Cousins isn't a winner?

[hrdboild]

Let me ask you a serious question:

If Cousins spends the remainder of his career in this franchise, and they are unable to build a winning team around him, would you be happy with him with every franchise record and a retired jersey but nothing to show for it like Richmond, or would you rather cut ties, let him try again elsewhere and start a rebuild now?

To even ask the question I think is to know what the answer is.

But I'll elaborate a bit. If you tell me DeMarcus will be a hall-of-fame center and play his entire career in Sacramento and we never make the playoffs -- I would say that's probably impossible. Mitch played 7 seasons in Sacramento and made the playoffs in one of those. And I was thrilled with Mitch Richmond, he was the star of the team when I first started watching them. He wasn't a league MVP but he was our star, and he was pretty damn great. But we all root for the team. Mitch got traded and then Webber became our star. If DeMarcus was drafted in Minnesota we would have found a different star to lead our team and DeMarcus would be just another great player that wears someone else's jersey. I'd still respect him but he wouldn't be our star.

So in an abstract sense, yeah I guess if I knew the future and it's never going to happen with DeMarcus then let's try something else. Let's suck for however long it takes to actually win a draft lottery (yeah, like that will ever happen to this team...) and see where we go from there. But we don't know the future. "Well he hasn't done it yet so clearly he can't do it" is not a satisfying argument to me. And just as I appreciate Richmond for what he was rather than what he wasn't and I appreciate Webber for what he was rather than what he wasn't, I appreciate DeMarcus for the star player that he is and hope that the front office can get out of their own way long enough to give the team a chance to succeed while he's still here.

 

[Showtime]

To even ask the question I think is to know what the answer is.

But I'll elaborate a bit. If you tell me DeMarcus will be a hall-of-fame center and play his entire career in Sacramento and we never make the playoffs -- I would say that's probably impossible. Mitch played 7 seasons in Sacramento and made the playoffs in one of those. And I was thrilled with Mitch Richmond, he was the star of the team when I first started watching them. He wasn't a league MVP but he was our star, and he was pretty damn great. But we all root for the team. Mitch got traded and then Webber became our star. If DeMarcus was drafted in Minnesota we would have found a different star to lead our team and DeMarcus would be just another great player that wears someone else's jersey. I'd still respect him but he wouldn't be our star.

So in an abstract sense, yeah I guess if I knew the future and it's never going to happen with DeMarcus then let's try something else. Let's suck for however long it takes to actually win a draft lottery (yeah, like that will ever happen to this team...) and see where we go from there. But we don't know the future. "Well he hasn't done it yet so clearly he can't do it" is not a satisfying argument to me. And just as I appreciate Richmond for what he was rather than what he wasn't and I appreciate Webber for what he was rather than what he wasn't, I appreciate DeMarcus for the star player that he is and hope that the front office can get out of their own way long enough to give the team a chance to succeed while he's still here.

My issue is this franchise has a year, maybe a year and a half to convince him not to bolt. I think fans need to take another look at that possibility that his career here might not ever work out.

 

[Sac.1989]

My point is this: we may never see the franchise straighten out its internal issues during Cousins' prime years. That is a very real and possible outcome, and that's with any player. You could have a young Kareem there, and might struggle under a constant shift of GMs and coaches. It is even more difficult with somebody as volatile as Cousins. Ultimately, us fans may be in for a reality that doesn't include Demarcus and Kings being successful together. It might not work out, and realistically, while people want to give him more time, he's got one more full season before the team has to make a decision. Does anybody really think they can iron out everything in a year and a half? Considering the current circumstances, I do not.

your point is valid however if you seriously look at where our roster is now from last year and years gone since cousins came in we are in a much much better position. We've turned the corner in that sense whereby we actually have a roster capable of competing in the playoffs with a few gaps - that has been a key weakness in the past and we have addressed that so to speak.

yes the management side of it is still an issue and how the team is utilized and set out to play is still an issue with Karl at the helm but you fix that, and we have showed signs of turning a corner there with our win streaks this season and we have arrived. There is hope here

 

[Sac.1989]

To even ask the question I think is to know what the answer is.
And just as I appreciate Richmond for what he was rather than what he wasn't and I appreciate Webber for what he was rather than what he wasn't, I appreciate DeMarcus for the star player that he is and hope that the front office can get out of their own way long enough to give the team a chance to succeed while he's still here.

well said hrd.

the real question here to the naysayers is, how many games a season does what demarcus doesnt have cost us ?

that list of what he doesnt have is short and is basically summed up as his; on court persona, demeanor, need to pout when things aren't going well and general attitude towards officials - how many games does that cost us a season? How many losses can you subjectively put on that ? I'll tell you now its marginal at best.

We wouldn't even be competing in games like Golden State had it not been for Demarcus, hell half of us put these down at scheduled losses in the game thread.

flip this over, how many games has our reliance on collison and rondo down the stretch cost us ? how many games has not having WCS out there at key segments cost us ? how many games has our maddening rotations and push for tempo cost us ? how many games has having demarcus work the perimeter as opposed to the paint cost us ?

there's much more bigger issues here and to focus on Demarcus when there are aspects of our game that send us stark raving mad is an injustice. I mean im not going to put blame at Demarcus's feet for fouling out early when we have curry and collison defending dirk down the stretch...

 

[Amit149]

well said hrd.

the real question here to the naysayers is, how many games a season does what demarcus doesnt have cost us ?

that list of what he doesnt have is short and is basically summed up as his; on court persona, demeanor, need to pout when things aren't going well and general attitude towards officials - how many games does that cost us a season? How many losses can you subjectively put on that ? I'll tell you now its marginal at best.

We wouldn't even be competing in games like Golden State had it not been for Demarcus, hell half of us put these down at scheduled losses in the game thread

Here's a question for you- how much games a year he make us win...
I know it's simplistic and all the reasons behind it, but some of you are talking like we have been a treadmill playoff team when in fact we've been the league's carpet- 29 wins is our best season with him thus far- this year we were on pace to break it and have 32 wins(!).

Here's the entire list of teams worse than us last year:
Knicks, 76ers, Minnesota, Lakers and Orlando.
All teams are in the tanking process... not one team that had any kind of post-season aspirations were behind us, and that's our best season to date.

Take Cousins out of this team, how many games you think will win? a D-League roster for the 76ers won 18 games last year, so let's say... 23 games as a guess- so the difference between a 23 wins team and a 29 wins team is a once in a lifetime HOFer?

Cousins is a great player and an even greater talent and potential, but Kings&Cousins doesn't work right now and for all the praise he gets- we are still a very bad team, even with him.

 

[hrdboild]

My issue is this franchise has a year, maybe a year and a half to convince him not to bolt. I think fans need to take another look at that possibility that his career here might not ever work out.

It is a possibility. It's always been a possibility. But it feels to me like you're saying we should trade him now because he might decide that he wants to leave. That's a self-defeating strategy isn't it? A big part of the problem for this organization is their inability to choose one path of action everyone agrees on and then pursue it. We're changing our minds all over the place and jumping from one short-sighted strategy to another. Let's establish a defensive culture, no let's get guys in here who can run, no let's build around Rondo/Cousins/Gay, no let's shop Rudy Gay for a shooter. See what I mean? There's no patience, there's no long-term planning. I don't think good organizations make decisions out of fear.

 

[Merdiesel]

Except Rudy has taken over games and won games without Cousins, so you invalidated your argument. A #3 is not a guy who can go off for 30 points any given night. What makes him questionable is his inconsistency and lack of killer instinct, but we aren't talking about a Ben Maclemore situation. Rudy typically pours in 15~20 points a night when healthy, and that would qualify as a #2 on many teams.

Rudy has also botched more final possessions that I can count.

He's "gone off" for 30 points a whopping 3 times in 51 games.

Lastly, the Sacramento Kings are 1-13 this season when Rudy pours in 15 points or less (not including games missed).

 

[Bricklayer]

Brick I know your numbers will always let you have a good argument in Cousins favor. I agree he has not necessarily been giving the proper tools (talent or credible coaches) to succeed in Sac. I don't even question the fact that Boogie is an amazing talent. The question you must ask yourself with any star player though is can Cousins be the best player on a title winning team? When you really think about it can he? Comparing him with Melo only helps my argument. A truly talented player who is not a winner at his core. I know all the stats point to amazing regular season accolades, but the fact remains the Kings are a mess, Boogie is not the leader we need, and I truly doubt we ever win with him.

If that's the standard then about 27 teams every year should be trading their stars. VERY few stars, even superstars, ever win a title without a fellow HOFer to help.

Maybe we can argue Curry last year. Bron needed Wade. Kobe is arguable since he was clearly the alpha over Pau. KG and Pierce and friends were a collective. Even Shaq never did it without Kobe or Wade. Let's go get Cousins a HOF teammate and see what happens.

 

[Sac.1989]

Here's a question for you- how much games a year he make us win...
.

19 this year so far, to the tune of:

30 points, 13 rebounds, 1.5 blocks, 1 steal and 3 assists

Reign out that D league team though - break em out

 

[bajaden]

Hire a defensive coach coach and we will see the team win. Defense wins. Cousins knows it, Rondo knows it, Vlade knows it...Karl has never understood this..... Terrible, terrible stint in Sac. Started with him trying to trade Cousins in the Summer but I guess Karl gets a pass and Cousins is the cancer....smh.

While this statement currently has merit, I don't think you can say history is on your side in this argument. Our current team offensive rating is 105.9, while our defensive rating is 108.0. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that were on the wrong side of that equation. Odd's are that if your going to allow more points than you score, your probably going to lose a lot of games. However, that hasn't always been the case with Karl coached teams.

While coaching Seattle:
1993: Record - 55/27, Offensive rating - 108.6, Defensive rating - 101.8
1994: Record - 63/19, Offensive rating - 107.8, Defensive rating - 98.2
1995: Record - 64/18, Offensive rating - 107.8, Defensive rating - 99.0
1996: Record - 57/25, Offensive rating - 100.9, Defensive rating - 99.6
1997: Record - 61/21, Offensive rating - 108.5, Defensive rating - 93.4

While coaching Denver:
2005: Record - 44/38, Offensive rating - 104.2, Defensive rating - 102.1
2006: Record - 45/37, Offensive rating - 104.9, Defensive rating - 102.7
2007: Record - 50/32, Offensive rating - 107.9, Defensive rating - 104.0
2008: Record - 54/28, Offensive rating - 107.5, Defensive rating - 103.5
2009: Record - 53/29, Offensive rating - 108.7, Defensive rating - 104.7
2010: Record - 50/32, Offensive rating - 116.8, Defensive rating - 104.7

As you can see, at no time during his stay at Seattle or Denver did he fall on the wrong side of the offensive/defensive rating. Some teams were better defensively than others, but all of his teams scored more points than they allowed, and once again, logic tells you that you'll win more than you lose with that equation. Now you can argue that he's no longer up to the task, and that's possible, but you can't argue that he never coached a team that played defense. If you go back and look at the rosters he coached, I don't think you can accuse him of always playing small ball. I think Karl leans toward skilled players, and if they happen to be small, then so be it. He'd rather play a small skilled player than a tall unskilled, or less skilled player. Just my opinion of course.

All that said, it doesn't mean I agree with all of his rotations and distribution of minutes. Doesn't mean I would mind a coaching change. I'd prefer that any coaching change come at the end of the season. Frankly, I don't think anyone new, at this point of the season is going to make a significant difference. I think there are deeper problems with this team, and Karl is just one of them. When the tail starts wagging the dog, you have problems, and I think some of that is going on. To what extent, I don't know.

 

[Amit149]

19 this year so far, to the tune of:

30 points, 13 rebounds, 1.5 blocks, 1 steal and 3 assists

Reign out that D league team though - break em out

So you think our record without him would be 2-50...

My point was that every team in the NBA is going to get a certain number of wins, even the ones that are actively tanking.

Do you really think if you take Cousins out of our roster for a replacement level player we would drop that many wins? because it doesn't get much worse than where we are at now.

 

[bajaden]

If that's the standard then about 27 teams every year should be trading their stars. VERY few stars, even superstars, ever win a title without a fellow HOFer to help.

Maybe we can argue Curry last year. Bron needed Wade. Kobe is arguable since he was clearly the alpha over Pau. KG and Pierce and friends were a collective. Even Shaq never did it without Kobe or Wade. Let's go get Cousins a HOF teammate and see what happens.

And who might that be.? I agree with your premise. Hard to argue with history, unless you live in Russia where it's flexible. I think where some people have a problem, is that Cousins despite how good he is, really hasn't had an equal impact on the team. Yeah, were better with him on the floor than off of it, but the point is, were not very good either way. Or at least we haven't been. I think the argument that he hasn't had good players around him is a legit one, but if you look at Carmelo Anthony's impact when he came into the league, as a rookie, he immediately took a team that had won 17 games and lost 65 games, with essentially the same roster, and lifted them into the playoffs with a 43/39 record. I think that's the kind of impact people are looking for, and it hasn't happened. By the way, I'm not a big fan of Melo's.

We can sit around all day as to why, but some of the responsibility has to fall on Cousins. I'm not saying he needs to be traded, but something is wrong in river city, and it's not all on Karl. Although a new coach wouldn't bother me, depending on who.

 

[Sac.1989]

So you think our record without him would be 2-50...

My point was that every team in the NBA is going to get a certain number of wins, even the ones that are actively tanking.

Do you really think if you take Cousins out of our roster for a replacement level player we would drop that many wins? because it doesn't get much worse than where we are at now.

looking at the figures of how we have performed without demarcus, without him and this same squad we wouldnt win many put it that way - and the games we win you can hang your hat on Demarcus has been dominant as the stats suggest.

who can replace cousins production, dominance and efficiency ? no one, you would not be winning that trade unless you can get a young all star back and no one is shopping those

 

[Amit149]

looking at the figures of how we have performed without demarcus, without him and this same squad we wouldnt win many put it that way - and the games we win you can hang your hat on Demarcus has been dominant as the stats suggest.

who can replace cousins production, dominance and efficiency ? no one, you would not be winning that trade unless you can get a young all star back and no one is shopping those

I'm not saying that trading Cousins is necessarily the answer and I don't think you can get a more talented player for him in a trade.
I'm taking issue with calling him an all-time great and saying he is carrying the Kings- because we are not remotely successful with him, we've been (and as of now continue to be) one of the worst teams in the league.

Again, what do you think this team record would be with an average player in his place, and would it really be that different from where we are at now?

 

[Sac.1989]

Again, what do you think this team record would be with an average player in his place, and would it really be that different from where we are at now?

yes significantly less unless you can name me an average player who can average 30 and 12

 

[Amit149]

yes significantly less unless you can name me an average player who can average 30 and 12

What's significantly less when the floor for a team that tries is above 20 wins and we never won 30?

 

[Chubbs]

What's significantly less when the floor for a team that tries is above 20 wins and we never won 30?

Is there any answer that would make you stop?

 

[Sac.1989]

What's significantly less when the floor for a team that tries is above 20 wins and we never won 30?

we'd win 8 games with Karl in charge and no demarcus, we'd nab that high draft pick and spend it on the next Jimmer, Nik or Trob

 

[Amit149]

Is there any answer that would make you stop?

Yes, preferably a number...

we'd win 8 games with Karl in charge and no demarcus, we'd nab that high draft pick and spend it on the next Jimmer, Nik or Trob

I doubt you actually believe that, but I'll stop for Chubbs sake.

BTW how about that WCS guy since draft picks doesn't matter?

 

[Sac.1989]

Yes, preferably a number...
BTW how about that WCS guy since draft picks doesn't matter?

yeah hes dam solid when we play him. Comes from good stock as does Cousins.

we bought him in to play next to Demarcus. Play them and see what happens.

one decent pick in years. yay. hang your hat on that.

 

[LPKingsFan]

yeah hes dam solid when we play him. Comes from good stock as does Cousins.

we bought him in to play next to Demarcus. Play them and see what happens.

one decent pick in years. yay. hang your hat on that.

It's the extent of our sample size for Vlade and co, so (/shrugs)

 

[Sac.1989]

It's the extent of our sample size for Vlade and co, so (/shrugs)

if your advocating moving cousins so we can tank and back Vlade's drafting ability to bring in solid players then so be it.

Id rather just keep boogie, get a few more pieces and find a coach whose not washed up or talentless.

 

[LPKingsFan]

if your advocating moving cousins so we can tank and back Vlade's drafting ability to bring in solid players then so be it.

Id rather just keep boogie, get a few more pieces and find a coach whose not washed up or talentless.

Nope. Never said that. And if I thought they should, I don't think they will because: 1) the Philly trade and everything since means they've essentially gone all in on "winning now", and 2) I don't think they want to rebuild in the new building.

I just mean to push back on the notion that the franchise's past performance (or lack thereof) in the draft means much for how this current regime will do with the draft moving forward. You could say the same for their coaching selections (in fact, many have), free agency, and trades. The Kings as a franchise haven't been much good at anything, so why bother then!

 

[Sac.1989]

Nope. Never said that. And if I thought they should, I don't think they will because: 1) the Philly trade and everything since means they've essentially gone all in on "winning now", and 2) I don't think they want to rebuild in the new building.

I just mean to push back on the notion that the franchise's past performance (or lack thereof) in the draft means much for how this current regime will do with the draft moving forward. You could say the same for their coaching selections (in fact, many have), free agency, and trades. The Kings as a franchise haven't been much good at anything, so why bother then!

theres no better time then the now to start hitting for the fences

 

[HndsmCelt]

DMC questioning Karl's coaching on camera, by saying Quincy should get more time #coachkiller

 

[Bricklayer]

DMC questioning Karl's coaching on camera, by saying Quincy should get more time #coachkiller

Cuz is gonna run out of minutes for all his friends -- can't very well advocate simultaneously for all of Casspi, WCS, Acy and possiblyRudy as well to all get more minutes, unles he wants Rudy at the 2. And poor Kosta (who I noticed shared a big bearhug with Cuz late in this one).

 

[fansinceday1]

DMC questioning Karl's coaching on camera, by saying Quincy should get more time #coachkiller

We're a mess anyway. Might as well throw down what we've all been pulling our hair over all season.
Next, I want cuz to bring up curry rotting on the bench and belinelli getting as many minutes as he wants, no matter how bad he is.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Cuz is gonna run out of minutes for all his friends -- can't very well advocate simultaneously for all of Casspi, WCS, Acy and possiblyRudy as well to all get more minutes, unles he wants Rudy at the 2. And poor Kosta (who I noticed shared a big bearhug with Cuz late in this one).

Cuz never said he wanted to play !

 

[KingMilz]

DMC questioning Karl's coaching on camera, by saying Quincy should get more time #coachkiller

Even Grant Napear once every 2nd show says the same thing......maybe Cousins is smarter than I give him credit for.

 

[Kingster]

If that's the standard then about 27 teams every year should be trading their stars. VERY few stars, even superstars, ever win a title without a fellow HOFer to help.

Maybe we can argue Curry last year. Bron needed Wade. Kobe is arguable since he was clearly the alpha over Pau. KG and Pierce and friends were a collective. Even Shaq never did it without Kobe or Wade. Let's go get Cousins a HOF teammate and see what happens.

Why are we even talking here about a title? That's just ridiculous. Talk about getting to the playoffs. LBJ got 50+ games with zilch on his team; when he left they were nothing. It's a total apples to oranges comparison. Cousins is nowhere near those guys. And even it were true, where in hell do we ever get a Kobe? At best we're stuck in the middle with Cousins, in a no-man's land draft position. We've got nothing to sell except for Gay, and I'm not banking on Gay bringing us a Kobe anytime soon.