DeMarcus Cousins was traded by the Sacramento Kings to the New Orleans Pelicans today in what seemed like a lopsided deal.

The Pelicans got perhaps the league’s most prominent big man (and currently the league’s No. 4 scorer, at 27.8 ppg) in exchange for a whole lot of not much — rookie wing Buddy Hield, who is already 23; what’s left of Tyreke Evans and someone named Langston Galloway, plus the Pelicans gave up their two picks in the June draft.

They also got Omri Casspi from the Kings.

What can we make of this seemingly unequal deal?

The Kings really didn’t want to be Cousins-dependent for most of the next decade. They also did not want to pay out $209 million for a maximum, five-year contract with a player often described as “volatile”.

Cousins, 26, has put up strong numbers right from the start of his career, as a 20-year-old out of Kentucky, and this was going to be his most statistically significant season yet.

But never in his six-plus-seasons with the team did the Kings reach the playoffs and only once did they win more than 28 games (33, last season). The Kings, even with Cousins, risked another no-playoffs performance this season; they were 24-33 when they sent Cousins to New Orleans.

A great debate has surrounded Cousins over the past few years, and the schools of thought seem to be these: 1) he is a bad teammate and coach-killer who ensures a tension-racked lockerroom or 2) he was a victim of particularly poor management in Sacramento, where Vlade Divac is seen as out of his league as a general manager; ditto for erratic chairman Vivek Ranadive.

The cases for each recently were laid out in this long ESPN piece.

The Kings clearly believe the problem is the player.

Typically, you have a 300-pounder whose scoring average has gone up year on year since his rookie season, to that 27.8 he carries to Louisiana, and you sign him for as long as possible, for as much as possible, as soon as possible.

Instead, the Kings sent him away for what could be mid-round No. 1 and No. 2 draft picks, and Hield — and the privilege of not having to spend $209 million to keep him, come this summer.

This could be a trade that hurts both teams, as well as both players.

The Kings (24-33) lose their only star and may face an immediate collapse; the Pelicans (23-34) get an in-the-paint guy who wants the ball a lot when they already had one of those in superstar power forward, Anthony Davis, who is the NBA’s No. 5 scorer (at 27.7).

(ESPN’s David Jacoby suggested pace-and-space-oriented Pelicans coach Alvin Gentry has some work to do, comparing it to his being given a yacht … despite living in Montana.)

Also, because of the way the new collective bargaining agreement is written, Cousins loses $30 million (!) in his next contract — only the Kings could have offered him $209 mill for five seasons; everyone else can offer no more than $179 million. (Which might have helped explain Cousins’s professed interest in staying with the Kings.)

Anthony Davis, meanwhile, now has to deal with the “whose team is this?” questions, as well as “who is our first scoring option?” The lane may not be wide enough for the both of them.

Gauging the winners and losers of this deal could take some time, despite the stampede towards the “Pelicans robbed the Kings” side of the spectrum.

How useful will those two draft picks be? (Significantly more valuable if the Pelicans end up in the lottery.) Can New Orleans re-sign Cousins this summer? (Would a Magic Johnson-led Lakers make a run at him?)

Can Cousins avoid the disciplinary issues that have dogged him? Can Davis and the Pelicans’ one other useful player, point guard Jrue Holiday, find common cause with the new big guy? Will the Kings be able to win 30 games again at some point over the next decade?

All open for discussion. The NBA just got a little more interesting.