Moderators: bwgood77, lilfishi22, Qwigglez
Son of Ra wrote:Kerrsed wrote:A bit NSFW, but had to post:Spoiler:
Omg this is gold! I'm dying
Kerrsed wrote:Son of Ra wrote:Kerrsed wrote:A bit NSFW, but had to post:Spoiler:
Omg this is gold! I'm dying
Yeah, i just saw it going through the Cousins thread on the GB. So far im only about 25 pages in with another 25 to go, but at least im already caught up with the Cousins Trade Thread on the Kings Board and the Trade Board.
lilfishi22 wrote:Kerrsed wrote:Son of Ra wrote:Omg this is gold! I'm dying
Yeah, i just saw it going through the Cousins thread on the GB. So far im only about 25 pages in with another 25 to go, but at least im already caught up with the Cousins Trade Thread on the Kings Board and the Trade Board.
I'm guessing there's forum-wide condemnation of the trade?
Kerrsed wrote:bwgood77 wrote:If the Kings don't even want Knight as a throw in in the deal you know he has little value.
He might hold some value to some teams, but lets be real, The Kings already have Lawson and Collison at the PG spot, the last thing they need is a $14M a year 3rd stringer. They just didnt want to be saddled with paying an extra $14M a season for the next 3 years to a player that they really dont want or have a need for.
bwgood77 wrote:Kerrsed wrote:bwgood77 wrote:If the Kings don't even want Knight as a throw in in the deal you know he has little value.
He might hold some value to some teams, but lets be real, The Kings already have Lawson and Collison at the PG spot, the last thing they need is a $14M a year 3rd stringer. They just didnt want to be saddled with paying an extra $14M a season for the next 3 years to a player that they really dont want or have a need for.
So in other words, Knight has good value? Not as good as Lawson or Collison but good value? To who?
nevetsov wrote:Absolutely agree with the sentiment shared by DRK and many others here - the Kings just didn't appear to want to deal with us anymore. I knew we fleeced them on the Chriss trade, totally forgot about stealing IT as well. I'd be butt hurt too if I were them.
The only thing I would add is that I don't believe Bucher's reasoning at all regarding them balking at Knight. He just seems to be regurgitating the mainstream sentiment rather than breaking fact. I'm more inclined to believe reports earlier in the season (on multiple occasions) when the Kings reportedly wanted Knight, but we laughed them off because they had literally nothing of value. Yet another reason to want to give us the middle finger.
They might not want him as much now, although this trade and their recent draft picks suggest to me that they do target odd players. I don't think Knight would have been included in that offer to begin with if they had no interest in him.
I have no doubt we had the best offer, so there was no point in outbidding ourselves with an FO that just didn't want to play ball.
Kerrsed wrote:bwgood77 wrote:Kerrsed wrote:
He might hold some value to some teams, but lets be real, The Kings already have Lawson and Collison at the PG spot, the last thing they need is a $14M a year 3rd stringer. They just didnt want to be saddled with paying an extra $14M a season for the next 3 years to a player that they really dont want or have a need for.
So in other words, Knight has good value? Not as good as Lawson or Collison but good value? To who?
Hell, i take back what i said.....somewhat. I believe that Knight is better than both Collison and Lawson. He could have been their starting PG for the foreseeable future, or at least helped whatever PG they ended up drafting with our pick ease into the league. I also believe that he is better than any SG that the Kings have on the roster. He could have been fine next to Collison or Lawson or even transitioned into the SG role after helping ease the rookie PG into the starting PG role.
So the more i look at it, i honestly dont see why they didnt take the offer due to Knight.
And im not saying Knight has "Good value", but he does have some value to some teams. Just off the top of my head i can name the Mav's as another team that could currently use Knight as their starting PG. DeRon has been absolute trash, and unless they are intentionally tanking, wasting Dirks final years, i dont see how they wouldnt jump at the chance to upgrade from DeRon to Knight. I dont know how much value Lawson or Collison have, as they pretty much have been thrown around the league and ended up in the worst place they can be, on the Kings as expiring contracts.
cosmofizzo wrote:I have a series of reactions to all of this that depart from the general tone of this board on this subject:
1. There is no way we would have insisted the Kings take Knight in order to make a Boogie deal happen. Get real. If they didn't value him, we would've kept him. After all, we're looking for positive value for trading him straight up. It's bull, lazy reporting.
2. Either the Kings made an unreasonable demand, or we were legitimately worried, after speaking to DMC's representatives, that we could not realistically count on him re-signing with us. In either case, we'd be better off not selling the farm.
3. Cousins was the one player who could have moved the needle for us - neither Butler or George were going to do it. The fact that we have not gotten him should clarify that we really are committed to our young players and are taking the long - and ultimately more rewarding - route. With Cousins no longer a possibility, the odds that we'll be dealing vets at the deadline has increased.
All of this is to say, don't panic, don't overreact, and don't call for the GM's head; keep things in perspective. By the summer, we'll have added a top 5 pick and we'll come into next season with one of the league's most impressive collection of young players. Nothing's changed in that respect. Calm down, fellas.
If we'd landed Boogie in exchange for our picks (future and recent), the fate of our franchise would rest on the UFA whims of one Boogie Cousins. Think about that. We would have dealt a decent chunk of the core we are currently built around Booker for Cousins, and he could have simply walked away with that future, leaving Booker without the young supporting cast he will need to make this team a contender. While the prospect of adding Boogie was exciting, it would have also made us justifiably anxious. Way too much would have depended on our performance next season. Currently, we're in a good spot, still well-positioned to make the most out of the talent we've drafted. We should not be in a rush to make moves that jeopardize all of it.
TL;DR It's better not to buy than to overpay. You can be jealous of the Pels, but that's about it on this one. Moving on...
bwgood77 wrote:Kerrsed wrote:bwgood77 wrote:
So in other words, Knight has good value? Not as good as Lawson or Collison but good value? To who?
Hell, i take back what i said.....somewhat. I believe that Knight is better than both Collison and Lawson. He could have been their starting PG for the foreseeable future, or at least helped whatever PG they ended up drafting with our pick ease into the league. I also believe that he is better than any SG that the Kings have on the roster. He could have been fine next to Collison or Lawson or even transitioned into the SG role after helping ease the rookie PG into the starting PG role.
So the more i look at it, i honestly dont see why they didnt take the offer due to Knight.
And im not saying Knight has "Good value", but he does have some value to some teams. Just off the top of my head i can name the Mav's as another team that could currently use Knight as their starting PG. DeRon has been absolute trash, and unless they are intentionally tanking, wasting Dirks final years, i dont see how they wouldnt jump at the chance to upgrade from DeRon to Knight. I dont know how much value Lawson or Collison have, as they pretty much have been thrown around the league and ended up in the worst place they can be, on the Kings as expiring contracts.
McLemore isn't as good as I thought he would be, but I'd much rather have him than Knight.
bwgood77 wrote:As I said the last few days, they would want a 1, 2 and 3, and now they got Galloway, Hield and Evans and likely they keep their pick.
bwgood77 wrote:nevetsov wrote:Absolutely agree with the sentiment shared by DRK and many others here - the Kings just didn't appear to want to deal with us anymore. I knew we fleeced them on the Chriss trade, totally forgot about stealing IT as well. I'd be butt hurt too if I were them.
The only thing I would add is that I don't believe Bucher's reasoning at all regarding them balking at Knight. He just seems to be regurgitating the mainstream sentiment rather than breaking fact. I'm more inclined to believe reports earlier in the season (on multiple occasions) when the Kings reportedly wanted Knight, but we laughed them off because they had literally nothing of value. Yet another reason to want to give us the middle finger.
They might not want him as much now, although this trade and their recent draft picks suggest to me that they do target odd players. I don't think Knight would have been included in that offer to begin with if they had no interest in him.
I have no doubt we had the best offer, so there was no point in outbidding ourselves with an FO that just didn't want to play ball.
They didn't want IT. They easily could have re-signed him if they wanted to. He was more popular at the time than Cousins around the city and Cousins didn't like that. He may have also said there is no way I'm re-signing with Phx but thought playing with AD would be pretty crazy good....remember, even though they didn't play at the same time, both went to Kentucky.
As I said the last few days, they would want a 1, 2 and 3, and now they got Galloway, Hield and Evans and likely they keep their pick. Top 10 in draft lottery they likely keep since Philly has the right to swap and they won't. http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/team
They had no use for Len (remember, they did just draft Papa, Skal, WCS the year before and Knight, as we all know sucks. Galloway isn't much better, but keeping their pick and getting the Pelicans pick will allow them to potentially draft guys two guys among the likes of Ntilinka, Monk, Fox, one of the small forwards, etc.
Qwigglez wrote:bwgood77 wrote:nevetsov wrote:Absolutely agree with the sentiment shared by DRK and many others here - the Kings just didn't appear to want to deal with us anymore. I knew we fleeced them on the Chriss trade, totally forgot about stealing IT as well. I'd be butt hurt too if I were them.
The only thing I would add is that I don't believe Bucher's reasoning at all regarding them balking at Knight. He just seems to be regurgitating the mainstream sentiment rather than breaking fact. I'm more inclined to believe reports earlier in the season (on multiple occasions) when the Kings reportedly wanted Knight, but we laughed them off because they had literally nothing of value. Yet another reason to want to give us the middle finger.
They might not want him as much now, although this trade and their recent draft picks suggest to me that they do target odd players. I don't think Knight would have been included in that offer to begin with if they had no interest in him.
I have no doubt we had the best offer, so there was no point in outbidding ourselves with an FO that just didn't want to play ball.
They didn't want IT. They easily could have re-signed him if they wanted to. He was more popular at the time than Cousins around the city and Cousins didn't like that. He may have also said there is no way I'm re-signing with Phx but thought playing with AD would be pretty crazy good....remember, even though they didn't play at the same time, both went to Kentucky.
As I said the last few days, they would want a 1, 2 and 3, and now they got Galloway, Hield and Evans and likely they keep their pick. Top 10 in draft lottery they likely keep since Philly has the right to swap and they won't. http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/team
They had no use for Len (remember, they did just draft Papa, Skal, WCS the year before and Knight, as we all know sucks. Galloway isn't much better, but keeping their pick and getting the Pelicans pick will allow them to potentially draft guys two guys among the likes of Ntilinka, Monk, Fox, one of the small forwards, etc.
They are going to waive Gallaway and buyout Evans. Sixers have the right to swap picks with them this year, and Sixers also own their 2019 pick.
Pelicans pick is top 3 protected (not that it matters much).
Hield's rookie numbers as a 23 year old are worse than a rookie 20 year old in Knight. They also traded Stauskas away who, although has been in the NBA 3 years now, has slightly better numbers than Hield.
Just a terrible terrible deal for the Kings. I don't understand why they didn't just wait til the trade deadline to see what other offers came about.
Kerrsed wrote:bwgood77 wrote:Kerrsed wrote:
Hell, i take back what i said.....somewhat. I believe that Knight is better than both Collison and Lawson. He could have been their starting PG for the foreseeable future, or at least helped whatever PG they ended up drafting with our pick ease into the league. I also believe that he is better than any SG that the Kings have on the roster. He could have been fine next to Collison or Lawson or even transitioned into the SG role after helping ease the rookie PG into the starting PG role.
So the more i look at it, i honestly dont see why they didnt take the offer due to Knight.
And im not saying Knight has "Good value", but he does have some value to some teams. Just off the top of my head i can name the Mav's as another team that could currently use Knight as their starting PG. DeRon has been absolute trash, and unless they are intentionally tanking, wasting Dirks final years, i dont see how they wouldnt jump at the chance to upgrade from DeRon to Knight. I dont know how much value Lawson or Collison have, as they pretty much have been thrown around the league and ended up in the worst place they can be, on the Kings as expiring contracts.
McLemore isn't as good as I thought he would be, but I'd much rather have him than Knight.
Maybe strictly due to the fact that he is on his rookie scale contract?
Knight vs. McLemore Comparison
bwgood77 wrote:
Yeah, but not for long considering he was in the same draft as Len. Maybe they like him and want to have the money to pay him?
Kerrsed wrote:bwgood77 wrote:
Yeah, but not for long considering he was in the same draft as Len. Maybe they like him and want to have the money to pay him?
But if they liked McLemore so much (Which they dont), they wouldnt have just traded their all-star big man for his replacement. Make no mistake, Buddy will be replacing McLemore at the starting SG spot, and the fans will riot if he gets outplayed by McLemore. Hell, they already are pissed and on edge about the return they got, let alone for the fact that the "main piece" they got back is currently worse than the SG they shipped off to Philly (Stauskas along with a 2017 pick swap and unprotected 2019 pick), all to clear room for Rondo (who is long gone), Casspi (just traded as well), and Koufos.
Seriously, the WORST FRONT OFFICE EVER.
WORST
FRONT OFFICE
EVER.
EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!