Buddy Hield ignoring coach’s phone calls. Kings not concerned

[gouki88]

I'll be honest, I could definitely be persuaded into a Gordon-for-Hield trade. I really Hield as a 3pt shooter. However, I'd only do this trade if Tatum's progression as a passer we saw in the bubble is legit. If you replace Gordon with Hield, we now have 3 wings who are very suspect playmakers, and I don't think that's a recipe for success.

To be honest I could see this trade actually benefiting both teams. Gives Sacramento the secondary playmaker they so desperately need, who can still score 20 a night, and would give us a top-5 shooter in the competition.
I do agree with you regarding Tatum's progressions though - we would have to be absolutely certain that he could be that 5APG guy we saw in the playoffs, as we're not going to be bringing Buddy off the bench - that's what caused this whole debacle!

If we can extend Gordy to a 75 / 4 contract I would probably rather keep him though. That's half a sentimental thing though, lol

[LilRip]

I'll be honest, I could definitely be persuaded into a Gordon-for-Hield trade. I really Hield as a 3pt shooter. However, I'd only do this trade if Tatum's progression as a passer we saw in the bubble is legit. If you replace Gordon with Hield, we now have 3 wings who are very suspect playmakers, and I don't think that's a recipe for success.

I would do it but it all depends on what DA’s other moves are. As currently constructed, I think we have too many playmakers. Hayward, Smart, Kemba and Tatum all do well with the ball in their hands and they don’t do enough off-ball. Plus there’s Wanamaker who (for all his limitations) is a really good contract for what he can bring.

I’d definitely be interested in moving Hayward for Hield because it diversifies our offense with off-ball and on-ball attacks.

Sidenote: I wish Brown works on his off-ball movement. He’s a strong attacker when he has the ball but isn’t a huge threat off ball.

[action781]

3 way trade idea:

Hield to Boston
Hayward to GSW
Wiggins to Sacramento

-Hield would come off the bench in Boston while we continue using our 2020 playoffs starting lineup.
-I think Hayward would be a really cool fit at SF in GSW.  A much better fit than Wiggins.
-Wiggins is definitely fair value back for Sacramento sending Hield out.

[gouki88]

3 way trade idea:

Hield to Boston
Hayward to GSW
Wiggins to Sacramento

-Hield would come off the bench in Boston while we continue using our 2020 playoffs starting lineup.
-I think Hayward would be a really cool fit at SF in GSW.  A much better fit than Wiggins.
-Wiggins is definitely fair value back for Sacramento sending Hield out.

Wiggins fair value for Hield? I get that Hield's value is low because he's not getting along with Walton, but Hield is a superior player on a better contract that gets lower as it goes on, the opposite of Wiggins'.

Hield's whole issue is coming off the bench, which he's right to be mad about because he's the second best player in Sacramento after Fox. Not sure why we'd trade for him only to bench him and further annoy him

[Jvalin]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

[Androslav]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

[LilRip]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

Well...he would likely be the 4th-5th best player on this team. So yeah, I agree he can’t carry you and your team probably stinks if he’s your #1 guy.

But with Jaylen/Jayson/Kemba getting all the defensive attention? This dude would look like a flamethrower

[Jvalin]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

Well...he would likely be the 4th-5th best player on this team. So yeah, I agree he can’t carry you and your team probably stinks if he’s your #1 guy.

But with Jaylen/Jayson/Kemba getting all the defensive attention? This dude would look like a flamethrower

If all we want is a shooting specialist behind our big 3, why pay him $86M over the next 4 years? For instance, Aaron Nesmith is possibly just as good a shooter as Hield is. He'd be perfectly happy in a limited role, plus we can sign him for the rookie scale. Not saying he's a better player than Hield, just that he may be equally efficient in a limited role (and probably a better defender as well).

[Somebody]

I'll be honest, I could definitely be persuaded into a Gordon-for-Hield trade. I really Hield as a 3pt shooter. However, I'd only do this trade if Tatum's progression as a passer we saw in the bubble is legit. If you replace Gordon with Hield, we now have 3 wings who are very suspect playmakers, and I don't think that's a recipe for success.

To be honest I could see this trade actually benefiting both teams. Gives Sacramento the secondary playmaker they so desperately need, who can still score 20 a night, and would give us a top-5 shooter in the competition.
I do agree with you regarding Tatum's progressions though - we would have to be absolutely certain that he could be that 5APG guy we saw in the playoffs, as we're not going to be bringing Buddy off the bench - that's what caused this whole debacle!

If we can extend Gordy to a 75 / 4 contract I would probably rather keep him though. That's half a sentimental thing though, lol

I really don't see how it benefits us. Hield can't pass like Hayward does and not having an extra passer like Hayward who can shoot and create his own shot lowers the ceiling of our offence when we're counting on Kemba and Tatum as our primary offensive engines. I also don't see Tatum's raw assist averages being a ringing endorsement for his passing being good enough for us to ship away Hayward for a non-passer - yes he has improved as a playmaker, but he is a long way off from being good enough to shoulder the kind of offensive load some posters are pushing for us to give him.

If anything our struggles in crunch time during the playoffs where we sent Tatum and Kemba back to the late 90s and early aughts compared to teams like Miami who used heavy off-ball movement and multiple players who can shoot, pass and create to generate offence is strong evidence that we need to ditch this archaic idea that isolation offence is the only way for elite teams to hold steady offensively when defences tighten up in crunch time.

[Who]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

Well...he would likely be the 4th-5th best player on this team. So yeah, I agree he can’t carry you and your team probably stinks if he’s your #1 guy.

But with Jaylen/Jayson/Kemba getting all the defensive attention? This dude would look like a flamethrower

If all we want is a shooting specialist behind our big 3, why pay him $86M over the next 4 years? For instance, Aaron Nesmith is possibly just as good a shooter as Hield is. He'd be perfectly happy in a limited role, plus we can sign him for the rookie scale. Not saying he's a better player than Hield, just that he may be equally efficient in a limited role (and probably a better defender as well).

Buddy is not just a shooting specialist. He is a big time scorer. He would be a 20ppg here just like he is in Sacramento or anywhere else because of how he scores the basketball. He is a massive threat both on and off the ball. Doesn't need to dominate the basketball to get his. And has the type of game that will settle nicely alongside almost all other type of scorers. His volume, accuracy and versatility in outside shooting separates him from shooting specialists and puts him alongside the greats of today's game like Klay Thompson.

If Buddy Hield were here in Boston, he would not be a 10-14ppg scorer. He would still be a 20ppg threat because of dangerous a shooter and shot creator he is.

[ozgod]

Buddy Hield had the 2nd highest usage rate for the Kings at 27.2, just behind De'Aaron Fox.



He had the same usage rate as Kemba did for the Celtics. Here are the Celtics for comparison.

[Jvalin]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

Well...he would likely be the 4th-5th best player on this team. So yeah, I agree he can’t carry you and your team probably stinks if he’s your #1 guy.

But with Jaylen/Jayson/Kemba getting all the defensive attention? This dude would look like a flamethrower

If all we want is a shooting specialist behind our big 3, why pay him $86M over the next 4 years? For instance, Aaron Nesmith is possibly just as good a shooter as Hield is. He'd be perfectly happy in a limited role, plus we can sign him for the rookie scale. Not saying he's a better player than Hield, just that he may be equally efficient in a limited role (and probably a better defender as well).

Buddy is not just a shooting specialist. He is a big time scorer. He would be a 20ppg here just like he is in Sacramento or anywhere else because of how he scores the basketball. He is a massive threat both on and off the ball. Doesn't need to dominate the basketball to get his. And has the type of game that will settle nicely alongside almost all other type of scorers. His volume, accuracy and versatility in outside shooting separates him from shooting specialists and puts him alongside the greats of today's game like Klay Thompson.

If Buddy Hield were here in Boston, he would not be a 10-14ppg scorer. He would still be a 20ppg threat because of dangerous a shooter and shot creator he is.

I don't think he's a big time scorer, but that's irrelevant. My point is that we won't be using him as a scorer cause we already got 3 better scorers in Tatum-Kemba-Brown. Chances are we'd be using him as a shooting specialist. If so, why pay $86M over the next 4 years for a shooting specialist when we can sign one for the rookie scale?

[Who]

Buddy Hield had the 2nd highest usage rate for the Kings at 27.2, just behind De'Aaron Fox.



He had the same usage rate as Kemba did for the Celtics. Here are the Celtics for comparison.

I don't like usage rate as a statistic. I don't think it adds anything to conversation over a player's regular stat-lines.

Also, some folks have been talking about "offensive load" statistic over at thinking basketball which is far more accurate and reflective of a player's role than usage rate. But you have to pay to get those for all players.

https://backpicks.com/2017/10/16/offensive-load-and-adjusted-tov/

For a player like Buddy I'd view FGAs relative to minutes (since he is a scorer). He gives you some ball-handling and secondary playmaking but not enough that it is going to make any drastic changes to your offense (and his overall usage).

In other words, he is a guy that is going to need to take large number of shots and that is a good thing because he is one of the best shooters in the league. You are happy that he is taking those shots. That is what makes him good and what makes your team's offense good.

Buddy would slot into the offense behind Tatum and Kemba and probably ahead of Jaylen in terms of usage.

[Who]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

Well...he would likely be the 4th-5th best player on this team. So yeah, I agree he can’t carry you and your team probably stinks if he’s your #1 guy.

But with Jaylen/Jayson/Kemba getting all the defensive attention? This dude would look like a flamethrower

If all we want is a shooting specialist behind our big 3, why pay him $86M over the next 4 years? For instance, Aaron Nesmith is possibly just as good a shooter as Hield is. He'd be perfectly happy in a limited role, plus we can sign him for the rookie scale. Not saying he's a better player than Hield, just that he may be equally efficient in a limited role (and probably a better defender as well).

Buddy is not just a shooting specialist. He is a big time scorer. He would be a 20ppg here just like he is in Sacramento or anywhere else because of how he scores the basketball. He is a massive threat both on and off the ball. Doesn't need to dominate the basketball to get his. And has the type of game that will settle nicely alongside almost all other type of scorers. His volume, accuracy and versatility in outside shooting separates him from shooting specialists and puts him alongside the greats of today's game like Klay Thompson.

If Buddy Hield were here in Boston, he would not be a 10-14ppg scorer. He would still be a 20ppg threat because of dangerous a shooter and shot creator he is.

I don't think he's a big time scorer, but that's irrelevant. My point is that we won't be using him as a scorer cause we already got 3 better scorers in Tatum-Kemba-Brown. Chances are we'd be using him as a shooting specialist. If so, why pay $86M over the next 4 years for a shooting specialist when we can sign one for the rookie scale?

Because you would use him as a scorer.

I do not understand why you would have a player as talented as Buddy Hield and not use him as a scorer.

We have Gordon Hayward and we use him as a scorer (17.5ppg) and playmaker (4apg) --- why would we not be able to use Buddy Hield in a larger offensive role like we do with Hayward?

Of course we can.

Buddy Hield would be both the #1 shooter on the team and the #1 perimeter scorer on the team. Of course he is going to be used as a scorer.

[Somebody]

Wouldn't want us to trade for Hield. Imo, the strength of our team relies primarily on defensive versatility. 5 of our 6 best players can seamlessly switch ball screens on D. Hield ain't a good fit in our defensive system. I also think he's a one-dimensional offensive player. While he's an elite shooter, he's just an average slasher and passer. If his shots aren't falling one night, he's a net negative.

TP. It has been that way since his college days. Good scorer on lower levels, but a one-dimensional player overall.
And we know that those players are easiest to throw off or exploit in the PO.

Well...he would likely be the 4th-5th best player on this team. So yeah, I agree he can’t carry you and your team probably stinks if he’s your #1 guy.

But with Jaylen/Jayson/Kemba getting all the defensive attention? This dude would look like a flamethrower

If all we want is a shooting specialist behind our big 3, why pay him $86M over the next 4 years? For instance, Aaron Nesmith is possibly just as good a shooter as Hield is. He'd be perfectly happy in a limited role, plus we can sign him for the rookie scale. Not saying he's a better player than Hield, just that he may be equally efficient in a limited role (and probably a better defender as well).

Buddy is not just a shooting specialist. He is a big time scorer. He would be a 20ppg here just like he is in Sacramento or anywhere else because of how he scores the basketball. He is a massive threat both on and off the ball. Doesn't need to dominate the basketball to get his. And has the type of game that will settle nicely alongside almost all other type of scorers. His volume, accuracy and versatility in outside shooting separates him from shooting specialists and puts him alongside the greats of today's game like Klay Thompson.

If Buddy Hield were here in Boston, he would not be a 10-14ppg scorer. He would still be a 20ppg threat because of dangerous a shooter and shot creator he is.

I don't think he's a big time scorer, but that's irrelevant. My point is that we won't be using him as a scorer cause we already got 3 better scorers in Tatum-Kemba-Brown. Chances are we'd be using him as a shooting specialist. If so, why pay $86M over the next 4 years for a shooting specialist when we can sign one for the rookie scale?

Because you would use him as a scorer.

I do not understand why you would have a player as talented as Buddy Hield and not use him as a scorer.

We have Gordon Hayward and we use him as a scorer (17.5ppg) and playmaker (4apg) --- why would we not be able to use Buddy Hield in a larger offensive role like we do with Hayward?

Of course we can.

Buddy Hield would be both the #1 shooter on the team and the #1 perimeter scorer on the team. Of course he is going to be used as a scorer.

Yeah we'd be using him as one of our main offensive options if we get him, he's an elite shooter who can play on or off the ball on high volume. Still wouldn't trade Hayward for Hield, I think we have something really special going on our team with Hayward, Kemba, Tatum and Brown when 2 of the 4 are great playmakers and the other 2 are growing in that department - think we can get a synergistic effect that would lead to a truly elite offence if we incorporate more movement to get our guys in better positions to create as well as getting our less prolific offensive players easy looks.