Coin flip day today.

#32
Is there any reason why I would rather be in Minnesota's position? I don't know. What are their fans like? Cause if the have message boards that can go for more than half a page without two or three village cynics hijacking the conversation with "Wolves suck, Gupta sucks, wish we were the Kings", then maybe yeah, they would be the better bet
 
#34
I see “KAT and Russell are losers” and I counter with... so are Fox and Buddy and Bagley and everyone not named Barnes for those seasons he rode behind Curry and Klay. If they can’t build behind them why should we think we can build anything with our equally loser core?
Did you actually read my post? I mean really read it. I said:

"This is not to suggest the Kings have been good. We have been bad. Losers in fact. But KAT's teams have been worse, and Russell's teams MUCH worse. In fact, we have had a better record than KAT and Russell in 4 of their 6 years. Think of that- us better than any team in 4 of 6 years!"

Sactowndog has been running this narrative that the Wolves are legit, and that they are a Holmes signing away from being a competitor. I am saying they aren't. I am saying they are a joke, they are losers. They are even bigger joke losers than one of the biggest joke loser franchises- US!
 
#37
Every single thread here is hijacked by people who want to say the Kings suck, that other teams are better. Every single thread. Get a life.
Everyone likes to harp on and ride the wave of the now 15 consecutive non-playoff appearances.

But much of that has to do with circumstance and bad luck. For example, how many times might the KINGS qualified for the playoffs the past 15 seasons had they been in the Eastern Conference?

I get it, the KINGS have been mismanaged. And still likely are being mismanaged by a clueless owner. But let’s not act as if the 15 years of no postseason qualifies them as the worst. It doesn’t.

Look how poorly run PHX has been under Robert Sarver and the Knicks under James Dolan. Now suddenly everyone is praising those franchises after one good season.

Things can change quickly.
 
#38
Everyone likes to harp on and ride the wave of the now 15 consecutive non-playoff appearances.

But much of that has to do with circumstance and bad luck. For example, how many times might the KINGS qualified for the playoffs the past 15 seasons had they been in the Eastern Conference?

I get it, the KINGS have been mismanaged. And still likely are being mismanaged by a clueless owner. But let’s not act as if the 15 years of no postseason qualifies them as the worst. It doesn’t.

Look how poorly run PHX has been under Robert Sarver and the Knicks under James Dolan. Now suddenly everyone is praising those franchises after one good season.

Things can change quickly.
16 outta 30 make the playoffs every year.

More than half.

I doubt we will even be in the play in game for awhile.
 
#41
It seems that this has been said about Minnesota for the past 4 years.
They made the playoff in 2017-18. That's more than I can say as a fan of the Kings.

I'm willing to bet they will not need another 15 years to make the playoff again.

I'm not saying the T-Wolves are great or the Kings are horrible. But the reality is, they had more going for them than it for us.
.
 
#42
They made the playoff in 2017-18. That's more than I can say as a fan of the Kings.

I'm willing to bet they will not need another 15 years to make the playoff again.

I'm not saying the T-Wolves are great or the Kings are horrible. But the reality is, they had more going for them than it for us.
.
The guy who got them there left the next year because he felt the whole team was soft and didn't care enough about winning.
 
#43
Again with the Wolves love? KAT and Russell are losers. We might be a loser franchise, but those are two proven loser players. They have never led their teams to anything, with repeated failures over their first 6 years. Nice stats? Yes. Winners? No. They are soft losers. The numbers bear it out. They are worse than the Kings.

2015-16
Kings- 33-49
KAT- 29-53
Russell (LA) 17-65

2016-17
Kings- 32-50
KAT- 31-51
Russell (LA) 26-56

2017-18
KAT- 47-35 (carried by third team NBA Jimmy Butler)
Russell (BKN) 28-54
Kings 27-55

2018-2019
Russell (BKN)- 42-40
Kings- 39-43
KAT- 36-46

2019-2020
Kings 31-41
Russell (GS/MIN) 21-43
KAT- 19-45

2020-21
Kings 31-41
KAT 23-49
Russell 23-49

Since 2015-16
Kings 193-279
KAT- 185- 279 (8 less games because they didn't qualify for bubble)
Russell 157-307

This is not to suggest the Kings have been good. We have been bad. Losers in fact. But KAT's teams have been worse, and Russell's teams MUCH worse. In fact, we have had a better record than KAT and Russell in 4 of their 6 years. Think of that- us better than any team in 4 of 6 years! KAT's only good season came with Butler as the alpha. Russell's only decent season was with a scrappy Brooklyn team that probably wasn't any better than the Kings team that year. So spare me the love about the Wolves, and the talk that they are build something. They will never win a thing with KAT and Russell.
dude spare me the soliloquy. I said it was a question not a given conclusion. I don’t have a certain opinion much less love for them.
 
#44
I didn't realize the scope of the question. Still, I'm not sure that this Minnesota young core is any better than Fox, Haliburton, Bagley (yes, Bagley!), and a lotto pick this year (which Minnesota probably doesn't have). And the Kings have some other non-young-core pieces as well. Edwards has a loooong way to go to be equal to Buddy Hield.

Let's look at it this way:
Towns > Bagley
Russell << Fox
Edwards << Hield
McDaniels << Barnes
Rubio << Haliburton
Reid > Metu
Beasley << Kings Lotto pick

If Minnesota hits the lottery and manages a top-3 pick, then maybe you'd rather be Minny. Otherwise, seems like a tough argument to make.
yeah I’m not sure I agree with your Hield Edwards ranking. And definitely don’t buy Towns > Bagley. Perhaps Towns >>> Bagley
 
#45
Did you actually read my post? I mean really read it. I said:

"This is not to suggest the Kings have been good. We have been bad. Losers in fact. But KAT's teams have been worse, and Russell's teams MUCH worse. In fact, we have had a better record than KAT and Russell in 4 of their 6 years. Think of that- us better than any team in 4 of 6 years!"

Sactowndog has been running this narrative that the Wolves are legit, and that they are a Holmes signing away from being a competitor. I am saying they aren't. I am saying they are a joke, they are losers. They are even bigger joke losers than one of the biggest joke loser franchises- US!
personally I don’t care and it’s just conversation while we wait for our annual trip to the lottery. I’d much rather be talking the kings play-off match-ups than this topic but alas that topic is yet again not possible.

But you seem to forget that Russell led his team to the playoffs and was an all star in the east. That doesn’t mean he is a great player and I wouldn’t want him on that contract but then I don’t want Buddy on his contract either.
 
#46
They made the playoff in 2017-18. That's more than I can say as a fan of the Kings.

I'm willing to bet they will not need another 15 years to make the playoff again.

I'm not saying the T-Wolves are great or the Kings are horrible. But the reality is, they had more going for them than it for us.
.
meh

to argue the other side they are up against the Luxury tax with a big hole at the 4. They made some bad signings and without a pick they have limited options to fill it. If they keep their pick they could have a nice core but as Captain points out it’s a slim chance.

most likely neither team makes the playoffs next year without some lotto luck and an extraordinary rookie year.
 
#48
dude spare me the soliloquy. I said it was a question not a given conclusion. I don’t have a certain opinion much less love for them.
Two short paragraphs with supporting statistics is a "soliloquy?" Now I know why debates with you go nowhere on this board. Not sure how others do message board debates, but I made a point, supported it with readily available evidence from ESPN.com, and then concluded with a short paragraph of analysis. Hardly War and Peace...
 
#50
Two short paragraphs with supporting statistics is a "soliloquy?" Now I know why debates with you go nowhere on this board. Not sure how others do message board debates, but I made a point, supported it with readily available evidence from ESPN.com, and then concluded with a short paragraph of analysis. Hardly War and Peace...
fair enough I was somewhat responding to the “wolves love comment”. Debating who the Kings suck worse than because again no playoff series is hardly “Wolves love”

I think your stats ignore that the Wolves have been relatively unhealthy. Also the standard here isn’t are they going to be world beaters, it’s are they better than the Kings. They played, unfortunately for them, decent when they all played. Edwards and Daniels look like keepers. For the first half of the season (before everyone else tanks), I’m guessing they have a better record than us. Russell plays no defense but frankly neither does Fox except in spurts.
 
#51
Is there any reason why I would rather be in Minnesota's position? I don't know. What are their fans like? Cause if the have message boards that can go for more than half a page without two or three village cynics hijacking the conversation with "Wolves suck, Gupta sucks, wish we were the Kings", then maybe yeah, they would be the better bet
just curious. After 15 years when does cynic become realist? Another 15?
 
#55
just curious. After 15 years when does cynic become realist? Another 15?
Realist, via google:

Although our modern notion of 'being realistic' is much closer to standard pessimism, i.e. downplaying the good things and seeing the bad as inevitable, a true realist is someone who makes completely unbiased judgements and who doesn't see things through any kind of filter, neither a positive nor a negative one
Perhaps it is my own slant here, but I see few of your posts about the Kings as objective or free of bias. Label yourself as a realist if you wish - but if you want to do the term justice it seems there will need to be at least some effort to achieve balance.
 
#57
Realist, via google:



Perhaps it is my own slant here, but I see few of your posts about the Kings as objective or free of bias. Label yourself as a realist if you wish - but if you want to do the term justice it seems there will need to be at least some effort to achieve balance.
well I did pick the Kings to finish 9. Let see where did the finish? I also said Vlade was a bad drafter before the Bagley draft and got roasted.

on the positive,
I said Bogi could be a 19-21 ppg starter and he’s proving me correct just on the wrong team.
I also like Haliburton a lot and he is the primary reason I still bother to watch this team.

unfortunately when you 1) set the record for out of the play-offs 2) have the worst defense in league history 3) lose draft capital 4) and still draft 9

it’s pretty f’ing hard to find a lot of realistic positives.
 
#58
16 outta 30 make the playoffs every year.

More than half.

I doubt we will even be in the play in game for awhile.
Great. But that doesn’t dispel the point about the loaded West.

It has historically been much tougher to qualify the top 8 in the West.

In 07/08 it took 50 wins to earn the 8th seed. In 13/14, it took 49 wins. In 14/15 it took 45 wins.
Conversely it took 40, 38, 38 during the same seasons in the East.

HUGE difference.

Just looking at records as they were, the KINGS would have qualified for the postseason in the East in 07/08 and only would have missed by 2-3 games in each of of the past 4 seasons.

That of course is using their West loaded schedule. With an East loaded schedule, they probably make the playoffs in most if not all those seasons.

And we wouldn’t be talking about this 15 year nonsense.

Instead these bottom tier East teams are spared from the same embarrassment merely because of geography.
 
Last edited:
#59
Great. But that doesn’t dispel the point about the loaded West.

It has historically been much tougher to qualify the top 8 in the West.

In 07/08 it took 50 wins to earn the 8th seed. In 13/14, it took 49 wins. In 14/15 it took 45 wins.
Conversely it took 40, 38, 38 during the same seasons in the East.

HUGE difference.

Just looking at records as they were, the KINGS would have qualified for the postseason in the East in 07/08 and only would have missed by 2-3 games in each of of the past 4 seasons.

That of course is using their West loaded schedule. With an East loaded schedule, they probably make the playoffs in most if not all those seasons.

And we wouldn’t be talking about this 15 year nonsense.

Instead these bottom tier East teams are spared from the same embarrassment just because of geography.
The problem is Vivek gets impatient, unrealistic and ties his GM’s hands. The should have traded H Barnes and could well have had the 16th pick in this draft plus an improving Nesmith. We could have had a line-up of:

Fox/Davis
Haliburton/Buddy
Giddey/Nesmith
Garuba
Bagley/Holmes

But Vivek is obsessed with winning now and isn’t smart enough to realize he is too far away. Nor will he hire a GM that will tell him the truth.

if you don’t think that is true here is a quote from Ham’s latest mock draft...

Sacramento also is looking to turn this ship around quickly with the hopes of snapping a 15-year playoff drought. Don’t be surprised if this pick is packaged in a trade to land a veteran that can help with that objective.
 
#60
lucky #9 it is, well at least for now. In that range I’d be looking carefully at both Garuba and Giddey.
If Ham is correct about using the pick as part of a trade package, then I’d sure like an idea of veteran trade targets.
 
Last edited: