sactowndog
All-Star
Welp, there's that. I dont think that takes the vets off the table, but it very likely takes Fox off the table in any trades.
Not really. Just going to keep all options open …. While we finish 9-12 in the draft.
Welp, there's that. I dont think that takes the vets off the table, but it very likely takes Fox off the table in any trades.
Using Fox to upgrade to Simmons is not punting and rebuilding.
This is a popular take on this forum and a sure fire way to never enjoy watching your favorite sports teams. You could make an argument that 5-6 teams have a realistic chance at winning the championship in any given year, usually less. I get it, and I held that belief at one time but have since stopped taking sports so seriously. Sometimes its ok to have a team that is fun to watch and at least competitive. My cubs were lovable losers forever before they won the World series. Some of the highest attendance and tv viewership in the league. Since the win, a lot of cubs fans have become jaded and are pissed with the direction of the team even after making the playoffs nearly every year.
Dude you live in Iowa. You at least have both BIG and/or Big-12 sports to follow.
This team has managed to put themselves in the most hopeless spot year after year for most of Vivek’s tenure. Only Vlade’s luck offered some hope. I’m not even talking about Championships. Give the fans some damn Hope period!
Welp, there's that. I dont think that takes the vets off the table, but it very likely takes Fox off the table in any trades.
Nobody is going to argue that having a higher draft pick is worse than a lower one. But I think some (not saying you, your draft post just was convenient for this thought) also overvalue them to the point of absurdity.Unbelievable. Would be extremely easy to do what Toronto did last year, just punt for the rest of the season and get that top 5 pick. Doesnt even require trading away all the vets. Just acknowledge the fact that we arent competing this season, sell those players that arent in your plans 1-2 years from now and give more playing time to young guys. Thats all it takes. Doing everything you can to possibly be the 10th worst team in a 15 team conference gets you Davion Mitchell while the other strategy gets you Scottie Barnes. Same stuff every year, no wonder we are where we are
How many people think we are better off because we won couple of extra games last season rather than losing a couple more and being able to draft Barnes or Wagner. Or do people think that Toronto would've rather got couple more wins and Mitchell compared to getting couple more losses and Barnes?
Of cource that clip didnt say that the Raptors one year tank is out of the question but a total rebuild being completely off the table is a bummer. Should be at least an option if its a strategy that makes the most sense
I agree. When you’re a perennial playoff team or a team that is championship caliber, trading away multiple firsts is fine cuz they’re late picks and you have a team that doesn’t need more rookies. When you’re a perennial lottery team, you still need those picks to draft better players or trade for better players. Small market teams really only have the draft and trade to build the team, free agency is a long shot. We can’t blow all our future assets in first round picks at this stage.Nobody is going to argue that having a higher draft pick is worse than a lower one. But I think some (not saying you, your draft post just was convenient for this thought) also overvalue them to the point of absurdity.
Because for every Toronto example where they may have done well, you could also end up with a Pervis Ellison, or Greg Oden, or Marco Milicic, or Hasheem Thabeet, or Len Bias, etc. Or you fall in the draft lottery outside the range of the best players. Or in Kings land, maybe you get Stauskas, Justin James, Trob, Quincy Douby, or Dickau.
And you've traded away your best players in order for the "honor" to do so.
We've been in the lottery for 15 years and it's netted us pretty much a grand total of Fox, Bagley, Hali, Davion, and Hield (via trade) and a record of 17-27 this year so far. Out of the last 15 years in the lottery. The Spurs seemed to do just fine for decades with no lottery picks - it's not the end-all be-all of NBA talent acquisition.
I'd rather (judiciously) trade the draft capital for known talent than keep taking swings at unknowns. But let's not get crazy and go attaching several FRP to trade Fox for a Simmons. That's overpaying by a long shot (IMHO). We need a careful balance; I think some just start going all crazy slinging assets around.
Nothing about Monte’s interview filled me with confidence. Outside of breaking trade news I’m not sure anything would’ve. But it would’ve been nice to come away from that interview convinced that Monte was being a proactive GM and not a reactionary one. His attitude was very much if a good trade comes along, great, if not whatever. We’re inquiring with a few teams, but nothing beyond that. Given that the Kings have shed 50% or more of their viewing audience this year I would’ve liked to see a little more aggression on his part. The interview didn’t give me hope for the rest of season.
And LOLZZ. We're nice compared to others:
The last time the fans got involved we ended up with George Karl and Nik Stauskas. For everyone who thinks we need to just do something already because watching bad basketball is stressing them out, be careful what you wish for.
Nobody is going to argue that having a higher draft pick is worse than a lower one. But I think some (not saying you, your draft post just was convenient for this thought) also overvalue them to the point of absurdity.
Because for every Toronto example where they may have done well, you could also end up with a Pervis Ellison, or Greg Oden, or Marco Milicic, or Hasheem Thabeet, or Len Bias, etc. Or you fall in the draft lottery outside the range of the best players. Or in Kings land, maybe you get Stauskas, Justin James, Trob, Quincy Douby, or Dickau.
And you've traded away your best players in order for the "honor" to do so.
We've been in the lottery for 15 years and it's netted us pretty much a grand total of Fox, Bagley, Hali, Davion, and Hield (via trade) and a record of 17-27 this year so far. Out of the last 15 years in the lottery. The Spurs seemed to do just fine for decades with no lottery picks - it's not the end-all be-all of NBA talent acquisition.
I'd rather (judiciously) trade the draft capital for known talent than keep taking swings at unknowns. But let's not get crazy and go attaching several FRP to trade Fox for a Simmons. That's overpaying by a long shot (IMHO). We need a careful balance; I think some just start going all crazy slinging assets around.
The fans have never been involved in those personnel/exec decisions, contrary to what we may believe.
The team produced a video of fans presenting their analysis of draft picks to the front office in 2014. George Karl was actively campaigning on social media for the Kings coaching job months before he was hired.
Even if we assumed fan opinions mattered, the most soohisticated algos, would apply at most a 1% to 5% weight to fan opinions.
I dont know what to say about Spurs. After they lost their golden generation and Kawhi after that, they have been bad and without a clear direction. Of cource they have a hall of fame level coach but without talent it will never amount to anything significant.
Sure. Maybe it was just PR. I'm just saying, they were invited and the team did make a big deal at the time that crowdsourcing was a new innovation for the NBA that they were pioneering.
EDIT: Read it for yourself, they really hyped up that fan involvement was the future of the draft.
https://www.nba.com/kings/crowdsourcing-analytics-point-nik
Sure, they marketed it that way, but wasn’t the fan suggestion someone other than Stauskas?
The Spurs were built on the backs of two #1 overall picks in Robinson and Duncan, followed by a five-year stretch where they completely Moneyballed international scouting before everybody else caught up. And obviously you could say that they only needed three years. Ginobili in 1999 was the franchise's very first international pick. In 2000 there was only one good international player (Hedo) and he was taken before their selection, they didn't take any internationals. In 2001 they grabbed Tony Parker. That's your franchise.
They continued to do reasonably well in international picks but the league caught up shortly thereafter. Following Parker in 2001 they haven't had a Duncan-Parker-Ginobili level draft pick outside of Kawhi at #15 in 2011. So that whole run they had was based on a no-doubt #1 overall pick and a quick burst of Moneyballing that sustained them for a decade when they got an injection of luck when Kawhi fell way further than he should have.
A lot of the presenters they showed in the video were split between Stauskas and Elfrid Payton. Regardless I think it's obviously inaccurate to say that fans were never involved when they were invited to present to the whole front office and the team produced a video and a PR campaign promoting Draft 3.0 and how they were going to beat the odds with crowdsourcing and statistical analysis.
Do you remember what the consensus was around here? I don't remember Stauskas being the favorite. I remember people convincing each other that he was going to be a solid 15, 4 and 4 player after he was selected but I don't recall him being super popular pre draft.
I recommend everyone stay off social media in general its TOXIC.
Do you remember what the consensus was around here? I don't remember Stauskas being the favorite. I remember people convincing each other that he was going to be a solid 15, 4 and 4 player after he was selected but I don't recall him being super popular pre draft.
I'm pretty sure a lot of us liked Vonleh and thought of him as a solid complement to Cousins long term with his shooting potential, rim protection/defensive potential, potential to guard 4s/5s, athleticism, & size/length (6'8" w/o shoes, 7'4.25" wingspan, 9'0" standing reach, & 247 lbs).Do you remember what the consensus was around here? I don't remember Stauskas being the favorite. I remember people convincing each other that he was going to be a solid 15, 4 and 4 player after he was selected but I don't recall him being super popular pre draft.