With the current odds the third seed in the lottery has 52.1% chance for a top 4 pick. Tenth seed has 13,9% chance for a top 4 pick and a 86,9% chance for 10th or lower. Thats quite significant and thats the difference between desperately chasing the play in and retooling for the future and playing the young guys. If you do it the whole year you could even have a chance to even better odds by being 2nd or 1st or if you get more wins then atleast you apparrently have some good young guys and bunch of additional draft capital
Blow It Up
- Thread starter SLAB
- Start date
Having candle-night vigils praying over getting lucky in the lottery isn't a strategy. It's a joke. I'm not against getting a couple of 1st in trade deals, but should not be the center piece of any legitimate strategy, but more like the icing on the cake. Robinson and Duncan are prehistoric history now, what with the change in lottery odds. If you want to pray, start praying about getting another Joker with a 2nd round pick.
Right. Because we know this expensive core is basically tapped out at like a 35-39 win team. Which is literally just death in the NBA and the absolute nut low position to be in as a franchise.
Prioritizing Monte's prospects shows a direction of the franchise. Not that we're actively trying to throw games, but hey, we're building this thing for 2 years down the line and we're going to try to find a Draymond/Jokic/Brogdon type that can drastically upshift the direction of the franchise.
Prioritizing Monte's prospects shows a direction of the franchise. Not that we're actively trying to throw games, but hey, we're building this thing for 2 years down the line and we're going to try to find a Draymond/Jokic/Brogdon type that can drastically upshift the direction of the franchise.
Another way of putting this is that you can have the worst record in the league and still have a 48% chance of getting the #5 pick. So, no matter how bad you are, you’re still flipping a coin to get one of the cherry lottery picks. Is guaranteeing a top 7 or so pick with outside odds of getting to the top 3 worth it? Maybe. But you’re also seriously running the risk of tanking your talent down to zero, getting the #5 pick in a 4 person draft, and not just being a treadmill 30 win team but a treadmill 15 win team
The OKC approach actually hedges against this. They’re not outright tanking since they are picking up legit talent (Shai, Dort). Having multiple lotto tickets is good and they’re not relying on their own picks hitting
The OKC approach actually hedges against this. They’re not outright tanking since they are picking up legit talent (Shai, Dort). Having multiple lotto tickets is good and they’re not relying on their own picks hitting
I'm extremely happy with Mitchell, but look at the quality of the prospects ahead of him that are absolutely thriving: Mobley at 3, Barnes at 4, Giddey at 6, even Franz at 8 with his positional value. It doesn't have to be winning the lottery to find those star-caliber talents. All those guys look like foundational pieces moving forward and being in the top 5-6 picks gives you a much better chance of actually finding upper-tier starters/star players than the back end of the lottery does. Monte has hit it out of the park with Mitchell/Hali for where they were drafted, but what if we had the 3rd pick in the last 2 drafts? How excited would we be for a Melo/Mobley core?
They cut to the bench at one point when the Lakers first started their run but the game was still within single digits. The look on Fox's face told the whole story. He didn't even look like he was mentally in the building.
Yep I'd much rather watch terrible basketball with some hope for the future, rather than slightly less terrible basketball with no hope.
Yep I'd much rather watch terrible basketball with some hope for the future, rather than slightly less terrible basketball with no hope.
There's a huge leadership void. And a point on body language - Did anyone else notice the juxtaposition of Buddy Hield & Richaun Holmes body language after the game? Hield was smiling & laughing w/ A-Davis after the game, along with Thompson while Holmes was serious and had a look of "we're better than this, not satisfied" as he walked off the court. The camera went to both back 2 back. People might think, "Oh players can't smile at each other after a game" ... And actually - No. If you're a Kings player and know you just played a terrible half, got blown out at home, you wouldn't immediately have a big grin on your face after a game talking to the opposing team's player. It's 1 thing if it was a quick 2 second smile from something Davis said, but Hield was smiling ear to ear. That's not a natural reaction after a loss for a guy that cares about winning games and building a winning culture, immediately after a game.
Sounds harsh but I think guys like Hield and Fox are losing players. Fox for different reasons, but his body language is terrible too. One point - He constantly whines to the ref after turning the ball over, it's so predictable and most of the time he's late getting back on defense as a result. The epitome of a loser mentality to let a previous play affect the next play. Plays like that led to a downward spiral.
Not to mention every time the opposing team gets hot - I hate how the Kings immediately look to the bench as if they are waiting for a timeout to be called ... Keep on playing! Rally your team instead of looking to the bench to bail you out when the other team gets hot. Even if it's a 2 second glare I notice it - and again, it's a loser mentality because it's 2 seconds a player loses inbounding the ball or getting ahead of the defense. Again it boils down to letting the previous play affect the next play - Which to reiterate, is a part of a losing culture.
How is that corrected? By shipping the guys with that losing mentality out.
Sounds harsh but I think guys like Hield and Fox are losing players. Fox for different reasons, but his body language is terrible too. One point - He constantly whines to the ref after turning the ball over, it's so predictable and most of the time he's late getting back on defense as a result. The epitome of a loser mentality to let a previous play affect the next play. Plays like that led to a downward spiral.
Not to mention every time the opposing team gets hot - I hate how the Kings immediately look to the bench as if they are waiting for a timeout to be called ... Keep on playing! Rally your team instead of looking to the bench to bail you out when the other team gets hot. Even if it's a 2 second glare I notice it - and again, it's a loser mentality because it's 2 seconds a player loses inbounding the ball or getting ahead of the defense. Again it boils down to letting the previous play affect the next play - Which to reiterate, is a part of a losing culture.
How is that corrected? By shipping the guys with that losing mentality out.
Say you get an All Star HOFer-ability center by getting the number 1 pick in the draft. Yippee! We did it! We got the guy we need! Unfortunately, he's an injury ridden mess. Then you get an All Star unicorn point guard. Fantastic! NBA Championship here we come! Unfortunately, the unicorn point guard is a mental case. Philly had much better odds than we would have in the lottery and that's what it got them after several years. Forget the burn it to the ground go with first rounders approach. First rounders should be the complementary piece to what the Kings get in trades, not the center piece.
Fox definitely still has value. Is it the same value as last season when he was averaging 5 more ppg on 47% from the field and 32% from 3 (vs 43% and 26% this season) and was the best guard finisher in the paint and one of the top 4th quarter scorers in the league? I don't know that it is.
Here's why Barnes value matters. Because he'll be a 30 FA after next season. I'm not pointing at you specifically but Kings fans (especially on this board) generally complain loudly every time the Kings lose an "asset" for nothing. How many times have we discussed Bogi signing with the Hawks with many people pointing to it as a failure by McNair. Do you see the Kings re-signing HB? I don't. So why wait to trade him? His value will only drop as he gets closer to free agency, first over the summer and then at next year's trade deadline.
But you may be misunderstanding what I said. By not having value to a rebuilding team I mean that it makes little sense for the Kings to hang on to him if they decide to trade Fox and go with a youth movement. So we may actually agree on that point. I don't know.
I mean scrappy from a management perspective, not a team/player perspective. They were forced into that talent acquisition pathway but yes, they did a decent job acquiring talent under the circumstances. Some bad contracts etc but a decent job by Marks. Still that team won (I believe) 40 games at its best with not a lot of ceiling left before they signed Durant and Irving.
If that's loserville I don't know what that makes Sacramento. The Thunder are currently 1 game behind the Kings with a massively more promising future.
Here's why Barnes value matters. Because he'll be a 30 FA after next season. I'm not pointing at you specifically but Kings fans (especially on this board) generally complain loudly every time the Kings lose an "asset" for nothing. How many times have we discussed Bogi signing with the Hawks with many people pointing to it as a failure by McNair. Do you see the Kings re-signing HB? I don't. So why wait to trade him? His value will only drop as he gets closer to free agency, first over the summer and then at next year's trade deadline.
But you may be misunderstanding what I said. By not having value to a rebuilding team I mean that it makes little sense for the Kings to hang on to him if they decide to trade Fox and go with a youth movement. So we may actually agree on that point. I don't know.
I mean scrappy from a management perspective, not a team/player perspective. They were forced into that talent acquisition pathway but yes, they did a decent job acquiring talent under the circumstances. Some bad contracts etc but a decent job by Marks. Still that team won (I believe) 40 games at its best with not a lot of ceiling left before they signed Durant and Irving.
If that's loserville I don't know what that makes Sacramento. The Thunder are currently 1 game behind the Kings with a massively more promising future.
The odds are still very clear that its much more beneficial to be top 3 entering the lottery compared to 9-12th range and there is no question about it. Especially considering the data that its much more likely to draft top level talent in the top of the draft compared to 9-12th range. The difference is statistically very big.
I would very much like the OKC approach where we collect as much future draft capital as possible by trading away our vets and/or taking in some salary dumps while playing the young guys and giving us the best possible odds to get a high draft pick.
This Philly/process discussion has been had here multiple times so I dont want to go too much into it. They had huge amount of draft capital, so much that they could afford to miss on some picks, have horrible front office come and spend it all very badly and they are still a lock for a playoff team year after year. If you want to compare it to the Kings "process" of chasing the 8th-10th seed and not getting any additional draft capital, its hard to say that we have made the right choise by doing what we have done.
I think what the people here are saying is that we lack talent, especially top level talent. We arent a good role player away to be a team thats almost a sure playoff team year after year. We have bunch of role players that could be role players on playoff teams: Barnes, Hield, Haliburton, Holmes and Mitchell all could play big minutes for a good team. We lack the top level talent that impacts the game a lot. We lack players that can dramatically raise the ceiling and the floor on a team.
The best way for a small market team is to get that talent via draft. Data strongly indicates that in order to do that you should position yourself as close to the top of the draft as you can. With rebuilding thats just a one thing that will happen. You should also accumulate additional draft capital in order to increase the odds to draft either a top level talent or a young cost controlled role player.
And who is to say you can't get that kind of talent for Fox? Maybe there's a team out there that needs a point guard much more than their very good shooting guard currently on their roster? As examples, Anthony Edwards or Jalen Brown. You have to ask yourself: If Monte can find good value in the draft pool, is there any reason he can't find value in the NBA pool? Leaving aside the above examples, McNair should be focused on getting young NBA or G-league talent (less than 25 years old) that for whatever reason doesn't fit or is redundant or is undervalued on the team on which they currently reside (or maybe the team is just desperate for Fox or Barnes as their missing piece). Then you don't have to wait for 4-5 years before they know how to play basketball because when you purchase them you purchase some experience in the NBA. Then you have some guys who are hungry with chips on their shoulders. Then you don't have prima donnas who think the world is owed to them, but instead are willing to do anything you ask of them in order to make their way in the NBA. Then you don't have to pray that you luck out in the lottery with just the right player who might or might not get you to the playoffs three or four or five years from now.
The Sixers were a #1 seed last year. The Kings are about to set a record for futility in terms of consecutive seasons missing the playoffs.
But let's flip the conversation around. Can you name a mediocre, end of the lottery small market team that rebuilt on the fly and became a perennial playoff contender? I'm asking legitimately. Because the only one that comes to mind for me is the 1999 Sacramento Kings.
But unless Monte makes a Richmond for Webber level deal for Fox, signs a Vlade level talent in free agency and drafts two mid and late lottery rookies the level of JWill and Peja (who was actually drafted in 96 of course) I don't know that he can replicate that type of turnaround.
I can name a LOT of franchises that were turned around by one or more top 3 or top 5 draft picks. I can literally only think of that Kings team as one that became a legit contender by retooling a mediocre roster. I suppose you could name the Suns with CP3 but Ayton (though not the main driver) was a #1 overall pick. Can you think of a team that went from where this Kings team is now to a perennial playoff team or even a champion?
But let's flip the conversation around. Can you name a mediocre, end of the lottery small market team that rebuilt on the fly and became a perennial playoff contender? I'm asking legitimately. Because the only one that comes to mind for me is the 1999 Sacramento Kings.
But unless Monte makes a Richmond for Webber level deal for Fox, signs a Vlade level talent in free agency and drafts two mid and late lottery rookies the level of JWill and Peja (who was actually drafted in 96 of course) I don't know that he can replicate that type of turnaround.
I can name a LOT of franchises that were turned around by one or more top 3 or top 5 draft picks. I can literally only think of that Kings team as one that became a legit contender by retooling a mediocre roster. I suppose you could name the Suns with CP3 but Ayton (though not the main driver) was a #1 overall pick. Can you think of a team that went from where this Kings team is now to a perennial playoff team or even a champion?
The Suns have honestly been built through really strong drafts the last few years. That team doesn't go without Ayton/Bridges and Cam Johnson providing an awesome supporting cast around CP3 and Booker. Take those 3 away and the Suns aren't near the same level of team they've been the last year and a half, even with CP3 on board.
Yeah, a bit of an in between given that Blake WAS a #1 overall pick, but I think that qualifies as another example. But the larger takeaway from that retooling is that if you have a chance to get CP3 on a bargain trade you always take it. I mean I dislike him as a player but Paul has elevated every franchise he's been a part of. He made the Thunder competitive and they basically took him on as a bad contract at that point. Kind of amazing.
I'm not sure that's true. Prior to Durant and Irving they made the playoffs twice, once with a losing record (35-37) and once at 42-40 and failed to win a playoff series either time. But yes, I would take a young, middling playoff team that plays hard over what the Kings currently are.
Can McNair build that type of team on the fly with the pieces we have? I guess we'll see because it sure seems like Vivek is dead set against a full rebuild.
Can McNair build that type of team on the fly with the pieces we have? I guess we'll see because it sure seems like Vivek is dead set against a full rebuild.
I'll just fill out the rest of the responses for you guys so we don't have to waste our time rehashing the same old arguments....
Kings need to tank to get the #1 pick.
Having the worst record doesn't guarantee you the #1 pick.
I know but it gives you the best odds.
They'll just pick a bust with it anyway.
They've got to get lucky at some point and pick an all star.
Having an all star doesn't guarantee you a playoff berth.
I know but it's better than not having an all star.
TANKING IS DISRESPECTFUL TO THE FANS AND THE GAME!!!
Would you rather finish as the 11th seed and pick 10th in the draft again?
CJ McCollum was picked 10th.
There are other ways to go about it than losing on purpose.
I don't mean losing on purpose, I mean tanking by developing the younger players and trading the vets.
What do you guys think about this trade proposal?
No way, our players are awesome.
Everything would have been better if they would have just picked Luka.
*mod closes thread*
Kings need to tank to get the #1 pick.
Having the worst record doesn't guarantee you the #1 pick.
I know but it gives you the best odds.
They'll just pick a bust with it anyway.
They've got to get lucky at some point and pick an all star.
Having an all star doesn't guarantee you a playoff berth.
I know but it's better than not having an all star.
TANKING IS DISRESPECTFUL TO THE FANS AND THE GAME!!!
Would you rather finish as the 11th seed and pick 10th in the draft again?
CJ McCollum was picked 10th.
There are other ways to go about it than losing on purpose.
I don't mean losing on purpose, I mean tanking by developing the younger players and trading the vets.
What do you guys think about this trade proposal?
No way, our players are awesome.
Everything would have been better if they would have just picked Luka.
*mod closes thread*
I feel like the new lottery odds are actually MORE favorable to the Kings. They will not be bad enough to out-tank the really terrible teams. I mean. Look at Houston. We will never be that bad. So tearing it down is actually a better strategy now more than ever since the blatantly tanking teams have reduced odds.
Portland, Utah and Denver recently, arguably Memphis but that’s TBD (winning one play-in series as a sub 8 seed isn’t enough to me but it looks like they’re on the road to being a real playoff team again)
In general tho yea the playoff teams last year were lead almost entirely by guys who went 1-3. Blazers Jazz and Nuggs nailed it with later lotto selections and obviously finding Jokic out of nowhere
In general tho yea the playoff teams last year were lead almost entirely by guys who went 1-3. Blazers Jazz and Nuggs nailed it with later lotto selections and obviously finding Jokic out of nowhere