How is this team for the future?
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- Starter
- Posts: 2,221
- And1: 443
- Joined: Nov 28, 2012
Re: How is this team for the future?
For you guys, I wonder if it would be possible to trade McLemore for a similarly bad starting rookie at another position. The moment you guys traded for Gay, and with Boogie and I.Thomas on your team, you've pretty much got all your usage used up. McLemore is going to have a really hard time breaking through because he won't get many shots per game any time soon. Maybe you could go after a pure defensive big man by trading him.
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- Starter
- Posts: 2,129
- And1: 644
- Joined: Jun 03, 2007
-
Re: How is this team for the future?
Brapman wrote:For you guys, I wonder if it would be possible to trade McLemore for a similarly bad starting rookie at another position. The moment you guys traded for Gay, and with Boogie and I.Thomas on your team, you've pretty much got all your usage used up. McLemore is going to have a really hard time breaking through because he won't get many shots per game any time soon. Maybe you could go after a pure defensive big man by trading him.
Posters of realgm are having an extremely difficult time gasping the concept that Mclemore is a 20 year not even 39 games into his rookie year and isnt going anywhere. Theres going to be struggles, but with his potential and fitting a spot we desperately need he's not going anywhere, nor should he.
Re: How is this team for the future?
- AnDrOiDKing4
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,173
- And1: 57
- Joined: Jan 26, 2005
- Location: Hiding from Kobe's Elbow
-
Re: How is this team for the future?
I still believe that IT2 is probably the best 6th man in the league. We need an upgrade at the 2 and the 4.
I am impressed by our GM's abilities to consolidate talent. Williams and Gay have been home runs so far. He was spot on about Evans, with reports about Pelicans trying to trade him. He proved me wrong big time by signing Cousins to a long term deal even though I personally think he was not worth it at the time.
I am impressed by our GM's abilities to consolidate talent. Williams and Gay have been home runs so far. He was spot on about Evans, with reports about Pelicans trying to trade him. He proved me wrong big time by signing Cousins to a long term deal even though I personally think he was not worth it at the time.
Lamak wrote:His playstyle is very similar to Derrick Rose, but asian.
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 778
- And1: 152
- Joined: Jun 23, 2011
-
Re: How is this team for the future?
AnDrOiDKing4 wrote:I still believe that IT2 is probably the best 6th man in the league. We need an upgrade at the 2 and the 4.
I am impressed by our GM's abilities to consolidate talent. Williams and Gay have been home runs so far. He was spot on about Evans, with reports about Pelicans trying to trade him. He proved me wrong big time by signing Cousins to a long term deal even though I personally think he was not worth it at the time.
Not to mention the added bonus of moving Salmons, Hayes and Patterson. And it only cost us Vasquez and Luc Mbah a Moute. Neither of which I have heard making as much of an impact as their trade counterparts. Although Toronto has seemed to improve the most from our trade, I believe this is less likely due to the players they received and is more likely the result of removing the conflict among games and styles on their roster.
Time will tell, but if Pete continues to make savvy moves to improve the talent on our roster, I believe the playoffs will be visible on the horizon.
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 760
- And1: 139
- Joined: Dec 14, 2010
Re: How is this team for the future?
enderwilson wrote:AnDrOiDKing4 wrote:I still believe that IT2 is probably the best 6th man in the league. We need an upgrade at the 2 and the 4.
I am impressed by our GM's abilities to consolidate talent. Williams and Gay have been home runs so far. He was spot on about Evans, with reports about Pelicans trying to trade him. He proved me wrong big time by signing Cousins to a long term deal even though I personally think he was not worth it at the time.
Not to mention the added bonus of moving Salmons, Hayes and Patterson. And it only cost us Vasquez and Luc Mbah a Moute. Neither of which I have heard making as much of an impact as their trade counterparts. Although Toronto has seemed to improve the most from our trade, I believe this is less likely due to the players they received and is more likely the result of removing the conflict among games and styles on their roster.
Time will tell, but if Pete continues to make savvy moves to improve the talent on our roster, I believe the playoffs will be visible on the horizon.
I think an underrated part of the trade for Toronto is that, yes, they moved conflicting styles on their roster, but they also play in the Eastern Conference.

But yeah, I love the moves we've made so far. As for the future, I think we're 1 draft pick and a trade away from developing into a playoff team. I think we need a different presence at starting 4, a legitimate backup PG (even though Jimmer has been playing a lot better), and a defensive minded SG. Regardless, I think the future of this team is very bright.
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,085
- And1: 1,084
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
Re: How is this team for the future?
enderwilson wrote:AnDrOiDKing4 wrote:I still believe that IT2 is probably the best 6th man in the league. We need an upgrade at the 2 and the 4.
I am impressed by our GM's abilities to consolidate talent. Williams and Gay have been home runs so far. He was spot on about Evans, with reports about Pelicans trying to trade him. He proved me wrong big time by signing Cousins to a long term deal even though I personally think he was not worth it at the time.
Not to mention the added bonus of moving Salmons, Hayes and Patterson. And it only cost us Vasquez and Luc Mbah a Moute. Neither of which I have heard making as much of an impact as their trade counterparts. Although Toronto has seemed to improve the most from our trade, I believe this is less likely due to the players they received and is more likely the result of removing the conflict among games and styles on their roster.
Time will tell, but if Pete continues to make savvy moves to improve the talent on our roster, I believe the playoffs will be visible on the horizon.
Nothing has changed though, this team won't become a real threat until they start getting the RIGHT talent around their REAL talent. Time to start checking off the needs, not just "guys who can score". Warriors didn't start getting good until they did. Pete needs to build the kind of team around Cousins and Gay that they had in Denver. The problem in Denver was they didn't have a Gay or Cousins to build around. This roster has be dieing to be made sense of for the last 3 years.
The Pelicans were stupid, they watched how Evans failed miserably in certain situations here, didn't pay attention obviously, and then brought him in to put him in the same exact situation. Kind of like Derrick Williams might be now that Landry is back. A home run? It becomes real tough to find shots and minutes for somebody now. Playing guys, in particular offensively inclined ones, platoon minutes doesn't work. Kings fans can write the book on that if Pete needs help.
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 778
- And1: 152
- Joined: Jun 23, 2011
-
Re: How is this team for the future?
SacKingZZZ wrote:Nothing has changed though, this team won't become a real threat until they start getting the RIGHT talent around their REAL talent. Time to start checking off the needs, not just "guys who can score". Warriors didn't start getting good until they did. Pete needs to build the kind of team around Cousins and Gay that they had in Denver. The problem in Denver was they didn't have a Gay or Cousins to build around. This roster has be dieing to be made sense of for the last 3 years.
The Pelicans were stupid, they watched how Evans failed miserably in certain situations here, didn't pay attention obviously, and then brought him in to put him in the same exact situation. Kind of like Derrick Williams might be now that Landry is back. A home run? It becomes real tough to find shots and minutes for somebody now. Playing guys, in particular offensively inclined ones, platoon minutes doesn't work. Kings fans can write the book on that if Pete needs help.
I'm confused about what you're trying to say. In the same breath you're saying that we are the exact same team with Gay and Williams as we were with Vasquez, Salmons, Patterson, and Luc, but arguing that our "REAL" talent involves Gay as well. Understandably, Williams' time will go down now that Landry is back, but in time he has had, he has demonstrated his talent and potential making him an asset that I'm sure that Pete will put to good use.
All in all, Pete's moves, including letting Evans go, seem to have been way more cool and calculated that people have given him credit for. We've accumulated talent and value while trimming the fat. This puts us in a better position to trade for the "RIGHT talent" that you allude to. That and this NEW team has yet to reach its peak. I think it will continue to improve from game to game, and will have best record it has had in the last 5-6 years, and that is in a Western conference that is tougher than ever. Maybe my glasses are more rosey than yours, but I don't get how you can say "nothing has changed".
Re: How is this team for the future?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,085
- And1: 1,084
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
Re: How is this team for the future?
enderwilson wrote:SacKingZZZ wrote:Nothing has changed though, this team won't become a real threat until they start getting the RIGHT talent around their REAL talent. Time to start checking off the needs, not just "guys who can score". Warriors didn't start getting good until they did. Pete needs to build the kind of team around Cousins and Gay that they had in Denver. The problem in Denver was they didn't have a Gay or Cousins to build around. This roster has be dieing to be made sense of for the last 3 years.
The Pelicans were stupid, they watched how Evans failed miserably in certain situations here, didn't pay attention obviously, and then brought him in to put him in the same exact situation. Kind of like Derrick Williams might be now that Landry is back. A home run? It becomes real tough to find shots and minutes for somebody now. Playing guys, in particular offensively inclined ones, platoon minutes doesn't work. Kings fans can write the book on that if Pete needs help.
I'm confused about what you're trying to say. In the same breath you're saying that we are the exact same team with Gay and Williams as we were with Vasquez, Salmons, Patterson, and Luc, but arguing that our "REAL" talent involves Gay as well. Understandably, Williams' time will go down now that Landry is back, but in time he has had, he has demonstrated his talent and potential making him an asset that I'm sure that Pete will put to good use.
All in all, Pete's moves, including letting Evans go, seem to have been way more cool and calculated that people have given him credit for. We've accumulated talent and value while trimming the fat. This puts us in a better position to trade for the "RIGHT talent" that you allude to. That and this NEW team has yet to reach its peak. I think it will continue to improve from game to game, and will have best record it has had in the last 5-6 years, and that is in a Western conference that is tougher than ever. Maybe my glasses are more rosey than yours, but I don't get how you can say "nothing has changed".
In terms of being overstuffed with offensively minded players, yes, nothing has changed. That's all I was referring to, the roster is still a bit unbalanced, nothing more. I was saying I think they may have the REAL talent now, now time to build around them with the RIGHT talent. No gloomy outlooks in what I was saying.
