Merged: Cousins traded to N'Awlins (for some Cajun shrimp)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Blazers Roy said:
who couldn't draw more interest
Click to expand...

sac apparently took the best offer, which was a 23 year old averaging 8ppg on sub .400 shooting, and the 18th-ish pick in the draft. apparently that was his trade value. sac even had to throw in omri casspi to get it done.
 
After passing on Drummond earlier. Competent franchises don't pass on decent returns only to throw away the asset in a panic deal a month or two later. Competent franchises also don't throw stars away for essentially nothing when they have another year to try to get a better deal. Even if a better deal never materialized, this deal was so poor that they were risking nothing.

The Kings aren't a competent franchise. I'm not even willing to assume that they took the best deal offered last night.
 
Vlade just said at the live press conference the Kings had a better offer for Cousins 2 days ago and didn't take it.

Some insider on another site said the Suns offered something like Knight, Warren and 2 1sts for Cousins and the Kings passed. Who knows if true but it's certainly plausible.

Also know the Lakers were in the mix, probably Randle and a 1st and then filler or something. Depends on how much you like Hield I guess.
 
3RA1N1AC said:
sac apparently took the best offer, which was a 23 year old averaging 8ppg on sub .400 shooting, and the 18th-ish pick in the draft. apparently that was his trade value. sac even had to throw in omri casspi to get it done.
Click to expand...

Minstrel said:
The Kings aren't a competent franchise. I'm not even willing to assume that they took the best deal offered last night.
Click to expand...

In the last 24 hours, articles have said that of the offers the Kings had received in the last year or two, they got numerous offers which were better than this one. The owner simply got the urge to trade at the wrong time.

 
Minstrel said:
After passing on Drummond earlier. Competent franchises don't pass on decent returns only to throw away the asset in a panic deal a month or two later. Competent franchises also don't throw stars away for essentially nothing when they have another year to try to get a better deal. Even if a better deal never materialized, this deal was so poor that they were risking nothing.

The Kings aren't a competent franchise. I'm not even willing to assume that they took the best deal offered last night.
Click to expand...
They did take the best offer that they liked. But they also stopped answering the phones so they could have probably got a better deal. So both sides are right. Took best deal for them with what they were presented with. Didn't take the best deal they probably could have.
 
B-Roy said:
Vlade just said at the live press conference the Kings had a better offer for Cousins 2 days ago and didn't take it.

Some insider on another site said the Suns offered something like Knight, Warren and 2 1sts for Cousins and the Kings passed. Who knows if true but it's certainly plausible.

Also know the Lakers were in the mix, probably Randle and a 1st and then filler or something. Depends on how much you like Hield I guess.
Click to expand...
Unless those were unprotected 1sts then that deal isn't really any better. Knight has a contract in numbers and length that SAC probably didn't want to have.

Where SAC messed up is just not waiting the 3 days until the deadline before deciding what deal to take.
 
Detroit would have probably given them Drummond and a first if they insisted. Cousins is better than Drummond because of his scoring and ability to stretch the floor but Drummond would be a good piece to build on.
 
KeepOnRollin said:
They did take the best offer that they liked. But they also stopped answering the phones so they could have probably got a better deal. So both sides are right. Took best deal for them with what they were presented with. Didn't take the best deal they probably could have.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, by definition they took the deal they liked best. I'm just saying that I wouldn't give them the credit of assuming that the deal they liked the best was the best one for the franchise.
 
Minstrel said:
Well, yeah, by definition they took the deal they liked best. I'm just saying that I wouldn't give them the credit of assuming that the deal they liked the best was the best one for the franchise.
Click to expand...
Isn't that in the eye of the beholder though? What one team thinks is the best of them long-term is likely very different from another team. I think the biggest fault is them not waiting the extra 3 days until the deadline.
 
selloutking said:
maybe NOLA said they have X amount of time to respond or the offer was off the table because they had other options they wanted to try so some panic ensued?
Click to expand...
I think that is likely. Once it got out they were going to move Cousins then you had to do it quick as you certainly don't want to have to bring him back in after not being able to move him. That would be a disaster.
 
selloutking said:
maybe NOLA said they have X amount of time to respond or the offer was off the table because they had other options they wanted to try so some panic ensued?
Click to expand...
New Orleans was going to trade for Okafor if Cousins wasn't available and time was running out
 
Blazers Roy said:
Cousins is a great player on a bad franchise.
Sac got many offers for him and said 'no' too many times and eventually they traded him out of panic instead of doing the right decision at the right time.

All this talk about Cousins being a loser\scrub\headcase\criminal who couldn't draw more interest is absurd.
Click to expand...

I think another problem is the number of teams in need of his services are smaller than we think.

Sac wanted to make a trade now in order to tank for this years draft.

Teams who need to make a trade mid season tend to be those who are not doing well, which eliminates any team that does not want to screw with their chemistry. Boogie is risky for good teams.

And you can eliminate younger teams since Cousins has proved what he can do with young players......Not much.

So that leave teams that are not super young and who are not doing well. (like us)
 
Sacramento should have done the Tpups thing. Let teams know they were trading Boogie, and given them a LOT of time to come up with an offer.
 
Kings making their vets available:
I'd do Biebs for Koufas (age 27) today. Would Save us about $2 mil next year.

Knowing the Kings, we could probably get a 2nd rounder, too!
 
KeepOnRollin said:
Unless those were unprotected 1sts then that deal isn't really any better. Knight has a contract in numbers and length that SAC probably didn't want to have.

Where SAC messed up is just not waiting the 3 days until the deadline before deciding what deal to take.
Click to expand...

If you listen to the press conference, Vlade's rationale was literally that he thought the offers would decline as they got closer to the deadline because they had a better offer (his words, and presumably, his determination) 2 days ago that was no longer on the table by the time the NO deal went through.
 
jlprk said:
Two stars who are used to getting the ball, will get into each other's way, whose shots overlap...Nope. Look at how perfectly their favorite shots complement each other.

Cousins is Mr. Inside-Outside and Davis (the uterus pattern) is the forward.

demarcus-cousins-vs-anthony-davis.png
Click to expand...
That is Davis' new nickname. The Uterus Pattern.
 
KeepOnRollin said:
Isn't that in the eye of the beholder though? What one team thinks is the best of them long-term is likely very different from another team.
Click to expand...

Are you saying there's no such thing as objectively better deals and, by extension, objectively better players? I mean, I'm kind of sympathetic to the high bar to clear for something to be "objectively" better (some would argue there's never such a thing as "objectively" better), but I think a deal for, say, Karl-Anthony Towns would be pretty conclusively better than what they got, in the aim of building a stronger basketball team, even if they "liked" what they got more. I'm not saying they had that offer available (obviously, they didn't), but I think they could easily have turned down a deal that would have made their team better than the deal they took.

To make this simpler: I have no faith in their evaluation skills, so what they "like" carries little weight with me. That's what I'm saying.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Sac wanted to make a trade now in order to tank for this years draft.
Click to expand...

That surely wasn't a factor. Thanks to a previous horrific deal, the 76ers have the right to swap picks with the Kings, so if the Kings successfully tank, the '6ers reap the benefit.
 
76ers are loving this deal for sure. if sac lucks into the top 3 the sixers will swap. so they get 2 chances to move up. and then they need LA to move out of the top 3. but they could easily end up with the #1 and #4 pick.
 
3RA1N1AC said:
76ers are loving this deal for sure. if sac lucks into the top 3 the sixers will swap. so they get 2 chances to move up. and then they need LA to move out of the top 3. but they could easily end up with the #1 and #4 pick.
Click to expand...

Philadelphia: where lottery picks go to get injured and miss their first season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top