Bogdan Bogdanovic

Status
Not open for further replies.
Čarolija said:
I just laugh when people say that veterans are not needed in full rebuild. Players like Temple, Tolliver and even Kosta to a lesser degree are exactly the types of veterans you want on the rebuilding team. Coaches cannot be there with each youngster on the bench talking and educating. They have a game to coach.

People have not really been paying attention this season. Young players like Malachi, Skal, Buddy etc. take a seat next to a veteran when they are on the bench and constantly talk abut the game. How often do you see temple sitting on the bench and talking to young players pointing things out on the court as they are happening. Same for Tolliver!

Rebuilding is not about just loading up on the younsters and letting them play. Those kids need guidance and that guidance does come from the coaches but it hits home quicker and gets more attention if it is coming froma selft made veteran who are pros day in day out. Veterans point out little tricks of the trade while the game is happening and coaches are too busy coaching the actual game.

You listen to Christie talk and he will tell you exactly the same thing. He used to sit at the end of the bench with Williams and soak in everything the savvy vet was teaching him while the game was being played. He even said it himself that players are more receptive when it comes from a player. Not that they don't listen to the coaches but they value it more coming from a veteran.

Trading away Temple will be such a Kings thing to do....i.e. Dumb!
Click to expand...

It is not necessary to dump your veterans when you are in rebuild mode, but you do not trade away your young talent.

You can definitely make room for savy vets like temple on the team, but you definitely do not trade away your cheap, talenteded young players on rookie contracts, for the sake of finding PT for the vets.
 
Čarolija said:
I just laugh when people say that veterans are not needed in full rebuild. Players like Temple, Tolliver and even Kosta to a lesser degree are exactly the types of veterans you want on the rebuilding team. Coaches cannot be there with each youngster on the bench talking and educating. They have a game to coach.

People have not really been paying attention this season. Young players like Malachi, Skal, Buddy etc. take a seat next to a veteran when they are on the bench and constantly talk abut the game. How often do you see temple sitting on the bench and talking to young players pointing things out on the court as they are happening. Same for Tolliver!

Rebuilding is not about just loading up on the younsters and letting them play. Those kids need guidance and that guidance does come from the coaches but it hits home quicker and gets more attention if it is coming froma selft made veteran who are pros day in day out. Veterans point out little tricks of the trade while the game is happening and coaches are too busy coaching the actual game.

You listen to Christie talk and he will tell you exactly the same thing. He used to sit at the end of the bench with Williams and soak in everything the savvy vet was teaching him while the game was being played. He even said it himself that players are more receptive when it comes from a player. Not that they don't listen to the coaches but they value it more coming from a veteran.

Trading away Temple will be such a Kings thing to do....i.e. Dumb!
Click to expand...

No, dumb would be fast forwarding 3 years when Malachi is possibly scoring 15+ a game while we're still holding on to Temple and all his "guidance".

Throwing away talented youngsters is exactly what the Kings have been doing for years and look where it has landed them?

We could have a team of IT, Curry, Gay, Cousins and Whiteside right now. Instead, all we have left is a torn achilles and a few draft picks from last year. How many times does this franchise need to make the exact same mistake before people start to realize that we are going to get no where with middling veterans? I'm not advocating running out an entire team of first and second year players but the amount of talented leaving Sacramento vs. coming in to Sacramento is downright ridiculous. Time to stop making the same mistake over and over again. It's never a good idea to trade a promising young player away to keep a career backup veteran for guidance on a losing team.
 
Jimbob said:
I agree. I would hate to see Malichi traded before we even know what we got. Bogdans situation somewhat tics me off. Not all his fault but its a bit manipulative. String the Kings out while he waits for the non rookie contract..meanwhile we don't even know how well his game will translate to the NBA. Bogdan could also effect the way the Kings draft, however, seeing its Vlade at the helm the draft choices will probably make little sense anyways.
Click to expand...
Bogdans situation doesn't tick me at all. That was understood to be the case when the trade happened. He hasn't strung anyone out. Come over last year for a million plus for three years or wait one and get more than that in one. They have a limited shelf life and he's not the youngest spring chicken on the shelf. I would have done the same, wouldn't you?
 
  1. Evans (1+team option) / Monk
  2. Temple / Hield / Bogdanovic
  3. Porter (max) / Richardson
  4. Gay / Labissière / Tolliver
  5. KK / WCS / Papagiannis
That's a 13 man rotation plus 1 more for the 2nd rounder to tip off the season next year. It gives time for the youngster's to develop. We'll see if Bogdanovic can handle the rock at this level.
 
ESP47 said:
No, dumb would be fast forwarding 3 years when Malachi is possibly scoring 15+ a game while we're still holding on to Temple and all his "guidance".

Throwing away talented youngsters is exactly what the Kings have been doing for years and look where it has landed them?

We could have a team of IT, Curry, Gay, Cousins and Whiteside right now. Instead, all we have left is a torn achilles and a few draft picks from last year. How many times does this franchise need to make the exact same mistake before people start to realize that we are going to get no where with middling veterans? I'm not advocating running out an entire team of first and second year players but the amount of talented leaving Sacramento vs. coming in to Sacramento is downright ridiculous. Time to stop making the same mistake over and over again. It's never a good idea to trade a promising young player away to keep a career backup veteran for guidance on a losing team.
Click to expand...
Don't get mad at me but some "facts" are taking on a life of their own. You have to admit that saying in 3 years Malachi is possibly scoring 15+ is an educated speculation. In my "guess" I think we would be remarkably lucky if that was the outcome. The real argument if there is any is whether you trade Temple or Malachi. I am sure there are other possibilities but let's stick with that. I agree you keep the rookie and trade the vet. The problem is that Temple has great value to a team with a bunch of rookies and for the life of me I don't know what Vlade was doing by loading up on young SGs. I don't know why "guidance" is written this way. Temple is an active teacher and worth a lot. My interpretation is that you were mocking the value of guidance. I don't think you dismiss what Temple has to offer as a mentor.

Your aggravation from long ago can be met head on with facts. Some one posted the usage rate of IT and Boogie. Add them together and the two of the needed or had the ball roughly 70% of the time. You can't run an offense where the other three essentially have no role. Think about it. Either Boogie or IT had to go. The third possibility is that IT come off the bench but that's a waste of his talent. I personally thought letting IT go was a waste but a necessary waste just as we may lose Temple.

There are choices that need to be made when there is no ideal answer. I think we made the proper choices.

I agree wholeheartedly about Curry. I still don't understand letting him go. Whiteside was useless and showed little promise. How many years did he spend in China? It took a long time for him to get his act together and I am happy for him. His improvement surprised me. Could we have stuffed him in the DL for 4 years with the hopes it would pay off? That's just not reasonable.

I am not going to argue. These are my views.
 
Glenn said:
Don't get mad at me but some "facts" are taking on a life of their own. You have to admit that saying in 3 years Malachi is possibly scoring 15+ is an educated speculation. In my "guess" I think we would be remarkably lucky if that was the outcome. The real argument if there is any is whether you trade Temple or Malachi. I am sure there are other possibilities but let's stick with that. I agree you keep the rookie and trade the vet. The problem is that Temple has great value to a team with a bunch of rookies and for the life of me I don't know what Vlade was doing by loading up on young SGs. I don't know why "guidance" is written this way. Temple is an active teacher and worth a lot. My interpretation is that you were mocking the value of guidance. I don't think you dismiss what Temple has to offer as a mentor.

Your aggravation from long ago can be met head on with facts. Some one posted the usage rate of IT and Boogie. Add them together and the two of the needed or had the ball roughly 70% of the time. You can't run an offense where the other three essentially have no role. Think about it. Either Boogie or IT had to go. The third possibility is that IT come off the bench but that's a waste of his talent. I personally thought letting IT go was a waste but a necessary waste just as we may lose Temple.

There are choices that need to be made when there is no ideal answer. I think we made the proper choices.

I agree wholeheartedly about Curry. I still don't understand letting him go. Whiteside was useless and showed little promise. How many years did he spend in China? It took a long time for him to get his act together and I am happy for him. His improvement surprised me. Could we have stuffed him in the DL for 4 years with the hopes it would pay off? That's just not reasonable.

I am not going to argue. These are my views.
Click to expand...

You're right and I didn't state them as facts, or at least I didn't mean to. I just said that he could possibly become a 15ppg scorer. He averaged 21 a game in the D League and got to the line a ton so it's not like it's out of the realm or anything. The Kings are simply in a situation where the young guys are the future. We aren't going to win this year or next so we need to give them every chance to succeed. Keeping a 30 year old career journeyman over a 21 year old kid with promise would just be repeating the past....which hasn't worked yet.

Temple is probably about as good a mentor as you can get but his advice is not worth losing a young player. In essence you are trading Garrett Temple advice for Malachi Richardson. We will all be here kicking ourselves if he winds up turning into Allen Crabbe or better.

I can't say I agree with you on the IT and Cousins pairing. A good coach can make any good PG and C work just fine together. Their individual numbers may go down but the team wins will go up. I think saying that they could never win games together is just a way of justifying the huge mistake that was made by this F.O.

A mentor can be picked up at another position where we wont need to trade away young talent to keep. There is no real good way for this franchise to get back to winning unless they stockpile a bunch of young talent and see what pans out.
 
ESP47 said:
I can't say I agree with you on the IT and Cousins pairing. A good coach can make any good PG and C work just fine together. Their individual numbers may go down but the team wins will go up. I think saying that they could never win games together is just a way of justifying the huge mistake that was made by this F.O.

A mentor can be picked up at another position where we wont need to trade away young talent to keep. There is no real good way for this franchise to get back to winning unless they stockpile a bunch of young talent and see what pans out.
Click to expand...

What? Did I say that?
 
I don't see why it's an either or situation as it pertains to any of our guards. Temples contract in no way hampers us going forward. He's on the books at 8M for next season then has a PO for the next at which time all of our recent draftees would still be on their rookie deals. It's a guard league right now and we'll see which ones stand out.
 
ESP47 said:
You're right and I didn't state them as facts, or at least I didn't mean to. I just said that he could possibly become a 15ppg scorer. He averaged 21 a game in the D League and got to the line a ton so it's not like it's out of the realm or anything. The Kings are simply in a situation where the young guys are the future. We aren't going to win this year or next so we need to give them every chance to succeed. Keeping a 30 year old career journeyman over a 21 year old kid with promise would just be repeating the past....which hasn't worked yet.

Temple is probably about as good a mentor as you can get but his advice is not worth losing a young player. In essence you are trading Garrett Temple advice for Malachi Richardson. We will all be here kicking ourselves if he winds up turning into Allen Crabbe or better.

I can't say I agree with you on the IT and Cousins pairing. A good coach can make any good PG and C work just fine together. Their individual numbers may go down but the team wins will go up. I think saying that they could never win games together is just a way of justifying the huge mistake that was made by this F.O.

A mentor can be picked up at another position where we wont need to trade away young talent to keep. There is no real good way for this franchise to get back to winning unless they stockpile a bunch of young talent and see what pans out.
Click to expand...
Next year there will be more slots to "stash" players in the D-league and let them develop. I will agree with you we don't need to discard our youngsters until we know what the team has. I don't think with the extra slots that it has to be an either-or situation.
 
whozit said:
Bogdans situation doesn't tick me at all. That was understood to be the case when the trade happened. He hasn't strung anyone out. Come over last year for a million plus for three years or wait one and get more than that in one. They have a limited shelf life and he's not the youngest spring chicken on the shelf. I would have done the same, wouldn't you?
Click to expand...

I agree that from Bogdans perspective it all makes sense. And Vlade knew what he was getting into, at least I would think so, when he made the trade. What bothers me, somewhat, is that we don't know what we have or what he brings in relation to the current team with him playing in Europe, for example can he play a bit of 1 or 3 in the NBA. The last I heard he has not even promised to come over this year or at all and that could be important in how we draft.
Personally I almost wish he was out of the equation so we can quit including him in discussions and draft considerations. I'm beginning to warm up to Monk as a pick but my hesitance has been our perceived glut of SG's which includes a non committed Bogdan.
 
Glenn said:
What? Did I say that?
Click to expand...

You're right, you didn't say that. Instead I should have used the word "implied" when referring to the tidbit about the usage rates of Cousins and IT. I was just saying that a good coach would be successful with both of those players. Especially when you have Cousins, who is a guy who can do absolutely anything on the court and if he can't do it at the time, he will work on it until he can do it in the future. Cousins and IT may not work well in a Keith Smart/George Karl offense but they'd certainly work well in a structured offense together. If Durant, Curry and Klay can all get their shots up, then certainly Cousins, IT and whoever else is out there with them could.

whozit said:
Next year there will be more slots to "stash" players in the D-league and let them develop. I will agree with you we don't need to discard our youngsters until we know what the team has. I don't think with the extra slots that it has to be an either-or situation.
Click to expand...

You're right as well, I didn't realize the roster was opening up next year so that's actually perfect timing with our stable of SG's. Your point makes this entire discussion moot ;)
 
Glenn said:
Probably true. Trade Galloway or does this player not exist?
Click to expand...

The SG trade talk is interesting. Interesting because the Kings recent trades and lack of trades give us no indication of what Vlade may do. Why did we trade a big man for a couple of SGs, and on top of that, not trade the SG we already have? Our past sign and trades haven't netted us anything significant in return before. We already got fleeced for our all star center. Blew the IT sign and trade. No reason to believe we're going to do better now. So it looks to me like we're going to let some assets walk? Unless.......Vlade is not confident Bogdan is coming over.
 
Suicide King said:
Maybe Vlade/Ken's plan is to be a guard farm in the way Philly was a big's farm
Keep the ones that fit and utilize the rest for trades
Click to expand...

It could work but not if we follow Philly's example. :) The Nerlens Noel trade was essentially a fire-sale for them and he was the only one of their three bigs who actually has a track-record of extended NBA success. He's already helping to lead a resurgent Dallas team which is 5-1 since the trade when he suits up while the two bigs they kept... Jahlil Okafor looks like a one-dimensional scorer who hurts you on defense as much or more than he contributes offensively and he's got a bit of an attitude problem too (though there's a chicken and egg situation there...) and Embiid is a serious injury concern who's got all the talent in the world but has played 31 out of a possible 164 games in his first two seasons. That's not a situation I would be coveting.
 
Agreed. I believe they prefered dealing Okafor but no one was biting.

I am just hoping there is a definite plan regarding all our aquisitions and not just random. I have held on to the belief that there is. Athletic players with good length for their positions seems a decent model in todays landscape, and one we seem to be aspiring to.
 
If Bogdan wants to play on an up and coming team, and help create something special, I don't see why he wouldn't come over to play with the kings this summer!

Don't miss the boat Bogdan!

This team will be fun to be a part of next year! :)
 
Hansel said:
Bogdanovic injured his ankle (again) yesterday night, seems serious.
Click to expand...

Life of a Kings fan:

joel_centipede.jpg
 
Couldn't see too well but I agree that his reaction seemed worse than the injury. Perhaps he was afraid of how bad it might be?
 
VF21 said:
Couldn't see too well but I agree that his reaction seemed worse than the injury. Perhaps he was afraid of how bad it might be?
Click to expand...
Probably!

It's the same ankle that kept him away from the court from October to January at the beginning of the season. That time his reaction was even worse.

 
Hansel said:
He's playing for a Euroleague contender, there's no chance he's gonna rest even if he's just able to run a bit. He's a fighter, luckily.
Click to expand...
I'm just looking at it from a selfish kings fan pov. Plus isn't the whole point to play in the big leagues?
 
I'm indifference on Bogdanovic now. I don't know if he'd fit with our youth movement. Will be 25 at the start of the season, but then again, Buddy will also be 24.
 
206Fan said:
I'm indifference on Bogdanovic now. I don't know if he'd fit with our youth movement. Will be 25 at the start of the season, but then again, Buddy will also be 24.
Click to expand...

My god man, when did 25 become old. I'd give my right arm to be 25 years old again. How long does the average player in the NBA play for one team? 3 years? 4 years? Yeah, you have the Duncan's and Jordan's of the world, but the average player usually doesn't stick around with one team very long. Sometimes they price themselves out, and sometimes they don't fit well. So why worry about a player being 25 years old. If he can play, and we have him for 4 or more years, then fine. If he can't play, then who cares?

Nothing bugs me more than this age crap. There was a time when every player that came into the NBA was 21 years old or older. They all went to college for four years, and frankly, it was a lot easier to figure out who could play in the NBA and who couldn't then. Now we draft some 19 yr old kid who was diapers a couple of years earlier, spend 3 years trying to teach him how to play, and far too often, he ends up in Europe or out of the league. Give me a 25 year old player that knows how to play and I'm happy.
 
bajaden said:
My god man, when did 25 become old. I'd give my right arm to be 25 years old again. How long does the average player in the NBA play for one team? 3 years? 4 years? Yeah, you have the Duncan's and Jordan's of the world, but the average player usually doesn't stick around with one team very long. Sometimes they price themselves out, and sometimes they don't fit well. So why worry about a player being 25 years old. If he can play, and we have him for 4 or more years, then fine. If he can't play, then who cares?

Nothing bugs me more than this age crap. There was a time when every player that came into the NBA was 21 years old or older. They all went to college for four years, and frankly, it was a lot easier to figure out who could play in the NBA and who couldn't then. Now we draft some 19 yr old kid who was diapers a couple of years earlier, spend 3 years trying to teach him how to play, and far too often, he ends up in Europe or out of the league. Give me a 25 year old player that knows how to play and I'm happy.
Click to expand...


It's the advanced experience that some on the Kings young squad has that gives me hope that they'll have a chance to be good sooner than later.
 
bajaden said:
My god man, when did 25 become old. I'd give my right arm to be 25 years old again. How long does the average player in the NBA play for one team? 3 years? 4 years? Yeah, you have the Duncan's and Jordan's of the world, but the average player usually doesn't stick around with one team very long. Sometimes they price themselves out, and sometimes they don't fit well. So why worry about a player being 25 years old. If he can play, and we have him for 4 or more years, then fine. If he can't play, then who cares?

Nothing bugs me more than this age crap. There was a time when every player that came into the NBA was 21 years old or older. They all went to college for four years, and frankly, it was a lot easier to figure out who could play in the NBA and who couldn't then. Now we draft some 19 yr old kid who was diapers a couple of years earlier, spend 3 years trying to teach him how to play, and far too often, he ends up in Europe or out of the league. Give me a 25 year old player that knows how to play and I'm happy.
Click to expand...
25yearsold is not young for a rookie by any means. In reality, 25 is the age where NBA players hit their prime. AD is 23, Beal is 23, and Giannis is 23. Bogdanovic is already older than all of them, while all 3 of those guys have had 4+ NBA experience compared to Bogdanovic's 0.
At this point in time, I really don't care for Bogdanovic anymore. Carolinja said above that he believes Bogdanovic is having 2nd thoughts about the NBA. If it turns out to be true, then Bogdanovic would just be an unneeded distraction. The same problem all Suns fans had.

He also hasn't been able to stay healthy, which could influence his decision on the NBA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
Buyout Market
2 3
Replies
87
Views
5K
ShastaKingsFan
ShastaKingsFan
N
Its time to move Keegan
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
iowamcnabb
iowamcnabb
K
Schroder Trade
Replies
1
Views
194
iowamcnabb
iowamcnabb
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
“THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
6K
The_Jamal
T
Y
Mike Bibby lands NCAA coaching gig and the Vancouver Grizzlies legend looks jacked now
Replies
2
Views
201
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
Back
Top