Sac-Chi-NO

[pipfan]

Assumptions:
-Sac wants to make the playoffs next year
-NO likes Evans at PG
-Chic wants to balance roster

Holiday to Bulls, and Sac drops pick protection to top 7
Taj to Sac
Staukas and #21 to NO

This happens in July-Chic drafts for NO

NO gets 2 young guys for depth and cap space, and move Evans to PG full time

Sac gets their 4 man-need wing depth but they could be a playoff team

Bulls get awesome 3rd guard, and get Niko minutes. Plus they help their chances of a lottery pick from Sac next year

[skywalker33]

SAC gets screwed

[pelifan]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

common man, look at that again.

[bpcox05]

SAC gets screwed

No, we accept this deal gladly. The Pelicans are getting the short end of the stick...

[pipfan]

This seems very fair to Sac. They get their PF for Staukas and giving up a bit more on the pick protection, plus cap space.

Honestly, I thought Holiday was a neutral asset for NO. Adding Staukas and a pick, plus the cap space, would be a positive for them. Isn't Evans better at the point? Then, in 2016 they would have a ton of cap space. What could the Bulls add?

[lordjeff05]

This seems very fair to Sac. They get their PF for Staukas and giving up a bit more on the pick protection, plus cap space.

Honestly, I thought Holiday was a neutral asset for NO. Adding Staukas and a pick, plus the cap space, would be a positive for them. Isn't Evans better at the point? Then, in 2016 they would have a ton of cap space. What could the Bulls add?

The big problem with all of the Stauskas to the Pels moves is that it s a bad fit. And that's ignoring the fact that the dude was disappointing this year. Evans playing the point on offense doesn't mean that he can guard the position on defense. Stauskas isn't going to step in and guard PGs. We still need Holiday for his D and he isn't a useless player off the ball on offense. He's always been more of a combo guard anyway.

[Jon1798]

Holiday is the second best player on the team. Come on now.

[Golabki]

It's all part of chicago's play to have 40m of injured pgs on the roster

[pipfan]

Well, never mind then-I wanted the Bulls to add Holiday in the draft 6 years ago over JJohnson. He would be PERFECT for the Bulls as 3rd guard. On to the next one

[LightTheBeam]

I get that the Pelicans gave up a ton to get Holiday so this is pretty much admitting they made a mistake. I think it is pretty clear Reke and Davis have a good chemistry and the team seems to play best with Reke at the point. This allows them to add shooting and move Reke to full time pg. In theory Stauskas is the perfect fit next to Tyreke, Tyreke can always guard the best opposing guard and Stauskas can shoot. But again I understand that they probably wouldn't want to make that trade.

From Kings perspective I plan on giving the pick either way next year so I would definitely be open to this trade. I would drop the protection down to top 3 but would insist Landry be sent out as well.

[City of Trees]

SAC gets screwed

No, we accept this deal gladly. The Pelicans are getting the short end of the stick...

Kings haven't proved they can move out of the Lottery. Why would this bad team lower their protection and trade away last years lottery pick for a role player? All while Bulls get the best player in the trade AND lowered protection on pick owed. Homer trade by Bulls. Pelicans get completely owned in this trade. Its bad.

[bpcox05]

SAC gets screwed

No, we accept this deal gladly. The Pelicans are getting the short end of the stick...

Kings haven't proved they can move out of the Lottery. Why would this bad team lower their protection and trade away last years lottery pick for a role player? All while Bulls get the best player in the trade AND lowered protection on pick owed. Homer trade by Bulls. Pelicans get completely owned in this trade. Its bad.

A Kings fan should know better

[pipfan]

Taj for Staukas and lowering the protection to top 7 got good reviews from Sac. It seems like a nice step for them to get ready for a playoff fight

NO is the part I had off

[bpcox05]

Taj for Staukas and lowering the protection to top 7 got good reviews from Sac. It seems like a nice step for them to get ready for a playoff fight

NO is the part I had off

It's fair value. I'm not sure why some Kings fans are getting bent out of shape about it.

[City of Trees]

Taj for Staukas and lowering the protection to top 7 got good reviews from Sac. It seems like a nice step for them to get ready for a playoff fight

guess I'm in the minority then.
I'm all about taking risks with that pick but Gibson is not the guy I take that risk for. Agree to disagree.

[City of Trees]

It's fair value. I'm not sure why some Kings fans are getting bent out of shape about it.

Value isn't the only area to consider when making a trade.

[bpcox05]

It's fair value. I'm not sure why some Kings fans are getting bent out of shape about it.

Value isn't the only area to consider when making a trade.

You are definitely correct there so let me break it down for you so you can understand...

The 2016 pick next year is top 10 protected. The 11th worst team over the past 3 years have posted these records: 38-44, 36-46, and 34-48. The Kings finished 29-53 this season. That would be a 9 game, 7 game, and 5 game improvement from where they finished this season. Is that unrealistic? Not at all.

Now, anybody paying attention to this season would understand that this team has a lot more potential than a 29 win team. At the beginning of the season, the Kings were 9-6 with the 2nd strongest schedule (in fact, they only played 4 non-playoff teams during this stretch with 2 of those teams being the Suns and Thunder). After that game on November 26th, Cousins went down with viral meningitis. The next 9 games, the Kings went 2-7 under an easier schedule. A game before Cousins returned to action, Malone was fired. From then on, the team would struggle for the rest of the year.

Any team going through a coaching change in the middle of the season is going to go through an adjustment period and struggle to play to their full potential. But not only did the Kings fire their coach midseason, they had no plan to bring in a coach who was better or at least as good as Malone. Corbin was not the answer. We knew, the players knew it, and even Corbin knew it. In the meantime, the team was just going through the motions knowing that the effort they put in at the beginning of the season, essentially, meant nothing to the FO. Here's a quote from a recent Sac Bee article:

Players were confused and, consequently, played as if their effort didn’t matter. That’s the message many players took when general manager Pete D’Alessandro said the team’s 5-1 start or 9-6 record before DeMarcus Cousins contracted viral meningitis didn’t matter because the concern was the style of play.

It was a stinging message to a locker room with many players who had not been part of a winning team. A general distrust of the front office resulted because it seemed winning was not the ultimate goal. Instead, the aim appeared to be an entertaining style, even if the roster was not built for it.

Karl inherited a disenchanted bunch. By the end of the season, he was saying the Kings needed another wing defender, more shooting and more facilitators – exactly what Malone wanted.

But that wasn’t the message before the season, when Ranadive said this campaign would be about “wins and losses” and not changing the culture, which he boldly declared in September had been changed after a 28-54 season under Malone. Read more at http://www.sacbee.com/sports/nba/sacram ... 57375.html

A lot of people don't realize how demoralized this team was after Malone was let go (as a Kings fan, you should know). This team just lost their leader who was able to get everyone on the team to buy into his system (even Cousins). If the FO doesn't care about winning, why should the players? The culture of the team starts at the top and trickles down. That has always been the case in the NBA.

So if anyone is going to gauge how the Kings will perform next year based solely on their record this season, you are taking a very, very lazy approach. We saw what this team could accomplish with stability and when the players are given time to learn/buy into a system (notice how I didn't mention anything about improving the current roster). The roster this year was on pace for a 49-33 season before Cousins became ill. Not to mention, that pace is taken from a stretch when they had the second hardest strength of schedule. Now am I saying that the Kings would have for sure ended up at 49-33? No, but even if you reduce their win total by 11 games they still would have forfeited their pick. Barring a fluky illness to Cousins and an unnecessary coaching change, is it really that hard to believe that the Kings wouldn't have given up the pick this year? I don't think so.

Now when you look at next year, it should only be more likely. We know what the current core of players can do after buying into a coach's system, but now we have a HOF coach, an early lottery pick, around $10-$13 mil in cap space (depending on if we stretch Landry), and the possibility that McCallum, McLemore, Stauskas, Moreland, and Cousins have continued to progress as players. Considering the coaching stability and the likely improvement in the roster by player development, FA signings, and the draft, I find it very likely that we will lose our pick even with top 10 protection.

Now considering all of this logic, is there much value in dropping the pick protection to top 7? Absolutely not. It gives Chicago a little more insurance that the pick won't turn into a 2nd rounder, but if we're still performing in the bottom 10 of the league next year or the year after, we have much bigger issues than losing the 8th, 9th, or 10th pick in the draft. At that point, Cousins is likely wanting out of Sacramento. So again, dropping a pick protection from 10 to 7 should hardly be a determining factor in this trade.

Is a player at the 8th, 9th, and 10th pick that much more valuable than a player taken at the 11th, 12th, 13th, and so on? I don't think so (Stauskas/Vonleh/Payton vs. McDermott/Saric/LaVine or Caldwell-Pope/Burke/McCollum vs. Carter-Williams/Adams/Olynyk). Also, there's not much value in the player you are taking with the 8th, 9th and 10th pick anyways. These aren't star studded, elite prospects compared to what you can get after the 10th pick, so if the pick does end up transferring in that 8-10 range, it's not a huge value transfer.

I mentioned earlier that if we are performing in the bottom 10 next year, we're going to be in trouble. I'm not sure how much more patience Cousins will have after 6 seasons of being on a losing team, so in the grand scheme of things, would I rather make a trade to try and better the team currently or stay put because I don't want to risk losing my 1st round pick next year? Let's play out both scenarios:

1. If we do that trade, and we perform above the bottom 10, great! We're headed in the right direction as a team, hopefully Cousins is happy, and the pick would have transferred anyways. If the team doesn't do the the trade, and we perform above the bottom 10, great! We're headed in the right direction as a team, hopefully Cousins is happy, and the pick transfers over. Both scenarios have a similar result if we perform above the bottom 10.

2. If we do that trade, and we are the 8th-10th worst team in the league. It's very possible Cousins is unhappy and is leaning towards leaving the franchise. Not to mention the 1st round pick transfers over to Chicago. If we don't do that trade, and we are the 8th-10th worst team in the league. It's very possible Cousins is unhappy and is leaning towards leaving the franchise, but we get to keep our 8th, 9th, or 10th pick.

Obviously keeping the pick is preferred, but I'll tell you why it doesn't matter much to me. If we're still in the bottom 10 next year and Cousins has one foot out the door, the Kings will need to rebuild if they want to have a shot at a title again someday. Trying to make a weak/shallow push with Gay, Collison, and another 2nd/3rd tier player (or whoever they get for Cousins) is not going to end up in a championship. The Kings will need to go full rebuild, and by doing a full rebuild, the Kings will need to do what they can to grab 1 or 2 players who can be franchise changing talents to build around (basically what Cousins and Gay are for us right now). These players are typically had early in the draft. It's not very likely that you're going to find one of these players at the 8th, 9th, or 10th pick. I'm not saying it's not possible, but playing the odds, it's not very likely. So in the end, if it results in Cousins wanting out because we're not making progress (which means that the pick could transfer with a top 7 protection), losing a 8th, 9th, or 10th pick is not going to be as crucial to our new rebuild. It wouldn't hurt bringing in a young player, but you typically want to try and get your superstars first rather than bringing in roleplayers/mediocre talent to make your team just good enough to keep you away from a top pick to help you land that franchise changing player. It's one of the reasons why Philly ended up trading MCW. He is a fine, young PG, but he's no game changer. So what did they do? They moved him for a pick that is top 5 protected this year, top 3 protected next year and the year after that, and unprotected in 2018. It gives them a shot at either drafting that franchise level player or packaging the pick with another pick/player to move up and take an even better prospect.

My last point in regards to the pick is that we should want to get rid of the pick. Our team is in win now mode. The trading of future picks is a great way to bring back pieces that can help you win now. The current protection on that pick limits us in these types trades, so taking that into consideration, the sooner that pick transfers. The sooner we get more flexibility when trying to makes trades that help us compete today.

And we need to start being competitive immediately if we want to have a chance at keeping Cousins. As a small market team, he's really the only shot we have at winning a title. Moves that help bring back pieces to help us compete now or trades that will give us more flexibility in the future to make win now moves should be the goal.

Revisiting the trade, Gibson is a piece that easily helps us win now. He's one of the best compliments we could find for Cousins and we're lucky enough that his current team seems to be okay with moving him. He's a great defender who can defend the pick and roll, the post, and the rim. Not to mention, his defensive rotations are very good and his rebounding is solid as well. On offense, he knows where to be, but more importantly, he knows his role. He's not going to take shots away from the players who should be taking them. He'll get his points within the flow of the offense, and on top of that he can knock down midrange jumpers to help space the floor for Cousins and Gay. He would be a very solid starting PF to have on this team.

He is older (will be 30 to start next season), but just because you're 30 doesn't mean you can't contribute. I've mentioned this on here multiple times already, but Cousins has logged more regular season minutes than Gibson in his career. Gibson's legs are relatively fresh considering he came into the league at 24 and has primarily been backing up Boozer and now Gasol his whole career. I don't expect his production to dropoff at the same age we see most players do. Besides, Gibson only has two more years on his deal. It's not like we just signed a 30 year old to a 5 year contract. He'll be 31 when he expires.

In those two years, we can look to find a long term PF to play next to Cousins, but in the meantime, we need to make this team as good as we can if we want to have some hope at keeping Cousins. That's why my idea was to take Cauley-Stein while also trading for Gibson. It gives us a legitimate starting PF immediately while we also have Cauley-Stein and Moreland in the background developing as the long term PF replacement.

Ideally, I would side with you as far as not trading for Gibson IF we didn't have to worry about pleasing Cousins to persuade him to stay here. For instance, if Cousins was still on his rookie deal, and we had this current roster, then yes let's not trade some of our young potential for veteran players. However, our time to draft rookies and give our young players time to develop has passed. We need vets who can produce immediately so when Cousins contract is up, we have a better shot at keeping him. That's not to say we can't have rookies on our team, but they shouldn't be relied upon to produce. That portion of our rebuilding process has passed, and we squandered most of it by drafting Fredette and Robinson (jury is still out on McLemore and Stauskas).

So considering our situation and what's on the table...

1. Likely to lose our pick next year (even if it's still top 10 protected)
2. We need to be competitive now to persuade Cousins to stay here (don't want to become the Wolves with love)
3. Gibson is a very good compliment to Cousins and would finally give us a starting caliber PF
4. Stauskas is still an unknown at this point and will most likely not be a big contributor to helping us compete now
5. We already have another young SG on the roster (McLemore) that we can develop while we look for a veteran SG to start

...I see no reason why any person who has the best intentions for the Kings would not want to do this deal.

[pipfan]

thanks bpcox-that is the exact reasoning I have for Sac, plus the fact that they are moving to a new arena and they need to build some excitement. Gibson would be great with Cousins.

I do Taj for Staukas and the Top 7 protection alone (or JThompson, but I assume Sac wants to keep him). It is the Holiday part I had wrong

[bpcox05]

thanks bpcox-that is the exact reasoning I have for Sac, plus the fact that they are moving to a new arena and they need to build some excitement. Gibson would be great with Cousins.

I do Taj for Staukas and the Top 7 protection alone (or JThompson, but I assume Sac wants to keep him). It is the Holiday part I had wrong

Well a new arena should never affect your timeline for becoming a good team. If you rush your rebuild, then you can limit the potential of your team. It just so happens that the team's readiness to win is on a similar timeline as when the area will be ready. Again, as far as building a winner, an arena should have no say in how you build a basketball team. As far as marketing and sales, yeah it makes sense.

I think I asked you this in another thread and I'm not sure you ever got back to me, but would you be willing to trade Gibson if we only lowered the protection (no Stauskas), and in this scenario, we would lower the protection to top 3. It gives you more cap space (if you want it), and if get hit with massive injuries, you could be looking at a pretty low pick. Just wanted to get your thoughts.

[pipfan]

It sounds ok, but I doubt Sac falls that low. We would need something coming back. I see your point, but I doubt it.

What about Taj, your pick back and the #22 for your #6 and #36?