[Game] 65/82: Kings vs. Bulls 08 MAR 2026, 6pm PT/9pm ET

[sactowndog]

Only if the Kings both finish without the worst record and without the Number One pick; the way I see it, if either one of those things happen, you're still wrong.

I might still say it anyway, though, because I've also never once said that the organization isn't dumb. If anything, I've intimated that I think it is quite dumb but, since I got out of the rooting-for-teams business, I just don't let it bother me overmuch. "Tanking correctly" is not a thing I care about, though, since I'm opposed to the practice on principle, so you only get that after the lottery is held, if both conditions are met.

No because the worst record / 1 seed are within team control. The final pick after that is just a matter of dumb luck. You can be dumb as a rock and still be lucky or sharp as a tack and be unlucky. So the final pick is irrelevant to how well you played the system.

 

[sactowndog]

Does this even really matter at the end of the day? Especially since the top 3 odds are leveled across the board? Can you REALLY consider the Kings to, if they finish with the worst record in the NBA, to have the #1 draft lottery "seed"? Or, are you also assuming/implying that a "seed" can be assigned to multiple teams? And, if that is the case, then would it even be considered a "seed" at that point???

The seed is where you sit going into the lottery and it matters for odds and non top 4 pick order. Yes teams can be tied and technically have the same seed and pick order is determined by luck. For example we and Orlando (Chicago’s pick) had the same seed and they won the coin toss.

Those of us in the pro tank crowd want the 1 seed alone so we are guaranteed no worse than the 5th pick.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Does this even really matter at the end of the day? Especially since the top 3 odds are leveled across the board? Can you REALLY consider the Kings to, if they finish with the worst record in the NBA, to have the #1 draft lottery "seed"? Or, are you also assuming/implying that a "seed" can be assigned to multiple teams? And, if that is the case, then would it even be considered a "seed" at that point???

I am currently more preoccupied with why, if he considers the terms to ostensibly be synonyms, does he use both of them back-to-back in the same sentence?

 

[The_Jamal]

The “seed” is the pre-lottery term. They cannot finish with worst record and not the top seed.

They can finish without the worst record and the top pick.

Seems to be legal definition day.

Will you post this org is as dumb as we thought that they cannot even tank correctly.

I remember you freaking out after the 4-game win streak... and we're 3-20 since that point.

Is that not tanking correctly? I haven't looked, but I'd be pretty confident that's the worst record in that span.

 

[Caccia]

I remember you freaking out after the 4-game win streak... and we're 3-20 since that point.

Is that not tanking correctly? I haven't looked, but I'd be pretty confident that's the worst record in that span.

Doggone it. We won another game?

 

[Warhawk]

No because the worst record / 1 seed are within team control.

Only to a certain extent. We can't pull our healthy players willy-nilly as the league will crack down on that. They have warned everyone they are on the watch for tanking behavior and are also indicating that they may be making changes to the draft next year because of what they are seeing.

Our players will play to win. Some nights we'll hit a lot more shots than usual. Whatever. It happens.

Are there small minutes tweaks we could do? Sure. But if we're sitting a healthy Westbrook and playing Stevens 35 minutes a night they aren't going to let that fly.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Are we not still the “#1 seed?” Last time I checked we still had the worse record in the NBA. Not sure how much more we can “correctly tank.”

***Brooklyn just won 2 straight. Good thing they don’t know how to “correctly tank” either.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Are we not still the “#1 seed?” Last time I checked we still had the worse record in the NBA. Not sure how much more we can “correctly tank.”

I've actually got his back on this, loathe as I am to the concept of tanking itself: how do you tank "more correctly"? Not a single person on the team who is older than Google should play more than 25 minutes in any game for the remainder of the season, regardless of opponent, schedule, availability or any other extenuating circumstances. That's how you tank "more correctly."

 

[GWD]

But if we're sitting a healthy Westbrook and playing Stevens 35 minutes a night they aren't going to let that fly.

From this perspective, Silver is deciding the roster and playing times for alleged "tanking teams". The Kings and Christie are forced to play certain players, perhaps as a percentage of their season average...say 80% or face fines.

In Westbrook's particular case, the logical path is to simply release him now. The season is lost for the Kings and laying the groundwork for next season is logical. Would Silver negate the release? Would the Kings be fined or otherwise penalized? Refusing to make room for a developing player would seem to be contrary to league and team goals.

In the ultimate "in you face" to Silver, the Kings could re-sign Westbrook next season, perhaps as a player/coach, if he would still be available.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Are there small minutes tweaks we could do? Sure. But if we're sitting a healthy Westbrook and playing Stevens 35 minutes a night they aren't going to let that fly.

Some people are either misunderstanding the rule, or willfully misinterpreting it. You can put a 25 minute per game cap on Westbrook, and nobody can reasonably say that you're "sitting" him. People who think that the Kings would get in trouble for not playing the veterans 35+ minutes a night are wrong.

 

[sactowndog]

Only to a certain extent. We can't pull our healthy players willy-nilly as the league will crack down on that. They have warned everyone they are on the watch for tanking behavior and are also indicating that they may be making changes to the draft next year because of what they are seeing.

Our players will play to win. Some nights we'll hit a lot more shots than usual. Whatever. It happens.

Are there small minutes tweaks we could do? Sure. But if we're sitting a healthy Westbrook and playing Stevens 35 minutes a night they aren't going to let that fly.

Sure but if we are playing 4 of our 5 starters 35 plus minutes we have our head up our ass

Grizz played GG Jackson and Wells 26 minutes. We played Monk more minutes than that.

 

[The_Jamal]

Sure but if we are playing 4 of our 5 starters 35 plus minutes we have our head up our ass

Starters being:

42 pick
2-way contract
37 year old Russ
Vet min contract picked up 3 weeks into the season
23rd pick.

Once again, how do you play "less" talent on the floor than this?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Starters being:

42 pick
2-way contract
37 year old Russ
Vet min contract picked up 3 weeks into the season
23rd pick.

Once again, how do you play "less" talent on the floor than this?

Westbrook and Carter's minutes, and Hayes and Monk's minutes, respectively, should be reversed. This isn't really that complicated.