i certainly wouldn't have been disappointed if the kings had nabbed greg oden with the number 1 pick only to see him go down! geez...you can't engage in all this "next year Greg Oden might well set all kinds of records, etc, but maybe he won't" talk. if you have a chance at greatness, you take it. kevin martin is going to be good for a lot of years. but he will never be great. spencer hawes may be good for a lot of years, if he can stay healthy. but he will never be great. greg oden, while recovering from knee surgery, might not be great. but maybe he WILL. i'll take a flyer on losing to have the chance at "great" as opposed to winning a few more games to have the chance that someone like spencer hawes might be "good."
if the kings had oden and he still went down before stepping onto the court, then hello derrick rose or oj mayo! just imagine a young PG/C combo of either of those guys and oden! those are the two single toughest positions to fill in the modern nba, and, given your hypothetical scenario, the kings conceivably could have single-handedly vaulted themselves to future-contender status with a young core of rose/martin/oden or mayo/martin/oden. that's something to get excited about! udrih/martin/hawes is, quite frankly, absolutely nothing to get excited about. sports is only about the "now" if you are successful. there are varying degrees of success, but if you were to look at the moves kings management has made the last few years, and you knew nothing about the team or the nba, you would be tempted to assume that the kings were winners. you sign MLE patch-type-players when you need small roles filled. you trade veterans for youth and picks when you SUCK and need to begin the process of rebuilding. this is when sports becomes about "the future."
it ain't black and white for all fans. some of us want to see a team that will be viable for many years, as opposed to the pathetic nonsense that will, invariably, take the court this season.
