Offseason Kings Thoughts, What's Next?

[Chubbs]

First major post, sorry if I rehash what has been said. It's inevitable. I'm a little negative, but realistic. And by no means an expert. Correct me where I'm factually wrong please.

I see those remaining positive after this offseason still are waiting for all those other moves. How or what? Reality check. We have few legit assets. Except cousins. Our next most wanted player is mclemore. They'll be burdened with landrys contract the next 4 years. No one will take that on. Same with JT. Salmons we just decided to ride it out one more season. Outlaw, one more season of him too after this. Also untradeable. Same with Hayes.


Then you have jimmer and IT, two undersized sgs masquerading as below avg PGs, neither of whom can dream of guarding a legit 2 guard. Jimmer is overpaid, IT underpaid (for their current value). Makes them hard to trade. And you have mcallum, already more of a PG than either of them, but no room on the roster. Which is ok right now, d-league for a season makes sense. Which means they won't do that.


Thornton? Has value, but like Landry (who,is basically the same guy as thornton, minus the clutch shots and 3 point shooting), is overpaid for what he does. But he's prob the most likely trade candidate. Of course, give him up, you're facing a real unknown if Ben gets thrown to the fire as the starter. Is he ready? No one knows. What I saw in summer was a streaky player, who more often streaked in the bad way. He has legit talent but is soft mentally right now. And is a zero as a ball handler.


Patterson? Still on rookie contract like cousins. Meaning, trading him now makes little sense.

As for the "big" offseason signing?


Landrys black hole status is well established. 0.8 assists per game for his career. 0.5 blocks. He's a very efficient scorer with great shooting numbers (53% for his career). He's not a bad player. Just happens to be the polar opposite of what we needed (shot blocker, rebounder, defender). He's been a very nice role player on good teams. Of course with us, he was a starter on a bad team. Which he may do again. He's a role player. The problem is Thornton already fills that role. Not the worst signing in the nba this offseason, but it's close. Really bad start to PDA's reign in sac. Could any move have made LESS sense?


Can the team still improve? Of course. Has the FO done anything to improve the team? Nope. Well, except the coach. To me, he's musselman 2.0 until he proves otherwise. I hope it's not like that, but their backgrounds are painfully similar.

Is Vazquez a better pg than we've had? For sure. Did he avg 9.0 assists for a team no better than the kings? Yep. Did those numbers equal wins? Nope. Will they here? Doubtful, especially if he's fighting for time with 3 other pgs. New Orleans the team had 21.0 apg. Kings had 20.8. Tells me two things. Vazquez wasn't leading a vastly superior offense to what we already had. But he sure had the ball a lot. Or all the time. Good luck with that style here.


How do we get better given the lack of help from the FO? Cousins makes the leap. 22 and 12. Something like that. Makes the all star team, etc. can the team improve on d despite lowering the talent level (tyreke was a HUGE loss on the d side). Maybe. A lot is effort, and the system. There are some terrible individual defenders on the spurs, but as a team, they get it done (that of course is cause they have one of the best ever in Duncan). Can cousins improve to a semi Duncan defensive level? Seems really unlikely, but he can be better. Can cousins turn into a shot blocking force? Very unlikely. That huge hole still exists.


Did we address either glaring need at sf or a shot blocker? No, we didn't. Is mbah a moute a shut down defender? Perhaps. So they got one half of a great sf. Do they need the other half? Not always. If he can really guard a variety of positions, he may be the one piece we acquired this offseason that really fits.

What moves are even possible? Are trades even a possibility at this point?

rookie coach, rookie gm, rookie owner. What could go wrong?

Chubbs

 

[hrdboild]

Thanks for your thoughts Chubbs! Many of them won't be popular, but for my part I agree with everything you had to say. And you're entitled to your opinion same as everyone else. A lot of hopes are pinned on Cousins developing into an All-Star, Malone substantially raising the level of team defense, and McLemore developing into a consistent scoring threat. If any one of those things happens this season, we should consider ourselves lucky. It's a tall order. On the other hand, while we don't have a lot of assets right now, we also don't have a huge amount of overhead either. Thornton, Hayes, Outlaw, and Mbah a Moute will be expiring contracts after this season. Vasquez, Patterson and Thomas are expiring contracts this season. And Salmons and Jimmer have team options for next season. So conceivably if everything goes wrong, 3/4ths of the roster is shipped out in short order. This seems to be the direction the front office wants to go. We're writing this season off as a loss already and that makes me sick to think the last 7 seasons of development basically have resulted in us clearing house and starting over again. But there's nothing we can do about it.

My chief concerns at this point are that the inevitable Cousins max-extension and the substantially higher mandated minimum salary floor are going to significantly impede our ability to rebuild the roster going forward and we have 4 years now locked into redundant pieces in Landry and Thompson, both of whom are serviceable players, but at least one of them is going to become sunk cost as soon as this season. I wanted us to try and lock in our chief starters before the Cousins extension and ship Thompson out in the process for either a lower salary bench player or a higher salary starter, and for a fleeting moment it looked like that might be possible, but instead we've gone the complete opposite direction. It's not a promising start in my opinion, but I've been wrong before. Hopefully this is just step one and we'll see significant progress made soon (how long have we been saying that now? sigh).

 

[Padrino]

excellent "first major post." i think you've done a great job of distilling this offseason's difficulties and controversies into a single train of thought. i share your skepticism and your criticisms, though we all must hope for the best, i suppose. nothin' left to do but "wait and see"...

 

[Gary]

First major post, sorry if I rehash what has been said. It's inevitable. I'm a little negative, but realistic. And by no means an expert. Correct me where I'm factually wrong please.

Then you have jimmer and IT, two undersized sgs masquerading as below avg PGs, neither of whom can dream of guarding a legit 2 guard. Jimmer is overpaid, IT underpaid (for their current value). Makes them hard to trade. And you have mcallum, already more of a PG than either of them, but no room on the roster. Which is ok right now, d-league for a season makes sense. Which means they won't do that.


Thornton? Has value, but like Landry (who,is basically the same guy as thornton, minus the clutch shots and 3 point shooting), is overpaid for what he does. But he's prob the most likely trade candidate. Of course, give him up, you're facing a real unknown if Ben gets thrown to the fire as the starter. Is he ready? No one knows. What I saw in summer was a streaky player, who more often streaked in the bad way. He has legit talent but is soft mentally right now. And is a zero as a ball handler.


Patterson? Still on rookie contract like cousins. Meaning, trading him now makes little sense.

As for the "big" offseason signing?


Landrys black hole status is well established. 0.8 assists per game for his career. 0.5 blocks. He's a very efficient scorer with great shooting numbers (53% for his career). He's not a bad player. Just happens to be the polar opposite of what we needed (shot blocker, rebounder, defender). He's been a very nice role player on good teams. Of course with us, he was a starter on a bad team. Which he may do again. He's a role player. The problem is Thornton already fills that role. Not the worst signing in the nba this offseason, but it's close. Really bad start to PDA's reign in sac. Could any move have made LESS sense?


Can the team still improve? Of course. Has the FO done anything to improve the team? Nope. Well, except the coach. To me, he's musselman 2.0 until he proves otherwise. I hope it's not like that, but their backgrounds are painfully similar.

Is Vazquez a better pg than we've had? For sure. Did he avg 9.0 assists for a team no better than the kings? Yep. Did those numbers equal wins? Nope. Will they here? Doubtful, especially if he's fighting for time with 3 other pgs. New Orleans the team had 21.0 apg. Kings had 20.8. Tells me two things. Vazquez wasn't leading a vastly superior offense to what we already had. But he sure had the ball a lot. Or all the time. Good luck with that style here.


Chubbs

Bold#1 - IT is not a below average PG. He does fine in a PG role, but if we are to play a zone defensively it would cause problems for IT. IT might be one of the best bench PGs this year.

Bold#2 - McCallum is NOT a better PG than IT at this moment in time. Can he be? I am not sure. Time will tell.

Bold#3 - Why would we want to trade away a 20ppg scorer (who can score with some of the best in the league at SG) when we don't know what we have in McLemore?

Bold#4 - Landry won't start. PF is JT's at this point. Landry is not the player I wanted but he can provide low post scoring off the bench, which the bench team needs.

Bold#5 - Vasquez is the starter. There will be no fighting with other players. IT will be the backup, and Jimmer will be the 12th man so he's not going to get time. McCallum at this point will be dressing in regular clothes unless there is an injury. Vasquez will not average 9apg here. He might get as high as 7.5-7.9 here but we should see other players stats going way up because we have a PG now that can get them the ball.

 

[Chubbs]

Thanks for your thoughts Chubbs! Many of them won't be popular, but for my part I agree with everything you had to say. And you're entitled to your opinion same as everyone else. A lot of hopes are pinned on Cousins developing into an All-Star, Malone substantially raising the level of team defense, and McLemore developing into a consistent scoring threat. If any one of those things happens this season, we should consider ourselves lucky. It's a tall order. On the other hand, while we don't have a lot of assets right now, we also don't have a huge amount of overhead either. Thornton, Hayes, Outlaw, and Mbah a Moute will be expiring contracts after this season. Vasquez, Patterson and Thomas are expiring contracts this season. And Salmons and Jimmer have team options for next season. So conceivably if everything goes wrong, 3/4ths of the roster is shipped out in short order. This seems to be the direction the front office wants to go. We're writing this season off as a loss already and that makes me sick to think the last 7 seasons of development basically have resulted in us clearing house and starting over again. But there's nothing we can do about it.

My chief concerns at this point are that the inevitable Cousins max-extension and the substantially higher mandated minimum salary floor are going to significantly impede our ability to rebuild the roster going forward and we have 4 years now locked into redundant pieces in Landry and Thompson, both of whom are serviceable players, but at least one of them is going to become sunk cost as soon as this season. I wanted us to try and lock in our chief starters before the Cousins extension and ship Thompson out in the process for either a lower salary bench player or a higher salary starter, and for a fleeting moment it looked like that might be possible, but instead we've gone the complete opposite direction. It's not a promising start in my opinion, but I've been wrong before. Hopefully this is just step one and we'll see significant progress made soon (how long have we been saying that now? sigh).

I thought Hayes and outlaw both have another year. Could be wrong, I hope I'm wrong!

 

[Chubbs]

excellent "first major post." i think you've done a great job of distilling this offseason's difficulties and controversies into a single train of thought. i share your skepticism and your criticisms, though we all must hope for the best, i suppose. nothin' left to do but "wait and see"...

I'm hoping it all works out. I just curious what people are hoping will happen in the way of trades or moves. It seems like that door slammed shut.

Even if cousins "leaps" I'm having a hard time seeing more than 32-35 wins. Worst case, cousins gets hurt, and we are in the low 20 wins. Or is that the best case considering the talent coming out?

 

[Gary]

I'm hoping it all works out. I just curious what people are hoping will happen in the way of trades or moves. It seems like that door slammed shut.

Even if cousins "leaps" I'm having a hard time seeing more than 32-35 wins. Worst case, cousins gets hurt, and we are in the low 20 wins. Or is that the best case considering the talent coming out?

Trades or moves? Not sure.. I assume that depending on how well McCallum does in practice and in training camp will dictate whether or not IT is on the market. I will not say 20 wins is the best case scenario. In this situation I am a glass half full. The draft is never a sure thing, and I wouldn't want to tank for a chance at getting someone decent.

I think your win total is about right though. 32-35 wins. Possibly more wins if Cousins does better than expected with a PG that can actually get him the ball consistently.

 

[The Hammer]

Trades or moves? Not sure.. I assume that depending on how well McCallum does in practice and in training camp will dictate whether or not IT is on the market. I will not say 20 wins is the best case scenario. In this situation I am a glass half full. The draft is never a sure thing, and I wouldn't want to tank for a chance at getting someone decent.

I think your win total is about right though. 32-35 wins. Possibly more wins if Cousins does better than expected with a PG that can actually get him the ball consistently.

I think this is one of the biggest positives to come out of the recent changes. How many times was Cuz either on the bench, or left out to dry in the low post? A ridiculous amount. Just with a system centered around him, let alone a competent facilitator at PG, and I think he gets to 20-10 EASY. My personal ceiling for Cuz this year is 25/12, and frankly I don't see much in the way to prevent him from getting that. IF that happens, we are, imo, a 35 win team. If that happens in combination with say, improving from dead last in defense to say, 20th? 18th? that's another 5 wins right there.

I seem to be more hopeful than most lately. I can easily see this team winning 40 games.

 

[Chubbs]

Bold#1 - IT is not a below average PG. He does fine in a PG role, but if we are to play a zone defensively it would cause problems for IT. IT might be one of the best bench PGs this year.

Bold#2 - McCallum is NOT a better PG than IT at this moment in time. Can he be? I am not sure. Time will tell.

Bold#3 - Why would we want to trade away a 20ppg scorer (who can score with some of the best in the league at SG) when we don't know what we have in McLemore?

Bold#4 - Landry won't start. PF is JT's at this point. Landry is not the player I wanted but he can provide low post scoring off the bench, which the bench team needs.

Bold#5 - Vasquez is the starter. There will be no fighting with other players. IT will be the backup, and Jimmer will be the 12th man so he's not going to get time. McCallum at this point will be dressing in regular clothes unless there is an injury. Vasquez will not average 9apg here. He might get as high as 7.5-7.9 here but we should see other players stats going way up because we have a PG now that can get them the ball.

That's my point, IT is a bench PG/sg. And he's fine in that role. That still makes him a below avg starting pg. but trade value? Not much there. All I meant about mcallum was that he's shown more true PG skills than IT. You know, like passing and stuff.

As for Thornton, I'm not saying they SHOULD want to trade him, just that there's not a lot of other valuable assets. Calling him a 20ppg is a bit of a stretch considering he's never reached that, and avg 12.7 last year. Was that all Smarts refusal to play one of his most productive players big mins? Maybe it was. I don't think we SHOULD trade him, cause of M16's unknown status right now, just that among the current roster, he's one of the only guys we COULD trade and expect anything of value back.

I hope you're right Landry doesn't start. I just don't see why he's needed. Scoring wasn't their problem last year.

I hope you're right that Vazquez is the day 1 starter.

 

[Bricklayer]

I think this is one of the biggest positives to come out of the recent changes. How many times was Cuz either on the bench, or left out to dry in the low post? A ridiculous amount. Just with a system centered around him, let alone a competent facilitator at PG, and I think he gets to 20-10 EASY. My personal ceiling for Cuz this year is 25/12, and frankly I don't see much in the way to prevent him from getting that. IF that happens, we are, imo, a 35 win team. If that happens in combination with say, improving from dead last in defense to say, 20th? 18th? that's another 5 wins right there.

I seem to be more hopeful than most lately. I can easily see this team winning 40 games.

If Cousins blows up to 25-12 and Top 10 player in the league status you would not be wrong. Mighty big jump though.

 

[Chubbs]

I think this is one of the biggest positives to come out of the recent changes. How many times was Cuz either on the bench, or left out to dry in the low post? A ridiculous amount. Just with a system centered around him, let alone a competent facilitator at PG, and I think he gets to 20-10 EASY. My personal ceiling for Cuz this year is 25/12, and frankly I don't see much in the way to prevent him from getting that. IF that happens, we are, imo, a 35 win team. If that happens in combination with say, improving from dead last in defense to say, 20th? 18th? that's another 5 wins right there.

I seem to be more hopeful than most lately. I can easily see this team winning 40 games.

Im with you, I can see that scenario as well. I think most likely is the low 30 range, no playoffs, kinda no mans land for the draft. I'd rather have seen them leave Landry alone, and just play Patterson a lot and see what happens. Maybe it costs a few wins, but if they play hard, I'd rather have that than a couple extra wins when extra ping pong balls might be better.

 

[Gary]

That's my point, IT is a bench PG/sg. And he's fine in that role. That still makes him a below avg starting pg. but trade value? Not much there. All I meant about mcallum was that he's shown more true PG skills than IT. You know, like passing and stuff.

As for Thornton, I'm not saying they SHOULD want to trade him, just that there's not a lot of other valuable assets. Calling him a 20ppg is a bit of a stretch considering he's never reached that, and avg 12.7 last year. Was that all Smarts refusal to play one of his most productive players big mins? Maybe it was. I don't think we SHOULD trade him, cause of M16's unknown status right now, just that among the current roster, he's one of the only guys we COULD trade and expect anything of value back.

I hope you're right Landry doesn't start. I just don't see why he's needed. Scoring wasn't their problem last year.

I hope you're right that Vazquez is the day 1 starter.

He did with that half year he was with us (I believe it was about a half year?). He's more than capable of putting it up again which was basically my point.

While Landry wasn't my first choice either, I still think we will benefit from his post game in the backup role. But yah, I would have rather had a shot blocking defensive big.

As for IT, I think he's an average starting PG. That's where our opinions differ. Also, I believe he does see the floor better than McCallum does, but that's my opinion as well having not seen much game footage of McCallum.

 

[hrdboild]

I thought Hayes and outlaw both have another year. Could be wrong, I hope I'm wrong!

I think I just didn't express myself very well. Thornton, Hayes, Outlaw, and Mbah a Moute all have two years remaining on their contracts presently. That means that 1 year from now they will all have 1 year expiring contracts remaining which means at worst they're here for 2 more seasons if we can't move them as expiring deals next off-season. Of course we don't have to trade all of them. I hope we keep Mbah a Moute at least, but the front office have set themselves up for a lot of roster flexibility next year with only 2 long term deals presently (Landry, Thompson) plus the expected Cousins deal and the rookies. Everyone else (Salmons, Thomas, Jimmer, Patterson, Vasquez) is currently playing out their last season under contract or has a team option for next season which we could opt to decline. That's the good news. The bad news is that big name free agents generally aren't clamoring to come to Sacramento and we have to spend all that cap space somehow (on deals like the Landry deal, typically). There's plenty of reason to be pessimistic or optimistic about the future right now. I'm unhappy with the way this off-season went, and really the entire terrible situation we've been in for nearly a decade, but if I were to erase all of that memory and start fresh from this point, we're not in a bad situation going forward. If Cousins takes a big step this year and Malone lives up to his reputation than you could even say we have a bright future. But we're in limbo right now, so it's too early to really say anything.

He did with that half year he was with us (I believe it was about a half year?). He's more than capable of putting it up again which was basically my point.

Well, it was 27 games so about 1/3 of the season and the last 10-12 games a year are usually pretty suspect statistically. All sorts of wonky roster shuffling going on at that time between teams resting for the playoffs and other teams tanking for the lotto. Averaging nearly 19 a game the season after that is more telling I think, but then we were also a terrible team that year and from my perspective, his play was one of the big reasons why. He's probably a 20ppg scorer on a bad team the same way Kevin Martin was -- if those guys are your leading scorers than you're in trouble. But 14-17ppg of scoring and streaky but pretty solid 3pt shooting isn't terrible. He's a role player, but a pretty consistent one. I'd think he'd be movable as an expiring deal at least, maybe at the deadline this year even.

 

[Spike]

If the FO wants to impress me this offseason, they'll need to be on the winning side of a trade, preferably a 2 for 1 that fills a need. Something like IT+ Hayes for a starting, or potentially starting, SF. That's where the 4 steps ahead comes in. Take a gamble on a young kid, instead of adding duplicative pieces.

Aside from that, I'm pretty resigned to believe that nothing major will happen this offseason. Maybe a mid-year trade of Thornton. I'd hate to get rid of Thompson. He's a legit backup at two positions, a solid roleplayer, and all-around good guy. Versatile players are a commodity in my book.

 

[Chubbs]

Well, it was 27 games so about 1/3 of the season and the last 10-12 games a year are usually pretty suspect statistically. All sorts of wonky roster shuffling going on at that time between teams resting for the playoffs and other teams tanking for the lotto. Averaging nearly 19 a game the season after that is more telling I think, but then we were also a terrible team that year and from my perspective, his play was one of the big reasons why. He's probably a 20ppg scorer on a bad team the same way Kevin Martin was -- if those guys are your leading scorers than you're in trouble. But 14-17ppg of scoring and streaky but pretty solid 3pt shooting isn't terrible. He's a role player, but a pretty consistent one. I'd think he'd be movable as an expiring deal at least, maybe at the deadline this year even.

Yeah, Thornton is a nice bench player who is likely to start. Or, you have the nightmare of watching Landry, IT, and Thornton battle for shots off the bench if they go with Ben. Thornton may reach that 20 ppg, but the team will still be terrible. That's the problem with him, he doesn't make anyone else better. He can make buckets for sure.

 

[VF21]

If the FO wants to impress me this offseason, they'll need to be on the winning side of a trade, preferably a 2 for 1 that fills a need. Something like IT+ Hayes for a starting, or potentially starting, SF. That's where the 4 steps ahead comes in. Take a gamble on a young kid, instead of adding duplicative pieces.

Aside from that, I'm pretty resigned to believe that nothing major will happen this offseason. Maybe a mid-year trade of Thornton. I'd hate to get rid of Thompson. He's a legit backup at two positions, a solid roleplayer, and all-around good guy. Versatile players are a commodity in my book.

People keep saying this, but I just don't see teams jumping besides themselves with glee to trade a starting SF for IT and Hayes.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I think that the OP's assessment is notable for its lack of mention of Mbah a Moute whom, my criticism of him in previous threads aside, I do agree is a good (as in a definite upgrade, just not a difference maker on an otherwise poor defensive team) defender. The comparison in team assists between us and New Orleans last year was an eye-opener, and makes me wonder if Vasquez has any "Rondo" in him.

 

[Chubbs]

I think that the OP's assessment is notable for its lack of mention of Mbah a Moute whom, my criticism of him in previous threads aside, I do agree is a good (as in a definite upgrade, just not a difference maker on an otherwise poor defensive team) defender. The comparison in team assists between us and New Orleans last year was an eye-opener, and makes me wonder if Vasquez has any "Rondo" in him.

I said mbah a moute was the one piece we got that fits I think.

 

[Spike]

People keep saying this, but I just don't see teams jumping besides themselves with glee to trade a starting SF for IT and Hayes.

I recognize that, but I'm sure somewhere on someone's bench is that young kid who just needs a shot. That's what I would like. It doesn't have to be a big name, but an attempt to fill a need, even if it is a gamble. I think IT's value is at a high right now, and can net us that piece. That's where PDA can start to show his savvy.

It also doesn't have to be IT + Hayes, but a 2 for 1 move to clear out excess would be fantastic.

 

[VF21]

I recognize that, but I'm sure somewhere on someone's bench is that young kid who just needs a shot. That's what I would like. It doesn't have to be a big name, but an attempt to fill a need, even if it is a gamble. I think IT's value is at a high right now, and can net us that piece. That's where PDA can start to show his savvy.

It also doesn't have to be IT + Hayes, but a 2 for 1 move to clear out excess would be fantastic.

Thanks for clarifying. I'd like that, too.

 

[jcwkings]

The only thing i don't understand is how Thornton and Landry are basically the same players. One is a 6'4 SG off the ball scorer that you run off screens, the other is a low post scorer with a formidable midrange jumper. One guy you throw the ball to and let him go to work, the other you do anything but that. Its like saying Tyreke Evans and Ben McLemore are basically the same players.

 

[Chubbs]

The only thing i don't understand is how Thornton and Landry are basically the same players. One is a 6'4 SG off the ball scorer that you run off screens, the other is a low post scorer with a formidable midrange jumper. One guy you throw the ball to and let him go to work, the other you do anything but that. Its like saying Tyreke Evans and Ben McLemore are basically the same players.

They're both scorers that do little else. Thats all i meant. You are correct in that they take up different space on the court. But they're one dimensional. Neither makes people around them better.

 

[Kingsfan23]

How much is JT making over the next 4 years, like 6.2 a year? As far as I'm concerned that is not above a starting quality pf's market value.. that contract has to be the one moves of the previous regime that I have no problem with

 

[Spike]

Unfortunately, that may strengthen JT as a tradable asset. He is a great value for what he does, which makes the pickup of Landry all the more puzzling.

I'm curious to see how the rotation is going to work...

 

[Kingster]

You left out the biggest pink elephant in the room - Cousins and his mental state. That's the HUGE ???? for the season. All the talk so far is meangingless. We have to see it manifest in action. You talk about the mental state of McLemore. McLemore is a bit player in comparison to Cousins, and he doesn't have the Cousins history. I'll just tell you this - this season is going to be a WHOPPING success if Cousins reinvents himself into a disciplined mentally strong team oriented player. If half the team goes down with injury and they only win15 games during the regular season and Cousins did in fact reinvent himself, it's still a WHOPPING success. If, on the other hand, the new Cuz is in fact the old Cuz, then we're at ground zero. That means a 100% rebuild.

The IT-Jimmer comparison is simplistic, innacurate, and misleading. They are very different players. Also, IT as a SG analogue is ridiculous. I was re-watching the last game (Clippers) in which IT had 10 assists. He had three other passes that were absolute dimes that were blown at the rim by those "awesome" Kings finishers. If that's a SG, then please let's get more SGs like that.

Yes, they need some trades, but McLemore's raw state and Jimmer's inability last season to step up in Thornton's absence makes it much more difficult to trade Thornton. And when it comes to the pf and center position, you'd really have to trade several guys to make it all work. It's an unwieldly mess right now.

 

[The Hammer]

If Cousins blows up to 25-12 and Top 10 player in the league status you would not be wrong. Mighty big jump though.

I agree, Brick, it is a big jump. But you and I both saw how incredibly fast he learns. I think a lot of learning has gone on "under the surface" so to speak, and now that the organization is coming out and fully supporting him (max contract fingers crossed)... we all know it's a possibility, and if he's coached correctly, and it clicks for him, it's basically an inevitability. So the only question left is how long till he gets there. I'm very encouraged by the news we're getting about his offseason. His attitude does seem better (so is mine), and if the coach is what we hope... big jump and all... but yes, the possibility is there for it to happen this year, even if it's only in the second half.

I realize those are numerous conditions to be met... but someone tell me (and not a Cousins hater), how does this not happen? Talk me down, give me the other side of the debate.

 

[kingsnation]

People keep saying this, but I just don't see teams jumping besides themselves with glee to trade a starting SF for IT and Hayes.

I don't want a "starting SF," just one that's more capable than Salmons and Outlaw.

 

[kingsnation]

The only thing i don't understand is how Thornton and Landry are basically the same players. One is a 6'4 SG off the ball scorer that you run off screens, the other is a low post scorer with a formidable midrange jumper. One guy you throw the ball to and let him go to work, the other you do anything but that. Its like saying Tyreke Evans and Ben McLemore are basically the same players.

I would say because their primary and usually only contribution is scoring. They just have different ways of doing so. Aside from that though, they don't consistently provide much more.

 

[Gary]

People keep saying this, but I just don't see teams jumping besides themselves with glee to trade a starting SF for IT and Hayes.

There are SFs out there who I believe we could get our hands on while offering minimal talent in return. A couple of first round picks who are decent (i.e. Jordan Hamilton) but who are lost in the rotation or have players ahead that are better at this point.

 

[sdballer]

People keep saying this, but I just don't see teams jumping besides themselves with glee to trade a starting SF for IT and Hayes.

I don't disagree. The same applies to the type of big we need. It's why I'm perplexed when people give the front office a pass for compiling redundant pieces under the guise that more moves are coming. We don't have great assets so why add mid-level ones that tie up salary?