How did the Sacramento Kings and New Orleans Pelicans do in the blockbuster DeMarcus Cousins trade? How will Boogie fit with Anthony Davis? And what does the future look like for both teams?
Our NBA Insiders debate.
1. How did the Kings come out in this deal?
Amin Elhassan, ESPN Insider: Like a team that was upset at all the attention the Knicks received over the past few weeks. Honestly, this is why you don't appoint a team president (Vlade Divac) with zero experience: To walk away with a vanilla 23-year-old rookie (Buddy Hield), a middling 2017 first-round draft pick (that only figures to get worse as the season progresses) and a second-rounder for a player of Cousins' caliber indicates either a gross misunderstanding of his value on the trade market or massive incompetence in negotiation strategy.
I've been one of the louder advocates for trading Cousins for years, but not like this. He's a headache, yes, but he's still an elite-level talent who was sought after by multiple suitors.
Justin Verrier, ESPN.com: Appearing even more dysfunctional. Throwing in the towel of a Cousins-centric worldview has its merits, but any upside of this deal requires an effective utilization of cap space and lottery picks. A gross failure to do so is how they ended up here in the first place. The Kings are indeed playing 4-on-5, just not the way Vivek Ranadive hoped.
David Thorpe, ESPN Insider: I look at the Kings like I look at the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. No matter what you do, the ship is going down. Acquire assets? Who cares, because when has this team developed its assets? From top to bottom there are enormous structural flaws that prevent anything the franchise does from working. Until those flaws are fixed, the product on the court will flounder.
Jeremias Engelmann, ESPN Insider: Very good, if the Kings' plan was to cement their status as the worst NBA franchise. Before last year's draft, Hield was essentially rated as a second-rounder by statistical draft models because of his age -- he's already 23 -- and because he had few skills besides scoring.
This season, Hield has done nothing to prove the doubters wrong -- his assists, rebounds and defense are subpar -- while also struggling with the one thing he's supposed to be good at, with a shooting percentage below 40 percent from the field. Given that the Kings got only one first-rounder for Cousins, this deal might be remembered as one of the worst in NBA history.
Bradford Doolittle, ESPN Insider: Terribly. If that's the best offer on the table for Cousins, then you just hold on to him and push forward. If it was just a matter of his petulance having worn thin, then this is the worst way to respond. And if your evaluation is that Hield is a great return, you're pretty much sunk anyway.
2. How did the Pelicans come out in this deal?
Verrier: Like bandits. How to acquire a front line running mate for Davis while still playing to win now has been the Pelicans' paradox for years, yet they somehow solved it for a price not significantly higher than the sticker on Jahlil Okafor.
There's work to be done -- to fill in around their core, to bring back Jrue Holiday this summer and Boogie next summer -- but this Hail Mary offer has, at the very least, made them relevant again.
Thorpe: Phenomenally well. I thought Cousins would be best served in a huge market where he can't thrive by sucking all the oxygen out of the room -- because there are too many other stars in the same city. In this case, at least he's headed to a football-crazed city where he might not be the best player on the team, which could help.
I think Davis will help Cousins mature and Alvin Gentry will be ideal as a man who can preach to him about how to be more productive. Can Gentry get Cousins to run? Maybe, and that becomes the biggest on-court question going forward. The Pels run, the Kings jog, Cousins walks.
Engelmann: That'll depend somewhat on whether Cousins re-signs with New Orleans -- his deal is up in the in the summer of 2018. If he bolts after next season -- and Pelicans management has been notoriously inept at putting good role players around Davis -- this might not turn out to be the massive win it looks like today.
As for this season, it's not a given that Cousins will propel the Pelicans into the playoffs, with New Orleans trailing by 2½ games for the last playoff spot in the West.
Doolittle: Great. It's not the kind of team I would have designed around Davis, but there are only so many elite, in-their-prime talents in the league at one time. If you have the chance to pair two of them, you have to do it. Given what the Pelicans gave up in the deal, it was a no-brainer.
Elhassan: From a purely transactional standpoint, the Pelicans are massive winners. They significantly improved their roster with only the smallest of investments: Hield has been OK at best, and their first-round pick, even should they miss the playoffs, is top-3 protected and almost certainly will fall outside the hot spot of marquee picks.
To walk away with Cousins without any future obligations beyond June is miraculous, even if he were to leave as a free agent in 2018 without any further compensation to New Orleans. Kudos to general manager Dell Demps for hitting a grand slam, and Gentry is the exact type of coach who can connect with a mercurial talent like Cousins.
However, I am not confident that New Orleans has the overall infrastructural stability to maximize Cousins' potential. There is a high likelihood the Pelicans encounter many of the same obstacles Sacramento did, and if things don't go well out of the gate and they decide to make further changes at coach or GM, then the cycle of dysfunction has just followed Cousins to the Big Easy. It is imperative that the organization operate on the same page immediately and consistently when handling Cousins.
3. How well will Cousins and Davis play together?
Doolittle: It'll be interesting. Cousins is a pretty good passer, but whenever they are on the floor together, that's a combined 65 percent usage rate. They can both spot up, so that helps. Gentry will be under the microscope now and I'm not sure his preferred style of play works with this kind of foundation.
Engelmann: It's a decent fit, but not perfect, as both players care primarily about offense and there are diminishing returns when it comes to defensive rebounding. There might be some growing pains as they figure how not to take each other's space away near the basket -- but I'm fairly certain they'll figure it out eventually.
Thorpe: This duo has the makings of a champion, potentially. If Gentry and Davis can convince Cousins to run with them, it's a fantastic match.
They should complement each other beautifully on both ends, making each other even more valuable. Davis might force Cousins to be more unselfish -- Cousins has the skills but has never loved the idea of passing just to move the ball. Next to Davis he might accept that duty. High-low action is an obvious strategy, but since both guys can dribble, maybe they can add some ball-screen action with either player as the ball handler.
Elhassan: They'll play well together, as Cousins will benefit from Davis' ability to space offensively and his length on the defensive end, while Davis can benefit from Cousins' passing and elite rebounding. But I wonder what long-term impact this will have on Davis, who has played much better as a 5; when playing the role of the stretch big, he's a lot less aggressive rolling to the basket off pick-and-roll and crashing offensive glass, and that makes him less than what he could be as a player.
Verrier: Squeezing in two top-10 usage rates will require someone to throttle back -- with the early money on Davis, who is indeed dominant but also willingly deferential -- but otherwise the fit seems ideal. Cousins can keep the big bodies off Davis and provide some needed pop to the 27th-ranked offense; Davis' rim protection and stretchiness can provide Cousins cover and space.
4. Fact or Fiction: This deal will make the Pelicans a major factor in the West during the next five years.
Thorpe: Fact, with qualifiers. Some factors are too obvious to discuss (for example, will Cousins stay?). Others are less obvious, like Holiday's health and who the GM and coach will be over the long haul.
Could this deal form the foundation of a contending team? Without a doubt. It's not a complete team yet, but if it were a stock, everyone would be buying it.
Verrier: Fiction. The Pelicans were gift-wrapped an elite talent before and struggled to fill out a roster capable of contention. Adding a second certainly makes it easier, but cap-clogging deals for Omer Asik and Solomon Hill limit future flexibility, especially with the luxury tax an impending concern. There is a future in New Orleans, but it's too soon to predict a rise into the Warriors' orbit.
Doolittle: Fact. Cousins is up against it to make it work, assuming he really wants to change perceptions of him. My feeling has always been that underlying his bad choices is an almost out-of-control desire to win. Channeled properly, that's not a bad thing. In the NBA, Cousins has never been paired with a talent like Davis and maybe that will ease some of his mental burden.
Elhassan: Fact-ion. On one hand, the Pelicans have two high-profile, elite talents entering their respective primes, and that's the hardest thing to acquire in basketball. On the other hand, there are no long-term guarantees that Cousins will remain with the franchise, and even if he were to, the Pelicans haven't shown the greatest track record in acquiring competent supporting cast talent. For the short term, put me down as optimistic that the Pelicans will make the playoffs this season.
Engelmann: Fiction. Few teams struck worse deals last summer than the Pelicans did, which includes the $48 million deal they gave to Hill. The Pelicans just got a gift from the worst management in the NBA, but unless they bring in new decision-makers I don't see them putting a successful team around these two superstars.
5. Fact or Fiction: The Kings are at least five years away from making the playoffs.
Elhassan: Fact. Five is probably putting it lightly. The Kings have shown repeatedly that they don't get it on staggering levels, so even as they execute the correct long-term play in divesting themselves of Cousins, they do so in a manner that inspires zero optimism that they'll get this next part right.
Doolittle: Fact. If it weren't for the Knicks, this would be the most dysfunctional franchise in the league. I'm a big fan of coach Dave Joerger and maybe if he were to get final say in personnel matters, things could move forward. As it is, their rebuilding path looks long enough, but it's a lot worse when you factor in the time it'll take the owner to realize he has to juggle the front office. Again.
Thorpe: Fiction, only because history can change fast. In 2013-14, Boston won just 25 games. I have no confidence that the Kings will make the right moves like Boston did, but it is possible.
Engelmann: Five might be understating things. I don't think this franchise can make the playoffs under Ranadive and Divac. They've gotten fleeced in deal after deal, they have an awful roster now, they owe an unprotected first-round pick to Philadelphia in 2019 (and could lose the rights to their first-round pick in 2017) and so far they've proven unable to draft and develop solid NBA players. (They inherited Cousins.)
They've now surpassed Brooklyn -- still reeling from the moves Billy King made -- as the franchise with the worst long-term outlook.
Verrier: Fact. The Kings' lackluster haul is even worse than the trade itself, because any attempt to start from scratch will be derailed by the unprotected first-rounder they owe to Philly in 2019 ... which they gave up for cap space to sign four players, only one of whom (Kosta Koufos) is still on the roster. Good grief.
Bonus: Should the Celtics, Lakers or others have made a bigger play for Cousins?
Elhassan: Perhaps, but all indications are that the Kings' asking price to different franchises varied greatly. They're all probably scratching their collective heads trying to figure out how this deal trumps their own lowball offers to Sacramento.
Doolittle: Not the Lakers. Putting Cousins on another developing team is asking for trouble. The Celtics should have made a push, because the package the Pelicans ended up sending out for Cousins would have been easily topped by Boston. They could have added a third star-level player without really disrupting much of their rotation. And in the stable environment created by Brad Stevens, Cousins could have been positioned to play his best basketball yet.
Thorpe: Boston, yes, in theory. He'd have been great for that franchise and coach. But they shouldn't have taken too much risk for the move because their future is still bright. The Lakers can just build as they are and keep Cousins in mind if he doesn't decide to stay in New Orleans.
Engelmann: The Lakers probably shouldn't have. A deal for Cousins likely would have just put them in no-man's land again: not good enough to make the playoffs, not bad enough to get high draft picks. The Celtics certainly could have used Cousins and could have offered a significantly better deal -- in the eyes of most people, anyway; who knows how the Kings evaluate these things? -- but probably didn't want to take the risk of Cousins not re-signing.
Other than Boston, the 76ers and Suns could have offered the best selection of future firsts. The 76ers probably want to roll with Joel Embiid, but Phoenix should have tried to make a play here.
Verrier: Yes, given the price. But the Pelicans' unique situation -- pressurized enough to swing for the fences despite Cousins' reported unwillingness to sign an extension; not as precious about their culture as Boston; already boasting a fully formed superstar -- may matter as much as the deal's particulars.
