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.

Well, you have no doubt heard. The schedule is out. And, like any truncated timetable of a schedule, this is a doozy.

January is a killer. There is 12 road games and 5 home games. All the home games are imminently winnable with New Orleans (without Chris Paul no less), Milwaukee, Orlando, Indiana and Denver coming in.

Jan 3rd, 4th and 5th is the first back to back to back. (That's @ Memphis, @ Denver and home vs Milwaukee.)

That, strangely enough, is the only b2b2b for the Kings. The Kings however have 16 set of b2b's, and multiple 4 game in 5 night type sets. There are no long stretches of days off. The longest stretch is a 2 day stretch in between January 28th and January 31st. The only other multi day stretch throughout the season is the All-Star break.

In the same way that the schedule taketh away, the schedule giveth too. March has 9 straight home games (at one point), and a total of 12 home games for the month (vs 6 road and all in the Western Conference).

Overall, not to inundate you with a bunch of nonsense (I want to keep this brief for so many reasons and then some), but the schedule is reasonably fair. I'm surprised the Kings didn't draw 3 of the b2b2b's, but then again it's also possible that due to the mostly open nature of Arco II (I refuse to call it Power Balance Pavilion anymore) and the scheduling that the Kings were able to get more home games within blocks than other teams. That does help after all.

The post All-Star schedule is much kinder than it is pre All-Star break. (TZ @ Sactown Royalty notes this too.) For a young team with lots of new potential faces by the time the season starts, in many ways this is not a bad thing. You can go on the road, learn each other, and do what you can. There will be many teaching moments for all the players learning each other games. I don't know what the Western Conference picture looks like, and I suspect none of us really will know until rosters shake out and we know how they look like. I stand by my assertion that this Kings team has the potential with the right roster moves in Free Agency (or trades during this period) to make the playoffs and perhaps even be a .550 or even peeking near a .600 team. Heady stuff right? It all revolves around Tyreke Evans staying healthy. I bring this up to point out that for a screwy schedule, this is as favorable it will get when you are the Kings.

In the meantime, be happy that we have a NBA season (albeit an ugly season).

There are, today, 9 National TV dates with 8 of them on NBATV. The other appearance is on TNT February 9th vs Oklahoma City.

The 8 NBA TV dates are:

Dec Mon 26 vs LA Lakers Jan Sat 28 @ Utah Feb Sat 11 vs Phoenix Mar Fri 09 vs Dallas Mar Sun 11 vs Atlanta Mar Sat 24 @ Golden State Mar Sat 31 vs New Jersey Apr Sun 08 vs Houston

I think this is it.

Since I've talked about the Nene/Sam Dalembert pipe dream, I should admit that I've always known it was a pipe dream. After all, doing so (overpaying Nene/Dalembert at the same time while re-signing Marcus Thornton) was going to be a stretch on all 3 counts. Nothing wrong with that, and I still don't think it was as much of a reach as some insinuate.

That said, it's probably not going to happen because the Kings, if you believe Ken Berger, are interested in Tyson Chandler.

The specific passage mentioning the Kings is actually near the top of Berger's piece, but here is the most important part that Kings fans need to heed:

Jason Terry and Jason Kidd come off the books after the season, and the Mavs will want their Hall of Fame point guard to pass the torch to a star in his prime and keep Nowitzki in the hunt for more titles during the final two years of his contract. In addition to Williams, Paul and Howard, the 2012 free-agent class is loaded with attractive restricted free agents, such as Russell Westbrook, Eric Gordon, O.J. Mayo and George Hill -- not to mention Derrick Rose, who nobody envisions leaving Chicago.

So the lackluster nature of this free-agent class compared to next summer's, combined with confusion about the new rules and an unwillingness to be the team that sets the market, have slowed the activity with four days to go before camps and free agency officially open. Also, don't underestimate how the shortened season provides an incentive for teams to pass on significant moves now when July 1 is only a few months away.

The biggest impediment to the wheeling and dealing in 2011 has everything to do with 2012 and beyond.

Now, I still think the Kings aren't in the market for any of those guys. Eric Gordon would probably prefer to sign an extension wherever he lands (probably still in LA). Russell Westbrook would want to leave the Thunder why exactly? OJ Mayo? Really? That's the most disappointing part of the piece as far as I'm concerned.

I spent a lot of words talking about why I wanted Nene and Dalembert a couple days ago. I didn't say why I didn't see the Kings being in a worse position by spending the money. The salary floor has raised 10% from the previous CBA (it was 75% and has been raised to 85% for the next 2 years and 90% for the rest of the CBA). So what this has done is created a need to fill that space with a temporary measure so you can use cap room when the time is right.

Here's the problem with that scenario: Any time you use a lot of cap room and commit a lot of dollars to a player is a risk. There is no guarantee that the risk today is worse or even more problematic than the risk you can take down the road.

There are lots of teams out there other than the Kings that are below or right at the salary floor. I listed a few in a post awhile ago that counted 18 out of 30 teams in the league at the cap level (which I didn't know at the time would be the same as a year ago minus the pro-rated shares) or below the cap level for last season.

18 out of 30 is not an advantage. Of all those teams, many have prepared for the floor. In that linked post, I noted that it's not an advantage to be below the floor unless you're going to be aggressive in signing players. (Listening to Paul Westphal on Grant Napear's show yesterday, it certainly sounds like that is the plan. Listening to Geoff Petrie, and a much appreciative thanks to Kings.com (and to Jon Santiago for passing that footage along), you can tell that he wants to get the process started and completed as quickly as possible. (I thought the most interesting thing when Petrie talked about the lockout being over was not mentioning ownership. I wonder if that means he's old enough that he doesn't have to kiss a billionaires ass. I'm hoping that's it. Then again, maybe he just didn't want to mention it.)

The Kings have about 31.75 million in salaries for this season. That means without Marcus Thornton, they have to spend somewhere in the range of 18 million just to get to the minimum salary. 18 MILLION DOLLARS.

Even if you have a Nick Collison situation with Marcus Thornton (Collison got a huge bonus from Oklahoma City last year that got him his money up front and OKC got to spread the cap hit across the course of the contract), that still likely leaves somewhere between 4 and 5 million to acquire another player.