First off, I'd like to say it's great to watch basketball again. That's first and foremost. Here is the boxscore.

Some random thoughts before I hit a bullet point. It's quite possible the Kings were playing without their entire opening day starting frontline tonight: Cousins, Hayes & Salmons. Because of the circumstances surrounding the game, it's hard to evaluate exactly what went on. Because it is the Warriors who are not an exceptionally big team, it's ever more difficult to assess how this team is going to go.

In general, I find it strange that Westphal didn't play a deeper bench although I'm sure he'll address that in his post-game why some other guys didn't get those minutes.

Onto the bullet points.....

This is according to Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports. Look. I hate Travis Outlaw. What I wrote last night was being kind. Outlaw is an inefficient combo F who really only scores and does little else. His man defense may be okay, and I stress okay, but he's no better than JJ Hickson is for instance.

As far as the modified waived process that allows teams to bid on amnestied contracts, the Kings utilized that option with Outlaw. The minimum bid on Chauncey Billups (or any contract I believe) was 1.3 million, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Kings were the only team to bid on Outlaw. If they bid a minimum of 1.3 million for 1 season, I can live with that.

The question is can the waiver system on amnestied contracts work the same way as the waiver system? When a player is waived, a player has 48 hours to clear waivers before a player is waived. During that 48 hours teams can decide to pick up the entire salary of the waived player (along with the contract). My judgment of the modified process is that a team is able to bid years and dollars on an amnestied player. I'd be shocked if the Kings bid more than the minimum on Outlaw and for longer a year. If the only way you can bid on a player is to bid a dollar amount for the remaining years of the contract, the greater question is why? What's the point. (Like I said, I don't think the Kings have assumed the remaining 4 years of Outlaw's deal.)

UPDATE: According to Howard Beck, the Kings bid 3 million and will assume the next 4 years of Outlaw's contract. Excuse me, I have to ram my head repeatedly into a wall. Resume reading.

I don't like Outlaw, and I'll be happy if I'm wrong. But there's a reason Portland traded Outlaw away to the Clippers in 2010, and there's a reason the Nets, even after dropping a 5 year 35 million dollar deal on Outlaw, amnestied the guy. He just doesn't have a lot of value left.

Maybe I'm wrong and maybe I'm not. As per usual, folks will see this how they want (I don't like him and have thought he was overrated for a long time), and I see this as a stupid move. If it works out, then it works out. I'm just not holding out my breathe that it will be something of any real or even immediate value. Here's hoping I'm wrong eh?

A lot of people are still hoping Andrei Kirilenko is a player the Kings can go out and get. At 3 years 27 million it's a risk, but this team is at that juncture where a risk is more than reasonable. In fact, a risk is outright mandatory for a team that needs to get back to the playoffs as soon as this season.

I'm going to examine potential trade candidates that would require limited or very little other than financial relief from the contract. Before I do that, I want to make it clear that there are few players out there will be available for pure "cap relief" that are also enticing. The idea of this list is to find players who, for whatever reason, could rebound from poor production making their contract difficult to move. In my opinion, this is the one area where the Kings have a quality opportunity to find a player whose contract, otherwise impossible to take on, can help you in the interim and provide you with quality play in the next few years.

Marvin Williams Atlanta

No-one else on the roster even qualifies, and according to StoryTellers contract info (a must bookmark--Twitter here), Atlanta happens to have just crossed into the tax territory.

Demands from Atlanta? The only realistic asking price would be Donte Greene or Hassan Whiteside. Of the two, Donte most likely would be the asking price (mostly because the Hawks need a roster filler and Greene is a cheap test run at the worst). Does Atlanta do this? I do have my doubts. Rick Sund is known to over-demand talent in return for players like Williams which hurts things. As long as Atlanta wishes to pretend that it has a championship level team, trading for Williams is likely to take a major piece in return. There is no way the Kings do this.

Would I do this? Williams is due just under 25 million (24.9 million more precisely) and has produced very mediocre numbers in Atlanta. Would he be the type of player that would benefit from an up-tempo system? My opinion is yes as Atlanta is a very slow team which doesn't help Williams much.

When judging a deal like this, is it possible the Kings could lose just money and little else? Well, that's pretty much what the deal would be. I don't think Williams is on Petrie's radar, but I do believe he is the type of player that would benefit from a change of scenery and an up tempo system. Time is running out to get players who can contribute on a roster and do so quickly.

Chances of happening? 20-80 and that's being kind. Other than Josh Childress, I would rather have Williams than any other player on this list.

I know. It's Josh Childress. He sucks. Or does he?

What happened in Phoenix is an unfortunate bi-product of what can happen when things don't quite go your way. Is Josh Childress as bad as the 6% of 3PT's he hit last season? No. Until he left for Europe, Childress' career Percentage was about 35.7% on 258 3PT attempts. OVER 4 SEASONS.

Childress, despite the fact he isn't that adept at taking 3 pointers is a very good player. He handles the ball, is a good passer, and can play the 2/3. In a lot of ways for a team looking to shore up it's depth and get a veteran, I think Childress qualifies.

I would be very happy to trade Donte Greene for Childress if a veteran is really something the Kings are looking for. Sure it sounds crazy, but quality SF's are not easy to find. Is it a risk? Sure, 4 years and about 27 million remaining is a risk. A crazy out of mind risk? One that analysts will agree with? Not really no.

Let's be honest. There are not many players that are veterans that are available, that are easy to attain, that teams will just trade away for little or next to nothing. There is risk associated with this type of move. Some will say why not trade Francisco Garcia to get Childress? Because for no other reason than depth is necessary. Garcia provides a necessary veteran component that the Kings believe (and they aren't alone) they need.

Yesterday I thought an Andrei Kirilenko acquisition was overkill. Today I think that too, but there are other things out there to consider that I hadn't as of then considered.

Numero Uno: Andrei Kirilenko plays the 3 and plays the 4. My general impressions are that Francisco Garcia is the backup SF and will play some backup SG as needed. But in a 66 game season on an exceptionally truncated timetable as this season will be, Garcia will likely be the backup SG instead as the backup SF. It's not like Garcia will be any more or less valuable at one or the other; it's just that if you sign Kirilenko he's not a SG.

I'll make this point in a very simple way: A short season with lots of games and little days off means depth; You gotta have it. Without depth, injuries will kill you. You can't recover. In a normal season I'd stand by the overkill remark. I think it would be overkill. But in a normal season, you have more days off. There's only one time during the regular season (not including the All-Star break) where the Kings even have TWO days off in a row.

Numero dos: What kind of contract do you offer Kirilenko? I'm not convinced Andrei Kirilenko is better than John Salmons today. You aren't convincing me with 82games numbers, Adjusted +/- or anything else. Salmons and Kirilenko are different type of offensive players sure (I know: Salmons is a ball pounder and you hate that; got it), however the real impact for each player with the Kings will be on the defensive end. Both do it a bit differently, but the end game is both are effective at each end. (How much better than one another? It'll depend on how you feel about Salmons when it comes right down to it.)

I'm rooting for Chuck Hayes. I'm going to let go my feelings of ineptitude on the Maloofs part. It's simply not something that I have any control over. So, it's usually best to understand that, while you can want what you want, when it's in the hands of others that's the way it is.

Can Hayes reach Cousins head? Can Hayes benefit from playing PF a whole lot more often? Can Hayes benefit by playing with younger talented teammates who certainly would benefit from Hayes' wisdom?

Chuck Hayes, like I said on Twitter, is the best you're going to get as a backup backup plan. He's not a sexy name, and his game is even less sexy to boot. He's a blue collar hard hat type of guy who took the opportunity to get a large contract due to the situation. (Chuck Hayes is absolutely one of the major winners of this off-season.)

As far as Hayes talents go on the court? He's a rugged physical defender who is adept in getting opponents heads. Can he stop Blake Griffin, Amare Stoudemire, or all the other high scoring PF's in the NBA right now? No. But nobody can, and what Hayes certainly can do is make it more difficult and not to mention painful to score.

First, I'd like to thank Kevin Fippin (of Here We Stay) for this wonderful photoshop (he's also posted it at @ Sactown Royalty):

Ignoring one of my favorite images of all time, I like this deal. I'm hoping that we see a similar structure deal to what Nick Collison (a big bonus this season that pushes the total to the amount we see but actually reduces the strain of the contract in later years) received with the Thunder last year.

Is Marcus Thornton the best of fits with the Kings? I think he has a strong possibility of improving on his 28 games last season with more time and a chance to play off a healthy Tyreke Evans. I also think Thornton could end up settling into a Ben Gordon role off the bench that is a super scoring sub. Thornton does have enough talents that I think will make the King significantly benefit regardless of the exact circumstances and minute distribution moving forward.

News has also just leaked that Chuck Hayes has indeed signed with the Kings for 4 years and 21.3 million. Since I have to give a few minutes to collect my thoughts on Hayes, come back in a hour for that post.

As far as Thornton, this is a low risk potentially high yield reward move. The reality that you could have your entire backcourt together for their entire prime is a wonderful prospect that the Kings have set themselves up for in the long run. I like that the Kings payed Thornton, which some could say is more than he is worth today, with the idea that they needed him to stick around to maximize the value of the other more important talents on the roster right now.

I believe, and continue to believe that Marcus Thornton is a key component to the King mini-successful run the Kings made towards the end of last season. Keeping Marcus Thornton is a nice way to start an off-season and a disappointing yesterday (yeah I'm really ticked by what Stern did).

BUCKETZAAASZZZZAZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!1211409#$%@$!!!!!!!! (Can you tell I like this move?)

UPDATE: After some renegotiating, the deal will be 4 years 31 million most likely according to Sam Amick. I still like the deal. At 4 years it may be even more advantageous to the Kings and Thornton to renegotiate then. Since this isn't set in stone, we'll have to wait 4 years to really discuss it in depth. That said, re-signing Thornton was a must and the Kings did that.

If you aren't aware by now, there was an agreement earlier today that the Lakers, Rockets and Hornets had agreed to a 3 way trade. The Lakers would get Chris Paul (and I suspect Jarrett Jack and Trevor Ariza to make the financial end work), the Rockets were getting Pau Gasol, and the Hornets were getting Lamar Odom, Kevin Martin, Luis Scola, Goran Dragic and the Knicks unprotected 2012 1st round pick (from the Rockets).

Now, if you haven't read this piece by Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports, you probably should. First snippet:

Hornets general manager Dell Demps is “disconsolate” over the heavy-handed move from the commissioner’s office, a source told Y! Sports. Demps considered resigning his job on Thursday, league sources said, and had to be talked out of it. The Hornets had scored a terrific deal for Paul, a trade that was lauded by some of Demps’ peers throughout the league. Officials involved in the trade talks said the league office was consulted throughout the negotiations, and there was never an indication Demps didn’t have the power to make a deal. In fact, several teams negotiating with New Orleans to get Paul asked the league office, and were told Demps had full authority to execute a trade.

The last set of points to quote:

“We were all told by the league he was a trade-able player, and now they’re saying that Dell doesn’t have the authority to make the trade?” said an NBA executive who had periodic talks with New Orleans throughout the process. “Now, they’re saying that Dell is an idiot, that he can’t do it his job. [Expletive] this whole thing. David’s drunk on power, and he doesn’t give a [expletive] about the players, and he doesn’t give a [expletive] about the hundreds of hours the teams put into make that deal.

“How do the Lakers explain this to Odom? How does Houston deal with the guys it just tried to trade? Scola and Martin are going to be pissed at them, and who knows how long that takes to get over? Explain to me how the league kills this Pau Gasol deal, but allows Kwame Brown for Pau Gasol?

“To me, this makes the league feel like it’s rigged, that Stern just does whatever Stern wants to do. He’s messed up the competitive balance of this league a lot worse by killing the deal, because you’ve completely destroyed the planning that New Orleans, Houston did and left them in shambles over this. I’ve never been so discouraged about this league, never so down.

“I mean, come on: Chris Paul is leaving New Orleans in 66 games. He’s gone. And what’s Dell Demps, and that franchise, going to have to show for it?”

I got lots of problems with killing this deal. Lots of problems.

The title implies I hate Chuck Hayes. Not at all. I like Chuck Hayes; as a 4th big man. While I used the Bill Simmonsian line from the 2011 trade deadline column, it's still pretty worth it nonetheless.

The problem isn't Chuck Hayes okay? It never was. Chuck Hayes is neither the problem or the solution. It's the method behind the madness that is the problem.

I'll advocate shooting the moon and overpaying, even drastically, a guy like Nene Hilario, Samuel Dalembert or Tyson Chandler. Those guys all have major impacts on the game. Hayes does not. I think Chuck Hayes is the low rent version of a "veteran hard working doesn't complain big man who can help a young team grow and improve along the way". Which is exactly why I'm advocating Tyson Chandler.

I know all the upsides of Hayes vs Chandler. The injury history alone makes Chandler a very expensive risk. But that's the kind of risk that tells me you're willing to lay it on the line to really improve the team. Yet, like usual, this team has limited it's spending to limited veterans and biding it's time with young players on rookie scale contracts.

If you saw my ridiculous onslaught of a Twitter rant, then you know why I'm pissed. I'm not upset at anyone for attempting to inject reason into that (except lecturing me on how to act; that's always a no-no) side of the debate.

Trying to "figure" out who you are? What does that even really mean? Flexiblity? For what? A much overall worse Free Agent class than 2011 beyond the big 3 names (Deron Williams, Chris Paul and Dwight Howard in case you're living in a cave)?

The problem is not Chuck Hayes. In fact, I understand why the Kings may end up signing Hayes, re-signing Thornton to a big up front money this season (similar to Nick Collison) with reasonable payments the rest of the contract.

This is going to be short I promise you. Ken Berger of CBS Sports has a piece up that I think has some really important tidbits that will matter moving forward.

• The minimum team salary will be 80 percent of the salary cap in 2011-12, 85 percent in '12-'13 and 90 percent in '13-'14.
•  The international player buyout amount is increased from $500,000 to $525,000 this year, and by $25,000 each additional season.
• Player contracts can be renegotiated downward in extensions, as long as the player's salary does not decrease by more than 40 percent. Previously, renegotiations could only increase a player's salary. This could provide another key avenue for teams to maintain roster flexibility and add players with space created by restructuring existing contracts, similar to the NFL.
• Minimum fee for player promotional appearances made on behalf of commercial sponsor set at $3,000 ($3,500 beginning in 2016-17). The fee is $4,000 for appearances beyond eight in a season.
• Players will have a minimum of 16 days off per season beginning in 2012-13. A joint NBA-NBPA committee will study further improvements to workplace conditions, focusing on such issues as back-to-back games and two-a-days during training camp. 
• Draft eligibility age remains set at one year removed from high school, with a joint NBA-NBPA committee discussing future changes.
• Players with three or fewer years of service can receive unlimited assignments to the NBA Development League but will be paid their NBA salaries. Players with more than three years of service can be assigned to the D-League with their consent, for example, for injury rehab.
• Beginning in 2012-13, players can be tested a maximum of two times during the offseason for performance-enhancing drugs only. Previously, players were subject to four random drug screenings from Oct. 1-June 30. HGH testing is not included, but the joint NBA-NBPA committee will study its possible future inclusion if it is agreed that the tests would be scientifically reliable.
• For those who really enjoy the fine print, the player per diem is set at $120, training camp compensation is increased to $2,000 per week and housing reimbursement for traded players is increased to $4,500 for three months following the trade.