Trade IT for? (split)

[Fear the Putin]

Just because IT doesn't fit with our core, doesn't mean he isn't a damn talented player. The peanuts some of you are offering is mind boggling. He's a scoring machine and maybe, just maybe...with the right coach, he can be mentored into running an offense and becoming a distributor.

 

[rainmaker]

Just because IT doesn't fit with our core, doesn't mean he isn't a damn talented player. The peanuts some of you are offering is mind boggling. He's a scoring machine and maybe, just maybe...with the right coach, he can be mentored into running an offense and becoming a distributor.

Well, his contract is peanuts compared to the rest of the league, so you'd have a hell of a time attempting to trade IT for fair value.

 

[Bricklayer]

Why trade him when he would be an awesome 6th man off the bench. He has Bobby Jackson written all over him. As much as I love Marcus Thornton, his salary can fetch us that SF that would fit us perfectly.

This is my general thought on that situation too. Thornton's bigger contract may actually HELP us. Only way it could work opposite is if you traded IT for a pick in this upcoming draft where you had a SF targeted. Have a team in need of a scoring PG and IT could look to them to be pretty much of a sure thing on a contract as cheap as a rookie's would have been.

 

[bajaden]

I absolutely do not want any draft picks. Let's settle in with what we have and develop them and also develop a team. We have a very good offense. If the draftee was a shot blocker, I would change my mind but I am worn out on young guys with unknown future. We need role players. We need defenders. I don't know who Dieng is so can't comment on a note that explains nothing.

Dieng is a defender. He's 6'11", 250 pounds, and was on the Louisville team that just won the national championship. He's not much of an offensive player, but he has a very good jumper from the top of the key. I wouldn't put him in the same class of shotblocker as Anthony Davis, but he is a good shotblocker, and an excellent man on man defender in the post. Decent to good rebounder. Knows his role, and doesn't try to do what he can't. He's improved every year in college,and thats always a good sign. I can't predict an immediate impact, but down the road I could see him as a starter at the PF position along side Cuz.

In my humble opinion, with the shortage of shotblockers in the NBA, your going to have to home grow one. The only way to do that, is do what the Thunder did. They gambled on a raw player in Ibaka, and it paid off. The Bucks are starting to reap the benefits of Sanders after a couple of years. These guys just don't grow on trees, and when a team has one, they don't want to let them go.

 

[bajaden]

This is my general thought on that situation too. Thornton's bigger contract may actually HELP us. Only way it could work opposite is if you traded IT for a pick in this upcoming draft where you had a SF targeted. Have a team in need of a scoring PG and IT could look to them to be pretty much of a sure thing on a contract as cheap as a rookie's would have been.

There is a SF in the upcoming draft that I would target. Thats Otto Porter. And he's the only one that I would be interested in at that position. There is a chance he'll drop to us, depending on the needs of those ahead of us. He's solid, and can start right now.

 

[Padrino]

Just because IT doesn't fit with our core, doesn't mean he isn't a damn talented player. The peanuts some of you are offering is mind boggling. He's a scoring machine and maybe, just maybe...with the right coach, he can be mentored into running an offense and becoming a distributor.

you know who else is a scoring machine? demarcus cousins. as is tyreke evans. as is marcus thornton. as is jimmer fredette. a team does not need this many scorers, particularly when the majority of those scorers are rather weak defenders. the team is imbalanced, and because of thomas' contract situation, it will be very difficult to acquire a worthy talent in return. so what to do with him? stash him on the bench in a sixth man role, where he can be a "damn talented player" without mucking up the development of the kings' core talents. but he's not a priority. "the right coach" is one that will mesh well with and maximize the talents of demarcus cousins and tyreke evans...

 

[Agent23]

you know who else is a scoring machine? demarcus cousins. as is tyreke evans. as is marcus thornton. as is jimmer fredette. a team does not need this many scorers, particularly when the majority of those scorers are rather weak defenders. the team is imbalanced, and because of thomas' contract situation, it will be very difficult to acquire a worthy talent in return. so what to do with him? stash him on the bench in a sixth man role, where he can be a "damn talented player" without mucking up the development of the kings' core talents. but he's not a priority. "the right coach" is one that will mesh well with and maximize the talents of demarcus cousins and tyreke evans...

Absofreakinlutely! It boggles the mind that some have to be convinced of this. You have 2 players, despite not being fully developed yet, that are matchup nightmares. Teams gameplan for these 2 players. They double team them. The future success of this team depends on getting the right players around them to exploit the amount of attention these 2 players get. They laugh when Tyreke Evans gets frozen out of the offense or Isaiah Thomas has more shot attempts than Demarcus Cousins. Its an automatic win for the other team.

 

[ppine]

cousins good. Thomas bad. Nobody around here apparently values heart, integrity, and respect for the game.

 

[Agent23]

cousins good. Thomas bad. Nobody around here apparently values heart, integrity, and respect for the game.

We value game dominating talent. All the heart, integrity and respect for the game in the world doesn't win games. Once in a decade talent does.

 

[mac]

cousins good. Thomas bad. Nobody around here apparently values heart, integrity, and respect for the game.

Wrong. Everyone values heart, integrity? and respect for the game (how in the world is integrity involved here? Did IT return a lost wallet or something?). Just not everyone wants to design their offense and team around heart and respect when you can design it around much greater talent.

 

[Kingster]

Wrong. Everyone values heart, integrity? and respect for the game (how in the world is integrity involved here? Did IT return a lost wallet or something?). Just not everyone wants to design their offense and team around heart and respect when you can design it around much greater talent.

On the other hand, with Cousins, you might make a large investment, build a substantial edifice around him, only to find that you've just built on quicksand. Better do a lot of due dilegence on the geolgical strata before you build around him.

 

[mac]

On the other hand, with Cousins, you might make a large investment, build a substantial edifice around him, only to find that you've just built on quicksand. Better do a lot of due dilegence on the geolgical strata before you build around him.

Yes, and nobody here disregards that nothing is certain with Cousins. All we are saying is that it is clear that Cousins has the potential to be the best big man in the league. We should be building around that (what we have right now), and perhaps see how it goes along under a good coach for 2-3 years. Isaiah Thomas is not leading us to ever possibly winning a championship. He is a huge liability on the defensive end and was drafted #60 for a reason. He has certainly proved to be far far more valuable than the 60th pick, but there is no frikin way on earth that I am building my team around a 5'9 shoot-first Point Guard. That doesn't mean I don't value what he could similarly do under a good coach. It just means I don't value what he's doing right now, nor the way that the organization has pumped him up.

Just out of curiosity - is it true that teams normally announce their best, star player last? E.g. LeBron James would be introduced last, Kobe last etc. Because against the Clippers the order was Salmons, JT, Cuz, MT, IT. I found that strange.

 

[Padrino]

Yes, and nobody here disregards that nothing is certain with Cousins. All we are saying is that it is clear that Cousins has the potential to be the best big man in the league. We should be building around that (what we have right now), and perhaps see how it goes along under a good coach for 2-3 years. Isaiah Thomas is not leading us to ever possibly winning a championship. He is a huge liability on the defensive end and was drafted #60 for a reason. He has certainly proved to be far far more valuable than the 60th pick, but there is no frikin way on earth that I am building my team around a 5'9 shoot-first Point Guard. That doesn't mean I don't value what he could similarly do under a good coach. It just means I don't value what he's doing right now, nor the way that the organization has pumped him up.

Just out of curiosity - is it true that teams normally announce their best, star player last? E.g. LeBron James would be introduced last, Kobe last etc. Because against the Clippers the order was Salmons, JT, Cuz, MT, IT. I found that strange.

i have, since the day he was drafted, trumpeted the notion that a home run swing that misses with demarcus cousins is worth it so much more than a base hit with an inferior talent. you get nowhere in either case, but at least you put yourself in a position to achieve greatness when you rolled the dice on a player like cousins. for a small market franchise like sacramento, you get very few opportunities to swing for the rafters. in 28 years, there has not been a single kings draft pick with more potential than demarcus cousins. not one. and there might never be another with this much talent. bitter beer face? so what. technical fouls? pish posh. KG's got a ton of 'em. even the occasional ejection, while hardly ideal, doesn't bother me more than an ounce. demarcus has time to iron out his behavioral issues, and make no mistake, time is always what it takes...

but let's get hypothetical for a second and say that such an ejection occurred in the playoffs. this is, after all, what a lot of the naysayers are at least implicitly building their argument around, that demarcus can't be counted on, that his temper will hold this team back, that... wait a minute, **** me, i don't even give a ****, DMC would have gotten the kings into the playoffs!! after all, a guy that is capable of putting up 36/22/3/3 is a guy that can get you where you're trying to go. and where has this team been the last seven seasons? in the basement, no where near the playoffs. ancient greek discus champions couldn't hit that mark from where the kings have been standing, because the kings, as an organization, have shown exactly zero acumen for building around young talent with star potential...

of course, in answer to your curiosity, there are plenty of kings fans out there who are satisfied with rooting for isaiah thomas. he's announced last during introductions because he's a feel-good story, and feel-good stories generate a lotta cheers in sacramento. but ya know what generates more cheers? winning. and, in the contemporary nba, you win with star talent. you build with star talent. you begin with star talent. DMC is such a talent. it's true enough that he may never live up to his promise, but i'm taking that chance ten times out of ten. ****, if i could, i'd take that chance eleven times out of ten. such an opportunity may never come around again, to draft a player who could very quickly become "The Best ___ in the Game." you simply do not sabotage yourself by casting that opportunity aside...

 

[The_Jamal]

My take is largely because I don't think he has a lot of potential to get any better than he is now. As a starting PG he is averaging 14 points and 4 assists. You can find that out of about 10 guys through free agency, and a couple others in the draft.

If we could swing a deal to get Isaiah out of here, you can easily replace his production with a guy like Beno Udrih, who is a free agent this offseason averaging 10 points and 6AST since being traded to orlando. Another guy I like is Jose Calderon. Like Isaiah, I wouldn't consider either of these guys 'starters' but as a replacement backup PG, Udrih and Calderon would be a good veteran fit. I still think the starting PG spot needs to be addressed either way. Thomas is not a starter in my opinion.

I'd take a veteran free agent who is more team oriented over Isaiah Thomas next season anyway, so if we can get a draft pick for him .. why not?

Some scenarios I'd consider - if we went with one of the point guards in this years draft - Marcus Smart, Trey Burke, Carter-Williams - you use that guy as the starter, deal off Thomas for a second first rounder, draft Dieng or Wilthey (two defensive bigs slated to go in the second half of the first round) and then sign Udrih or Calderon. Hell, I'd even keep Douglas as a backup point guard. I'd also consider stashing a euro player with that second 1st rounder.

Is it really that easy to replace IT? The guy was jerked in and out of the starting lineup the first 35 games of the year and settled into a great groove post all-star break. 17.3 PPG, 5.3 assists while nearly hitting 50/40/90 shooting percentages in 30 minutes is quite a bit better than Beno or Calderon production. Thats over a 28 game period as well; not just a few games. Not to mention, he suffered from inconsistent minutes from Smart.

I don't know why people are so willing to deal him for peanuts. He's in the top 15-20 range of PG's, he's a great scorer, and if used properly, can be incredibly dangerous as a 3rd option next to Tyreke and Cousins. Believe or not, 3 offensive-minded players can work. In fact, most championship teams are built on it. But, according to most on here, only Tyreke and Cousins are allowed to shoot

 

[Padrino]

Is it really that easy to replace IT? The guy was jerked in and out of the starting lineup the first 35 games of the year and settled into a great groove post all-star break. 17.3 PPG, 5.3 assists while nearly hitting 50/40/90 shooting percentages in 30 minutes is quite a bit better than Beno or Calderon production. Thats over a 28 game period as well; not just a few games. Not to mention, he suffered from inconsistent minutes from Smart.

I don't know why people are so willing to deal him for peanuts. He's in the top 15-20 range of PG's, he's a great scorer, and if used properly, can be incredibly dangerous as a 3rd option next to Tyreke and Cousins. But, according to most on here, only Tyreke and Cousins are allowed to shoot

incorrect. other kings should feel inclined to shoot the ball, but in complement to the games of cousins and evans. here's where i have a serious problem with isaiah thomas' role on the team: in order to achieve the statistics you provided above, IT took more shots than any other king post-all star break. more than cousins. and more than evans. granted, in that span thomas played in two more games than evans, and one more game than cousins, but the fact remains that it shouldn't be close. there's certainly no worthwhile reason for thomas to be taking more shots than DMC, particularly when you have a player in cousins who is capable of 36/22/3/3 if you just keep him involved...

people mischaracterize demarcus as a guy who "dogs it" every once in awhile. it's plain fallacy, because he tends to play better when either evans or thomas is out, and that is not a slight to either evans or thomas. it's just that you can't load up a starting unit with so many scorers and so few defenders. there's only one ball to go around, so you prioritize the development of your talents. that means cousins and evans are your primary offensive hubs. and, of the three players in question, evans is the only above average defender, so thomas, an undersized guard and weak defender, falls back into a sixth man role to help your rotation steady itself and provide a scoring punch off the bench (marcus thornton then becomes expendable). this all-offense-all-the-time schtick has gotten the kings exactly nowhere for seven straight seasons. you must balance your starting lineup, and if that means thomas is bound for the bench, then so be it...

 

[The_Jamal]

incorrect. other kings should feel inclined to shoot the ball, but in complement to the games of cousins and evans. here's where i have a serious problem with isaiah thomas' role on the team: in order to achieve the statistics you provided above, IT took more shots than any other king post-all star break. more than cousins. and more than evans. granted, in that span thomas played in two more games than evans, and one more game than cousins, but the fact remains that it shouldn't be close. there's certainly no worthwhile reason for thomas to be taking more shots than DMC, particularly when you have a player in cousins who is capable of 36/22/3/3 if you just keep him involved...

people mischaracterize demarcus as a guy who "dogs it" every once in awhile. it's plain fallacy, because he tends to play better when either evans or thomas is out, and that is not a slight to either evans or thomas. it's just that you can't load up a starting unit with so many scorers and so few defenders. there's only one ball to go around, so you prioritize the development of your talents. that means cousins and evans are your primary offensive hubs. and, of the three players in question, evans is the only above average defender, so thomas, an undersized guard and weak defender, falls back into a sixth man role to help your rotation steady itself and provide a scoring punch off the bench (marcus thornton then becomes expendable). this all-offense-all-the-time schtick has gotten the kings exactly nowhere for seven straight seasons. you must balance your starting lineup, and if that means thomas is bound for the bench, then so be it...

I agree with everything you said. I don't think IT needs to shoot less, his percentages dictate that. It's HOW he's getting those shots that needs to be changed. I don't want him to totally give up his ability to drive and create, but I think a new coach can reign him in a bit and suit his game to playing off of Reke and Cousins in a complementary fashion.

You also make it sound like IT took waaaaaaaay more shots than anyone else on the team post all-star break. In fact, he was like .5 shots ahead of Tyreke and maybe 1 shot ahead of DeMarcus. Considering he was scoring close to a 50/40/90 clip, I don't have any problem with that shot distribution. If he was taking 5 or 6 more shots than DeMarcus or Tyreke, and shooting a lot worse than he was, then we would have a serious, serious issue.

My big thing is you don't ruin what potentially can be one of the best offensive trio's in the NBA. (yes, I'm being completely serious) DeMarcus and IT have the ability to score all over the floor, and Tyreke's improved jumper+elite rim play can and will be absolutely lethal with a coach who knows how to utilize those strengths. All 3 are above-average passers and have good floor vision when they want to play team ball. I also get the sneaking suspicion that a lot of our "selfishness" derives from us not having a system to fall back on so players just go ISO-mode. I would not classify any of the 3 as "selfish-chuckers" like a Thornton, Monta, Jennings, Crawford, etc

 

[Padrino]

I agree with everything you said. I don't think IT needs to shoot less, his percentages dictate that. It's HOW he's getting those shots that needs to be changed. I don't want him to totally give up his ability to drive and create, but I think a new coach can reign him in a bit and suit his game to playing off of Reke and Cousins in a complementary fashion.

You also make it sound like IT took waaaaaaaay more shots than anyone else on the team post all-star break. In fact, he was like .5 shots ahead of Tyreke and maybe 1 shot ahead of DeMarcus. Considering he was scoring close to a 50/40/90 clip, I don't have any problem with that shot distribution. If he was taking 5 or 6 more shots than DeMarcus or Tyreke, and shooting a lot worse than he was, then we would have a serious, serious issue.

My big thing is you don't ruin what potentially can be one of the best offensive trio's in the NBA. (yes, I'm being completely serious) DeMarcus and IT have the ability to score all over the floor, and Tyreke's improved jumper+elite rim play can and will be absolutely lethal with a coach who knows how to utilize those strengths. All 3 are above-average passers and have good floor vision when they want to play team ball. I also get the sneaking suspicion that a lot of our "selfishness" derives from us not having a system to fall back on so players just go ISO-mode. I would not classify any of the 3 as "selfish-chuckers" like a Thornton, Monta, Jennings, Crawford, etc

kings fans just need to get over this obsession. seriously. they finished with a top-10 offense this season, at undeniable expense to the other side of the ball, having also finished dead last in points allowed per game. all those points they score don't mean a damn thing if they can't stop anybody. isaiah thomas is not the root of the problem, but, as an undersized tweener guard often caught up on screens, who also has a gunner's proclivity, he is quite clearly a culprit on an already-weak defensive team. and no, IT didn't take "waaaaaaaaay more shots than anyone else on the team post all-star break," as if that matters. he's not a first option. he's not a second option. he shouldn't be anywhere near the most FGA on any team. he is a supplementary talent better suited to a sixth man's role...

 

[The_Jamal]

kings fans just need to get over this obsession. seriously. they finished with a top-10 offense this season, at undeniable expense to the other side of the ball, having also finished dead last in points allowed per game. all those points they score don't mean a damn thing if they can't stop anybody. isaiah thomas is not the root of the problem, but, as an undersized tweener guard often caught up on screens, who also has a gunner's proclivity, he is quite clearly a culprit on an already-weak defensive team. and no, IT didn't take "waaaaaaaaay more shots than anyone else on the team post all-star break," as if that matters. he's not a first option. he's not a second option. he shouldn't be anywhere near the most FGA on any team. he is a supplementary talent better suited to a sixth man's role...

So differing opinions is an "obsession" now? You're rather amusing, I give you that

Nothing you say in your well-worded rhetoric can debunk the fact that Isaiah Thomas would make a brilliant 3rd option. The proof is in the numbers. As to our defensive issues, Cousins being a weak defender has much more to do with our defensive issues than IT does. The PG position is the least impactful defensive spot on the court by a long shot.

 

[Kingster]

Yes, and nobody here disregards that nothing is certain with Cousins. All we are saying is that it is clear that Cousins has the potential to be the best big man in the league. We should be building around that (what we have right now), and perhaps see how it goes along under a good coach for 2-3 years. Isaiah Thomas is not leading us to ever possibly winning a championship. He is a huge liability on the defensive end and was drafted #60 for a reason. He has certainly proved to be far far more valuable than the 60th pick, but there is no frikin way on earth that I am building my team around a 5'9 shoot-first Point Guard. That doesn't mean I don't value what he could similarly do under a good coach. It just means I don't value what he's doing right now, nor the way that the organization has pumped him up.

Just out of curiosity - is it true that teams normally announce their best, star player last? E.g. LeBron James would be introduced last, Kobe last etc. Because against the Clippers the order was Salmons, JT, Cuz, MT, IT. I found that strange.

First, this notion that IT is a "huge liability on the defensive end" is is incorrect. Tell me, how many guards in the West stole the ball from Chris Paul, not once, but three times? He did so in the last two games he played against him, two in the second from the last game against the Clipps, one in the last game. How many guards in their freaking lifetime stole the ball from Chris Paul, period? That should give anybody pause before they characterize IT as a "huge defensive liability on the defensive end." How do you make that square peg go into that round hole? Tell me, what guard on the Kings has *ever* stole the ball from Chris Paul three times, much less in two consecutive games? Sure, IT is going to be posted up. Teams have tried post him up. I'd wager their success rate is below 30%.

You're argument seems to be: you can't build a team around IT, so therefore you must build a team around Cousins, despite his obvious risks. I reject that argument. You don't have to build a team around either. Just because you like IT as a component of your team, doesn't mean you have to logically reject Cousins, or vice versa. I look at IT independent of Cousins and Cousins independent of IT. There is nothing stopping anybody from blowing this team up entirely. I know that's very unsettling, because then the "building blocks" would then be unknown to us. But still it's an option. I really get the feeling sometimes that the desperation to have the key building blocks leads to an avoidance of dealing with the risks of the building block. After all, if we don't have a building block that we can count on by now, then where is the payoff for the pain over the last decade?

Let's say Cousins is the keystone to the building we are constructing. The keystone obviously has some flaws, as you have acknowledged. Nobody knows whether the flaws are going to rupture under pressure and time to a full fledged break. If Cousins were in fact a keystone to the building that is going to take two or three more years to construct - that's five to six in total - wouldn't it give you pause to expend the time and the millions of dollars to finish the construction, knowing that if the Cousins keystone fell apart, the entire structure would fall down? Would you feel comfortable in entering that building after you constructed it, knowing that the Cousins building block could crumble? Maybe I'm just risk averse, but I'd think about reconfiguring the building with some different building blocks. When I go inside I don't want to have to worry about an impending collapse.

 

[Padrino]

So differing opinions is an "obsession" now? You're rather amusing, I give you that

Nothing you say in your well-worded rhetoric can debunk the fact that Isaiah Thomas would make a brilliant 3rd option. The proof is in the numbers. As to our defensive issues, Cousins being a weak defender has much more to do with our defensive issues than IT does. Oddly enough, we don't hear about those issues very much do we?

sure we do. cousins is a very weak post defender, particularly in the pick and roll. but he's also a potential 20/10 franchise center, so a good front office acquires a defensively-minded presence to start alongside of him in the frontcourt. since the kings do not yet have such a player, it is paramount that the backcourt doesn't play defense like swiss cheese. evans holds his own just fine, but thomas is a sieve. he repeatedly gets caught on screens (his size being a problem), allowing his man into the paint, where cousins and jason thompson are vulnerable as poor defenders. but it starts with the backcourt...

and no, opinions that differ are not equal to obsession. but this franchise and its fanbase have been offense-obsessed for far too long, neglecting the other side of the ball to tremendously ill effect. the result has been seven straight seasons out of the playoffs, a few of those ending in the league's basement. once again, i do not care if "the proof is in the numbers." you simply do not make decisions as a franchise based on the quality of your "third option." who the eff cares? third options are everywhere in the nba. you can draft 'em, sign 'em, or trade for 'em with relative ease, no matter your style of play, the size of your market, or the appeal of your city...

the balance of the kings' lineup would be much better served by starting a non-invasive role player like toney douglas who competes on the defensive end. it's a basketball-smart adjustment. and if offense wasn't an obsession, if defense was truly prioritized by this team or its fans, why would anybody object to such a suggestion? isaiah thomas would make an excellent sparkplug off the bench and a potential sixth man of the year contender...

 

[Capt. Factorial]

kings fans just need to get over this obsession. seriously. they finished with a top-10 offense this season, at undeniable expense to the other side of the ball, having also finished dead last in points allowed per game.

Ah, but the Kings were only 29th in points allowed per possession. The Bobcats were actually (very slightly) worse defensively, but didn't play at as high a pace. (I just wish we had something to grasp onto, for instance if pace-adjusting our defense got it into the low-20s or something. Oh, well.)

 

[Padrino]

First, this notion that IT is a "huge liability on the defensive end" is is incorrect. Tell me, how many guards in the West stole the ball from Chris Paul, not once, but three times? He did so in the last two games he played against him, two in the second from the last game against the Clipps, one in the last game. How many guards in their freaking lifetime stole the ball from Chris Paul, period? That should give anybody pause before they characterize IT as a "huge defensive liability on the defensive end." How do you make that square peg go into that round hole? Tell me, what guard on the Kings has *ever* stole the ball from Chris Paul three times, much less in two consecutive games? Sure, IT is going to be posted up. Teams have tried post him up. I'd wager their success rate is below 30%.

You're argument seems to be: you can't build a team around IT, so therefore you must build a team around Cousins, despite his obvious risks. I reject that argument. You don't have to build a team around either. Just because you like IT as a component of your team, doesn't mean you have to logically reject Cousins, or vice versa. I look at IT independent of Cousins and Cousins independent of IT. There is nothing stopping anybody from blowing this team up entirely. I know that's very unsettling, because then the "building blocks" would then be unknown to us. But still it's an option. I really get the feeling sometimes that the desperation to have the key building blocks leads to an avoidance of dealing with the risks of the building block. After all, if we don't have a building block that we can count on by now, then where is the payoff for the pain over the last decade?

Let's say Cousins is the keystone to the building we are constructing. The keystone obviously has some flaws, as you have acknowledged. Nobody knows whether the flaws are going to rupture under pressure and time to a full fledged break. If Cousins were in fact a keystone to the building that is going to take two or three more years to construct - that's five to six in total - wouldn't it give you pause to expend the time and the millions of dollars to finish the construction, knowing that if the Cousins keystone fell apart, the entire structure would fall down? Would you feel comfortable in entering that building after you constructed it, knowing that the Cousins building block could crumble? Maybe I'm just risk averse, but I'd think about reconfiguring the building with some different building blocks. When I go inside I don't want to have to worry about an impending collapse.

keith smart's defensive strategy has always relied on every king reaching in to poke at the ball, and slacking off jump shooters to help in the paint. his three steals on chris paul were certainly impressive, but that hardly tells the whole story, and it's obfuscation to attempt to construct such an argument that positions IT as something other than a liability on the defensive end. every guard in the league can shoot over him, and most whom IT covers do so. but more commonly, IT's diminutive stature causes him to get caught up on screens, which he struggles to fight over the top of, resulting in his cover easily sliding into the paint. it happens again and again and again. opposing penetration consistently starts with IT getting broken down by his man. that said, of course cousins and IT can be evaluated independent of each other. they should be. but throw tyreke evans into that mix, and all of a sudden balance becomes a serious issue. to pound the drum, IT fits the mold of a supplementary talent. he's got a classically sixth man style of play, the kind of guy who can generate instant offense off the bench...

 

[mac]

First, this notion that IT is a "huge liability on the defensive end" is is incorrect. Tell me, how many guards in the West stole the ball from Chris Paul, not once, but three times? He did so in the last two games he played against him, two in the second from the last game against the Clipps, one in the last game. How many guards in their freaking lifetime stole the ball from Chris Paul, period? That should give anybody pause before they characterize IT as a "huge defensive liability on the defensive end." How do you make that square peg go into that round hole? Tell me, what guard on the Kings has *ever* stole the ball from Chris Paul three times, much less in two consecutive games? Sure, IT is going to be posted up. Teams have tried post him up. I'd wager their success rate is below 30%.

You're argument seems to be: you can't build a team around IT, so therefore you must build a team around Cousins, despite his obvious risks. I reject that argument. You don't have to build a team around either. Just because you like IT as a component of your team, doesn't mean you have to logically reject Cousins, or vice versa. I look at IT independent of Cousins and Cousins independent of IT. There is nothing stopping anybody from blowing this team up entirely. I know that's very unsettling, because then the "building blocks" would then be unknown to us. But still it's an option. I really get the feeling sometimes that the desperation to have the key building blocks leads to an avoidance of dealing with the risks of the building block. After all, if we don't have a building block that we can count on by now, then where is the payoff for the pain over the last decade?

Let's say Cousins is the keystone to the building we are constructing. The keystone obviously has some flaws, as you have acknowledged. Nobody knows whether the flaws are going to rupture under pressure and time to a full fledged break. If Cousins were in fact a keystone to the building that is going to take two or three more years to construct - that's five to six in total - wouldn't it give you pause to expend the time and the millions of dollars to finish the construction, knowing that if the Cousins keystone fell apart, the entire structure would fall down? Would you feel comfortable in entering that building after you constructed it, knowing that the Cousins building block could crumble? Maybe I'm just risk averse, but I'd think about reconfiguring the building with some different building blocks. When I go inside I don't want to have to worry about an impending collapse.

If you don't see how much of a liability IT is on the defensive end and defend that with his steal numbers there is really no way of convincing you. He gets stuck on EVERY single screen that has ever been set on him, and the second that happens it becomes 5v4. Now getting stuck is not that much of a problem - it's rotating back after you get caught, which IT doesn't even try to do. It doesn't show on the stat sheet because unlike him, other PGs don't just take the opportunity to jack up a shot. But anybody who has been carefully watching the games will see that our defensive breakdowns on every possession start with IT getting caught on a screen. I will say this - IT is a very pesky 1 on 1 defender. We saw that when the Clippers tried to ISO Chris Paul against him. But most NBA offenses don't run isos for their PGs on a regular basis. The problems with his height and size have already been mentioned - guys cna easily shoot over him and he is of no use on a switch, where guys like Thabo Sefolosha can post him up and score several buckets. Are our defensive problems entirely on Isaiah? Of course not! The fact that we have rather terrible defensive bigs in terms of rotating and challenging shots just compounds the problem once IT gets caught on screens. In any case, I'm willing to give it a year under a good coach to see how our defense improves.

As for building for the future - yes, we can blow this team up. But I have two problems with that. Firstly, I don't see how you can root for a team thinking "BLOW THEM UP! BLOW THEM UP!". If you support a team, you try and find that one or two players that you think will help in the future, and you root for the organization to build around them. The second problem, as Padrino has extensively mentioned, is that getting franchise talent is not easy. We already have DMC who can be the best big man in the game, and that says a lot. Everyone knows how much a dominant big can impact the game. Aside from Evans and Cousins who you do not like, what talent have we had in the last 7 years? Kevin Martin? He's now a sixth man for a championship contender. Who else have we had that could even remotely lead us to the playoffs? The best player we've had outside of those guys was Artest.

So say we trade Cousins as you advocate - who exactly do we trade him for? We're not going to get anyone close in talent in return. So alright, we build through the draft again! That's worked out mighty fine the last 5 years eh?

 

[bajaden]

So differing opinions is an "obsession" now? You're rather amusing, I give you that

Nothing you say in your well-worded rhetoric can debunk the fact that Isaiah Thomas would make a brilliant 3rd option. The proof is in the numbers. As to our defensive issues, Cousins being a weak defender has much more to do with our defensive issues than IT does. The PG position is the least impactful defensive spot on the court by a long shot.

You and I agree on most things, but on this one, we disagree. If IT could keep his man in front of him, and I'll admit that its a tough job when your guarding some of quick PGs can come loaded with hesitation moves and wicked crossovers, but if he could, it would make Cousins life a lot easier. Most of Cousins reach in fouls come when a PG is flying down the lane after shediing IT with a pick. For a good part of the season I watched IT just observe as Cousins/JT came up to defend the pick and roll instead of getting in the passing lane to stop the ball going to the roller. We don't play a zone very much anymore because its death with a player as short as IT on the floor. The other team will work your zone and end up with IT guarding someone 6'7" or taller. I've watched Chris Paul and others post up IT.

I've nothing against IT. I think he would be a great backup PG off the bench. But we will never win a championship with a player his size running the point. IT averaged 10.5 shots per game for the year, and he shot a blistering 44% from the floor, while going what I would call a decent 35.8% from the three. You mentioned Calderon. Well he took 8.5 shots per game, while shooting a pee poor 52.7% from the floor, and a lousy 52% from the three. Calderon averaged 6.6 assists a game while IT averaged 4.0 assists a game.. Evans almost averaged as many assists a game as IT from the SG position. So maybe its a matter of taste, but personally, I want a pass first PG on the floor with Cousins and Tyreke. And IT isn't it! I want a PG, that like Calderon, and or Nash, takes shots when left open. I've nothing against any PG driving into the lane. Thats where a good PG does his damage. But I want driving and dishing more often than driving and throwing up wild shots. Just my personal opinion.

 

[King Baller]

This is what a PG is supposed to do:

 

[Gilles]

After this game Pistons "did a Sacramento" and traded for a guy that torched them.

 

[Sac.Kings]

I think Eric Bledsoe would be a wonderful option as a PG. I am not sure who we would trade for him but he has shot a good percentage from three this season and definitely is athletic and strong. He would definitely make a good starting combo with tyreke at the two. He is also quite young with a lot of unlocked potential. I would love it if we could get our hands on him somehow.. I suspect he might be targeted heavily this offseason. What do you guys think?

 

[upinsmoke]

I think Eric Bledsoe would be a wonderful option as a PG. I am not sure who we would trade for him but he has shot a good percentage from three this season and definitely is athletic and strong. He would definitely make a good starting combo with tyreke at the two. He is also quite young with a lot of unlocked potential. I would love it if we could get our hands on him somehow.. I suspect he might be targeted heavily this offseason. What do you guys think?

IT plus the pick might get that done.

 

[Telemachus]

I think Eric Bledsoe would be a wonderful option as a PG. I am not sure who we would trade for him but he has shot a good percentage from three this season and definitely is athletic and strong. He would definitely make a good starting combo with tyreke at the two. He is also quite young with a lot of unlocked potential. I would love it if we could get our hands on him somehow.. I suspect he might be targeted heavily this offseason. What do you guys think?

I like Bledsoe a lot. He is a very good defensive player, and has become a solid PG since coming into the NBA. I don't know what we would have to give up to get him, or if the Clippers would be willing to trade him (he is the perfect backup to Paul IMO).

 

[ParniValjak]

I absolutely do not want any draft picks. Let's settle in with what we have and develop them and also develop a team. We have a very good offense. If the draftee was a shot blocker, I would change my mind but I am worn out on young guys with unknown future. We need role players. We need defenders. I don't know who Dieng is so can't comment on a note that explains nothing.

I would trade our pick, Thornton and Jimmer for Favors and any other contract they like. Chances of that happening areo just about non existiant.

I do agree that the pick is very much tradeable unless we are addressing one of our 2 major needs. I am not sure I wouldn't trade the pick even if we win the lottery. Noel would be great but the knee makes me nervous!