Recent news about DeMarcus Cousins' nonexistent free agent market has raised the question of his potential next destination. Exactly one year ago, the Golden State Warriors shocked the NBA world by agreeing to a one-year, $5.3 million deal for the mid-level exception — a deal that bolstered their depth at their most fragile position after the departure of starter Zaza Pachulia and locker room favorite JaVale McGee.

Yet 365 days after, Cousins finds himself in the same position — with no calls, and no suitors in place lining up for his services.

So would the Warriors be smart to give the man a ring and consider re-signing him?

Let's tackle the logistics first. The Warriors are hard-capped after executing a sign-and-trade for D'Angelo Russell on Sunday, capping them at $138,627,000 for the 2019-20 season — with no exceptions.

As it sits at the moment, Golden State has nine players under contract:

Data compiled by Spotrac

Out of these nine, it is Shaun Livingston's contract that is the key to arranging a potential extended ride for the Boogieman, as the veteran guard delayed his $2 million payment of his $7.7 million non-guaranteed contract for the 2019-20 NBA season from June 30 to July 10.

Those 10 days are invaluable to the organization at this point, considering that they could trade his salary before it's due or pay him the $2 million outright and gaining a near $5.7 million in cap space once he retires, as many expect he will.

Yet re-signing Cousins would mean paying more than the $5.7 million for the mid-level exception (a slight increase from the $5.3 million he signed for last season due to an expanding salary cap). The Warriors would have to give Cousins a 20% raise of his 2018-19 salary; by the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement rules, putting his compensation at a beefy $6.36 million for one year.

ESPN's Adrian Wojnarowski suggested there is no market for him, not even at the mid-level. Yet unlike the other 29 teams, the Warriors don't have the luxury of offering a veteran's minimum contract for a player they just had on their roster last season.

Cousins is a clear upgrade (even if he's at less than 100%) from Damian Jones, who is still playing in the Summer League, despite being named the starter last season while Cousins recovered from a torn Achilles tendon.

He is more versatile than Kevon Looney, who the Warriors brought back on a bargain three-year, $15 million deal on Monday.

However, he is not worth handicapping an already luxury-laden organization into further salary complications, as he would leave the team with close to $1 million left for five other bodies to fill in the roster.

To summarize: Is it possible? Yes. Is it worth a shot? No.

There is a reason why Cousins hasn't driven the market wild during this free agency. Despite showing flashes of brilliance during his 30 regular season games and coming up big in a few postseason games, Boogie has looked like a shell of his former self, unable to get enough lift on his body and looking a couple of steps too slow when attacking the basket.

Achilles injuries have been known to do a number on players and they have surely done so with Cousins, who may still fully recover from it, but likely never as the dominant version of himself that put him among the highest-usage players for five straight seasons.

The Warriors could benefit by using whatever is left of their cap space to sign capable players that can be a plug-and-play, as they have yet to officially sign their rookie selections Jordan Poole, Eric Paschall and Alen Smailagic, who is likely bound for another year with the Santa Cruz Warriors in the G League.

As much as Cousins would give the team a scoring presence in the absence of Klay Thompson and Kevin Durant, doing so at the cost of limiting Kevon Looney's minutes and impeding the development of Damian Jones would sour the development process that the organization so keenly has looked to inspire.

Should Golden State revisit this scenario somewhere down the line if Cousins calls again, they should be smart enough to graciously say “thanks, but no thanks.”