Hornets Waive Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

1:15pm: The Hornets have officially waived Kidd-Gilchrist, according to Rick Bonnell of the Charlotte Observer.

Charlotte now has two open roster spots and $5.2MM of its mid-level exception for the 2019/20 season left to spend, which the team could use to add G-League prospects, according to ESPN’s Bobby Marks (via Twitter).

11:50pm: The Hornets are finalizing a buyout with forward Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, according to ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski and Tim MacMahon (Twitter link). The Mavericks have emerged as a favorite to sign Kidd-Gilchrist once he clears waivers, Wojnarowski adds.

We relayed earlier this week with the trade deadline looming that Dallas had “kicked the tires” on Kidd-Gilchrist, among others. The veteran forward was once a reliable starter for the Hornets, with whom he has spent his entire career after being the second overall pick in the 2012 NBA Draft.

This season, however, the 26-year-old has appeared in just 12 games and is averaging 4.0 PPG and 2.9 PPG. Kidd-Gilchrist opted in to his $13MM option over the summer and entered camp this past fall without a defined role.

As he heads for free agency this summer, Kidd-Gilchrist could set himself up for a decent payday by playing well with a contending team down the stretch.

newest oldest

35 thoughts on “Hornets Waive Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

  1. stretch123

    Charlotte could’ve had Bradley Beal or Dame Lillard in 2012 but chose this guy… I understand hesitating on Lillard at that time, but how in the world did they pass up Bradley Beal?

      • Ironmonger835

        It was a dumb decision at the time. Everyone knew Beal would at least be a good scorer. This dude had the worst jump shot ever. Worse than Ronnie Brewer’s.

        • rexington12

          During the draft Beal had a really nice jumpshot with defense and playmaking questions. MKG was considered a possible 3 position elite defender with an excellent motor. broken jumper yes, but fixable with his work ethic. Obviously they struck out, but it wasn’t considered that bad of a pick at the time

          • joeyrocafella

            I recall then drafting him, and it was definitely considered a bad pick at the time. He was our consolation prize to AD

            • Natergater77

              Sporting News even recapped that MKG was risk to be franchise face but should become one of the leagues best fast break artist and defenders.

              Same article had concerns about Beals college 3pt %

      • Appalachian_Outlaw

        It is. There are also certain times you don’t need hindsight to see things clearly. For instance, deciding to climb Mt. Everest in shorts and a t-shirt, bad idea from the jump.

        Beal had a higher floor, easily. If he developed nothing else, he’d have produced points. MKG had some potential, but he wasn’t the type of gamble you take at #2. He just had so many elements to his game where you’re saying, “He might…”

    • x%sure

      Agree with the draft scouts here, but too add, Beal vs. MKG was a hard/soft issue. MKG won the NCAA title at the 4 and was scary doing it. He looked to dunk more than shoot. Beal was a glider who then spent years being overshadowed by Wall.

      MKG may not be tall enough to do what would work, but look at what Houston is doing with a 6-5 center & no 4.

    • Question, how would you define practically all of Michael Jordan’s draft picks? Answer, see above.

      • Appalachian_Outlaw

        This is why great players often make poor executives. When you have all that talent, things come easier than they do for most. I wonder how many of those guys he looked at and thought they’d make some sort of monumental leap that wasn’t in them?

    • hiflew

      Not really. Darko Milicic is a bust. Adam Morrison is a bust. Anthony Bennett is a bust. Dragan Bender is a bust.

      MKG has played in the league for 8 years. Sure he has not hit the ceiling that was projected for him, but he is hardly a bust. Just a slight disappointment. But he was good enough for the Hornets to extend for $52 million. That’s not bust money.

      • Appalachian_Outlaw

        Hiflew, if they took him at #19, I’d say fair point. To me, there is an expectation based on where a guy is drafted, however. I don’t want a #2 pick spent on a guy just good enough to last. That doesn’t win my team games.

  2. I don’t even know which playoff team takes him at this point.

    Dallas is included in every rumour it seems, so I don’t put a lot of stock that he ends up there. Maybe the Spurs, who could use a little size at the 3/4? They’re not a real playoff team though.

  3. formerlyz

    Dallas makes a lot of sense for MKG. Heat would have made sense before they made the trade they made. Could think of some other teams that could use him at the 4 spot

  4. formerlyz

    Mkg was looking improved and on his way to being more productive before his shoulder problems came up. He had even changed his shooting mechanics, but after the injuries, never was able to get back to that. Hasnt been the same since

  5. KnickerbockerAl

    Char under MJ has not drafted well. They have gone for local talent or safe picks. MKG is just a gd example of this. Small market teams can’t blow it on draft. It’s their best way to compete. He was a good two way player, gd size. Coming out, never should of gone that high. Only 26 can still be a rotation player.

    • Jason Lancaster

      I often wonder if the difference between a good pick and a bad one is player development.

      Some teams always find decent players in the draft, regardless of where they pick. That can’t be luck, and it’s hard to believe they’re better at scouting. Maybe, but usually all the scouts have the same basic opinion of each player (especially if they’re in the lottery).

      • x%sure

        I think its about hits & misses, not development. Some people (a group which includes scouts) are too impressed with compensatory behaviors, or success at self-interested camps. Not that there’s hard-and-fast rules.

  6. Lillard wasn’t a thought at #2, nor would he have been for anyone in the top 5. He was a reach at #6, born of a PG starved team and a dearth of PGs in that draft. I’m imagining the media/fan reaction if Jordan had reached for a Div II PG at #2, when he drafted Kemba Walker the year before.

    MKG, Beal and Robinson were the consensus options in no particular order. They didn’t get the worst player.

    • The only team with a worse drafting record than Michael Jordan is the Sacramento Kings. And worse by a lot.

      • x%sure

        A GM has to avoid the saviour factor, which the Cavs will fall for if Lebron’s not around. SAC might have done that– except in the case of avoiding Doncic!

      • Dallas before drafting Doncic, probably got less out of the draft than either of those teams, and that goes way back. Kings and Hornets have been bad though.

        • RockHard

          Dallas rarely had any first rounders, much less high lottery picks. Totally different situation.

    • Chucktoad1

      Yet Lillard turned out to be the best player in that draft. (And yes I’m saying he’s better than AD)

      • Different issue. Drafting without a crystal ball, which is how it’s done, teams don’t vary much from consensus – except within tiers. If Jordan wanted a Walker-Lillard backcourt, then he’d have to have traded down.

    • jkoms57

      10 teams passed on Stephen Curry.

      Memphis traded Kevin Love for OJ Mayo.

      Pistons took Darko over Melo.

      Things happen. Heck even MPJ even with his injuries looks every bit as worthy of being taken a lot earlier.

      • Good points. Though Curry was picked #7. I know because the Knicks picked #8, and talked for two weeks about how they thought Curry was the steal of the draft.

        • Yes, and I remember the Warriors trying to decide between Jordan Hill & Curry. At least publicly.

Leave a Reply