selling out on season tickets next year at the current situation. They need a playoff run to boost sales. Plus the extra revenue playoff games generate is huge.
So, to play devils advocate here, is the goal to make money, or is the goal to build a championship team. Not a team to make the eighth spot, and likely lose four straight to the Warriors, but a team that will actually compete for the western division championship and then the NBA championship? And if the goal is a championship, then how does losing our first round pick this year in the best draft in 10 to 15 years, help us? Do we subscribe to be the new Atlanta Hawks, or the Warriors?

It's this "We have to win now" approach that's gotten us into this mess in the first place. And for the most part, it's been about money. The team should have been torn apart long ago when Webb had the knee injury and Vlade's age had caught up to him. But the Maloof's were broke, and needed butts in the seats, so year after year, they tried to create an image of a team that was going to win again. There was a brief moment when the right moves could have propelled us into the next generation of up and coming teams, but instead of adding a Klay Thompson, a Kahwi Leonard, or a Damian Lillard, we added a Jimmer Fredette and a Thomas Robinson. Because they had name recognition, and would put butts in the seats.

The team has made a lot of mistakes, and most of them were because of money. I happen to agree with twslam07 on this point. The goal of the team right now may be to make the playoffs, but that goal may not necessarily be the best thing for the long range success of the team. Can anyone look at the makeup of this team, and tell me that their excited for the future of the franchise. Collison, Gay, Casspi, and McLemore are all probably gone at years end. Maybe Lawson as well. That's five of the 15 players on the roster. There's also a good chance we let Afflalo walk out the door. Barnes is going to be a thousand years old, Willie still needs seasoning, and Koufos is no more than a solid backup center.

Essentially, we could be left without a PG and huge holes at the SG and SF positions. Were already doing PF by committee. Right now, this team is truly a team where the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. And that's commendable, but it doesn't do a damm thing for the future of the team. So you'll excuse me if I don't get all that excited about grabbing the eighth spot in the playoffs. Now if someone will show me how were going to do both, make the playoffs, and build a championship team, then I'm on board. If we keep putting off the inevitable, at some point the chickens will come home to roost.
 
#79
Doubt they trade one of their stars for a couple of expirings and a bust. Their fans would riot.
I tend to agree, but the Wizards are going to be in a bind pretty soon and I think they know it. Wall only has 1 year left on his contract and 20 million in capspace for them could be huge. Beal and Wall don't get along and Otto Porter is going to need an extension pretty soon. If you have Wall-Beal-Porter as your top 3, I don't think that's enough to get you out of the East (heck, they have had them for years already as their top 3 and they struggle to even make the playoffs). You give them 20 million in capspace, and suddenly a move for Blake Griffin becomes possible for them.

I agree, Wall is their star, but they have had a better roster than the Kings for a long time and they still can't cut it, even in the East. That, along with the Beal-Wall instability, would be something I try to exploit. Hell, I would take Beal no problem in that trade scenario. Our biggest problem is PG leadership. Our best PG has been playing well for about 8-10 games and has a rather poor off the court history. I really don't want to see that scenario while we try to push for the playoffs, especially if Lawson's play declines.
 
#80
So, to play devils advocate here, is the goal to make money, or is the goal to build a championship team. Not a team to make the eighth spot, and likely lose four straight to the Warriors, but a team that will actually compete for the western division championship and then the NBA championship? And if the goal is a championship, then how does losing our first round pick this year in the best draft in 10 to 15 years, help us? Do we subscribe to be the new Atlanta Hawks, or the Warriors?

It's this "We have to win now" approach that's gotten us into this mess in the first place. And for the most part, it's been about money. The team should have been torn apart long ago when Webb had the knee injury and Vlade's age had caught up to him. But the Maloof's were broke, and needed butts in the seats, so year after year, they tried to create an image of a team that was going to win again. There was a brief moment when the right moves could have propelled us into the next generation of up and coming teams, but instead of adding a Klay Thompson, a Kahwi Leonard, or a Damian Lillard, we added a Jimmer Fredette and a Thomas Robinson. Because they had name recognition, and would put butts in the seats.

The team has made a lot of mistakes, and most of them were because of money. I happen to agree with twslam07 on this point. The goal of the team right now may be to make the playoffs, but that goal may not necessarily be the best thing for the long range success of the team. Can anyone look at the makeup of this team, and tell me that their excited for the future of the franchise. Collison, Gay, Casspi, and McLemore are all probably gone at years end. Maybe Lawson as well. That's five of the 15 players on the roster. There's also a good chance we let Afflalo walk out the door. Barnes is going to be a thousand years old, Willie still needs seasoning, and Koufos is no more than a solid backup center.

Essentially, we could be left without a PG and huge holes at the SG and SF positions. Were already doing PF by committee. Right now, this team is truly a team where the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. And that's commendable, but it doesn't do a damm thing for the future of the team. So you'll excuse me if I don't get all that excited about grabbing the eighth spot in the playoffs. Now if someone will show me how were going to do both, make the playoffs, and build a championship team, then I'm on board. If we keep putting off the inevitable, at some point the chickens will come home to roost.
Could not have said it better myself. Every King's fan wants to see us in the playoffs, but when looking at what it could cost us in the long run, it could be the worst year in the past ten to do so. Like I said elsewhere, we win the battle but lose the war. I will root like hell for us to win every game as I always do, while hoping the front office has some amazing long term plan that I cant see from the outside.
 
#81
So, to play devils advocate here, is the goal to make money, or is the goal to build a championship team. Not a team to make the eighth spot, and likely lose four straight to the Warriors, but a team that will actually compete for the western division championship and then the NBA championship? And if the goal is a championship, then how does losing our first round pick this year in the best draft in 10 to 15 years, help us? Do we subscribe to be the new Atlanta Hawks, or the Warriors?

It's this "We have to win now" approach that's gotten us into this mess in the first place. And for the most part, it's been about money. The team should have been torn apart long ago when Webb had the knee injury and Vlade's age had caught up to him. But the Maloof's were broke, and needed butts in the seats, so year after year, they tried to create an image of a team that was going to win again. There was a brief moment when the right moves could have propelled us into the next generation of up and coming teams, but instead of adding a Klay Thompson, a Kahwi Leonard, or a Damian Lillard, we added a Jimmer Fredette and a Thomas Robinson. Because they had name recognition, and would put butts in the seats.

The team has made a lot of mistakes, and most of them were because of money. I happen to agree with twslam07 on this point. The goal of the team right now may be to make the playoffs, but that goal may not necessarily be the best thing for the long range success of the team. Can anyone look at the makeup of this team, and tell me that their excited for the future of the franchise. Collison, Gay, Casspi, and McLemore are all probably gone at years end. Maybe Lawson as well. That's five of the 15 players on the roster. There's also a good chance we let Afflalo walk out the door. Barnes is going to be a thousand years old, Willie still needs seasoning, and Koufos is no more than a solid backup center.

Essentially, we could be left without a PG and huge holes at the SG and SF positions. Were already doing PF by committee. Right now, this team is truly a team where the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. And that's commendable, but it doesn't do a damm thing for the future of the team. So you'll excuse me if I don't get all that excited about grabbing the eighth spot in the playoffs. Now if someone will show me how were going to do both, make the playoffs, and build a championship team, then I'm on board. If we keep putting off the inevitable, at some point the chickens will come home to roost.
Well put.

And, in case there's any doubt where this direction is coming from, it is coming from the very top:

Given principal owner Vivek Ranadive’s directive to assemble a veteran roster and push for the postseason in Year 1 at Golden 1 Center rather than build for the future, reaching the 2017 playoffs would validate their much-discussed/debated approach and end a decade-long playoff absence.
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/ailene-voisin/article123246314.html#storylink=cpy
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#82
So, to play devils advocate here, is the goal to make money, or is the goal to build a championship team. Not a team to make the eighth spot, and likely lose four straight to the Warriors, but a team that will actually compete for the western division championship and then the NBA championship? And if the goal is a championship, then how does losing our first round pick this year in the best draft in 10 to 15 years, help us? Do we subscribe to be the new Atlanta Hawks, or the Warriors?

It's this "We have to win now" approach that's gotten us into this mess in the first place. And for the most part, it's been about money. The team should have been torn apart long ago when Webb had the knee injury and Vlade's age had caught up to him. But the Maloof's were broke, and needed butts in the seats, so year after year, they tried to create an image of a team that was going to win again. There was a brief moment when the right moves could have propelled us into the next generation of up and coming teams, but instead of adding a Klay Thompson, a Kahwi Leonard, or a Damian Lillard, we added a Jimmer Fredette and a Thomas Robinson. Because they had name recognition, and would put butts in the seats.

The team has made a lot of mistakes, and most of them were because of money. I happen to agree with twslam07 on this point. The goal of the team right now may be to make the playoffs, but that goal may not necessarily be the best thing for the long range success of the team. Can anyone look at the makeup of this team, and tell me that their excited for the future of the franchise. Collison, Gay, Casspi, and McLemore are all probably gone at years end. Maybe Lawson as well. That's five of the 15 players on the roster. There's also a good chance we let Afflalo walk out the door. Barnes is going to be a thousand years old, Willie still needs seasoning, and Koufos is no more than a solid backup center.

Essentially, we could be left without a PG and huge holes at the SG and SF positions. Were already doing PF by committee. Right now, this team is truly a team where the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. And that's commendable, but it doesn't do a damm thing for the future of the team. So you'll excuse me if I don't get all that excited about grabbing the eighth spot in the playoffs. Now if someone will show me how were going to do both, make the playoffs, and build a championship team, then I'm on board. If we keep putting off the inevitable, at some point the chickens will come home to roost.
The single best "championship" move we can make right now is creating a set of circumstances where we are able to lock down Boogie until he's 30, at which point a series of playoff appearances and his own loyalty and sense of "home" will likely secure him for the remainder of his career in Sac. That one move secures an 8-10 year window where a good coach and reasonable management have a chance to put together something.

Any other approach (tear down, trade Boogie, rebuild from scratch etc.) is just a complete shot in the dark. Buying a lottery ticket and assuming we are going to win it. Every team tears down and rebuilds at some point. Very few of them go on to contend let alone win the title. When you run out of time, its what you do, but there is absolutely no reason to believe that we'd magically be the one team to do it right this time after half a century of failure.

So you play to make the playoffs. Quiet the locals, secure the Boogie extension. Give Joerger the cache he needs to authoritatively put together a winner, and a willing partner in Cuz. Make it easier for free agents to imagine coming. And then you do the work. Not The Process, but long years of intelligent acquisitions and climbing the playoff ladder until maybe you are just sexy enough to get a friend of Cuz to come to town and turn you into a contender. Its not sexy, glamorous, or clean. There's no sign of it all just magically coming together like it did in '99. But its the work, and you aim to get that contending support personnel around Cuz by his late 20s/early 30s the same way it happened for Hakeem and Ewing back in the day.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#83
The single best "championship" move we can make right now is creating a set of circumstances where we are able to lock down Boogie until he's 30...
...
So you play to make the playoffs. Quiet the locals, secure the Boogie extension.
Right now, this is the right play. This offseason, we can offer Cousins a five-year extension at the maximum salary. Nobody can possibly offer more in free agency. If he signs, we know what to do - build around him. If he doesn't sign...well, we know what to do then, too.
 

dude12

Hall of Famer
#84
This biggest off season move was securing Dave Joerger. He is delivering on what everyone hoped he would be. He's establishing the culture, with help from some of the signings by Vlade. This alone shows stability and making the playoffs will just reinforce it.

I believe it's going to lead to better FA signings....maybe not the elite signings but rock solid signings. We already have our star. I also think that Joerger and company is developing correctly our young players. Bottom line is they have to get better to earn time as opposed to just being given time ala Ben in his first few years. I have high hopes on Malachi and Skal and Papa as being very important rotational pieces.

I think things are definitely in place for upwards movement.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#85
The single best "championship" move we can make right now is creating a set of circumstances where we are able to lock down Boogie until he's 30, at which point a series of playoff appearances and his own loyalty and sense of "home" will likely secure him for the remainder of his career in Sac. That one move secures an 8-10 year window where a good coach and reasonable management have a chance to put together something.

Any other approach (tear down, trade Boogie, rebuild from scratch etc.) is just a complete shot in the dark. Buying a lottery ticket and assuming we are going to win it. Every team tears down and rebuilds at some point. Very few of them go on to contend let alone win the title. When you run out of time, its what you do, but there is absolutely no reason to believe that we'd magically be the one team to do it right this time after half a century of failure.

So you play to make the playoffs. Quiet the locals, secure the Boogie extension. Give Joerger the cache he needs to authoritatively put together a winner, and a willing partner in Cuz. Make it easier for free agents to imagine coming. And then you do the work. Not The Process, but long years of intelligent acquisitions and climbing the playoff ladder until maybe you are just sexy enough to get a friend of Cuz to come to town and turn you into a contender. Its not sexy, glamorous, or clean. There's no sign of it all just magically coming together like it did in '99. But its the work, and you aim to get that contending support personnel around Cuz by his late 20s/early 30s the same way it happened for Hakeem and Ewing back in the day.
I wasn't necessarily suggesting we trade Cuz. Personally, I'd rather build around him, and to that end, I hate to lose what could be a valuable piece in the coming draft. Now maybe it's just me, but I don't think we have to make the playoffs to convince Cuz to resign. He's a very smart guy, and I don't think it would be hard to convince him of the merits of a long range plan, especially at his young age. And as stated above, we can pay him more than anyone else. But then, I could be wrong. My problem is that the only plan I see is, lets win now and make the playoffs. Nothing wrong with that on the surface, But I want to know what comes after. Theories are great. You have yours and I have mine, but all they are, are theories.

Now Vlade may have a long range plan, and everything is going just the way he's planned it, but I'd like to see something happen, some sort of move that makes me feel encouraged that he knows what he's doing. I'm sure Cousins knows that some of his teammates are stop gap measures. That a lot of the players he's currently playing with, aren't likely to be the players he'll be playing with next season. And that's fine as long as some of them, if not all of them are replaced with players that will be here for a while. Otherwise you'll be going through the exact same process we went through this year, every year. I realize Joerger is trying to build a culture, but that becomes difficult to do when you keep changing the parts every year.

Look, I get where your coming from, and if the intent is to build around Cousins, then resigning him has to be the top priority. So its hard to argue against any plan that would accomplish that. There could already be a verbal agreement, but then, verbal agreements are as good as the paper they're not written on. On the other hand, there are those that would advocate trading Cousins, and not because they hate Cuz, but because if there was ever a draft to cash in on, this is the one, and Cousins is the only asset we have that bring back a couple of those players in the draft.

But your right, it's a risk. A big risk! However, as they say, nothing ventured, nothing gained. But then, Las Vegas has built an entire city with the money of people who thought the risk was worth it. I'm glad I don't have to make the decision. My concern going forward is about our lack of immediate assets, and lack of future draft picks. Those picks are a lot more valuable to a team like the Kings than they are to a team likc the Clippers or the Warriors. They're already knocking on the door. We're trying to figure out where the door is.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#86
Right now, this is the right play. This offseason, we can offer Cousins a five-year extension at the maximum salary. Nobody can possibly offer more in free agency. If he signs, we know what to do - build around him. If he doesn't sign...well, we know what to do then, too.
The only tiny flaw in that plan, is that he'll probably have a little less value then than he does now, if we end up having to trade him. And, the draft will already be over, so there wouldn't be the option of a draft day deal. I'm assuming that signing him to an extension before the new calendar year would remove one year from the extension, unless that's been changed in the new CBA.
 

hrdboild

Hall of Famer
#87
Anyone who has been paying attention to the draft this year isn't excited about losing that pick. The top 10 this year could easily be as good as the top 5 of the last 5 drafts so we're looking at the possibility of drafting our second best player. With Rudy Gay leaving at the end of the season, that's a big deal for our future. I'll wait and see how this whole thing plays out. Nobody else in the West is stepping up and threatening for that #8 spot yet so we may just back into it after all. Personally I want to see more of a coherent long-term plan in place than simply renting mid-tier vets every year and hoping for the best. The actual contenders have a lot more than just 1 star on their roster and right now I don't see how we plan to compete on that level. Toeing. 500 might be enough to get us a playoff spot this year but some of the teams below us are cultivating enough young talent to blow by us in the near future if we can't take a leap forward ourselves and that puts us in perpetual limbo with Denver and New Orleans.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#88
The only tiny flaw in that plan, is that he'll probably have a little less value then than he does now, if we end up having to trade him. And, the draft will already be over, so there wouldn't be the option of a draft day deal. I'm assuming that signing him to an extension before the new calendar year would remove one year from the extension, unless that's been changed in the new CBA.
I think the lack of a draft-day deal is not a major problem - we could still trade for a highly-drafted player (ala Love for Wiggins) and in some sense if the player is signed it might make salary matching easier. We wouldn't necessarily get the guy we wanted most, however, unless the guy we wanted most was drafted by the right team. I believe you're right that we have to wait until July to sign him to a full five-year extension, otherwise it would just be four, so that does probably prevent us from just offering the extension now.

However, you're right that his value would go down a bit if we waited until the offseason. I think that's a pill we probably have to swallow, though. If the choices are trading Cousins at 100% of current value, or [maybe a 65% chance of keeping Cousins on a 5-year -max and barring that trading Cousins at 70% of current value], then the chance we could keep him probably outweighs the loss in trade value. Of course, we don't really know what the odds are that he inks a max extension. He says all the right things in the papers, but you just don't know until he signs on the dotted line. Hopefully the guys in the front office have a pretty good read on that, though.

There's also the opposite question of whether the Kings franchise is willing to put up the money to make Cousins a max player, but if they aren't...that's bad news. Because if not Cousins, then whom? Obviously if you're not willing to max him out, you have to trade him ASAP, but I can't see this franchise (or really, any franchise) putting together a championship team without a superstar, and you're not going to keep a superstar around if you won't max them out. Of the last 26 NBA champions, 20 of them had at least one of a select group of only five players: LeBron, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan. Then there were two Rockets teams with Olajuwon, the Celtics with Garnett, the Mavs with Dirk, and the Warriors with Curry, leaving you with five other teams with superstars. Only the '03 Pistons in that entire time could be claimed to be driven by a group of stars rather than at least one superstar. If we don't offer the extension, we're basically saying that as a franchise we're not serious about winning.
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#89
Why not go for broke and go after John Wall or Bradley Beal? Neither like each other so maybe there is a chance we can play into that.... I would prefer Wall as Cousins and him have that bromance.

Rudy, Collison, WCS for Wall and Oubre? I would pretty much trade anyone on the roster minus Cousins. Wizards would essentially get 20 million to work with this offseason and get a young big in the process.
You are the second poster on here that has mentioned this. I'm not sure where you are drawing this conclusion from...they have not shown in the slightest that they dislike each other. Even if they don't LOVE each other, they play well together, which essentially, is all that matters so long as you get wins out of it.
 
#90
Rudy, Collison, WCS for Wall and Oubre?
There's no chance the wizards trade a star and a good youth piece for two expirings and a youth piece. That trade is ridiculously favoring us.

As I've said before, the only shot we have at trading for Wall is if we trade Gay for a guy like Payne and we keep our own 1st rounder this year. You could also make a Collison & Koufos for Rondo & top 20 protected 1st to add another asset. Then we'd have our pick, the bulls pick, Payne, Bogdanovic, Richardson, Cauley-Stein, Labissiere, & Papagiannis as possible trade chips. Something like SAC 1st (top 10), CHI 1st (20-30), Payne, Bogdanovic, & one of Cauley-Stein, Labissiere, or Papagiannis might be enough for the Wizards to bite. That would leave us with this team with a lot of cap space to use (we might have more luck signing someone with both Wall & Cousins on the roster):

PG - Wall
SG - Temple / Richardson
SF -
PF - Cauley-Stein / Labissiere
C - Cousins

The fact of the matter is that we don't have the assets to trade for a star right now, and the only real shot we have at trading for a star is either keeping our 1st this year to give us another asset or one of our current youth pieces (Bogdanovic, Richardson, Cauley-Stein, Labissiere, & Papagiannis) make a big jump in their development and up their value.