Be careful what you wish for

[Big Cuz 15]

My prediction is that we will end up with the 6th or 7th seed and get by the first round of the playoffs. Then I will have to bring this thread back up when the 2nd round of the playoffs get here.

sure. i'll be waiting for you to bring back this thread. i'm not a pessimist but a realist. the kings ain't getting past the 1st round. at best, they'll be 8th seed.. if they get super lucky they'll be 7th. who will they face? dallas or phoenix. i don't even need to talk about the outcome. lets be realistic here. kings aren't going to the 2nd round with the current squad.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Well said Slim.

 

[kyo2002]

1.) My solution is to ship the Kings to Oklahoma City next season.
2.) Who are all these great franchise players everyone keeps talking about? I only know of two. Please tell.
3.) Oden's a TRUE center, but all I see is his defensive instincts. Anyone know his game well?
4.) Durant's really good but what makes him a franchise player? He can shoot 3s and rebound but I haven't seen him dominating teams. He's looks to me like a versatile PF or SF i.e. Euro players.
5.) How do we know these guys are sure things?

 

[Kev.in]

The chances of getting a "franchise" player in the lottery are slim to none. They come around only once in a while and you have to get lucky.

This is ridiculous.

 

[Stroms]

what are you high? where do you think franchise players come from? the stork?

I didn't say they didn't come from the lottery. Read what you're quoting instead of getting high with storks. I said the chances of landing one is a crap shot at best. Unless you have a one of the top picks, you're not getting a sure thing. So at that point you're betting on ping pong balls.

 

[Viking]

i dont want the kings to tank. i at least want to get in the playoffs. its dumb to try and rebuild through the draft when all you have to do is make 1 lousy trade

were gonna need a hell of a lot more than that, its like putting a bandaid on a dam with a hole in it

 

[Vlade4GM]

I didn't say they didn't come from the lottery. Read what you're quoting instead of getting high with storks. I said the chances of landing one is a crap shot at best. Unless you have a one of the top picks, you're not getting a sure thing. So at that point you're betting on ping pong balls.

you said "The chances of getting a "franchise" player in the lottery are slim to none." that's exactly what you said, if you messed up fine, but don't blame me for the way you worded.

 

[diggining]

The funny thing is that I was all ready to quote the same passage, but for the reason that I disagree with it very much. I did not quote a particularly weak draft...

Oooooh... yes you did; the 1997 draft was a [Walton]HOOOORIBLE[/Walton] draft! It had one can't-miss superstar (Duncan), one guy who figured to be a solid NBA player (Van Horn), and a bunch of guys that you couldn't pick out of a lineup; I distinctly remember people saying that, if you didn't get one of the top-two picks in that draft, you were pretty much screwed.

If you had quoted my entire sentence, it would've made more sense:

I did not quote a particularly weak draft; what we're interested right now is in the first pick or two, picks that might actually be worth tanking for, and Tim Duncan was probably the most sure-fire prospect in the last 10, 15 years coming out of college.

My point was that what we're interested in / what might actually be worth tanking are the first pick or two, and the first pick or two in Duncan's draft was a strong one because of Mr. Duncan. I really don't think it's worth tanking so we can pick someone like a Josh McRoberts or a Horford instead of a Tiago Splitter or a Yi Jianlian.

I think that Oden is every bit as much a sure thing as Duncan was; at the very least, he's as much a sure thing as Carmelo Anthony was... I'll also dispute that Durant is a "significant" step below Oden or Duncan, and he may not be any kind of step below either of them. Howe'er, comma, Durant isn't seven feet tall, and I'll take a can't-miss center over a can't-miss swingman any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. In fact, Durant may very well end up being the Jordan to Oden's Olajuwon, but I can't imagine that Houston felt like it made a mistake drafting Olajuwon.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree here. That said, I have hard time seeing how someone could think that a guy who's spent one year in college is as much of a sure thing as a 4-year college star. (I didn't think Melo was that much of a sure thing either, and it's just hindsight if you want to argue how good he is now--he really didn't have very good rookie and sophomore seasons--inefficient offense + poor defense. He's improved a lot since then. I do find it reasonable for one to believe that Oden is as much of a sure thing as Melo was, although we do have to take into account Melo's national championship. There's also the issue of big, young, 7-footers have tend to have more injury problems than others, and Oden doesn't have the best injury history. These are not huge factors, but still some we might want to keep in mind.)

I'd be willing to bet that, even if they're closer than I think they are, they're a lot further away than you think they are; this team isn't a piece away, it isn't two pieces away, and it isn't three pieces away. Nobody's saying that we will solve all our problems in one OMGZMIRCALEDRAFTLOLZ~!!!!1111, but if we can get a franchise player in the draft, we can build a winning team around him, and be legitimate championship (not merely playoff, championship) contenders within five years.

I have said this elsewhere, but not in this thread, so I should clarify here that my main point is this: I don't see how this current team is bad enough to tank effectively. In order for us to tank, we'll really have to break up this team and get significantly less talent in return for cap space and maybe a pick or two. And if we do, we'll be farther away from where we want to be, and a higher draft pick may or may not be able to get us there. I do find it believable that the Kings' chances of willing a championship in the next 5, 10 years might be slightly higher by tanking (it might be something like 1.25% to 1%!), but I think that the expectation value of number of Kings win will be higher if we don't break it all up. And as I have said elsewhere, my utility scale of how well the Kings do vs. my happiness is not the mostly flat + big spike for a championship that some people have; it's much closer to a straight sloping line, even after we take into account discounted future performance. And what this utility scale is is certainly one's own personal preference.

There is nobody on this team that a championship team can be built around, not Bibby, not Martin, not Artest, not anybody. And there's no one player (and probably not any two players) on this team that we could trade to GET a franchise player. There's nobody that we could trade for that would make this a significant playoff team without trading at least a third of our top talent... and there's nobody that we could get in a trade that would make this a significant playoff team with a third of the currently existing talent gone. Hoping for some miracle free agent is a fool's errand.

I'm certainly not saying we're close, I'm just saying that imo, you're underestimating the team--we'll just have to agree to disagree here. As for free agency, I agree that it's difficult to improve significantly just signing free agents (with what cap room?). But it's also difficult to improve through the draft, and all these are possible ways for us to improve--a combination of these two and shrewed trades is my guess the best way to improve. That's how we did it in 97-98; we got C-Webb by trade, Vlade by free agency and Jason Williams from the draft. If we are to start a new perennial championship(?) contender, a combination of these three can help us get there.

1) The only player that Petrie ever drafted in the single-digits was Jason Williams, and that was hardly a bad pick, even though Nowtizki and Pierce turned out to be better players in hindsight (but, we already had Webber, and Petrie had a jones for Stojakovic, so what the hell would we have done with Nowitzki, anyway?).

You're right; TAW was the 11th pick rather than the 8th pick that I thought he was. (Also, Brian Grant was a single-digit pick.) That said, I don't think you got my point (I probably was just unclear): my point is just that there is not a huge difference between what we can expect from something like a 7-9th pick than a 11-13th pick. I would agree that it would be a much bigger difference if it's picks 1 or 2 in this draft, but the chances of getting it with the 9th most ping pong balls than 13th most ping pong balls is minimal the way the lottery is set up.

We don't need another Robin, we need the next Batman. And you ain't gonna get Batman with the fifteenth pick in the draft.

The chances of getting a Batman with the 15th pick (Nash!) is very low, but I don't think the chances of getting a Batman with, say, the 8th pick, is that much higher (can't think of any 8th pick franchise players off my head right now. 9th pick has better histories, 7th is ok.)


There are a lot of things we disagree on that are a matter of personal opinion, so we'll just have to agree to disagree on those. That said, we can agree on this:

Go Kings!!

whatever that may actually mean in the short term...

 

[diggining]

Oh, btw, sorry about not quoting your full name . I have trouble copy and pasting your name and still keep the right font and style.

 

[Stroms]

you said "The chances of getting a "franchise" player in the lottery are slim to none." that's exactly what you said, if you messed up fine, but don't blame me for the way you worded.

"Slim to none" meaning that the chances are rare. I didn't say that it never happens. Give me a little credit. Obviously Shaq, MJ, Lebron, etc. weren't ALL drafted after the 14th pick.

 

[Jerryaki]

jeebus. for everyone who advocates against "losing" / "rebuilding," try to imagine what life would be like in a groundhog's day.

reliving first round exits like last year over and over.

drafting versatile wingmen with the 16th+ pick over and over.

making no significant acquisitions in free agency until 2010 or so. because "who would want to play for a losing team."

do you really want a team who makes the playoffs every year but are no real threat, like the grizzlies or wolves? is that really doing any good?

how do we improve THIS SUMMER when we have no cap space and no one wants our parts? the DRAFT, and if it's a particularly LOADED draft, then what the heck is the boggle???

 

[kennadog]

"Slim to none" meaning that the chances are rare. I didn't say that it never happens. Give me a little credit. Obviously Shaq, MJ, Lebron, etc. weren't ALL drafted after the 14th pick.

Well the chances of drafting a franchise player after the 14th pick are definitely worse, if not non-existent. Also, far less likely is trading for a young, franchise-type player. I'd rather take a slim chance than have a worse than slim chance.

 

[Stroms]

Well the chances of drafting a franchise player after the 14th pick definitely worse, if not non-existent. Also, far less likely is trading for a young, franchise-type player. I'd rather take a slim chance than have worse than slim chance.

True enough. We were pretty lucky to be able to trade for C-Webb. I don't see a situation like that happening again.

 

[Kingster]

I'd rather trade the entire Kings team right now for the Charlotte Bobcats, and their record is worse than ours. Why? Because they are young and athletic and are only getting better, whereas our core is in their prime and only getting worse. And after this next draft, the Bobcats will be loaded with talent. I'm sure there are FAs out there who will go with the Bobcats because they see the same thing.

 

[Kingster]

Every year we hear talks of a strong draft, and this year is no exception. Is this year really better than average? Probably, but the most prized players are no sure thing. This certainly does not seem as strong as the Lebron-Melo-Darko (as we now know, Lebron-Melo-Wade-Bosh) draft year--the hype today can't compare with the hype that year.

No, we don't hear about strong draft every year. That's just factually inaccurate. No one was saying it last year because all the high schoolers that would have gone to the draft, didn't, due to the change in NBA rules saying that one year of college was the minimum. This year could be called extraordinary because of the "pent-up demand" of those one year college players. That's why it would be nice to accumulate as many #1s this year as possible. It certainly won't be the Purvis Ellison, Travis Best, Anthony Bonner draft, that's for sure. And by the way, in that draft, everyone was saying it was a lousy draft, not that it was a great draft.

 

[Miles and Miles]

I'd rather trade the entire Kings team right now for the Charlotte Bobcats, and their record is worse than ours. Why? Because they are young and athletic and are only getting better, whereas our core is in their prime and only getting worse. And after this next draft, the Bobcats will be loaded with talent. I'm sure there are FAs out there who will go with the Bobcats because they see the same thing.

That wouldn't solve anything. The Warriors and Clippers seem to have all the young "talent", "potential", and draft picks but yet they seem to suck every year. I don't know how many years I have been hearing how "great" the Clippers and Warriors are going to be from writers but they still suck. Good draft picks don't equal wins.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

The Clippers have young talent? Are we talking about the same Clippers whose average age is 30? Those wacky, young 30 year-olds...

As far as the Warriors go, you must live in Northern California. Nobody on the east coast talks about how good they think the Warriors are going to be, ever. I'm not seeing this hype you speak of.

 

[Jechtsphere]

Yeah well both those teams are still better than us.

Good draft picks don't equal wins...then what does?

 

[kyo2002]

It seems that the only ways for teams to improve (with winning the championship in mind) are either to draft, trade, or sign. True enough, but I think all players need development...even the great ones. There is even a scouting section called NBA Ready for just this. The idea nowadays is to draft some athletic freak and develop his skills, because you can't teach fast! It also does wonder to have someone seven feet in the paint, but I say that a player has to want to develop and CAN develop if he is to be any good. I swear the 2001 draft had all the big men franchise players: Kwame, Chandler, Gasol, and Curry. Raise your hand if you knew Arenas was the best pick.

At this point I think the NBA is just true center deprived, and the Kings are just seven footer deprived. Tanking can cost millions of dollars in terms of team value (I don't know the wording) if the Kings don't win the dice roll and get a sure deal. I won't watch tanking if they suck even worse next year.

Let's watch soccer. Being seven foot is actually a disadvantage.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

True enough. We were pretty lucky to be able to trade for C-Webb. I don't see a situation like that happening again.

And let's not forget that we traded a multi-time All Star and franchise player (even if he was at the end of his career) to get Webber who at that time was considered to be malcontent who failed to live up to his immense talent. We don't have a player like that on our roster today.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I won't watch tanking if they suck even worse next year.

Did you watch before 1999?

A lot of us did. And the Kings SUCKED. In legendary ways. And we loved them.

And you're completely missing the point, nobody wants to go into seasons upon seasons of tanking. We're talking about this year in this special draft. And we're not talking about losing just to lose, we're talking about building towards the future in a way that will result in some short term losses - playing the young guys, trading for young unproven talent that we think will blossom, etc.

If this team were completely reloaded next year with young hungry players, finished 32-50, missed the playoffs by 16 games but showed intensity on the court, bonding, growth and an actual identity you're telling me you wouldn't watch and be excited about the future?

 

[Stroms]

Did you watch before 1999?

A lot of us did. And the Kings SUCKED. In legendary ways. And we loved them.

And you're completely missing the point, nobody wants to go into seasons upon seasons of tanking. We're talking about this year in this special draft. And we're not talking about losing just to lose, we're talking about building towards the future in a way that will result in some short term losses - playing the young guys, trading for young unproven talent that we think will blossom, etc.

If this team were completely reloaded next year with young hungry players, finished 32-50, missed the playoffs by 16 games but showed intensity on the court, bonding, growth and an actual identity you're telling me you wouldn't watch and be excited about the future?

I totally agree with you on this, but some people have advocated trading Artest, Bibby and Miller for essentially what amounts to cap space. I don't think that is going to get us very far because I just don't see us signing a top tier player.

 

[kyo2002]

1.) Hmm... in 99' I was playing basketball not cheering and Kings games weren't televised like it is on Comcast nowadays. I watch all 82 plus preseason every year by the way. Let's not bash me like everyone did Stroms please?

2.)I think basketball is more than winning or losing. Championship rings don't mean as much as "free money" these days anyway. Basketball should be about playing the game. I watch high school, college, nba, even middle school, and my favorite streetball. I'm sticking to "Winning isn't everything."

3.)I just don't see it as a good idea to bench SAR, Thomas, Miller. Bibby and Artest can probably be traded by the 22nd. Business-wise, Kings stock go down, Kings lose fans and players. Maloofs lose money. David Stern might even put in a Kings clause for the future. I'm all for Oden but I'm against don't play your best. Why even show up for a game, just forfeit every game, dismiss the team for the season. Basketball isn't basketball anymore when you're just aiming to miss the basket and shooting full court shots for the heck of it.

 

[Vlade4GM]

why can't people tell the difference between tanking/rebuilding and throwing games?

 

[BMiller52]

1.) Hmm... in 99' I was playing basketball not cheering and Kings games weren't televised like it is on Comcast nowadays. I watch all 82 plus preseason every year by the way. Let's not bash me like everyone did Stroms please?

2.)I think basketball is more than winning or losing. Championship rings don't mean as much as "free money" these days anyway. Basketball should be about playing the game. I watch high school, college, nba, even middle school, and my favorite streetball. I'm sticking to "Winning isn't everything."

3.)I just don't see it as a good idea to bench SAR, Thomas, Miller. Bibby and Artest can probably be traded by the 22nd. Business-wise, Kings stock go down, Kings lose fans and players. Maloofs lose money. David Stern might even put in a Kings clause for the future. I'm all for Oden but I'm against don't play your best. Why even show up for a game, just forfeit every game, dismiss the team for the season. Basketball isn't basketball anymore when you're just aiming to miss the basket and shooting full court shots for the heck of it.

That's not what people want at all! The idea isn't to have your best players try to miss the basket, the idea is get a lot of youth and expiring contracts. That way you have a young team that trys hard but can't close games out. The end result is youth that grows into good players and all of those guys peak at the same time so you have a larger window at a championship.

 

[kennadog]

why can't people tell the difference between tanking/rebuilding and throwing games?

Exactly. I don't know why the side that wouldn't mind unintentional losing for the short term keep having their position mischaracterized.

If we did trade Bibby and Artest by the 22nd (woithout commenting on the liklihood of that) and put the young guys out there on the floor for more minutes, chances are we would lose more. The young guys get experience, we get to see if they really are keepers. They play with energy, excitement and effort, but just likely lose more. Young and inexperienced = likely more loses = higher draft pick.

How in the world is that trying to lose or making no effort? Its just changing gears big time and going with a new plan.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

3.)I just don't see it as a good idea to bench SAR, Thomas, Miller. Bibby and Artest can probably be traded by the 22nd. I'm all for Oden but I'm against don't play your best. Why even show up for a game, just forfeit every game, dismiss the team for the season. Basketball isn't basketball anymore when you're just aiming to miss the basket and shooting full court shots for the heck of it.

Why not bench them and run the young bucks since the team isn't going to the playoffs this year? What is the point in holding back their experience in the NBA?

Business-wise, Kings stock go down, Kings lose fans and players. Maloofs lose money. David Stern might even put in a Kings clause for the future.


>Are you a shareholder for the kings? you mean they're going to lose a few fairweather fans because they want to build for the future? as a kings fan now, i'm NOT excited about it's current situation. lose a few bucks? it's a business, thats the risk you take in running a business. and, I highly doubt DS would put a kings clause for the future if they decided to rebuild. if DS were to put in a kings clause, they might as well put in a sixers clause also since they waived WEBB and TRADED the answer.

 

[Bricklayer]

Again (and again and again and again):

Dallas drafted Dirk (effectively) Top 10.
Phoenix drafted Amare and Marion Top 10.
Houston drafted Yao Top 10.
Utah drafted Williams Top 10.
San Antonio drafted Duncan Top 10.
Denver drafted Melo Top 10.
Miami drafted Wade Top 10.
Chicago drafted Heinrich and Gordon Top 10.
Cleveland drafted LeBron Top 10.
Toronto drafted Bosh Top 10.
Orlando drafted Howard Top 10.

Oh, and Chicago drafted Jordan Top 10. Houston drafted Hakeem Top 10. Detroit drafted Isiah Top 10. Boston drafted Bird Top 10. The Lakers drafted Magic Top 10.

ANY argument that getting bad, taking a dive, whatever, has not been, and is not currently an absolutely CORE element of championship contention in the NBA is flat out ignorant. Its not debatable. Its not soemthing we sit around and discuss. It is a simple FACT that the vast majority of title teams and title contenders have gotten to that place by having a really ****ty year or two, and reaping the rewards of having a ****ty year. Those rewards being a top draft pick which do OVERWHELMINGLY produce the greatest players. Using an argument that only 1 in 5 top picks is going to be a superstud is a classic logic strawman when you fail to note that only 1 in 100 non top picks is goig to be a superstud. It also of course remains compeltely irrelevant to the concrete situation of THIS draft THIS year of which there are virtually no naysayers beyond a handful of fans taking a "philosophical stand" in a game invoilving a bouncy orange ball.

 

[kyo2002]

Uh oh, bashing begins. we ignent fulks aint smaart, This thread has to be getting the quickest replies now. No more lurkers! haha I'm just making it interesting and trying to bring in more opinions. I'll argue for the other side when the opportunity arise.
Tanking isn't a decision to be made by fans on computers. Sixers actually LOOK like they're rebuilding, Kings are looking for a one shot wonder. I haven't heard any suggestions. I can be wrong and Vlade4GM and others can advise me, but isn't it like shooting yourself in the leg to avoid combat? or waiting for a person to commit a second crime to find his/her location?
I'm up for seeing the Kings play Celtic if both decides to tank. That can be one game to remember if both were trying to lose.

I'll repost this:
1.) My solution is to ship the Kings to Oklahoma City next season.
2.) Who are all these great franchise players everyone keeps talking about? I only know of two. Please tell.
3.) Oden's a TRUE center, but all I see is his defensive instincts. Anyone know his game well?
4.) Durant's really good but what makes him a franchise player? He can shoot 3s and rebound but I haven't seen him dominating teams. He's looks to me like a versatile PF or SF i.e. Euro players.
5.) How do we know these guys are sure things?

 

[pdxKingsFan]

1.) Hmm... in 99' I was playing basketball not cheering and Kings games weren't televised like it is on Comcast nowadays. I watch all 82 plus preseason every year by the way. Let's not bash me like everyone did Stroms please?

Its not about bashing you its about perspective. And your lack of it. When you make statements about who is going to support this team and you admit to not following them during the lean years you lack credibility because you lack perspective.

2.)I think basketball is more than winning or losing. Championship rings don't mean as much as "free money" these days anyway. Basketball should be about playing the game. I watch high school, college, nba, even middle school, and my favorite streetball. I'm sticking to "Winning isn't everything."

And yet you just said a post ago that you will quit watching the team if they continue to suck.

3.)I just don't see it as a good idea to bench SAR, Thomas, Miller. Bibby and Artest can probably be traded by the 22nd. Business-wise, Kings stock go down, Kings lose fans and players. Maloofs lose money. David Stern might even put in a Kings clause for the future. I'm all for Oden but I'm against don't play your best. Why even show up for a game, just forfeit every game, dismiss the team for the season. Basketball isn't basketball anymore when you're just aiming to miss the basket and shooting full court shots for the heck of it.

NOBODY has proposed doing anything of the sort. You aren't even paying attention. And the "Kings Clause"???? Its already there and its called "the lottery". And its why we don't have to lose the most games possible to get a decent draft shot. Just being in the bottom 5 should give us a fair chance at either a franchise player or at minimum a player with the potential to be the best player on our roster since C-Webb went down.