Blow It Up

[dude12]

On Carmichael Dave show, it is said that Monte has several potential trades that he can pull the trigger on at some point.

From bigger deals to smaller ones. Pressure is on him from above to make a change but he’s also not going to make a move to make a move. If teams won’t meet an asking price or drop theirs, then those deals won’t happen.

The Vucecic/Chicago deal is a blueprint. Looking for that guy who might be out there that may involve a player and protected picks.

And CD speculated as has many others, the public statement is they won’t blow it up because that does hurt negotiations. You say you are pushing for the playoffs and negotiate from that stance.

If we get a Grant and Turner, depending on what we have to give up, those 2 guys do improve the defense…..so there’s that

 

[KingsFanSince85]

We can even play a little game. Choose a team from a range like 2010-2020 (maybe leave out years try e kings didn’t have a pick). Pro tankers choose only top 3, anti tankers choose only from where the king’s chose or later. I’d bet good money both teams would be very close in talent.

You can just start off by selecting Steph Curry in 2009 instead of Tyreke Evans, who was selected not because he was more talented but because he manhandled all the other PG’s in one-on-one play (that was cited after the draft).

How good might the KINGS have been with Curry and Cousins after a few seasons together, no matter who else was surrounding them?

The KINGS would have been just as bad after the 2009 season with Curry as they were with Evans to still land Cousins in 2010.

Then they still could have been in position to draft Klay Thompson or Kawhi Leonard in 2011 (selected 11th and 15th respectively. Or at worst surely could have selected Jimmy Butler (30th pick).

Draymond Green could have been had a season later in 2012 no matter how well a core of the above players performed, as he was selected 35th.

Then in 2013 CJ McCollum was available at 10, Giannis Antetokounmpo at 15 and Rudy Gobert at 27.

Then in 2014 Joe Harris was available at 33, Spencer Dinwiddie at 38 and Nikola Jokić at 41.

Then in 2015 Devin Booker was available at 13, Montrezl Harrell at 32 and Richaun Holmes at 37.

Over just that 6 year period the KINGS could have EASILY acquired a core of players capable of winning a title that could still be largely together today.

And that’s just players available via the draft. Who knows how the roster could have been augmented via FA or trades once the team was successful. People forget good role players wanted to play in SAC once they became an established winner circa 1999-2006.

Top 3 picks weren’t a necessity back then and they aren’t a necessity now.

Just assemble the right FO with the right vision and capable of identifying and developing talent.

Geoff Petrie once did all the above. He built the 2000’s era KINGS with draft picks no higher than 7.

Corliss Williamson (13), Peja Stojakovic (14), Jason Williams (7), Hedo Turkoglu (16), Gerald Wallace (25), Kevin Martin (26).

Corliss was traded for Doug Christie and Williams for Mike Bibby.

That’s how good org’s typically do it.

Monte McNair could use Petrie’s template to trade for Ben Simmons with Tyrese, Fox, or Mitchell still in the fold then add to it as Petrie did with solid draft picks in the middle to latter part of the draft (if that’s where the future picks lay) and with a few cunning FA acquisitions.

 

[kb02]

LETS GOOOOOOOOO

Never under estimate desperation.

 

[kb02]

If we somehow end up with fox, Ty, grant and Turner, I won’t be too upset

Only works if Fox is a star. If he’s not, dat sh*t is going to crumble so hard.

 

[Dongoodboy]

2/3 odds Kings are really going to mortgage the future for Jerami Grant and Myles Turner. Just SMH.

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiret...ng-Jerami-Grant-Domantas-Sabonis-Myles-Turner

At this point, whatever, they want to win now, just freaking do it. Don't end up with fringe players and tell us a minor tweak is enough.

 

[EIM86]

At this point, whatever, they want to win now, just freaking do it. Don't end up with fringe players and tell us a minor tweak is enough.

no way man I’m not down to trade Metu for a Giannis-like player

 

[twslam07]

Here's your crazy doozy of the day...


BOS Gets: Buddy Hield & Alex Len
BOS Gives: Al Horford & Aaron Nesmith
Why for BOS? Get out of the luxury tax this season, free up time for R. Williams as the full time C (no more Williams-Horford combo), and add much needed floor spacing around Smart-Brown-Tatum-Williams.

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes
CHA Gives: Ish Smith & PJ Washington
Why for CHA? They can backfill Washington's minutes with Hayward, Bridges, & Oubre. Holmes is a big upgrade at C for them

DET Gets: Marvin Bagley, Aaron Nesmith, & 2022 SAC 1st (Top 4 Protected)
DET Gives: Jearmi Grant
Why for DET? Move their win now vet for young assets to add to their rebuild.

IND Gets: Davion Mitchell, Mo Harkless, & PJ Washington
IND Gives: Myles Turner
Why for IND? Move Turner for a couple young players that fit well around Brogdon & Sabonis. Moves Sabonis to full-time C with a 3&D PF playing next to him.

POR Gets: Tristan Thompson, 2022 SAC 2nd, & 2023 SAC 2nd
POR Gives: Robert Convington
Why for POR? Sell off Convington who expires after this year for a couple of 2nd round picks.

SAC Gets: Al Horford, Jerami Grant, Myles Turner, Robert Covington, & Ish Smith
SAC Gives: Buddy Hield, Marvin Bagley, Richaun Holmes, Tristan Thompson, Davion Mitchell, Mo Harkless, Alex Len, 2022 SAC 1st (Top 4 Protected), 2022 SAC 2nd, & 2023 SAC 2nd
Why for SAC? Huge push to go all-in to win now. They keep Fox, Haliburton, & Barnes in place and pick-up Grant, Turner, Covington, & Horford to really bolster the defense and make a run at the play-in. Fox-Haliburton-Covington-Grant-Turner should be a solid defensive unit with plenty of spacing to allow Fox to carve up defenses. Davis-Barnes-Horford would give us a very good bench with solid scoring, shooting, and defense.




PG - Fox / Smith
SG - Haliburton / Davis / Ramsey
SF - Covington / Barnes / Woodard
PF - Grant / Metu
C - Turner / Horford / Jones

 

[kb02]

Here's your crazy doozy of the day...


BOS Gets: Buddy Hield & Alex Len
BOS Gives: Al Horford & Aaron Nesmith
Why for BOS? Get out of the luxury tax this season, free up time for R. Williams as the full time C (no more Williams-Horford combo), and add much needed floor spacing around Smart-Brown-Tatum-Williams.

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes
CHA Gives: Ish Smith & PJ Washington
Why for CHA? They can backfill Washington's minutes with Hayward, Bridges, & Oubre. Holmes is a big upgrade at C for them

DET Gets: Marvin Bagley, Aaron Nesmith, & 2022 SAC 1st (Top 4 Protected)
DET Gives: Jearmi Grant
Why for DET? Move their win now vet for young assets to add to their rebuild.

IND Gets: Davion Mitchell, Mo Harkless, & PJ Washington
IND Gives: Myles Turner
Why for IND? Move Turner for a couple young players that fit well around Brogdon & Sabonis. Moves Sabonis to full-time C with a 3&D PF playing next to him.

POR Gets: Tristan Thompson, 2022 SAC 2nd, & 2023 SAC 2nd
POR Gives: Robert Convington
Why for POR? Sell off Convington who expires after this year for a couple of 2nd round picks.

SAC Gets: Al Horford, Jerami Grant, Myles Turner, Robert Covington, & Ish Smith
SAC Gives: Buddy Hield, Marvin Bagley, Richaun Holmes, Tristan Thompson, Davion Mitchell, Mo Harkless, Alex Len, 2022 SAC 1st (Top 4 Protected), 2022 SAC 2nd, & 2023 SAC 2nd
Why for SAC? Huge push to go all-in to win now. They keep Fox, Haliburton, & Barnes in place and pick-up Grant, Turner, Covington, & Horford to really bolster the defense and make a run at the play-in. Fox-Haliburton-Covington-Grant-Turner should be a solid defensive unit with plenty of spacing to allow Fox to carve up defenses. Davis-Barnes-Horford would give us a very good bench with solid scoring, shooting, and defense.




PG - Fox / Smith
SG - Haliburton / Davis / Ramsey
SF - Covington / Barnes / Woodard
PF - Grant / Metu
C - Turner / Horford / Jones

Monte wishes he could get those players for that price. At a minimum, Mitchell and two Kings first will need to go out. Then he’ll have to find a first from the other spare parts not named Hali or Fox.

 

[24 rick barry]

You can just start off by selecting Steph Curry in 2009 instead of Tyreke Evans, who was selected not because he was more talented but because he manhandled all the other PG’s in one-on-one play (that was cited after the draft).

How good might the KINGS have been with Curry and Cousins after a few seasons together, no matter who else was surrounding them?

The KINGS would have been just as bad after the 2009 season with Curry as they were with Evans to still land Cousins in 2010.

Then they still could have been in position to draft Klay Thompson or Kawhi Leonard in 2011 (selected 11th and 15th respectively. Or at worst surely could have selected Jimmy Butler (30th pick).

Draymond Green could have been had a season later in 2012 no matter how well a core of the above players performed, as he was selected 35th.

Then in 2013 CJ McCollum was available at 10, Giannis Antetokounmpo at 15 and Rudy Gobert at 27.

Then in 2014 Joe Harris was available at 33, Spencer Dinwiddie at 38 and Nikola Jokić at 41.

Then in 2015 Devin Booker was available at 13, Montrezl Harrell at 32 and Richaun Holmes at 37.

Over just that 6 year period the KINGS could have EASILY acquired a core of players capable of winning a title that could still be largely together today.

And that’s just players available via the draft. Who knows how the roster could have been augmented via FA or trades once the team was successful. People forget good role players wanted to play in SAC once they became an established winner circa 1999-2006.

Top 3 picks weren’t a necessity back then and they aren’t a necessity now.

Just assemble the right FO with the right vision and capable of identifying and developing talent.

Geoff Petrie once did all the above. He built the 2000’s era KINGS with draft picks no higher than 7.

Corliss Williamson (13), Peja Stojakovic (14), Jason Williams (7), Hedo Turkoglu (16), Gerald Wallace (25), Kevin Martin (26).

Corliss was traded for Doug Christie and Williams for Mike Bibby.

That’s how good org’s typically do it.

Monte McNair could use Petrie’s template to trade for Ben Simmons with Tyrese, Fox, or Mitchell still in the fold then add to it as Petrie did with solid draft picks in the middle to latter part of the draft (if that’s where the future picks lay) and with a few cunning FA acquisitions.

More Tomfoolery from KingsFanSince85
Don't you remember that guy named Webber and the other guy-let me think-Divac? When did the Kings draft these Kings Legends?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Just assemble the right FO with the right vision and capable of identifying and developing talent.

Geoff Petrie once did all the above. He built the 2000’s era KINGS with draft picks no higher than 7.

Corliss Williamson (13), Peja Stojakovic (14), Jason Williams (7), Hedo Turkoglu (16), Gerald Wallace (25), Kevin Martin (26).

Corliss was traded for Doug Christie and Williams for Mike Bibby.

That’s how good org’s typically do it.

Monte McNair could use Petrie’s template to trade for Ben Simmons with Tyrese, Fox, or Mitchell still in the fold then add to it as Petrie did with solid draft picks in the middle to latter part of the draft (if that’s where the future picks lay) and with a few cunning FA acquisitions.

I'm going to skip the entire top of the post, because I just don't get why people insist on remiseration of the past. We, like many other franchises, have missed opportunities. The people in charge when we missed those opportunities are no longer in charge. The bad things that happened in the past are always going to be there, they're never going to change. If you insist on poking the wound over and over, you're only hurting yourself.

But as far as the bottom part of your post goes, how do we know we aren't a good organization?

You point out that Petrie made good draft picks - indeed he did. He was very good at it. But Petrie didn't turn the franchise around in two years. He took over for the 1994 offseason. His first four seasons were all under .500 and went:
39 wins
39 wins* --> snuck into the playoffs but were manhandled in the first round
37 wins
27 wins

His first four first-round picks were Brian Grant, Corliss Williamson, Peja Stojakovic, and Tariq Abdul-Wahad. After four seasons at the helm where he did a pretty good job of drafting but the team only got worse, Petrie made his big move in the 1998 offseason, trading Richmond for Webber, signing Vlade Divac, and grabbing J-Will in the draft. In Petrie's fifth season the Kings finally broke .500 - and they were still building their core. Corliss was with the team for two more years, and wasn't traded for Christie until the 2000 offseason, the same year Hedo was picked. J-Will was with the team for three more years, and wasn't traded for Bibby until the 2001 offseason.

There, in the summer of 2001, we finally had our core built. It wasn't until Petrie's fifth year that we became a perennial playoff team. It wasn't until Petrie's 8th year that we finally fielded the core that was championship worthy. That's how long it took an admittedly GOOD front office to turn things around.

Monte McNair has not yet completed his second year. His first two draft picks (Haliburton, who is good and Mitchell, who is TBD) look to be of similar quality to Petrie's first two picks. The book is not even closed on his second trade deadline yet. Now, I don't yet know if McNair is as good as Petrie or not. But what I do know is that if we kicked Petrie to the curb following no big splash at his second trade deadline, the glory years never happen. Maybe, just maybe, we should have a little bit of patience to see what the guy is going to do before insinuating that we yet again have a terrible front office.

 

[steelevt]

I'm going to skip the entire top of the post, because I just don't get why people insist on remiseration of the past. We, like many other franchises, have missed opportunities. The people in charge when we missed those opportunities are no longer in charge. The bad things that happened in the past are always going to be there, they're never going to change. If you insist on poking the wound over and over, you're only hurting yourself.

But as far as the bottom part of your post goes, how do we know we aren't a good organization?

You point out that Petrie made good draft picks - indeed he did. He was very good at it. But Petrie didn't turn the franchise around in two years. He took over for the 1994 offseason. His first four seasons were all under .500 and went:
39 wins
39 wins* --> snuck into the playoffs but were manhandled in the first round
37 wins
27 wins

His first four first-round picks were Brian Grant, Corliss Williamson, Peja Stojakovic, and Tariq Abdul-Wahad. After four seasons at the helm where he did a pretty good job of drafting but the team only got worse, Petrie made his big move in the 1998 offseason, trading Richmond for Webber, signing Vlade Divac, and grabbing J-Will in the draft. In Petrie's fifth season the Kings finally broke .500 - and they were still building their core. Corliss was with the team for two more years, and wasn't traded for Christie until the 2000 offseason, the same year Hedo was picked. J-Will was with the team for three more years, and wasn't traded for Bibby until the 2001 offseason.

There, in the summer of 2001, we finally had our core built. It wasn't until Petrie's fifth year that we became a perennial playoff team. It wasn't until Petrie's 8th year that we finally fielded the core that was championship worthy. That's how long it took an admittedly GOOD front office to turn things around.

Monte McNair has not yet completed his second year. His first two draft picks (Haliburton, who is good and Mitchell, who is TBD) look to be of similar quality to Petrie's first two picks. The book is not even closed on his second trade deadline yet. Now, I don't yet know if McNair is as good as Petrie or not. But what I do know is that if we kicked Petrie to the curb following no big splash at his second trade deadline, the glory years never happen. Maybe, just maybe, we should have a little bit of patience to see what the guy is going to do before insinuating that we yet again have a terrible front office.

I don’t see in his post where he was saying get rid of Monte. Just saying a good front office can build a good team with the right picks. If anything I read it as being patient and Monte might be able to follow petrie’s blueprint without having to go full tank.

 

[twslam07]

Monte wishes he could get those players for that price. At a minimum, Mitchell and two Kings first will need to go out. Then he’ll have to find a first from the other spare parts not named Hali or Fox.

• Pacers get a value of two 1sts for Turner (Mitchell & Washington)
• Pistons get a value of two 1sts for Grant (lightly protected 2022 SAC 1st which is currently 6th and Nesmith/Bagley)
• Blazers get a value of two 2nds for a 31 year old, expiring Covington (two SAC 2nds)
  

Value seems pretty fair.

 

[funkykingston]

Grant and Turner as a package would be a disaster IMO.

Yes, they'd improve the frontcourt defense but both are very poor rebounders for their positions, both want more touches on offense, and both are FAs after next season.

Of the two I'd rather have Turner, depending on the price. He provides better shotblocking and floor spacing and I think he's a better fit with Fox & Haliburton. I don't think there's reasonable a three team deal for Fox that nets Ben Simmons, but Turner would also be a better fit with Simmons, just on the outside chance that happens.

But Holmes to Charlotte for PJ Washington and change definitely makes sense.

Turner, Washington, Fox & Haliburton is a step in the right direction. The team would still need starting caliber wings but at the very least the team needs to start actually building a complimentary roster if they are really going to try and make things work with the Fox/Haliburton backcourt. A 3&D SF helps get you there.

Then they'll need to hit in the draft. Jabari Smith or Paulo Banchero are good fits at PF. Banchero would definitely benefit from a 5 that can spot up. Holmgren fascinates me though. Could he play the same type of role as Evan Mobley, as a big, skilled PF next to a traditional center? Mobley is much quicker laterally which lets him switch more easily on the perimter, but Holmgren is a better shotblocker and both are unselfish, versatile, and high IQ players.

If they Kings don't get lucky in the lottery there are several wings that should be available around their pick that could help. Kendall Brown, Adrian Griffin Jr, Benedict Mathurin, maybe even Tari Eason (who I'm high on) or Patrick Baldwin (who I'm not as high on but who should fare better in the NBA game.)

Hopefully McNair makes the right moves. Standing pat would be pretty much unacceptable at this point (I'd be completely done for this season and maybe beyond) but ill conceived "win now" moves could be worse. I don't have high hopes for trade deadline moves but I'd love to be wrong.

 

[24 rick barry]

Grant and Turner as a package would be a disaster IMO.

Yes, they'd improve the frontcourt defense but both are very poor rebounders for their positions, both want more touches on offense, and both are FAs after next season.

Of the two I'd rather have Turner, depending on the price. He provides better shotblocking and floor spacing and I think he's a better fit with Fox & Haliburton. I don't think there's reasonable a three team deal for Fox that nets Ben Simmons, but Turner would also be a better fit with Simmons, just on the outside chance that happens.

But Holmes to Charlotte for PJ Washington and change definitely makes sense.

Turner, Washington, Fox & Haliburton is a step in the right direction. The team would still need starting caliber wings but at the very least the team needs to start actually building a complimentary roster if they are really going to try and make things work with the Fox/Haliburton backcourt. A 3&D SF helps get you there.

Then they'll need to hit in the draft. Jabari Smith or Paulo Banchero are good fits at PF. Banchero would definitely benefit from a 5 that can spot up. Holmgren fascinates me though. Could he play the same type of role as Evan Mobley, as a big, skilled PF next to a traditional center? Mobley is much quicker laterally which lets him switch more easily on the perimter, but Holmgren is a better shotblocker and both are unselfish, versatile, and high IQ players.

If they Kings don't get lucky in the lottery there are several wings that should be available around their pick that could help. Kendall Brown, Adrian Griffin Jr, Benedict Mathurin, maybe even Tari Eason (who I'm high on) or Patrick Baldwin (who I'm not as high on but who should fare better in the NBA game.)

Hopefully McNair makes the right moves. Standing pat would be pretty much unacceptable at this point (I'd be completely done for this season and maybe beyond) but ill conceived "win now" moves could be worse. I don't have high hopes for trade deadline moves but I'd love to be wrong.

Always enjoy funkykingston's thoughtful analysis.

 

[kb02]

• Pacers get a value of two 1sts for Turner (Mitchell & Washington)
• Pistons get a value of two 1sts for Grant (lightly protected 2022 SAC 1st which is currently 6th and Nesmith/Bagley)
• Blazers get a value of two 2nds for a 31 year old, expiring Covington (two SAC 2nds)

Value seems pretty fair.

First, you’re completely disregarding the years remaining on a rookie contract. That alone brings down the value of the spare parts that you cobble together to equal first.

Second, quantity does not equal quality. Two players worth seconds, who are 2-4 yrs into their rookie deals does not now equal a first.

Third, if Washington was worth a first, Charlotte would’ve already trades him for a first by now

It’s like Boston saying we’ll give you equal value by trading Romeo, Nesmith, Pritchard, a 2025 FRP and 2027 FRP for Fox. See, that’s 5 firsts for Fox!

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

On Carmichael Dave show, it is said that Monte has several potential trades that he can pull the trigger on at some point.

From bigger deals to smaller ones. Pressure is on him from above to make a change but he’s also not going to make a move to make a move. If teams won’t meet an asking price or drop theirs, then those deals won’t happen.

The Vucecic/Chicago deal is a blueprint. Looking for that guy who might be out there that may involve a player and protected picks.

And CD speculated as has many others, the public statement is they won’t blow it up because that does hurt negotiations. You say you are pushing for the playoffs and negotiate from that stance.

If we get a Grant and Turner, depending on what we have to give up, those 2 guys do improve the defense…..so there’s that

Good point about not making a statement about "tanking" or not. Vlade probably would have laid his cards on the table, never realizing it could hurt his chances in trade discussions

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I'm going to skip the entire top of the post, because I just don't get why people insist on remiseration of the past. .

You missed the entire point if you believe my point was “remiseration of the past”.

IDK how you extrapolate that after following the thread.

I outlined examples, yet again, debunking this idea that securing top 3 picks for several years is the only way or even best way to go.

I not only pointed to perennial winners that weren’t built that way, I demonstrated how the KINGS could have done the same with the non top 3 picks they’ve had.

There was no insistence on dwelling on the past, but rather to cite it as an factual example dispelling this lazy narrative.

 

[sactowndog]

Good point about not making a statement about "tanking" or not. Vlade probably would have laid his cards on the table, never realizing it could hurt his chances in trade discussions

For everything about Vlade, absent the Philly trade Vlade actually made good trades. The problem for Vlade was his drafting was crap…

but consider.
Bellineli for the 22nd 16 pick

8th (Chriss) for Bogi, 13th and 28th

Cousins for Hield and the 10th pick, plus Evans, Galloway, etc.

If Vlade had even average draft acumen I don’t think you reverse any of those picks. The problem Vlade had is he couldn’t positively leverage any of the draft capital he accumulated.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

You missed the entire point if you believe my point was “remiseration of the past”.

IDK how you extrapolate that after following the thread.

I outlined examples, yet again, debunking this idea that securing top 3 picks for several years is the only way or even best way to go.

I not only pointed to perennial winners that weren’t built that way, I demonstrated how the KINGS could have done the same with the non top 3 picks they’ve had.

There was no insistence on dwelling on the past, but rather to cite it as an factual example dispelling this lazy narrative.

My mistake. I see the same point of view repeated so often that sometimes it's hard to keep track of a poster's intentions, even when reading their post. It would seem your point of view is closer to mine than I interpreted it.

Regardless of my misread of your post, I stand by my observation of the Kings under Petrie. Definite progress did not happen until his fifth year, the core was not fully built until his eighth year, and it is too early to judge Monte McNair for good or for ill. I do not accuse you of prejudging him.

 

[sactowndog]

You missed the entire point if you believe my point was “remiseration of the past”.

IDK how you extrapolate that after following the thread.

I outlined examples, yet again, debunking this idea that securing top 3 picks for several years is the only way or even best way to go.

I not only pointed to perennial winners that weren’t built that way, I demonstrated how the KINGS could have done the same with the non top 3 picks they’ve had.

There was no insistence on dwelling on the past, but rather to cite it as an factual example dispelling this lazy narrative.

Yeah except your model is mathematically challenged and highlighting one off instances across an entire draft is hardly proof.

but you have managed to get me and the Captain to agree on something so there is that accomplishment.

 

[twslam07]

First, you’re completely disregarding the years remaining on a rookie contract. That alone brings down the value of the spare parts that you cobble together to equal first.

Second, quantity does not equal quality. Two players worth seconds, who are 2-4 yrs into their rookie deals does not now equal a first.

Third, if Washington was worth a first, Charlotte would’ve already trades him for a first by now

It’s like Boston saying we’ll give you equal value by trading Romeo, Nesmith, Pritchard, a 2025 FRP and 2027 FRP for Fox. See, that’s 5 firsts for Fox!

No, I'm not disregarding the remaining years on a rookie contract. I think you're disregarding that not every player you draft with a 1st is a promising player. Meaning would you rather have a solid young player who has 2 years on their rookie deal or an unknown who has 4 year on their rookie deal. The answer is "it depends" hence why it's not as black & white as you make it sound.

It's been rumored that Indy wants two 1st for Turner or a young player and a 1st for Turner. In this case, it appears that Indy is fine with going the "quantity" route rather than risk losing Turner for nothing in 1.5 years. Same for Grant. Covington could walk next year and is 31. Is he going to want to stay with the 20-28 Blazers? Maybe & maybe not.

Well it depends on what type of 1st for Washington. I wouldn't give up a lotto pick for him, but would consider a 1st in the 20-25 range.

 

[ESP47]

You missed the entire point if you believe my point was “remiseration of the past”.

IDK how you extrapolate that after following the thread.

I outlined examples, yet again, debunking this idea that securing top 3 picks for several years is the only way or even best way to go.

I not only pointed to perennial winners that weren’t built that way, I demonstrated how the KINGS could have done the same with the non top 3 picks they’ve had.

There was no insistence on dwelling on the past, but rather to cite it as an factual example dispelling this lazy narrative.

You just used revisionist history to say that the Kings could have drafted all the best players without taking into account that many of those players weren't even on the radar. Tell me the Kings could have drafted Klay or Kawhi instead of Jimmer and I'll buy that. But saying they could have drafted Jokic or Dinwiddie instead of Stauskas is completely unrealistic. Yeah they could have drafted them but none of those guys were even remotely on the radar for the 8th pick.

Its like saying any competent NFL franchise should have picked Tom Brady in the first 6 rounds. Very easy to say in 2022 but go back to a day before the draft and make me a list of competent people who said Brady should have gone #1. I'm pretty sure only his mom would be on that list.

 

[kb02]

No, I'm not disregarding the remaining years on a rookie contract. I think you're disregarding that not every player you draft with a 1st is a promising player. Meaning would you rather have a solid young player who has 2 years on their rookie deal or an unknown who has 4 year on their rookie deal. The answer is "it depends" hence why it's not as black as what as you make it sound.

It's been rumored that Indy wants two 1st for Turner or a young player and a 1st for Turner. In this case, it appears that Indy is fine with going the "quantity" route rather than risk losing Turner for nothing in 1.5 years. Same for Grant. Covington could walk next year and is 31. Is he going to want to stay with the 20-28 Blazers? Maybe & maybe not.

Well it depends on what type of 1st for Washington. I wouldn't give up a lotto pick for him, but would consider a 1st in the 20-25 range.

Quantity simply does not equal value no matter how much you try to rationalize it. Wish you were right, but there is no way the Kings are getting those players by simply punting spare parts and one first.

 

[twslam07]

Quantity simply does not equal value no matter how much you try to rationalize it. Wish you were right, but there is no way the Kings are getting those players by simply punting spare parts and one first.

Again, it's not my asking price. It's the asking price rumored.

 

[funkykingston]

You just used revisionist history to say that the Kings could have drafted all the best players without taking into account that many of those players weren't even on the radar. Tell me the Kings could have drafted Klay or Kawhi instead of Jimmer and I'll buy that. But saying they could have drafted Jokic or Dinwiddie instead of Stauskas is completely unrealistic. Yeah they could have drafted them but none of those guys were even remotely on the radar for the 8th pick.

Its like saying any competent NFL franchise should have picked Tom Brady in the first 6 rounds. Very easy to say in 2022 but go back to a day before the draft and make me a list of competent people who said Brady should have gone #1. I'm pretty sure only his mom would be on that list.

I heard Mrs. Brady had LaVar Arrington at the top of her draft board.

 

[kb02]

Again, it's not my asking price. It's the asking price rumored.

I'm not questioning the rumored asking price. I'm questioning the value that you place on the spare parts.

 

[kb02]

You just used revisionist history to say that the Kings could have drafted all the best players without taking into account that many of those players weren't even on the radar. Tell me the Kings could have drafted Klay or Kawhi instead of Jimmer and I'll buy that. But saying they could have drafted Jokic or Dinwiddie instead of Stauskas is completely unrealistic. Yeah they could have drafted them but none of those guys were even remotely on the radar for the 8th pick.

Its like saying any competent NFL franchise should have picked Tom Brady in the first 6 rounds. Very easy to say in 2022 but go back to a day before the draft and make me a list of competent people who said Brady should have gone #1. I'm pretty sure only his mom would be on that list.

Yea, I hate hindsight experts. Simple math says its more advantageous to select from a larger pool than a smaller one, especially if the larger pool contains each member of the smaller pool.

 

[sactowndog]

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2022/01/2...on-making-trades-before-deadline-not-selling/

while I fully suspect it is behind the latest desperate push to make the playoff…. Monte best be careful as Vivek is ruining his reputation in the process.

 

[The_Jamal]

You just used revisionist history to say that the Kings could have drafted all the best players without taking into account that many of those players weren't even on the radar. Tell me the Kings could have drafted Klay or Kawhi instead of Jimmer and I'll buy that. But saying they could have drafted Jokic or Dinwiddie instead of Stauskas is completely unrealistic. Yeah they could have drafted them but none of those guys were even remotely on the radar for the 8th pick.

Its like saying any competent NFL franchise should have picked Tom Brady in the first 6 rounds. Very easy to say in 2022 but go back to a day before the draft and make me a list of competent people who said Brady should have gone #1. I'm pretty sure only his mom would be on that list.

Ah. the old "Why didn't the Kings just select every star player picked after them?" trope. Classic.

Mainly because teams are really bad at drafting and talent evaluation. No one hits a home-run on every 1st round pick year after year. But what bad teams (in any sport really) will do is give themselves at the top end talent and give themselves multiple opportunities to hit on franchise.

Put yourself in the top 5 picks, give yourself the overwhelmingly better odds to select a franchise cornerstone. This stuff isn't hard. Of course you can select the Marvin Bagley in the top 5. You can also select the Zion Williamson/Ja Morant/LaMelo Ball/Evan Mobley/Cade Cunningham/Ant Edwards. And it just takes one to change your team's course.

But it's just a circular argument we have every year because the Kings refuse to let us actually have fun watching the basketball team lol.

 

[steelevt]

But it's just a circular argument we have every year because the Kings refuse to let us actually have fun watching the basketball team lol.

This right here every day, every year…sigh