Community Shootaround

In a recent Q&A with Akis Yerocostas, editor of SB Nation’s Sactown Royalty, as part of our ongoing Top Bloggers series, he opined that the Kings were better off not having signed Wesley Matthews or Monta Ellis, whom they were reportedly targeting, and instead splitting their cap space between Rajon Rondo, Kosta Koufos and Marco Belinelli.

Yerocostas’ full response to our query was, “I’m actually a bit happier that the Kings missed out on those two bigger names. While I would have loved to have a player of Matthews’ caliber on the team, the fact that he’s coming off of a major injury makes me a little squeamish about offering him what would have been the second biggest contract on the team. Ellis would have been a smaller financial commitment, but I’ve never been a fan of his fit on a team that already features two heavy usage scorers in DeMarcus Cousins and Rudy Gay.  The Kings were instead able to use that money to acquire some solid depth at key positions. Rajon Rondo might not be the Rondo of old anymore, but he’s still a top-tier playmaker and is only locked down for one year (meaning the Kings can cut ties pretty easily if things don’t work out).  Koufos was probably one of the best bench bigs in the league last season and will bring a real defensive presence in the middle, and Belinelli brings the kind of shooting the Kings have been lacking for years. I don’t know if the Kings would have been able to add as much depth if they had signed Matthews or Ellis.”

This brings me to the question/topic of the day: Would the Kings have been better served to land either Wesley Matthews or Monta Ellis this summer, or was adding more depth across the board a better move for the team in the long run?

Take to the comments section below to share your thoughts and opinions on the matter. We look forward to what you have to say.

The Grizzlies reportedly looked into acquiring Danilo Gallinari at the trade deadline this past season, according to Grantland’s Zach Lowe, which corroborates a report from June indicating that Memphis was pursuing the combo forward as the draft neared. Denver instead held on to him, even though they “absolutely could have” scored first-round picks for Gallinari or Wilson Chandler, as Lowe wrote. Both signed renegotiations-and-extensions this summer with Denver, a place Gallinari loves, according to Lowe’s report, making him a relative rarity among top-level players and extra valuable to the Nuggets.

This brings me to the question/topic of the day: Should the Nuggets have dealt Danillo Gallinari last season when the opportunity was available?

While Gallinari’s strong second half of the 2014/15 campaign, as well as his excellent performance during this summer’s Eurobasket qualifying tournament, certainly bode well for the future, the 27-year-old’s injury history makes it difficult to count on the Italian forward for a full season. Would Denver, a team in the midst of a full rebuild, have been better served to deal Gallinari to Memphis for draft picks?

On one side of the argument, I can make the case that it would have been worth it for Denver to do so, as the extra draft pick(s), as well as the increased odds of securing next season’s No. 1 overall pick if Gallinari were indeed subtracted from the roster, would certainly aid in hastening the team’s overhaul. Dealing the forward would have also eliminated the yearly worry that Gallinari would miss significant time due to some malady. Of course, the argument could easily be made that the Nuggets have a great shot at securing the top overall pick in 2016 regardless of Gallinari’s presence, and having the forward on hand will at least make the team watchable on a nightly basis for its fans. In addition, Denver isn’t viewed around the league as a free agent destination, so retaining talent is paramount for the Nuggets as they move forward.

But what do you think? Should Denver have pulled the trigger on a trade? If so, what sort of return would they needed to have received to make such a deal worthwhile? Take to the comments section below to share your thoughts and opinions on the matter. We look forward to what you have to say.

The Bulls currently have a bit of a logjam at the power forward position heading into training camp. Veteran Pau Gasol is the expected starter, but after him things become a bit muddled. The remainder of minutes at the four spot will need to be divvied up between Taj Gibson, Nikola Mirotic, rookie Bobby Portis, Cameron Bairstow, and offseason signee Cristiano Felicio. While not all of these players are assured of a regular season roster spot, new head coach Fred Hoiberg will certainly have some tough calls to make, not just during the preseason, but over the course of each and every contest throughout the season.

This brings me to the topic of the day: Who should the Bulls’ power forward rotation consist of during the 2015/16 season?

Time for you to play head coach and make the call. Should Gasol be utilized off the bench to better take advantage of his versatility, or should he indeed remain the starter? As for the rest of the rotation, who makes the cut, and what should be the minutes allotments between those players? If you feel that the team is too stacked at the four, who would you trade, and why? Take to the comments section below to share your thoughts and opinions on the subject. We look forward to what you have to say.

One of the Rockets’ most significant offseason moves was the acquisition of Ty Lawson from Denver. But the 27-year-old is not guaranteed a starting spot, according to coach Kevin McHale. Whether or not this is simply a coach being diplomatic remains to be seen, but for now it would appear that Lawson will compete with Patrick Beverley, whom the Rockets re-signed this summer for $23MM over four years, for the starting point guard job.

This brings me to the topic of the day: Who should be the Rockets’ starting point guard in 2015/16?

For a quick comparison, here are the 2014/15 stats for both players:

1. Patrick Beverley: 10.1 PPG, 4.2 RPG, 3.4 APG, 1.1 SPG, and 1.5 TPG in 30.8 minutes per contest. His slash line was .383/.356/.750.
2. Ty Lawson: 15.2 PPG, 3.1 RPG, 9.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, and 2.5 TPG in 35.5 minutes per night. His slash line was .436/.341/.730.

Which player will give the Rockets the best chance to win this season? In your opinion, does one fit within Houston’s system better than the other? If your pick is Lawson, do you believe he’ll be able to stay out of trouble throughout the 2015/16 campaign? Take to the comments section below to weigh in with your thoughts and opinions on the matter. We look forward to what you have to say.

On Tuesday, Hoops Rumors’ Chuck Myron ran down the list of the longest-tenured primary executives around the NBA. Around the league, head coaches are usually the first ones to shoulder the blame when a season goes awry, sometimes unfairly so, especially given that most NBA coaches aren’t directly involved with the construction of their teams’ rosters. That burden falls to each team’s primary basketball executive, be he a GM, team president, or president of basketball operations. Regardless of their title, these are the men who are tasked with putting together the best roster that they possibly can, and they have to do so within the bounds of the salary cap.

It’s certainly a difficult job, and one that garners constant criticism and scrutiny, not only from the fanbase, but the owners and shareholders as well. While the turnover rate among front office personnel isn’t quite as high as those who represent the coaching ranks, it’s not a job where most executives can expect a multi-decade run with the same franchise. Turnover is inevitable, which segues perfectly into the topic of the day: Who do you predict will be the next primary team executive to be fired?

For convenience, and with a big thanks to Chuck for compiling, here’s the current list of primary front office executives arranged by tenure:

1. Pat Riley, Heat: September 1995
2. Mitch Kupchak, Lakers: August 2000
3. R.C. Buford, Spurs: July 2002
4. Danny Ainge, Celtics: May 2003
5. Ernie Grunfeld, Wizards: June 2003
6. Donnie Nelson, Mavericks: June 2005
7. Daryl Morey, Rockets: May 2007
8. Sam Presti, Thunder: June 2007
9. John Hammond, Bucks: April 2008
10. Gar Forman, Bulls: May 2009
11. Billy King, Nets: July 2010
12. Dell Demps, Pelicans: July 2010
13. Rich Cho, Hornets: June 2011
14. Bob Myers, Warriors: April 2012
15. Neil Olshey, Trail Blazers: June 2012
16. Rob Hennigan, Magic: June 2012
17. Dennis Lindsey, Jazz: August 2012
18. Ryan McDonough, Suns: May 2013
19. Sam Hinkie, Sixers: May 2013
20. Masai Ujiri, Raptors: May 2013
21. Tim Connelly, Nuggets: June 2013
22. Doc Rivers, Clippers: June 2013
23. Larry Bird, Pacers: June 2013 (returned to organization)
24. David Griffin, Cavaliers: February 2014
25. Phil Jackson, Knicks: March 2014
26. Stan Van Gundy, Pistons: May 2014
27. Chris Wallace, Grizzlies: May 2014 (returned to power)
28. Mike Budenholzer, Hawks: September 2014
29. Vlade Divac, Kings: March 2015
30. Milt Newton, Timberwolves: September 2015 (interim)

Take to the comments section below to share your thoughts and opinions on the subject. We look forward to what you have to say.