How is this team for the future?

pasfru · Post #1 » by **pasfru** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:18 pm

I havent watched any Kings games this season and I was wondering, how good are the Kings for the future? Is Boogie, Thomas and McLemore a good core going forward or does this team still require a lot of work and rebuilding?

jeffjtk1234 · Post #2 » by **jeffjtk1234** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:37 pm

We need a better PF and a better backup PG. Once Landry comes back I think you will see a consistent team.

Right now IMO the core is Cousins and Gay. Anyone else can be traded. Gay has shown so far to compliment Cousins perfectly.

Kings2013 · Post #3 » by **Kings2013** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:40 pm

McLemore hasn't shown much and his future is in doubt. We might need another long-term solution at SG

Big_Cat · Post #4 » by **Big_Cat** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 9:08 pm

I believe over the next 5 years, this team will see similar to success in the ballpark of Phoenix/Denver/Milwaukee has seen over the past 5 years.

The team's trajectory will only be pushed into the contender level if DeMarcus jumps to a superstar level (think 2000's Duncan/Shaq...even a prime Webber wouldn't be good enough)...either that or we need McLemore or 2014 pick to develop into a player on the level of a Paul George.

ADoaN17 · Post #5 » by **ADoaN17** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:09 pm

Big_Cat wrote:I believe over the next 5 years, this team will see similar to success in the ballpark of Phoenix/Denver/Milwaukee has seen over the past 5 years.

The team's trajectory will only be pushed into the contender level if DeMarcus jumps to a superstar level (think 2000's Duncan/Shaq...even a prime Webber wouldn't be good enough)...either that or we need McLemore or 2014 pick to develop into a player on the level of a Paul George.

None of those teams had a player like Cousins tho. Those teams lacked an allstar or go to scorer.

Big_Cat · Post #6 » by **Big_Cat** » Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:03 am

ADoaN17 wrote:
Big_Cat wrote:I believe over the next 5 years, this team will see similar to success in the ballpark of Phoenix/Denver/Milwaukee has seen over the past 5 years.

The team's trajectory will only be pushed into the contender level if DeMarcus jumps to a superstar level (think 2000's Duncan/Shaq...even a prime Webber wouldn't be good enough)...either that or we need McLemore or 2014 pick to develop into a player on the level of a Paul George.

None of those teams had a player like Cousins tho. Those teams lacked an allstar or go to scorer.

Denver had Carmelo. Phoenix had Nash directing things. Milwaukee played in a very weak East.

Point being, I believe the current plausible trajectory of the roster might see (in any order) 4th, 8th, 10th, 6th, 12th place finishes in the West...over the next five years.

While we do have Boogie, we don't have the defensive presence Milwaukee had, or the collective athleticism and toughness of Denver, etc. Where we are better in some areas, we are worse in others.

Joel Embust · Post #7 » by **Joel Embust** » Thu Jan 16, 2014 4:46 pm

Obviously Isaiah has had a tremendous season, but I remember people saying IT2 isn't a starter on a succesful team and that you'd rather have him as a 6th man.

My question is, has his recent play made you change your mind and do you view him as a long term starter in your lineup?

Kings2013 · Post #8 » by **Kings2013** » Thu Jan 16, 2014 8:31 pm

Eleqtrique wrote:Obviously Isaiah has had a tremendous season, but I remember people saying IT2 isn't a starter on a succesful team and that you'd rather have him as a 6th man.

My question is, has his recent play made you change your mind and do you view him as a long term starter in your lineup?

There is a split on that amongst Kings fans. I'm pro-IT and believe he could be a quality starting pg if he continues to take strides on defense and running the team.

Big_Cat · Post #9 » by **Big_Cat** » Thu Jan 16, 2014 8:39 pm

Eleqtrique wrote:Obviously Isaiah has had a tremendous season, but I remember people saying IT2 isn't a starter on a succesful team and that you'd rather have him as a 6th man.

My question is, has his recent play made you change your mind and do you view him as a long term starter in your lineup?

Between Boogie, Gay, Thompson, and Landry, we do not really have a lot of flexibility in terms of cap space. The four combined will be making around $45 million every year. DeMarcus and Gay are viewed as pieces to our core and likely won't be touched. Thompson's contract is so large and production being mediocre, he won't be moved either simply because he'll have no value (think Kenny Thomas).

Because we don't have any cap flexibility, our options at improving the PG position will be severely limited, and we are more desperate at getting help in the SG and PF positions...so Thomas will likely be our starter for the foreseeable future. Not the best option, but certainly the best we can do.

SacKingZZZ · Post #10 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:34 am

Eleqtrique wrote:Obviously Isaiah has had a tremendous season, but I remember people saying IT2 isn't a starter on a succesful team and that you'd rather have him as a 6th man.

My question is, has his recent play made you change your mind and do you view him as a long term starter in your lineup?

Well, he's played himself out of the possibility of being a 6th man, there will be at least one team willing to pay him starter money at this point I think.

Whether or not he's long term starter type with this team will depend on the moves made around him. I just don't think you can have no true defensive role players on this teams starting unit so for him to be a starter on this team long term and have it be truly successful in a contending way, they need to find a good on ball defender that can take some pressure off of him. Maybe McLemore can develop into that but it will take a while if it even ever does happen. SG and PF need to be defensive personnel for this team moving forward. Neither Cousins nor Thomas are necessarily ghastly defenders but you can't have them be at the beginning and end of your defensive sequence if you want to be a consistent defensive team. The trick is finding those players. There are a few options out there and so far, this GM has made some really sensible moves, and then some that leave you scratching your head a little. We'll see what happens.

That said, I could totally see IT moved in a multi-player deal in favor of a proven PG on a long term deal now, but with the way he's playing it's going to be hard for a lot of people to swallow even if that player is proven and may make this team better. You don't just give away 20 and 8 level PG's. If I were them I'd look to find solutions at SG and PF first, then work from there.

LovingCousins · Post #11 » by **LovingCousins** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:29 am

A lot depends on the draft and whether we can find a way to clear thompson and thornton off the books and find more effective options. A lot of people are putting their stock in Embiid who would be great if we get a top pick but I would be very pleased to get a player like Willie Cauley-Stein. Rather than a OKC model of two dominant scorers at the 1 and 3, the Kings should focus on a Memphis or Indiana model where they bully teams with size, athleticism and defense. The Kings are missing a defensive 4 to anchor their defense. That being said, I believe Malone has the ability to make the Kings a good defensive team and an elite defensive team with the addition of a defensive 4. Malone is a great coach

SmellingColors · Post #12 » by **SmellingColors** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 9:03 am

LovingCousins wrote:A lot depends on the draft and whether we can find a way to clear thompson and thornton off the books and find more effective options. A lot of people are putting their stock in Embiid who would be great if we get a top pick but I would be very pleased to get a player like Willie Cauley-Stein. Rather than a OKC model of two dominant scorers at the 1 and 3, the Kings should focus on a Memphis or Indiana model where they bully teams with size, athleticism and defense. The Kings are missing a defensive 4 to anchor their defense. That being said, I believe Malone has the ability to make the Kings a good defensive team and an elite defensive team with the addition of a defensive 4. Malone is a great coach

You make a good point. I hadn't seen any of Cauley-Stein, but he certainly looks promising based off this game. I would certainly be OK with that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYyj8oT0qIA

Post #13 » by **City of Trees** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:45 pm

SmellingColors wrote:
LovingCousins wrote:A lot depends on the draft and whether we can find a way to clear thompson and thornton off the books and find more effective options. A lot of people are putting their stock in Embiid who would be great if we get a top pick but I would be very pleased to get a player like Willie Cauley-Stein. Rather than a OKC model of two dominant scorers at the 1 and 3, the Kings should focus on a Memphis or Indiana model where they bully teams with size, athleticism and defense. The Kings are missing a defensive 4 to anchor their defense. That being said, I believe Malone has the ability to make the Kings a good defensive team and an elite defensive team with the addition of a defensive 4. Malone is a great coach

You make a good point. I hadn't seen any of Cauley-Stein, but he certainly looks promising based off this game. I would certainly be OK with that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYyj8oT0qIA

he is a more realistic choice for us since I believe we will land 6-10 in the draft. That and he is NOT from Kansas!

LovingCousins · Post #14 » by **LovingCousins** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:38 pm

I also think that having a mid lottery pick will allow us to be more realistic and pragmatic when picking in the draft. I feel like we've tried to swing for the fences every time a player fell to us rather than picking a piece that fit. It happened with TRob and I think with Mclemore, although I do believe Malone will be able to develop him. If we had later mid lottery picks, maybe we would have gone for drummond or even henson, both of whom would be great fits around Cousins. In the most recent draft, we might have picked MCW who a lot of drafts sites had us slotted picking if we had a later pick. Imagine MCW playing two alongside isaiah at the 1.

Kings2013 · Post #15 » by **Kings2013** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:10 pm

LovingCousins wrote:A lot depends on the draft and whether we can find a way to clear thompson and thornton off the books and find more effective options. A lot of people are putting their stock in Embiid who would be great if we get a top pick but I would be very pleased to get a player like Willie Cauley-Stein. Rather than a OKC model of two dominant scorers at the 1 and 3, the Kings should focus on a Memphis or Indiana model where they bully teams with size, athleticism and defense. The Kings are missing a defensive 4 to anchor their defense. That being said, I believe Malone has the ability to make the Kings a good defensive team and an elite defensive team with the addition of a defensive 4. Malone is a great coach

The problem is we already have so many 4s. Thompson, Landry, Williams and Acy have been contributing there. I think Thompson will be tough to move due to the length of his contract unless we sweeten the deal

SacKingZZZ · Post #16 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:14 pm

The future is now, getting a big in the draft that would help would be nice but this team needs experience. That along with a few of the personnel issues is what's holding this team back.

Big_Cat · Post #17 » by **Big_Cat** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:39 am

LovingCousins wrote:I also think that having a mid lottery pick will allow us to be more realistic and pragmatic when picking in the draft. I feel like we've tried to swing for the fences every time a player fell to us rather than picking a piece that fit. It happened with TRob and I think with Mclemore, although I do believe Malone will be able to develop him. If we had later mid lottery picks, maybe we would have gone for drummond or even henson, both of whom would be great fits around Cousins. In the most recent draft, we might have picked MCW who a lot of drafts sites had us slotted picking if we had a later pick. Imagine MCW playing two alongside isaiah at the 1.

Jimmer and Robinson were both considered very "safe" picks. We haven't swung for the fences in ages...we've pretty much have just been drafting very "safe' picks...

Winglish · Post #18 » by **Winglish** » Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:50 pm

The problem is we already have so many 4s. Thompson, Landry, Williams and Acy have been contributing there. I think Thompson will be tough to move due to the length of his contract unless we sweeten the deal.

I agree that the Kings overpaid those guys and will have to pay to get rid of them, but you have to draft the best player available and worry about roster fit later.

Big_Cat · Post #19 » by **Big_Cat** » Sun Jan 19, 2014 4:11 pm

Kings2013 wrote:The problem is we already have so many 4s. Thompson, Landry, Williams and Acy have been contributing there. I think Thompson will be tough to move due to the length of his contract unless we sweeten the deal

Thompson (and most likely Thornton) will play out their contracts in Sacramento. Time after time, we overpay for these scrubs and then suffer the consequences for years down the line (Kenny Thomas, Shareef, John Salmons, etc. etc. etc.)

enderwilson · Post #20 » by **enderwilson** » Mon Jan 20, 2014 3:26 pm

Big_Cat wrote:Jimmer and Robinson were both considered very "safe" picks. We haven't swung for the fences in ages...we've pretty much have just been drafting very "safe' picks...

What does that mean for this team? I can understand TRob being the "obvious" pick, as we were looking to add talent in the front court and he fell to us in the draft after being projected as a top 2 pick. Jimmer on the other hand was anything but a "safe" pick. I know many people loved him because of his supposed shooting abilities (but likely for his personality), however not many believed his game would translate well to the NBA. As a result, it was a calculated risk to trade down in the draft for him and it didn't really pan out.

So my blanket question is, assuming we draft in the 6-7 position, what would be the "safe" pick, what would be the "swing for the fences" pick, and why?