You guys are sleeping on Russell. He already pretty good in pick and role and has outstanding court vision with a very good jumper. He would be very good with DMC running a pick and roll. Also don't know why you guys are hung up on Hibbert he is expiring we would be at 50mill in cap next year with this trade projected 38mill to spend. We can sign Batum/Barnes or Bazemore
Kings making Rudy available for trade?
- Thread starter Bosnian Diehard
- Start date
I don't remember that "inside source" guy actually breaking any details on the philly trade. Mostly he posts every few days that we're talking to 10-15 teams about a number of players and willing to trade some of our guys, but not all of them. Feels more like attention seeking behavior than anything else
Right.... cause freeing up cap space to chase free agents has worked out so well in every other year of Sacramento Kings history. Koufos signed a 4 year deal with us, Gay agreed to a 3 year extension and you're going to trade both of them for a rookie and an expiring contract. Then you're going to tell DeMarcus and Rajon to chill because next year we're really going to be something. In 3 or 4 years when Russell is an elite wing you're going to make a run at a championship. This line of thinking has gotten us nowhere. Maybe this time it's different. Maybe this time we'll pick the right rookie. Or maybe it's just the same old Kings, determined to sabotage themselves at every turn.
I'm not sure why everyone has turned on Rudy so quickly. It took awhile to convince me, but I don't think Rudy Gay is any worse as a second option than Klay Thompson or Kyrie Irving/Kevin Love or Pau Gasol or Chandler Parsons or Dwight Howard or Zach Randolph. The list goes on. Only OKC has a second option that outclasses Rudy completely. He was arguably the biggest snub from last year's All Star team. He's struggled at times this year with our current offensive scheme and his defensive intensity wavers, but you could say the same of almost every player on our roster. I argued against re-signing him for a long time because I thought he was just an inefficient scorer but after the season he had last year I think you'd be nuts to give up on him now after a couple months of up and down play just so you can create cap-space to potentially overpay a comparable player or bring in a rookie who's years away from having the same impact.
I'm not sure why everyone has turned on Rudy so quickly. It took awhile to convince me, but I don't think Rudy Gay is any worse as a second option than Klay Thompson or Kyrie Irving/Kevin Love or Pau Gasol or Chandler Parsons or Dwight Howard or Zach Randolph. The list goes on. Only OKC has a second option that outclasses Rudy completely. He was arguably the biggest snub from last year's All Star team. He's struggled at times this year with our current offensive scheme and his defensive intensity wavers, but you could say the same of almost every player on our roster. I argued against re-signing him for a long time because I thought he was just an inefficient scorer but after the season he had last year I think you'd be nuts to give up on him now after a couple months of up and down play just so you can create cap-space to potentially overpay a comparable player or bring in a rookie who's years away from having the same impact.
There have been a few knee-jerk "no" responses on this one, but it's actually a pretty fair deal. Hibbert isn't in there as a piece so much as salary filler and an expiring contract. Butler is just there because we're trying to give him another home. Which basically means it's a Russell for Gay/Koufos deal that actually is legal under the salary cap rules.
The Lakers are really hurting on the front line - Hibbert looks more or less done as an impact player and beyond him, it's basically Randle, Bass and a bunch of nothing. So I can see how they might have their eye on Koufos, who has been steady if unspectacular throughout his career. We all know about Gay - dynamic scorer, extremely frustrating on defense because of his wildly inconsistent effort, does dumb stuff sometimes, but I can see why they'd want him because he instantly upgrades their offense. And then there's Russell, who has great size and potential for a PG but who is having a pretty rough transition into the league and if they can sell him off to get a big offensive piece and something solid in the middle, that's not a terrible bet given that Clarkson isn't looking incapable of handling point for a while.
If we were to do it, it certainly seems like a white flag move on the season. And furthermore, it's basically a commitment to Russell as the PG of the future, which means we probably don't bring Rondo back. But of course, our FO probably has a better read on whether we can successfully bring Rondo back or not and I think that would have to play into our decision making here. Gay is a great piece to have, but I'm OK shipping him off to get quality - he has just been far too frustratingly inconsistent - but I wouldn't sell him just to sell him. Koufos is also a decent player, but with Cuz here and with WCS improving before our eyes he'll never be more than a third big - which we might be able to fill nearly as well for less money.
If we're faced with the prospect of standing pat vs. this move, it's probably important to ask where we're at. As it stands now, Rondo is our only major player who is not under contract next year, and Cuz, Koufos, Belli, and WCS are around for at least another year on top of that. We've got makings of a stable core, but it's one that halfway into the season is still a bit shaky - sure that five-game win streak felt really good, but then it all came crashing down again. Is this a good enough core to make the playoffs? Is it a good enough core to compete for a championship? And if not, where do we get the pieces we need to do that? Right now, the draft isn't our friend. We owe the Cleveland pick to Chicago if we're any good. If we stink and hit the lottery, Philly is going to swap it out from under us. It's most likely time to build in free agency. As it stands right now, next year we're committed to about $67M and we assume we're going to have to spend a pretty good chunk of our cap space (given projections we'd figure to have about $18M in cap space total) to get Rondo back. With every other team in the league also flush with cap space, $18M or so isn't going to go too far - if we stand pat at the trade deadline saying that this is our playoff core, then next year's team probably doesn't look too different.
If we take the deal as offered, where are we? You figure Rondo walks, you figure Hibbert walks, so we get an instant $17M more in cap space (Russell vs Gay/Koufos/Butler) - that's up to more like $35M. And, given that Rondo would probably be a goner, we might be able to flip him for something useful at the deadline (though that would presumably diminish our cap space). The question, then, is whether a Cousins/Russell/WCS core with guys like Omri/Ben/Marco/Darren as filler is enough to attract a huge free agent in the offseason - like perhaps a guy whose name rhymes with Mevin Murant. If so, I gotta do the deal. If not I've got to be really convinced that Russell is good enough to be piece #2, and while I like him, I don't know if I'm really convinced.
But hey, you know it's a reasonable trade offer when it's that hard to say yes or no.
The Lakers are really hurting on the front line - Hibbert looks more or less done as an impact player and beyond him, it's basically Randle, Bass and a bunch of nothing. So I can see how they might have their eye on Koufos, who has been steady if unspectacular throughout his career. We all know about Gay - dynamic scorer, extremely frustrating on defense because of his wildly inconsistent effort, does dumb stuff sometimes, but I can see why they'd want him because he instantly upgrades their offense. And then there's Russell, who has great size and potential for a PG but who is having a pretty rough transition into the league and if they can sell him off to get a big offensive piece and something solid in the middle, that's not a terrible bet given that Clarkson isn't looking incapable of handling point for a while.
If we were to do it, it certainly seems like a white flag move on the season. And furthermore, it's basically a commitment to Russell as the PG of the future, which means we probably don't bring Rondo back. But of course, our FO probably has a better read on whether we can successfully bring Rondo back or not and I think that would have to play into our decision making here. Gay is a great piece to have, but I'm OK shipping him off to get quality - he has just been far too frustratingly inconsistent - but I wouldn't sell him just to sell him. Koufos is also a decent player, but with Cuz here and with WCS improving before our eyes he'll never be more than a third big - which we might be able to fill nearly as well for less money.
If we're faced with the prospect of standing pat vs. this move, it's probably important to ask where we're at. As it stands now, Rondo is our only major player who is not under contract next year, and Cuz, Koufos, Belli, and WCS are around for at least another year on top of that. We've got makings of a stable core, but it's one that halfway into the season is still a bit shaky - sure that five-game win streak felt really good, but then it all came crashing down again. Is this a good enough core to make the playoffs? Is it a good enough core to compete for a championship? And if not, where do we get the pieces we need to do that? Right now, the draft isn't our friend. We owe the Cleveland pick to Chicago if we're any good. If we stink and hit the lottery, Philly is going to swap it out from under us. It's most likely time to build in free agency. As it stands right now, next year we're committed to about $67M and we assume we're going to have to spend a pretty good chunk of our cap space (given projections we'd figure to have about $18M in cap space total) to get Rondo back. With every other team in the league also flush with cap space, $18M or so isn't going to go too far - if we stand pat at the trade deadline saying that this is our playoff core, then next year's team probably doesn't look too different.
If we take the deal as offered, where are we? You figure Rondo walks, you figure Hibbert walks, so we get an instant $17M more in cap space (Russell vs Gay/Koufos/Butler) - that's up to more like $35M. And, given that Rondo would probably be a goner, we might be able to flip him for something useful at the deadline (though that would presumably diminish our cap space). The question, then, is whether a Cousins/Russell/WCS core with guys like Omri/Ben/Marco/Darren as filler is enough to attract a huge free agent in the offseason - like perhaps a guy whose name rhymes with Mevin Murant. If so, I gotta do the deal. If not I've got to be really convinced that Russell is good enough to be piece #2, and while I like him, I don't know if I'm really convinced.
But hey, you know it's a reasonable trade offer when it's that hard to say yes or no.
I would hope that Rondo resigns even if we really trade for Russel. I think that they fit each other fairly well and can play a good amount of minutes together since Russel is a very good spot up shooter and I can see him even guarding SGs better than PGs because of his size and lack of quickness. It would also would release him of the pressure of running the whole team. We could first let Rondo try to set Cuz up with Russel spacing the floor or running around screens and then fall back to a Russel-Cuz pick and roll if nothing is open.
But still, this is a deal that clearly is contrary to our win-now mentality and does nothing for our perimeter defense. So if we actually do this, I don't think we're done with trades. Maybe we then flip Mclemore for a defensive 3 like P.J. Tucker. A Rondo-Russel-Tucker-Wcs-Cousins lineup seems pretty balanced.
But still, this is a deal that clearly is contrary to our win-now mentality and does nothing for our perimeter defense. So if we actually do this, I don't think we're done with trades. Maybe we then flip Mclemore for a defensive 3 like P.J. Tucker. A Rondo-Russel-Tucker-Wcs-Cousins lineup seems pretty balanced.
Last edited:
I gave my reasons, I don't think my reaction was knee jerk. I can see the logic in it, but I don't believe D'Angelo Russell is a superstar in the making so it's probably a talent downgrade in exchange for salary cap flexibility and throwing in the towel on another season. And I would contend that any deal whose upside involves luring Kevin Durant in free agency is probably a bad deal. It falls in the same category for me as the "first we trade DeMarcus Cousins for picks, then we win the lottery and draft Ben Simmons" type of deals people were discussing in December. The chances of Kevin Durant picking Sacramento as the place he's going to cement his legacy are about as good as my chances of flying to the moon by flapping my arms.
Maybe you can get Al Horford to come over from Atlanta but even that seems unlikely unless we manage to win a playoff series or something and prove that we're for real. You can throw a bunch of money at a young almost-star like Jeff Green or Hassan Whiteside but neither one makes you an automatic contender and you still have to convince them that your money is better than the LA Lakers who'll have a clean slate, no Kobe Bryant, and ample playing time to offer. Recall that in the recent past Andre Igoudala signed with Golden State for less money than we offered and Wesley Matthews initially picked a smaller deal with Dallas over ours (which turned into a bigger deal after DeAndre Jordan drama subsided). The next time we outbid all 29 other franchises on a coveted free agent will be the first.
Maybe you can get Al Horford to come over from Atlanta but even that seems unlikely unless we manage to win a playoff series or something and prove that we're for real. You can throw a bunch of money at a young almost-star like Jeff Green or Hassan Whiteside but neither one makes you an automatic contender and you still have to convince them that your money is better than the LA Lakers who'll have a clean slate, no Kobe Bryant, and ample playing time to offer. Recall that in the recent past Andre Igoudala signed with Golden State for less money than we offered and Wesley Matthews initially picked a smaller deal with Dallas over ours (which turned into a bigger deal after DeAndre Jordan drama subsided). The next time we outbid all 29 other franchises on a coveted free agent will be the first.
Well....I'll put it this way...Rudy Gay >>>>>Russell and that goes for now obviously and it goes for the foreseeable future. Could Russell end up better, that is a maybe. Should we take a chance on that? I wouldn't. I think Rudy gets undervalued here and I also think that he gets used incorrectly by George.
If I'm Miami, would I trade Winslow for Gay? In a heartbeat! If I'm the Kings, would I trade Gay for Winslow, not on your life. Gay is a proven player and Winslow is still all potential. Trading Gay for a productive young player might be difficult, but not impossible. There are a lot of very good young players in the league. The trick is finding one you like that the other team is willing to trade. First you have to find a team that wants Gay, like the Clippers, and then see what they have to offer. This is why Vlade gets paid the big bucks.
That's not fair, he actually called him a young almost star...
I don't think that's true... there is immense value in a rookie you get for a tiny salary and have control over his next 8 years in terms of team building.
When you are building a team there is value to those things, look at Brooklyn- did they lose talent in any of their trades? they gained proven players... and now they are the NBA's most miserable franchise for the forseeable fututre.
I don't think that's true... there is immense value in a rookie you get for a tiny salary and have control over his next 8 years in terms of team building.
When you are building a team there is value to those things, look at Brooklyn- did they lose talent in any of their trades? they gained proven players... and now they are the NBA's most miserable franchise for the forseeable fututre.
You noticed. 
I didn't think I'd be able to get away with that. It's a weak free agent class (look for yourself) so he looked relatively noteworthy and he did average 17 points per game for a couple seasons in Boston which makes him a poor man's Rudy Gay maybe?? Yeah, it was quite a stretch. All the more reason why trading Rudy would be a mistake. Jeff Green probably wouldn't even sign with Sacramento in free agency if he got a comparable offer elsewhere and even on his best day he wishes he were as talented as Rudy Gay.
I didn't think I'd be able to get away with that. It's a weak free agent class (look for yourself) so he looked relatively noteworthy and he did average 17 points per game for a couple seasons in Boston which makes him a poor man's Rudy Gay maybe?? Yeah, it was quite a stretch. All the more reason why trading Rudy would be a mistake. Jeff Green probably wouldn't even sign with Sacramento in free agency if he got a comparable offer elsewhere and even on his best day he wishes he were as talented as Rudy Gay.
You noticed. I didn't think I'd be able to get away with that. It's a weak free agent class (look for yourself) so he looked relatively noteworthy and he did average 17 points per game for a couple seasons in Boston which makes him a poor man's Rudy Gay maybe?? Yeah, it was quite a stretch. All the more reason why trading Rudy would be a mistake. Jeff Green probably wouldn't even sign with Sacramento in free agency if he got a comparable offer elsewhere and even on his best day he wishes he were as talented as Rudy Gay.
I didn't think I'd be able to get away with that. It's a weak free agent class (look for yourself) so he looked relatively noteworthy and he did average 17 points per game for a couple seasons in Boston which makes him a poor man's Rudy Gay maybe?? Yeah, it was quite a stretch. All the more reason why trading Rudy would be a mistake. Jeff Green probably wouldn't even sign with Sacramento in free agency if he got a comparable offer elsewhere and even on his best day he wishes he were as talented as Rudy Gay.
Al Horford
DeMar DeRozan
Bradley Beal
Nicolas Batum
Mike Conley
Harrison Barnes
Chandler Parsons
Jordan Clarkson
Ryan Anderson
Terrence Jones
And the one and only, borderline All-Star starter- Zaza Paculia
I like each and everyone of this player better than Jeff Green.
This is just my opinion, but I thought the two best players in the draft were Russell and Towns, and I haven't changed my mind. Admittedly, Russell is far from being a starting PG right now, but in the future, I think he's going to be one of the best PG's in the league. He's already a very good 3pt shooter, and he has the size you want in today's PG. Hibbert is an expiring contract which will take 15 mil off of our books this summer. So what if we take that 15 mil and turn it into Ryan Anderson. That way we go with a three man rotation of Cuz, Willie, and Anderson. Basically your trading Gay for Russell, and capspace which will give you flexability next offseason. It's not a perfect trade, and comes with some risk, but it gives you some wiggle room for the future. Koufos minutes are going to slowly go down as Willie gets better.
I mean seriously, you're arguing a point that I've already conceded was poorly thought out. I even liked your sarcastic comment because it was both funny and accurate. But for what it's worth I did mention Al Horford before I mentioned Jeff Green. And while I completely missed Batum (didn't see him on the list) he's dropped way off the last two seasons anyway. And then you're listing a lot of guys who are restricted free agents or key players on playoff teams. Do you really think Bradley Beal (R), Harrison Barnes (R), DeMar DeRozan, Mike Conley, or Chandler Parsons are leaving their current teams for any amount of money? I sure don't. Those are the type of players I consider to be free agents in name only. They're not available. Ryan Anderson is the guy I should have mentioned but then he's the one guy we might have a puncher's chance at because he's actually from the area.
Hmmm, sort of reminds me of what some Kings fans had to say about Cousins when he first got here. Look, Russell had no problems at Ohio St, and Scott is a known hard ass who has clashed with players before. Not saying I know everything about the situation, but I watched Russell play in college and he never had any incidents with his coach there. My personal opinion is that he's been terribly misused by Scott, and he's not the only one. Scott has butted heads with Julius Randle as well. The Lakers are a very young team, and I think Scott is the wrong coach for that team. But then, they didn't ask me. If you can get Russell, and turn Hibbert into Ryan Anderson (a big if), then it's a good trade. In my humble opinion.
This I most definitely agree with. I liked the Koufos signing (called for it the minute I read about the Philly deal) but I think he may have a short shelf life if Willie is ready for major minutes. If we can somehow land Ryan Anderson (and I appreciate the legwork that others have done in analyzing the cap and showing it might not be easy if we want to keep Rondo), I think a 3-man rotation of Cousins, WCS, and Anderson would use up most of the big man minutes. Then you could sign a low minutes bruiser to back up Cousins, someone like Cole Aldrich would be fine. Koufos would be overkill in that role.
There's no doubt that it's a bit of a risk, but write it down. Russell is going to be an all star someday. While he did shine at Ohio St., he had to play out of position at SG because they already had a PG that was pretty good. Despite that, if you watched enough games, you would see that, holy S__t pass every once in a while that reminded you of all the greats. His court vision is off the charts and he has the passing ability to match if. But yes, he's going to make mistakes. All rookies do. Let him get stronger, and learn the league, and I think you'd have one hell of a player and your PG of the future. Oh and yes, he's 6'5" tall and only 19 years old. But then, I could be wrong.
As to why the Lakers would do this deal, I think they realize that they need some veteran leadership on the team and it would have to be a player that everyone respected. Not a lot of those around, and Gay is one. Butler would help as well.
As to why the Lakers would do this deal, I think they realize that they need some veteran leadership on the team and it would have to be a player that everyone respected. Not a lot of those around, and Gay is one. Butler would help as well.
Youre right, sorry for that.
About the list: Bradley Beal will most likely stay put, Barnes has a good chance of leaving both because GS is rumored to chase Durant and because of the owners pocket.
DeRozan would 99.9% (if his not having career ending injury) opt-out so he's fair game, Conley is a FA and you never now (some rumors are made about Memphis trading him) and Chandler Parsons would most likely stay... but I also thought that would be the case in Houston.
About the list: Bradley Beal will most likely stay put, Barnes has a good chance of leaving both because GS is rumored to chase Durant and because of the owners pocket.
DeRozan would 99.9% (if his not having career ending injury) opt-out so he's fair game, Conley is a FA and you never now (some rumors are made about Memphis trading him) and Chandler Parsons would most likely stay... but I also thought that would be the case in Houston.
You and I are thinking along the same lines. I'm looking at the team as it stands now, and I'm not getting too excited. Yeah, I know it's all the coaches fault, but different coach or not, does anyone think that this team is capable of winning a championship? I certainly don't, and isn't that the point. Making the playoffs is great and all, if you have a team that you think only needs some seasoning to go for the whole banana. I don't see that with this team with it's current makeup. And if so, then what do you do? We have no draft picks in the immediate future, unless we acquire one, and not enough capspace to make any, or enough, significant moves in the freeagent market.
This trade, which may be nothing more than a figment of someone's imagination, points out where we are as a team. Yes, this team is better than last seasons team. So what, it wouldn't have taken much to be better. Sorry, but I'm not going to get too excited about a team that wins 5 in a row, and then goes out and loses three in a row. But hey, we've won 5 out of our last 10. Agreed, but were on a roller coaster. Everytime we start to think were over the hump, we get reminded were not. What I don't want to become, is the Atlanta Hawks of old. They made the playoffs every year, and went out in the first round every year. But they were maxed out on the cap, and never drafted high enough to get a top player. They were in NBA limbo. Until a new GM came along and blew it up.
I know many won't agree with me on this, but I think the only thing worse than floundering at the bottom with draft picks and freeagents, is being stuck in the middle, just good enough to make the playoffs, but not having any flexablity to improve. To me, that's an eternal nightmare. It's fools gold.
This trade, which may be nothing more than a figment of someone's imagination, points out where we are as a team. Yes, this team is better than last seasons team. So what, it wouldn't have taken much to be better. Sorry, but I'm not going to get too excited about a team that wins 5 in a row, and then goes out and loses three in a row. But hey, we've won 5 out of our last 10. Agreed, but were on a roller coaster. Everytime we start to think were over the hump, we get reminded were not. What I don't want to become, is the Atlanta Hawks of old. They made the playoffs every year, and went out in the first round every year. But they were maxed out on the cap, and never drafted high enough to get a top player. They were in NBA limbo. Until a new GM came along and blew it up.
I know many won't agree with me on this, but I think the only thing worse than floundering at the bottom with draft picks and freeagents, is being stuck in the middle, just good enough to make the playoffs, but not having any flexablity to improve. To me, that's an eternal nightmare. It's fools gold.
I don't disagree about Winslow's value, but that's a separate argument. Miami is trying to win right now. Wade isn't getting any younger, and Winslow isn't going to help them do that, and Gay may. I could argue both sides on this one, but if Miami's agenda is to try and win a championship, then Gay has more value to them than Winslow.
The lakers are morons who have fine out and said Kobe's last season is more important the developing Russell and Randle. Straight moronic. Russell is also playing with the ball hog likes of LuWill and Kobe and the idiot coach Scott. I've seen enough games to say confidently Russell will at least be a borderline all star. You can't teach his vision and passing dude will be an elite passer. He also can score from 3 and mid range.
I'd take the trade sign Barnes (who will go to the highest at bidder), trade Marco for a big man or dova sign and trade for Anderson ( give NO Collison)
Rondo
Russell/Ben
Barnes/Casspi
WCS/Anderson
Dmc
I'd also wouldn't care if we kept Fay just saying the trade isn't horrible.
PS: I'm biased for Russell cause before his senior I played 3on3 vs him at a local gym in orlando. For a high profiled player he still went pretty hard in the 3on3 and he wasn't a ***** like someone like austin rivers. Now he might have changed since than but he was pretty chill than.
I'd take the trade sign Barnes (who will go to the highest at bidder), trade Marco for a big man or dova sign and trade for Anderson ( give NO Collison)
Rondo
Russell/Ben
Barnes/Casspi
WCS/Anderson
Dmc
I'd also wouldn't care if we kept Fay just saying the trade isn't horrible.
PS: I'm biased for Russell cause before his senior I played 3on3 vs him at a local gym in orlando. For a high profiled player he still went pretty hard in the 3on3 and he wasn't a ***** like someone like austin rivers. Now he might have changed since than but he was pretty chill than.
