Front office ... the discussion

[funkykingston]

yup. this was, of course, the biggest contributor to evans' eventual departure from sacramento. the maloofs put the new regime in a tough spot, because PDA had to make a snap decision on evans just a couple of weeks after taking the job. i still maintain that you have to re-sign him, because i see no more flexibility in a player like monta ellis (who has the disadvantage of being inefficient, already 27 years old, and unlikable) at a likely $8-10 million per than i see in tyreke evans (who at least has the advantage of being efficient, only 23 years old, and likable) at $11 million per. you get what you pay for, and all that...

I can't shake the feeling that if the Kings FO had come out and given Tyreke the full court press and talked him up as they did with Cousins and then dropped a 4 year/$40 million deal on him that he would have signed. With 7.5% raises that would have meant a starting salary of $9 million this season, making him pretty easy to move next offseason if things didn't work out as planned.

 

[Padrino]

I can't shake the feeling that if the Kings FO had come out and given Tyreke the full court press and talked him up as they did with Cousins and then dropped a 4 year/$40 million deal on him that he would have signed. With 7.5% raises that would have meant a starting salary of $9 million this season, making him pretty easy to move next offseason if things didn't work out as planned.

i hesitate to get into that kinda speculation game too much, but i tend to agree. the front office had hardly begun assembling in sacramento as the draft approached, as free agency approached, and i think they just had starry eyes: they're far too convinced of ben mclemore for my liking, and they thought there would be something out there that they could snatch up on the free agent market...

they saw tyreke evans as expendable without giving him a fair shake, and they happily accepted a role player in return via trade. but i consistently maintain that it doesn't matter an ounce what you think of tyreke evans. he's a young and talented asset that could have been leveraged at a later date, and a prudent front office that wasn't dreaming of making a huge splash in free agency would have been more proactive in negotiations. you put nose to grindstone and convince tyreke that he should re-sign with the kings before anyone else is ready to make an offer. people talk on and on about vivek ranadive's acumen, savvy, and powers of persuasion. it likely could have been done. and it should have been done, in my estimation...

 

[Spike]

My point is that in FA they really can't be picky in terms of need or fit because as a non-playoff small market team the FAs that are in demand either are not interested at all, or may be interested at a higher price than other teams. That's a difficult situation if you have as a priority not to overpay so as to manage the cap and keep flexibility for future deals. Something has to give, and it appears that being picky about need and fit is what is giving. It appears they are making the choice that they are willing to take a player that isn't a need or even a fit if the player is a reasonable talent for a decent price. (Like I said, if they sign Ellis to a very high contract, that thesis gets blown out of the water).

Keep in mind that SA is a playoff team with a very long history of success. So it's apples/oranges when it comes to comparison with the Kings in FA. They can get deals on the cheap; the Kings can't.

Right, but that success started with the draft and keeping talent. I'm not talking about now, as yes, it is much easier to attract players to SA (although they're not really big gamers in the market) now than in the past, but historically, building from the bottom is what SA did. We're not following that model. Since we're spending, I'd rather not waste the money on ill fitting pieces like Ellis (to a lesser extent, Landry), but overspend on players that would fit. You're right though, the money shown to Ellis will be telling - it would be big if Ellis can be had for 8 million or fewer.

The rest of your post was addressed, and yeah, I'm none to happy with the Maloofs for many reasons, but not extending Evans, which would have been relatively cheap, was one of the reasons.

 

[HereWeBoogie]

looks like we just lost Toney Douglas. signing with the Warriors

 

[Kingster]

Right, but that success started with the draft and keeping talent. I'm not talking about now, as yes, it is much easier to attract players to SA (although they're not really big gamers in the market) now than in the past, but historically, building from the bottom is what SA did. We're not following that model. Since we're spending, I'd rather not waste the money on ill fitting pieces like Ellis (to a lesser extent, Landry), but overspend on players that would fit. You're right though, the money shown to Ellis will be telling - it would be big if Ellis can be had for 8 million or fewer.

The rest of your post was addressed, and yeah, I'm none to happy with the Maloofs for many reasons, but not extending Evans, which would have been relatively cheap, was one of the reasons.

I agree that the small market teams have to pull themselves up by the bootstraps of the draft and trades primarily. Then after getting to the playoffs they have a shot at FAs for the right price. But I don't think this FO has as a principle to necessarily overspend to keep the players that we have drafted, even if those players fit. It probably depends on their perception of the talent level of the particular player. It's hard to tell right now how much they weigh fit into their thought process, but it seems that fit is a lesser consideration than value, at least in free agency. The Ellis scenario could be telling.

 

[Kingster]

looks like we just lost Toney Douglas. signing with the Warriors

Makes TOTAL sense from a Warrior's perspective. Now they don't have to play against him.

 

[Padrino]

I agree that the small market teams have to pull themselves up by the bootstraps of the draft and trades primarily. Then after getting to the playoffs they have a shot at FAs for the right price. But I don't think this FO has as a principle to necessarily overspend to keep the players that we have drafted, even if those players fit. It probably depends on their perception of the talent level of the particular player. It's hard to tell right now how much they weigh fit into their thought process, but it seems that fit is a lesser consideration than value, at least in free agency. The Ellis scenario could be telling.

rarely do i agree with your view of things, but i am curious as to how you would view "the ellis scenario" should the kings overpay him (or should they lose out on ellis despite attempting to overpay him). i'd be beside myself, and nearly unable to comprehend the move. how would you perceive such a hypothetical?

 

[Darth Divac]

looks like we just lost Toney Douglas. signing with the Warriors

I'll miss his D, but I like McCallum as our future PG-explosive athlete, terrific ballhandler, solid facilitator, and proficient at all other aspects of the game besides shooting, which is why we have Jent.

 

[Gary]

I wouldn't bank on a 2nd rounder being out "future PG" just yet. IT was a fluke, and he'll be an amazing backup if he could keep up his productivity.

 

[Bricklayer]

looks like we just lost Toney Douglas. signing with the Warriors

Yep. Lost both our guards who could actually defend to FA.

They really should have hired me as it turns out. At least I watched all the Kings games last year and knew what was going on.

 

[Hallama]

Tim Kawakami @timkawakami 2 minutes ago
GSWs entered summer capped out--could've lost Jack/Landry without any pick-ups. Instead, found way to add Iguodala, Speights, O'Neal and TD.

Well, I guess Vivek went after the wrong GSW GM. Nice offseason, Myers. (helps to have a contending team, just a little bit)

 

[Darth Divac]

I wouldn't bank on a 2nd rounder being out "future PG" just yet. IT was a fluke, and he'll be an amazing backup if he could keep up his productivity.

I'm not saying he is the guy we should hand the keys to the franchise to, just saying that he will REALLY surprise you with his productivity.

 

[Bricklayer]

Well, I guess Vivek went after the wrong GSW GM. Nice offseason, Myers. (helps to have a contending team, just a little bit)

Just you wait. You can't say that for 3 or 4 years at least.

Maybe 5.

and P.S. Pete was Denver's flunky, not Golden State's. Some rumors stated/speculated that Vivek was uncomfortable raiding anymore of he Warriors' personnel. Which I thought was fair minded of him. Ironic then we seem to be stuck on such a Golden State castoff kick anyway.

 

[Bricklayer]

And now Jermaine O'Neal to the Warriors too.

We've brought a tiny pocketknife to a gunfight.

 

[Dreadnought]

I'd rather us just tank this season. There's good draft picks to be had. It's about time we got a #1 pick.

 

[funkykingston]

and P.S. Pete was Denver's flunky, not Golden State's. Some rumors stated/speculated that Vivek was uncomfortable raiding anymore of he Warriors' personnel. Which I thought was fair minded of him. Ironic then we seem to be stuck on such a Golden State castoff kick anyway.

and P.P.S. D'Allesandro is as much Oakland's "flunky" as he is Denver's:

D'Alessandro spent four years with the Warriors, influencing the signings of Andris Biedrins and Monta Ellis and helping to trade away Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy. He lost his job after Mullin's contract wasn't renewed but landed a job working under the Denver Nuggets' Masai Ujiri, who was trying to find a way to deal with Carmelo Anthony's trade demand. D'Alessandro played a large role in putting together the massive swap that sent Anthony to the Knicks.

The Full Article

 

[Hallama]

Just you wait. You can't say that for 3 or 4 years at least.

Maybe 5.

and P.S. Pete was Denver's flunky, not Golden State's. Some rumors stated/speculated that Vivek was uncomfortable raiding anymore of he Warriors' personnel. Which I thought was fair minded of him. Ironic then we seem to be stuck on such a Golden State castoff kick anyway.

Technically, Pete'D was a Mullin flunky...even worse. I'm just having fun with all of this...hopefully he works out and is just foo'lin us.

 

[VF21]

For obvious reasons, I've closed the poll. I may start another one shortly, after the news of our latest acquisition.

Randoim conspiracy theory: Vivek bought the Kings so he could make the Warriors better.

























Now let's see how long that takes to get taken out of context and spun. LOL.

 

[upinsmoke]

I will reserve judgment until some of the smoke clears. One thing I'm keeping an eye on is the trade front to see what the new brass has up their sleeve I'm actually fine with the Evans deal.

 

[Spike]

Vivek bought the Kings so he could make the Warriors better.

 

[Kingster]

rarely do i agree with your view of things, but i am curious as to how you would view "the ellis scenario" should the kings overpay him (or should they lose out on ellis despite attempting to overpay him). i'd be beside myself, and nearly unable to comprehend the move. how would you perceive such a hypothetical?

If they pay Ellis a high amount, say $11 mill/yr then I really wouldn't know what to think. Then I would see no underlying rationale. The dots wouldn't connect for me. I'd have to wait to hear from DA about his moves to glean what he's thinking.

 

[Padrino]

If they pay Ellis a high amount, say $11 mill/yr then I really wouldn't know what to think. Then I would see no underlying rationale. The dots wouldn't connect for me. I'd have to wait to hear from DA about his moves to glean what he's thinking.

well, with the trade for mbah a moute, it's probably a moot point, anyway. even with a john salmons amnesty, monta ellis would likely only be had at that price via sign-and-trade, and i'm not sure the bucks would want to take back any of the kings' spare parts in such a scenario...