Kings and free agency - part 2
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
Completely with you on that, I think after the trade Matthews is a risk we got to take (and it does hold a huge reward if he gets back to what he was).
But if we strike out, you can still build a pretty good team with leftovers and our current roster, though I don't think it will be enough for the playoffs (to be honest, I don't think we are favourites to go to the playoffs in any scenario).
But if we strike out, you can still build a pretty good team with leftovers and our current roster, though I don't think it will be enough for the playoffs (to be honest, I don't think we are favourites to go to the playoffs in any scenario).
Dammit, the Nets got Thomas Robinson for 2 years at 1.1 million a year. I was thinking he'd be a nice bench big for us.
thomas robinson
✔@Trobinson0
All thanks to GOD and BROOKLYN NETS this time won't be the same I promise!
??? Why is he saying that?
✔@Trobinson0
All thanks to GOD and BROOKLYN NETS this time won't be the same I promise!
??? Why is he saying that?
Disclaimer- I want you to know I am not trying to troll you or start anything. My post also really has nothing to do with the specific post I am quoting, but more of your overall posts. I just want to know what your ideal offseason would have been, and how successful you think it would be long term. Again, not a personal attack on you, I am just curious for the other perspective. You have been loudly against the trade, so I am curious what you would do otherwise. I also know you were loudly against drafting WCS, and were ticked off we passed on Mudiay.
Do you think we would have been better off with Cousins/JT/Rudy/Ben/DC with a bench of Landry/Nik/Mudiay and $8m in cap space? Knowing what the cap space will get you in this market, what was your hope for the $8m in cap space? We certainly aren't going to win any free agent battles next year when everyone has space, so was the hope Mudiay is a star, hope that we are bad enough in 2015-2016, and again in 2016-2017 that we keep the pick we owe the Bulls two more seasons and take another flyer at the lottery? Do you think Gay and Cousins would have been on board with that? When were you hoping we would make the leap from "team slowly acquiring assets" to "team playing to win now"? I know you are upset we traded a 2018 pick to Philly, so was the plan to still be acquiring assets at that point?
Do you feel more comfortable short and long term with the roster core above and draft picks in both 2018 and 2019, or more comfortable short and long term with Cousins/WCS/Gay/Ben/DC and $24 in cap space, with all the same picks, except potentially minus one in either 2018 or 2019?
Again, please know I am not trying to troll. I mean these questions honestly, and I want to know what the other side of the argument thinks is the right thing to do (other than just "I wouldn't have made the trade"). To me, we have diverted from your preferences because we have WCS instead of Mudiay, because we have $24m in cap space instead of $8m in cap space, JT/Landry/Nik, and because we might lose a pick in 2018-2019. Do you really think we are worse off?
Do you think we would have been better off with Cousins/JT/Rudy/Ben/DC with a bench of Landry/Nik/Mudiay and $8m in cap space? Knowing what the cap space will get you in this market, what was your hope for the $8m in cap space? We certainly aren't going to win any free agent battles next year when everyone has space, so was the hope Mudiay is a star, hope that we are bad enough in 2015-2016, and again in 2016-2017 that we keep the pick we owe the Bulls two more seasons and take another flyer at the lottery? Do you think Gay and Cousins would have been on board with that? When were you hoping we would make the leap from "team slowly acquiring assets" to "team playing to win now"? I know you are upset we traded a 2018 pick to Philly, so was the plan to still be acquiring assets at that point?
Do you feel more comfortable short and long term with the roster core above and draft picks in both 2018 and 2019, or more comfortable short and long term with Cousins/WCS/Gay/Ben/DC and $24 in cap space, with all the same picks, except potentially minus one in either 2018 or 2019?
Again, please know I am not trying to troll. I mean these questions honestly, and I want to know what the other side of the argument thinks is the right thing to do (other than just "I wouldn't have made the trade"). To me, we have diverted from your preferences because we have WCS instead of Mudiay, because we have $24m in cap space instead of $8m in cap space, JT/Landry/Nik, and because we might lose a pick in 2018-2019. Do you really think we are worse off?
Alex Kennedy@AlexKennedyNBA
5 mins ago
Kosta Koufos has received interest from the Mavs, Lakers and Kings among others. The Bucks showed interest too (before landing Greg Monroe).
I am not the kind of guy to get offended, so there was really no need to about 8 disclaimers about you not being against me. We're cool, and it's not like you even said anything remotely hurtful.
I think that the post that best represent my thoughts is one you probably haven't read (because of your questions) and it pretty much says that we are doing the right move in a dumb way.
I didn't want Mudiay over WCS, but with WCS stock dropping (and it has dropped on every single draft-board) it would have been easy for us to do something like the 76ers did last year- they drafted Payton (which they didn't want) and than turned him into the guy they did want (Saric) and future picks- that's smart. I wanted WCS, but doing what you want isn't the smartest play and i think we could've gotten more.
Same here- we should've cleared cap space, but we should've gotten a better deal- this is a high rate to pay on a salary dump (and for andjel- a salary dump is a term that doesn't have to talk about saving money, it talks about cutting salary- hence a salary dump).
This deal can have very bad results- we were handicapped by the Chicago deal for years, the pick swaps may hurt us in the future, and about the first rounder:
If we convey it than we paid too much for the salary dump, and if we son't the Stepien rule will stop us from trading a first rounder for a long time (like the Chicago deal) it's a lose-lose and a bad deal.
I think we over-all did things I liked, it just we paid high rates to get them- and I think we lost a lot of things we shouldn't have...
I think that the post that best represent my thoughts is one you probably haven't read (because of your questions) and it pretty much says that we are doing the right move in a dumb way.
I didn't want Mudiay over WCS, but with WCS stock dropping (and it has dropped on every single draft-board) it would have been easy for us to do something like the 76ers did last year- they drafted Payton (which they didn't want) and than turned him into the guy they did want (Saric) and future picks- that's smart. I wanted WCS, but doing what you want isn't the smartest play and i think we could've gotten more.
Same here- we should've cleared cap space, but we should've gotten a better deal- this is a high rate to pay on a salary dump (and for andjel- a salary dump is a term that doesn't have to talk about saving money, it talks about cutting salary- hence a salary dump).
This deal can have very bad results- we were handicapped by the Chicago deal for years, the pick swaps may hurt us in the future, and about the first rounder:
If we convey it than we paid too much for the salary dump, and if we son't the Stepien rule will stop us from trading a first rounder for a long time (like the Chicago deal) it's a lose-lose and a bad deal.
I think we over-all did things I liked, it just we paid high rates to get them- and I think we lost a lot of things we shouldn't have...
After reading it several more times, it looks like you're trying to turn our one deal with Philly into a pair of three-way sign-and-trades. Maybe that could work, though it's super complicated and we chased off our cap expert. But originally it sure as heck looked like you were trying to trade the same players to two teams.
And they have a million UFA's they're looking at resigning. Never seen a team have 3 UFA's the same off-season. There's also questions as to if you even want to tie yourself into a core that's failed in the playoffs. Lilard and LMA (if they got him back) at 20mil+ and West at 15mil+ pretty much is your core for the foreseeable future. It's shown it can't win, so they'll probably move on.
If Aldridge goes I think that signals a total rebuild in Portland. Heck, every move they've made has been for young players pretty much. Getting Vonleh and Plumlee looks like a team with two young bigs looking to see what they have and perhaps build around them. Re-signing Matthews for them is the equivalent to the Kings getting John Salmons while rebuilding. The Blazers can pretty much field and entire starting unit with young high to decent upside players.
