Blow It Up

[The_Jamal]

I know it did. And how many playoff appearances have we made since that 10 year run of ideal draft positioning (5 top 5 picks and 6 other top 10 picks)?

You know, it's almost like having high draft picks is no guarantee of playoff basketball if your team doesn't have good management and a focus on quality talent acquisition in all areas.

Well yeah, poor management matters. You need a good FO structure and talent department to make use of those high picks. Almost immediately after drafting the hits, the FO would try to expedite the rebuild and surround them with middling FA vets, rather than continue to try to hit and develop young talent. Which is why we're stuck in 30 win hell to this day.

And even still, Fox/Boogie/Tyreke aren't horrible hit rate considering all 3 guys were outside the top 3 picks. Robinson was 5th. So it's not like we had 5 opportunities inside the top 3 and whiffed them all.

Monte's eye for young player development/talent has been his best asset so far in my eyes. Which is why I'd love to turn a rebuild over to him because I think he'd be able to correctly field and develop a winning NBA team. Vlade/PDA were clearly lacking in that department.

 

[Warhawk]

Well yeah, poor management matters. You need a good FO structure and talent department to make use of those high picks.

THANK YOU. At least someone gets it. Hopefully Monte is better, and I'm cautiously optimistic but not banking on it yet.

You can't just keep saying trade away all our talent for picks, hope some of those end up in the top 5, and BAM!, we're back in the PO! It is so much more than that, and more than our team has shown, so far, than it can execute and deliver on. Because then you have no established talent, a bunch of picks that may or may not be good players, some overpaid vets on the margins to get to your salary floor, and a team still in the muck.

 

[Dongoodboy]

I know it did. And how many playoff appearances have we made since that 10 year run of ideal draft positioning (5 top 5 picks and 6 other top 10 picks)?

You know, it's almost like having high draft picks is no guarantee of playoff basketball if your team doesn't have good management and a focus on quality talent acquisition in all areas.

No one is saying high draft picks save the world. It is the start. FO is poor for sure. I am not sure what you are trying to say.

 

[The_Jamal]

THANK YOU. At least someone gets it. Hopefully Monte is better, and I'm cautiously optimistic but not banking on it yet.

You can't just keep saying trade away all our talent for picks, hope some of those end up in the top 5, and BAM!, we're back in the PO! It is so much more than that, and more than our team has shown, so far, than it can execute and deliver on. Because then you have no established talent, a bunch of picks that may or may not be good players, some overpaid vets on the margins to get to your salary floor, and a team still in the muck.

But the solution isn't abandon the best hope a bad team has to get out of the gutter; which is to hit on a top 5 talent.

 

[Warhawk]

No one is saying high draft picks save the world. It is the start. FO is poor for sure. I am not sure what you are trying to say.

Lots of people are, or at least are insinuating it. Over and over, ad nauseum, for years: Trade Fox for picks, tank the season, trade away every vet that doesn't "fit" our "timeline" (whatever imaginary timeline a team that's been sub-0.500 has) for picks, Hinke or bust, follow the Process, etc., etc., just to get a good draft pick or two.

 

[Warhawk]

But the solution isn't abandon the best hope a bad team has to get out of the gutter; which is to hit on a top 5 talent.

Hitting on a top 5 talent isn't going to get you out of the gutter if getting it guts you of your existing talent and resources.

And remember, the expected draft pick spot for a team that has the worst record in the league is 4. You are HOPING against the odds that you can land a top 3 pick, even if you went 0-82.

Approaching team building holistically instead of putting all your hopes in one draft lottery roll of the dice for draft positioning and then hoping that the player you select actually works out seems to be a smarter way to go about it. The draft is great for what it is, but don't pin all your hopes on it.

 

[Dongoodboy]

Lots of people are, or at least are insinuating it. Over and over, ad nauseum, for years: Trade Fox for picks, tank the season, trade away every vet that doesn't "fit" our "timeline" (whatever imaginary timeline a team that's been sub-0.500 has) for picks, Hinke or bust, follow the Process, etc., etc., just to get a good draft pick or two.

Still don't see why we need to argue on that. If I say we need to hit a top 5 talent, I don't need to be reminded the personnel and development behind that, it is already implied. It is arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.

 

[ESP47]

This is seriously got to be the most frustratingly, annoying topic that we discuss on here. It's like arguing that someone with one lottery ticket has the same odds of winning as someone with ten lottery tickets.

No one made the point that ten lottery tickets guarantees that you win the lottery. Just merely that you have better odds.

 

[whozit]

This is the problem of this franchise. They don't know what they are doing. Masai Ujiri is too smart not to maximize the draft position once he knew the season is a lost cause. Kings on the other hand, continue to play the vets just to miss out the playin. We didn't develop our guys nor improve the position.

Last season's end of season wins can be attributed to Office Politics. Coach doing what was best for him that day and not what was best for the team going forward. Don't know how McNair felt about it, one way or the other. He kept him so Walton succeeded and he failed the team.

That is one BIG black mark on him but he has a eye for talent evaluation so I still have high hopes for him. Hopefully whatever he does at this trading deadline will blot out some of that black mark.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'll give you some guidelines: (1) You need to find 2 All Stars in the draft. (2) It has to take no more than 6 years. (3) You must account for lottery odds. (4) You must end up with at least 66% chance of success.

You guys are arguing back and forth, but nobody seems to want to actually DO this, which irritated me enough that I DID it. We can take @Gguod's favorite chart at https://www.pdg-analytics.com/articles/nba-draft-all-star-correlations and try to fit the equation (since they so helpfully did not provide their coefficients). OK, done. A = 1.0284, beta = 0.34, c = 0.06. Great. That gives us the odds of drafting an all-star at a given draft slot. Then we can take a listing of current lottery odds (no ties), grab it from Tankathon or your favorite source, do some multiplication, et voilà, we have our odds of drafting an All-Star based on tank finish position. Here they are, rounded to the nearest 0.5%, because that's plenty accurate:

1: 40%
2: 39%
3: 38%
4: 35.5%
5: 32%
6: 29%
7: 25.5%
8: 22%
9: 18.5%
10: 15%
11: 12.5%
12: 11%
13: 9.5%
14: 8%
15+: essentially 6%

Do with this data what you will. It is interesting to me how much flatter this data is than the data in the chart, which means the lottery really is doing the job it is intended to do.

Edit: here, I even made a plot for you:

 

[The_Jamal]

Hitting on a top 5 talent isn't going to get you out of the gutter if getting it guts you of your existing talent and resources.

And remember, the expected draft pick spot for a team that has the worst record in the league is 4. You are HOPING against the odds that you can land a top 3 pick, even if you went 0-82.

Approaching team building holistically instead of putting all your hopes in one draft lottery roll of the dice for draft positioning and then hoping that the player you select actually works out seems to be a smarter way to go about it. The draft is great for what it is, but don't pin all your hopes on it.

The Kings don't have a choice. They have to dominate the draft if they ever want to be a playoff team. The greatest FA signing in the last 20 years is Harrison Barnes for goodness sake. And you're only acquiring good trade capital through drafting well, so the other 2 phases are directly correlated to what happens in the draft.

The Grizzlies are never getting a Ja Morant talent outside of the draft. The Cavs are never getting an Evan Mobley outside the draft. The Hornets are never getting a LaMelo Ball. The Bucks are never getting another Giannis outside the draft. That's just the reality for the non-LA/NYK/Miami markets. You have no chance if you aren't a top 5-10 drafting organization.

 

[sactowndog]

From 2009 through 2018 we had 5 top 5 picks (ideal results from a tankathon method) and another 6 picks from 6-10. How is that working out for us?

Where did you miss I said you have to have a competent GM????

 

[sactowndog]

You guys are arguing back and forth, but nobody seems to want to actually DO this, which irritated me enough that I DID it. We can take @Gguod's favorite chart at https://www.pdg-analytics.com/articles/nba-draft-all-star-correlations and try to fit the equation (since they so helpfully did not provide their coefficients). OK, done. A = 1.0284, beta = 0.34, c = 0.06. Great. That gives us the odds of drafting an all-star at a given draft slot. Then we can take a listing of current lottery odds (no ties), grab it from Tankathon or your favorite source, do some multiplication, et voilà, we have our odds of drafting an All-Star based on tank finish position. Here they are, rounded to the nearest 0.5%, because that's plenty accurate:

1: 40%
2: 39%
3: 38%
4: 35.5%
5: 32%
6: 29%
7: 25.5%
8: 22%
9: 18.5%
10: 15%
11: 12.5%
12: 11%
13: 9.5%
14: 8%
15+: essentially 6%

Do with this data what you will. It is interesting to me how much flatter this data is than the data in the chart, which means the lottery really is doing the job it is intended to do.

Interesting data. Curious how it changes if you excluded the Kings (who tend to be outliers from the data)

 

[kb02]

You guys are arguing back and forth, but nobody seems to want to actually DO this, which irritated me enough that I DID it. We can take @Gguod's favorite chart at https://www.pdg-analytics.com/articles/nba-draft-all-star-correlations and try to fit the equation (since they so helpfully did not provide their coefficients). OK, done. A = 1.0284, beta = 0.34, c = 0.06. Great. That gives us the odds of drafting an all-star at a given draft slot. Then we can take a listing of current lottery odds (no ties), grab it from Tankathon or your favorite source, do some multiplication, et voilà, we have our odds of drafting an All-Star based on tank finish position. Here they are, rounded to the nearest 0.5%, because that's plenty accurate:

1: 40%
2: 39%
3: 38%
4: 35.5%
5: 32%
6: 29%
7: 25.5%
8: 22%
9: 18.5%
10: 15%
11: 12.5%
12: 11%
13: 9.5%
14: 8%
15+: essentially 6%

Do with this data what you will. It is interesting to me how much flatter this data is than the data in the chart, which means the lottery really is doing the job it is intended to do.

Edit: here, I even made a plot for you:
View attachment 10836

Flatter? Odds of picking an all star at #1 is almost 100% greater than #8.

 

[kb02]

Interesting data. Curious how it changes if you excluded the Kings (who tend to be outliers from the data)

Hinke knew the data, hence shots on goal.

 

[Rob-The-Great]

At all costs? Isn't that how this storied franchise started in Sacramento? Sold the future just for the honor of being swept by the Rockets. How many years before the Kings sniffed of the playoffs again? No, there is a cap on costs.

You think we been in this drout because we sold some future? And ill take a (honor) of being swept in playoffs instead of breaking the record for not sniffing the playoffs anyway. Novody is waiting another 6 years for a maybe chance at a allstar player who may or may not leave after his contract is up to a bigger market.

Fox is a allstar in LA
Buddy is a 6th man of the year on any decent team
Hali is a budding allstar on a team with stability
Bagley on the spurs is a double double machine and in playoffs. He'll I don't think he's much worse than Ayton. Only difference is Ayton gets 1st pick minutes and Bagley doesn't until now get 2nd pick treatment

 

[gunks]

Just add missing the playoffs and Kingsfans arguments about the merits of tanking to that list with death and taxes.

 

[whozit]

You think we been in this drout because we sold some future? And ill take a (honor) of being swept in playoffs instead of breaking the record for not sniffing the playoffs anyway. Novody is waiting another 6 years for a maybe chance at a allstar player who may or may not leave after his contract is up to a bigger market.

Fox is a allstar in LA
Buddy is a 6th man of the year on any decent team
Hali is a budding allstar on a team with stability
Bagley on the spurs is a double double machine and in playoffs. He'll I don't think he's much worse than Ayton. Only difference is Ayton gets 1st pick minutes and Bagley doesn't until now get 2nd pick treatment

No, I do not think we are in this "drought" because we sold out the future so many decades ago. It is simply that if you can't learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it. The team (i.e. owner) hasn't seemed to learn from what hasn't worked.

Now if you can make a move to make the playoffs that simultaneously builds towards the future without mortgaging said future, go for it. The Kings own enough of the records one doesn't want to own already....... but when the cards aren't in your hand, there is a time to fold and cut your losses.

 

[Rob-The-Great]

No, I do not think we are in this "drought" because we sold out the future so many decades ago. It is simply that if you can't learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it. The team (i.e. owner) hasn't seemed to learn from what hasn't worked.

Now if you can make a move to make the playoffs that simultaneously builds towards the future without mortgaging said future, go for it. The Kings own enough of the records one doesn't want to own already....... but when the cards aren't in your hand, there is a time to fold and cut your losses.

What future are you referring to?

Two years ago,

Giles Buddy, bogi and Bagley was our future. Now we can't wait to get rid of them so we can get 3 more future players. I think we tanked plenty to realize it's time to make some moves, not get worse to pray to get better

 

[twslam07]

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes & Keifer Sykes
CHA Gives: Ish Smith & PJ Washington

PG - Ball / Bouknight / Sykes
SG - Rozier / Martin
SF - Hayward / Oubre
PF - Bridges / McDaniels / Thor
C - Holmes / Plumlee / Jones / Richards / Carey


IND Gets: Marvin Bagley, Tristan Thompson, PJ Washington, Jaden Springer, 2022 SAC 1st (Top 4 Protected)
IND Gives: Myles Turner, TJ Warren, & Keifer Sykes

PG - Brogdon / McConnell / Springer
SG - Duarte / LeVert / Lamb
SF - Holiday / Craig / Brissett
PF - Washington / Bagley
C - Sabonis / Bitadze / Jackson / Thompson


PHI Gets: De'Aaron Fox, Harrison Barnes, & TJ Warren
PHI Gives: Tobias Harris, Ben Simmons, Jaden Springer, & Shake Milton

PG - Fox / Curry
SG - Maxey / Korkmaz / Joe
SF - Green / Thybulle
PF - Barnes / Warren / Niang / Reed
C - Embiid / Drummond / Bassey


SAC Gets: Tobias Harris, Ben Simmons, Myles Turner, Ish Smith, & Shake Milton
SAC Gives: De'Aaron Fox, Harrison Barnes, Marvin Bagley, Richaun Holmes, Tristan Thompson, & 2022 SAC 1st (Top 4 Protected)

PG - Mitchell / Milton / Smith
SG - Haliburton / Davis / Ramsey
SF - Simmons / Hield / Woodard
PF - Harris / Metu / Harkless
C - Turner / Jones / Len





That would be quite the overhaul for the Kings...

• They'd bring in two players that are in All Defensive Team conversations year in & year out (Simmons & Turner) and have Mitchell who maybe one day enters those conversations as well. This would be a fun group to watch defensively with Mitchell guarding the elite PGs of the league, Haliburton playing the passing lanes, Simmons locking up opposing wings, and Turner protecting the rim at an elite level.
• Rebounding would be solid as well. Turner isn't the best rebounding C out there, but Simmons and Harris are great rebounders for their positions and would really help us in that department.
• The shooting and floor spacing would be superb around Simmons Mitchell, Haliburton, Harris, Turner, Milton, Davis, & Hield would give him plenty of shooters to work with and hopefully unlock Simmons' full potential.
• The passing/playmaking would be interesting to watch with Mitchell, Haliburton, Simmons, & Harris all being unselfish and effective passers.
• This team doesn't have any elite go-to scorers but they have many 15-20 PPG type players, but they'd at least have Hield as a 6th man to give them a scoring punch off the bench. With the shooting, passing, and smart play, I can see this team still scoring at a decent level while locking people up on the defensive side of the ball.

 

[Warhawk]

Still don't see why we need to argue on that. If I say we need to hit a top 5 talent, I don't need to be reminded the personnel and development behind that, it is already implied. It is arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.

No. Because we don't have that. Or at least we haven't proven yet that we do. That's one reason I think we might be better off going after established talent that has gone through at least part of that process.

 

[SLAB]

I hope any GM or owner woke up from a 4 year coma last night, happened to tune into the Kings, and made the decision Marvin is the man they absolutely HAVE to build around.

 

[whozit]

What future are you referring to?

Two years ago,

Giles Buddy, bogi and Bagley was our future. Now we can't wait to get rid of them so we can get 3 more future players. I think we tanked plenty to realize it's time to make some moves, not get worse to pray to get better

The season after this. And then the next. I am not into "The Process." And I am not going to write a blank check, "whatever the cost" to make sure we make it this year. That was the point I took exception to.

I am not Championship or bust. I would like the team to have success, especially continued success. Not one and done with tomorrow starting all over again at the bottom.

 

[SacTownKid]

Nobody is arguing that you don't need to draft talent. What all of the pro-tank posters are refusing to acknowledge is that you don't get those top 5 picks by losing, you get those top 5 picks by losing and then getting lucky in the lottery. Most years we've moved down in the lottery from where our record said we should have picked. Unless you also have a plan for how we're going to get the lottery balls to cooperate, the strategy of tanking for top 5 picks amounts to a lot of losing on purpose to have a chance at getting a top 5 pick once every 12 months. And if you don't get lucky you end up picking in the 8-12 range every year -- in other words, exactly what you all are arguing that we shouldn't do.

The trick isn't drafting talent, it's not tanking it. If you made the NBA you have some degree of talent. The Kings are a lead example of wiping your butt with whatever talent you do have and waiting until all value is sapped before doing something. Great franchises are usually ahead of those things.

 

[SacTownKid]

From 2009 through 2018 we had 5 top 5 picks (ideal results from a tankathon method) and another 6 picks from 6-10. How is that working out for us?

If you continuously tank picks partly or mostly do to usage, I think after that many years it's clear. It's not them, it's YOU.

 

[Gguod]

No. Because we don't have that. Or at least we haven't proven yet that we do. That's one reason I think we might be better off going after established talent that has gone through at least part of that process.

So just because our organisation has been bad we should throw all the data about draft out the window and instead focus on getting that star level player via trade? Getting that player via trade without giving so many assets that it handicaps your franchise is extremely rare so I'd so much rather take my odds in the draft compared to that. Stars dont usually become available via trade. Stars dont usually want to commit here. If stars get available via trade, some competing ready team will be ready to offer their whole draft for the next 6 years (swaps and original picks every other year)

Im not holding my breath on getting that star. Fox to Simmons probably wont move the needle much especially with how hard its to build around Simmons. Philly isnt even going to take that and I would never give up additional draft capital because that swap alone wont make us an acutally competing team.

Besides Simmons I dont know what else is available in there. Maybe Turner but hes still a third best player on a championship contending team. What players and or pick would you need to send out to get that? Probably not a trade that would benefit this team in the long run.

Trading for a star is extremely hard. If you think that drafting a star is a low possibility, trading for one is much much more unlikely. Small markets should focus on the draft and get their franchise player in there. We dont need a better role player than Barnes or Buddy, or a slight improvement to Fox. We need a star and the draft is our best chance for that

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Flatter? Odds of picking an all star at #1 is almost 100% greater than #8.

Flatter. As in, the blue line is flatter than the red line. Notice that I did not say “flat”. If you need help distinguishing between “flat” and “flatter”, Merriam-Webster can help you.

Notice that I also did not take a position on the argument in question. I merely showed the data describing the probability of an all-star being selected at every pick adjusted for the current lottery odds. This is important for the discussion of tanking, because this not the NFL or MLB where the worst record automatically gets the best pick.

 

[kb02]

Flatter. As in, the blue line is flatter than the red line. Notice that I did not say “flat”. If you need help distinguishing between “flat” and “flatter”, Merriam-Webster can help you.

Notice that I also did not take a position on the argument in question. I merely showed the data describing the probability of an all-star being selected at every pick adjusted for the current lottery odds. This is important for the discussion of tanking, because this not the NFL or MLB where the worst record automatically gets the best pick.

Ah, that makes more sense now. Your chart shows nothing.

 

[Warhawk]

Ah, that makes more sense now. Your chart shows nothing.

Only if you don't understand the chart.

 

[Turgenev]

Ah, that makes more sense now. Your chart shows nothing.

The chart shows the odds of picking an all star based on league finish position and odds of picking an all star based on draft position. Perhaps, for all knowing individuals like yourself, that is nothing. I, for one, appreciate the visualisation.