The Boogie Watch

[Denis998]

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/244552/DeMarcus-Cousins-Intends-To-Sign-$207M-Extension-With-Kings-In-Offseason

Well, Cousins might be Melo 2.0 and care about money more than winning, though he claims otherwise. Not to sure how credible this source is, but if it's true and he wants to stay there, he's probably not worth trading for anyways. Pretty clear that he'll never be winning there with terrible management and drafting and no real assets moving forward.

Not much surprise though, it is 207 million after all. Thats like winning the jackpot.

[LilRip]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

[Roy H.]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

[jpotter33]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

False equivalency. Significant difference between Horford's situation and Boogie's situation. There's also a significant difference between never winning a championship and never even making it to the playoffs. If he stays in Sacramento with that kind of contract, there's a legitimate chance that he'll never make the playoffs in his career, especially with as dysfunctional as that organization is, its reputation, and its lack of assets and drafting skill.

He might legitimately be seen as the biggest failure in NBA history if that happens. For someone who supposedly cares about winning and reputation, that should matter. He'd get a max contract wherever he went. Players who care about winning wouldn't make such a decision. I'll be convinced that he just likes being the "big fish in the small pond" more than winning if he takes that contract and commits himself to that situation long term.

There are other ways he can get that kind of money while still getting in a better situation, such as an extend and trade.

[Phantom255x]

So with Cousins pretty much in line to sign the extension... does this thread stand a purpose for now 

Or maybe this thread could be "universal" and used even after the extension and the Kings still suck.

[LilRip]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

False equivalency. Significant difference between Horford's situation and Boogie's situation. There's also a significant difference between never winning a championship and never even making it to the playoffs. If he stays in Sacramento with that kind of contract, there's a legitimate chance that he'll never make the playoffs in his career, especially with as dysfunctional as that organization is, its reputation, and its lack of assets and drafting skill.

He might legitimately be seen as the biggest failure in NBA history if that happens. For someone who supposedly cares about winning and reputation, that should matter. He'd get a max contract wherever he went. Players who care about winning wouldn't make such a decision. I'll be convinced that he just likes being the "big fish in the small pond" more than winning if he takes that contract and commits himself to that situation long term.

There are other ways he can get that kind of money while still getting in a better situation, such as an extend and trade.

Can teams still even extend and trade? It seems like that hasn't happened in quite a while. Not since the Miami Heat Lebron thing.

[saltlover]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

False equivalency. Significant difference between Horford's situation and Boogie's situation. There's also a significant difference between never winning a championship and never even making it to the playoffs. If he stays in Sacramento with that kind of contract, there's a legitimate chance that he'll never make the playoffs in his career, especially with as dysfunctional as that organization is, its reputation, and its lack of assets and drafting skill.

He might legitimately be seen as the biggest failure in NBA history if that happens. For someone who supposedly cares about winning and reputation, that should matter. He'd get a max contract wherever he went. Players who care about winning wouldn't make such a decision. I'll be convinced that he just likes being the "big fish in the small pond" more than winning if he takes that contract and commits himself to that situation long term.

There are other ways he can get that kind of money while still getting in a better situation, such as an extend and trade.

Can teams still even extend and trade? It seems like that hasn't happened in quite a while. Not since the Miami Heat Lebron thing.

They technically can, but new rules combined with the salary cap spike made it non-viable.  The extension could add no more than two years to the current deal and offer only a limited raise.

[jpotter33]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

False equivalency. Significant difference between Horford's situation and Boogie's situation. There's also a significant difference between never winning a championship and never even making it to the playoffs. If he stays in Sacramento with that kind of contract, there's a legitimate chance that he'll never make the playoffs in his career, especially with as dysfunctional as that organization is, its reputation, and its lack of assets and drafting skill.

He might legitimately be seen as the biggest failure in NBA history if that happens. For someone who supposedly cares about winning and reputation, that should matter. He'd get a max contract wherever he went. Players who care about winning wouldn't make such a decision. I'll be convinced that he just likes being the "big fish in the small pond" more than winning if he takes that contract and commits himself to that situation long term.

There are other ways he can get that kind of money while still getting in a better situation, such as an extend and trade.

Can teams still even extend and trade? It seems like that hasn't happened in quite a while. Not since the Miami Heat Lebron thing.

They technically can, but new rules combined with the salary cap spike made it non-viable.  The extension could add no more than two years to the current deal and offer only a limited raise.

So I just read that the Designated Player Extension is not eligible for an extend-and-trade, and there's actually a one year "no-trade clause" attached to it, i.e. Sacramento can't trade Cousins for a year after him signing the extension. Thus, at the earliest we would be able to trade for Cousins in the summer of 2018 if he signs the extension this summer, and an extend-and-trade is not a possibility.

Can you verify this, Celticsblog resident CBA expert?

[saltlover]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

False equivalency. Significant difference between Horford's situation and Boogie's situation. There's also a significant difference between never winning a championship and never even making it to the playoffs. If he stays in Sacramento with that kind of contract, there's a legitimate chance that he'll never make the playoffs in his career, especially with as dysfunctional as that organization is, its reputation, and its lack of assets and drafting skill.

He might legitimately be seen as the biggest failure in NBA history if that happens. For someone who supposedly cares about winning and reputation, that should matter. He'd get a max contract wherever he went. Players who care about winning wouldn't make such a decision. I'll be convinced that he just likes being the "big fish in the small pond" more than winning if he takes that contract and commits himself to that situation long term.

There are other ways he can get that kind of money while still getting in a better situation, such as an extend and trade.

Can teams still even extend and trade? It seems like that hasn't happened in quite a while. Not since the Miami Heat Lebron thing.

They technically can, but new rules combined with the salary cap spike made it non-viable.  The extension could add no more than two years to the current deal and offer only a limited raise.

So I just read that the Designated Player Extension is not eligible for an extend-and-trade, and there's actually a one year "no-trade clause" attached to it, i.e. Sacramento can't trade Cousins for a year after him signing the extension.

Can you verify this, Celticsblog resident CBA expert?

I can neither verify nor deny this.  The new CBA has not been ratified yet, nor presented to the parties for a vote yet, so some details are certainly still in flux.  I would not expect it to be eligible for an extend-and-trade -- the league indicated in the last CBA that they didn't like them, and there's been little word of them coming back.  As for the one year trade restriction, I wouldn't be surprised either way.  There's already a six-month restriction on trades after an extension, so increasing the restriction on this special extension wouldn't be irrational.  On the other hand, as I've said, nothing is finalized, and if one side didn't like the restriction enough to push back at it, I can't see it being a deal breaker.

[Monkhouse]

207 is a lot of money to walk away from. For his career's sake though, I think he should leave. If not, no matter how good he is, he'll be forgotten. History remembers winners. Even almost-winners.

For an extra $50 million guaranteed, I'd probably stick around, too. The "cares more about money than winning" thing only goes so far. Otherwise, we should be chastising Horford for not taking a minimum deal to sign with the Warriors.

False equivalency. Significant difference between Horford's situation and Boogie's situation. There's also a significant difference between never winning a championship and never even making it to the playoffs. If he stays in Sacramento with that kind of contract, there's a legitimate chance that he'll never make the playoffs in his career, especially with as dysfunctional as that organization is, its reputation, and its lack of assets and drafting skill.

He might legitimately be seen as the biggest failure in NBA history if that happens. For someone who supposedly cares about winning and reputation, that should matter. He'd get a max contract wherever he went. Players who care about winning wouldn't make such a decision. I'll be convinced that he just likes being the "big fish in the small pond" more than winning if he takes that contract and commits himself to that situation long term.

There are other ways he can get that kind of money while still getting in a better situation, such as an extend and trade.

Cousins can always demand a trade.

[sawick48]

No they aren't.  Their best chance for franchise success is to convince Boogie to stay another 6 years.  They couldn't even get draft picks willing to go to SAC to work out last draft -- tanking is the wrong strategy right now.  They need to make their organization less of an embarrassment.

There is zero chance that Sacramento ever wins anything with him on the team and middling draft picks. They have virtually no other assets, no free agent prospects, and they won't even get a single high lottery talent. Gay is literally their only other above-average player on the roster and hates it there. Then they have to bet on Cousins resigning for the super max salary, so he'll be expensive as possible. Or he'll leave, since losing sucks after a long while.

On the other hand, they could have 3x top-5 talents in the next 2 years all locked into rookie contracts, and go into an offseason with 2-3x max player money. Not only do our assets give them high lottery picks in strong year(s), but as someone else pointed out tanking could turn their own pick from a 2nd rounder into a high lottery pick.

As far as the future of the franchise, this is a no brainer. Sell and tank. But, certain people want to keep their jobs and sell tickets. It's short term greed and/or stupidity, plain and simple.

I agree the "obvious" decision for the health of the franchise in Sacto would be to tank, but keep in mind, we're also incredibly biased on this side of that argument.

As for people keeping their jobs being the reason against tanking, I believe it's less that and more that their bosses are actually delusional human beings.  Vlade has 0 experience when it comes to team building and worrying about things like lockerroom chemistry, personnel, play styles, etc.  And EVVVVERYTHING I've ever seen/heard/read about Vivek has left me with the impression that the guy is a lunatic.  Whether it was the Grantland video with him in the war room a few years ago or the interview he gave USA Today over this summer, he's got shades of our dear President-elect in him.  Whatever he says is factual regardless of whether it actually happened or not.  It has to be an embarrassment working under such leadership for anyone in that organization that actually knows the sport/administrative side well. 

I sincerely believe that Vivek is less trying to max out Cousins to make him as expensive as possible or because he thinks Boogie is his only asset of value, than I do honestly and truly think that psychopath thinks he's only a piece away from contending for a title.

[nickagneta]

If Cousins signs that extension can we change the name of this thread to THE BOOGIE WATCHED?

[Phantom255x]

If Cousins signs that extension can we change the name of this thread to THE BOOGIE WATCHED?

Or how about "And now our [Boogie] Watch has ended"

Taking a GoT script here lol..

[jpotter33]

Wow. Gay is being reported to have tore his Achilles tendon. That pretty much puts an end to any of their dimming hopes to make the playoffs this year.

It also shows the dysfunction of the Kings franchise, because now they're not going to get anything at all in value for him. He straight up told management that he wouldn't resign there, but they kept him around to try and make the playoffs.

Tough break for Rudy. I wonder how or if that changes things regarding their plans with Boogie, especially if they start losing even more now.

[tazzmaniac]

No they aren't.  Their best chance for franchise success is to convince Boogie to stay another 6 years.  They couldn't even get draft picks willing to go to SAC to work out last draft -- tanking is the wrong strategy right now.  They need to make their organization less of an embarrassment.

There is zero chance that Sacramento ever wins anything with him on the team and middling draft picks. They have virtually no other assets, no free agent prospects, and they won't even get a single high lottery talent. Gay is literally their only other above-average player on the roster and hates it there. Then they have to bet on Cousins resigning for the super max salary, so he'll be expensive as possible. Or he'll leave, since losing sucks after a long while.

On the other hand, they could have 3x top-5 talents in the next 2 years all locked into rookie contracts, and go into an offseason with 2-3x max player money. Not only do our assets give them high lottery picks in strong year(s), but as someone else pointed out tanking could turn their own pick from a 2nd rounder into a high lottery pick.

As far as the future of the franchise, this is a no brainer. Sell and tank. But, certain people want to keep their jobs and sell tickets. It's short term greed and/or stupidity, plain and simple.

I agree the "obvious" decision for the health of the franchise in Sacto would be to tank, but keep in mind, we're also incredibly biased on this side of that argument.

As for people keeping their jobs being the reason against tanking, I believe it's less that and more that their bosses are actually delusional human beings.  Vlade has 0 experience when it comes to team building and worrying about things like lockerroom chemistry, personnel, play styles, etc.  And EVVVVERYTHING I've ever seen/heard/read about Vivek has left me with the impression that the guy is a lunatic.  Whether it was the Grantland video with him in the war room a few years ago or the interview he gave USA Today over this summer, he's got shades of our dear President-elect in him.  Whatever he says is factual regardless of whether it actually happened or not.  It has to be an embarrassment working under such leadership for anyone in that organization that actually knows the sport/administrative side well. 

I sincerely believe that Vivek is less trying to max out Cousins to make him as expensive as possible or because he thinks Boogie is his only asset of value, than I do honestly and truly think that psychopath thinks he's only a piece away from contending for a title.

The Sixers have a pick swap with the Kings if the Kings pick is top 10.  So the Kings don't have an incentive to tank.