[NBA] Comments that don't warrant a thread (MAR)

[Kings_of_California]

trade Booker for Ja Morant & other players to make numbers work. Re-sign Kelly Oubre. Build around Morant, Ayton, Jackson, Oubre. Suns will start winning games then.

I actually agree with this. I've seen Booker play, he's a good player but he is not a good team player. I see him arguing with his teammates a lot. Ayton in particular.

It's hard to advocate for trading away a potential franchise cornerstone like Devin, they don't come around a lot. But there's something off about him that makes me think of him as a 1B instead of 1A.

 

[steelevt]

I actually agree with this. I've seen Booker play, he's a good player but he is not a good team player. I see him arguing with his teammates a lot. Ayton in particular.

It's hard to advocate for trading away a potential franchise cornerstone like Devin, they don't come around a lot. But there's something off about him that makes me think of him as a 1B instead of 1A.

Replace booker with boogie and that was our situation. I hated the trade and was so pissed off at the time but sometimes you have to move on. If the suns get rid of him they should know, with some luck, theres always a chance the franchise can move on.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Eh, that's a little disingenuous. Run TMC was never a "winner," at least not in any sense that "winner" applies to them, but not to any of the post-Sacramento teams that Martin or Evans played on. Martin, in particular, played exactly one fewer playoff game in his career than Richmond. And the one season that Run TMC played together as a unit, they finished with one more win than the Pelicans team that made the playoffs, where Evans was the second-best player, so I'm not sure how you're defining "winner" here.

Just meant he had been big part of a winning team before all the losing years in SAC. Nothing ‘disingenuous’ about that.

Martin was a role player and not a top guy on the winning teams he was part of after his time with the KINGS. I suppose you are spot on about Tyreke and New Orleans, and I just gave more credit to AD as why they were a winner. So I stand corrected.

Regardless, we still are very familiar with empty stats from players that didn’t at all translate to winning for various reasons.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Replace booker with boogie and that was our situation.

Not at all. Did the KINGS win with Boogie? No. So that’s the same. But the reasons are drastically different. The Suns have actually accumulated some nice young talent around Booker. Yet they still aren’t winning.

Meanwhile the KINGS never hit on any draft picks for numerous years after Cousins was acquired and Tyreke Evans regressed due to injuries and other factors. He surely didn’t develop as Steph Curry or James Harden did.

Not only did they not build around Boogie, also factor in numerous coaching/front office changes and the relocation/ownership saga and you’re not likely to find a more unstable and dysfunctional situation in the league during that time or since. As bad as Sarver has been in PHX, that situation has still been better than what happened in SAC for many years.

But most importantly, the young talent PHX currently has is well above anything the KINGS assembled around Cousins. As bad as the KINGS were, Cuz still was able to help squeeze out 28-33 wins in a loaded Western Conference.

Meanwhile Booker and all that young talent averages about 6-10 wins less than that since he’s been there and might not crack 20 this season despite adding the top overall pick and Kelly Oubre into the mix.

When did Cousins ever get paired with a #1 overall pick, let alone one that looks as talented as Ayton?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Just meant he had been big part of a winning team before all the losing years in SAC. Nothing ‘disingenuous’ about that.

Martin was a role player and not a top guy on the winning teams he was part of after his time with the KINGS...

I don't know why you moved the goalposts from being "part of a winner" when talking about Rock Richmond, to being a "top guy" when talking about Martin, but okay. Martin was the third-leading scorer on a team with Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant; I'm not sure how big a role you think he needed to have?

I suppose you are spot on about Tyreke and New Orleans, and I just gave more credit to AD as why they were a winner

I continue to stand by the opinion that Anthony Davis is the most overrated superstar to play in my lifetime.

Regardless, we still are very familiar with empty stats from players that didn’t at all translate to winning for various reasons.

Man, I guess. I don't necessarily believe that all stats that don't result in wins are "empty," per se; I think that there is a lot of excluded middle there. I will stipulate that Evans' ROY campaign was contrived as hell, but even then I would question how "empty" stats were. To me, empty stats are when you're going for yours in, like, blowout losses. The whole time Evans played for Sacramento, he only had nine total games where he broke 30, and only one of those came in a game where the Kings lost by double-digits. In fact, a double-digit Kings loss is far more likely to be tied to a game where he didn't play well. You could make the "empty stats" argument for Cousins, and I wouldn't fight you too hard, but I still think that the kid got a bad rap.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I don't know why you moved the goalposts from being "part of a winner" when talking about Rock Richmond, to being a "top guy" when talking about Martin, but okay. Martin was the third-leading scorer on a team with Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant; I'm not sure how big a role you think he needed to have?.

I’m moving the goalposts. Just further explaining clarifying my thinking/opinion for you, as I clearly didn’t do the first time around.

The only reason I mentioned Richmond’s time in the Bay was because I was anticipating someone bringing it up once I dropped his name among the list of KINGS that compiled impressive offensive stats w/o winning.

Furthermore all of these cats were the #1 option on the KINGS so I didn’t believe it to be comparable when they were the #2 or #3 option later in their career. They had different roles. We don’t know if they could have been winners as a #1 option with better talent surrounding them. Except perhaps Mitch, who was more of a 1a or 1b in Golden State.

Alas, none of this debate changes my view on Booker — right or wrong.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I continue to stand by the opinion that Anthony Davis is the most overrated superstar to play in my lifetime.

I can see how you’d feel that way. I’m not a big AD guy myself. I mean, I think he’s really, really good but a bit overrated too. I believe he’s had better talent around him than Cousins ever had in SAC but has largel underachieved. Though I will say that I think NO had a chance to make a nice run last year had Cousins not torn his Achilles. But we’ll never know now.

AD lost me the postseason when he allowed Draymond Green to defend him 101 and kept settling for shots outside the paint. I realize Draymond is a great defender, but AD is a lot taller and longer and should have been able to make them pay for that matchup but he couldn’t or wouldn’t do it. It made me feel that he’s a bit soft and lacking an alpha dog, mamba mentality that a true elite #1 typically has.

So, in a way, we seem to agree on this.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Man, I guess. I don't necessarily believe that all stats that don't result in wins are "empty," per se; I think that there is a lot of excluded middle there. I will stipulate that Evans' ROY campaign was contrived as hell, but even then I would question how "empty" stats were. To me, empty stats are when you're going for yours in, like, blowout losses. The whole time Evans played for Sacramento, he only had nine total games where he broke 30, and only one of those came in a game where the Kings lost by double-digits. In fact, a double-digit Kings loss is far more likely to be tied to a game where he didn't play well. You could make the "empty stats" argument for Cousins, and I wouldn't fight you too hard, but I still think that the kid got a bad rap.

Point taken.

And I fully agree about Cousins.

 

[kingsboi]

I actually agree with this. I've seen Booker play, he's a good player but he is not a good team player. I see him arguing with his teammates a lot. Ayton in particular.

It's hard to advocate for trading away a potential franchise cornerstone like Devin, they don't come around a lot. But there's something off about him that makes me think of him as a 1B instead of 1A.

finding a player like Booker, who is a high usage, no defense playing shooting guard is not that rare to find. He is a good third option to have but nothing more than that, in my opinion.

 

[steelevt]

Not at all. Did the KINGS win with Boogie? No. So that’s the same. But the reasons are drastically different. The Suns have actually accumulated some nice young talent around Booker. Yet they still aren’t winning.

Meanwhile the KINGS never hit on any draft picks for numerous years after Cousins was acquired and Tyreke Evans regressed due to injuries and other factors. He surely didn’t develop as Steph Curry or James Harden did.

Not only did they not build around Boogie, also factor in numerous coaching/front office changes and the relocation/ownership saga and you’re not likely to find a more unstable and dysfunctional situation in the league during that time or since. As bad as Sarver has been in PHX, that situation has still been better than what happened in SAC for many years.

But most importantly, the young talent PHX currently has is well above anything the KINGS assembled around Cousins. As bad as the KINGS were, Cuz still was able to help squeeze out 28-33 wins in a loaded Western Conference.

Meanwhile Booker and all that young talent averages about 6-10 wins less than that since he’s been there and might not crack 20 this season despite adding the top overall pick and Kelly Oubre into the mix.

When did Cousins ever get paired with a #1 overall pick, let alone one that looks as talented as Ayton?

You act like the suns drafted superstars around booker and yet they failed while cuz only got scrubs and won. Suns drafted bender, chriss, Josh Jackson and ayton. Cousins was drafted with hassan Whiteside, then we got IT, jimmer, Thomas Robinson, mclemore, stauskas, wcs. Did we get busts, yeah, did we get good players. Yeah. The similarities aren't as far off as you are implying tho. Hell we were high in Ben and Robinson. Will ayton be better? Probably but it's only been 1 season. Both teams had dysfunction, both teams under achieved under all star caliber players who argued with teammates. And it's hard to argue trading these cornerstone players away from their teams at certain points in their careers as the op pointed out.
And all that's beside the point. Read the original posters post then read mine. You are making an argument out of something that isn't there.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

... Furthermore all of these cats were the #1 option on the KINGS so I didn’t believe it to be comparable when they were the #2 or #3 option later in their career. They had different roles. We don’t know if they could have been winners as a #1 option with better talent surrounding them. Except perhaps Mitch, who was more of a 1a or 1b in Golden State...

I feel like you're splitting hairs here, and I also don't think that your memories of Run TMC are necessarily backed up by the data. Richmond was never a 1a or a 1b in Oakland, any more than Klay Thompson is; he was always the clear #2 behind Mullin. If anything, I'd say that Thompson is a perfect comparison for Richmond: nobody's lead-dog, but an All-Time sidekick.

AD lost me the postseason when he allowed Draymond Green to defend him 101 and kept settling for shots outside the paint. I realize Draymond is a great defender, but AD is a lot taller and longer and should have been able to make them pay for that matchup but he couldn’t or wouldn’t do it. It made me feel that he’s a bit soft and lacking an alpha dog, mamba mentality that a true elite #1 typically has.

So, in a way, we seem to agree on this.

I'll put it this way: there's been no other superstar in my lifetime that's been praised as highly as Anthony Davis, who's as mediocre-to-bad at creating his own shot as he is. And the fact that he can be pushed around by a smaller but tougher defender, in a way that hasn't been seen since pre-MVP Nowitzki... it vexes me.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You act like the suns drafted superstars around booker and yet they failed while cuz only got scrubs and won. Suns drafted bender, chriss, Josh Jackson and ayton. Cousins was drafted with hassan Whiteside, then we got IT, jimmer, Thomas Robinson, mclemore, stauskas, wcs. Did we get busts, yeah, did we get good players. Yeah. The similarities aren't as far off as you are implying tho. Hell we were high in Ben and Robinson. Will ayton be better? Probably but it's only been 1 season. Both teams had dysfunction, both teams under achieved under all star caliber players who argued with teammates. And it's hard to argue trading these cornerstone players away from their teams at certain points in their careers as the op pointed out.
And all that's beside the point. Read the original posters post then read mine. You are making an argument out of something that isn't there.

The biggest difference between Booker and Cousins to me is that, while neither of them proved successful at elevating lesser teammates, I always felt like Cousins wanted it. I felt like he wanted it so bad, that it tore him up inside, and he took it out on everybody around him. Maybe I just don't watch enough Suns games, but I never saw Booker play and thought, "That looks like a guy who hates to lose. That looks like a guy who hates that he's not making his teammates better."

 

[KingsFanSince85]

You are making an argument out of something that isn't there.

I clearly quoted the part of your post I disagreed with and cited reasons why. How’s exactly that making an argument out of something that isn’t there? What’s the argument then?

You wrote it. I disagree with it. It’s not the same situation.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

The biggest difference between Booker and Cousins to me is that, while neither of them proved successful at elevating lesser teammates, I always felt like Cousins wanted it. I felt like he wanted it so bad, that it tore him up inside, and he took it out on everybody around him.

Agreed.

And I’ll keep pointing out that the KINGS typically won between 24-33 games per year with Boogie as their best player whereas PHX is between 17-24 with Booker leading the charge. Neither were playoff teams, of course, but that’s still a notable difference in wins per season, which shouldn’t be glossed over.

Both weren’t good enough to lift mediocre to bad teams to the postseason, but one player was and still is clearly more impactful than the other.

 

[Tetsujin]

Mitchell Robinson continues to impress. Knicks not in as bad a spot as people said they were when the Zinger trade happened.

They just need to not do anything dumb during the offseason. (Watch them wind up throwing max contracts at Kemba and Boogie)

 

[steelevt]

I clearly quoted the part of your post I disagreed with and cited reasons why. How’s exactly that making an argument out of something that isn’t there? What’s the argument then?

You wrote it. I disagree with it. It’s not the same situation.

I actually agree with this. I've seen Boogie play, he's a good player but he is not a good team player. I see him arguing with his teammates a lot.

It's hard to advocate for trading away a potential franchise cornerstone like Boogie, they don't come around a lot. But there's something off about him that makes me think of him as a 1B instead of 1A.

I put boogie in where booker was. And it sure as hell looks similar.

Boogie is a good/great player. He was a bad teammate. It was hard to advocate trading a franchise cornerstone like him cuz players with his talent are rare. But we were in that situation and we pulled the trigger. We never won anything significant with him as our best player so it makes you think he is a 1b as opposed to a 1a.
You brought up who has better teammate. You brought up franchise dysfunction. You brought up the suns surrounding booker with supposedly better players than the kings did with boogie, which I don't agree with but again that wasn't at all mentioned in my post.

Again you picked out one sentence in the post and made up an argument out of nothing because putting boogie in when the op put booker there are definite similarities. Unless you believe boogie isn't a good talent. You believe he's a good teammate. You never see him arguing with teammates. It's easy advocate trading a player like him. Or you believe he can be a 1a on a winning team.

 

[mac]

I actually agree with this. I've seen Boogie play, he's a good player but he is not a good team player. I see him arguing with his teammates a lot.

It's hard to advocate for trading away a potential franchise cornerstone like Boogie, they don't come around a lot. But there's something off about him that makes me think of him as a 1B instead of 1A.

I put boogie in where booker was. And it sure as hell looks similar.

Boogie is a good/great player. He was a bad teammate. It was hard to advocate trading a franchise cornerstone like him cuz players with his talent are rare. But we were in that situation and we pulled the trigger. We never won anything significant with him as our best player so it makes you think he is a 1b as opposed to a 1a.
You brought up who has better teammate. You brought up franchise dysfunction. You brought up the suns surrounding booker with supposedly better players than the kings did with boogie, which I don't agree with but again that wasn't at all mentioned in my post.

Again you picked out one sentence in the post and made up an argument out of nothing because putting boogie in when the op put booker there are definite similarities. Unless you believe boogie isn't a good talent. You believe he's a good teammate. You never see him arguing with teammates. It's easy advocate trading a player like him. Or you believe he can be a 1a on a winning team.

I mean .. you do know who you're talking to right?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

... Boogie is a good/great player. He was a bad teammate. It was hard to advocate trading a franchise cornerstone like him cuz players with his talent are rare. But we were in that situation and we pulled the trigger. We never won anything significant with him as our best player so it makes you think he is a 1b as opposed to a 1a.
You brought up who has better teammate. You brought up franchise dysfunction. You brought up the suns surrounding booker with supposedly better players than the kings did with boogie, which I don't agree with but again that wasn't at all mentioned in my post.

Again you picked out one sentence in the post and made up an argument out of nothing because putting boogie in when the op put booker there are definite similarities. Unless you believe boogie isn't a good talent. You believe he's a good teammate. You never see him arguing with teammates. It's easy advocate trading a player like him. Or you believe he can be a 1a on a winning team.

Having seen Cousins on Team USA, and in New Orleans, and in Oakland, I'm positive that he's a good teammate. I think that his temperament means that he's just about the worst possible guy to have on a bad team, though. Cousins is, like, the best example of, just because you're the best player, doesn't mean you're the leader. I'm not bothered by Cousins' antics, the way some of his critics are (to the contrary, I'm here for the antics), but I will certainly stipulate that he's not a leader.

I still think that a winning team (and, by winning, I simply mean perennially above .500; I'm not actually sure whether or not you could build a championship contender around him) could be built with him as the best player, but you'd have to be much smarter at surrounding him with complementary pieces than the Kings ever attempted. Or the Pelicans, for that matter. What's funny to me is, you know who's the guy in the league who would be the perfect #2 to Cousins, if you were trying to build a winning team around him? Draymond Green. The only thing about having Cousins and Green on their own team is that, if it didn't work, and they found themselves, like, ten games below .500 after the All-Star Break, there's about a forty-five percent chance that they'd break out into a fistfight, in the middle of a game.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Damn, Thaddeus, how do you miss that?!

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Karl-Anthony Towns was 2-12 before Cousins fouled out, 3-5 afterwards. #SAWFT

 

[VF21]

https://twitter.com/statuses/1112095518128168960

 

[VF21]

https://twitter.com/statuses/1112084070379520002

 

[kingsboi]

how long before Adam Silver puts his foot down on these teams sitting star players out for non-injury purposes or supposed " " injuries?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I dunno... I feel like, if you're going to accuse somebody of goldbricking, you need to be prepared to prove that ****. Mad athletes have ruined their own careers trying to play through injuries, when they shouldn't have.

 

[kingsboi]

and at the same time, you have had athletes sit out games because they don't want to play on back to backs or want to rest for the playoffs while the fans who pay money get stiffed to go watch them play

 

[kingsboi]

depending how the Hawks fare in this years lottery and NBA draft selections, they gonna be a up and comer next season for sure. so long as Trae and Collins continue to improve in an upward trajectory.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

That was a reputation call. Flagrant-1, sure. Ejection? Horse****.