To Keep or Not Keep Rudy Gay

As we are getting closer to the offseason there has been a lot of debate about the direction of this team for next year, mostly regarding Isaiah Thomas obviously. I think it's interesting though that there hasn't been much debate about Rudy Gay, perhaps that's because it's not the team's decision. Regardless of that though I think it would be cool to get a general consensus of what we all think here, what we are hoping for at least.

Perhaps this is poor timing because of the last win, but my hope is that he opts not to stay here and I will explain why.

There has been one major thing with this team since the new bad years have started that has caused them to lose so much, can you guess what it is? I bet most people will say poor defense, which is true, but I actually think that even more important than that is that this team has not been able to make shots from the outside consistently since the good years where they were one of the best at it, I don't think that's a coincidence. I also don't think it's a coincidence that out of the top 10 FG% teams in the NBA, 8 of them are playoff teams and a 9th team on the fringe. Out of the bottom 15 FG% teams in the NBA, only 2 are playoff teams, both from the Eastern Conference so that's not saying much. Anyway I could expand more on this, perhaps I will in a new thread someday, but let's just say that shooting is important. No matter how much the game has changed over the years, consistently making outside shots is what typically wins.

So to start with my main point of why I hope Rudy Gay doesn't stay here is simply that while he is a good scorer he actually not a good shooter, which I will show here. He holds onto the ball too long, takes too many shots, and actually doesn't help out much in other areas. Let's talk about another player that we should all be familiar with to compare, Tyreke Evans. It seems that so many fans that like Rudy Gay's game are the same ones who complained about Tyreke Evans' game even though offensively they are so similar when it comes to the numbers.

Ever think about why Gay shot so poorly in Toronto and then how it improved so much here? Perhaps the Kings are simply a better fit for him. It's true, the current Kings play style is a better fit for his play style, the problem is that this play style doesn't win games, good for stats, bad for wins. The Toronto Raptors are a pass and shoot team while the Sacramento Kings are a penetrate and score team. Rudy Gay is a player who likes to drive and score, most of his shots and points come at the rim, like Tyreke Evans. Why is Toronto playing better without him? He bogged them down by holding onto the ball too long and taking too many shots, it hurt the flow of the team. Let's look at his shooting percentages this year from NBA.com.

At the rim: Takes 43% of his shots here, very high for a perimeter player. Shoots at 54%, nice. Tyreke Evans like this way, this is why is FG% has gone up here, many more opportunities at the rim because of play style.

Midrange shot, 5 to 10 feet: Shoots at 49%, not bad, could be better, they are high percentage shots. This is also Tyreke Evans like.

Midrange shot, 11 to 20 feet: Shoots at 34%, now we have a problem. No ability to spread the offense. Tyreke Evans anyone?

3-Point shot: Shoots at 34%, I would have said that this was better than Tyreke Evans, but I believe that is what Evans shot last year. Also missing is the consistency, Gay may shoot at 34% for the year, but he actually has only shot over 33% in 18 of the 62 games played. So basically not a good 3-Point shooter.

Right now Rudy Gay is here to score points, that's what we want him for, but I've shown that perhaps he might not be doing it as efficiently as you would hope. Now what about other things? Where does he help? From what I see he slows the offense down, turns the ball over too much, doesn't create for teammates (2.9 Assists per game to 3.0 Turnovers per game, not good), and not much of a one on one or team defender. At least Tyreke Evans created for his teammates and played excellent defense and we didn't want to pay him 11 million per year, let alone 19 million. Now I'm not saying I would have given Evans the contact that New Orleans did, I'm just using him as an example for comparative purposes.

Here is the thing, right now the Kings as a team average 101 points per game, if Rudy Gay leaves and takes his 20 points per game with him the Kings are not going to start averaging 81 points per game. Slack always gets picked up by another player or players, it's about finding the right combination. The Kings have averaged a lot of points per game for quite a few years now, players come and players go and the points still get scored, just haven't found the right combination. I believe there are difference makers and stat stuffers at all levels from role players to all-star players. The Kings have had a lot of stat stuffers and very few difference makers over the last several years. I believe that Rudy Gay is just another stat stuffer, I don't think he is a selfish player, it's just his game, take it or leave it. I don't want more of the same anymore. A lot of people really like Isaiah Thomas, a lot really like Rudy Gay, and a lot really like DeMarcus Cousins (I'm with you on this one). Let's keep them all! Let's not forget that we are a 24 win team, the big 3 may put up some impressive stats, but unfortunately, not wins. We need to the change the play style of this team and until we do things won't change.
 
I think if we lose Rudy it will be a huge backstep for this team. It seems we like to acquire talent and get rid of it. He interacts well with Cuz on the court and apparently off the court. At times it is if the two of them can get in sync and play at a different level than the rest of the team and the team they are competing against. I am sure there will be a flurry of notes and stats but why on earth did we trade for an overpriced star jut to let him go? Incredible. Have fun debating this folks. I can't believe there is even a need for a debate.

If we lose Rudy, my interest will decrease even more than it has. He is a great player.

Perhaps we should get rid of Boogie because of his low shooting percentage for his position, his large number of turnovers, the high number of techs, and his immaturity. Then we could start over. As we suck right now, we might even achieve Milwaukee level.
 
Last edited:
only way I would agree on Rudy not being here is a trade where we get 19 mil worth in no more than 2-3 players. i.e. Jeff Teague Al Horford
 
Gay is a really good player. You just know talent when you see it.

There are only two issues. The first is whether Gay wants to play here longer than he has to and the second is money.
 
Gay is a really good player. You just know talent when you see it.

There are only two issues. The first is whether Gay wants to play here longer than he has to and the second is money.

This should actually be interesting to watch. This contract will be Gay's prime years. Once it's over, he'll be 33 years old and on the down-slide of his career. Would he want to spend it on a team that's 2 years away from playoff contention?
 
I think if we lose Rudy it will be a huge backstep for this team. It seems we like to acquire talent and get rid of it. He interacts well with Cuz on the court and apparently off the court. At times it is if the two of them can get in sync and play at a different level than the rest of the team and the team they are competing against. I am sure there will be a flurry of notes and stats but why on earth did we trade for an overpriced star jut to let him go? Incredible. Have fun debating this folks. I can't believe there is even a need for a debate.

If we lose Rudy, my interest will decrease even more than it has. He is a great player.

Perhaps we should get rid of Boogie because of his low shooting percentage for his position, his large number of turnovers, the high number of techs, and his immaturity. Then we could start over. As we suck right now, we might even achieve Milwaukee level.

Agreed. Gay and Cousins are the only two players that give me any real hope for this team. Like others have said if you start taking away players like Gay how long do you think Cousins will hang around when his contract is up? Easier said than done with the salary cap and all but we need to add more players like Gay, not take them away.
 
I hope Rudy stays. He is one of the two best players on this team. It's much easier to build a winning team with two or three keepers than starting all the way over again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lwc
I agree with your post. One question I have is: Can Rudy Gay adapt his game to a motion offense, or is he unable/unwilling to adapt his game to a motion offense? I'll tell you, my bias is that I can't stand iso offense. I totally get that iso offense with a great iso player can win you games. You can look at the best players in the game and see that that is the case. You can see this last Washington game and see that the Rudy Gay iso offense closed that game. But, 1) I'm not sold that Gay is good enough to consistently close like what we saw in the Washington game, and 2) I hate iso offense.

Aside from the above, I just wonder whether Gay really wants to be in Sacto. He seems like he's just a tad too old, a tad too experienced to want to take on the parenting role of this bunch. He just doesn't seem to be as actively engaged with this team as you would like, more like it's an audition for a future engagement. I could be totally wrong, but that's the drift I get. In his short stint as a King, he's admitted a few times that he wasn't ready to play, either for an entire game or part of a game. It just makes you wonder. It's not going to shock me if he opts out and signs with another team.
 
If we can replace him with a Gordan Hayward or something like that or Parker/Wiggins I have zero issue letting him go he's just not a guy that plays hard all the time and we need players that do that. The guy has crazy talent but there's a reason he has been traded twice already and once from a team where if he was better/played harder and smarter could have been a contender.

Personally if I'm Rudy Gay and I have solid money saved up from the previous years I'm trying to go to a contender like the Bulls (would be with a healthy D-Rose) or one of the better teams in the NBA. Again I can't stress how badly we need players who don't take games/quarters off we got to many as it is.

Unless some miracle takes place over the summer with our team I find it hard to see us in the playoffs next season.
 
Keep him. It is going to be very hard to get anyone as talented as Rudy Gay here in Sacramento (unless we get very lucky on this draft)
On top of that, the guy is a true professional on and off the court
 
unless the kings come away with andrew wiggins or jabari parker in the upcoming draft, they should plan to keep rudy gay.
I'd still keep him and use his valuable expiring at next year's deadline if it didn't work out, but I'd fully plan on it working out.

Is this really even a discussion? Does it really have to been said for the umpteenth time that Sacramento does not, has not and until something changes, will not attract players of Rudy's caliber in free agency? Lose him and aside from Boogie we have no one who would net good value in return. I'm continually amazed at how fans of this market can even debate losing top talent, letting it walk for nothing as if we've ever done a damn thing with this mystical cap space.

Only real good free agent signing we've had is Vlade, and of course that was likely heavily dependent on Rick Adelman coming on board, Webber getting traded here and his boy from back home, Peja, coming over to join us that year so even Vlade was a special circumstance.

And this crap about Rudy fitting the system is a bunch of bull dookie. You tailor your system to your top talent and find pieces to fit around them. You don't force a system on your top talents and if they don't fit, let them walk instead of altering the system. Even the triangle offense was tweaked between Chicago and LA and tweaked around the makeup of those teams. We build around Boogie. Only question that should be asked is does Rudy fit with Boogie. Thus far, it's a clear yes and they have arguably better chemistry than any two players on this roster. Whether people prefer iso vs motion offenses or any system inbetween is besides the point. The last 5 mins, especially in playoff ball you win with iso ball and P&R's involving your top players. What the stars can do is what separates the men from the boys, the winners from the losers. It's why it's a star driven league and a star driven sport.(Obviously this isn't directed at you, Padrino)
 
Last edited:
Only real good free agent signing we've had is Vlade, and of course that was likely heavily dependent on Rick Adelman coming on board, Webber getting traded here and his boy from back home, Peja, coming over to join us that year so even Vlade was a special circumstance.

We offered Vlade the most money, that was the main reason why he came.

While there are always a multitude of reasons why certain players sign in certain places the primary reason is usually always money.

Small markets like Sacramento always have a chance with players that aren't consensus max players because they have the ability to overpay for them.
 
I'd still keep him and use his valuable expiring at next year's deadline if it didn't work out, but I'd fully plan on it working out.

Is this really even a discussion? Does it really have to been said for the umpteenth time that Sacramento does not, has not and until something changes, will not attract players of Rudy's caliber in free agency? Lose him and aside from Boogie we have no one who would net good value in return. I'm continually amazed at how fans of this market can even debate losing top talent, letting it walk for nothing as if we've ever done a damn thing with this mystical cap space.

Only real good free agent signing we've had is Vlade, and of course that was likely heavily dependent on Rick Adelman coming on board, Webber getting traded here and his boy from back home, Peja, coming over to join us that year so even Vlade was a special circumstance.

And this crap about Rudy fitting the system is a bunch of bull dookie. You tailor your system to your top talent and find pieces to fit around them. You don't force a system on your top talents and if they don't fit, let them walk instead of altering the system. Even the triangle offense was tweaked between Chicago and LA and tweaked around the makeup of those teams. We build around Boogie. Only question that should be asked is does Rudy fit with Boogie. Thus far, it's a clear yes and they have arguably better chemistry than any two players on this roster. Whether people prefer iso vs motion offenses or any system inbetween is besides the point. The last 5 mins, especially in playoff ball you win with iso ball and P&R's involving your top players. What the stars can do is what separates the men from the boys, the winners from the losers. It's why it's a star driven league and a star driven sport.(Obviously this isn't directed at you, Padrino)

As they say in Southern Russia, "No crapsky, ya'll."
 
We offered Vlade the most money, that was the main reason why he came.

While there are always a multitude of reasons why certain players sign in certain places the primary reason is usually always money.

Small markets like Sacramento always have a chance with players that aren't consensus max players because they have the ability to overpay for them.

How many free agents in the last two decades have we offered a lot of money to? One? Vlade's wife had a restaurant in LA and I don't think Vlade wanted to be away from her PLUS living in Charlotte. 'Course to go with my note above, this would have made him a Southern Serb. :)
 
Small markets like Sacramento always have a chance with players that aren't consensus max players because they have the ability to overpay for them.
Yeah, that worked out well with AK and Iggy.

Our best bet continues to be to draft star talent or trade for star talent, then convince them to stay and build a connection with the city. Overpaying Carl Landry/Aaron Brooks types gets you nowhere. Convincing support players, 3&D guys to sign is possible, of course it's a helluva lot easier once the stars are in place and the foundation for winning is in place.
 
How many free agents in the last two decades have we offered a lot of money to? One? Vlade's wife had a restaurant in LA and I don't think Vlade wanted to be away from her PLUS living in Charlotte. 'Course to go with my note above, this would have made him a Southern Serb. :)

Well like I mentioned already there are always a multitude of reasons, but at the end of the day the primary reason Vlade came was because we offered him the most money.
 
Yeah, that worked out well with AK and Iggy.

Our best bet continues to be to draft star talent or trade for star talent, then convince them to stay and build a connection with the city. Overpaying Carl Landry/Aaron Brooks types gets you nowhere. Convincing support players, 3&D guys to sign is possible, of course it a helluva lot easier once the stars are in place and the foundation for winning is in place.

I'll say it a different way because I think with what we have on our team now, there are two players who should be paid a similar amount of money and they are Cuz and Rudy. That doesn't leave a lot left to fill out a roster given a few other contracts. The IT drama will resolve itself but we have to be careful we don't paint ourselves into a corner and use what money we have poorly.
 
We offered Vlade the most money, that was the main reason why he came.

While there are always a multitude of reasons why certain players sign in certain places the primary reason is usually always money.

Small markets like Sacramento always have a chance with players that aren't consensus max players because they have the ability to overpay for them.

That's not exactly true. But since this thread is about Rudy Gay I'm not going to derail it with a discussion of Vlade.
 
I said a chance. In both of those situations we actually did have a plausible chance.
Chance is vague. We technically had a chance at Lebron.

What isn't vague however is small market failures to sign even above average FA's or top end talent in the modern NBA era. Whether its Portland(Lillard/Aldrige/Batum), Minn(Rubio/Love), Cle(Lebron previously/Kyrie), SA(Tim/Tony/Manu), OKC(Westbrook/Durant/Ibaka), Ind(Hibbert/George), there's a common theme here. The foundation of a winner is done through the draft and supporting pieces many times are acquired through trades. Role players are signed, some better than others, but rarely do we see difference makers sign. Hence, "chance" is overrated.
 
We offered Vlade the most money, that was the main reason why he came.

While there are always a multitude of reasons why certain players sign in certain places the primary reason is usually always money.

Small markets like Sacramento always have a chance with players that aren't consensus max players because they have the ability to overpay for them.


Vlade also wanted to be in Cali. for his wife's career.

And he's the very best the Kings have ever signed. A guy coming off a year when he was platooning and I think averaging 10ppg or some such.

The league doesn't work for Sacto like it does for the Lakers. Sacto can't let major talents go. They have to go in fair value in return trades or not at all. Sacto hasn't gotten a single return on any of the half dozen or so major talents they've had in the last decade -- actually except for Peja. But then we got nothing back for Artest. And that's part of the story why the franchise has tanked to the bottom of the league. Just no way for Sacramento to replace major talents it loses but in the draft. But to replace high end guys you need lottery picks, which means being bad, and then you need to hit on them.

Now IF the Kings hit gold in this draft, and given what happened just last summer its no guarantee, but IF they hit gold this summer, and IF they either retain Gay/Thomas or receive equal levels of talent back in return for them, they MAY have enough talent, but not enough experience, to win next year. If on the other hand we go right back to letting even more talent walk, then all you are doing is being an eternal lottery rat running on its wheel. Rudy Gay is quite likely one of the ten most talented players the Kings have had in their 30 years in Sacto. So obviously first thing that is discussed is whether to let him walk.
 
Last edited:
Chance is vague. We technically had a chance at Lebron.

What isn't vague however is small market failures to sign even above average FA's or top end talent in the modern NBA era. Whether its Portland(Lillard/Aldrige/Batum), Minn(Rubio/Love), Cle(Lebron previously/Kyrie), SA(Tim/Tony/Manu), OKC(Westbrook/Durant/Ibaka), Ind(Hibbert/George), there's a common theme here. The foundation of a winner is done through the draft and supporting pieces many times are acquired through trades. Role players are signed, some better than others, but rarely do we see difference makers sign. Hence, "chance" is overrated.

Plausible chance, as in both Igg and AK were reported to have considered offers from the Kings.

Yes, for a small markets to compete they must do it through the draft, but they also must be fiscally responsible.
 
Games like the Spurs game and numerous others is exactly why I hope Rudy opts out, you can't teach talent, effort and IQ and only having one of those is not enough to be a top 2 player on a team and expect that team to be successful. I know a lot of you will bring up his stomache bug but he's done this his whole career.
 
Games like the Spurs game and numerous others is exactly why I hope Rudy opts out, you can't teach talent, effort and IQ and only having one of those is not enough to be a top 2 player on a team and expect that team to be successful. I know a lot of you will bring up his stomache bug but he's done this his whole career.

I don't know what exactly you think he did but have a poor game, but that happens. He's not Lebron. Nobody but an idiot is suggesting he is. But he's borderline Top 5 for his position.
 
You ****ing keep him! Good coaching and proper management go a LOOOONG way to helping talent build chemistry. We're so used to such a poor environment that we think we need to find this cosmically perfectly aligned set of players. No. When guys are supported, they want to stay, and play. Teams who play together stay together right?
 
ridiculous notion to consider letting rudy go. If we draft Parker or Wiggins then you consider your options and even in that case you get value for him back. Rudy sets us up right good and depending on where we draft you plan to move forward with him and boogie. Now if we have a shot a a top tier SF then you look into but as it stands we have more pressing issues. An efficient PG does wonders for us and i wouldnt be suprised if we look to trade the pick depending on where we land
 
ridiculous notion to consider letting rudy go. If we draft Parker or Wiggins then you consider your options and even in that case you get value for him back. Rudy sets us up right good and depending on where we draft you plan to move forward with him and boogie. Now if we have a shot a a top tier SF then you look into but as it stands we have more pressing issues. An efficient PG does wonders for us and i wouldnt be suprised if we look to trade the pick depending on where we land

I agree with you, except that I consider Rudy himself a top-tier SF. We need to get a core group of really good players together and work with them. I feel like we have two great pieces in DMC and Rudy. We need a really good PG (I don't feel like IT is the answer) and some defense at the rim. We're getting there. Don't trade Rudy, please. He's part of the solution, and as others have said, players are not flocking to Sacramento.
 
Where exactly are players "flocking to"? Couldn't the vast majority of the teams in the league say that the top players are not beating down their doors to get there?
 
Back
Top