PMOTT3 and Chuck Texas Early Off-Season Review: Sacramento Kings

[stitches]

Of course it can be the same - when you improve from 25 wins to 35-40 wins and at the same time eliminate/limit options for future improvement.

Sounds like you are describing the Mavs last 4 off-seasons.. (yes I know we won more than 40 games but....)

the Mavs did the same this off-season too. They got as good as possible without getting good enough to be contenders, while giving horrible contracts to injured/aging players... In a way you guys are prisoners of Dirk right now. Trying to build good enough team for him to contend with, while he's no longer a piece you build a contender around.

[bondom34]

I said C, maybe C-. Really they did improve on court which is what I'm looking for but the Philly trade was just bad. Really really bad. I had no problem with WCS and liked basically everything in FA. Rondo is seemingly low risk on a 1 year, Koufos/Belli were good deals, and the minor vets (Butler, Acy) were whatever, they're so minor its not effecting my grade. They gave away McCallum for nothing which seemed a bad deal too, but ultimately I think they're better on court this season.

[BullyKing]

Improving 15 wins would likely mean they don't swap picks plus it would likely mean they just have to give the lotto protected pick in 3 years. That was the calculated part of the risk they took plus they signed guys to small enough deals that they'll still have plenty of cap space to make the other tweaks they'll need to.

The thing is while the risk is somewhat minor, the potential loss is enormous. Imagine losing a potential franchise player due to one of those pick swaps or the pick that is only protected one year?

I mean one Boogie injury and the bottom falls out. And now instead of getting the benefit of an unexpected top pick you have to watch it go elsewhere. Seems like you could have found a way to move that salary without taking on so much risk.

I absolutely loved the trade for the Sixers and couldn't believe it just kept getting better and better when you kept hearing about all the additional assets thrown in. In fairness though, if they swap picks this year, its unlikely that the Kings are falling that far out of their spot.

[HartfordWhalers]

Well he averaged 12 points and 6 assists with an nba body, good court vision. He also displayed all of the weaknesses that were cause for concern. He shot 38%, including 14% from 3, he averaged 5 turnovers per game and his d was inconsistent. The kings had a bigger need in their frontcourt and already had their sites on a more experienced guard with the same issues in rondo.

What people seem to conveniently ignore, after bashing the teams lack of assets all year, was that in order to turn around the steady pace of high twenty wins each year, that they were going to have to commit to a plan. They did that and even if they only reach the low 40s in wins, it's s huge step in the right direction. Yes, they potentially have to trade down at worst a couple spots the next 2 drafts but they made moves they needed to make with the limited pieces to make them.

I really liked Mudiay pre-draft and think he would have been perfect, and really didn't like WCS that much; but setting that aside.

Lets say next year Sac wins 40 games. My question is where are they in 2 years? Is the pg a Rondo re-signed as a 31 year old? Is the backup sg Belinelli and he is still good then enough to get those minutes also at 31?

Oh, he said it better:

Of course it can be the same - when you improve from 25 wins to 35-40 wins and at the same time eliminate/limit options for future improvement.

Okay, I guess I can go back to the draft and why I like Mudiay over WCS. I see Mudiay as a better floor, and a much much higher ceiling. In terms of ranking prospects, if I had Mudiay an 85, I would have WCS a 70 (Towns a 90). At least a tier below, more like a tier and a half to two.

[Hawk Eye]

I debated going with a F or D for my overall grade but just couldnt go with the F. As bad as their trades were and not addressing the multiple FO issues, they did get better on the court compared to last year and have a much improved bench/depth. But that elephant in the room is quickly becoming a full sized mammoth and needs to be addressed asap.

[stitches]

A bit more insight on what Kings fans might expect in the future:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/sportando/status/625314643968274433[/tweet]

http://www.sportando.com/en/usa/nba/170499/kings-vp-vlade-divac-halted-all-communication-with-dean-oliver.html

Kings VP Vlade Divac halted all communication with Dean Oliver

There is continued instability in the Kings front office.

High profile former ESPN analytics guru, Dean Oliver who was hand picked by owner Vivek Ranadive, as Director of Player Personnel, and Head of Analytics a season ago, and who has multiple years left on his contract with the Kings - was told by new Kings VP Vlade Divac not to attend NBA Summer League.

Oliver was in attendance anyway and was seen with King coaches. Oliver was not permitted to be there in his official capacity with the team.

Divac has told confidants that he is strongly opposed to the use of analytics in evaluating players, and has halted all communication with Oliver.

[Kings2013]

Well he averaged 12 points and 6 assists with an nba body, good court vision. He also displayed all of the weaknesses that were cause for concern. He shot 38%, including 14% from 3, he averaged 5 turnovers per game and his d was inconsistent. The kings had a bigger need in their frontcourt and already had their sites on a more experienced guard with the same issues in rondo.

What people seem to conveniently ignore, after bashing the teams lack of assets all year, was that in order to turn around the steady pace of high twenty wins each year, that they were going to have to commit to a plan. They did that and even if they only reach the low 40s in wins, it's s huge step in the right direction. Yes, they potentially have to trade down at worst a couple spots the next 2 drafts but they made moves they needed to make with the limited pieces to make them.

I really liked Mudiay pre-draft and think he would have been perfect, and really didn't like WCS that much; but setting that aside.

Lets say next year Sac wins 40 games. My question is where are they in 2 years? Is the pg a Rondo re-signed as a 31 year old? Is the backup sg Belinelli and he is still good then enough to get those minutes also at 31?

Oh, he said it better:

Of course it can be the same - when you improve from 25 wins to 35-40 wins and at the same time eliminate/limit options for future improvement.

Okay, I guess I can go back to the draft and why I like Mudiay over WCS. I see Mudiay as a better floor, and a much much higher ceiling. In terms of ranking prospects, if I had Mudiay an 85, I would have WCS a 70 (Towns a 90). At least a tier below, more like a tier and a half to two.

Are you just picking out who you think has the higher ceiling without regards to fit with Cuz/Gay? WCS is seen to compliment Cousins, a lot of Kings fans questioned Mudiays fit with the existing core.

[HartfordWhalers]

Well he averaged 12 points and 6 assists with an nba body, good court vision. He also displayed all of the weaknesses that were cause for concern. He shot 38%, including 14% from 3, he averaged 5 turnovers per game and his d was inconsistent. The kings had a bigger need in their frontcourt and already had their sites on a more experienced guard with the same issues in rondo.

What people seem to conveniently ignore, after bashing the teams lack of assets all year, was that in order to turn around the steady pace of high twenty wins each year, that they were going to have to commit to a plan. They did that and even if they only reach the low 40s in wins, it's s huge step in the right direction. Yes, they potentially have to trade down at worst a couple spots the next 2 drafts but they made moves they needed to make with the limited pieces to make them.

I really liked Mudiay pre-draft and think he would have been perfect, and really didn't like WCS that much; but setting that aside.

Lets say next year Sac wins 40 games. My question is where are they in 2 years? Is the pg a Rondo re-signed as a 31 year old? Is the backup sg Belinelli and he is still good then enough to get those minutes also at 31?

Oh, he said it better:

Of course it can be the same - when you improve from 25 wins to 35-40 wins and at the same time eliminate/limit options for future improvement.

Okay, I guess I can go back to the draft and why I like Mudiay over WCS. I see Mudiay as a better floor, and a much much higher ceiling. In terms of ranking prospects, if I had Mudiay an 85, I would have WCS a 70 (Towns a 90). At least a tier below, more like a tier and a half to two.

Are you just picking out who you think has the higher ceiling without regards to fit with Cuz/Gay? WCS is seen to compliment Cousins, a lot of Kings fans questioned Mudiays fit with the existing core.

Yes and no. I absolutely am, and see Mudiay as a higher ceiling in a vacuum.

But I also see him as a better fit. I'm not convinced Cousins should be a 4 and not a 5, I am not convinced that a player like WCS doesn't jam the offense and push Cousins further out on offense to make the positive of defense improvement not more than taken away, I think the ability of WCS to guard 5 positions has been exaggerated, and I think tehre were a lot more compatible young-ish bigs than there were young-ish pg's available last summer.

Meanwhile, I see a penetrator like Mudiay as exactly what Sac's outside shooters need. And the outside shooters ultimately will be what makes or breaks Sac offense. Stauskas was great when open, and horrific when guarded close. He needs to not be terrible when closely guarded in the NBA (and be able to get open off picks himself), but the bread and butter of outside shooters are half open or fully open looks.

Add in that Mudiay is heralded for his ability off the PnR, and I think you have a very good match for Cousins. If you are feeding the ball into him and letting him iso, you should be using your sg's (nowadays Belli) and not your pg's (nowadays Rondo), to ensure spacing and the feeder isn't being asked to create.

Granted, I might be higher on Mudiay than most (I definitely am), and lower on WCS than most (I don't think I am), but yeah, I really didn't like the pick.

[CBA]

This is very obviously an F, right? Drafting WCS to play with Cousins, trading unprotected firsts for the right to pay Rondo and Bellinelli who aren't even starters, paying Koufos big money to play at the same position as their best player and the guy they just drafted, George Karl, Peja and Bobby Jackson nepotism, attempting to sign Bargnani. I'll assume the new analytics rumor is just gossip, but honestly the Kings don't even deserve the benefit of the doubt at this point. This is the worst offseason I can recall.

[rpa]

I don't think you can give them anything better than a D because of the Philly trade. I mean, sure, they created $16mil in cap space, but they could have created $13mil by stretching Landry and trading Thompson/Stauskas for space (a move I haven't seen a single person say is unrealistic). Giving up unprotected pick swaps and (possibly) unprotected picks is just short sighted and bad business. Further, even if you think that the Kings will 100% be a) not swapping & b) handing over a mid to late 2018 first then it's still a crappy trade because they should have been able to get significantly more given the possible downside of the trade.

That said, the team has the talent to win 50 games next year if they're all on the same page, they signed Boston Rondo and not Dallas Rondo, and they still relatively healthy.

[Hawk Eye]

I don't think you can give them anything better than a D because of the Philly trade. I mean, sure, they created $16mil in cap space, but they could have created $13mil by stretching Landry and trading Thompson/Stauskas for space (a move I haven't seen a single person say is unrealistic). Giving up unprotected pick swaps and (possibly) unprotected picks is just short sighted and bad business. Further, even if you think that the Kings will 100% be a) not swapping & b) handing over a mid to late 2018 first then it's still a crappy trade because they should have been able to get significantly more given the possible downside of the trade.

That said, the team has the talent to win 50 games next year if they're all on the same page, they signed Boston Rondo and not Dallas Rondo, and they still relatively healthy.

I had this in my head and totally forgot to talk about it in my review. This would have been so much smarter and i think it is completely realistic.

[Kings2013]

I don't think you can give them anything better than a D because of the Philly trade. I mean, sure, they created $16mil in cap space, but they could have created $13mil by stretching Landry and trading Thompson/Stauskas for space (a move I haven't seen a single person say is unrealistic). Giving up unprotected pick swaps and (possibly) unprotected picks is just short sighted and bad business. Further, even if you think that the Kings will 100% be a) not swapping & b) handing over a mid to late 2018 first then it's still a crappy trade because they should have been able to get significantly more given the possible downside of the trade.

That said, the team has the talent to win 50 games next year if they're all on the same page, they signed Boston Rondo and not Dallas Rondo, and they still relatively healthy.

4/64 was being offered for their first target (Matthews), but yes that part is questionable

[brackdan70]

The good. Drafting WCS and signing Koufos..... the rest was pretty bad. that Philly trade was mind blowing. I still can't believe it, it has to be a typo right?
I hope Rondo bounces back, but man....the odds don't seem good.

[blind prophet]

Really need an incomplete grade for this.

Our bench was atrocious, our starting 5 when together and healthy pretty dang good last year.

An entire roster overhaul, for the cost of Sauce and a future 1st.

Could the Kings be screwed by a tiny pick swap odds now? Yes.

Could Rondo not work, but then expire, yes.

Could they turn it around and actually reach into the playoffs yes.

What/how would you have overhauled the roster in attempt to keep Cousins and Rudy in town any better?

So a lets see what happens INC is the proper grade here.

[Knosh]

What/how would you have overhauled the roster in attempt to keep Cousins and Rudy in town any better?

Cousins is under contract for 3 more years. I wouldn't have overhauled the roster in an attempt to keep Cousins this year. Keep Stauskas, the pick swaps and the pick. Try to move Thompson and Landry without giving up much value over the next two years. If two years from now things still look bad, then start thinking about moves like this.

[Texas Chuck]

So a lets see what happens INC is the proper grade here.

well technically this is the case for every team and it would be pretty pointless.

These threads are obviously speculative in nature. Typically on this board someone does mid-season reviews of the off-season and then year-end reviews. And I am fully prepared to eat crow on any of these because clearly I will have been very very wrong on multiple teams.

[blind prophet]

So a lets see what happens INC is the proper grade here.

well technically this is the case for every team and it would be pretty pointless.

These threads are obviously speculative in nature. Typically on this board someone does mid-season reviews of the off-season and then year-end reviews. And I am fully prepared to eat crow on any of these because clearly I will have been very very wrong on multiple teams.

True Chuck but this has been an extreme off season for the Kings, further complicated with a franchise player tired of promises.

I certainly give them a good grade for trying to do something of merit, or effort and balls of steel.

But this is one of those oddities in nature.

[Kings2013]

What/how would you have overhauled the roster in attempt to keep Cousins and Rudy in town any better?

Cousins is under contract for 3 more years. I wouldn't have overhauled the roster in an attempt to keep Cousins this year. Keep Stauskas, the pick swaps and the pick. Try to move Thompson and Landry without giving up much value over the next two years. If two years from now things still look bad, then start thinking about moves like this.

Cousins will be traded in his last year if things go wrong, so the team needs to show progress in the next two years

The free agent summers of the next couple years are not going to be a buyers market when the cap raises and everyone has cap. No guarantee you will get Koufos/Belinelli deals in the coming summers when everyone is looking to pay a finite amount of guys

[CBA]

Why would they worry if Koufos/Bellinelli deals aren't available over the next two years? One of those guys plays the same positions as the team's franchise player (and the kid they just drafted) and the other is simply mediocre. Sacrificing major assets for guys who don't move the needle isn't "taking a gamble." It's just poor management.

Koufos and Bellinelli aren't convincing Cousins to stay and if he leaves they'll still be getting paid.

[buckboy]

Big fat juicy F.

The risk is relatively minimal, but if it hits them bad, it could be a complete cluster****. I really don't like WCS either, probably would've been about 15 on my board. With Mudiay and Winslow sitting there, just a terrible pick IMO.

Rondo is terrible, but the risk is minimal. I also like Belinelli less than most. Koufos was a good signing.

The George Karl experience can be fun, but it can also crash into an Anthony-Mason-sized wall. Have fun Kings fans.