IT = Rumor of 3/24 offer from Pistons

[Capt. Factorial]

The number we need to worry about is the apron. The apron is $4M above the tax line, and since we have used the MLE we are hardcapped and not allowed to cross the apron. Since the tax level is $76.829M, the hard cap we have is $80.829M. That's the number we simply can't breach.

Right now, with our current roster we're at about $76.3M. That all depends on the actual price of DC's contract, whether we gave Stauskas the full 120%, and exactly how much of a raise Cousins' contract is going to get (the reported value is the max value from last year, but the actual contract will be the max value from this year which will be about $1M higher). That's for 13 players.

We have about $4M to play with right now. If we stretch both Terry and Outlaw, we gain $5.9M to play with...but we lose about $900K of that because we would have to sign a player at min to get up to the roster minimum of 13. So we can "easily" create about $9M worth of space ($5M before we hit the cap).

Just wanted to point out that if reports coming out on the "adjusted" size of Paul George's contract are correct, the max salary contract that he signed (and Cousins as well, with one fewer year) starts at $16M. So that would put us another $1.3M toward the cap that I hadn't anticipated. Current roster closer to $77.6M, more like $2.7M of wiggle room right now, and already over the tax.

 

[Kingster]

I continue to see this posted but have yet to see anyone address:

1) why appearing to not care about winning would not have adversely affected the arena situation politically and in the community at large

2) how tearing things down would not have required trading Cousins, or how we know Cousins would have agreed to sign an extension if it appears the team was prepared for a long re-rebuild.

3) not sure how you "gut" a roster with very few assets to begin with.

4) the one move that arguably managed to improve the asset base of the team--trading for Rudy Gay--eliminated any chance of cap space in 2014.

I'm no cap expert like some on this board, but I sure get the feeling that #1 and #2 are the driving forces behind the "strategy" of PDA; because they are understandable doesn't make them commendable. I think #4 partially answers #3 - Gay & Landry eats up $25 mill in cap space. And if they didn't see IT in their long term plans, then why didn't they trade him for value when they had the chance? As for Cousins, from my reading on the internet (others may weigh in), PDA signed him with a poison pill trade provision, so the flexibility there is highly limited.

 

[Kingster]

Big gamble to take, especially if you’re about to blow whatever cap space or asset we have just to retain IT. If you sign IT now with the intention of trading him later during the season, it will turn out to be a much worse situation and a big distraction to what the FO is trying to accomplish.

IT's value will drop precipitously and you might end up with no other team interested on IT. He won’t be the only option for the Kings at PG and won’t be able to showcase himself the way he did last season. His worth will diminished with a very good PG in Collison and an improving sophomore McCallum playing with him. The false perception of IT as a very good PG may be gone. Then we end up getting stuck overpaying the same selfish, poor facilitator, non-defending, severely undersized PG.

Besides, it is prudent to change the culture of the team NOW and start winning instead of midway of the season when we already piled up insurmountable losses.


I think the best way to proceed is to sign and trade IT for a more or less decent shot blocking BIG now or just let him go and move on to look for other opportunities to get our shot blocking BIG.

Pfft. Even if I buy into the "distraction" theory, which I don't, losing IT for nothing far outweighs any minor distractions. Also, FO's around the league aren't stupid. Even if IT played 15 minutes a game next year they know how good he is. They saw him this past year. They aren't going to have amnesia about his worth to a team. Of course, Malone might be tempted to play him more than 15 minutes a game because he might be interested in improving his winning percentage. Temptations, temptations...Problems, problems....

Look at the flexibility you get in signing him. In that scenario, IT doesn't determine the team he's going to - the FO and one of the other 29 teams determines it. And with that kind of breathing room there is more opportunity to get value in return.

As for the "false perception" argument: Nonsense. Implicit in that idea is that you are your brethren are so much more knowledable about IT and his value than the FO's of the NBA. Really?

And what the hell does culture have to do with signing IT? Nobody works harder than IT on his game. And he's not exactly the bad boy of the NBA. I can't even begin to imagine what you're talking about.

 

[whozit]

...

Look at the flexibility you get in signing him. In that scenario, IT doesn't determine the team he's going to - the FO and one of the other 31 teams determines it. And with that kind of breathing room there is more opportunity to get value in return.

Who are the other two teams? Seattle hasn't been awarded an expansion team yet.

 

[LPKingsFan]

As for Cousins, from my reading on the internet (others may weigh in), PDA signed him with a poison pill trade provision, so the flexibility there is highly limited.

Whether Cousins' current contract is PPP is irrelevant, though, because the question was why didn't they "tear things down" last summer, when Cousins was still on his rookie contract.

 

[Kingster]

Who are the other two teams? Seattle hasn't been awarded an expansion team yet.

There's breaking news. You haven't heard?

 

[Kingster]

Whether Cousins' current contract is PPP is irrelevant, though, because the question was why didn't they "tear things down" last summer, when Cousins was still on his rookie contract.

The Cousins thing is the least of concerns for me or for your post. You don't need to trade Cousins to tear it down.

 

[whozit]

There's breaking news. You haven't heard?

We all have those days ........

 

[Spike]

And what the hell does culture have to do with signing IT? Nobody works harder than IT on his game. And he's not exactly the bad boy of the NBA. I can't even begin to imagine what you're talking about.

Culture doesn't necessarily mean bringing on goody goodies. If you want a culture of sharing and ball movement, letting someone go whose game is the antithesis of ball movement would certainly be a positive.

 

[VF21]

Culture doesn't necessarily mean bringing on goody goodies. If you want a culture of sharing and ball movement, letting someone go whose game is the antithesis of ball movement would certainly be a positive.

Yep. While characters counts, there's the culture that demands TEAM players as opposed to those who are always concerned about THEIR performance, THEIR stats, THEIR minutes, etc. Isaiah Thomas just might be the nicest guy in the world, but that doesn't mean he has even the slightest idea of what it means to be a TEAM player. Sure, we saw it for very short stretches (few and far between), but for the most part, IT was, is and always will be about him. And it's understandable, considering how much harder than others he's had to work just to get to where he is now. Unfortunately, he's on a team that cannot hide his faults and really needs someone who not only understands the team concept but buys into it.

 

[The_Jamal]

Culture doesn't necessarily mean bringing on goody goodies. If you want a culture of sharing and ball movement, letting someone go whose game is the antithesis of ball movement would certainly be a positive.

Such a mis-guided and once again biased argument. If that were the case, we'd let the whole damn team go. Rudy and Cousins were two of the biggest ball-stoppers in the NBA last season. So do we get rid of them too?

 

[Dime Dropper]

Such a mis-guided and once again biased argument. If that were the case, we'd let the whole damn team go. Rudy and Cousins were two of the biggest ball-stoppers in the NBA last season. So do we get rid of them too?

No, because they're considerably more talented. Their games are designed for that type of play, IT's isn't.

 

[Spike]

Such a mis-guided and once again biased argument. If that were the case, we'd let the whole damn team go. Rudy and Cousins were two of the biggest ball-stoppers in the NBA last season. So do we get rid of them too?

Just as misguided as implying that IT deserves the ball as much as they do, I suppose. Of course your elite post should get the ball with intent to score. Gay too.

I happily admit my bias towards those two over IT. They're on a different level.

 

[VF21]

Such a mis-guided and once again biased argument. If that were the case, we'd let the whole damn team go. Rudy and Cousins were two of the biggest ball-stoppers in the NBA last season. So do we get rid of them too?

Seriously? If you and the other IT jockers could occasionally recognize that your idol has feet of clay just like everyone else, perhaps these debates/arguments/endless dialogues wouldn't always end up the same way.

IT isn't perfect. He puts his shot first and then reluctantly looks for others, often with way too little time left on the clock. It's something he could choose to work on, but he's made no mention of it. He wants to be the best scorer, he wants to prove he's the best point guard in the NBA, he wants to show all his detractors from his entire life that he's better than they ever thought he could be.

Again, that's all well and good BUT IT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED. We need someone who will defer to Rudy and DMC because they're Rudy and DMC. He's an adequate point guard who needs to realize the best way to become indispensable is to learn to distribute the ball.

 

[CurseOfTheSalmons]

Again, that's all well and good BUT IT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED. We need someone who will defer to Rudy and DMC because they're Rudy and DMC. He's an adequate point guard who needs to realize the best way to become indispensable is to learn to distribute the ball.

except we don't need that if we want to win games. we need a better bench and would benefit an SG who would do all the little things and defer to isaiah, gay, and cousins.

 

[VF21]

except we don't need that if we want to win games. we need a better bench and an SG who will do all the little things and defer to isaiah, gay, and cousins.

We don't need a better distributor if we want to win games? Yeah, okay...

An SG who will defer to Isaiah? Oh good lord...

 

[sdballer]

except we don't need that if we want to win games. we need a better bench and an SG who will do all the little things and defer to isaiah, gay, and cousins.

It would be extremely challenging to build a team around those three guys, especially with the parts we currently possess. Even if you did, at best they would challenge for the 8th seed.

 

[jcwkings]

Seriously? If you and the other IT jockers could occasionally recognize that your idol has feet of clay just like everyone else, perhaps these debates/arguments/endless dialogues wouldn't always end up the same way.

IT isn't perfect. He puts his shot first and then reluctantly looks for others, often with way too little time left on the clock. It's something he could choose to work on, but he's made no mention of it. He wants to be the best scorer, he wants to prove he's the best point guard in the NBA, he wants to show all his detractors from his entire life that he's better than they ever thought he could be.

Again, that's all well and good BUT IT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED. We need someone who will defer to Rudy and DMC because they're Rudy and DMC. He's an adequate point guard who needs to realize the best way to become indispensable is to learn to distribute the ball.

So you're saying Rudy and DMC didnt get their touches last season? They were amongst the highest usage players in the NBA. When the team was at full health IT naturally faded to third in terms of offensive focal point. Ben was probably rhe worst player in the leauge last season in relation to minutes played, and Thornton was a shell of himself. Landry played at 40 percent, JT was a mental wreck, Outlaw was mostly trash, IT was rightfully the third scoring option last season.

Now IT detractors could be right, we might be better overall without IT, but that will be dependant on Ben improving, Landry producing off the bench, Stauskas producing as a rook, McCallum cementing himself as a solid backup, Collison providing the balance, JT having a bounce back year, Williams producing in his contract year and the team playing better team defense overall. All those factors were not at play last season and IMO IT did as good a job as could have been done given the roster turnover throughout the season and just a HUGE talent dropoff after the top 3.

 

[VF21]

It would be extremely challenging to build a team around those three guys, especially with the parts we currently possess. Even if you did, at best they would challenge for the 8th seed.

And get flushed out of the first round like a turd.

 

[rainmaker]

Such a mis-guided and once again biased argument. If that were the case, we'd let the whole damn team go. Rudy and Cousins were two of the biggest ball-stoppers in the NBA last season. So do we get rid of them too?

A #1 and #2 option, a team's focal points, are supposed to be ball stoppers to an extent.

Do you not understand that repeatedly failing to recognize this shows extreme pro-IT bias on your part? You immediately switch any responsibility IT has as the freakin PG to keep others involved over to Boogie/Rudy, almost with that attitude of "them first". That's a great attitude for our PG, I'll pass as soon as Rudy and Boogie show they're not ball stoppers, or else I won't get enough shots.

How, pray tell, are Boogie and Rudy supposed to be our focal points, have the offense run through them, create scoring opportunities themselves or through the attention they draw, without having the rock most of the time? Opportunities many times are a result of your focal points having the rock, going to work, and either regularly beating their guy 1v1 or commanding help.

One of , if not the most talented bigs in the game who's one of the top 5 passing bigs btw, along with a scoring wing should without a doubt stop the ball. And you continue to fail to recognize the issue that those two don't have the responsibility to run the offense and keep others involved. That falls on the PG, where it's a much bigger problem if he's the ball stopper. Boogie and Rudy don't have the responsibility of making sure IT gets off and in a rhythm. IT or whomever is our PG does have the responsibility of feeding those two and keeping them in a rhythm.

This isn't nearly as complicated as a few are making it. A PG, like Westbrook or Lillard or Kyrie or Steph, are one of the top two options on their teams, hence the need for them to be aggressive as a focal point. When a PG is not a top two option, it's more his job to feed and create for the top two options. Our FO couldn't make it more clear the Boogie and Rudy are our top two options and focal points. Whether you agree or not, that's the blueprint. Any PG who's not down with that needs to go. It surely isn't about because Boogie and Rudy hog the rock too much and don't let the PG get enough shots that he's simply going to take the ball and do what he wants anyway, as he "wants to be wanted for being a scoring PG". Our PG should want possessions ending with Boogie and Rudy. That should be his focus, and making their lives easier. Not worried that they're getting too many touches. And it's clear our FO believes Collison is more likely to assume that role.

 

[VF21]

So you're saying Rudy and DMC didnt get their touches last season? They were amongst the highest usage players in the NBA. When the team was at full health IT naturally faded to third in terms of offensive focal point. Ben was probably rhe worst player in the leauge last season in relation to minutes played, and Thornton was a shell of himself. Landry played at 40 percent, JT was a mental wreck, Outlaw was mostly trash, IT was rightfully the third scoring option last season.

Now IT detractors could be right, we might be better overall without IT, but that will be dependant on Ben improving, Landry producing off the bench, Stauskas producing as a rook, McCallum cementing himself as a solid backup, Collison providing the balance, JT having a bounce back year, Williams producing in his contract year and the team playing better team defense overall. All those factors were not at play last season and IMO IT did as good a job as could have been done given the roster turnover throughout the season and just a HUGE talent dropoff after the top 3.

Congratulations. You and a couple of the other posters around here have taken the straw man argument to an art form.

You know what I said. You're not stupid and you're not a noob fan with no knowledge of the Kings or the NBA. You're choosing to obfuscate the discussion because you simply will not even consider that IT might not be the best choice for starting PG for our Kings. That's fine; it's your choice.

IT did a very good job last year, if you restrict how you're evaluating him. I'm trying to be as fair as I can. IMO he has issues he needs to address. He does NOT look for the open player. He prefers to work to find his own shot, often at the expense of someone who is in a position to make a better shot. He cannot break through screens. I could go on but I'd be preaching to the choir and those of you who choose to ignore his shortcomings would continue to create bigger and better straw men.

 

[jcwkings]

And get flushed out of the first round like a turd.

TBH after nearly a decade of mediocrity, getting dumped in the first round in the Western Conference sounds pretty good right about now(that would mean we won close to 50 games), at least Cousins would get a taste of the playoffs, something Kevin Love can't say. I'm not saying Cousins, Gay, IT is the future, but if you told me keeping IT gets us the 8th seed, sign me up RIGHT NOW.

 

[CurseOfTheSalmons]

the argument that ousins/gay aren't getting enough touches is bunk. cousins was 3rd in USG% last year. rudy gay was 20th. cousins led all big men in "time of possession" and was 4th among big men in front court touches per game.

cousins and gay are getting their touches with IT here, and lineups with IT can play good defense. IT is not even close to bottlenecking the team right now, and that's why wanting to replace him now is dumb.

 

[sdballer]

TBH after nearly a decade of mediocrity, getting dumped in the first round in the Western Conference sounds pretty good right about now(that would mean we won close to 50 games), at least Cousins would get a taste of the playoffs, something Kevin Love can't say. I'm not saying Cousins, Gay, IT is the future, but if you told me keeping IT gets us the 8th seed, sign me up RIGHT NOW.

I'm not even saying it gets us the 8th seed. I'm saying it caps out at that. Which isn't good enough for the payroll, flexibility and timeline.

 

[sdballer]

The Cousins/Gay need more touches argument is bunk. Cousins was 3rd in USG% last year. Rudy Gay was 20th. Cousins led all big men in "time of possession" and was 4th among big men in front court touches per game.

Pretty sure there's more to a balanced offense than that. Honestly, the diehard IT fans simply aren't going to get it.

God I wish we could send you IT fans along to wherever he ends up.

 

[jcwkings]

Congratulations. You and a couple of the other posters around here have taken the straw man argument to an art form.

You know what I said. You're not stupid and you're not a noob fan with no knowledge of the Kings or the NBA. You're choosing to obfuscate the discussion because you simply will not even consider that IT might not be the best choice for starting PG for our Kings. That's fine; it's your choice.

IT did a very good job last year, if you restrict how you're evaluating him. I'm trying to be as fair as I can. IMO he has issues he needs to address. He does NOT look for the open player. He prefers to work to find his own shot, often at the expense of someone who is in a position to make a better shot. He cannot break through screens. I could go on but I'd be preaching to the choir and those of you who choose to ignore his shortcomings would continue to create bigger and better straw men.

I'm just analyzing what I see. I'm a Kings fan who just happens to appreciate one of our players(wow what unique concept). Our roster was a wreck last season outside of Cousins, Gay, IT. Cousins had a career year and was a amongst the highest usage players in the league, Gay pretty much revived his career after being a laughing stock of the league. IT naturally provided that third scoring punch and after that it was a pool of mediocrity. I'm sure if IT played with a SG that could actually shoot he would have looked for him more(and his assists would have gone up too). For you guys just to ignore those facts is pretty laughable.

 

[jcwkings]

Pretty sure there's more to a balanced offense than that. Honestly, the diehard IT fans simply aren't going to get it.

God I wish we could send you IT fans along to wherever he ends up.

We understand what you're trying to say but the roster was absolutely abysmal outside of our top 3, for last season and last season only I feel IT did what needed to be done to give this bad team a chance to win. If Ben improves, Nick produces, Landry comes back 100% and other players step up then yes IT(and Cousins/Gay) should look for them more, but for LAST SEASON it was what it was and those 3 scoring 20 ppg each was our best hope of winning.

 

[Spike]

the cousins/gay need more touches argument is bunk. cousins was 3rd in USG% last year. rudy gay was 20th. cousins led all big men in "time of possession" and was 4th among big men in front court touches per game.

Good thing Cousins had a top 5 PER, then, given his touches.

 

[VF21]

I'm just analyzing what I see. I'm a Kings fan who just happens to appreciate one of our players(wow what unique concept). Our roster was a wreck last season outside of Cousins, Gay, IT. Cousins had a career year and was a amongst the highest usage players in the league, Gay pretty much revived his career after being a laughing stock of the league. IT naturally provided that third scoring punch and after that it was a pool of mediocrity. I'm sure if IT played with a SG that could actually shoot he would have looked for him more(and his assists would have gone up too). For you guys just to ignore those facts is pretty laughable.

I give up. You win.

Isaiah Thomas is the best point guard in the league and we should pay whatever it takes to keep him. Him being our "third scoring punch" is infinitely more important than having a point guard who can ... well ...guard, who can distribute the ball, who can break through a screen, who can run the pick and roll effectively, who can see the court, etc.

I'm ashamed of myself for being so blind and unappreciative. Bad VF21.

 

[Spike]

I'm sure if IT played with a SG that could actually shoot he would have looked for him more(and his assists would have gone up too). For you guys just to ignore those facts is pretty laughable.

This reads like opinion more than fact.