Who's this guy? Sam Amick's evil twin?
Dave started posting parts of this thread on twitter, saying these types make him mad. This is turning ugly, quickly.
Dave started posting parts of this thread on twitter, saying these types make him mad. This is turning ugly, quickly.
![]()
Yup. I'm following that whole post. Some of those guys on there are just going along with the whole "they saved our team be grateful" schtick. I'll forever be grateful to Vivek Ranadive for saving this team from leaving. That's completely separate from me disagreeing with how they are building this team. I could accept it if they were getting rid of talent to stockpile draft picks and young talent for the future. What they are doing is signing middling talents to large contracts and hoping it works. It's crazy.
I'm pretty sure they don't plan to give him the starting PG spot...
Anyways, I don't want to comment about Monta until it's official. It's so frustrating right now. I just hope there's something else coming our way, something like Udoh, or Henson, or Ilyasova. But I have little faith this will happen.
Point being, you generally want two different types of players manning point so you can throw change of looks at opponents. Kyrie is a much better player than Jimmer, but they both bring the same thing to the table, scoring. Toney Douglas would be a better fit for Cleveland.
Always been a fan of Dave and appreciate what he's done in keeping the Kings, but for someone that likes to label others arrogant, he sure is high up on that horse. The high and mighty attitude isn't doing him any favours.
Fact is, most of these moves are careless (big contracts to mediocre talent - that is how you cripple a franchise, especially one with young talent). People are worried about the future of the team, and to start calling those who follow PDA blindly despite the evidence "true" fans, whilst ridiculing the ones expressing concern, is a complete insult and awfully condescending. Everyone wants the team to succeed. There's a blueprint for success in the NBA. Calling for time and patience is all well and good, but it doesn't make you right if the moves being made are clearly going to restrict the franchise's potential for growth and success. Acting as if everything will be merry and well just because there's new owners in town does not make it so. I don't know anyone who has anything personal against PDA, much less Vivek, but people are going to be pissed if our room for movement in the future is seriously hampered by players such as Carl Landry and Monta Ellis!! Common sense people.
A few extra wins next season at the expense of the long term future is not good enough for most people. I've yet to see any basketball reasons given from Dave or any of the other supporters of PDA's work so far. It's all wait and see bleh. No actual substance, just condescending generalisations. I realise there's some that have gone completely over the top, calling for PDA's head and for Vivek to sell the team (I believe this was just one nut), but I'm really disappointed in Dave here.
Always been a fan of Dave and appreciate what he's done in keeping the Kings, but for someone that likes to label others arrogant, he sure is high up on that horse. The high and mighty attitude isn't doing him any favours.
Fact is, most of these moves are careless (big contracts to mediocre talent - that is how you cripple a franchise, especially one with young talent). People are worried about the future of the team, and to start calling those who follow PDA blindly despite the evidence "true" fans, whilst ridiculing the ones expressing concern, is a complete insult and awfully condescending. Everyone wants the team to succeed. There's a blueprint for success in the NBA. Calling for time and patience is all well and good, but it doesn't make you right if the moves being made are clearly going to restrict the franchise's potential for growth and success. Acting as if everything will be merry and well just because there's new owners in town does not make it so. I don't know anyone who has anything personal against PDA, much less Vivek, but people are going to be pissed if our room for movement in the future is seriously hampered by players such as Carl Landry and Monta Ellis!! Common sense people.
A few extra wins next season at the expense of the long term future is not good enough for most people. I've yet to see any basketball reasons given from Dave or any of the other supporters of PDA's work so far. It's all wait and see bleh. No actual substance, just condescending generalisations. I realise there's some that have gone completely over the top, calling for PDA's head and for Vivek to sell the team (I believe this was just one nut), but I'm really disappointed in Dave here.
I'm not the biggest Ellis fan, but i think if you keep him off the ball that black hole thing goes away, and he is a very good midrange shooter, decent 3pt shooter. Remember Ellis looked best in his early Golden State years when he played alongside a pass first/facilitating pg. Being paired with Curry and then Jennings of all people were bad situations for both teams. Paired with Vasquez you will probably see a more efficient Monta, where he isn't iso'ing for all his shots, rather coming off screens and picks.
Look i would not be the happiest guy with this move, but looking at it from the FO's perspective, you get a SG that can drop 25-30 on any night in his prime, which puts less pressure on McLemore, allows him to settle into the NBA game. Eventually you hope McLemore takes the starting SG spot, and you can have Ellis be a 6th man gunner. This also means Thornton is on his way out, hopefully combined with one of our bigs to bring in a SF.
Also i think people are overlooking Malone as a coach. He is going to require the team to play how he wants with the backing of Vivek. Anyone who doesn't buy into the system(that means playing defense and being professional) is out the door. Yes, that means Cousins as well, this is his last straw in Sacramento.
A lot of people forget that Monta was once one of the most efficient volume scorers in the game- he averaged 20 PPG on 53% shooting one year, and holds career shooting percentages of 46% from the field, 32% from thee, and 77% from the line. He also has good court vision, and his passing ability is decent. The problem that came up when he was traded to Milwaukee, he was played on the ball a ton more. His shooting percentages went down, and his turnovers went up. He also had one of the worst coaches in the NBA, and with no one to reign him in, his shot selection became erratic. I think that if he DOES come to Sac, Malone may be able to turn him back into GS Monta. But you never know, Monta paired with Cousins might not be the most well-behaved. There's always a chance they become Epic Bros, though, How I Met Your Mother style.![]()
most excellent.
I would argue that Hickson trade has been the most detrimental move made in the last 3 years(at least until this summer). The lack of a first round pick to package has absolutely killed out ability to trade with anyone for most of the last 2 years.
I don't think the FO is banking on Cousins just yet, this is a do or die year for Cousins, No more mouthing off on coaches because Malone is Vivek's guy, Cousins is not Vivek's guy. Either Cousins buys in, plays hard every night, or imo he is gone mid season. I think the FO is trying to put a competitive team out there, and IF Ellis signs, there will be a lot more moves to come.
How do we know if they are right and wrong before they are completed. Sure, on the outside they look wrong, but if it's part of a larger plan then we might be jumping the gun. OK, Landry sucks right? But what has pretty much everyone been saying about him? He's a good complementary piece to a contending team, right? What if we are in the playoffs in 2-3 years, then wouldn't Landry be looking like a good pickup? Stranger things have happened.![]()
i wasn't speaking to the views of the new FO. my point was that the oft-discussed scenario of moving tyreke to PG alongside ben mclemore and a defensive SF who could handle and pass made basketball sense, particularly on the defensive side of the ball, where the kings need the most improvement. however, given this particular team's shortcomings, valuing non-defensive personnel like grievis vasquez and monta ellis does not make basketball sense, particularly when the "wing scorer to partner with your big time post player" happens to be a chucker with an affinity for taking awful shots. if people thought tyreke evans' use of the shot clock was poor, wait until you see ellis fire off three-pointers (at a 32% clip) with 20 seconds left on the shot clock...
personally, i don't give a **** if the FO didn't think that highly of tyreke. i still maintain that, if you don't value him, you trade him down the road on your terms. they could have done better than vasquez and 2nd rounders. the fact that they're even considering monta ellis tells me just how desperate the front office is to make a splash, no matter how foolish it may be...
How do we know if they are right and wrong before they are completed. Sure, on the outside they look wrong, but if it's part of a larger plan then we might be jumping the gun. OK, Landry sucks right? But what has pretty much everyone been saying about him? He's a good complementary piece to a contending team, right? What if we are in the playoffs in 2-3 years, then wouldn't Landry be looking like a good pickup? Stranger things have happened.
I decided that I am going to give it to opening night to see what we have to work with. If it's still looking mismatched and terrible then I will start my complaining![]()
I have decided that if they let Cuz go im following him to his new team. That would be the end for me personally with the kings and i would need a new team and that seems a good way of choosing one
surly our GM isnt stupid enough to trade him/let him walk right???
Interesting to look at these two posts together because I don't think either argument really helps defend the Landry signing or the possible acquisition of Ellis
If this is a make or break year for Cousins, why litter the roster with more midlevel contracts eating up all caproom? If DMC walks the Kings are left with no caproom and a team led by McLemore, Monta Ellis and Carl Landry with no young assets to trade, no draft picks accumulated and no room to sign anyone of impact.
But why do that while leaving obvious holes (SF, defense, long term PG) that will prevent the team from getting good in the first place?
Landry & Ellis don't make sense if the team is hedging its bets with regards to Cousins and they don't make sense if they are all in with DMC and McLemore as the faces of the franchise. I just don't see how they fit in at all.
Cuz wouldn't be walking of his own accord; he'd be traded by the trade deadline.
you don't. but this is where experience is supposed to matter. the best teams in the nba manage their assets effectively; they overpay for young talent with potential, lock it up long term, and spend wisely on roleplayers. they do not overpay lesser talents like carl landry if they are not already in contention, and they do not overpay high volume chuckers like monta ellis if younger, cheaper, talent with greater upside is available for the taking...
people say things like "part of a larger plan" as if there's any more certainty to be found in such an abstract notion. with the departure of tyreke evans, the kings have exactly two useful assets: demarcus cousins and cap space. the rest of the roster is chock full of mid-level and low-level talent. you can package a few of those guys together and maybe you net a player of value in return via trade. but maybe the rest of the league looks at your mediocre collection of talent and your perpetual losing culture and decides that they can lowball you into oblivion at the first scent of your desperation. again, you have to be smart with the management of your assets, especially when you're a small market franchise coming off seven straight losing seasons...
as of yet, exactly one king has been traded, and he was one of value for which the kings did not receive equal value in return. so pardon my skepticism that lesser kings' talents will yield a higher rate of return. and pardon my skepticism that monta ellis and carl landry are a worthy use of the team's cap space at a time when they are having difficulty acquiring top shelf talent. yes, it is prudent to give the new regime a "grace period." they deserve that much because of the herculean effort they gave to keep the team in sacramento. however, their transactions-to-this-point fail to inspire confidence, and the rumored interest in monta ellis also fails to inspire confidence...
Cuz wouldn't be walking of his own accord; he'd be traded by the trade deadline.
Doesn't work. Not with an $11 mill price tag. The only team that wants him at that price tag is NO. If they signed him for $8.5 mill that's an entirely different story.
Perhaps, but if that's the case wouldn't you imagine a low return on investment? After all it would imply that Cousins either drastically underperformed, clashed with teammates/coaches/management or both and thus would have to be dealt for pennies on the dollar.
And if so, what would you expect the team to get in return that could make a core of Ellis, McLemore and Landry a winning team?