Yet again. Which way to go

[The_Jamal]

Are you saying if we drafted 7 or worse we can get a generational talent like steph, Giannis, jokic or kawhi? Or even a allstar like Vuc, derozan or lavine to go with fox and haliburton? Hmm maybe having a good gm might be more important than tanking

You can, but this has been proven, several times on this board in fact, that you're far more likely to get an all-star in the top 3 than you are pick 7 or later.

I've said this once, but as happy as I've been with Hali, Mitchell, we would have had the opportunity to take Melo/Mobley with a top 3 pick the past 2 seasons. That's the kind of duo/talent up top that creates a championship core.

 

[Kingster]

Spurs also drafted Robinson #1 at the start before landing Duncan.

And that was in the day that a full tank -worst record in the league - would guarantee the #1 pick, not a 14% chance of the #1 pick.

 

[Kingster]

You can, but this has been proven, several times on this board in fact, that you're far more likely to get an all-star in the top 3 than you are pick 7 or later.

I've said this once, but as happy as I've been with Hali, Mitchell, we would have had the opportunity to take Melo/Mobley with a top 3 pick the past 2 seasons. That's the kind of duo/talent up top that creates a championship core.

The problem is that even if this team "achieved" the worst record in the league, which is very unlikely, they still would have a greater chance of getting the 4th or 5th picks rather than the 1st, 2nd of 3rd picks. Say, for example, the Kings managed to "achieve" the 3rd worst record in the league, again unlikely, they would have a 40% chance of getting the 1st, 2nd or 3rd picks, but a 60% chance of getting the 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th pick. So to devise a strategy around getting a top 3 pick is devising a strategy based on beating the odds. That's not a rational plan in my view. That's a strategy based on gutting the franchise and spending years in doing so because you think you'll get lucky with the dice.

 

[Section 101]

And that was in the day that a full tank -worst record in the league - would guarantee the #1 pick, not a 14% chance of the #1 pick.

Wrong. Boston had the worst record.

 

[mrlaze]

He didn't say the spurs had the worst record.

 

[kingsfan101]

And that was in the day that a full tank -worst record in the league - would guarantee the #1 pick, not a 14% chance of the #1 pick.

No. The lottery was introduced in 85, and Ewing was the first pick for the Knicks that year. DR was selected by Spurs in 87, though he started playing for them only in 89. Duncan was selected in 97, after the Spurs had an injury filled season. Per some stories I read, once they realized they were unlikely to make the playoffs, they shut down DR even when he became healthy (who knows how much of this is true), to improve their lottery odds.

 

[kingsfan101]

Wrong. Boston had the worst record.

Per Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_NBA_draft
Grizzlies had the worst record, but being an expansion team, were disallowed from selecting first.

Boston had two picks, giving them better odds than just their record would have. Per some posts by Simmons I read long back, Boston fans were wearing TD shirts in their last home game, convinced that they will land him as the prize for their bad season.

Anyway, these stories are irrelevant to the main topic. The point made by Kingster that a poor record is no guarantee of a high pick is very valid. So, I don't want to tank just for a shot at a higher pick, particularly if it results in players/coaches/fans losing interest completely. That said, I have softened by stance compared to a month ago, when I was still optimistic, and feel that it's best to move on from Barnes and Buddy. My concern, now as it was then, is what are we getting in return. Monte made, what I thought were two decent deals for Buddy, but both fell apart. Can he be a third time lucky? What returns will Barnes bring? I just hope Monte is trying, we add up some assets, open up playing time for some of the kids, and balance out the roster a bit.

 

[The_Jamal]

The problem is that even if this team "achieved" the worst record in the league, which is very unlikely, they still would have a greater chance of getting the 4th or 5th picks rather than the 1st, 2nd of 3rd picks. Say, for example, the Kings managed to "achieve" the 3rd worst record in the league, again unlikely, they would have a 40% chance of getting the 1st, 2nd or 3rd picks, but a 60% chance of getting the 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th pick. So to devise a strategy around getting a top 3 pick is devising a strategy based on beating the odds. That's not a rational plan in my view. That's a strategy based on gutting the franchise and spending years in doing so because you think you'll get lucky with the dice.

Sure, but the alternative is we're stuck in pick 9-13 hell forever. Give me a chance to get a franchise talent instead of hoping we spike a starter with a late lotto pick that maybe builds into a low-seed playoff team down the line.

 

[Kingster]

Wrong. Boston had the worst record.

Non sequiter

 

[Kingster]

Sure, but the alternative is we're stuck in pick 9-13 hell forever. Give me a chance to get a franchise talent instead of hoping we spike a starter with a late lotto pick that maybe builds into a low-seed playoff team down the line.

It's better to do a Mitch Richmond for Webber trade than a gut the franchise for years strategy. At least with a trade you have some knowledge of what you are receiving in return. With a full tank-gut-the-franchise strategy you have no idea where you will be drafting or what player you will be drafting, then add on top of that the inherent risk of drafting and your risk/return ratio is astronomical. McNair has to make some decent trades to turn this franchise around. He just has to. Otherwise, we'll be staring into the void for years.

 

[kb02]

It's better to do a Mitch Richmond for Webber trade than a gut the franchise for years strategy. At least with a trade you have some knowledge of what you are receiving in return. With a full tank-gut-the-franchise strategy you have no idea where you will be drafting or what player you will be drafting, then add on top of that the inherent risk of drafting and your risk/return ratio is astronomical. McNair has to make some decent trades to turn this franchise around. He just has to. Otherwise, we'll be staring into the void for years.

McNair deserves to be fired if the Vlade core is still here after the trade deadline.

 

[LPKingsFan]

The Spurs didn’t gut the team for Duncan, did they? They had a hall of fame player already who got hurt, then got lucky in the lottery. That’s not exactly replicable here.

The Sixers did gut their team, but they also had to “redshirt” Embiid for two seasons after drafting him, which kept them from “getting too good too soon” and allowed them to be in a position to draft Simmons. I’m not sure that’s exactly replicable either, although the Cavs (who some thought were trying to get too good to quickly this summer by adding Markannen) are an example of how far adding one franchise-caliber rookie can go to turn things around (being in a position to nab Allen in the Harden trade helped too).

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

McNair deserves to be fired if the Vlade core is still here after the trade deadline.

There is the distinct possibility that nobody is interested in the players/deals that he can offer,....outside of him being willing to "lose" a trade.

They will give him at least until after next season to see what he can come up with

 

[miltonap]

If I'm McNair I trade Fox, Hield, Barnes.

They need to go either due to peak value, diminished play, or malcontent of being on this team.

I know many of you don't like the plus-minus stat but I was curious last night as to who the leaders were on this team.

I had a feeling Marvin Bagley was somewhere up there and I wasn't wrong.

But in reality, the results were pretty bad.

Terrence Davis is the only person on this team with a positive +/-. It was around 3.

Then next was Damian Jones at a little below zero, next Marvin, then Haliburton. I think Davion was after Haliburton but then the numbers just got too bad.

I would role out a lineup of

Davion
Terrence Davis
Tyrese Haliburton
Marvin Bagley
Damian Jones

I was iffy about trading Holmes, still not sure about that one.

But I think the haul that could be gotten with Fox Hield and Barnes could be very solid.

Perhaps some solid players, and some draft picks (Monte has been a pretty good drafter thus far).

I think the core above would be a solid start to a vision in Sacramento. Passion on both the defensive end and offensive end. Team style oriented play, passing and just working hard.

I keep going back to Memphis and Toronto but I think they're doing it right. They just play like a team and play with heart.

There seems to be strong culture there, that's what Sacramento needs.

I think we'd all see a very motivated Kings team if the above were to happen.

Add some draft picks this year, let Monte run his thorough coach search and get the best guy (I love the idea of Doug or Bobby by the way, I think they would exemplify the culture of heart and team. They've been involved in the intricacies of the Princeton offense, both tough as nails).

THIS is how Sacramento gets back on the map.

 

[Kingster]

McNair deserves to be fired if the Vlade core is still here after the trade deadline.

I hope big trades happen by the trade deadline. Frankly, this last game was the first one that I just couldn't watch. I started watching on the DVR, then saw Holmes do a silly foul in the first couple of minutes, and it was like getting hit on the head on an area that had already been battered and bruised. I think I've reached my threshold for pain. I'll probably just tune in every once in a while to see if some major trade has occurred and maybe watch Mitchell, who is the epitome of the exact opposite of what the team is at this moment.

 

[gunks]

I really just want Buddy outta here, I’ve hated him under every coach but Joerger, who would actually hold him accountable for his mental lapses, and play him correctly. He’s seemed like a low key malcontent ever since he got here too (occasionally a high key malcontent).

Fox shouldn’t be untouchable, but I certainly wouldn’t trade him just to trade him. I also wouldn’t really be too hurt to see him gone if we get a better fitting star player or a reeeeeeeeeaaaallly good rebuilding package. He’s talented, but has been sullen garbage for most of the year. Not a leader, not great for team culture… You roll the dice on more maturity, defensive effort, and an outside shot if you keep him, roll the dice on him developing all that elsewhere if you trade him.

On the subject of culture, for that reason alone I’d keep Davion. We need more guys here with that attitude as opposed to “soft and stupid” like Vlade liked em.

Barnes probably has the most trade value, but if we somehow get another star in a Fox trade I say keep him. If we actually go all in on a rebuild (hah) I think there’s probably a lot of good deals out there for Tinker.

I dig Hali, and would hate to see him traded because I think he’s a much easier guy to pair a star with than Fox. Closest player to untouchable on the roster as far as I’m concerned.

Everybody else, who cares. Nobody really moves the needle or is a blue chip prospect. I do like Holmes, but he probably has value around the league and could get us something good for a rebuild. Bagley is probably gonna be playing in China in a few years, putting up those Jimmer statlines.

I feel like Monte always has these trades lined up that would be great for us, but they fall through (Buddy to the Lakers for Kuz probably would have been win/win, but at least the Lakers are stuck with Westbrick), I’m hoping he actually pulls some off by the deadline and gives this sorry team a direction.

 

[sactowndog]

And that was in the day that a full tank -worst record in the league - would guarantee the #1 pick, not a 14% chance of the #1 pick.

No that is not correct. The lottery started in 1985. The NBA used a coin flip previously.

David Robinson was drafted in 1987.

 

[sactowndog]

The Spurs didn’t gut the team for Duncan, did they? They had a hall of fame player already who got hurt, then got lucky in the lottery. That’s not exactly replicable here.

The Sixers did gut their team, but they also had to “redshirt” Embiid for two seasons after drafting him, which kept them from “getting too good too soon” and allowed them to be in a position to draft Simmons. I’m not sure that’s exactly replicable either, although the Cavs (who some thought were trying to get too good to quickly this summer by adding Markannen) are an example of how far adding one franchise-caliber rookie can go to turn things around (being in a position to nab Allen in the Harden trade helped too).

They did not but they were the reason the lottery system was changed to a weighted lottery system as they were a good team that “tanked” to get in the lottery and won it because the odds were the same for all lottery participants.

 

[mac]

If I'm McNair I trade Fox, Hield, Barnes.

They need to go either due to peak value, diminished play, or malcontent of being on this team.

I know many of you don't like the plus-minus stat but I was curious last night as to who the leaders were on this team.

I had a feeling Marvin Bagley was somewhere up there and I wasn't wrong.

But in reality, the results were pretty bad.

Terrence Davis is the only person on this team with a positive +/-. It was around 3.

Then next was Damian Jones at a little below zero, next Marvin, then Haliburton. I think Davion was after Haliburton but then the numbers just got too bad.

I would role out a lineup of

Davion
Terrence Davis
Tyrese Haliburton
Marvin Bagley
Damian Jones

I was iffy about trading Holmes, still not sure about that one.

But I think the haul that could be gotten with Fox Hield and Barnes could be very solid.

Perhaps some solid players, and some draft picks (Monte has been a pretty good drafter thus far).

I think the core above would be a solid start to a vision in Sacramento. Passion on both the defensive end and offensive end. Team style oriented play, passing and just working hard.

I keep going back to Memphis and Toronto but I think they're doing it right. They just play like a team and play with heart.

There seems to be strong culture there, that's what Sacramento needs.

I think we'd all see a very motivated Kings team if the above were to happen.

Add some draft picks this year, let Monte run his thorough coach search and get the best guy (I love the idea of Doug or Bobby by the way, I think they would exemplify the culture of heart and team. They've been involved in the intricacies of the Princeton offense, both tough as nails).

THIS is how Sacramento gets back on the map.

Did I miss something or did Davion/TD/Bagley suddenly become non-offensive black holes overnight? Don't get me wrong, I don't question the passion and energy, but "team-style oriented play" is about the last thing that comes to mind when I think of these guys' offensive games.

 

[mac]

It's better to do a Mitch Richmond for Webber trade than a gut the franchise for years strategy. At least with a trade you have some knowledge of what you are receiving in return. With a full tank-gut-the-franchise strategy you have no idea where you will be drafting or what player you will be drafting, then add on top of that the inherent risk of drafting and your risk/return ratio is astronomical. McNair has to make some decent trades to turn this franchise around. He just has to. Otherwise, we'll be staring into the void for years.

Why not both? Fox+filler for Simmons, sit Simmons the rest of the year. Basically a poor man's version of Robinson/TD strategy

 

[DynaPamm]

Up north to Seattle

Hmmmm well that’s not going to happen….. at least not in my lifetime. Thanks to the hard work of Mike and so many others, Crown Downtown people which I was a part of, people of the community, we worked hard to gain our new Golden one center built ——not solely for the kings BTW but we did secure our Kings.

 

[kb02]

I hope big trades happen by the trade deadline. Frankly, this last game was the first one that I just couldn't watch. I started watching on the DVR, then saw Holmes do a silly foul in the first couple of minutes, and it was like getting hit on the head on an area that had already been battered and bruised. I think I've reached my threshold for pain. I'll probably just tune in every once in a while to see if some major trade has occurred and maybe watch Mitchell, who is the epitome of the exact opposite of what the team is at this moment.

The core is rotten for sure.

 

[kb02]

There is the distinct possibility that nobody is interested in the players/deals that he can offer,....outside of him being willing to "lose" a trade.

They will give him at least until after next season to see what he can come up with

Def possible. I think he clearly lost the TT trade.

 

[SLAB]

Def possible. I think he clearly lost the TT trade.

Didn’t we just swap Delon for TT? That seems like a net neutral at worst.

 

[kb02]

Didn’t we just swap Delon for TT? That seems like a net neutral at worst.

Wright didn’t have a role with Mitchell here, but I think he has more value than Thompson around the league. I rescind this view if TT nets Simmons. TT and Simmons are tight via Kardashian hang outs.

 

[SLAB]

Wright didn’t have a role with Mitchell here, but I think he has more value than Thompson around the league. I rescind this view if TT nets Simmons. TT and Simmons are tight via Kardashian hang outs.

Does he though? We got him for Cory Joseph. That’s some bottom-tier value right there. And he isn’t exactly lighting the world on fire in ATL either.

 

[The_Jamal]

Didn’t we just swap Delon for TT? That seems like a net neutral at worst.

Delon is more valuable, but if trading a 6th-8th man for a 9th-11th man is by far your worst move as GM, I think you're doing ok. I think the issue has just been being stuck in between a rock and a hard place in terms of the expensive core. If we were going to try to win in the last year and a half, what realistically would have gotten this core over the hump? What "win now" pieces would you have gotten for Buddy/Barnes in the last year and a half that would be an upgrade? And remember, Holmes was on that cheap 2 year deal with only early bird rights, so I dont think he'd have near the value of his production.

And this was all before Fox had seen his decline in numbers this year. So that wouldn't have made much sense either. I dunno, I think McNair was basically stuck to try to win around the Vlade core and it just hasn't worked. Moving forward, he's got to recognize this needs to be blown up, or he should/will be on the chopping block.

 

[Groovygreg]

I really just want Buddy outta here, I’ve hated him under every coach but Joerger, who would actually hold him accountable for his mental lapses, and play him correctly. He’s seemed like a low key malcontent ever since he got here too (occasionally a high key malcontent).

Fox shouldn’t be untouchable, but I certainly wouldn’t trade him just to trade him. I also wouldn’t really be too hurt to see him gone if we get a better fitting star player or a reeeeeeeeeaaaallly good rebuilding package. He’s talented, but has been sullen garbage for most of the year. Not a leader, not great for team culture… You roll the dice on more maturity, defensive effort, and an outside shot if you keep him, roll the dice on him developing all that elsewhere if you trade him.

On the subject of culture, for that reason alone I’d keep Davion. We need more guys here with that attitude as opposed to “soft and stupid” like Vlade liked em.

Barnes probably has the most trade value, but if we somehow get another star in a Fox trade I say keep him. If we actually go all in on a rebuild (hah) I think there’s probably a lot of good deals out there for Tinker.

I dig Hali, and would hate to see him traded because I think he’s a much easier guy to pair a star with than Fox. Closest player to untouchable on the roster as far as I’m concerned.

Everybody else, who cares. Nobody really moves the needle or is a blue chip prospect. I do like Holmes, but he probably has value around the league and could get us something good for a rebuild. Bagley is probably gonna be playing in China in a few years, putting up those Jimmer statlines.

I feel like Monte always has these trades lined up that would be great for us, but they fall through (Buddy to the Lakers for Kuz probably would have been win/win, but at least the Lakers are stuck with Westbrick), I’m hoping he actually pulls some off by the deadline and gives this sorry team a direction.

Bravo. Well said.

 

[Kingster]

No that is not correct. The lottery started in 1985. The NBA used a coin flip previously.

David Robinson was drafted in 1987.

A distinction without a difference. 50% is better than 14%

 

[Kingster]

Why not both? Fox+filler for Simmons, sit Simmons the rest of the year. Basically a poor man's version of Robinson/TD strategy

The team we have now is mentally weak. I don't want to substitute one player who is weak for another that is mega-weak. We need more Mitchell types on this team, not players that have major confidence issues. This team is already a psyche-ward. Please don't make it worse. Metaphorically speaking, if the Kings got Simmons they would need a full time nurse to follow him around for counseling and inquiries from the media on the state of his mind and his lack of confidence in his free throws and outside shooting. I cringe at the thought. We can deduce from the Mitchell pick, the Len pickup, and the swing for Harrell that McNair sees how soft this team is and the desperate need to toughen up. I doubt he goes for Simmons (but maybe Vivek the Idiot might). The question is, what else is he going to do for the Kings to stand up to the Memphis's of this league instead of whimpering in the corner like they usually do?