Cousins Cryptic Tweet

[Dime Dropper]

I'd like to know something....are your odds of winning a championship better with a star big man or a star guard/forward?

Star big man, easily. Just because there are fewer of them around doesn't make it less true. It's a PG generation right now, but that's more due to the fact that there just aren't many truly great big men at the moment. We have a truly great one.

 

[Spike]

Well, do we want to win some regular season games, or do we want to compete for a championship?
Karl is right that we can be competitive without "a star player". That was pretty much his MO in Denver. However, if we want to do anything in the playoffs, building around a player like Cousins is far and beyond the best way to go. Can you imagine having to deal with Cousins in a 7 game series?

 

[IfAt1st]

Man -
you guys say I'm the conspiracy theorist?

I've never proposed anything that had as little evidence, and more importantly, as little logic, as what you guys have been spinning here.

 

[Kingster]

He was talking about how he thinks the team can make a big leap next season, but then said "but in the same sense, we have to be aware of what ifs, you know what if we get offered, what if? thats Pete and Vlade's area of expertise. But i've had some great players, and i've never had one player that i have said is untradeable"


now who does that sound like it's about?

It sounds like being open and flexible. It doesn't sound like: "I'm trading Cousins for peanuts!"

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Man -
you guys say I'm the conspiracy theorist?

I've never proposed anything that had as little evidence, and more importantly, as little logic, as what you guys have been spinning here.

Actually, don't you say you're the conspiracy theorist?

 

[Spike]

Never a dull moment, I suppose.

It's times like these that make me pine for the days of the oodling hen.

 

[Hadlowe]

I'd like to know something....are your odds of winning a championship better with a star big man or a star guard/forward?

Historically? Far more championship teams anchored by dominant bigs. Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Moses. There does seem to have been a sea change in the last 15 years that coincides with rules changes that allow for easier doubling inside and better dribble penetration to the point that Pau Gasol was as close as you come to finding a dominant center on a championship team since Shaq won with the Heat. The 80's and 90's had a larger than average slate of quality bigs and the last two decades are notable for the absence of good big, so it is probably both factors adding up to force the game to the three point arc.

 

[Kingster]

I would think about these trades if it started with:
Durant
Westbrook
LBJ
Brow
Curry

But these guys are untouchable, like DMC should be.

Nobody is untouchable unless the FO thinks they are untouchable; and we can't read their minds, can we?

 

[Spike]

Historically? Far more championship teams anchored by dominant bigs. Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Moses. There does seem to have been a sea change in the last 15 years that coincides with rules changes that allow for easier doubling inside and better dribble penetration to the point that Pau Gasol was as close as you come to finding a dominant center on a championship team since Shaq won with the Heat. The 80's and 90's had a larger than average slate of quality bigs and the last two decades are notable for the absence of good big, so it is probably both factors adding up to force the game to the three point arc.

There is a definite lack of skilled big men in today's game, for sure. Having one is a definite advantage, but I don't feel as though we're treating it as such.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

... Unbelievable. Then we've got Grant going on KHTK and telling the fan base Cuz can play and is choosing not to play while Karl is saying he hasn't talked to Cuz since he's been ruled out? It's constant dysfunction. ****ing amateur hour.

See, this is what I was talking about earlier. I, too, have been listening to Napear's show daily here, recently, and I do not recall him saying any such thing. He has said, repeatedly, that he doesn't like it when athletes sit out when they're physically capable of playing. And he has also made it a point to reiterate that Cousins is not playing, and that he thinks he is not too injured to play. That is not the same thing as claiming that Cousins is choosing not to play. To the best of my recollection, he has never once accused Cousins of sitting of his own accord.

I'm not sure if he's ever said who he thinks is responsible for Cousins not playing, at least not on the record, but I feel positive that I've never heard him point the finger at Cousins. He's never once said anything to the effect of, "Cousins could play if he wanted to, he just doesn't want to," that I can recall. And, I may have missed a call or two, but I can't recall anyone ever actually asking him who he thinks is responsible. If anything, it seems as though he's been quite meticulous about not making any accusations on the record; I think that's just people reading imaginary subtext into what he's actually said.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

There is a definite lack of skilled big men in today's game, for sure. Having one is a definite advantage, but I don't feel as though we're treating it as such.

You don't even have to narrow the search to "dominant," or confine it to "history." There have been more teams to win championships with a Top Ten big than have won with a "dominant" guard.

 

[kingsboi]

Star big man, easily. Just because there are fewer of them around doesn't make it less true. It's a PG generation right now, but that's more due to the fact that there just aren't many truly great big men at the moment. We have a truly great one.

My point exactly. We all get caught up in the hype of it being a star PG generation but tell me what have they won? Paul, Curry, Westbrook, Lillard, Irving, Wall, etc etc. If Karl is serious about trying to trade away his franchise big for lesser talent, and that's what we will get in return regardless of assets, then I just don't see him being serious about winning championships and that makes me feel he is rather content on returning to his Denver days where his teams won 50+ games with no franchise player unless you consider Melo a winning franchise player. What exactly has Denver done to warrant mimicking their scheme or style of play? please someone help me understand this. The sky is not falling yet so I'll hold off further judgment, I'd like to see what other person they bring in to help Vlade and Pete out and how their vision coincides with two solid foundations in place.

 

[kingsboi]

Historically? Far more championship teams anchored by dominant bigs. Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Moses. There does seem to have been a sea change in the last 15 years that coincides with rules changes that allow for easier doubling inside and better dribble penetration to the point that Pau Gasol was as close as you come to finding a dominant center on a championship team since Shaq won with the Heat. The 80's and 90's had a larger than average slate of quality bigs and the last two decades are notable for the absence of good big, so it is probably both factors adding up to force the game to the three point arc.

so with all that being said, since the game has become so perimeter orientated, are Karl and company so blind to the fact that they have a star big on their roster all ready and are willing to mess that up by simply bringing in lesser players to win 50+ games, ala the Hawks or Karl's former Denver teams. If Karl's tenure here is wasted by just being one and done in the playoffs with no franchise big, then it's really all for not IMO, it would be nice to have a winning culture , don't get me wrong but teams kill for franchise players and you can only count on one hand how many franchise players you can build around year in and year out to consistently compete not just for playoff appearances but championship appearances.

 

[VF21]

See, this is what I was talking about earlier. I, too, have been listening to Napear's show daily here, recently, and I do not recall him saying any such thing. He has said, repeatedly, that he doesn't like it when athletes sit out when they're physically capable of playing. And he has also made it a point to reiterate that Cousins is not playing, and that he thinks he is not too injured to play. That is not the same thing as claiming that Cousins is choosing not to play. To the best of my recollection, he has never once accused Cousins of sitting of his own accord.

I'm not sure if he's ever said who he thinks is responsible for Cousins not playing, at least not on the record, but I feel positive that I've never heard him point the finger at Cousins. He's never once said anything to the effect of, "Cousins could play if he wanted to, he just doesn't want to," that I can recall. And, I may have missed a call or two, but I can't recall anyone ever actually asking him who he thinks is responsible. If anything, it seems as though he's been quite meticulous about not making any accusations on the record; I think that's just people reading imaginary subtext into what he's actually said.

As somewhat of an aside - Kingsgurl was at last night's game. She kept an eye on DMC, and said it was clear he was in pain with his foot.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Why do I feel like I'm the only person here who isn't assuming that "nobody is untradeable" is semantically equivalent to "I want to trade DeMarcus Cousins for a handful of magic beans"? I mean, seriously:

Let's all just assume we're trading Cuz for the #1 pick and FREAK OUT!

I've got to hand it to you, @gunks, you pulled the strings, and I'll be god damned if the puppets didn't dance... Hell, I'm halfway convinced that Bruski's source for "increased trade speculation" was just him reading your post on this message board.

 

[Spike]

I just don't see him being serious about winning championships and that makes me feel he is rather content on returning to his Denver days where his teams won 50+ games with no franchise player unless you consider Melo a winning franchise player. What exactly has Denver done to warrant mimicking their scheme or style of play? please someone help me understand this.

If you allow me to be cynical for a moment -

Perhaps the FO wants 50 wins, and that's about it. It fills the arena. Karl knows how to get a team to 50 wins playing "his way".
Is he interested in a championship? Does he have the patience? At the start of the year, I assumed that we'd flirt with the playoffs this year, make them next year, and be a contender when the arena opened. It was a likely logical progression. We're now back to square one.
Can Karl wait through another cycle? I don't think he can. I think he wants to get to "competitive" as quickly as possible, but I don't think he's looking to build a long term winner right now.

Of course, all of this is pure sausage and I could be wrong, but that's the way my tea leaves are currently spinning. This off-season will be telling. Are we going to sell low and buy high? Time will tell.

 

[IfAt1st]

I, too, have been listening to Napear's show daily here, recently, and I do not recall him saying any such thing. He has said, repeatedly, that he doesn't like it when athletes sit out when they're physically capable of playing.

A couple of notes:

1) This is very consistent with Grant's history - remember when he shockingly ripped Bobby Jackson for being soft and not playing when Grant thought he wasn't injured as bad?
One of the lowest times of the show, IIRC.

2) Grant has previously been WAY more aggressive and blatantly slanderous/muckracking against Demarcus.
I looked up one of my old posts and saw that it was sometime around Dec 15, 2012 when Grant suddenly started slandering Demarcus, week after week on his show. It was WAY worse than how he talks now. He was pretty clearly setting the Maloof's talking points about Demarcus, many that have persisted to this day.
As I've said before, Grant has personally done more damage to Demarcus' reputation in the NBA than any other one individual (except Demarcus).

What I don't get is -
It is obvious to every reasonable person following the NBA that the Kings FO didn't want Rudy or Cousins to play the last part of the season. Wins were simply not what would help this team. The way DMC and Rudy tag-teamed and passed off their nights off was really blatant assisting the tank job we succeeded in.
Tanking is a HUGE topic in the NBA lately - I feel the NBA does look closer at tankjobs nowadays and will come down on franchises who are too blatant.
One of the ways franchises can cover tankjobs is if they create plausible deniability about their star's injuries and rest-nights.

So here's a positive, uplifting, pull-y'all-back-from-the-ledge conspiracy theory:
* Grant and Karl are saying they don't want Demarcus to sit out simply to cover the fact that they DO want him to sit out. Both of them are FO mouthpieces, remember.
Does anyone really think that Karl hasn't spoken to Demarcus? He just had finished saying he talks to these guys so much they are probably sick of talking to him, that's why he's not big on exit interviews.

So Demarcus puts up the "this is a dirty business" tweet because he doesn't like being the fallguy for the team's tankjob's plausible deniability. But he understands the need for it.
There ya go! A happy conspiracy theory that minimizes the conflict in the team/franchise.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

A couple of notes:

1) This is very consistent with Grant's history - remember when he shockingly ripped Bobby Jackson for being soft and not playing when Grant thought he wasn't injured as bad?
One of the lowest times of the show, IIRC.

2) Grant has previously been WAY more aggressive and blatantly slanderous/muckracking against Demarcus.
I looked up one of my old posts and saw that it was sometime around Dec 15, 2012 when Grant suddenly started slandering Demarcus, week after week on his show. It was WAY worse than how he talks now. He was pretty clearly setting the Maloof's talking points about Demarcus, many that have persisted to this day.
As I've said before, Grant has personally done more damage to Demarcus' reputation in the NBA than any other one individual (except Demarcus).

What I don't get is -
It is obvious to every reasonable person following the NBA that the Kings FO didn't want Rudy or Cousins to play the last part of the season. Wins were simply not what would help this team. The way DMC and Rudy tag-teamed and passed off their nights off was really blatant assisting the tank job we succeeded in.
Tanking is a HUGE topic in the NBA lately - I feel the NBA does look closer at tankjobs nowadays and will come down on franchises who are too blatant.
One of the ways franchises can cover tankjobs is if they create plausible deniability about their star's injuries and rest-nights.

So here's a positive, uplifting, pull-y'all-back-from-the-ledge conspiracy theory:
* Grant and Karl are saying they don't want Demarcus to sit out simply to cover the fact that they DO want him to sit out. Both of them are FO mouthpieces, remember.
Does anyone really think that Karl hasn't spoken to Demarcus? He just had finished saying he talks to these guys so much they are probably sick of talking to him, that's why he's not big on exit interviews.

So Demarcus puts up the "this is a dirty business" tweet because he doesn't like being the fallguy for the team's tankjob's plausible deniability. But he understands the need for it.
There ya go! A happy conspiracy theory that minimizes the conflict in the team/franchise.

1. Everything I know about the Bobby Jackson and Chris Webber business is second-hand, so I'll decline to comment. Those incidents, TTBOMK, predated KHTK's availability online, and I do not live in California.
2. I'm not generally in the business of defending Grant Napear. I do not like Grant Napear; I think that he is a second-rate broadcaster, and a third-rate radio host, and it would make me happy to see him be relieved of both duties. All I'm saying is that, in this specific occurrence and nothing else, I do not believe that Napear has done what people here are claiming he has done.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Why do I feel like I'm the only person here who isn't assuming that "nobody is untradeable" is semantically equivalent to "I want to trade DeMarcus Cousins for a handful of magic beans"?

Well, I'd join you, but I've kind of given up on attempting to influence sanity these days.

 

[Bricklayer]

Well, I'd join you, but I've kind of given up on attempting to influence sanity these days.

I have no interest in influencing sanity these days.

I have a great interest in influencing idiots. I want those ****ers so terrified of consequences that they never even THINK about something like this without immediately peeing their pants. When dealing with children you need nonegotiable boundaries set. Its better for everyone.

 

[rhythmless]

Nobody is untouchable unless the FO thinks they are untouchable; and we can't read their minds, can we?

I read Vivek's mind. Or, I tried. It was just a jumbled mess of pictures of Vivek and random celebrities doing the shaka. And some poorly photoshopped pictures where he put Kings jerseys on all of the Warriors.

 

[SacTownKid]

I've been thinking about the "ear" thing Cuz posted and I think that was basically saying he heard what Karl said, or maybe even didn't say. This is the fear with Karl as the coach, he can rub players the wrong way sometimes.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Or maybe he was just thinking, "Let me see how many people's heads I can make explode, by posting an emoji?"

 

[Bricklayer]

Or maybe he was just thinking, "Let me see how many people's heads I can make explode, by posting an emoji?"

With Cuz the more likely misinterpretation is that he's focused on the media as the enemy. Hence ear = I hear what they are saying, and ... = disgust, SMH, etc.

Bu combined with the dirty business message a day before, gotta wonder.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

What's crazy is Vivek just made a similar mistake and it blew up in his face, hiring his coach before the GM and putting together a FO which worked in opposition to Malone.

And here we are again, hiring Karl, likely another GM coming on board while PDA apparently is retained/demoted but we have Karl and PDA forming an alliance based on the history between the two, then we have Vivek bringing in Vlade who I'd guess is part of the opposing faction and we still are waiting to see who the next guy will be who's brought in as our GM or working alongside Vlade.

There's been a few reports suggesting a few in the FO were against bringing in Vlade and it makes complete sense PDA is at the top of that list. So we've got our new coach forming his faction while the FO has yet to be filled out. What we're seeing right now is the foundation being laid for Vlade/YTBD hire going up against Karl/PDA and this sudden 180 on keeping/firing PDA suggests they're already not on the same page. This hardly appears like we're creating the best situation for Vlade to succeed.

The public message between the two is already quite different, with Vlade making clear how important Cuz is and that we need to get him help, have to build around him, while Karl is talking about essentially no one being untouchable, in reference to the best players he's ever coached, an implication it's Cuz who's not untouchable. Karl's smart, he knows there's a difference between the generic "we'll always look at offers to improve the team" and what he said yesterday.

Unbelievable. Then we've got Grant going on KHTK and telling the fan base Cuz can play and is choosing not to play while Karl is saying he hasn't talked to Cuz since he's been ruled out? It's constant dysfunction. ****ing amateur hour.

the sacramento circus continues.

however on another note.. we just gave the lake show a beat down. any questions?

 

[Big Cuz 15]

I read Vivek's mind. Or, I tried. It was just a jumbled mess of pictures of Vivek and random celebrities doing the shaka. And some poorly photoshopped pictures where he put Kings jerseys on all of the Warriors.

i'm dying. someone get this man a championship belt.

 

[206Fan]

With or without Cousins, I'll always be a Kings fan even if I lose interest in them. However, A LOT of other fans don't see it this way.. If DeMarcus leaves Sac, the new arena will be more than half empty..bank on it.

You know what I didn't appreciate from the players this year? How almost all of them checked out after Malone was fired. That shows lack of leadership with our players including all of our vets and players. This team lacks leadership and Karl CAN be that leader if the players give him the shot. If reports are true about Cuz deciding himself that he doesn't want to play the final 3 games, then reports about him not wanting Karl earlier in the season have to be true. I'm very disappointed if he's the one who decided he shouldn't play for his own reasons that aren't injury/personal related.

 

[pshn80]

Good thing I don't read Twitter let alone understand the one's I'm exposed on here , if I did I might get involved in these wild speculations. How about if I just continue to hope we get a real and successful SG to start next year. I hear folks/ Napear saying we need extensive changes in personnel next year. I shudder to think of it because I believe it would set us back at least another whole year at least. We do need two starters - SG and PF- and one bencher - a 3 and D player. That much change is Lenny big enough.

 

[whozit]

With or without Cousins, I'll always be a Kings fan even if I lose interest in them. However, A LOT of other fans don't see it this way.. If DeMarcus leaves Sac, the new arena will be more than half empty..bank on it.

You know what I didn't appreciate from the players this year? How almost all of them checked out after Malone was fired. That shows lack of leadership with our players including all of our vets and players. This team lacks leadership and Karl CAN be that leader if the players give him the shot. If reports are true about Cuz deciding himself that he doesn't want to play the final 3 games, then reports about him not wanting Karl earlier in the season have to be true. I'm very disappointed if he's the one who decided he shouldn't play for his own reasons that aren't injury/personal related.

One does not necessarily have any bearing on the other. "IF" the most powerful yet meaningless word. I suspect your mind is made up.

 

[VF21]

With or without Cousins, I'll always be a Kings fan even if I lose interest in them. However, A LOT of other fans don't see it this way.. If DeMarcus leaves Sac, the new arena will be more than half empty..bank on it.

You know what I didn't appreciate from the players this year? How almost all of them checked out after Malone was fired. That shows lack of leadership with our players including all of our vets and players. This team lacks leadership and Karl CAN be that leader if the players give him the shot. If reports are true about Cuz deciding himself that he doesn't want to play the final 3 games, then reports about him not wanting Karl earlier in the season have to be true. I'm very disappointed if he's the one who decided he shouldn't play for his own reasons that aren't injury/personal related.

Flawed logic, my friend. Even if Cousins did decide he didn't want to play, there's no way that would in and of itself validate the rumor about him not wanting George Karl.

I cannot believe how quickly people want to jump to the worst possible conclusion.