Retaining Thomas

[bajaden]

I said "probably", because unless I'm mistaken, Evans will cost less. Is that how it's looking, in terms of the money issue?

I hope not. I really want to keep Acy

Evans is on a guaranteed contract for next season and is making $1,768,653.00. Acy is on a non-guaranteed contract and is making $915,243.00. Neither Evans or Acy is an offensive juggernaut. But defensively, Evans is the batter player. I doubt any player in the NBA likes being guarded by Evans. He's one of those players that you love when he's on your team, and hate when he's on the other team. That said, Acy's contract is so cheap, I see no reason for them to let him go. I don't think it has to be an either/or situation. Besides, I expect either Landry or Thompson to be moved in the offseason.

 

[Toasty]

I am a Landy supporter. He will come around. if our ...cough ... Big 3 allow it. Do you job IT

 

[Kings Faithful]

Evans is on a guaranteed contract for next season and is making $1,768,653.00. Acy is on a non-guaranteed contract and is making $915,243.00. Neither Evans or Acy is an offensive juggernaut. But defensively, Evans is the batter player. I doubt any player in the NBA likes being guarded by Evans. He's one of those players that you love when he's on your team, and hate when he's on the other team. That said, Acy's contract is so cheap, I see no reason for them to let him go. I don't think it has to be an either/or situation. Besides, I expect either Landry or Thompson to be moved in the offseason.

Here's another factor.... Evans is 33, Acy is 23. I agree that its not an either or thing yet, but if we are going to get rid of one, the age difference alone makes it pretty clear cut. Acy is a perfect garbage man for this team going forward...and one that can actually hit the occasional outside shot which is extremely rare. Good rebounder, decent defender with lots of potential on that end, thunderous dunks, and rarely turns it over. Also seems to be a good locker room guy. I want to keep him for as long as possible.

As far as IT goes, I like him, but with Gay and Cousins in the starting lineup i just don't think we need a third option scorer who thinks he's a first option. Especially when that person is the PG and in charge of running the game. If we target a PG in the draft and hit gold, IT and Landy/JT can be packaged together to bring back some solid talent. Then target a big man to pair with Cousins....Okafor, Dalembert....someone like that.

 

[Glenn]

Here's another factor.... Evans is 33, Acy is 23. I agree that its not an either or thing yet, but if we are going to get rid of one, the age difference alone makes it pretty clear cut. Acy is a perfect garbage man for this team going forward...and one that can actually hit the occasional outside shot which is extremely rare. Good rebounder, decent defender with lots of potential on that end, thunderous dunks, and rarely turns it over. Also seems to be a good locker room guy. I want to keep him for as long as possible.

As far as IT goes, I like him, but with Gay and Cousins in the starting lineup i just don't think we need a third option scorer who thinks he's a first option. Especially when that person is the PG and in charge of running the game. If we target a PG in the draft and hit gold, IT and Landy/JT can be packaged together to bring back some solid talent. Then target a big man to pair with Cousins....Okafor, Dalembert....someone like that.

I understand Acy is working on his three pt shot. That's joke in case ANYONE had a doubt as to my sincerity. I am not being sincere.

I don't like the idea of drafting a pg as they take awhile to catch on and I think we have to win some day. Exum however may be the guy worth waiting for. The ignorant side of me doesn't see the pg as being incredibly important if he knows how to get the ball to Cuz and Gay. That would be a good start among the basketball skills. Exum is already can do that.

 

[randymoss1881]

I am a Landy supporter. He will come around. if our ...cough ... Big 3 allow it. Do you job IT

People are judging him when he is clearly not healthy.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

No, we're judging him based on the fact that we've already seen him. We know what he is, and we know it was a bad decision to sign him. And, if he were healthy, it still would have been a bad decision to sign him.

 

[Bricklayer]

I am a Landy supporter. He will come around. if our ...cough ... Big 3 allow it. Do you job IT

Landry is not what we need even if 100% healthy. He can play...if you think being a small, weak defending, poor rebounding, non-shotblocking, non-passing PF is something that you can just overlook.

And at his age, stupid contract, and now with a major injury, its not even clear he's moveable. Nobody needs aging undersized mediocrity on long term deals. We were bidding against ourselves.

 

[ParniValjak]

I disagree. This is the reality in the NBA now.. There are stars, and then everyone else. Our pg isn't a star and shouldn't get paid like one.

Respect doesn't come into it. We are not catering this team to our PG. It just makes no sense to do that. The FO hasn't seemed remotely concerned about hurting the feelings of Maloof era holdovers. PDA defended Ben very strongly (which makes me real nervous), not Jimmer, not our PG, not JT. Ben. Landry to to an extent talking about getting him more minutes. And Ray.

The number of teams with the cap space and need for a PG are pretty small. Someone always comes out of the woodwork and does something crazy (see New Orleans with Tyreke). If someone wants to do that with our pg, that's the end of the road for him here.

I'm very curious to see what the market is like. We learned through this trade deadline, with our PG clearly on the market if you believe some tweets, people weren't offering anything all that enticing. It was said we were shooting for the stars. We missed. But I don't think we are done aiming by any means.

I just get this feeling, and it's based on seeing them ship out damn near every player from the maloof years, is that they don't want him. Out with the old, in with the new. I don't know how they plan on replacing him, but the vibe is strong that ALL maloof era players not named Demarcus Cousins are going to moved as soon as they can. They've all but confirmed that at this point. Jimmer is done here. They desperately tried to trade JT. They unloaded MT for uh, Reggie Evans and his cheap contract and a player who will probably never play here. There are only two other holdovers. Do the math.

There is no doubt that there is a blanket view from the new front office about Petrie era players. I for one think that as a first big off the bench, JT can be more useful than Landry but these guys obviously disagree.

They rightly gave Cousins an extension and made him the centre piece. That should have been obvious to anyone paying any sort of attention.

IT is more of in between. I think the new front office like him but as a dynamic 6th men and not a starter. I say this because even when Vasquez was stinking up the place and IT was playing the best basketball of his career, they started Vasquez and played IT as a 6th man for 25mpg where he could gun as much as he liked. I've got no doubt that coming into the season, Malone and the front office saw IT and Landry as the dynamic inside/outside scoring duo when the starters sit for some rest. They thought that these two could hold things together in terms of scoring (and I think they could to be honest).

But then things happened. Landry got injured and IT was the dynamic 6th man at the times in career form and early favorite candidate for 6th man of the year award. Then we made a deal for Gay which was a clear talent grab that cost us nothing really. In fact in helped clear all the players from previous regime. All of a sudden the player they linked as a dynamic guard off the bench became a starter without a real back up. He started gunning it to the tune of 20ppg and 6apg and of a sudden, what might have been a given (re-signing IT as a 6th man) might suddenly not be so because the price has just gone up.

I think the front office like IT as a 6th man at a certain price which I think we might not be willing to go over to match the offers that he will get in summer. I think there is a team out there that will do something stupid with IT which probably means we lose him like Tyreke.

We tried to trade him but no one wanted to take a risk. Not because they did not like him but because they did not want to use real assets to get him, only to potentially lose him for nothing in the summer.

I still think that this front office don't see IT as a starter (hence why we have been interested in every PG that could run a team that was semi available) but they would absolutely love to keep him as a 6th man type at the right price. That would be their best case scenario. Trade for a starting pass first PG and keep IT as a dynamic guard off the bench and have him and Landry lead the new version of bench mob. By keeping IT, you also keep someone that is seemed to be really liked by Cousins.

This team is such a state of flux at the moment that we do not know which direction we will go in. I suspect this will be determined by what happens with Rudy Gay in the summer. If he does not opt out, we are limited in what we can do. If he opts out and we re-sign him for less than his current salary, then we get a bit more wiggle room. If he leaves, I think we let IT walk and start going aggressively after other players. Interesting summer ahead!

 

[Sac.1989]

indeed. If we can resign him we are set at 6th man for the foreseeable future. IT is that dynamic guard that championship teams loves. We aim to be there one day so keeping him makes sense. Id honestly say we are against it however as someone will spend big and start him only to realize he's truly better off the bench and he'll get traded, before finding a spot on a upcoming contender and making a real difference. Depending on where we draft we could get our starting PG and resign IT or we could get our starting PG, let IT walk and sign a vet PG to play backup. Not sure what the FA pg markets like this summer but our draft position figures to be a key aspect here and id revisit trading for Rondo if Boston picks up the phone.

 

[SacKings2002NBAChampions]

Well the trade deadline has passed and Thomas is still a King. It appears the FO made him available, but no deals were ever worked out. So does this mean the FO is going to try and resign him or let him walk in this upcoming offseason? I don’t think it would be wise to let him walk for nothing if the FO decides to part ways with Thomas because (as many have mentioned already) it would be a talent bleed, but are the Kings able to resign him with their current cap situation?

This analysis will take into account worst case scenarios in regards to the cap. What I mean by that is I will not be factoring in the possibility that Gay will opt out and sign for less. As of now, we will have exactly $67,264,451 on our books next year. The Luxury Tax Level is estimated to be $75,700,000. That gives us $8,435,549 to work with before hitting the Luxury Tax Level. Some might say that $8,435,549 would be enough to retain Thomas; however, we have a 1st round draft pick this year who we have to sign before signing any of our Free Agents.

Currently we hold the 4th worst record in the league. If we remain the 4th worst in the league, that gives us the opportunity of landing between picks 1-7 in the 2014 draft. Using the rookie salaries from the 2013 draft, I calculated how much cap room we would have left after signing our rookie for each position in the draft (1-7).

1st pick: $3,111,269 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
2nd pick: $3,671,789 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
3rd pick: $4,157,549 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
4th pick: $4,578,509 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
5th pick: $4,942,829 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
6th pick: $5,263,229 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
7th pick: $5,539,589 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level

As you can see , we don't have much room to offer Thomas a contract. I also calculated how big of a contract we could offer him for each pick (using a 4 year contract with 7.5% raises each year).

1st pick: $13,916,463 over 4 years / average of $3,479,116 per year
2nd pick: $16,423,625 over 4 years / average of $4,105,906 per year
3rd pick: $18,596,392 over 4 years / average of $4,649,098 per year
4th pick: $20,479,313 over 4 years / average of $5,119,828 per year
5th pick: $22,108,888 over 4 years / average of $5,527,222 per year
6th pick: $23,542,012 over 4 years / average of $5,885,503 per year
7th pick: $24,778,149 over 4 years / average of $6,194,537 per year

Are any of the contracts large enough to keep Thomas in Sacramento? I hope so because that would mean he’s making sixth man money. We wouldn’t be able to offer him starters’ money without going into the Luxury Tax.

Now one thing I realized about the Thornton trade is that it might make it easier to resign Thomas. It gave us $956,034 in cap space next season, and it gave us one less roster spot to fill. After signing Thomas, we would have the minimum 13 man roster rather than having to sign another player who would take up more space.

One more thing we can do to save some space is to trade one of our expirings for a late 2nd round pick. Acy and Evans are probably the most attractive given how much they make, but since this is a worst case scenario, we'll use Acy as the man traded away. Peyton Siva was the 56th draft pick last year and he makes $490,180 this year. I'm going to assume our 2nd round draft pick will make the same amount of money in this scenario. Acy's contract ($915,243) minus our 2nd Round Draft Pick ($490,180) would be $425,063 saved. It's not much, but every dollar counts.. This is what the cap situation will look like:

1st pick: $3,536,332 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
2nd pick: $4,096,852 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
3rd pick: $4,582,612 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
4th pick: $5,003,572 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
5th pick: $5,367,892 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
6th pick: $5,688,292 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level
7th pick: $5,964,652 before hitting the Luxury Tax Level

And we would be able to offer Thomas these contracts:

1st pick: $15,817,736 over 4 years / average of $3,954,434 per year
2nd pick: $18,324,898 over 4 years / average of $4,581,224 per year
3rd pick: $20,497,665 over 4 years / average of $5,124,416 per year
4th pick: $22,380,586 over 4 years / average of $5,595,146 per year
5th pick: $24,010,161 over 4 years / average of $6,002,540 per year
6th pick: $25,443,285 over 4 years / average of $6,360,821 per year
7th pick: $26,679,422 over 4 years / average of $6,669,855 per year

This gives us more leeway while negotiating with Thomas. If we did resign Thomas and trade Acy, our lineup would look like this:

PG – Thomas/McCallum
SG – McLemore/Terry
SF – Gay/Williams/Outlaw
PF – Thompson/Landry
C – Cousins/Evans
And a 2014 1st & 2nd Round Draft Pick

The FO could also shop a player on draft day to try and free up more space if they need to. If they wanted to trade Williams for a late 1st rounder, we would have more cap space for Thomas and Acy or Thomas and possibly a MLE player (Jordan Hill or Ed Davis would be nice targets assuming we didn't draft a shotblocker and that we plan on moving Landry at some point in the future) depending on how much Thomas’ contract would cost.

Trading Williams would be nice for a mid to low first round draft pick. We would have to take some crapty salary player back though.
Williams is still a young player who is slowly but surely blossoming. He just lacks confidence and would thrive in a team that believes in him and starts him from the get go. We are not that team. He will eventually rot on our squad.
This late first rounder would be coming from a playoff team that needs that extra umph like OKC or Timberwolves to be a contender.

There's a lot of late 1st rounders in this draft that I'd be heavily interested in. Especially for the pg, pf, and C positions. However, we'd sort of be going back to rebuilding rather than a "win now" team. I am all for this however the FO is not and they are getting a lot of pressure from fans and those alike to actually have a team for the following season that will be able to make the playoffs. I don't see the harm in waiting one more season possibly getting one more good draft pick next year, re-signing Gay, getting rid of unwanted cap space and being able to sign another veteran or two or even a star player if we choose to let Gay and CO. go like a Rondo or hell maybe a Lebron (jk)
This way, we can concentrate on getting some decent draft picks this year and letting Ben Mac develop for another season. Cause lets face it. We can't do much without a solid SG. There is no way we'll make the playoffs next season with a 4 man team. The 4th is assuming our big man draft pick (assuming again we choose a big man) to be able to protect the RIM. These are all big questions. I think come 2015 we'd have a better rounded team, we'd be able to sign some veterans, and our rookies/sophomores will have developed further into more experienced basketball players.

There is no future next year and I believe we'll fall very short of making the playoffs which is useless again. Cousins is very young. There is no pressure around him. I know he wants to win now but he has to realize that the best thing might be to wait another year to actually have a strong team rather than barely missing the playoffs or even dropping out in the 1st round as an 8th seed. As much as I would like to make the playoffs, i'd rather win a championship or have the potential to do so. Since we are a small market team, we won't get the same opportunities as other big market teams such as Lakers will have. With a little push from *friends*, Lakers will end up with Wiggins and sign an all-star like K. Love, Rondo etc next season and they'll be contending already in a few years. We don't have that same luck.

So, I'm all for winning now but we have to be realistic with what we currently have and how we can further develop this squad without taking too many gambles such as hoping IT re-signs for example. We could have gotten a decent player from IT as well as getting rid of some unwanted cap space. However, we didn't end up trading him. I sure do hope they signed a pre-contract with him for a 6th man type of contract because if not, it all goes down hill from there. Especially if we don't get an Exum out of the draft.

 

[Gilles]

For Williams to be an effective player, he needs to work on two things: shooting threes and learning to play defense (defensive footwork and recognizing opponents' offense). Handles, finishing at the rim and not missing dunks will come naturally with experience. Until he made progress in those two things, he's not worth much - I don't believe anyone would give you an expiring and a good pick this summer. Still his game is suited for 6th-7th guy, so if Kings retain IT and stick to Landry, maybe trading is worth exploring. But, I believe, timing is pretty good with his contract situation: if he shows serious signs of development, but Rudy is still here, you could still sign Derrick for under MLE due to his limited role and lack of exposure to lock him on a very good deal leading to his prime.

 

[The_Jamal]

No, we're judging him based on the fact that we've already seen him. We know what he is, and we know it was a bad decision to sign him. And, if he were healthy, it still would have been a bad decision to sign him.

Yes, because those Kings rosters were SOOOOO conducive for winning basketball right? Let's just ignore how well he did on last season with GSW right?

 

[twslam07]

Yes, because those Kings rosters were SOOOOO conducive for winning basketball right? Let's just ignore how well he did on last season with GSW right?

You're missing the point. It's not about if Landry is a good player or not. It's about whether he is a good fit with this team. It just so happens that he is a poor fit. Period. End of discussion.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Yes, because those Kings rosters were SOOOOO conducive for winning basketball right? Let's just ignore how well he did on last season with GSW right?

Are you under the impression that he was a strong rebounder/defender/distributor when he was playing for winning teams? Because he wasn't. He's a capable low-post scorer, who provides almost nothing else: are you under the impression that we didn't already know that?

We came into the season with our single-biggest need being a rim protector. We got him. And my post was in response to someone who suggested that we were judging Landry on the handful of games he's played this season, as if we haven't seen him before. As if we don't know what he is, and what he isn't. As if he learned any new tricks, or dropped any of his bad habits, since the last time he played here. Let me help you out: he hasn't. How good he is or isn't has no bearing on the fact that Carl Landry is a player that we did not need, and whom does not fit.

 

[Kingster]

I still think that this front office don't see IT as a starter (hence why we have been interested in every PG that could run a team that was semi available) but they would absolutely love to keep him as a 6th man type at the right price. That would be their best case scenario. Trade for a starting pass first PG and keep IT as a dynamic guard off the bench and have him and Landry lead the new version of bench mob. By keeping IT, you also keep someone that is seemed to be really liked by Cousins.

This is where the confusion lies. Yes, the Kings have been looking for a point guard. But starting point guard, as in 38 minutes a game point guard? Sure, if you're talking about the pipe dream in Rondo. But if you're talking about reality, they want another Vasquez who can share the minutes with Isaiah, not a guy that plays starter's minutes of 38 and relegates IT to 10. This is where semantics comes into play. What exactly is meant by 6th man? If it's 10-12 minutes a game, that ain't going to happen. IT is obviously a much better player than a 10-12 minute a game guy, and he's going to be paid accordingly. If he's offered 10-12 minute a game type salary, forget about it; he's gone. If it's 30-32 minutes, then it's realistic. So instead of talking about the category of "6th man", it's better to drill down to define what exactly is meant by sixth man. Does it mean playing more than half the game? Does it mean playing in the 4th quarter when the game is on the line? What exactly?

 

[randymoss1881]

Lowry and Bledsoe are both free agents also so that will make IT suiters even less. Also I'm sure teams would rather offer chalmers 4-6 than offer IT 7-8 both will be back ups next year if they leave there teams.

 

[bajaden]

This is where the confusion lies. Yes, the Kings have been looking for a point guard. But starting point guard, as in 38 minutes a game point guard? Sure, if you're talking about the pipe dream in Rondo. But if you're talking about reality, they want another Vasquez who can share the minutes with Isaiah, not a guy that plays starter's minutes of 38 and relegates IT to 10. This is where semantics comes into play. What exactly is meant by 6th man? If it's 10-12 minutes a game, that ain't going to happen. IT is obviously a much better player than a 10-12 minute a game guy, and he's going to be paid accordingly. If he's offered 10-12 minute a game type salary, forget about it; he's gone. If it's 30-32 minutes, then it's realistic. So instead of talking about the category of "6th man", it's better to drill down to define what exactly is meant by sixth man. Does it mean playing more than half the game? Does it mean playing in the 4th quarter when the game is on the line? What exactly?

In IT's case, I think its having another PG that can start, and also, perhaps be on the floor with IT in crunch time to make the decisions. No one questions IT's talent (size aside). What's in question is his decision making at crucial moments in the game. And those moments aren't always the last shot with 10 seconds left on the clock. A crucial moment can be the 4th quarter with 7 minutes left in the game and you've just fought your way back from a 15 point deficit. What happens next, many times is the deciding factor in a game. Its in those moments that IT tends to put on his jersey with the big S on it. And believe it or not, I'm not being critical of him here. That's just who he is, and at that moment, he needs a calming influence on the floor to make the decisions.

Now finding a PG that fits that description is difficult. Probably only one in the draft, and no matter how you cut it, a draft pick is a gamble until proven. So PDA has his work cut out for him. The best approach is to be patient, and wait for the right player in the right situation. However, patience is in short supply around here. I've always thought there's was some irony in that the older you got, the more patient you became, but the less time you had. One of God's little jokes. I like to think that patience comes from enlightenment. Sorry, just stroking my ego a bit. Back to the subject. Here's my thing with IT. First, with our so called big three, were still, at best, a five hundred team. Take the Miami Heat. You can take Lebron, Wade, and Bosh, and put just about anyone around them, and their competing for a championship. You can't do that with Cousins, Gay, and It. And if not, then something needs to be changed.

When I watch the games, especially when I'm grading a game, the one thing that looms out at me, is that both Cousins and Gay have to use most of their god given talents to score. In other words, neither gets a lot of easy baskets. The majority of their baskets comes from isolation plays. We need a PG that has the ability to create easy baskets for them, and is able to create some open shots for McLemroe. Right now, McLemore is almost an afterthought on offense. The few times he touches the ball, unless he's coming off a screen, he's being asked to create for himself. Something I'm not sure I want him doing at the moment, regardless of how much I admire his reckless drives to the basket. He needs someone to help him build confidence. And easy shots would be a good step in that direction. When McLemore isn't rushing, he's a very good shooter. We need a PG that can help him slow down. This isn't about what a player can't do, its about how a player can become better at what he can do, by putting him a position of strength. In short, we need a starting PG, that can see all four of his teammates on the floor, and can find a way to get baskets for all of them. No one is an afterthought. If any player on the Kings is an afterthought to our starting PG, then he's an afterthought to the other team as well. With a good PG, that becomes an asset.

 

[Kingster]

In IT's case, I think its having another PG that can start, and also, perhaps be on the floor with IT in crunch time to make the decisions. No one questions IT's talent (size aside). What's in question is his decision making at crucial moments in the game. And those moments aren't always the last shot with 10 seconds left on the clock. A crucial moment can be the 4th quarter with 7 minutes left in the game and you've just fought your way back from a 15 point deficit. What happens next, many times is the deciding factor in a game. Its in those moments that IT tends to put on his jersey with the big S on it. And believe it or not, I'm not being critical of him here. That's just who he is, and at that moment, he needs a calming influence on the floor to make the decisions.

Now finding a PG that fits that description is difficult. Probably only one in the draft, and no matter how you cut it, a draft pick is a gamble until proven. So PDA has his work cut out for him. The best approach is to be patient, and wait for the right player in the right situation. However, patience is in short supply around here. I've always thought there's was some irony in that the older you got, the more patient you became, but the less time you had. One of God's little jokes. I like to think that patience comes from enlightenment. Sorry, just stroking my ego a bit. Back to the subject. Here's my thing with IT. First, with our so called big three, were still, at best, a five hundred team. Take the Miami Heat. You can take Lebron, Wade, and Bosh, and put just about anyone around them, and their competing for a championship. You can't do that with Cousins, Gay, and It. And if not, then something needs to be changed.

When I watch the games, especially when I'm grading a game, the one thing that looms out at me, is that both Cousins and Gay have to use most of their god given talents to score. In other words, neither gets a lot of easy baskets. The majority of their baskets comes from isolation plays. We need a PG that has the ability to create easy baskets for them, and is able to create some open shots for McLemroe. Right now, McLemore is almost an afterthought on offense. The few times he touches the ball, unless he's coming off a screen, he's being asked to create for himself. Something I'm not sure I want him doing at the moment, regardless of how much I admire his reckless drives to the basket. He needs someone to help him build confidence. And easy shots would be a good step in that direction. When McLemore isn't rushing, he's a very good shooter. We need a PG that can help him slow down. This isn't about what a player can't do, its about how a player can become better at what he can do, by putting him a position of strength. In short, we need a starting PG, that can see all four of his teammates on the floor, and can find a way to get baskets for all of them. No one is an afterthought. If any player on the Kings is an afterthought to our starting PG, then he's an afterthought to the other team as well. With a good PG, that becomes an asset.

Starting is irrelevant. Never has been important. Never will be important. It's a symbolic gesture. Nothing more.

Second, with our big three we're already a .500 team. When the big 3 have been healthy, they've played .500 ball. That's with a young pg and a young center and a terrible bench and a two-guard who can't currently shoot and defend.

The iso offense is on Malone. It's up to him to get Gay to move and not play iso ball, and for everybody else to cut without the ball. This offense became more iso as soon as Gay came to this team. It was obvious. Now, it's up to Malone and Co. to adapt and get guys to move. I'm not blaming that on IT.

 

[Hadlowe]

Starting is irrelevant. Never has been important. Never will be important. It's a symbolic gesture. Nothing more.

Second, with our big three we're already a .500 team. When the big 3 have been healthy, they've played .500 ball. That's with a young pg and a young center and a terrible bench and a two-guard who can't currently shoot and defend.

The iso offense is on Malone. It's up to him to get Gay to move and not play iso ball, and for everybody else to cut without the ball. This offense became more iso as soon as Gay came to this team. It was obvious. Now, it's up to Malone and Co. to adapt and get guys to move. I'm not blaming that on IT.

There was another significant roster move when Gay arrived, no? I agree that Gay takes too many iso shots, and I have been complaining about team ball movement for a while now. The fact still remains that IT pounds the ball more than anyone in the league not named John Wall and that is a problem.

A gameplan centered on the point guard creating opportunities for his teammates is one of the easiest gameplans to shut down in the playoffs when half-court offense is king. IT will need to become more comfortable giving up the ball earlier in the possession.

 

[jcwkings]

Trading Williams would be nice for a mid to low first round draft pick. We would have to take some poopooty salary player back though.
Williams is still a young player who is slowly but surely blossoming. He just lacks confidence and would thrive in a team that believes in him and starts him from the get go. We are not that team. He will eventually rot on our squad.
This late first rounder would be coming from a playoff team that needs that extra umph like OKC or Timberwolves to be a contender.

There's a lot of late 1st rounders in this draft that I'd be heavily interested in. Especially for the pg, pf, and C positions. However, we'd sort of be going back to rebuilding rather than a "win now" team. I am all for this however the FO is not and they are getting a lot of pressure from fans and those alike to actually have a team for the following season that will be able to make the playoffs. I don't see the harm in waiting one more season possibly getting one more good draft pick next year, re-signing Gay, getting rid of unwanted cap space and being able to sign another veteran or two or even a star player if we choose to let Gay and CO. go like a Rondo or hell maybe a Lebron (jk)
This way, we can concentrate on getting some decent draft picks this year and letting Ben Mac develop for another season. Cause lets face it. We can't do much without a solid SG. There is no way we'll make the playoffs next season with a 4 man team. The 4th is assuming our big man draft pick (assuming again we choose a big man) to be able to protect the RIM. These are all big questions. I think come 2015 we'd have a better rounded team, we'd be able to sign some veterans, and our rookies/sophomores will have developed further into more experienced basketball players.

There is no future next year and I believe we'll fall very short of making the playoffs which is useless again. Cousins is very young. There is no pressure around him. I know he wants to win now but he has to realize that the best thing might be to wait another year to actually have a strong team rather than barely missing the playoffs or even dropping out in the 1st round as an 8th seed. As much as I would like to make the playoffs, i'd rather win a championship or have the potential to do so. Since we are a small market team, we won't get the same opportunities as other big market teams such as Lakers will have. With a little push from *friends*, Lakers will end up with Wiggins and sign an all-star like K. Love, Rondo etc next season and they'll be contending already in a few years. We don't have that same luck.

So, I'm all for winning now but we have to be realistic with what we currently have and how we can further develop this squad without taking too many gambles such as hoping IT re-signs for example. We could have gotten a decent player from IT as well as getting rid of some unwanted cap space. However, we didn't end up trading him. I sure do hope they signed a pre-contract with him for a 6th man type of contract because if not, it all goes down hill from there. Especially if we don't get an Exum out of the draft.

At some point you have to stop relying so much on the draft, for every Cousins there are the Robinson's, McLemores, Jimmer's. The draft is purely based on projected raw talent, not taking into account professionalism, work ethic, intangibles etc. The odds that we find a PG better than IT through the draft are minimal at best, even then its going to take 4 or 5 seasons for a 19 year old kid to develop (as we see with McLemore and other young guys). Cousins is young, but we only have him locked up for four seasons, 3 years from now if we still suck he is out the door just like Kevin Love is about to do.

 

[SacKings2002NBAChampions]

We aren't going to win a championship with IT at helm. At least not in a starting position that is. That's the reality of things.
You need a pass first PG in this situation where you have two established scorers in Cousins and Gay and a potential one in Ben Mac.

A player like Exum, Ennis, LaVine and even Smart etc who can all develop into that leader PG that can play on both ends.
More importantly, you need a PG that plays good defense and can stop his man from penetrating and kicking out and closing down the lanes. IT cannot do any of this.

 

[randymoss1881]

We aren't going to win a championship with IT at helm. At least not in a starting position that is. That's the reality of things.
You need a pass first PG in this situation where you have two established scorers in Cousins and Gay and a potential one in Ben Mac.

A player like Exum, Ennis, LaVine and even Smart etc who can all develop into that leader PG that can play on both ends.
More importantly, you need a PG that plays good defense and can stop his man from penetrating and kicking out and closing down the lanes. IT cannot do any of this.

Exactly you won't go far with IT starting. I'd take Ennis before smart/LaVine, I think we won't be able to get low enough for Exum. But Ennis is exactly what we need, a true floor general who is a pass first pg and can lead. Not to mention he is a big shot maker. This will also make our bench elite with IT/Landry leading the way.

 

[Gilles]

We aren't going to win a championship with IT at helm. At least not in a starting position that is. That's the reality of things.
You need a pass first PG in this situation where you have two established scorers in Cousins and Gay and a potential one in Ben Mac.

A player like Exum, Ennis, LaVine and even Smart etc who can all develop into that leader PG that can play on both ends.
More importantly, you need a PG that plays good defense and can stop his man from penetrating and kicking out and closing down the lanes. IT cannot do any of this.

One is not like the other three: LaVine doesn't belong in the conversation right now. Conference play came (i.e. stronger competition) and he completely fell off the grid. Drafting him in teens looks like charity right now - he needs to return as he's 3 years away from contributing. And lol at Ennis closing down anything.

 

[SacKings2002NBAChampions]

Better than anything IT can do on defense.

 

[randymoss1881]

@AlexKennedyNBA: John Wall leads the NBA in time of possession, controlling the ball for eight minutes per game. Runner up is Isaiah Thomas at 7.6 minutes.

That is an abusered stat for someone like IT to be leading in.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

It's such an attention-grabbing statistic, I can't believe that no one has mentioned it before... I wonder why I can't believe that?

 

[Chubbs]

Hmm, it was 7.5 before. Watch out John Wall, the pizza guy is getting closer.

 

[pshn80]

You're missing the point. It's not about if Landry is a good player or not. It's about whether he is a good fit with this team. It just so happens that he is a poor fit. Period. End of discussion.

Pardon me if I am not as confident in this as you are.

 

[VF21]

You're missing the point. It's not about if Landry is a good player or not. It's about whether he is a good fit with this team. It just so happens that he is a poor fit. Period. End of discussion.

Yeah, that is so not how it works around here.

 

[Chubbs]

Landry is a poor fit NOW. We have no idea what the team will look like 5 months from now. They may have 9 guards and 3 PFs at that point, and suddenly you need landry.

It's bizarre we keep acquiring more guys that play his position though. But I see all of that as temporary. Keeps me sane. Otherwise we just have no plan and I don't believe that. Vivek has built companies before. There has to be a plan here.