[Game] Kings v. Nuggets - 3/11/17 - 7:30PT/10:30ET
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
This is what I've been trying to get at. Essentially two lottery picks considering we probably lose ours with Cousins. The biggest issue and why I'm going back and forth and because people here seem to mock the whole "future/culture" thing as if it's a joke when it's clearly the purpose of this whole deal. I get trashing the handling of it and feeling slighted, but I don't get not seeing how bleak the future was and how moving Cousins was the ONLY way to have a shot at the future.
I don't know what the future holds. Maybe every single pick busts, Hield is trash, WCS is trash, Skal is trash, Malachi is trash etc. What I do know is WCS and McLemore both look night and day in terms of confidence since Cousins left and that leads me to believe what I thought all along and that's that Cousins is incredibly difficult to play with as a young player trying to develop confidence in the league. Of course you got guys like IT, but that's an outlier. I also know that we at least have a chance to hit on something now as opposed to none had we not moved Cousins. We'd have 0 picks this years with Cousins and don't have a 1st rounder next year. Where do we surround Cousins with the necessary talent that people claim he's been lacking to be a decent team with no picks and absolutely no pull in FA along with that massive contract? It was virtually a guarantee of nothing getting better in that case. We could swing and miss on all these picks and this youth development we're seeing now could mean nothing, but there's at least a chance as opposed to being locked in on that contract with no draft pieces and being the Sacramento Kings when it comes to FA.
I don't know what the future holds. Maybe every single pick busts, Hield is trash, WCS is trash, Skal is trash, Malachi is trash etc. What I do know is WCS and McLemore both look night and day in terms of confidence since Cousins left and that leads me to believe what I thought all along and that's that Cousins is incredibly difficult to play with as a young player trying to develop confidence in the league. Of course you got guys like IT, but that's an outlier. I also know that we at least have a chance to hit on something now as opposed to none had we not moved Cousins. We'd have 0 picks this years with Cousins and don't have a 1st rounder next year. Where do we surround Cousins with the necessary talent that people claim he's been lacking to be a decent team with no picks and absolutely no pull in FA along with that massive contract? It was virtually a guarantee of nothing getting better in that case. We could swing and miss on all these picks and this youth development we're seeing now could mean nothing, but there's at least a chance as opposed to being locked in on that contract with no draft pieces and being the Sacramento Kings when it comes to FA.
There were Kings Fans whom, after the trade, brought up how Warriors fans booed Joe Lacob for trading Monta Ellis, and had to eat crow when the Warriors won a championship. If that's the standard that we're working with, then I expect to see the Kings in the Finals no later than 2020, or else the trade was a bust.
This is a reasonable and mature post, which does a spectacular job of not answering the question that I asked you.
This is a reasonable and mature post, which does a spectacular job of not answering the question that I asked you.
But not too many factors to declare affirmatively, "we are clearly in much better shape going forward," or "But when that time hits and you have these blossoming players instead of that one supreme talent, that ONLY talent and one who was only going to sustain mediocrity, you'll look back and be happy you have something to look forward to instead of an aging, declining player, no cap space and no young talent to look forward to"?
But, that's not a "fact," any more than saying that buying a lottery ticket is a better use of two dollars than setting it on fire is a fact. Having the draft picks means that the Kings have an avenue for potentially improving that they probably wouldn't have had otherwise (unless, of course, they'd signed Cousins to the extension, and traded him after the year moratorium for assets that actually matter), but that still doesn't mean that the Kings are "clearly in much better shape going forward." Right now, all it means is that the Kings have the potential to possibly be in better shape going forward.
"culture" is just an in hand excuse, even if he was a model citizen he might have been shipped out just the same.
The problem, as I complained about it all year, is why he has turned into a stretch big and used his bully ball, which should've been his calling card, only a fourth of the time. Only vague guesses that it has been the implementation of now three coaches - Karl, Joerger, Gentry. Or that he needed to save his body from the abuse of getting in the paint all game
If he was a definitive top tier talent he wouldn't have been shipped out. If he's a stat stuffer that may have had some elements of his game that the coaching staff/management disagreed with, it would've been easier to part with him
He needed to be Shaq 2. Get his out of condition self on the block, demand attention, rinse and repeat. Was he capable? As of now I think he either thinks he's Dirk/Jokic instead of Shaq, or he's out of shape to not wanting to play that brand
The problem, as I complained about it all year, is why he has turned into a stretch big and used his bully ball, which should've been his calling card, only a fourth of the time. Only vague guesses that it has been the implementation of now three coaches - Karl, Joerger, Gentry. Or that he needed to save his body from the abuse of getting in the paint all game
If he was a definitive top tier talent he wouldn't have been shipped out. If he's a stat stuffer that may have had some elements of his game that the coaching staff/management disagreed with, it would've been easier to part with him
He needed to be Shaq 2. Get his out of condition self on the block, demand attention, rinse and repeat. Was he capable? As of now I think he either thinks he's Dirk/Jokic instead of Shaq, or he's out of shape to not wanting to play that brand
We are clearly in much better shape going forward because there IS potential as opposed to holding on to Cousins which was just a continuation of something that has proven to not work. The potential is worth more than something that has proven to not work and was only going to get worse with even LESS to put around him as he got older. Yes, it's only potential and could all fail as well. But it's better to have the chance than to have none.
A. Keep the player who has not shown an ability to take this team to the next level even with solid 2nd options and even less ability to put talent around him with his massive contract and no picks for two years
or
B. Two lottery picks in a deep draft and one from last year, the sped of development of the youth already on our roster and the cap space that allows us to overpay a couple decent role players (no, not for sure we could get said role players but at least the chance)
.
It is very clear option B gives us a better chance in the long run. At this point, opportunities are all we have unfortunately. So the more opportunities, the better.
or
B. Two lottery picks in a deep draft and one from last year, the sped of development of the youth already on our roster and the cap space that allows us to overpay a couple decent role players (no, not for sure we could get said role players but at least the chance)
.
It is very clear option B gives us a better chance in the long run. At this point, opportunities are all we have unfortunately. So the more opportunities, the better.
@Jeremy Fraser, no, I just don't feel the need to write a few hundred words to defend something that I think is intuitive.
Look, your Option B is not "clearly" better. It's just perceived to be better. And that perception is based on the belief that the "foundation" of the "building" is ****ed up, and if you tear the whole building down, and pour a new foundation, then the new building that you put on top of that will be sturdier. Which is fine, if you believe that, but the only thing is, there's no reason to believe that new foundation will be any sturdier than the old one, when you don't actually know what the materials you're using are made out of. You're basically just operating on faith that it's quality material. Since you don't actually know what the new materials are made of, you can't say definitively that they can't be worse than the old material.
What you're saying can be distilled down to A is bad, so B has to be better, and I'm saying, how do you know? Why can't B be worse?
Look, your Option B is not "clearly" better. It's just perceived to be better. And that perception is based on the belief that the "foundation" of the "building" is ****ed up, and if you tear the whole building down, and pour a new foundation, then the new building that you put on top of that will be sturdier. Which is fine, if you believe that, but the only thing is, there's no reason to believe that new foundation will be any sturdier than the old one, when you don't actually know what the materials you're using are made out of. You're basically just operating on faith that it's quality material. Since you don't actually know what the new materials are made of, you can't say definitively that they can't be worse than the old material.
What you're saying can be distilled down to A is bad, so B has to be better, and I'm saying, how do you know? Why can't B be worse?
Last edited:
That's not what I said; what I said is that it's not "clear" that starting over is better. That requires faith, at this point.
It's like if you break up with your significant other, because they can't cook, and you're going to determine whom your next significant other is by playing the lottery. You might end up with a new SO who can cook. Or, you might end up with a new SO who can't cook, and cheats on you.
It's like if you break up with your significant other, because they can't cook, and you're going to determine whom your next significant other is by playing the lottery. You might end up with a new SO who can cook. Or, you might end up with a new SO who can't cook, and cheats on you.
When something has proven to not work, you have to start over. What, do you just stick with the girl you're miserable with because "it could be worse"? No, you take your chances because you aren't getting anywhere with that relationship. Sure, she isn't going to break you, but you're never going to prosper with her either and the longer you hold on, the longer you hold off on finding someone who you can prosper with.
If you're going to say ridiculous things like this, then please explain how the Kings botching and/or not receiving a major impact from any 1st round draft pick made by the franchise from 2011 through 2016 is Cousins fault? Furthermore, explain how he (or any player for that matter) is supposed to single-handedly overcome something like that? I challenge you to name one superstar player that's been in a similar situation yet was still able to lead his team to winning seasons and the playoffs despite his front office's inability to draft a single impact player over a long period of time.
I'm baffled as to why some people hate on the guy so damn much that they choose to ignore the #1 reason why the Kings haven't been any good. Missing on every single 1st round draft pick, all of them in the lottery, for 6 straight years is pretty significant, don't you think? Sure, the last 2 (WCS and Papa) could end up working out, but to this point in time they've not helped the team in the least.
The only legit players the Kings ever surrounded Cousins with were Isaiah Thomas and Rudy Gay. They traded IT before they could really see what they had with that trio, and got nothing for him, and Rudy Gay doesn't have the greatest reputation helping teams win based upon Memphis and Toronto's immediate improvement once he left.
While nobody should claim that Cousins was/is without flaws, your comments wreak of ignorance and/or bias because you fail to acknowledge or even mention the most obvious and compelling factor. I'm sure there's good reason for that.
But, again, if you are going to lay blame at the feet of Cousins for not being able to overcome the front office's draft, trade and FA failures for the past 6 years, then please provide the name of the superstar player(s) the Kings would assuredly be winning with given the exact same circumstances. And please don't forget to detail why. I look forward to hearing it. If we need to move this to a different thread, fine.
I'm baffled as to why some people hate on the guy so damn much that they choose to ignore the #1 reason why the Kings haven't been any good. Missing on every single 1st round draft pick, all of them in the lottery, for 6 straight years is pretty significant, don't you think? Sure, the last 2 (WCS and Papa) could end up working out, but to this point in time they've not helped the team in the least.
The only legit players the Kings ever surrounded Cousins with were Isaiah Thomas and Rudy Gay. They traded IT before they could really see what they had with that trio, and got nothing for him, and Rudy Gay doesn't have the greatest reputation helping teams win based upon Memphis and Toronto's immediate improvement once he left.
While nobody should claim that Cousins was/is without flaws, your comments wreak of ignorance and/or bias because you fail to acknowledge or even mention the most obvious and compelling factor. I'm sure there's good reason for that.
But, again, if you are going to lay blame at the feet of Cousins for not being able to overcome the front office's draft, trade and FA failures for the past 6 years, then please provide the name of the superstar player(s) the Kings would assuredly be winning with given the exact same circumstances. And please don't forget to detail why. I look forward to hearing it. If we need to move this to a different thread, fine.
You do?
What about identifying the 'real' reason why something isn't working rather than just making blind guesses? Over the past 11 seasons, the only thing proven not to be working are the countless coaching hires and 95% of the draft decisions. The new regime has only been responsible for 4 of those seasons, but they've continued the trend regardless. Until they get that right, nothing else is going to matter.
Focusing on Cousins and not on those responsible for all the failed moves the past 4 seasons (and counting) is akin to screaming about mouse $@%# when there's elephant $@%# everywhere.
What about identifying the 'real' reason why something isn't working rather than just making blind guesses? Over the past 11 seasons, the only thing proven not to be working are the countless coaching hires and 95% of the draft decisions. The new regime has only been responsible for 4 of those seasons, but they've continued the trend regardless. Until they get that right, nothing else is going to matter.
Focusing on Cousins and not on those responsible for all the failed moves the past 4 seasons (and counting) is akin to screaming about mouse $@%# when there's elephant $@%# everywhere.
Getting words put into my mouth. Not once have I blamed Cousins for not leading us to success. I am fully aware we didn't have the necessary components around him to sustain any success. What I am saying (or questioning) is how conducive he was to winning while only leading us past 30 wins ONE TIME. I question how highly people on here view him because there is absolutely 0 way you can tell me that a player as highly regarded as Cuz is on here and Rudy Gay/IT as second options could get past a 30 wins ONE.SINGLE.TIME. That win total is putrid. I don't care how dysfunctional your FO is, if you are a true superstar, getting past 30 wins more than once is not difficult. I question why he is never held accountable for his attitude and how it's downplayed so much here to the point that it's simply irrelevant.
That's my whole thing. I'd never place the blame on him not willing us to the playoffs. I will, however, question how much of a franchise player he truly is without being able to make us at least mediocre.
That's my whole thing. I'd never place the blame on him not willing us to the playoffs. I will, however, question how much of a franchise player he truly is without being able to make us at least mediocre.
I have not disputed this, aside from maybe nitpicking over the standard of "proof."
I have, however, and continue to, dispute this. Every new beginning is not a better beginning.
The problem, of course (and where the metaphor falls apart), is that in sports, you don't have the option of getting out of the "dating game," and taking a few years off to "find yourself." That's what the Kings really need to do; it's a shame that relegation isn't an option.
I have, however, and continue to, dispute this. Every new beginning is not a better beginning.
The problem, of course (and where the metaphor falls apart), is that in sports, you don't have the option of getting out of the "dating game," and taking a few years off to "find yourself." That's what the Kings really need to do; it's a shame that relegation isn't an option.