Bee: Time to start over - Kings' act is tired

kupman

kupman

Starter
#31
#31
Bricklayer said:
It is not lost on anyway else. You're just being stubborn.
Click to expand...

I do not mean to come across as a stubborn a**. I just see alot of weird, magical type of thinking running rappant on this board in an effort to manage the emotional angst that comes from watching your team lose night after night.

exhibit #1: replacing nearly 100% of something and calling it "touch-up." That is not touch-up and to call it touch-up is to rob the word of its meaning. 'Overhaul,' would be a much more fitting word if you insist on only using 'rebuild' for successful endeavors. You may not like the end product (I do not think any one does like the product) but that does not make it a 'touch-up.'

exhibit #2: believing that losing will increase the chances of winning. There is no appreciable 'rebuild effect.' Will we get better in the future if we enter the lottery? Chances are high that we will, but nothing that cannot be explained by natural variance and regression to the mean.

Many would like to believe that if we tank as part of the master 'rebuild' strategy we will be catapulted to 55 win seasons faster that if we remain an avarage to good team. I am sorry to say that 20 wins in a season is not going to get you to 55 wins any faster than winning 40-45. You can even ask the fans of teams who have many losing seasons in a row if you do not believe me.

This type of wishful is nothing more than a defense mechanism that exists for sole purpose of managing anxiety. It helps people sleep better at night.
 
J

joejoe

G-League
#32
#32
Mike0476 said:
Ailene Voisin: Time to start over - Kings' act is tired

http://www.sacbee.com/351/story/111613.html

By Ailene Voisin - Bee Sports Columnist

Last Updated 12:18 am PST Monday, January 22, 2007
Story appeared in SPORTS section, Page C5
Print | E-Mail | Comments (0)


...
With few exceptions, championship clubs have watched the balls spin in the air to determine the order of selection, then benefited from the high picks and the chance to acquire Tim Duncan, Dwyane Wade or Kobe Bryant.
...
Click to expand...
Kobe was drafted 13th by the Hornets. The only reason the Lakers got him was because Kobe held his breath and pouted and said he wouldn't play for a bunch of other teams that had higher picks, like the Kings, for example. I always thought something fishy was going on there...
 
GoGoGadget

GoGoGadget

All-Star
#33
#33
kupman said:
exhibit #1: replacing nearly 100% of something and calling it "touch-up." That is not touch-up and to call it touch-up is to rob the word of its meaning. 'Overhaul,' would be a much more fitting word if you insist on only using 'rebuild' for successful endeavors. You may not like the end product (I do not think any one does like the product) but that does not make it a 'touch-up.'
Click to expand...
You're judging this by the wrong thing -- looking only at the roster and coaching staff, instead of its/their holes, deficiencies, pluses and minuses. Those have all stayed the same. In that respect, there's been no "overhaul." There's barely been a "touch up."

Yes, the team has changed. Yes, the coaching staff is new. But that's it. We're otherwise the same team as we ever were -- well, not when we were good, but since the downhill track started getting slippery. Acquisition and loss all over the place, but... have we addressed interior defense? Have we significantly cut our payroll? Have we stocked up on youth? Have we developed the youth that we do have (with Kevin as the obvious exception)? Have we made any moves that would indicate, clearly, this is who we are and this is who we hope to become?

No.

Not even a little.

Chris Webber fell down and hurt his knee once upon a time, and the Kings, as an organization, have been treading water in the pool of sameness ever since. Only difference is a few of the names.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#34
#34
kupman said:
I do not mean to come across as a stubborn a**. I just see alot of weird, magical type of thinking running rappant on this board in an effort to manage the emotional angst that comes from watching your team lose night after night.

exhibit #1: replacing nearly 100% of something and calling it "touch-up." That is not touch-up and to call it touch-up is to rob the word of its meaning. 'Overhaul,' would be a much more fitting word if you insist on only using 'rebuild' for successful endeavors. You may not like the end product (I do not think any one does like the product) but that does not make it a 'touch-up.'

exhibit #2: believing that losing will increase the chances of winning. There is no appreciable 'rebuild effect.' Will we get better in the future if we enter the lottery? Chances are high that we will, but nothing that cannot be explained by natural variance and regression to the mean.

Many would like to believe that if we tank as part of the master 'rebuild' strategy we will be catapulted to 55 win seasons faster that if we remain an avarage to good team. I am sorry to say that 20 wins in a season is not going to get you to 55 wins any faster than winning 40-45. You can even ask the fans of teams who have many losing seasons in a row if you do not believe me.

This type of wishful is nothing more than a defense mechanism that exists for sole purpose of managing anxiety. It helps people sleep better at night.
Click to expand...

Erm, what? Do we have to send you a check for the psychoanalysis?
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#37
#37
GoGoGadget said:
You're judging this by the wrong thing -- looking only at the roster and coaching staff, instead of its/their holes, deficiencies, pluses and minuses. Those have all stayed the same. In that respect, there's been no "overhaul." There's barely been a "touch up."

Yes, the team has changed. Yes, the coaching staff is new. But that's it. We're otherwise the same team as we ever were -- well, not when we were good, but since the downhill track started getting slippery. Acquisition and loss all over the place, but... have we addressed interior defense? Have we significantly cut our payroll? Have we stocked up on youth? Have we developed the youth that we do have (with Kevin as the obvious exception)? Have we made any moves that would indicate, clearly, this is who we are and this is who we hope to become?

No.

Not even a little.

Chris Webber fell down and hurt his knee once upon a time, and the Kings, as an organization, have been treading water in the pool of sameness ever since. Only difference is a few of the names.
Click to expand...
Thank you! Said much better than I ever could have. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.