I know this is offtopic, but i can't help myself:
Why do you think 90's basketball is superior?
Is it superior from an entertainment standpoint or in general?
Nobody knows how big mans of the past would do in todays NBA. It's more or less pure speculation.
What we do know is, that Cousins, who is regarded as a future HOF on this board, couldn't reach the playoffs yet.
What we do know is, that Memphis had a solid amount of success with two bigs and a couple of elite defenders.
What we do know is, that Anthony Davis and Andre Drummond reached the playoffs, but got swept.
And what we do know is, that guys like Monroe or Jefferson aren't considered as franchise players.
So right now smash mouth, low post basketball is not a big thing in this league.
Now of course we can assume, that's because there are no dominant bigs today (i tend to disagree).
But what we do know is, that teams with a space and pace approach make it into the playoffs and are capable of winning championships.
So from an objective point of view, it's really difficult to make the statement, that smashmouth, low post basketball is superior right now.
I agree - you have to play a style that suits your roster. But for the Kings, were Cousins, who is as versatile as any big that ever played, is the only untouchable building block from my point of view, that doesn't mean it has to be a slow, smashmouth, low post approach.
The task is to find a way to beat the current dominant playstyle without prematurely limiting this team out of the feeling, that one particular style of basketball is superior per se.