[Game] Kings @ Heat 2/21/12

[The_Jamal]

JJ sucks. Who cares about his numbers. If you scouted him as an organization you'd know he sucks. Adding a pick to that was ludicrous. Hayes was an ok signing. The problem is though it should have been in addition to resigning Daly or getting another big. But losing Daly, only singing Hayes and then hearing both Westy and Petrie say we don't need to add anything more to our frontcourt is and was a huge mistake. A few said that all along, and guess how its turned out.

Salmons trade was the worst. But getting Outlaw off waivers for 3-4M per for 4 years was also very bad. Our FO did nothing right this past off season. And resinging Thornton didn't require much, if anything from our FO. He was restricted, we could have gotten him back no matter what.

To top that all off, that pick we included in the trade for Hickson can't be traded until draft day. That's a very valuable pick in a deep draft we can't use coming up on the deadline. Might not seem like much, until you consider Rondo is on the market, Bos wants picks, and our pick + MT + JT might sound good to them. Maybe not, but we don't even have that option now.

Trading a lottery pick in this draft is beyond stupid making that option a non-start already

I also 100% disagree about Hickson. You judge players by several factors, but numbers are easily the most objective answers to judge a player upon. He showed a lot of potential on Cleveland for 3 years and had enough talent to be a fringe all-star player. Unfortunately, he didn't pay off and we got burned. It happens! To knock the trade is pretty foolish, especially since we likely won't have to deal that pick for another 2-3 years and Omri is just as terrible as any of our current SF's

 

[BMiller52]

I blame it on everyone. FO, players not performing, coaching being subpar for so long.

The 3rd is on the FO too though. Unless they couldn't find anyone else willing to coach for the same price as PW and Smart and the Maloofs wouldn't pay more. Also, it's their job to put together a roster that compliments eachother. This roster has too many good/decent players at the guard spots, a serious lack of talent at the 3, no shotblocker, and no size on the bench. JJ is terrible, Chuck is ok but would've been better with Sammy or someone similar, Outlaw is terrible, Salmons is terrible, etc. Petrie failed to put together a complete team.

 

[BMiller52]

Trading a lottery pick in this draft is beyond stupid making that option a non-start already

I also 100% disagree about Hickson. He showed a lot of potential on Cleveland for 3 years and had enough talent to be a fringe all-star player. Unfortunately, he didn't pay off and we got burned. It happens!

Not if we could've gotten a legit 3 or 4. At some point you have to get vets who can teach your rookies and 2nd and 3rd year guys how to win, and stop trying to nurture the next talented young player that comes along.

 

[The_Jamal]

The 3rd is on the FO too though. Unless they couldn't find anyone else willing to coach for the same price as PW and Smart and the Maloofs wouldn't pay more. Also, it's their job to put together a roster that compliments eachother. This roster has too many good/decent players at the guard spots, a serious lack of talent at the 3, no shotblocker, and no size on the bench. JJ is terrible, Chuck is ok but would've been better with Sammy or someone similar, Outlaw is terrible, Salmons is terrible, etc. Petrie failed to put together a complete team.

Agreed. Thus our 10-21 record or w/e it is now. But we also have 4-5 guys who are seriously playing below their true talent level and all started this season as core rotational players. That's on them just as much as the FO

 

[BMiller52]

I've always said the moves last summer were a disaster. I think they can be corrected and better be. That's all I'm saying and don't understand how you can disagree. Bodies can be traded. People can be let go or amnestied. People can be drafted and FAs can be signed. The thing that will stop this is the ownership.

Yeah but if the ownership doesn't change(either by way of making more money so they can spend more, or replacing with new owner) then we are screwed. You have to have willing trade partners and the money to sign new players or eat contracts that aren't producing. They better be corrected but it's going to be difficult for this current FO to do it.

 

[rainmaker]

Trading a lottery pick in this draft is beyond stupid making that option a non-start already

I also 100% disagree about Hickson. You judge players by several factors, but numbers are easily the most objective answers to judge a player upon. He showed a lot of potential on Cleveland for 3 years and had enough talent to be a fringe all-star player. Unfortunately, he didn't pay off and we got burned. It happens! To knock the trade is pretty foolish, especially since we likely won't have to deal that pick for another 2-3 years and Omri is just as terrible as any of our current SF's

I'd like the option of trading that pick. If it was just Omri for JJ straight up, I'd be disappointed but not complaining. But not having that pick to trade limits us. If it costs us a chance at Rondo or another young vet who'd step in, start, and have an impact that's a mistake.

 

[The_Jamal]

Not if we could've gotten a legit 3 or 4. At some point you have to get vets who can teach your rookies and 2nd and 3rd year guys how to win, and stop trying to nurture the next talented young player that comes along.

Like what? I'd love to hear what kind of big-time vet player we could get for a lottery pick that makes sense in the context of what we're trying to do as a team

 

[The_Jamal]

I'd like the option of trading that pick. If it was just Omri for JJ straight up, I'd be disappointed but not complaining. But not having that pick to trade limits us. If it costs us a chance at Rondo or another young vet who'd step in, start, and have an impact that's a mistake.

Rondo isn't near worth his cost. Boston would want MT or Reke+Lottery pick+JT/Greene.

 

[rainmaker]

Like what? I'd love to hear what kind of big-time vet player we could get for a lottery pick that makes sense in the context of what we're trying to do as a team

It'd be a package, obviously. Not just the pick. I'm sure you heard Rondo is on the trade block.

 

[BMiller52]

Like what? I'd love to hear what kind of big-time vet player we could get for a lottery pick that makes sense in the context of what we're trying to do as a team

A guy like Danny Granger? I don't know but atleast having the option would've been nice. And if we keep it, it's not like we can trade next year's pick then either.

 

[rainmaker]

Rondo isn't near worth his cost. Boston would want MT or Reke+Lottery pick+JT/Greene.

Now we're getting into opinion. My point was we don't have the option, when we should, and not having that option is a mistake.

 

[rainmaker]

A guy like Danny Granger? I don't know but atleast having the option would've been nice. And if we keep it, it's not like we can trade next year's pick then either.

We seem to agree. It's not that we will make a trade, it's that we don't even have the option to include a valuable pick in a trade.

 

[The_Jamal]

How many lottery picks for player have been traded in the last 10 years? Other than the Boston deal, I can't think of any that's happened before the draft actually occurred.

 

[Tyndel]

Trading a lottery pick in this draft is beyond stupid making that option a non-start already

I also 100% disagree about Hickson. You judge players by several factors, but numbers are easily the most objective answers to judge a player upon. He showed a lot of potential on Cleveland for 3 years and had enough talent to be a fringe all-star player. Unfortunately, he didn't pay off and we got burned. It happens! To knock the trade is pretty foolish, especially since we likely won't have to deal that pick for another 2-3 years and Omri is just as terrible as any of our current SF's

Some of the posters here were saying on the day traded Hickson isn't as good as JT. We were expected at the time to resign Dally and we still had Whiteside as a project where was the playing time for him to come from. And then you throw in a First round pick on a year we fully expected to be out of the lottery in a very deep draft. It was a bad trade for a 1 year rental of a 4th big because of the expected loss of the first round pick. 5 minutes of research at the time told us his weaknesses and they have proven true.

When you further compound that going after Chuck and having Hickson meant Dally had more reason to scat it cost us more then an exchange of under performing players + a first round. Hickson has played to expectations of many on this board. Salmons has played worse then any could reasonably expect.

How many lottery picks for player have been traded in the last 10 years? Other than the Boston deal, I can't think of any that's happened before the draft actually occurred.

We traded a lotto pick and player for a player and a lower lotto pick on draft day.... They are used in packages.

 

[BMiller52]

We seem to agree. It's not that we will make a trade, it's that we don't even have the option to include a valuable pick in a trade.

Exactly. It stops us from getting better. And even if we keep the pick(which we most likely will), we then don't have the option for trading next year's pick. That could bring in a good veteran, or be part of a package deal for a really good player. We should atleast have the option.

 

[IfAt1st]

Giving away a FIRST ROUND PICK PLUS Casspi meant that the Kings scouting team and Front Office truly thought that JJ Hickson was the real deal and would instantly produce here.

What does that say about their ability to scout and analyze players?

 

[Glenn]

Giving away a FIRST ROUND PICK PLUS Casspi meant that the Kings scouting team and Front Office truly thought that JJ Hickson was the real deal and would instantly produce here.

What does that say about their ability to scout and analyze players?

I don't think too many people thought that the trade was a bad one. The first round pick, if JJ was decent, was in some ways useless. If JJ had been a starter, which is what people expected, a lottery protected pick is not a lot usually. At least that's the way I look at it. The guys picked that low end up at best on the bench and we were hoping to snare a starter.

Am I surprised at how JJ turned out???? Oh, yes, and I think some analysis of how this decision was made needs to be investigated by the owners. And then again, maybe JJ will be great next year. This has been an odd year with multiple players underperforming. "Underperformance" seems to be a team wide disease. As much as I'd like to see him packaged in some trade before the deadline, there is a part of me that wonders if he might turn out to be just fine as early as next year.

 

[spudfan]

Giving away a FIRST ROUND PICK PLUS Casspi meant that the Kings scouting team and Front Office truly thought that JJ Hickson was the real deal and would instantly produce here.

What does that say about their ability to scout and analyze players?

I had no idea, you actually believe in this team. Here I thought you had them pegged as a terrible team forever. If that was case, you would know that we won't be giving away a first round pick. I think their ability to scout and analyze is one of the best in the league. JJ hasn't been good, but if he can make some improvements like JT did over the last couple years he will be fine. By the way, JJ is 6 months older than Jimmer.

 

[spudfan]

I don't think too many people thought that the trade was a bad one. The first round pick, if JJ was decent, was in some ways useless. If JJ had been a starter, which is what people expected, a lottery protected pick is not a lot usually. At least that's the way I look at it. The guys picked that low end up at best on the bench and we were hoping to snare a starter.

Am I surprised at how JJ turned out???? Oh, yes, and I think some analysis of how this decision was made needs to be investigated by the owners. And then again, maybe JJ will be great next year. This has been an odd year with multiple players underperforming. "Underperformance" seems to be a team wide disease. As much as I'd like to see him packaged in some trade before the deadline, there is a part of me that wonders if he might turn out to be just fine as early as next year.

Doesn't it kind of support the fact that they didn't think JJ would be a starter and make a big difference? He was and still is a pretty raw player with lots of potential. As such, the protection on the 1st round pick reflects that. I don't think they would have wanted to give up a lottery pick this year with the talent that they knew was around. In any case anyone can't remember the terms of the draft pick are:
Protection specifics on pick going from Kings to Cavs: Protected 1-to-14 in 2012, 1-to-13 in 2013, 1-to-12 in 2014, 1-to-10 from 2015-2017; If first-round pick is not conveyed from SAC to CLE by 2017, then Kings convey their 2017 second-rounder to Cavaliers (protected 56-60)

edit: As has been discussed here before, if we are still a lottery team that far into the future we have much bigger problems than picks...

 

[Bricklayer]

I don't think too many people thought that the trade was a bad one. The first round pick, if JJ was decent, was in some ways useless. If JJ had been a starter, which is what people expected, a lottery protected pick is not a lot usually. At least that's the way I look at it. The guys picked that low end up at best on the bench and we were hoping to snare a starter.

Am I surprised at how JJ turned out???? Oh, yes, and I think some analysis of how this decision was made needs to be investigated by the owners. And then again, maybe JJ will be great next year. This has been an odd year with multiple players underperforming. "Underperformance" seems to be a team wide disease. As much as I'd like to see him packaged in some trade before the deadline, there is a part of me that wonders if he might turn out to be just fine as early as next year.

JJ won't be here next year, can pretty much bank on that. And yes, they thought he might jsut be pretty good. And he actually is better than he's shown. He;s just in a terrbible role for him. Its like bringin in John Salmons and asking him to be...oh oops.

Anyway, the first we gave away was lottery protected, so for the immediate term its hardly us giving away the #1 pick for him. If he helped us make the playoffs, then fine, we end up trading the #18 pick for the guy or something. If not, then we still keep our lottery pick.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Giving away a FIRST ROUND PICK PLUS Casspi meant that the Kings scouting team and Front Office truly thought that JJ Hickson was the real deal and would instantly produce here.

What does that say about their ability to scout and analyze players?

To be fair, there were a lot of other scouts/FO people who thought JJ was the real deal. And frankly he could still be that player, just doesn't seem to be a good fit here. I personally thought it was a great deal at the time..not so much now.