Blow It Up
- Thread starter SLAB
- Start date
True if Fox would actually bring us Simmons.
If Fox can’t get his shooting back up and continues to play poor defense, I worry the bad contract Vlade gave Buddy is go to pale in comparison to the contract Monte gave Fox.
My biggest fear is in a desperate attempt to make the playin and declare victory, this front office gives away multiple picks like the Vlade Philly trade.
Geez why do I even follow this team? Probably because I live in Sac and we literally have no other options. Not even a G5 FBS team. Sacramento is a sports wasteland.
If Fox can’t get his shooting back up and continues to play poor defense, I worry the bad contract Vlade gave Buddy is go to pale in comparison to the contract Monte gave Fox.
My biggest fear is in a desperate attempt to make the playin and declare victory, this front office gives away multiple picks like the Vlade Philly trade.
Geez why do I even follow this team? Probably because I live in Sac and we literally have no other options. Not even a G5 FBS team. Sacramento is a sports wasteland.
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!
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!
The big issue a lot of us have is the teams arent even worth watching for many of the past 15 or so seasons. The team from a few years ago where we won 38 or so games was entertaining and made you believe we MIGHT actually have something promising. Hope is what a lot of us are craving. even if we dont contend for a championship give us a team we can be proud of and is worth watching. i get teams will have down years but 15 YEARS??? That is a long friggin time to be a doormat
Sacramento has their best seasons when they took-in star players that have reputations to redeem (Webber and Artest). This pattern to me is credible because the media tends to follow players with this profile and putting back to spot light small market teams, which seems to kindle winning underdogs spirit for at least the first couple of years. And in those years, the team would suddenly become a free agency magnet.
If Monte understands that there is good percentage this will happen if he brings in Simmons here, I hope he pulls the trigger even if it's gonna be Fox. Remember we got Webber for Mitch Richmond. If Kings need to survive, it needs to see the economics that Simmons in SAC could bring in way more basketball attention to the than what Fox is right. Fox plus 2 first round picks would probably make it.
If Monte understands that there is good percentage this will happen if he brings in Simmons here, I hope he pulls the trigger even if it's gonna be Fox. Remember we got Webber for Mitch Richmond. If Kings need to survive, it needs to see the economics that Simmons in SAC could bring in way more basketball attention to the than what Fox is right. Fox plus 2 first round picks would probably make it.
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
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
Last edited:
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.
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.
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.
Was dropping off the kiddo at daycare, so only caught bits and pieces of MMM's interview. I heard three drinking game comments, so three shots for me later today:
1. No Vivek interference.
2. Open to all paths. (Sactowndog)
3. We will make the move when the opp comes. (Dongoodboy).
That said, CD should've asked was that the case when you traded Wright for Thompson?
1. No Vivek interference.
2. Open to all paths. (Sactowndog)
3. We will make the move when the opp comes. (Dongoodboy).
That said, CD should've asked was that the case when you traded Wright for Thompson?
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.
There was a back and forth between CD and MMM that I found interesting. When CD goes, I know you're a "Vision" guy. The problem is, MMM's vision thus far seems a little incoherent. Are you going to continue to build around the good guys, but selfish, offense only, soft as a pillow Vlade core? Or are you going to build around your analytics driven, team first, connectors that you drafted? I'm not at the point where I think McNair should be fired, but his window is now. If he continues to build around the Vlade core, do nothing, or trades Haliburton, dude should be fired immediately.
Last edited:
There is data available on the importance of draft position. I dont care about how many examples one could come up with. Its still much more likely to draft an all star top 3 compared to 7-12th. Its just the data, it isnt my fault and its not about opininion. Its numbers and the data is extremely clear on this.
I value top level talent. Its objectively the most important thing that gets your franchise to be actually competitive. I think majority of us can agree with the fact that if this team wants to actually compete it needs a player that is a top level player in this team. How competitive we are depends on how good the addition is. I would never want to place my bet on my team becoming good to getting lucky in the draft at the 9th spot.
We dont even need to do that if we want to do what the Raptors did. You yourself obviously understand that every single raptors fan and organisation member are extremely happy that they didnt follow the same strategy as Kings. They are a smart organisation. They won the championship, one year the noticed they werent going to compete and acknowledging that they made sure they got as good talent in the draft as possible. Zero people can objectively claim that Kings are any better off because they won those two additional games. Zero. Its the exact same thing this year.
Being in the lottery isnt the goal. The goal is either being competitive or drafting top 5. The fact that we had one of the worst GM's ever doesnt change the fact that a top 3 pick at the time would've completely changed this franchise. That position came to us by pure luck but its a good example on why you want to put yourself in a position to draft as close to 1 as possible.
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.
What trades are out there that suddenly make us an actually competitive team. Fox for Simmons swap isnt probably it. Only realistic way for us is an addition to this core and most likely it comes via draft. In trade you have to give up too many pieces for an actuall difference maker, swapping Hield or Barnes for some other player dont move the needle at all and free agency is hard for us since we are capped out and one of the least favourable destinations amongst good players
If you add to this core an actuall difference maker, THEN make a trade with Fox or 1st round picks or whatever to add even more to that, then you can be competitive. Otherwise we keep going on this same track that is the worst possible track that an nba franchise can follow
I value top level talent. Its objectively the most important thing that gets your franchise to be actually competitive. I think majority of us can agree with the fact that if this team wants to actually compete it needs a player that is a top level player in this team. How competitive we are depends on how good the addition is. I would never want to place my bet on my team becoming good to getting lucky in the draft at the 9th spot.
We dont even need to do that if we want to do what the Raptors did. You yourself obviously understand that every single raptors fan and organisation member are extremely happy that they didnt follow the same strategy as Kings. They are a smart organisation. They won the championship, one year the noticed they werent going to compete and acknowledging that they made sure they got as good talent in the draft as possible. Zero people can objectively claim that Kings are any better off because they won those two additional games. Zero. Its the exact same thing this year.
Being in the lottery isnt the goal. The goal is either being competitive or drafting top 5. The fact that we had one of the worst GM's ever doesnt change the fact that a top 3 pick at the time would've completely changed this franchise. That position came to us by pure luck but its a good example on why you want to put yourself in a position to draft as close to 1 as possible.
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.
What trades are out there that suddenly make us an actually competitive team. Fox for Simmons swap isnt probably it. Only realistic way for us is an addition to this core and most likely it comes via draft. In trade you have to give up too many pieces for an actuall difference maker, swapping Hield or Barnes for some other player dont move the needle at all and free agency is hard for us since we are capped out and one of the least favourable destinations amongst good players
If you add to this core an actuall difference maker, THEN make a trade with Fox or 1st round picks or whatever to add even more to that, then you can be competitive. Otherwise we keep going on this same track that is the worst possible track that an nba franchise can follow
Last edited:
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
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
Last edited:
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.
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.
I would also give them a lot of credit for drafting Kawhi and developing him into an MVP candidate. I don't think that was an obvious pick considering his shooting in college was mediocre to terrible and I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that he would have been an elite player wherever he ended up. If that relationship between Kawhi and Pop hadn't soured so quickly and completely they would still be a contender having successfully rebooted following Duncan's retirement without needing to miss the playoffs at all.
He was considered a bit of a sleeper but he had his supporters. Including, I believe, @bajaden. I remember really liking Elfrid Payton that year and he's basically been a journeyman backup PG most of his career. Zach Lavine would have been the better pick in retrospect but he looked pretty terrible at UCLA -- just a gunner with bad shot selection and little interest in playing defense. Credit to him for working hard and improving his game. And Nikola Jokic would have been the HR pick of course but he wasn't anywhere on my radar.
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).
Since we had Collison and McLemore, I think a lot of us were shying away from Payton and Stauskas in favor of the "better fit" on paper (Vonleh). I don't really remember anyone outside of those 3 being discussed at where we were picking.
PG - Collison / Sessions / McCallum
SG - McLemore
SF - Gay / Casspi / D. Williams
PF - Vonleh / Landry / Evans
C - Cousins / Thompson / Moreland
Since we had Collison and McLemore, I think a lot of us were shying away from Payton and Stauskas in favor of the "better fit" on paper (Vonleh). I don't really remember anyone outside of those 3 being discussed at where we were picking.
PG - Collison / Sessions / McCallum
SG - McLemore
SF - Gay / Casspi / D. Williams
PF - Vonleh / Landry / Evans
C - Cousins / Thompson / Moreland
Yeah Vonleh and Payton are now ringing bells as the guys we were talking about the most at the time. We were picking just out of the reach of Smart and Randle with the 8th pick (sound familiar?). This pattern will more than likely continue on this year.
Funny thing is that you have to get to #15 with Adreian Payne to be able to find a player worse than Stauskas. Yet another year where the Kings happened to defy the odds and make the worst possible decision that was available. There were other busts like Exum and players like Payton, Vonleh, McDermott and Parker that didn't turn out as good as people thought, but Stauskas wound up being the worst of all of them.
Funny thing is that you have to get to #15 with Adreian Payne to be able to find a player worse than Stauskas. Yet another year where the Kings happened to defy the odds and make the worst possible decision that was available. There were other busts like Exum and players like Payton, Vonleh, McDermott and Parker that didn't turn out as good as people thought, but Stauskas wound up being the worst of all of them.