Page 1 of 3
George Hill traded
Posted: Thu Feb 8, 2018 6:14 pm
by dozencousins
The KIngs , Cavs , Heat & Jazz just did a 4 way trade .
Kings get J.Johnson likely will be bought out + Shumpert . Also kings get 3 million in cash + Heat 2020 2nd round pick
Cavs get Hill & R.Hood
Jazz get Crowder & D.Rose
Heat get Wade
More details may be coming .
Kings are not done yet more coming !
Re: RE: George Hill traded
Posted: Thu Feb 8, 2018 6:38 pm
by CaptainMorgan78
dozencousins wrote:The KIngs , Cavs , Heat & Jazz just did a 4 way trade .
Kings get J.Johnson likely will be bought out + Shumpert . Also kings get 3 million in cash + Heat 2020 2nd round pick
Cavs get Hill & R.Hood
Jazz get Crowder & D.Rose
Heat get Wade
More details may be coming .
Kings are not done yet more coming !
I like what the Cavs have done, new starting lineup:
PG: Hill
SG: Hood
SF: LeBron
PF: Love
C: Thompson
Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Thu Feb 8, 2018 7:13 pm
by SacKingZZZ
Vlades image takes a hit here. The way to redeem it is to sit his coach down and tell him to cut the BS and run with the young guns.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Thu Feb 8, 2018 7:16 pm
by City of Trees
Well hold on SacKingzzz its hard for us as fans to guage the value Hill added off the court in Fox's development.
Sent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Thu Feb 8, 2018 7:27 pm
by SacKingZZZ
City of Trees wrote:Well hold on SacKingzzz its hard for us as fans to guage the value Hill added off the court in Fox's development.
Sent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
The only thing I can say for sure is that playing on the court looked like it did the trick.
Simply put they tried to have their cake and eat it to. They wanted be Spurs light and they busted. Good now pick up the pieces, go with the wind, and build something instead of circling the same drain. The kiddie gloves need to come off by friday. This shows you the damage to value done with the usage of this roster. Platoon lineups do this and there is no way around it. The 25 mpg max strikes again. Now the question is whether or not the Kings ride the real sustainable long term talent on this team or continue the same unwatchable, destructive garbage. I don't care vets or not, Zbo does nothing for you. Temple does nothing for you. Iman does nothing for you. If they provide a good locker room presence then great, the floor now needs to be the young guys for value sake alone. The value lost in their assets this year was even worse than I thought. That's saying something major. They just dumped Malachi for nothing. They just traded a really good player in George Hill for basically nothing. I was down on this all year but this just shows you even I underestimated the damage done. I'm cool, but now it's how they respond. More Zbo, Koufos and the crew and your now just digging that hole deeper by burying your young assets which is realistically the only thing on your roster that may yield some sort of return at some point.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Thu Feb 8, 2018 9:29 pm
by bleeds_purple
City of Trees wrote:Well hold on SacKingzzz its hard for us as fans to guage the value Hill added off the court in Fox's development.
Sent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
Probably close to zero. Playing was more important than any "mentorship" he received from a guy who clearly didn't want to be here.
Soon as Fox got bumped up in minutes and became the primary ball-handler his confidence went up. On court experience will always trump everything else.
If anyone is giving mentorship out of vets its Vince. I love that guy man. He's always talking in all the young guys ears. That is value!
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Fri Feb 9, 2018 1:48 am
by LiSTWithLani
Didn't want to start another thread on your board, but know that Bruno is a great young kid with crazy potential.
Bruno has almost comically long arms, he's decently light on his feet, but unfortunately still learning the game, despite years of grooming. He's a great shooter with length exceeding many centers and a game that most closely resembles a prototypical SF. Many believe that he'd be best suited as a PF or perhaps small ball C.
Weakness is his awareness and dribbling.
I'm excited to see Malachi Richardson and what he brings to the table.
What a fun day for you guys, Shumpert is a baller. Pre-knee injury I thought that he was one to watch for sure.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Fri Feb 9, 2018 2:49 am
by KL78192020
yo you got Bruno!!
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Fri Feb 9, 2018 3:13 am
by nolimit0820
bleeds_purple wrote:City of Trees wrote:Well hold on SacKingzzz its hard for us as fans to guage the value Hill added off the court in Fox's development.
Sent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
Probably close to zero. Playing was more important than any "mentorship" he received from a guy who clearly didn't want to be here.
Soon as Fox got bumped up in minutes and became the primary ball-handler his confidence went up. On court experience will always trump everything else.
If anyone is giving mentorship out of vets its Vince. I love that guy man. He's always talking in all the young guys ears. That is value!
To join the converaation--we cannot value Vince's mentorship because he "is always in the young guys ears" and then discredit the same role Hill played. We don't know the Fox and Hill relationship well enough to make assumptions and what we do know is that they had a good relationship. So, I think we can, as fans, walk away from this trade deadline thankful for the short role he played in point De'Aaron in the right direction. Personally, most of us thought when Hill was brought in it would be for a half season to help point the ship and play big bro to Fox. He did that...now it's Fox's turn. I'm cool with it.
Re: RE: Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Fri Feb 9, 2018 3:58 am
by City of Trees
nolimit0820 wrote:bleeds_purple wrote:City of Trees wrote:Well hold on SacKingzzz its hard for us as fans to guage the value Hill added off the court in Fox's development.
Sent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
Probably close to zero. Playing was more important than any "mentorship" he received from a guy who clearly didn't want to be here.
Soon as Fox got bumped up in minutes and became the primary ball-handler his confidence went up. On court experience will always trump everything else.
If anyone is giving mentorship out of vets its Vince. I love that guy man. He's always talking in all the young guys ears. That is value!
To join the converaation--we cannot value Vince's mentorship because he "is always in the young guys ears" and then discredit the same role Hill played. We don't know the Fox and Hill relationship well enough to make assumptions and what we do know is that they had a good relationship. So, I think we can, as fans, walk away from this trade deadline thankful for the short role he played in point De'Aaron in the right direction. Personally, most of us thought when Hill was brought in it would be for a half season to help point the ship and play big bro to Fox. He did that...now it's Fox's turn. I'm cool with it.
Fox has gone on record saying his challenge as a rookie is not physical but the mental part of the game. The link below is about Fox and the vets helping him along the way. Basically solidifies Hill has played a role in Fox's development. Hill and Fox would watch film together.
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.sacbee.com/sports/nba/sacramento-kings/kings-blog/article197768839.htmlSent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
Re: RE: Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Fri Feb 9, 2018 4:20 am
by nolimit0820
City of Trees wrote:nolimit0820 wrote:bleeds_purple wrote:
Probably close to zero. Playing was more important than any "mentorship" he received from a guy who clearly didn't want to be here.
Soon as Fox got bumped up in minutes and became the primary ball-handler his confidence went up. On court experience will always trump everything else.
If anyone is giving mentorship out of vets its Vince. I love that guy man. He's always talking in all the young guys ears. That is value!
To join the converaation--we cannot value Vince's mentorship because he "is always in the young guys ears" and then discredit the same role Hill played. We don't know the Fox and Hill relationship well enough to make assumptions and what we do know is that they had a good relationship. So, I think we can, as fans, walk away from this trade deadline thankful for the short role he played in point De'Aaron in the right direction. Personally, most of us thought when Hill was brought in it would be for a half season to help point the ship and play big bro to Fox. He did that...now it's Fox's turn. I'm cool with it.
Fox has gone on record saying his challenge as a rookie is not physical but the mental part of the game. The link below is about Fox and the vets helping him along the way. Basically solidifies Hill has played a role in Fox's development. Hill and Fox would watch film together.
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.sacbee.com/sports/nba/sacramento-kings/kings-blog/article197768839.htmlSent from my LG-H872 using
RealGM mobile app
Absolutely. Thanks for that. I'm totally a believer that we'll never see the tangible results of a good mentoring relationship. So I thank George Hill and now it's Fox time I think the larger issue, that we can all agree on, is that our young guys are not getting ample opportunity to develop. MAN!!! Why did we not trade any more of our vets though? I'm fine with a couple but not 5 or 6. Now add Shump? Oh boy....
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Fri Feb 9, 2018 1:24 pm
by perempe20
pretty nice nostalgic team with ISO Joe and Vince
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:06 pm
by dckingsfan
Signing Hill, Randolph and Carter was such a cluster... taking the change that they gather picks for bad contracts was sooooo the way to go.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:16 pm
by benchmobbin02
dckingsfan wrote:Signing Hill, Randolph and Carter was such a cluster... taking the change that they gather picks for bad contracts was sooooo the way to go.
I think the Kings would say they have gotten more than their money's worth from Carter. Randolph is the tank commander and Hill got moved anyways.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 10:21 pm
by dckingsfan
benchmobbin02 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:Signing Hill, Randolph and Carter was such a cluster... taking the change that they gather picks for bad contracts was sooooo the way to go.
I think the Kings would say they have gotten more than their money's worth from Carter. Randolph is the tank commander and Hill got moved anyways.
But there was no point... develop the youngsters by their PT. Use the cap to take on short-term bad contracts and assets.
This was unquestionably the wrong strategy, IMO. Shumpert and Randolph still represents $22M in cluster for next year.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 12:06 am
by benchmobbin02
dckingsfan wrote:benchmobbin02 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:Signing Hill, Randolph and Carter was such a cluster... taking the change that they gather picks for bad contracts was sooooo the way to go.
I think the Kings would say they have gotten more than their money's worth from Carter. Randolph is the tank commander and Hill got moved anyways.
But there was no point... develop the youngsters by their PT. Use the cap to take on short-term bad contracts and assets.
This was unquestionably the wrong strategy, IMO. Shumpert and Randolph still represents $22M in cluster for next year.
We signed the vets so we had guys the young players could learn from on and off the court and so we didn't put out a putrid product every night. I mean it's still pretty bad but that wasn't the intention. If they would have just run the young guys and signed Raymond Felton, Luke Babbitt and Tolliver then yes we'd have saved a ton of money but the team would have be all-time bad to the point people would stop showing up to the new building. ZBo and Shum are also both guys that can help when playing well and are expiring. I get what you're saying and understand but I think they have a long term plan. I mean like a 5 year plan, not a 2 year plan.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:57 pm
by dckingsfan
benchmobbin02 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:benchmobbin02 wrote:I think the Kings would say they have gotten more than their money's worth from Carter. Randolph is the tank commander and Hill got moved anyways.
But there was no point... develop the youngsters by their PT. Use the cap to take on short-term bad contracts and assets.
This was unquestionably the wrong strategy, IMO. Shumpert and Randolph still represents $22M in cluster for next year.
We signed the vets so we had
guys the young players could learn from on and off the court and so we didn't put out a putrid product every night. I mean it's still pretty bad but that wasn't the intention. If they would have just run the young guys and signed Raymond Felton, Luke Babbitt and Tolliver then yes we'd have saved a ton of money but the team would have be all-time bad to the point people would stop showing up to the new building. ZBo and Shum are also both guys that can help when playing well and are expiring. I get what you're saying and understand but I think they have a long term plan. I mean like a 5 year plan, not a 2 year plan.
The Celtics and Sixers did this the right way - they learned from their coach.
The would have been much better off not signing the vets and at least trying for additional assets. Their plan sucks - that hasn't changed.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:54 pm
by benchmobbin02
dckingsfan wrote:benchmobbin02 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:But there was no point... develop the youngsters by their PT. Use the cap to take on short-term bad contracts and assets.
This was unquestionably the wrong strategy, IMO. Shumpert and Randolph still represents $22M in cluster for next year.
We signed the vets so we had
guys the young players could learn from on and off the court and so we didn't put out a putrid product every night. I mean it's still pretty bad but that wasn't the intention. If they would have just run the young guys and signed Raymond Felton, Luke Babbitt and Tolliver then yes we'd have saved a ton of money but the team would have be all-time bad to the point people would stop showing up to the new building. ZBo and Shum are also both guys that can help when playing well and are expiring. I get what you're saying and understand but I think they have a long term plan. I mean like a 5 year plan, not a 2 year plan.
The Celtics and Sixers did this the right way - they learned from their coach.
The would have been much better off not signing the vets and at least trying for additional assets. Their plan sucks - that hasn't changed.
The Celtics and Sixers are working with top 3 draft picks.
The Kings plan is good for a long term rebuild - that hasn't changed.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:25 pm
by dckingsfan
benchmobbin02 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:benchmobbin02 wrote:
We signed the vets so we had guys the young players could learn from on and off the court and so we didn't put out a putrid product every night. I mean it's still pretty bad but that wasn't the intention. If they would have just run the young guys and signed Raymond Felton, Luke Babbitt and Tolliver then yes we'd have saved a ton of money but the team would have be all-time bad to the point people would stop showing up to the new building. ZBo and Shum are also both guys that can help when playing well and are expiring. I get what you're saying and understand but I think they have a long term plan. I mean like a 5 year plan, not a 2 year plan.
The Celtics and Sixers did this the right way - they learned from their coach.
The would have been much better off not signing the vets and at least trying for additional assets. Their plan sucks - that hasn't changed.
The Celtics and Sixers are working with top 3 draft picks.
The Kings plan is good for a long term rebuild - that hasn't changed.
Neither the Celtics or the Sixers bought short-term veteran contracts during the rebuild.
The Kings plan is still bad for a long-term rebuild. It is short-sighted.
Re: George Hill traded
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:29 pm
by benchmobbin02
dckingsfan wrote:benchmobbin02 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:The Celtics and Sixers did this the right way - they learned from their coach.
The would have been much better off not signing the vets and at least trying for additional assets. Their plan sucks - that hasn't changed.
The Celtics and Sixers are working with top 3 draft picks.
The Kings plan is good for a long term rebuild - that hasn't changed.
Neither the Celtics or the Sixers bought short-term veteran contracts during the rebuild. The Kings plan is still bad for a long-term rebuild. It is short-sighted.
That was my point, they didn't have too.The Kings plan is in the 2nd yrs so too early to judge. It's not bad for a long term rebuild the way they are doing it. They have had more assets then they could handle. They needed vets to balance out the roster. Not a bad plan. Just not the way you would have done it.