Only way to rebuild

[206Fan]

**** I feel the same way.....
However if LAL get the number 1 pick and offer us Russell/Simmons and DMC has demanded a trade u say **** it that's the best deal. We'd be look at 2 potential super stars at prime positions.
Simmons has the looks if a guy that can go 20-8-5 at PF and Russell looks like a 20-4-6 PG. Russell is already showing out. It would hurt like hell seeing Cousins win a ring there but can really propel our future

I have a feeling that if the Sixers win the lotto, they may select Ingram over Simmons, but I'd take that Lakers trade. Potential is almost equal, but Simmons has the clear lead, however, it'll be pretty hard to build around Simmons when the Sixers have a team of Okafor-Noel-Embiid.

Assume Lakers get the #2 pick.
The Kings get the #5 pick.

At #2, the Kings would draft Brandon Ingram.
At #5, the Kings could draft Henry Ellenson.

Go into FA with a team of:
Russell/Collison/Curry
McLemore/Belinelli/Anderson
Gay/Ingram/Casspi
Ellenson/Acy
WCS/Kofus

This would be an amazing young squad.. Russell/Ingram/Ellenson/WCS. It would honestly be the best team we've had in years just purely based on potential.

 

[Kingster]

The core needs to be traded, including Cousins. The coaching staff needs to go. Management needs to be restructured.

Why does Cousins have to go? First, if you get a new coach, he's going to have to be an adjunct of Cousins, not the other way around. What does everyone say on this board when trying to assess who the next coach should be? - How is the prospective coach going to get along with Cousins? That's exactly what ownership would be thinking if they kept Cousins and went for a new coach. That's exactly the wrong starting point in the thinking process for this organization. That is the beginning of the placating, coddling and pandering the next adjunct coach will be required to do if he coaches Cousins. It will continue to undermine any possibility of engendering a winning culture into this team and organization. Second, there are not enough assets to rebuild without trading Cousins, and therefore you'd be stuck in Mediocreville forever if you keep him (if he wants to stick around).

The big C has taken it out of Karl. If you blow it up and start anew you've got to hire a young coach who is an intelligent tough leader who can grow with the young team.

Management needs to be restructured. Vlade is a pr guy, a counselor, a coordinator, a charmer. It's only in Kings land that the charming mail room clerk is hired overnight to be the president of the company. The Vlade hire was pandering to the masses more than anything else. Bring in a guy with major chops as the GM - the guy who makes all the basketball decisions, without the meddling of Vlade or Vivek. Then rebuild a scouting staff to be second to none in the NBA, all of which takes a monetary commitment.

Do I expect the above to occur? HELL NO! THIS IS THE KINGS AFTER ALL!

 

[funkykingston]

I have a feeling that if the Sixers win the lotto, they may select Ingram over Simmons, but I'd take that Lakers trade. Potential is almost equal, but Simmons has the clear lead, however, it'll be pretty hard to build around Simmons when the Sixers have a team of Okafor-Noel-Embiid.

Assume Lakers get the #2 pick.
The Kings get the #5 pick.

At #2, the Kings would draft Brandon Ingram.
At #5, the Kings could draft Henry Ellenson.

Go into FA with a team of:
Russell/Collison/Curry
McLemore/Belinelli/Anderson
Gay/Ingram/Casspi
Ellenson/Acy
WCS/Kofus

This would be an amazing young squad.. Russell/Ingram/Ellenson/WCS. It would honestly be the best team we've had in years just purely based on potential.

The Lakers would never make that trade.

 

[randymoss1881]

The core needs to be traded, including Cousins. The coaching staff needs to go. Management needs to be restructured.

Why does Cousins have to go? First, if you get a new coach, he's going to have to be an adjunct of Cousins, not the other way around. What does everyone say on this board when trying to assess who the next coach should be? - How is the prospective coach going to get along with Cousins? That's exactly what ownership would be thinking if they kept Cousins and went for a new coach. That's exactly the wrong starting point in the thinking process for this organization. That is the beginning of the placating, coddling and pandering the next adjunct coach will be required to do if he coaches Cousins. It will continue to undermine any possibility of engendering a winning culture into this team and organization. Second, there are not enough assets to rebuild without trading Cousins, and therefore you'd be stuck in Mediocreville forever if you keep him (if he wants to stick around).

The big C has taken it out of Karl. If you blow it up and start anew you've got to hire a young coach who is an intelligent tough leader who can grow with the young team.

Management needs to be restructured. Vlade is a pr guy, a counselor, a coordinator, a charmer. It's only in Kings land that the charming mail room clerk is hired overnight to be the president of the company. The Vlade hire was pandering to the masses more than anything else. Bring in a guy with major chops as the GM - the guy who makes all the basketball decisions, without the meddling of Vlade or Vivek. Then rebuild a scouting staff to be second to none in the NBA, all of which takes a monetary commitment.

Do I expect the above to occur? HELL NO! THIS IS THE KINGS AFTER ALL!

Cousins hast to go NOWHERE!

 

[kingsboi]

I agree on number one and two. Cousins is averaging just under 21 shots a game, and of those 21 shots, only 3.3 are from the three point line. So I don't think you can accuse him of camping out there. And if anyone wants to take the time to look at film from Belinelli's time with the Spurs, or even more recently, his time in the world championsips for his country, he played exactly the same way he's playing for us, just more successfully. As for the Rondo/Collison situation, I would either fire Karl, or let Rondo walk at seasons end, or both. Personally, I favor both. I can't stand to look at Karl anymore, and Rondo doesn't equal winning. Plus, he's going to demand more money than his results deserve.

Add Rudy Gay to that list and we are talking. They are way too buddy buddy to even hold each other accountable when they mess up and the coach sure as hell isn't doing it so you get this undisciplined, uncaring team.

 

[206Fan]

The Lakers would never make that trade.

It was a hypothetical trade by the proposal up there.

 

[funkykingston]

It was a hypothetical trade by the proposal up there.

I know. But if the thinking of people wanting to move Cousins is that the Kings are going to get a massive haul I think it's worth noting what is realistic.

Cousins for Russell and a top 3 pick (plus salary filler) is a relatively realistic deal in terms of talent. But from the Lakers standpoint, trading away DR (who I'm sure they believe is a future star) and the ability to draft another star in Simmons or Ingram for a disgruntled player who has never won more than 30 games is not something they'd want to pull the trigger on. I'm pretty sure their mindset is that if they can develop a young core they can bring in all the other talent they need via FA simply because they're the Lakers. And they are probably right.

Probably the best trade to look at is what Minnesota got for Kevin Love. Love put up similar numbers but I think people within the NBA know Boogie is the superior player. That said, Cousins' attitude is a cause for concern and lowers his trade value a bit and the Cavs probably overpaid because they wanted Love to put around LeBron, probably at LeBron's request.

In any event, the T'Wolves dealt Love, Schved and Mbah a Moute for Wiggins, Bennett, and Thaddeus Young.

That's a solid PF, a former #1 pick that was a bust and a promising #1 pick.

I put Simmons as a superior prospect to Wiggins and Ingram as a slightly lesser prospect (Wiggins had a significantly higher floor but somewhat lower ceiling coming out IMO) and I think D'Angelo Russell carries significantly more value than Young. So again, on paper I think it's a reasonable deal, but because it's the Lakers I don't see them being at all willing.

 

[bajaden]

You could be right about the Lakers Funky. Trading for Cousins would speed up their process and give them more legitimacy, but they're going to be around 50 mil under the cap this offseason, and they are as you said, the Lakers. I doubt they'll have any trouble attracting some of the top freeagents to add to their young core. So I agree, it would be a fair trade, but the Lakers would probably be better served staying pat with what they have and rebuilding through the freeagent market.

 

[206Fan]

I know. But if the thinking of people wanting to move Cousins is that the Kings are going to get a massive haul I think it's worth noting what is realistic.

Cousins for Russell and a top 3 pick (plus salary filler) is a relatively realistic deal in terms of talent. But from the Lakers standpoint, trading away DR (who I'm sure they believe is a future star) and the ability to draft another star in Simmons or Ingram for a disgruntled player who has never won more than 30 games is not something they'd want to pull the trigger on. I'm pretty sure their mindset is that if they can develop a young core they can bring in all the other talent they need via FA simply because they're the Lakers. And they are probably right.

Probably the best trade to look at is what Minnesota got for Kevin Love. Love put up similar numbers but I think people within the NBA know Boogie is the superior player. That said, Cousins' attitude is a cause for concern and lowers his trade value a bit and the Cavs probably overpaid because they wanted Love to put around LeBron, probably at LeBron's request.

In any event, the T'Wolves dealt Love, Schved and Mbah a Moute for Wiggins, Bennett, and Thaddeus Young.

That's a solid PF, a former #1 pick that was a bust and a promising #1 pick.

I put Simmons as a superior prospect to Wiggins and Ingram as a slightly lesser prospect (Wiggins had a significantly higher floor but somewhat lower ceiling coming out IMO) and I think D'Angelo Russell carries significantly more value than Young. So again, on paper I think it's a reasonable deal, but because it's the Lakers I don't see them being at all willing.

I think the Lakers would be more confident in pulling off the trade if it was the 3rd overall pick..but of course, the Kings wouldn't be since there's an enormous drop off of talent after that.

I'm not trading Cousins unless it yields us a star in return OR a #1 pick in 2017 from a team that will suck....(will be a great draft).

However, if he, himself demands a trade, I'd take the #2 overall by itself. I don't think any package would come remotely close because Ingram has sky-high potential..more than Wiggins imo. He's 6'9.5 with a 7'3 wingspan. His frame will need to fill out.

I'd honestly trade Cousins straight up for Giannis...but the Bucks wouldn't. Cuz is a great talent, but there honestly aren't a lot of fair buyers imo.

You could be right about the Lakers Funky. Trading for Cousins would speed up their process and give them more legitimacy, but they're going to be around 50 mil under the cap this offseason, and they are as you said, the Lakers. I doubt they'll have any trouble attracting some of the top freeagents to add to their young core. So I agree, it would be a fair trade, but the Lakers would probably be better served staying pat with what they have and rebuilding through the freeagent market.

Can't a guy dream about Russell? He's going to be a stud in a few years.

 

[kingsboi]

You could be right about the Lakers Funky. Trading for Cousins would speed up their process and give them more legitimacy, but they're going to be around 50 mil under the cap this offseason, and they are as you said, the Lakers. I doubt they'll have any trouble attracting some of the top freeagents to add to their young core. So I agree, it would be a fair trade, but the Lakers would probably be better served staying pat with what they have and rebuilding through the freeagent market.

The Lakers will probably complete their rebuilding process just as quick as the Celtics have.

 

[Bricklayer]

The core needs to be traded, including Cousins. The coaching staff needs to go. Management needs to be restructured.

Why does Cousins have to go? First, if you get a new coach, he's going to have to be an adjunct of Cousins, not the other way around. What does everyone say on this board when trying to assess who the next coach should be? - How is the prospective coach going to get along with Cousins? That's exactly what ownership would be thinking if they kept Cousins and went for a new coach. That's exactly the wrong starting point in the thinking process for this organization. That is the beginning of the placating, coddling and pandering the next adjunct coach will be required to do if he coaches Cousins. It will continue to undermine any possibility of engendering a winning culture into this team and organization. Second, there are not enough assets to rebuild without trading Cousins, and therefore you'd be stuck in Mediocreville forever if you keep him (if he wants to stick around).

The big C has taken it out of Karl. If you blow it up and start anew you've got to hire a young coach who is an intelligent tough leader who can grow with the young team.

Management needs to be restructured. Vlade is a pr guy, a counselor, a coordinator, a charmer. It's only in Kings land that the charming mail room clerk is hired overnight to be the president of the company. The Vlade hire was pandering to the masses more than anything else. Bring in a guy with major chops as the GM - the guy who makes all the basketball decisions, without the meddling of Vlade or Vivek. Then rebuild a scouting staff to be second to none in the NBA, all of which takes a monetary commitment.

Do I expect the above to occur? HELL NO! THIS IS THE KINGS AFTER ALL!

Piffle.

ALL competent organizations hire their head coaches for the sake of their stars. That is the absolute core relationship you need to try to establish. Every star does not need to do the hiring themselves, but its an absolute consideration at all times, as it should be. And THAT is how you build a "winning culture". You match coach to star(s), and away you go. Why firing Malone was such a traumatic mistake. Some of the most aggressive top players even effectively hire coaches (LeBron, CP3).

And in particular when you have the league's preeminent big man, that is specialized personnel deserving of a specialized compatible coach. I remember when the Knicks briefly tried to hire Don Nelson to coach Ewing's Knicks. It was a complete disaster, and the team basically shut him out of the gym and fired him themselves. At which point Jeff Van Gundy took over, as he should have in the first place had management not wanted to stick it to Pat Riley for leaving. Just as Jeff Van Gundy should not coach Steve Nash or Steven Curry, Mike D'Antoni or quite possibly George Karl should not coach DeMarcus Cousins. And the good news for the organization and the fans, although some of them don't know it yet, is Vlade I think understands theses things. Every move he has affirmatively made reeks of a guy who gets it. We need a defensive length player to put next to Cousins, he drafts a defensive length player to put next to Cousins. We have a hole at SG, he goes out and tries to sign the best 3 & D guard on the market, at least pre-Achilles. When that falls through, he instead gets a defensive minded backup C and a pure shooter to try to provide space. Those are all absolute 100% "gets it" moves. He knows what Cousins is, and he knows what is needed around him. Including a coach. Because with very few exceptions coaches are satellites around great players, not the other way around.

 

[DHR]

**** I feel the same way.....
However if LAL get the number 1 pick and offer us Russell/Simmons and DMC has demanded a trade u say **** it that's the best deal. We'd be look at 2 potential super stars at prime positions.
Simmons has the looks if a guy that can go 20-8-5 at PF and Russell looks like a 20-4-6 PG. Russell is already showing out. It would hurt like hell seeing Cousins win a ring there but can really propel our future

Russell Simmons for DMC
Walk This Way right now!

 

[ParniValjak]

I can guarantee you that DMC is not getting traded. Vlade will not trade him, he will build around DMC. First cab off the rank is hiring a coach that knows what the foundation of successful teams is. I hope it will be Thibs but I am almost certain that will not be Thibs due to our owners starting to penny pinch due to past mistakes, and the fact that Thibs will have a choice of places where to go. He probably taken on Minny job and develops that youth.

There is no doubt that there are a lot of ties for Thibs to Sacramento (Rondo, DMC, Gay, Belinelli and I have no doubt that he would absolutely LOVE to coach WCS) and it might be our strongest point but a lot of things need to happen before we are even in the running.

 

[Kingster]

Piffle.

ALL competent organizations hire their head coaches for the sake of their stars. That is the absolute core relationship you need to try to establish. Every star does not need to do the hiring themselves, but its an absolute consideration at all times, as it should be. And THAT is how you build a "winning culture". You match coach to star(s), and away you go. Why firing Malone was such a traumatic mistake. Some of the most aggressive top players even effectively hire coaches (LeBron, CP3).

And in particular when you have the league's preeminent big man, that is specialized personnel deserving of a specialized compatible coach. I remember when the Knicks briefly tried to hire Don Nelson to coach Ewing's Knicks. It was a complete disaster, and the team basically shut him out of the gym and fired him themselves. At which point Jeff Van Gundy took over, as he should have in the first place had management not wanted to stick it to Pat Riley for leaving. Just as Jeff Van Gundy should not coach Steve Nash or Steven Curry, Mike D'Antoni or quite possibly George Karl should not coach DeMarcus Cousins. And the good news for the organization and the fans, although some of them don't know it yet, is Vlade I think understands theses things. Every move he has affirmatively made reeks of a guy who gets it. We need a defensive length player to put next to Cousins, he drafts a defensive length player to put next to Cousins. We have a hole at SG, he goes out and tries to sign the best 3 & D guard on the market, at least pre-Achilles. When that falls through, he instead gets a defensive minded backup C and a pure shooter to try to provide space. Those are all absolute 100% "gets it" moves. He knows what Cousins is, and he knows what is needed around him. Including a coach. Because with very few exceptions coaches are satellites around great players, not the other way around.

Your analysis fails when you assume one "star" is the same as any other. One star player is certainly not the same as another. Two oranges are similar in their orangeness, but one may be sweet and the other bitter. Also, your argument begs the question of stardom entirely. In fact, labeling Cousins a star, then making generalized assertions about "stars" and organizations does nothing except make for interesting wordplay. Cousins needs to go. Years of experience with numerous coaches is evidence of that fact. For many years now, the constant theme with Cousins and his coach is, "It's going to be different this time." It never is.

There is an EITHER/OR question that needs to be answered by this organization: Does culture have primacy or does personality has primacy? The theme with the Kings organization for several years now is that they are sell-outs. They sell out having a winning culture in favor of the short-term marketing advantage in pandering to their top player. Winning culture isn't created from placating your top player(s). Winning culture is based on making it the priority over all others.

 

[206Fan]

When has Cousins ever reached the level of CP3 and Lebron? Lebron fired Blatt...guess what? Massive blacklash all over the media even by ESPN. Stars should not command who should be coaching, but I agree with your take on Malone. Was a huge mistake because Vivek doesn't want to keep his nose clean.

 

[randymoss1881]

I can guarantee you that DMC is not getting traded. Vlade will not trade him, he will build around DMC. First cab off the rank is hiring a coach that knows what the foundation of successful teams is. I hope it will be Thibs but I am almost certain that will not be Thibs due to our owners starting to penny pinch due to past mistakes, and the fact that Thibs will have a choice of places where to go. He probably taken on Minny job and develops that youth.

There is no doubt that there are a lot of ties for Thibs to Sacramento (Rondo, DMC, Gay, Belinelli and I have no doubt that he would absolutely LOVE to coach WCS) and it might be our strongest point but a lot of things need to happen before we are even in the running.

I hope you're right man! It's not if Vlade will trade him we no he won't it's is DMC finally demand out?! When is enough enough.

 

[randymoss1881]

**** it just give Marc Jackson the job cause in the words of Patino
"Thibs ain't walking through tgat door"

 

[Bricklayer]

**** it just give Marc Jackson the job cause in the words of Patino
"Thibs ain't walking through tgat door"

Jackson likes Cuz, but as I recall Cuz wasn't impressed by Jackson, nor would that be a surprise. Cuz is much smarter than people give him credit for and has a highly sensitive B.S. monitor. I would think Vlade would have no use for another drama coach either, although maybe being NBA contemporaries might soften it. Can;t imagine Vivek has heard any good things about Jackson from his G.S. friends.

 

[Kingston Jamaica]

Piffle.

ALL competent organizations hire their head coaches for the sake of their stars. That is the absolute core relationship you need to try to establish. Every star does not need to do the hiring themselves, but its an absolute consideration at all times, as it should be. And THAT is how you build a "winning culture". You match coach to star(s), and away you go. Why firing Malone was such a traumatic mistake. Some of the most aggressive top players even effectively hire coaches (LeBron, CP3).

And in particular when you have the league's preeminent big man, that is specialized personnel deserving of a specialized compatible coach. I remember when the Knicks briefly tried to hire Don Nelson to coach Ewing's Knicks. It was a complete disaster, and the team basically shut him out of the gym and fired him themselves. At which point Jeff Van Gundy took over, as he should have in the first place had management not wanted to stick it to Pat Riley for leaving. Just as Jeff Van Gundy should not coach Steve Nash or Steven Curry, Mike D'Antoni or quite possibly George Karl should not coach DeMarcus Cousins. And the good news for the organization and the fans, although some of them don't know it yet, is Vlade I think understands theses things. Every move he has affirmatively made reeks of a guy who gets it. We need a defensive length player to put next to Cousins, he drafts a defensive length player to put next to Cousins. We have a hole at SG, he goes out and tries to sign the best 3 & D guard on the market, at least pre-Achilles. When that falls through, he instead gets a defensive minded backup C and a pure shooter to try to provide space. Those are all absolute 100% "gets it" moves. He knows what Cousins is, and he knows what is needed around him. Including a coach. Because with very few exceptions coaches are satellites around great players, not the other way around.

Maybe, but I don't like the sound of it. Moreover, I like the teams that have gone the absolute opposite way. The Spurs have given Popovich complete power to coach the team. That is the core of their success. Any player who doesn't match the criteria will find himself on the block in no time, never mind how good they are. People are saying that the Spurs have been lucky in the drafts. That's not true except for Duncan (20 years ago!!!). Parker was a late 1st rounder, Manu a second rounder, Kawhi a mid-late 1st rounder, Green a 2nd rounder etc., etc. It is simply Popovich building them into the team. GSW was not a great team for decades. Jackson was able to get them into the playoffs (with early exits), but only after Kerr polished the team, it became a winner with a roster that was not considered to be something special (now they are, but that's another story). Blatt was mentioned. What he did in the finals was outright miraculous. He had Bron, but none of the remaining Cavs players would probably not even have made it to that GSW roster, not to mention their rotation. Still Blatt was able to win two games and even take the lead at 2-1. Bron did it by himself? Come on now! He was the only remaining scorer, so clearly his numbers were great (but low %). It was the defense of the rest of the team that kept the blazing GSW at bay. Then Bron fired Blatt. We'll see how that turns out when it counts. You can not underestimate a good coach and the NBA player divas are often detrimental to themselves.

 

[New Era]

**** I feel the same way.....
However if LAL get the number 1 pick and offer us Russell/Simmons and DMC has demanded a trade u say **** it that's the best deal. We'd be look at 2 potential super stars at prime positions.
Simmons has the looks if a guy that can go 20-8-5 at PF and Russell looks like a 20-4-6 PG. Russell is already showing out. It would hurt like hell seeing Cousins win a ring there but can really propel our future

There is no way the Lakers make that deal. Cousins gets way overvalued on this board.

 

[206Fan]

There is no way the Lakers make that deal. Cousins gets way overvalued on this board.

I don't think Cousins is over-valued at all. He's stepped up BIG time with his game this year. He's worked on his dribbling and jumpshot. Even if you don't like that, he's become such a talented player. I'd argue top 5 or 10.

Cousins' value is extremely high, but teams will try to fleece a rookie GM when giving offers to Vlade. I think the only way we trade Cousins if it's something we can't down-right refuse(Devin Booker+Knight+1st rounder...or Irving+Love) OR if he demands a trade.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

There is no way the Lakers make that deal. Cousins gets way overvalued on this board.

There's no way the Kings deal him for anything less. Straight up for Russell, we don't pick up the phone. Straight up for Simmons (who is tantalizing but far from a sure thing), we don't pick up the phone. Basically any hope the Lakers have of getting Cousins would revolve around Russell and their lottery pick this year.

Now, I don't think he's actually for sale - but that's the price.

 

[funkykingston]

Maybe, but I don't like the sound of it. Moreover, I like the teams that have gone the absolute opposite way. The Spurs have given Popovich complete power to coach the team. That is the core of their success. Any player who doesn't match the criteria will find himself on the block in no time, never mind how good they are.

Popovich is the greatest coach of this era and one of the best of all time if not the best. But credit needs to go to Tim Duncan for letting him become that by being coachable. Duncan was a consensus #1 pick when he came out and he would have been the #1 had he come out the year before too. He was (barring injury) one of the few "can't miss" prospects that I've seen. But he allowed himself to be coached. Pop would yell at Timmy and he'd take it. Duncan set the tone for things. If your best player and perennial MVP candidate is going to let the coach ride him then everybody is. Tony Parker has talked about this. He was 19 coming in and Pop was merciless with him. But he looked at Popovich getting on Duncan and realized he just had to accept it and grow.

It was Pop and Duncan together that created the Spurs culture. And once they did they the Spurs could bring in guys that fit the system and had the attitude that they wanted. It was a synergy between star and coach that allowed that to develop. If somehow Popovich had LeBron instead of Timmy I don't think he ever gets to the level he's at.

GSW was not a great team for decades. Jackson was able to get them into the playoffs (with early exits), but only after Kerr polished the team, it became a winner with a roster that was not considered to be something special (now they are, but that's another story).

Golden State is an interesting case to look at in terms of the impact of coaching. Outside of drafting Curry, Thompson & Green, the biggest thing that changed the Warriors into contenders was trading Monta Ellis, Epke Udoh & Kwame Brown for Andrew Bogut and Stephen Jackson, the latter of whom was flipped to S.A. for a 2nd rounder that became Ezeli. That deal moved Curry to PG (he and Ellis were both PG/SGs before) and Thompson to SG, it gave them a defensive anchor in the middle, and it let them finish the year bad enough (remember that Bogut was hurt) to drop deeper into the lottery where they nabbed Harrison Barnes.

Jackson coached them into the playoffs the next two years (into the second round and then an underwhelming first round exit) but they won 51 games that year. I don't think it was so much Kerr transforming them into winners as Jackson holding them back from reaching their potential. At least that was certainly the Warriors' front offices' opinion. And I think they were right. Kerr has done a fantastic job, but I think it's overstating it to say that he was the main reason for the Warriors improvement. Curry stopped getting hurt and became otherworldly. Thompson became a very good defender and even improved as a shooter/scorer. An extra year together, Draymond Green's emergence and the addition of finals MVP Andre Iguodala were all part of it.

We can differ on how much credit Kerr deserves but to me the telling part was that with Kerr gone from the sidelines Luke Walton guided the Warriors to a historic start. Unless we believe that Walton is a coaching legend himself then it does have to take a little bit of Kerr's shine.

Blatt was mentioned. What he did in the finals was outright miraculous. He had Bron, but none of the remaining Cavs players would probably not even have made it to that GSW roster, not to mention their rotation. Still Blatt was able to win two games and even take the lead at 2-1. Bron did it by himself? Come on now! He was the only remaining scorer, so clearly his numbers were great (but low %). It was the defense of the rest of the team that kept the blazing GSW at bay. Then Bron fired Blatt. We'll see how that turns out when it counts. You can not underestimate a good coach and the NBA player divas are often detrimental to themselves.

Speaking of Lebron . . .

I like David Blatt. I think he's a very good coach. But he was forced to bend to LeBron's will. Blatt wanted to run some elements of the Princeton offense. LeBron didn't. And so the Cavs threw out that part of their playbook. James routinely waved off Blatt's plays, even saying so directly in one post game interview when he changed the final play himself. We didn't really get to see how good of a coach Blatt was because he was handcuffed by having to kowtow to his best player.

 

[funkykingston]

There's no way the Kings deal him for anything less. Straight up for Russell, we don't pick up the phone. Straight up for Simmons (who is tantalizing but far from a sure thing), we don't pick up the phone. Basically any hope the Lakers have of getting Cousins would revolve around Russell and their lottery pick this year.

Now, I don't think he's actually for sale - but that's the price.

I really like Simmons as a prospect but he's not LeBron. He's not Duncan. He's not Shaq. He's not even Karl Anthony-Towns in terms of being a can't miss guy. His lack of a reliable jump shot and tendency to get passive during games makes me wonder if he'll be more Lamar Odom than LeBron James.

I like D'Angelo Russell's game. I had doubts about him at draft time because of his lack of athleticism but he looks to be coming around after a rough early adjustment period. But (1) he strikes me as a guy that would bolt for a big market as soon as he has the chance if he were traded here and (2) he often has such a smug, punchable face that it only seems right that he stay a Laker.

 

[Bricklayer]

Maybe, but I don't like the sound of it. Moreover, I like the teams that have gone the absolute opposite way. The Spurs have given Popovich complete power to coach the team. That is the core of their success. Any player who doesn't match the criteria will find himself on the block in no time, never mind how good they are. People are saying that the Spurs have been lucky in the drafts. That's not true except for Duncan (20 years ago!!!). Parker was a late 1st rounder, Manu a second rounder, Kawhi a mid-late 1st rounder, Green a 2nd rounder etc., etc. It is simply Popovich building them into the team. GSW was not a great team for decades. Jackson was able to get them into the playoffs (with early exits), but only after Kerr polished the team, it became a winner with a roster that was not considered to be something special (now they are, but that's another story). Blatt was mentioned. What he did in the finals was outright miraculous. He had Bron, but none of the remaining Cavs players would probably not even have made it to that GSW roster, not to mention their rotation. Still Blatt was able to win two games and even take the lead at 2-1. Bron did it by himself? Come on now! He was the only remaining scorer, so clearly his numbers were great (but low %). It was the defense of the rest of the team that kept the blazing GSW at bay. Then Bron fired Blatt. We'll see how that turns out when it counts. You can not underestimate a good coach and the NBA player divas are often detrimental to themselves.

Pop just happens to have been there before anybody else was and basically never lost. And Pop knows where his bread is buttered too. He has repeatedly, explicitly, tied his coaching career to Duncan's tenure. At no point was Pop set up against Duncan. He essentially tanked to get him, drafted him, and has rode him for two decades. In many ways its the ultimate coach/player synergy.

 

[Bricklayer]

There is no way the Lakers make that deal. Cousins gets way overvalued on this board.

Its hard to overvalue the best player at his position in the entire league.

Many Kings fans though rather sadly engage in a peculiar form of self loathing.

Consider:

15-16 Cousins 34.6min 27.1pts (.537TS%) 11.4reb 3.3ast 1.4stl 1.3blk 3.9TO
00-01 Webber 40.5min 27.1pts (.516TS%) 11.1reb 4.2ast 1.3stl 1.7blk 2.8TO



But then again, maybe I am using the wrong comparison too, since there were always a contingent of Kings fans/blithering idiots who didn't like Webber either. Its built into Kings fans DNA.

 

[Kingston Jamaica]

Popovich is the greatest coach of this era and one of the best of all time if not the best. But credit needs to go to Tim Duncan for letting him become that by being coachable. Duncan was a consensus #1 pick when he came out and he would have been the #1 had he come out the year before too. He was (barring injury) one of the few "can't miss" prospects that I've seen. But he allowed himself to be coached. Pop would yell at Timmy and he'd take it. Duncan set the tone for things. If your best player and perennial MVP candidate is going to let the coach ride him then everybody is. Tony Parker has talked about this. He was 19 coming in and Pop was merciless with him. But he looked at Popovich getting on Duncan and realized he just had to accept it and grow.

It was Pop and Duncan together that created the Spurs culture. And once they did they the Spurs could bring in guys that fit the system and had the attitude that they wanted. It was a synergy between star and coach that allowed that to develop. If somehow Popovich had LeBron instead of Timmy I don't think he ever gets to the level he's at.



Golden State is an interesting case to look at in terms of the impact of coaching. Outside of drafting Curry, Thompson & Green, the biggest thing that changed the Warriors into contenders was trading Monta Ellis, Epke Udoh & Kwame Brown for Andrew Bogut and Stephen Jackson, the latter of whom was flipped to S.A. for a 2nd rounder that became Ezeli. That deal moved Curry to PG (he and Ellis were both PG/SGs before) and Thompson to SG, it gave them a defensive anchor in the middle, and it let them finish the year bad enough (remember that Bogut was hurt) to drop deeper into the lottery where they nabbed Harrison Barnes.

Jackson coached them into the playoffs the next two years (into the second round and then an underwhelming first round exit) but they won 51 games that year. I don't think it was so much Kerr transforming them into winners as Jackson holding them back from reaching their potential. At least that was certainly the Warriors' front offices' opinion. And I think they were right. Kerr has done a fantastic job, but I think it's overstating it to say that he was the main reason for the Warriors improvement. Curry stopped getting hurt and became otherworldly. Thompson became a very good defender and even improved as a shooter/scorer. An extra year together, Draymond Green's emergence and the addition of finals MVP Andre Iguodala were all part of it.

We can differ on how much credit Kerr deserves but to me the telling part was that with Kerr gone from the sidelines Luke Walton guided the Warriors to a historic start. Unless we believe that Walton is a coaching legend himself then it does have to take a little bit of Kerr's shine.



Speaking of Lebron . . .

I like David Blatt. I think he's a very good coach. But he was forced to bend to LeBron's will. Blatt wanted to run some elements of the Princeton offense. LeBron didn't. And so the Cavs threw out that part of their playbook. James routinely waved off Blatt's plays, even saying so directly in one post game interview when he changed the final play himself. We didn't really get to see how good of a coach Blatt was because he was handcuffed by having to kowtow to his best player.

Thanks, Man! I really appreciate your input in this. Goes without saying that I very much agree with what you write. It seems that we actually see the same things. It is about coaching and if the coach "rules", you don't have to have the top picks in the lottery to become a basketball dynasty. I didn't go into coaching legends, such as Phil Jackson and Pat Riley for instance, because they had all the great players there to produce. Maybe Jackson's Bulls were a bit real coaching products. However, there are so many superstars that never won anything, because they weren't coachable or refused to buy into systems. Bron has two rings despite not being coachable (and the one against the Spurs was pure luck), but he could have 6-7 by now if he was.

 

[New Era]

Its hard to overvalue the best player at his position in the entire league.

Many Kings fans though rather sadly engage in a peculiar form of self loathing.

Consider:

15-16 Cousins 34.6min 27.1pts (.537TS%) 11.4reb 3.3ast 1.4stl 1.3blk 3.9TO
00-01 Webber 40.5min 27.1pts (.516TS%) 11.1reb 4.2ast 1.3stl 1.7blk 2.8TO



But then again, maybe I am using the wrong comparison too, since there were always a contingent of Kings fans/blithering idiots who didn't like Webber either. Its built into Kings fans DNA.

I'm not arguing if he's the best player at his position or if he's comparable to Chris Webber. My point is the Lakers would not trade Russell plus the overall #1 pick in this year's draft for Cuz.

 

[Kingston Jamaica]

Its hard to overvalue the best player at his position in the entire league.

Many Kings fans though rather sadly engage in a peculiar form of self loathing.

Consider:

15-16 Cousins 34.6min 27.1pts (.537TS%) 11.4reb 3.3ast 1.4stl 1.3blk 3.9TO
00-01 Webber 40.5min 27.1pts (.516TS%) 11.1reb 4.2ast 1.3stl 1.7blk 2.8TO



But then again, maybe I am using the wrong comparison too, since there were always a contingent of Kings fans/blithering idiots who didn't like Webber either. Its built into Kings fans DNA.

I agree with you with cousins value. I don't think he is overvalued. However, trading such a player will always look like you got less than his value in return. The success of such a trade depends on your vision concerning the future of those players you got in return. In other words, it's very risky. You would have to find a team that feels its window of winning closing to get a real deal. I wonder if the Lakers really fit that category?
Personally, I'm not convinced yet that the Kings FO is able to get the right value for Cousins. The problem is that they don't seem to be able to bring the right coach in either. Karl is a great coach, but I don't see his style and ideas fitting Cousins. Maybe someone like Luke Walton or David Blatt, would be a better fit for Cousins, because they both play very good defense and build their offense on that. By the way, I don't think Thibs would be much better than Karl for the Kings even though I think Thibs is one of the best coaches around. I guess Vlade knows all that much better than I do and I don't know all the other organizational restrictions there are.

 

[bajaden]

I think the Lakers would be more confident in pulling off the trade if it was the 3rd overall pick..but of course, the Kings wouldn't be since there's an enormous drop off of talent after that.

I'm not trading Cousins unless it yields us a star in return OR a #1 pick in 2017 from a team that will suck....(will be a great draft).

However, if he, himself demands a trade, I'd take the #2 overall by itself. I don't think any package would come remotely close because Ingram has sky-high potential..more than Wiggins imo. He's 6'9.5 with a 7'3 wingspan. His frame will need to fill out.

I'd honestly trade Cousins straight up for Giannis...but the Bucks wouldn't. Cuz is a great talent, but there honestly aren't a lot of fair buyers imo.



Can't a guy dream about Russell? He's going to be a stud in a few years.

LOL! Yeah, I would love to have him. Just trying to be real. If I'm the Lakers, I don't trade Russell. He's been mishandled this year. If your the Lakers, and you see the way the league is going with Portland and the Warriors, you don't let go of a young PG with his potential. Not only is he a great passer with terrific court vision, but the dude can shoot as well. He just scratched the surface this season.