revisit the cousins trade once more

It’s a stretch to say it gave the KINGS Fox. It certainly netted them Buddy, JJ, and Giles. Everything else is assumed. The KINGS might have ended up with #3/#5 regardless.
 
It's hard for me to imagine any scenario where we don't improve our win total in 2017 if we keep Cousins so I think we can say almost certainly we would not have Fox. Whether we lose the pick by falling out of the top 10 or hang on and get DSJ or Mitchell is up for debate but I doubt we land Fox. Hell if we didn't have the boneheaded Philly trade we may have f'd up and wound up with Fultz somehow.

Any way you slice it though, we're clearly better off for having moved on and New Orleans no longer have any players from the trade a year and a half later, so it's a clear win for us. I was reading a review of the trade yesterday because this discussion came up elsewhere and they even gave Philly an A while giving us an F. Haha, they probably hurt themselves by being able to trade up.
 
We just went through a year complaining about a team that didn't know what was good for them and wouldn't tank and played themselves all the way out of a top draft pick and now we're believing that if we had held onto Cousins we'd have tanked and got Fox?

I find that assertion laughable. Fox is part of the deal.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
We just went through a year complaining about a team that didn't know what was good for them and wouldn't tank and played themselves all the way out of a top draft pick and now we're believing that if we had held onto Cousins we'd have tanked and got Fox?

I find that assertion laughable. Fox is part of the deal.
Click to expand...

Agree. Fox ABSOLUTELY is part of that deal. I was a huge skeptic of the trade but was willing to take Vlade's three year bet... and... Vlade was right. That trade was a massive win for us. And don't forget Giles. So, Buddy, Fox, and Giles, essentially. (if I'm remembering that correctly).
 
The trade worked and in reality they probably moved Cousins a year or two too late (as they could and should have got even more for him). However in the end it all worked out because who is to say if they move him a year earlier they draft a player as good as Fox.

The Kings were never going to win with Cousins as their centerpiece after all the years of drama. They failed him numerous time and of course he failed them. Had things been done differently from the beginning it may very well all come out differently......but so much negativity and drama surrounded Cousins with this team that bad been accumulated over the years.

Both sides benefited from a change of scenery and 100% the Kings are a better team for trading Cousins and starting over.
 
The Hammer said:
Agree. Fox ABSOLUTELY is part of that deal. I was a huge skeptic of the trade but was willing to take Vlade's three year bet... and... Vlade was right. That trade was a massive win for us. And don't forget Giles. So, Buddy, Fox, and Giles, essentially. (if I'm remembering that correctly).
Click to expand...
The trade wound up being the 10th pick (Zach Collins) which we traded to Portland for 15 (JJ) and 20 (Giles).

The pick that became Frank Mason also part of the deal. If we had hung onto our pick we'd have our own second rounder and maybe would have been able to nab him, but that pick conveyed to Chicago and was used to pick Jordan Bell at 37, sent to GSW.

Also note that if Cousins agent hadn't tried to tank the deal we'd have NO pick this year, which probably wouldn't be very good, ironically because moving on from Cousins caused Davis to explode.
 
Winning solves everything and makes it easy to forget the past.
The two things about Cousins I do not miss are complaining and whining, and forcing the ball into the paint and having his shot blocked especially late in games.
 
Last season Boogie looked like a stealth MVP candidate as he averaged 25 & 13 with 5.5 assists and 1.6 blocks thrown in along with shooting slightly over 35% from three and nearly 75% from the stripe. But he wasn't going to get votes because he was playing next to another big who was putting up 25/13/5/3 himself. That's crazy. Who knows how they might have matched up with the Warriors if Boogie didn't go down.

And I think that's what bothers me about looking back at this trade now. DMC's achilles injury drastically reshapes the optics of it, especially when it essentially leaves the Pelicans with zero to show for it.

I'm happy with where the Kings are. I hope Cousins makes a full recovery. New Orleans is still a .500 team though they lost four straight after winning four to start the season. I guess I'd rather just look forward than back.

As for the details of the trade, the Kings traded DeMarcus and Casspi for Tyreke, Buddy, Langston Galloway, the Pels 2017 first-round pick and their 2017 second-round pick.

Those picks ended up being the 10th and 34th in that draft. The Kings own second rounder was finally conveyed as part of the Omri/JJ Hickson trade (another awful trade from Kings history past) to Chicago through Cleveland and bought by the Warriors who took Jordan Bell. But I digress. The 10th pick was traded to Portland for the 15th and 20th picks.

What the Kings can say they directly got from the deal is Tyreke Evans, Buddy Hield, Langston Galloway, Justin Jackson, Harry Giles, and Frank Mason.

Indirectly you could say Fox but does it really matter? This team is what it is. I can't imagine them playing this style of basketball with Cousins here.

So I guess that's a lot of words and winding about to say - let's just be happy with what we have and where the Kings are today.
 
Last edited:
pdxKingsFan said:
The trade wound up being the 10th pick (Zach Collins) which we traded to Portland for 15 (JJ) and 20 (Giles).

The pick that became Frank Mason also part of the deal. If we had hung onto our pick we'd have our own second rounder and maybe would have been able to nab him, but that pick conveyed to Chicago and was used to pick Jordan Bell at 37, sent to GSW.

Also note that if Cousins agent hadn't tried to tank the deal we'd have NO pick this year, which probably wouldn't be very good, ironically because moving on from Cousins caused Davis to explode.
Click to expand...

We clearly won that trade. NO is likely regretting it. I still want Cousins to figure it out eventually though. Maybe getting dumped a second time will help him introspect. Sad!
 
funkykingston said:
Omri/JJ Hickson trade (another awful trade from Kings history past)
Click to expand...
This seemingly innocuous trade handcuffed the team for the entire decade and Cousins era. It is almost certainly why we had to do the Philly deal the way we did it instead of just giving them a much earlier pick.

As it turns out, we may have matrixed our way around the worst case scenarios and come out ahead in the end, but for my money that trade (which also netted us the crappier player) was far more damaging than Vlade's much maligned stupid trade.
 
I don’t want to revisit that trade. Like all trades, it’s history. We are doing real well for the moment. Go Kings.
 
Hields start to this season is only a glimpse of what he can actually do. He is scoring effortlessly, and ridiculously efficiently. It won’t be long til we see a 30+pt game. And I don’t think it’ll be long after that until we see another, and another. Guy can shoot, and has the mentality of a killer. If he thinks his hand is warm at all, he’s launching, and we have enough weapons around him that he won’t be consistently slowed down. The gaping black hole that was our 2 guard (since Kevin Martin) has finally vanished.

Buddy&Culture>Boogie&Badassery
 
pdxKingsFan said:
It's hard for me to imagine any scenario where we don't improve our win total in 2017 if we keep Cousins so I think we can say almost certainly we would not have Fox. Whether we lose the pick by falling out of the top 10 or hang on and get DSJ or Mitchell is up for debate but I doubt we land Fox. Hell if we didn't have the boneheaded Philly trade we may have f'd up and wound up with Fultz somehow.

Any way you slice it though, we're clearly better off for having moved on and New Orleans no longer have any players from the trade a year and a half later, so it's a clear win for us. I was reading a review of the trade yesterday because this discussion came up elsewhere and they even gave Philly an A while giving us an F. Haha, they probably hurt themselves by being able to trade up.
Click to expand...
Seriously agree...FOX, BUDDY, GILES, JACKSON,MASON for Cousins is how that trade played out. It was a great draft. If not for that terrible trade like u said we could have missed out on fox. Things happen for a reason I guess. Anyway,

Fox and buddy have arrived, mason is at least an nba level player off the bench more a 3rd string but could be 2nd.

Giles could be the steal of this draft. I’m reserving all judgment on him till next year or the one after. Just like fox needed a year to find his bearings. Or how about WCS needing a few years lol! Giles could be really really good and he’s this moment an non factor!

Jackson however looks like the weak link here but he’s starting lol! Maybe in a year Justin is at least serviceable? To be continued
 
One thing is for sure! You can tell the players on this team all like and root for each other. They seem to genuinely enjoy being a team. You can't buy that kind of chemistry. ;)

None of the constant angst and anxiety as before.

When you know your teammate has your back, a team can do miraculous things! :cool:
 
Last edited:
John Galt said:
it is a stretch to say it didn't give them Fox. No trade = hard playoff push and super high likelihood of losing the pick completely.
Click to expand...
I think it is semantics here. The strategy to make the trade clearly ended up getting us Fox. However, the trade itself did not. People on a Pelican's forum are not sitting around bemoaning the fact that they traded BOTH Fox and Hield to the Kings for only a season and a half of Cousins. The only reason that distinction is needed on a Kings forum is to think whether we maximized the assets we received directly from our trade partner (which is different from the end result of the strategy).
 
TaxMan said:
I think it is semantics here. The strategy to make the trade clearly ended up getting us Fox. However, the trade itself did not. People on a Pelican's forum are not sitting around bemoaning the fact that they traded BOTH Fox and Hield to the Kings for only a season and a half of Cousins. The only reason that distinction is needed on a Kings forum is to think whether we maximized the assets we received directly from our trade partner (which is different from the end result of the strategy).
Click to expand...
Of course NO didn't lose Fox, but he was certainly a bi-product of the trade for us in which we clearly decided to check out of the playoff race and begin asset collection in earnest. So in this case it was Chicago who potentially lost out. A player in the 11-14 range would have worked out very nicely for them instead of the second round pick they wound up selling.
 
Fox was not a part of the trade. He was a potential (and likely) result of the trade. That doesn't mean you can retrospectively include him as part of it.

It was a terrible trade at the time. It may work out as a win though in spite of it. I'm as hyped about this team as the next person, but we're 9 games in. Perspective. We have a very difficult November coming up. If we're .500 after this month, we can talk about us being legit.
 
TaxMan said:
I think it is semantics here. The strategy to make the trade clearly ended up getting us Fox. However, the trade itself did not. People on a Pelican's forum are not sitting around bemoaning the fact that they traded BOTH Fox and Hield to the Kings for only a season and a half of Cousins. The only reason that distinction is needed on a Kings forum is to think whether we maximized the assets we received directly from our trade partner (which is different from the end result of the strategy).
Click to expand...
excellent perspective and logic. I could never understand why people wouldn't grant Fox as part of the trade, but I see it is because I'm looking at it strictly from the standpoint of "evaluating Vlade's decision" and not the trade itself. cool... thanks... I learned today :)
 
Dime Dropper said:
Fox was not a part of the trade. He was a potential (and likely) result of the trade. That doesn't mean you can retrospectively include him as part of it.

It was a terrible trade at the time. It may work out as a win though in spite of it. I'm as hyped about this team as the next person, but we're 9 games in. Perspective. We have a very difficult November coming up. If we're .500 after this month, we can talk about us being legit.
Click to expand...
"terrible trade at the time"... why? what was so terrible about it?
 
pdxKingsFan said:
We just went through a year complaining about a team that didn't know what was good for them and wouldn't tank and played themselves all the way out of a top draft pick and now we're believing that if we had held onto Cousins we'd have tanked and got Fox?

I find that assertion laughable. Fox is part of the deal.
Click to expand...

They tanked every year. They just had bad lotto luck and bad talent evaluaiton. Where they finished may be similar to what they would get if they had sat Cousins, traded role players for assets and so on. Maybe they moved up a spot or two at the most.

I mean they blew nearly every draft picks they got. If you look a the Warriors, you'll notice that all their homegrown stars were drafted after the Kings drafted. The Kings could be the Dubs if they knew how to draft. Three good picks over 12 years of tanking tells you the issue wasn't how hard you tanked.
 
swisshh said:
They tanked every year. They just had bad lotto luck and bad talent evaluaiton. Where they finished may be similar to what they would get if they had sat Cousins, traded role players for assets and so on. Maybe they moved up a spot or two at the most.

I mean they blew nearly every draft picks they got. If you look a the Warriors, you'll notice that all their homegrown stars were drafted after the Kings drafted. The Kings could be the Dubs if they knew how to draft. Three good picks over 12 years of tanking tells you the issue wasn't how hard you tanked.
Click to expand...
They sucked. They didn't tank. Philly tanked. There is a difference clear as day.

And yes, I pointed out more than once that a team can rebuild without resorting to Philly's tactics and pointed the Warriors out as an example, and took an incredible amount of flack for it.

But do go on.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
They sucked. They didn't tank. Philly tanked. There is a difference clear as day.

And yes, I pointed out more than once that a team can rebuild without resorting to Philly's tactics and pointed the Warriors out as an example, and took an incredible amount of flack for it.

But do go on.
Click to expand...

Haha. Strong point. The Kings eternal conundrum is that they couldn't even tank properly! Vlade took that decision out of their hands and vwallla! Two top 5 picks in a row. If that strategy is not lauded as part of that trade... kinda missing one of the main reasons Vlade pulled the trigger.
 
The Hammer said:
Haha. Strong point. The Kings eternal conundrum is that they couldn't even tank properly! Vlade took that decision out of their hands and vwallla! Two top 5 picks in a row. If that strategy is not lauded as part of that trade... kinda missing one of the main reasons Vlade pulled the trigger.
Click to expand...
I really do believe that most players drafted into the league have the tools to succeed and that often the difference can be whether or not they are put into a position for success. The willingness to commit to Vlade and Joerger to see out their vision is huge. And if you look at the other top 6 picks this year all but Dallas have a new coach or new GM or both which is why even though they were all picked to be way better and more improved we're the ones with the greatest swing so far.
 
John Galt said:
it is a stretch to say it didn't give them Fox. No trade = hard playoff push and super high likelihood of losing the pick completely.
Click to expand...

But that's the thing. You're speculating. We have no idea how the team may have performed w/ Boogie. You may think you know. But you don't. Neither do I. That was the point. We can believe it indirectly led to it -- but it surely wasn't a direct result. We have no way to truly know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
[Rumor] Miami Heat Add $74 Million All-Star In Blockbuster Trade Proposal
Replies
10
Views
487
Caccia
Caccia
C
[Trade] Cleveland Cavaliers Linked to Intriguing Team Amid Darius Garland Trade Rumors
Replies
3
Views
278
iowamcnabb
iowamcnabb
Y
Ranking 5 realistic trade packages for Sacramento Kings star De'Aaron Fox
Replies
2
Views
262
Capt. Factorial
Capt. Factorial
B
[Trade] Kings will crush Warriors' Jonathan Kuminga dream with another boneheaded trade
Replies
22
Views
969
Jdbraver137
J
S
New Report on Potential Kings, Jonathan Kuminga Trade
Replies
0
Views
170
Sacramento Kings On SI
S
Back
Top