What Realistically can be done to improve?
- Thread starter Jerichoholic
- Start date
I don't think Malone is or will tank but I do think he is following your advice and playing his best? players first and/or most. Vasquez is abetter player for the team and Malone will continue playing him. He will follow the same advice with Ben who will not blossom fast enough to stay in the starting lineup. Same with the 3 and 4 positions. The reward for tanking is so small that I can't understand anyone advocating it. For me, if
I can't root for my team to win, why have a team?
I can't root for my team to win, why have a team?
i can't tell you with any specificity in the present moment, but once the season's concluded, i can give you pretty exact odds, considering just how stacked the upcoming draft really is. if the kings land in the top-5, which isn't much of a long shot considering how terrible this roster is, they've got a great chance of drafting an impact player. that is no "small benefit." it simply isn't...
you've got it backwards, friend: the "price you pay" for winning now is huge compared to the benefit of drafting well, which can transform a franchise's future for a decade. all winning now does is keep the wheels spinning in no particular direction. a series of 35-40 win seasons wouldn't do this team any good, as they would continue to miss the playoffs in a brutally tough western conference, and also fail to pick high enough in the draft to grab a transformative player...
beyond that, boogie's not hanging around these parts forever, not if the new regime fails to build around him. that is the ultimate "price you pay," watching the only legitimate superstar level talent this franchise has seen since chris webber walk out the door because of an ill-conceived rebuild. this roster is going nowhere as constructed, and last i checked, big time free agents aren't knocking down the kings door, nor are they clamoring to get traded to sacramento. so you put yourself in a position to draft well: throw the unpolished ben mclemore into the starting unit, trade your veteran dead weight for picks/prospects, play the occasional small ball lineup, and hope for the best come draft day 2014...
it's not a foolproof plan, but there is no foolproof plan for an undesirable small market franchise expecting it's eighth straight losing season. that said, this upcoming draft represents the kings best chances to rebuild in an immediate manner that will satisfy demarcus cousins' needs as a competitor who wants to sniff the playoffs as soon as possible. it is, quite simply, much less likely to happen via trades or free agency...
you've got it backwards, friend: the "price you pay" for winning now is huge compared to the benefit of drafting well, which can transform a franchise's future for a decade. all winning now does is keep the wheels spinning in no particular direction. a series of 35-40 win seasons wouldn't do this team any good, as they would continue to miss the playoffs in a brutally tough western conference, and also fail to pick high enough in the draft to grab a transformative player...
beyond that, boogie's not hanging around these parts forever, not if the new regime fails to build around him. that is the ultimate "price you pay," watching the only legitimate superstar level talent this franchise has seen since chris webber walk out the door because of an ill-conceived rebuild. this roster is going nowhere as constructed, and last i checked, big time free agents aren't knocking down the kings door, nor are they clamoring to get traded to sacramento. so you put yourself in a position to draft well: throw the unpolished ben mclemore into the starting unit, trade your veteran dead weight for picks/prospects, play the occasional small ball lineup, and hope for the best come draft day 2014...
it's not a foolproof plan, but there is no foolproof plan for an undesirable small market franchise expecting it's eighth straight losing season. that said, this upcoming draft represents the kings best chances to rebuild in an immediate manner that will satisfy demarcus cousins' needs as a competitor who wants to sniff the playoffs as soon as possible. it is, quite simply, much less likely to happen via trades or free agency...
It's not about "holding out hope on the season." It's about instilling a plan, a vision, a method to the madness. A huge part of that involves Ben McLemore. He needs to be on the court with someone who will pass the ball, who will initiate the offense, who will put himself second. None of those apply to IT - and they don't need to when he's playing as the spark off the bench, the "Mighty Mouse" persona who is expected to come in and help save the day.
It's not about winning now. It's about building the foundation for winning in the future. The first step in that regard absolutely has to be establishing a philosophy that all the players buy into, including the knowledge they will get treated fairly, they will know their roles and they will be rewarded for their efforts.
Kings fans need to continue to look at the big picture and quit worrying about whether or not IT starts. It's not about who starts anyway. It's about who's on the court when they need to be. And IT needs to be on the court with the second unit. Either that or we just put some chairs out there and let the opposing team totally run roughshod over us when we have to give the starters a breather. We don't have enough "best players" to be able to compete for 48 minutes without the judicious balance Malone is already showing he will use.
It's not about winning now. It's about building the foundation for winning in the future. The first step in that regard absolutely has to be establishing a philosophy that all the players buy into, including the knowledge they will get treated fairly, they will know their roles and they will be rewarded for their efforts.
Kings fans need to continue to look at the big picture and quit worrying about whether or not IT starts. It's not about who starts anyway. It's about who's on the court when they need to be. And IT needs to be on the court with the second unit. Either that or we just put some chairs out there and let the opposing team totally run roughshod over us when we have to give the starters a breather. We don't have enough "best players" to be able to compete for 48 minutes without the judicious balance Malone is already showing he will use.
This is what I hate the most about the whole tanking argument...
I will always root for the Kings to win. Always, always, always. I don't believe in rooting for anything less. I don't think we're tanking this year. Vivek, Malone et all have made it abundantly clear that it's not about wins this year. It's about changing the culture, establishing a team mentality and instilling in all our players the knowledge that if they do not buy into the system they will not play.
We're doing things right. If some have to call it tanking, that's on them. I prefer to think of it as doing the best with what we have - not only for today, but for all the tomorrows. I've enjoyed watching the games this season much more than last because there's hope, there's reason and there's logic. We may not be very good, and that cannot be helped right now, but at least we aren't pathetic. We have a coach, we have a developing superstar and we have a future. That's enough for me right now - I refuse to call it tanking. You might try looking at it that way and don't let the "tanking" terminology get you down.
I will always root for the Kings to win. Always, always, always. I don't believe in rooting for anything less. I don't think we're tanking this year. Vivek, Malone et all have made it abundantly clear that it's not about wins this year. It's about changing the culture, establishing a team mentality and instilling in all our players the knowledge that if they do not buy into the system they will not play.
We're doing things right. If some have to call it tanking, that's on them. I prefer to think of it as doing the best with what we have - not only for today, but for all the tomorrows. I've enjoyed watching the games this season much more than last because there's hope, there's reason and there's logic. We may not be very good, and that cannot be helped right now, but at least we aren't pathetic. We have a coach, we have a developing superstar and we have a future. That's enough for me right now - I refuse to call it tanking. You might try looking at it that way and don't let the "tanking" terminology get you down.
You make a compelling argument, but not for tanking. But right away you lose with me. You mention 35 to 40 wins ........ that does it for me, especially in a year like this where we will be lucky to win 25. I'd love it.
As for Cousuns as a cost of winning those games, I doubt it. And if it was true, you can have tour Cousins. In my mind quite thr opposite could likely be true, that Cousins would as he should get sick of a team tanking and get the flock out of here. No, tanking is an idle, time filling but counter-productive conversation for TDOL (L for losing). We have many times over the years been in this boat and heard the conversation and nothing has ever come of it. Certainly was not a major arguing factor for keeping the Kings in Sacramento. In your comment above you put a number of adjectives in front o "Sacramento" that mean nothing to me. This is my town and my team and I would be ashamed if a member of our team heard me even mention the word or be seen as rooting for a loss. With kings it has never been necessary anyway.
But we may go our different ways, but I suspect we and the Kings will wind up in the same place. Now I'm exhausted and have used up all my posting words for a week and a half.
As for Cousuns as a cost of winning those games, I doubt it. And if it was true, you can have tour Cousins. In my mind quite thr opposite could likely be true, that Cousins would as he should get sick of a team tanking and get the flock out of here. No, tanking is an idle, time filling but counter-productive conversation for TDOL (L for losing). We have many times over the years been in this boat and heard the conversation and nothing has ever come of it. Certainly was not a major arguing factor for keeping the Kings in Sacramento. In your comment above you put a number of adjectives in front o "Sacramento" that mean nothing to me. This is my town and my team and I would be ashamed if a member of our team heard me even mention the word or be seen as rooting for a loss. With kings it has never been necessary anyway.
But we may go our different ways, but I suspect we and the Kings will wind up in the same place. Now I'm exhausted and have used up all my posting words for a week and a half.
This is what I hate the most about the whole tanking argument...
I will always root for the Kings to win. Always, always, always. I don't believe in rooting for anything less. I don't think we're tanking this year. Vivek, Malone et all have made it abundantly clear that it's not about wins this year. It's about changing the culture, establishing a team mentality and instilling in all our players the knowledge that if they do not buy into the system they will not play.
We're doing things right. If some have to call it tanking, that's on them. I prefer to think of it as doing the best with what we have - not only for today, but for all the tomorrows. I've enjoyed watching the games this season much more than last because there's hope, there's reason and there's logic. We may not be very good, and that cannot be helped right now, but at least we aren't pathetic. We have a coach, we have a developing superstar and we have a future. That's enough for me right now - I refuse to call it tanking. You might try looking at it that way and don't let the "tanking" terminology get you down.
I will always root for the Kings to win. Always, always, always. I don't believe in rooting for anything less. I don't think we're tanking this year. Vivek, Malone et all have made it abundantly clear that it's not about wins this year. It's about changing the culture, establishing a team mentality and instilling in all our players the knowledge that if they do not buy into the system they will not play.
We're doing things right. If some have to call it tanking, that's on them. I prefer to think of it as doing the best with what we have - not only for today, but for all the tomorrows. I've enjoyed watching the games this season much more than last because there's hope, there's reason and there's logic. We may not be very good, and that cannot be helped right now, but at least we aren't pathetic. We have a coach, we have a developing superstar and we have a future. That's enough for me right now - I refuse to call it tanking. You might try looking at it that way and don't let the "tanking" terminology get you down.
A huge part of why we have been so bad this season is because:
- D'Allesandro grossly overestimated his ability to attract free agents to Sacramento.
- D'Allesandro grossly overestimated his ability to find agreeable trade partners.
- D'Allesandro and Malone miscalculated how quickly they could turn the culture around on this team.
- Their one big culture changing/impact free agent "get" (Landry) hasn't played a game yet this season, and isn't expected to play until the All-Star break.
I expect, having experienced a full season and offseason of how difficult it is to actually get talent to Sacramento, that D'Allesandro and Ranadive will be better prepared next season, which should yield more positive results. At least, that is the hope. But, just because their first at bat was a groundout, doesn't mean it was tanking.
My objections to the whole "pie in the sky," "future superstar" plan have always been the same: unlike, say bajaden, I take a dim personal view of amateur sports, and so I don't really watch any college sports, except for WCBB (and, if the WNBA season ran concurrent to the WCBB season, I wouldn't watch that, either). As a result, I am grossly uninformed about the alleged talent of these one-and-done "future superstars," but tend to be skeptical about their likelihood to necessarily become superstars at the NBA level.
Even if this draft is deep like they say it is - and it might be - even that doesn't mean that all of these kids are going to be beasting against pros like they are against college players. We've had deep drafts before: 2003 was a deep draft, lots of quality players, and the draft with the most current or former All-Stars (7) still playing, but only two guys (maybe three, depending on whom you ask) that would be considered impact players. 1999 was also another surprisingly deep draft, although I can't remember whether it was thought such at the time, but no real impact players were to be had; it was a great year to have a lottery pick, if you needed a third option, though. Even 1998, which my memory tells me was a draft talked about the way that this one was talked about, was disappointing: Bibby, LaFrentz, Jamison, Carter and Pierce were all thought of as going to come into the league and be stars for years, and really only Pierce did, although Carter was good for a couple of years (until he left Toronto). The best player to come out of that draft (Nowitzki) was virtually unknown on draft night.
Even the vaunted 1996 draft, which some people have considered the best draft of the lottery era - it's certainly in the top 3 - really only had three impact players (maybe four, depending on what criteria for "impact player" you're working from). And so, I find myself psychologically incapable of rooting for ping pong balls, in the hope that we might get the next big thing. I find that I am very much a "bird in the hand" type of guy, in that respect. I would rather see our GM move assets to get a player that we already know can play at the NBA level, than go all-in to try and draft a guy who might be the next Kevin Durant, or might be the next Mike Dunleavy. Or, even worse, the next Ed O'Bannon.
Even if this draft is deep like they say it is - and it might be - even that doesn't mean that all of these kids are going to be beasting against pros like they are against college players. We've had deep drafts before: 2003 was a deep draft, lots of quality players, and the draft with the most current or former All-Stars (7) still playing, but only two guys (maybe three, depending on whom you ask) that would be considered impact players. 1999 was also another surprisingly deep draft, although I can't remember whether it was thought such at the time, but no real impact players were to be had; it was a great year to have a lottery pick, if you needed a third option, though. Even 1998, which my memory tells me was a draft talked about the way that this one was talked about, was disappointing: Bibby, LaFrentz, Jamison, Carter and Pierce were all thought of as going to come into the league and be stars for years, and really only Pierce did, although Carter was good for a couple of years (until he left Toronto). The best player to come out of that draft (Nowitzki) was virtually unknown on draft night.
Even the vaunted 1996 draft, which some people have considered the best draft of the lottery era - it's certainly in the top 3 - really only had three impact players (maybe four, depending on what criteria for "impact player" you're working from). And so, I find myself psychologically incapable of rooting for ping pong balls, in the hope that we might get the next big thing. I find that I am very much a "bird in the hand" type of guy, in that respect. I would rather see our GM move assets to get a player that we already know can play at the NBA level, than go all-in to try and draft a guy who might be the next Kevin Durant, or might be the next Mike Dunleavy. Or, even worse, the next Ed O'Bannon.
you've repeatedly objected to the idea that it's worth it to strategically position oneself for a high draft pick this upcoming offseason. it's certainly a worthy argument to make, except that i find the alternative you present to be horribly wanting. what "assets" is d'allesandro going to move, exactly, in order to bring back the quality of talent demarcus cousins needs to be surrounded with?
if the kings are in a position to draft jabari parker, and he busts despite a world of ringing endorsements from every scout across the country, are the kings seriously any worse off than if they somehow managed to trade their spare parts for... i dunno, the overrated and inefficient, but "proven," rudy gay, with his ball and chain of a contract?
under the new cba, a potential impact player on a rookie contact is considerably more valuable than an overpaid veteran. and if a player like jabari parker, with great physicality, an nba-ready body, and a paul pierce-like skill set, does manage to succeed in a kings uni? well, it only cost you wins in a season in which the majority of your roster had no future in sacramento, anyway. forward-looking. that's the name of the game. hence the trade that sent a veteran, defensive-minded roleplayer to minnesota for a young, unproven player like derrick williams...
if the kings are in a position to draft jabari parker, and he busts despite a world of ringing endorsements from every scout across the country, are the kings seriously any worse off than if they somehow managed to trade their spare parts for... i dunno, the overrated and inefficient, but "proven," rudy gay, with his ball and chain of a contract?
under the new cba, a potential impact player on a rookie contact is considerably more valuable than an overpaid veteran. and if a player like jabari parker, with great physicality, an nba-ready body, and a paul pierce-like skill set, does manage to succeed in a kings uni? well, it only cost you wins in a season in which the majority of your roster had no future in sacramento, anyway. forward-looking. that's the name of the game. hence the trade that sent a veteran, defensive-minded roleplayer to minnesota for a young, unproven player like derrick williams...
that's fair, but you're still not very forthcoming about what you believe to be a more appropriate strategy than "tanking." i don't have the slightest notion of how Mr. Slim Citrus believes this roster will improve before demarcus cousins gets antsy enough for a playoff appearance to skip town. DMC is being patient with the new regime's growing pains, but after a few years of maloofery, i can't imagine he'll want to stick around past his contract extension if the team doesn't start winning soon. drafting well in 2014 could go a long way towards ensuring future victories, and ensuring cousins' future in sacramento. in a sport where only five players step onto the court for a single team at any given time, one talented young player can make tremendous difference, even if that player only represents the promise of talent...
i'd assume that you'd prefer to see the kings package their first rounder with other assets in order to bring back a quality veteran talent, but the unfortunate reality of past maloofery renders the kings' 2014 first rounder untradable, due to restrictions brought about by the j.j. hickson trade a couple years back. you've made a point of criticizing the idea that a high pick in a stacked 2014 draft class isn't worth the strategy of allowing losses to pile up this season, but where else do you see viable methods with which to improve this team? from within? who truly stands out, apart from cousins, thomas, mclemore, and possibly vasquez? are they enough? and what will the rest of these kings fetch on the trade block? could it be enough? what 2014 or 2015 free agent is likely to sign here? would that be enough? i'd like to know what you think this new regime should do, and i'm speaking honestly...
i'm familiar enough with your posting history over the years to recognize that you prize professional basketball above all other sports, and are not particularly inclined to give your attention to collegiate sports, even ncaa basketball. but nba players come from somewhere. most of them are drafted out of college. the best of them tend to be lottery selections. with scant other options at the kings' disposal to acquire top shelf talent, wouldn't it seem wise to at least properly scout the upcoming draft, to see what all the fuss is about? or are you too principled for that?
i'd assume that you'd prefer to see the kings package their first rounder with other assets in order to bring back a quality veteran talent, but the unfortunate reality of past maloofery renders the kings' 2014 first rounder untradable, due to restrictions brought about by the j.j. hickson trade a couple years back. you've made a point of criticizing the idea that a high pick in a stacked 2014 draft class isn't worth the strategy of allowing losses to pile up this season, but where else do you see viable methods with which to improve this team? from within? who truly stands out, apart from cousins, thomas, mclemore, and possibly vasquez? are they enough? and what will the rest of these kings fetch on the trade block? could it be enough? what 2014 or 2015 free agent is likely to sign here? would that be enough? i'd like to know what you think this new regime should do, and i'm speaking honestly...
i'm familiar enough with your posting history over the years to recognize that you prize professional basketball above all other sports, and are not particularly inclined to give your attention to collegiate sports, even ncaa basketball. but nba players come from somewhere. most of them are drafted out of college. the best of them tend to be lottery selections. with scant other options at the kings' disposal to acquire top shelf talent, wouldn't it seem wise to at least properly scout the upcoming draft, to see what all the fuss is about? or are you too principled for that?
Oh, if only you were right and it was that simple. I care not about the last 8 years or the next 8 years, this is the year my season tickets are for. I'd much rather have a 35 win season than a 25 win season. You don't have to worry about any draft, that's being taken care of for you and me. Possibly just a difference of opinion.
I wonder, too. I have been a season ticket for a long time, since the beginning. It does make difference for me. It's not at all a fun and games thing for me, the "tanking" business, and, as anyone can tell, even the "tanking" conversation on here bugs the hell out of me. But I keep coming back. And I do want the Kings to win right now and every night.
As I've said before, I live in Saramento, I've always lived in Sacramento, I bought season tickets in 1985 because the team came to Sacramento and I could, I enjoy watching the games at "Arco", I don't care about the draft until the season is over, I have little interest in being the coach or GM, and I continue to look forward to the day that Fredette and
Thornton are gone even if for two old sway-backed horses. I didn't say I wasn't emotionally involved.
As I've said before, I live in Saramento, I've always lived in Sacramento, I bought season tickets in 1985 because the team came to Sacramento and I could, I enjoy watching the games at "Arco", I don't care about the draft until the season is over, I have little interest in being the coach or GM, and I continue to look forward to the day that Fredette and
Thornton are gone even if for two old sway-backed horses. I didn't say I wasn't emotionally involved.
First let me start where you ended. No one, and I mean no one ever thought that Durant would end up being the next Mike Dunleavy. At least no one with any ability to judge talent. I'll admit that Durant ended up being better than I thought he would be, but I never doubted he would be a very good player. I don't expect you to sit and watch college games the way that I do. Thus, I feel some responsibility to impart some of what I see, by posting on this forum, and you or anyone else can take it for what you pay for it.
While the 1996 draft is noted for being one of the deepest overall with talent from top to bottom, it isn't noted for being top heavy with sure fire stars, or potential superstars. As a matter of fact, a lot of the stars of that draft were almost unknowns to the general public. Players like Peja, Kobe, and Nash, weren't big names back then. Iverson and Camby were the two big names along with Marbury, Abdur Rahim, and Antoine Walker.
Two of the best drafts in my opinion came back to back in 2003 and 2004. The 2003 draft included such notables as Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Kaman. Later in that same draft came David West, Kirk Hinrich, Kendrick Perkins, Josh Howard, Nick Collison, and Carlos Delfino. The one major bust in that draft was Darko Milicic.
The 2004 draft was equally loaded with Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor, Ben Gordon, Delvin Harris, Luol Deng, Andre Iguodala, Kris Humphries, Al Jefferson, Kevin Martin, Dorell Wright, Josh Smith, Anderson Varejao, and Tony Allen. All drafts are not created equal. There are very good ones, where if you do your homework, you'll get a good player, and possibly a star. Then there are drafts where the talent level is so bad that players that would at the bottom of the first round or even in the top of the second round in the 2004 draft, are in the top ten of their current draft.
This next draft is comparable, at least on paper, to the 2003/2004 drafts. In other words, the chance of getting a franchise changer is far better than in most years. So that being said, this is a draft that would reward you for having a high pick. lest we forget, all the players playing in the NBA, except for a few, came into the league through the draft. So to discard the draft as some irrelevant event that occurs once a year is fool hardy. It can, if your smart and put in the work, become an important way to not only build your franchise, but maintain it.
While the 1996 draft is noted for being one of the deepest overall with talent from top to bottom, it isn't noted for being top heavy with sure fire stars, or potential superstars. As a matter of fact, a lot of the stars of that draft were almost unknowns to the general public. Players like Peja, Kobe, and Nash, weren't big names back then. Iverson and Camby were the two big names along with Marbury, Abdur Rahim, and Antoine Walker.
Two of the best drafts in my opinion came back to back in 2003 and 2004. The 2003 draft included such notables as Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Kaman. Later in that same draft came David West, Kirk Hinrich, Kendrick Perkins, Josh Howard, Nick Collison, and Carlos Delfino. The one major bust in that draft was Darko Milicic.
The 2004 draft was equally loaded with Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor, Ben Gordon, Delvin Harris, Luol Deng, Andre Iguodala, Kris Humphries, Al Jefferson, Kevin Martin, Dorell Wright, Josh Smith, Anderson Varejao, and Tony Allen. All drafts are not created equal. There are very good ones, where if you do your homework, you'll get a good player, and possibly a star. Then there are drafts where the talent level is so bad that players that would at the bottom of the first round or even in the top of the second round in the 2004 draft, are in the top ten of their current draft.
This next draft is comparable, at least on paper, to the 2003/2004 drafts. In other words, the chance of getting a franchise changer is far better than in most years. So that being said, this is a draft that would reward you for having a high pick. lest we forget, all the players playing in the NBA, except for a few, came into the league through the draft. So to discard the draft as some irrelevant event that occurs once a year is fool hardy. It can, if your smart and put in the work, become an important way to not only build your franchise, but maintain it.
I had season tickets for many years and gave them up because the team was not interesting. As you get older your patience tends to wain also has how long must we wait for a decent team? I will guarantee pshn84 that the team next year will be a hoot to watch. You will be very happy for this one last bad year. Meanwhile you can watch Williams and McLemore evolve. Those two plus Cuz should be fun. You are getting to watch one of the best a most diversely skilled big men to play NBA basketball.
We may be working with differing values of "franchise changer." I see two in 2003, one in 2004. There's no question that those were talented drafts, and they had lots of guys that are good third-option players (and even a few second-option players), but I still only see three guys in the two drafts combined, that I would be willing to flush the whole thing down the toilet to try and get. And, as a fan, given how many times we've been burned in the lottery (worst record in the league, only to get the #4 pick?) I still find myself incapable of rooting for ping pong balls.
As pshn80 put it, I'll give a **** about the draft when the season is over.
As pshn80 put it, I'll give a **** about the draft when the season is over.
Give me your best shot: where would Pervis Ellison be drafted in this up coming draft? Or Joe Kleine? It's not a silly question as I think it will give a clearer view of what this upcoming draft is like.
It's not a silly question as I think it will give a clearer view of what this upcoming draft is like.