What is Cousins' Value, Really?

[The_Jamal]

i'm not beating around the bush. you are. i don't care to trade demarcus cousins. you do. i'm armchair gm of a team that already has him on their active roster. i value him highly, and i am choosing not to trade him. more to the point, i am confused by this silly little game you're trying to play here. because DMC is still a sacramento king until his free agency in the '14 offseason, and because he has shown considerable improvement in his time with the kings, the burden of proof rests with you to present a scenario in which the kings might actually get something resembling value via trade for their potential superstar-level talent...

if we're all honest with each other, this thread you've concocted is just smoke and mirrors, and it distracts from the sobering realities of transaction in the contemporary nba, restrictive CBA included. i'd expect as much from someone like LWP777, ever the obfuscation junkie, but i actually think you've got a modicum of basketball acumen in that fiendish little brain of yours, misguided as you are on the subject of both demarcus cousins and tyreke evans...

but if you really want an answer to your rather irrelevant question... orlando gives up literally any combination of players on their roster to acquire DMC. houston likewise offers up any combination of players, apart from james harden, who is the only player between those two teams that you could place in the same class of talent as demarcus. disproportionate contract figures aside, that doesn't mean houston gives him up when they know sacramento will take a lesser offer, desperate as the kings would be in a scenario in which they attempt to trade demarcus cousins on his rookie contract. again, you're asking a foolish hypothetical question that ignores the reality of market conditions...

Cousins doesn't have near the value that most people seem to think he currently has. He's essentially an untradeable asset at this point; teams will not be giving anything close to their best players for him while Cousins maintains the potential to be the best C in the game. Take Orlando for instance. We would probably ask for something around Vuvevic, a 1st round pick, and Harkless. While seemingly a great trade for Orlando, we are essentially taking every good young asset they have and giving them a problem C with an assortment of on/off-court issues. Which they just got rid of with Dwight I might add. For us, we're getting solid future role players in return, but none that even come close to Cousins if he reaches his potential

The team is locked into the proverbial Cousins ship. Either he fufils his talent and we get to see him dominate for the next decade, or he flames out in the next few seasons with us and we lose him in FA. The days of teams paying a fair price for his potential are over

 

[Padrino]

Cousins doesn't have near the value that most people seem to think he currently has. He's essentially an untradeable asset at this point; teams will not be giving anything close to their best players for him while Cousins maintains the potential to be the best C in the game. Take Orlando for instance. We would probably ask for something around Vuvevic, a 1st round pick, and Harkless. While seemingly a great trade for Orlando, we are essentially taking every good young asset they have and giving them a problem C with an assortment of on/off-court issues. Which they just got rid of with Dwight I might add. For us, we're getting solid future role players in return, but none that even come close to Cousins if he reaches his potential

The team is locked into the proverbial Cousins ship. Either he fufils his talent and we get to see him dominate for the next decade, or he flames out in the next few seasons with us and we lose him in FA. The days of teams paying a fair price for his potential are over

incorrect. i don't care what problems a player has, if he's only in his third year, and if he displays superstar potential, he has considerable value around the league. whether or not a particular gm is willing to take on that risk is irrelevant. you all are completely missing the point. all that matters is what a gm thinks he has to part with to get cousins from a team that wants to move him this early in his career. let's say cousins was an angel in all respects. the kings would still get lowballed if they attempted to trade him while he remains on his rookie deal. you have zero leverage if you're attempting to move a young talent that you've given up on too soon. nobody's trading you their established star talent for the promise of a superstar, because there's no guarantees in professional sports. so you dig in and properly develop your potential superstar yourself. you do the smart thing and acquire your talent in-house by turning that potential into a dominant franchise cornerstone...

 

[andjel]

i'm not beating around the bush. you are. i don't care to trade demarcus cousins. you do. i'm armchair gm of a team that already has him on their active roster. i value him highly, and i am choosing not to trade him.

Thank you for saving me figuring out how best to articulate absurdity of Kingsters request.

 

[Jose]

I can't even believe this is even debatable right now. We are fans of a small market team and we currently have one of the most talented big man to come out of college since Tim Duncan and we're talking about trading him? So what if he's angry?! This organization has to swing for the fences and make sure he matures under their watch. This is the guy that can make sure this organization can stay relevant the next decade. As much as I love Reke, he can be replaced. Demarcus Cousins absolutely cannot be replaced. The fact that we have those 2 fall into our laps, is crazy. What's even crazier is the fact this team is poorly constructed around their unique talents. Geoff Petrie and the Maloofs should be ashamed. They had a gold mine handed to them and they are on the verge of wasting it.

Correction: Wasted it.

One way or another, this team will not be in their hands next year. Whatever golden opportunity they had, they wasted.

Thank goodness they didn't go the extra mile and dump DMC or Reke for nothing just to get some cash.

 

[mac]

Kingster you apparently paid little attention to my post so I will say it again. Cousins is not in other GMs plans, and so they will not look to give up a lot for him. Without Cousins they are already better teams than us, why give up a lot for someone that MAY NOT pan out. And as far as I can see nobody on this board is guaranteeing that Cousins is going to become a superstar, people only see the potential of it happening and realise that it is a rare opportunity for us to one day have a superstar on our roster. You want a specific offer? I'd say something like Drummond for Cousins. Detroit is building around Knight and Monroe, Drummond is a good asset for them but they will have a very formidable front court if both Cuz and Monroe pan out.

 

[rainmaker]

Still not answering the question. What are you afraid of? You are a GM of a team that needs a good center. You have stated over and over again how valuable he is. So, quit beating around the bush and tell me what you would offer if you were a GM of Orlando or Houston or some other team. Cut the crap and give some specifics. And of course the bids will start low, but there are several GMs you're bidding against. Look at all the competing "GMs" on this board that says how valuable he is. So you have competitors, and if you really do value him, I guess you better not nickel and dime. Or do you not value him really as highly as you say you do? Which is it? Quit beating around the bush.

What happened to you? You used to offer decent analysis and insight. Now you're on a crusade to tell everyone how much a failure Reke and Cuz are.

You're the OP. You've failed to outline what a good package for Cuz is. You've failed to give examples of what value you think Cuz could get back. You've failed to deliver specifics. What is this game you're playing? You want people to post hypothetical trades for our best player? Why? Why is anyone concerned with how you value Cuz? Why would people who don't want to trade a 22 yr old and the best player we've ever drafted in the Sac era, participate in this nonsense?

You ever think maybe we want to wait and see what Cuz will do with a real coach, better GM and arena situation behind us? Why are Kings fans so intent on giving up on and trading youth? Remember how much Hawes sucked? How many wanted to get rid of him? Put up 18/16/8/7 tonight. Now he's not in Cuz's class talent wise, but it's another example of fans here not waiting for talent to develop.

The rush to trade the most talented player we've ever drafted, before he would graduate from college, in the worst situation in the league factoring in our ownership/arena situation/idiot coach/poor GM/dysfunctional roster is embarrassing. With all the problems with this franchise and roster, with all the places we need improvement, you have pinpointed Reke and Cuz as our main problems. It's unbelievable. Shocking lack of perspective.

How about you quit beating around the bush and show you comprehend the entire situation?

 

[kupman]

I think the OP is trying to understand or point out the dichotomy of statements such as DMC is "a HOF talent; the best big since Duncan; a once in generation player etc," with statements such as "no one in the league will give use any useful player in a trade for DMC."

It is a legitimate question/concern I think.

 

[Section 101]

So enough with the blarney. Pick a team and tell me what you'd pay for Cousins. You've said he's part of the core and that anybody that thinks he shouldn't be is crazy. So man up and pick a team and tell me how much you'd pay. It shouldn't take more than a couple of sentences. And while you're doing that you might want to check out your competitors to see how much they would pay.

LBJ or Durant. That's it.

 

[The_Jamal]

incorrect. i don't care what problems a player has, if he's only in his third year, and if he displays superstar potential, he has considerable value around the league. whether or not a particular gm is willing to take on that risk is irrelevant. you all are completely missing the point. all that matters is what a gm thinks he has to part with to get cousins from a team that wants to move him this early in his career. let's say cousins was an angel in all respects. the kings would still get lowballed if they attempted to trade him while he remains on his rookie deal. you have zero leverage if you're attempting to move a young talent that you've given up on too soon. nobody's trading you their established star talent for the promise of a superstar, because there's no guarantees in professional sports. so you dig in and properly develop your potential superstar yourself. you do the smart thing and acquire your talent in-house by turning that potential into a dominant franchise cornerstone...

incorrect. For starters, there would 0 discussion whatsoever to trade Cousins from any level of fan/member organization you can think of. The only reason fans bring up trading Cousins is because they are tired of his on/off-court antics. Which is understable, but said antics are also what destroyed Cousins rep around the league. If Cousins didn't have any problems AND the Kings were still trying to trade him, you'd have teams lining up for a bidding war for his services. You'd have every team in the NBA lining up to outbid each other to get Boogie on their team and we'd have our pick of who to send him to.

And you're agreeing with me without knowing it. I said, the exact same thing... Teams are not going to send us their best players or big package for a problem child like Cousins. No matter how talented he is. The offers we would receive would not outweigh the potential gain of Cousins fufiling his potential. I'll say it again: We either go down in flames with the Cousins ship, or we benefit from one of the best bigs in basketball the next decade. The time has long passed where we can get fair value for him in a trade

 

[Glenn]

We have been discussing Cousins for a long time and there are varying opinions. I hope the OP doesn't think that beating this subject to death will end in a universally acceptable answer. That's not possible. I think the original note was a baited trap. I don't care if we disagree. That's the state of man. If we all agreed it would be horribly boring.

Solve it Kupman if you think it is a legitimate question. Maybe you and Kingster can solve it.

 

[KingMilz]

Kingster you apparently paid little attention to my post so I will say it again. Cousins is not in other GMs plans, and so they will not look to give up a lot for him. Without Cousins they are already better teams than us, why give up a lot for someone that MAY NOT pan out. And as far as I can see nobody on this board is guaranteeing that Cousins is going to become a superstar, people only see the potential of it happening and realise that it is a rare opportunity for us to one day have a superstar on our roster. You want a specific offer? I'd say something like Drummond for Cousins. Detroit is building around Knight and Monroe, Drummond is a good asset for them but they will have a very formidable front court if both Cuz and Monroe pan out.

Nah Detriot is actually building around Drummond hes the guy they want which could force Monroe out if he doesn't develop a jump shot, Drummond would be the last guy they trade at this point in time.

 

[mac]

Nah Detriot is actually building around Drummond hes the guy they want which could force Monroe out if he doesn't develop a jump shot, Drummond would be the last guy they trade at this point in time.

Really? I must be mistaken then. But from what I can see Drummond is there to be Robin to Monroe, not the other way around (at this point at least). But I suppose if that were the case then they'd offer Monroe for Cousins. Whatever it is, the point I'm trying to make is that teams will not be willing to give up their "franchise" players for Cousins, because Cousins remains an uncertainty at this point. Cousins' value to other teams is different from his value to us, because other teams have their own potential star players, and as a result it's foolish to try to quantify Cousins' value based on what other teams would offer for him. Cousins has a lot more upside than some of these other potential stars, but there's also more uncertainty that comes with that upside due to his immaturity. The fact is that nobody is denying that. People simply realise that Cousins is not in high demand any where else in the league, and the odds are stacked against us in getting present fair value for him, let alone future value.

 

[mac]

incorrect. For starters, there would 0 discussion whatsoever to trade Cousins from any level of fan/member organization you can think of. The only reason fans bring up trading Cousins is because they are tired of his on/off-court antics. Which is understable, but said antics are also what destroyed Cousins rep around the league. If Cousins didn't have any problems AND the Kings were still trying to trade him, you'd have teams lining up for a bidding war for his services. You'd have every team in the NBA lining up to outbid each other to get Boogie on their team and we'd have our pick of who to send him to.

And you're agreeing with me without knowing it. I said, the exact same thing... Teams are not going to send us their best players or big package for a problem child like Cousins. No matter how talented he is. The offers we would receive would not outweigh the potential gain of Cousins fufiling his potential. I'll say it again: We either go down in flames with the Cousins ship, or we benefit from one of the best bigs in basketball the next decade. The time has long passed where we can get fair value for him in a trade

Well done Jamal, you and I can finally agree wholeheartedly on something. With "problem child" being debatable of course. But you're right, the antics are there and it does affect his value around the league.

 

[The_Jamal]

Well done Jamal, you and I can finally agree wholeheartedly on something. With "problem child" being debatable of course. But you're right, the antics are there and it does affect his value around the league.

It is possible!

Also, that Det offer is another good example of how jaded Cousins value is. On the surface, I would take Cousins potential over Monroe's any day. Cousins has also caught up to Monroe's production this year as well. However, Det would never do that deal. Monroe has equal production without all the extra baggage that Cousins brings. And while Cousins has a much higher ceiling, it's simply not worth the risk of trading a stable, rising star big.

You can pretty much copy and paste with every team with talented young guys. Monroe, Irving, Paul George, Davis, are all equal "talents" to Cousins, but we couldn't dream of getting any of them in a deal because of Cousins negative rep. Speaking of which, those are 4 of a very, very short list who I would deal Cousins for.

 

[mac]

It is possible!

Also, that Det offer is another good example of how jaded Cousins value is. On the surface, I would take Cousins potential over Monroe's any day. Cousins has also caught up to Monroe's production this year as well. However, Det would never do that deal. Monroe has equal production without all the extra baggage that Cousins brings. And while Cousins has a much higher ceiling, it's simply not worth the risk of trading a stable, rising star big.

You can pretty much copy and paste with every team with talented young guys. Monroe, Irving, Paul George, Davis, are all equal "talents" to Cousins, but we couldn't dream of getting any of them in a deal because of Cousins negative rep. Speaking of which, those are 4 of a very, very short list who I would deal Cousins for.

Yeah if I were those teams' GMs I wouldn't trade them for Cousins. I originally thought Drummond would be a possibility (as opposed to Monroe), but Andremiller07 said that Detroit values Drummond more than Monroe. Whatever it is, the other team would only be willing to give up their 2nd best young player at most. So using DET/CLE/IND/NOH as an example it'd be Drummond (or Monroe)/ Waiters, Thompson or Zeller/ I don't see Indiana giving up anyone seeing as they're already a good young team and have no need for Cousins/ Aminu

 

[KingMilz]

Really? I must be mistaken then. But from what I can see Drummond is there to be Robin to Monroe, not the other way around (at this point at least).

Most of the Detriot people in regards to basketball such as journalists/fans think Drummond can be like a bigger Dwight Howard type player and a lot think that moving Monroe will be the key to him growing (I disagree but still) and getting a good shooting 4, thats why when Cousins (hes not a shooting 4) name came up in trade talks the Pistons had interest and Drummond was never rumoured but rather Monroe. They think his potential might be the best of out any big man right now. Personally I think they are overhyping his potential but I have no doubt he will be a monster on defense and rebounding/dunking around the rim.

 

[mac]

Most of the Detriot people in regards to basketball such as journalists/fans think Drummond can be like a bigger Dwight Howard type player and a lot think that moving Monroe will be the key to him growing (I disagree but still) and getting a good shooting 4, thats why when Cousins (hes not a shooting 4) name came up in trade talks the Pistons had interest and Drummond was never rumoured but rather Monroe. They think his potential might be the best of out any big man right now. Personally I think they are overhyping his potential but I have no doubt he will be a monster on defense and rebounding/dunking around the rim.

Well, just as some here think a Cousins Drummond front court would be monstrous I'm sure Detroit thinks the same. But pairing arguably the two best skilled young bigs in the league in Cuz and Monroe would be pretty formidable too... on offense at least.

 

[CruzDude]

Finally, an article that puts the Cuz situation in its proper persective and calls it like it is. Not a canned solution as much as what exactly Cuz needs to do to help the Kings and survive in the NBA.

http://www.cowbellkingdom.com/2013/...aloofs-are-away-demarcus-cousins-has-strayed/

 

[Double-K]

Finally, an article that puts the Cuz situation in its proper persective and calls it like it is. Not a canned solution as much as what exactly Cuz needs to do to help the Kings and survive in the NBA.

http://www.cowbellkingdom.com/2013/...aloofs-are-away-demarcus-cousins-has-strayed/

Great read. Thanks CruzDude!

 

[Padrino]

bottom line, people: the market conditions that led to the most recent lockout and the ratification of the new cba have dramatically changed the financial landscape of the contemporary nba. some of you either haven't been paying attention or don't care to acknowledge reality. those conditions are now a bit friendlier to teams that are looking to retain their talent, but they are not as friendly to free agents as they once were. they are also not as friendly to those who are looking to trade high level talent as they once were. what the nuggets got in return for carmelo anthony is almost certainly the absolute height of such a scenario given the current landscape, and though denver remains a competitive team, they did not get a single player back in the transaction who was of comparable talent to 'melo...

regardless of what an individual thinks of a player like anthony, he is still an established superstar-level talent, and when pushed to trade him, the nuggets did not receive superstar-level value in return. nor did the hornets for chris paul, for that matter. nor did orlando for dwight howard. these are all established superstar-level talents, and while demarcus cousins has superstar-level potential, he is not yet an established star in this league. if none of denver, new orleans, or orlando were able to come even close to breaking even with their big time superstar trades, does anybody honestly believe that the kings are going to get adequate talent in return for demarcus while they continue this slog of a rebuild? again, cousins' behavior issues are, indeed, a red flag that significantly impacts his trade value, but even if those problems did not exist, the market isn't going to budge from it's current trajectory just because kings fans want it to. a talented player on a rookie deal is a valuable asset to the team he's signed with. under the new cba, that asset will depreciate the minute you put it on the market, which is fine if you're talking about a jimmer fredette, but a potential superstar-level talent like demarcus? please...

it's fine if an armchair gm has no problem receiving second or third-tier talent in return for demarcus, but, given that tyreke evans' status with the team is quite precarious, as well, i want just one of you Trade DMC'ers to openly acknowledge that trading cousins could very well set the kings' playoff hopes back for years to come. all of the thomases and fredettes in the world aren't going to catapult this team back towards legitimacy. and it's already been established that 'reke's not going to be able to do so on his own, either...

 

[bajaden]

bottom line, people: the market conditions that led to the most recent lockout and the ratification of the new cba have dramatically changed the financial landscape of the contemporary nba. some of you either haven't been paying attention or don't care to acknowledge reality. those conditions are now a bit friendlier to teams that are looking to retain their talent, but they are not as friendly to free agents as they once were. they are also not as friendly to those who are looking to trade high level talent as they once were. what the nuggets got in return for carmelo anthony is almost certainly the absolute height of such a scenario given the current landscape, and though denver remains a competitive team, they did not get a single player back in the transaction who was of comparable talent to 'melo...

regardless of what an individual thinks of a player like anthony, he is still an established superstar-level talent, and when pushed to trade him, the nuggets did not receive superstar-level value in return. nor did the hornets for chris paul, for that matter. nor did orlando for dwight howard. these are all established superstar-level talents, and while demarcus cousins has superstar-level potential, he is not yet an established star in this league. if none of denver, new orleans, or orlando were able to come even close to breaking even with their big time superstar trades, does anybody honestly believe that the kings are going to get adequate talent in return for demarcus while they continue this slog of a rebuild? again, cousins' behavior issues are, indeed, a red flag that significantly impacts his trade value, but even if those problems did not exist, the market isn't going to budge from it's current trajectory just because kings fans want it to. a talented player on a rookie deal is a valuable asset to the team he's signed with. under the new cba, that asset will depreciate the minute you put it on the market, which is fine if you're talking about a jimmer fredette, but a potential superstar-level talent like demarcus? please...

it's fine if an armchair gm has no problem receiving second or third-tier talent in return for demarcus, but, given that tyreke evans' status with the team is quite precarious, as well, i want just one of you Trade DMC'ers to openly acknowledge that trading cousins could very well set the kings' playoff hopes back for years to come. all of the thomases and fredettes in the world aren't going to catapult this team back towards legitimacy. and it's already been established that 'reke's not going to be able to do so on his own, either...

I've been preaching the same thing. I pointed out that draftpicks are going to held in higher regard in the future, simply because your getting talent at a very low price and tying it up for 4 years. Its easy to say, lets trade Cousins for Dwight Howard, but what are the ramifications of that if it were indeed possible, which its not financially. Howard makes 19.2 million and Cousins makes just under 4 million. Thats a difference of 15 million dollars. Now from purely a financial prespective, is what Howard gives you, worth 15 million dollars more than what Cousins gives you?

I don't know about you, but for 15 million dollars, I can suck it up and tolerate a few headaches that might come with Cousins. If some of these people would take the time to forget the emotion of the situation, and look around the league at whats happening, they might have a different prespective. There's a reason the Hawks are trying to dump their big name stars. Not because they don't like them, or that they're too old. But because they can't afford them under the new CBA. Your going to see teams trying to trade big time players for ending contracts and draft picks. Its going to be harder for teams to afford 3 high paid stars on their roster. Mark Cuban knew what he was doing last season when he signed almost all of his players to 1 year contracts. The Mav's are one of the few teams that are in a position to clean up in the freeagent market.

So your right, we wouldn't get equal value for Cousins. And truthfully, we might not get equal value, even is he didn't have a bad reputation, simply because of the direction the league is going. Its not going to be business as usual. We have two very talented players, and whether you love them or hate them, they currently belong to us. If we let one or both go, its going to be very difficult to get that kind of talent back again. That could all change with new ownership, and a new image. But right now, if a player had to choose between the Kings, and the Mav's, where do you think he's going to go?

 

[jcassio]

You're all pretending that it's either "trade him yesterday" or "NEVER trade him." What a bunch of drama queens! I for one am somewhere in between and I don't think I'm the only one. I'd like to trade him if I can get good value in return, but I know that's somewhere down the road, if ever. In the meantime, he's a Sac King with big-time star potential, but also with big-time destructive potential. I recognize his star potential and celebrate it, but I'm still going to get frustrated by his head-case behavior.

 

[kpm308]

I think with all this talk about value and not trading cousins for less than he is worth that people are missing the big picture. This team shows just enough flashes of being good to keep the hard core fans believing that these guys will get it done with a few tweaks and some more time to mature, but I have a feeling that the new regime will see a bunch of flawed players and a losing culture within this organization that needs to be purged.

You have to try and see it from the new owner and gms point of view. The new owners are guys who have been dreaming of having their own franchise for who knows how long, and all the while the have been dreaming they have been watching this organization and the players on the team be as dysfunctional and embarrassing as any team I can think of since the jailblazers. And like the old saying goes, if you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

So if a fan doesnt think a guy like Burkle, who has taken a poorly ran team and turned them into champions, has been seeing everything wrong with this organization for the last few years and is planning to come in and make significant changes from top to bottom, that the fan is just too emotionally invested in their team to accept what will most likely happen.

The new owners, whether it be Burkle/Mastov or Hansen, are going to want to come into the league and show what they can do as owners of a franchise, I can't see any of them willing to wager their first few years of being an owner on whether or not a guy like Cousins is going to mature enough to help a team win. These guys will have a plan in place to build a team the way they think it should be done. And they have nothing yet invested with cousins, so I can see them cutting their ties, getting whatever value they can out of him, and use that to help their own plan come to fruition.

I'm not saying I agree that this is the best plan, but it is what will most likely happen. And while football and basketball aren't the same, people should look at what is happening down in Oakland, where they had new regime take over a team who was as close as you can get to making the playoffs and absolutely gut it. And are now going on their second offseason of getting rid of players that don't fit with what the new ownership is trying to do. First rounders and high potential guys have been the first ones on the chopping block. But they have a plan as to what they are trying to do, much like our new ownership will, and they aren't going to let decisions made by the people who ran the organization into the ground before them affect what they are trying to do.

 

[kupman]

bottom line, people: the market conditions that led to the most recent lockout and the ratification of the new cba have dramatically changed the financial landscape of the contemporary nba. some of you either haven't been paying attention or don't care to acknowledge reality. those conditions are now a bit friendlier to teams that are looking to retain their talent, but they are not as friendly to free agents as they once were. they are also not as friendly to those who are looking to trade high level talent as they once were. what the nuggets got in return for carmelo anthony is almost certainly the absolute height of such a scenario given the current landscape, and though denver remains a competitive team, they did not get a single player back in the transaction who was of comparable talent to 'melo...

regardless of what an individual thinks of a player like anthony, he is still an established superstar-level talent, and when pushed to trade him, the nuggets did not receive superstar-level value in return. nor did the hornets for chris paul, for that matter. nor did orlando for dwight howard. these are all established superstar-level talents, and while demarcus cousins has superstar-level potential, he is not yet an established star in this league. if none of denver, new orleans, or orlando were able to come even close to breaking even with their big time superstar trades, does anybody honestly believe that the kings are going to get adequate talent in return for demarcus while they continue this slog of a rebuild? again, cousins' behavior issues are, indeed, a red flag that significantly impacts his trade value, but even if those problems did not exist, the market isn't going to budge from it's current trajectory just because kings fans want it to. a talented player on a rookie deal is a valuable asset to the team he's signed with. under the new cba, that asset will depreciate the minute you put it on the market, which is fine if you're talking about a jimmer fredette, but a potential superstar-level talent like demarcus? please...

it's fine if an armchair gm has no problem receiving second or third-tier talent in return for demarcus, but, given that tyreke evans' status with the team is quite precarious, as well, i want just one of you Trade DMC'ers to openly acknowledge that trading cousins could very well set the kings' playoff hopes back for years to come. all of the thomases and fredettes in the world aren't going to catapult this team back towards legitimacy. and it's already been established that 'reke's not going to be able to do so on his own, either...

Strong post. Well stated side of the argument and free of insults.

 

[Bricklayer]

I think with all this talk about value and not trading cousins for less than he is worth that people are missing the big picture. This team shows just enough flashes of being good to keep the hard core fans believing that these guys will get it done with a few tweaks and some more time to mature, but I have a feeling that the new regime will see a bunch of flawed players and a losing culture within this organization that needs to be purged.

You have to try and see it from the new owner and gms point of view. The new owners are guys who have been dreaming of having their own franchise for who knows how long, and all the while the have been dreaming they have been watching this organization and the players on the team be as dysfunctional and embarrassing as any team I can think of since the jailblazers. And like the old saying goes, if you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

So if a fan doesnt think a guy like Burkle, who has taken a poorly ran team and turned them into champions, has been seeing everything wrong with this organization for the last few years and is planning to come in and make significant changes from top to bottom, that the fan is just too emotionally invested in their team to accept what will most likely happen.

The new owners, whether it be Burkle/Mastov or Hansen, are going to want to come into the league and show what they can do as owners of a franchise, I can't see any of them willing to wager their first few years of being an owner on whether or not a guy like Cousins is going to mature enough to help a team win. These guys will have a plan in place to build a team the way they think it should be done. And they have nothing yet invested with cousins, so I can see them cutting their ties, getting whatever value they can out of him, and use that to help their own plan come to fruition.

I'm not saying I agree that this is the best plan, but it is what will most likely happen. And while football and basketball aren't the same, people should look at what is happening down in Oakland, where they had new regime take over a team who was as close as you can get to making the playoffs and absolutely gut it. And are now going on their second offseason of getting rid of players that don't fit with what the new ownership is trying to do. First rounders and high potential guys have been the first ones on the chopping block. But they have a plan as to what they are trying to do, much like our new ownership will, and they aren't going to let decisions made by the people who ran the organization into the ground before them affect what they are trying to do.

That largely depends on whether the new owners are as dumb as Maloofs or not.

IF the new owners have two brain cells capable of firing simultaneously, and IF they actually know the NBA, they will know that they will win exactly jack and squat in the NBA without a talent at the level of a Cousins, and that there are maybe 20 of them, if that, to go around. So might they come in and run around like idiots trashing their own future? Sure. But I doubt it. I am banking on these guys having some basic NBA comprehension, at least enough to see how an elite talent performs under different circumstances. But you never know. They could be fools. And they'll have a lot of fools urging them to be fools even if they are not.

Here's a prediction, Cousins will be here. A major coach will be hired. One of two things will happen -- One: the influx of new money, a top coach to respect, new energy, causes Cousins to get happy and his detractors to crawl back under their rocks. Or two: the new coach hired is a disciplinarian of a mode that Cousins rebels against again, and THEN he gets traded.

 

[Telemachus]

I think with all this talk about value and not trading cousins for less than he is worth that people are missing the big picture. This team shows just enough flashes of being good to keep the hard core fans believing that these guys will get it done with a few tweaks and some more time to mature, but I have a feeling that the new regime will see a bunch of flawed players and a losing culture within this organization that needs to be purged.

You have to try and see it from the new owner and gms point of view. The new owners are guys who have been dreaming of having their own franchise for who knows how long, and all the while the have been dreaming they have been watching this organization and the players on the team be as dysfunctional and embarrassing as any team I can think of since the jailblazers. And like the old saying goes, if you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

So if a fan doesnt think a guy like Burkle, who has taken a poorly ran team and turned them into champions, has been seeing everything wrong with this organization for the last few years and is planning to come in and make significant changes from top to bottom, that the fan is just too emotionally invested in their team to accept what will most likely happen.

The new owners, whether it be Burkle/Mastov or Hansen, are going to want to come into the league and show what they can do as owners of a franchise, I can't see any of them willing to wager their first few years of being an owner on whether or not a guy like Cousins is going to mature enough to help a team win. These guys will have a plan in place to build a team the way they think it should be done. And they have nothing yet invested with cousins, so I can see them cutting their ties, getting whatever value they can out of him, and use that to help their own plan come to fruition.

I'm not saying I agree that this is the best plan, but it is what will most likely happen. And while football and basketball aren't the same, people should look at what is happening down in Oakland, where they had new regime take over a team who was as close as you can get to making the playoffs and absolutely gut it. And are now going on their second offseason of getting rid of players that don't fit with what the new ownership is trying to do. First rounders and high potential guys have been the first ones on the chopping block. But they have a plan as to what they are trying to do, much like our new ownership will, and they aren't going to let decisions made by the people who ran the organization into the ground before them affect what they are trying to do.

I think what you are going to see is a complete overhaul of the front office and management. That will be followed by a new coaching staff. Those 2 moves will greatly help to start changing the plight of the Kings organization. With new money flowing in it will also help to bring things back to where they were when they were one of the best organizations in the league (or so I hope).

Now, while i expect them to try and remake this team as much as possible as well, I think most of the core players might stick around. This team can be successful with Cousins and Tyreke as their two main players. Throw in Patterson and JT as good complementary players, and all you have to do is fill in the rest of the team. I am sure some of the other players might remain on the team, but the truth is that all of them are fairly easy to replace with equal or better players.

 

[Kingster]

Im confused as to the point you are trying to make. You know the people that value cousins highly on here think he is worth a lot. You also know that his rookie deal and current dysfunctional situation (a lot of which everyone knows he contributes to) potentially lessen what we would receive. So why so insistent on this? It's fairly obvious you just want them to list something so you can argue that "x team would never do that" so why continue?

Not trying to be argumentative just don't understand what the point is.

Just read my original post. People here love to talk "in the abstract" about how Cousins is so valuable, that he has to be part of the core, that he's untradable; and some of these same people say, you wouldn't get much anyway. Like my post says, how much is he worth, really? Specifics are required for that, not abstraction. So let's conduct the experiment on this board. Now instead of being the GM of Sacramento that we so often play on this board, we are the GM of another team.

For example, you've now been picked for the GM of Toronto. As the previous GM of the Kings, you've said Cousins is untradable (you as a generic). Now you're with Toronto. Tell me what you would offer the Kings to get him. By putting the shoe on the other foot, now you get some specifics. It's simple. But many don't want to answer the question. Why is that? It's not rocket science. Let's conduct the experiment and see what the highest bid is. It's hillarious, really. Those who claim he is so valuable won't even pick up the phone to make an offer. You can't have it both ways. So let's get some specifics to see exactly how valuable he is on this board. Otherwise all this talk about Cousins and how valuable his is is absolutely meaningless, just abstract meaningless blather with no grounding in concrete reality. Let's get some concreteness. Then we can have a meaningful disussion.

 

[mac]

Just read my original post. People here love to talk "in the abstract" about how Cousins is so valuable, that he has to be part of the core, that he's untradable; and some of these same people say, you wouldn't get much anyway. Like my post says, how much is he worth, really? Specifics are required for that, not abstraction. So let's conduct the experiment on this board. Now instead of being the GM of Sacramento that we so often play on this board, we are the GM of another team.

For example, you've now been picked for the GM of Toronto. As the previous GM of the Kings, you've said Cousins is untradable (you as a generic). Now you're with Toronto. Tell me what you would offer the Kings to get him. By putting the shoe on the other foot, now you get some specifics. It's simple. But many don't want to answer the question. Why is that? It's not rocket science. Let's conduct the experiment and see what the highest bid is. It's hillarious, really. Those who claim he is so valuable won't even pick up the phone to make an offer. You can't have it both ways. So let's get some specifics to see exactly how valuable he is on this board. Otherwise all this talk about Cousins and how valuable his is is absolutely meaningless, just abstract meaningless blather with no grounding in concrete reality. Let's get some concreteness. Then we can have a meaningful disussion.

Many, many here have already taken the time to respond to your post. I for one have given one such specific example. You have yet to comment on any of these posts. If you're not even going to bother to acknowledge all the well-thought out responses then please don't blabber on about wanting to have a "meaningful discussion". You haven't even begun to respond to the point about everyone's made that Cousins' value to other teams is not entirely comparable to his value to ours.

GM of Toronto? I'd offer Kleiza, Lowry or Landry Fields. This would keep my core of Bargs, Gay and DeRozan intact and if DMC pans out I walk away a huge winner. SAC is unlikely to accept this trade straight up, but problem is I can't throw in any other guys due to DMC's rookie salary. Would have to work out a deal taking back maybe Salmons or Jimmer or someone, but core pieces would still be Kleiza/Lowry/Fields for Cousins. Alternative if I'm more confident of Cousins' abilities is to offer Bargnani. Kings would have to send a good 5mil in addition to Cousins just to get Bargs, which makes the trade unlikely.

 

[Padrino]

Just read my original post. People here love to talk "in the abstract" about how Cousins is so valuable, that he has to be part of the core, that he's untradable; and some of these same people say, you wouldn't get much anyway. Like my post says, how much is he worth, really? Specifics are required for that, not abstraction. So let's conduct the experiment on this board. Now instead of being the GM of Sacramento that we so often play on this board, we are the GM of another team.

For example, you've now been picked for the GM of Toronto. As the previous GM of the Kings, you've said Cousins is untradable (you as a generic). Now you're with Toronto. Tell me what you would offer the Kings to get him. By putting the shoe on the other foot, now you get some specifics. It's simple. But many don't want to answer the question. Why is that? It's not rocket science. Let's conduct the experiment and see what the highest bid is. It's hillarious, really. Those who claim he is so valuable won't even pick up the phone to make an offer. You can't have it both ways. So let's get some specifics to see exactly how valuable he is on this board. Otherwise all this talk about Cousins and how valuable his is is absolutely meaningless, just abstract meaningless blather with no grounding in concrete reality. Let's get some concreteness. Then we can have a meaningful disussion.

as mac dutifully pointed out, you haven't bothered to respond to those who have already answered your question, myself included, so "meaningful discussion" does not appear to be this thread's end game. obfuscation is more likely the goal, because it's a stupid question. what is demarcus worth to other gm's? we don't know, and even if we did know, those gm's opinions of demarcus' worth will not be in line with their offers for him, because, in the hypothetical, they're dealing with a kings team who is selling low on a very talented player still earning his rookie contract...

once again, you've confused "value" with "outcome." given both his pending free agent status at the beginning of the '13-'14 season, and the status of cousins' growth to this point, competing gm's don't need to offer total value in return for demarcus in order to acquire him, so why would they? let's say mac's scenario involving toronto were to play out, and the kings received linas kleiza and landry fields in return for DMC and, i dunno, john salmons. that doesn't tell you a damn thing about what cousins is actually worth as a long term asset. it only tells you what a sucker the kings' gm is, and if it's, say, geoff petrie who pulls the trigger on such a trade, it shouldn't be surprising...

 

[Kingster]

Many, many here have already taken the time to respond to your post. I for one have given one such specific example. You have yet to comment on any of these posts. If you're not even going to bother to acknowledge all the well-thought out responses then please don't blabber on about wanting to have a "meaningful discussion". You haven't even begun to respond to the point about everyone's made that Cousins' value to other teams is not entirely comparable to his value to ours.

GM of Toronto? I'd offer Kleiza, Lowry or Landry Fields. This would keep my core of Bargs, Gay and DeRozan intact and if DMC pans out I walk away a huge winner. SAC is unlikely to accept this trade straight up, but problem is I can't throw in any other guys due to DMC's rookie salary. Would have to work out a deal taking back maybe Salmons or Jimmer or someone, but core pieces would still be Kleiza/Lowry/Fields for Cousins. Alternative if I'm more confident of Cousins' abilities is to offer Bargnani. Kings would have to send a good 5mil in addition to Cousins just to get Bargs, which makes the trade unlikely.

This is the 4th post I've made. I'm not responding to everyone because of time, but most importantly, just like a good GM should, I'm waiting for as many offers to come in as possible. Another reason is that if you take the game seriously, then each GM sees what another team has offered. Then you have to respond accordingly. Are there any other GMs on this board who have offered more than Kleiza, Lowry and Landry Fields in your estimation? If so, would you be willing to go higher? Similarly, to all the other GMs on this board, do you think your offers are comparable, higher, or lower to Kleiza, Lowry and Landry Fields? If your offer is lower, are you willing to go higher? Certainly, if you are the GM of the Kings and are willing to deal Cousins you let others know of the competing bids.

Let's see where we are at in couple of days. Then we can see if we summarize the results and see if we can determine the highest bid for Cousins. At least then we attach *some* specificity to this notion of Cousins value.