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

It's National Retro Video Game day. What's your favorite classic arcade game?


  • Total voters
    26
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
 
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.
 
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 “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.
 
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.
 
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. :p
 
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."
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
No argument from me on this approach. It seems as though some want to bench all the vets, and that just wouldn't fly.
 
EDIT - Confirmed: the Kings only had the sixth-worst record when they got the #1 Overall Pick in 1989.

The KINGS also had the 5th or 6th worst record the year they moved up to #2 and should have drafted #77 — the best player in that draft.

Gotta take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves. Unfortunately they rarely have.

Until proven otherwise, I’d fully expect them to pass on the right player even if they did end up top 2 or 3 this upcoming draft.
 
The KINGS also had the 5th or 6th worst record the year they moved up to #2 and should have drafted #77 — the best player in that draft.

Gotta take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves. Unfortunately they rarely have.

Until proven otherwise, I’d fully expect them to pass on the right player even if they did end up top 2 or 3 this upcoming draft.

i'm not sure this has been mentioned (regarding the luka/bagley draft):

i could buy vlade not wanting luka because he feared "parental influence" (luka's dad was a "coach")

but what i cannot forgive is vlade's seeming indifference to that draft.

as we recall, phoenix committed early to ayton, so, vlade had his choice.

he did not "guard" (the info) as to who he would select - he simply said, "it's bagley"

what he SHOULD have done is put his ear to the ground and know in advance that the mavs were looking to trade up (with atlanta) and ACTED LIKE he was still "deciding" (mind NOT "made up" - on his pick).in fact, he should have said (which would have been true), "we have some people in the 'take luka' camp and an equal number of people in the 'take bagley' camp, so, we have a big decision to make".

then wait for the mavs to call and seek a trade up to the #2 spot in return for a future FRP (AND a #2?), and if they decline, you draft luka and make them PAY for Luka - after vlade drafts luka second, i'm guessing dallas is on the phone to him asking, "who do you want us to draft for you at #5"?

you trade down to #5 and you STILL likely get bagley AND a future first.

OR (and i almost ALWAYS take this option): continue trading down and select someone in the 10-15 range (in our "economic ballpark")

vlade was a "lazy" GM.

but he wasn't the WORST GM - that designation goes to whoever was running the suns at the time.

in 2016, they drafted fourth and selected "dragon bender" (ouch)

in 2017 they had the fourth pick again and left fox on the table for vlade with a major blunder, drafting josh jackson ("double J" - double "ouch")

in 2018 they had the first pick and prematurely selected d'andre ayton (could have been worse - they could have selected bagley)

three high lottery picks in successive years and they really squandered their chance(s)

who COULD they have drafted (in those years):

2016: jamal murray (#7), domantas sabonis (#11) or trade down and select pascal siakim (#27)

2017: d'aaron fox (with #4 pick) - thank you, phoenix for leaving fox at #5 - or laurie markonnen (selected #7)

2017 other choices phoenix could have made: malik monk (#11), luke kennard (#12), donovan mitchell (#13), bam adebayo (#14)

(in that draft, the kings traded the #10 pick for #15/#20 BUSTS instead of selecting ANY of 11-14 picks

2018: suns pick first and select d'andre ayton: COULD have selected Luka (#3), jaren jackson jr (#4), trae young (#5), , #'s 10-12 were the Bridges brothers with SGA in between.

so, there were PLENTY of good choices, but the suns always picked the wrong guy(s).

there were plenty of good choices, even late in the first round.

the #27 picks in those three years were Pascal Siakim (2016), Kyle Kuzma (2017) and Robert Williams (2018), all starters eight years into their careers.

the draft is a crapshoot - unless you select well.
 
Last edited:
i could buy vlade not wanting luka because he feared "parental influence" (luka's dad was a "coach")
Vlade not wanting Luka had very little to nothing to do with his fear of "parental influence", as you put it, and pretty much everything to do with the fact that Fox was on the roster at the time.
 
Vlade not wanting Luka had very little to nothing to do with his fear of "parental influence", as you put it, and pretty much everything to do with the fact that Fox was on the roster at the time.

you should research before you post:

this is from AI (alright, i'm "lazy"):

Former Kings GM Vlade Divac reportedly passed on drafting Luka Dončić in 2018 partly due to a strained relationship with Luka’s father, Saša Dončić, and concerns over family influence. While rumors cited personal friction, Divac claimed the decision was based on basketball fit with De'Aaron Fox and preferring Marvin Bagley III.
NBC Bay Area +5
Key factors and reports surrounding the decision:
  • The "Father/Son" Issue: Reports suggested Divac was too close to the situation, knew Luka's father well, and did not hold a high opinion of him, creating concerns about the "like father, like son" dynamic.
  • Official Denial: Divac dismissed these claims as "journalistic nonsense," asserting he knows Saša well and has a positive relationship with the family.
  • Basketball Fit (The Official Reason): Divac stated he didn't draft Dončić because the team already had a young point guard in De'Aaron Fox and felt Bagley was a better fit for their needs at the time.
 
you should research before you post:

this is from AI (alright, i'm "lazy"):

Former Kings GM Vlade Divac reportedly passed on drafting Luka Dončić in 2018 partly due to a strained relationship with Luka’s father, Saša Dončić, and concerns over family influence. While rumors cited personal friction, Divac claimed the decision was based on basketball fit with De'Aaron Fox and preferring Marvin Bagley III.
NBC Bay Area +5
Key factors and reports surrounding the decision:
  • The "Father/Son" Issue: Reports suggested Divac was too close to the situation, knew Luka's father well, and did not hold a high opinion of him, creating concerns about the "like father, like son" dynamic.
  • Official Denial: Divac dismissed these claims as "journalistic nonsense," asserting he knows Saša well and has a positive relationship with the family.
  • Basketball Fit (The Official Reason): Divac stated he didn't draft Dončić because the team already had a young point guard in De'Aaron Fox and felt Bagley was a better fit for their needs at the time.
You should cite a reputable source, and not some random AI gibberish...

Link to Article: Former Kings GM Vlade Divac on why he passed on drafting Luka Doncic, ‘I already had De’Aaron Fox’
 
The Luka draft was literally eight years ago at this point. Do we really have to relitigate it again? What’s next? Reke versus Rubio?

As somebody who fumed over it for years and years and years, it's pretty nice to not give a **** anymore.

I'm not sure if it's a time healing all wounds situation or my near terminal apathy towards this dumpster fire of a team, but hey, feels good to not care either way!
 
The Luka draft was literally eight years ago at this point. Do we really have to relitigate it again? What’s next? Reke versus Rubio?
As somebody who fumed over it for years and years and years, it's pretty nice to not give a **** anymore.

I'm not sure if it's a time healing all wounds situation or my near terminal apathy towards this dumpster fire of a team, but hey, feels good to not care either way!
The pain felt after that draft will definitely be lessened (significantly) once we are able to find ourselves having sustained success once again. Until we do, though, I will continue to display a significant degree of saltiness towards Vlade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top