At the price they paid, I don't like those signings. Going for Vets is a win-now move, no matter how you slice it, and the Kings are not at that stage of the game.. They should've been in full 'asset acquisition mode'...
Why 2 years for Zach Randolph? Why?!?!
Now, there was no Harrison Barnes to be had, but these moves remind me of Utah paying Joe Johnson and Boris Diaw about $20MM last summer instead of going after Harrison Barnes, who would've been way better last year than those 2, he'd have gotten tons of starts with their injury riddled season, and of course moving forward,he'd have covered their ass for Hayward walking.................. I hope there isn't an overlooked move like which was available that comes back to look like a no-brainer in just a few months time..
You pay players to play not to mentor IMO, thats what the rest of the staff gets paid for... Even thru the lens of being mentors, those 2 aren't going to be as helpful as George Hill, who you will see talking non-stop when he's on the bench...
I think they should've gone for assets with potential. Potential to improve and potential to be real trade-assets down the line or even at this upcoming trade deadline. Or at least 1 year rentals, to sacrifice some flexibility for Zach Randolph seems crazy to me and frankly favoritism.
The Kings were in a position to bid on RFA's and run the price up on teams, the real head-scratcher to me is why Zach Randolph when JaMychal Green is clearly much better at this stage and has the potential to play at a high level for years.
Kentavious Caldwell Pope would've been great here too as far as I'm concerned, I don't care if they have Buddy, the Kings aren't in a position to be that kind of picky/choosey, IMO.