ESPN on tanking & the Kings as "long-term losers"

[Jose]

Ouch

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/39318/tanking-is-the-tip-of-the-iceberg

ugh... typo on the thread title :-(

 

[PurpleHaze]

Downright brutal assessment of Petrie and Maloofs.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'm halfway through, and it's already terrible. Abbott claims the Kings have no "home-run" transactions, and that they could have drafted Greg Monroe and Stephen Curry? So, wait, that would be better than Tyreke Evans and DeMarcus Cousins?

He basically picked a team to pick on, tries to highlight everything that has gone wrong, and makes the implication that we should have known ahead of time that everything would go wrong without any attempt at looking at context. He blames us for something that didn't even happen (the Wells contract). He nearly deifies Omri Casspi (umm, really, Henry?) to make the Hickson trade look worse when a ton of teams would have jumped on that one.

I kind of take objection to the whole thing - it's a hit piece on our franchise based on hindsight and removing context.

 

[swisshh]

He's right in that Petrie's transactions have been horrible and the coaching choices bad, but yeah, they've done well drafting.

 

[kupman]

I'm halfway through, and it's already terrible. Abbott claims the Kings have no "home-run" transactions, and that they could have drafted Greg Monroe and Stephen Curry? So, wait, that would be better than Tyreke Evans and DeMarcus Cousins?

He basically picked a team to pick on, tries to highlight everything that has gone wrong, and makes the implication that we should have known ahead of time that everything would go wrong without any attempt at looking at context. He blames us for something that didn't even happen (the Wells contract). He nearly deifies Omri Casspi (umm, really, Henry?) to make the Hickson trade look worse when a ton of teams would have jumped on that one.

I kind of take objection to the whole thing - it's a hit piece on our franchise based on hindsight and removing context.

I agree. This is a "biased" truth article. The Gerlad Wallace example he gave was really poor imho.

 

[rainmaker]

Some I agree with, some I don't. Obviously think drafting Reke/Cuz was great and wouldn't rather have the other players mentioned passing on. But the trades? I agree. Coaching? I agree.

Sure some of the criticism goes back pretty far to the Bonzi offered contract, Shareef deal and leaving GW unprotected. But the premise is correct, in that aside from a few draft picks and getting MT for KMart/Landry, we haven't made many good decisions as a franchise in years.

This is a mess, and extending Smart just adds to it. I just mentioned the other day how we interviewed Thibs twice during coaching vacancies and passed on him, as well as passing on Brooks/Thibs in the same off season and hiring Theus instead. Then we later passed on Thibs for Westy.

We just extended a coach who's 15-27 since taking over, giving up by far the most points in the league, playing guys out of position and can't comprehend sub patterns. Just more of the same.

Edit: Said Smart was 5-10. Quite a typo. 15-27 actually.

 

[Peter_Gibbons]

While he does make generalizations and throws out facts selectively to support some narrow arguments, some of the stuff he said are sadly... true.

 

[bajaden]

He starts the article with a premise, but never comes up with a cure to what he perceives to be the problem. But that aside, I agree with some of what he wrote. The team has been losing, and in the lottery for the past 5 years, and there have been some very bad decisions. At the same time, I'm not about to take Monroe over Cousins, which he fails to mention was an either/or decison. Ditto Curry/Evans. But he was dead right about the Bonzi deal, even though it never happened, it could have, and would have been another millstone around the teams neck. Add in, that we waited most of the freeagent season waiting for a response from Bonzi, that by the time he rejected the deal, very few other freeagents were left, and we ended up with the great Mikkie Moore. (Going on memory here. Always dangerous)

I also don't think it was above board to imply things about 4 GM's that have been living in the lottery for a while, without naming them, and then going after Petire (who is not above criticism), which could imply that he was one of the four. Either name names, and the name of your source, or don't bring it up in the first place.

Other than that, I agree that the Kings braintrust has made some very bad decisions. Some of them not that big, but if you make enough little, bad decisions, you still affect the overall talent level and chemistry of the team. We just signed Terrance Williams to a ten day contract. I have no doubt, based on what I've seen of him so far, he'll probably be extended another ten day. And thats fine! But where were thin, is at the center/PF position. No offense to Williams, but I would have rather seen them go after someone over 6'6". The other night when I was up at Unci03's house, he pointed out to me that the tallest player on the floor for the Kings was 6'7". We had a lineup of Hayes, Cisco, Thornton, Evans and Salmons on the floor. I'm sorry, but your not going to win many games with that lineup. And frankly, I'm damm tired of watching midgets play PF and Center at times.

Yeah, I know, after JT and Cousins, Smart doesn't have anyone else to go to. But whose fault is that??????????

 

[Glenn]

This is how the league perceives us. Now we have to deal with it. We can make excuses. We can aggressively try to improve this team. Seems like excuses are adequate so far.

Why did we sign TWill? Was this to win a few games and cost a place or two in the draft? That very well may be what happens. This is not the time to try to improve the team. That time was last summer and the time may be next summer. It is not right now. Now we need a great draft choice. Getting a higher draft choice should be our goal. So we sign TWill???? I am not saying to tell the players to lose. That's flat out wrong. But certainly there are passive ways of encouraging losing and signing players to improve our team RIGHT NOW is not one of the ways.

 

[rainmaker]

This is how the league perceives us. Now we have to deal with it. We can make excuses. We can aggressively try to improve this team. Seems like excuses are adequate so far.

Why did we sign TWill? Was this to win a few games and cost a place or two in the draft? That very well may be what happens. This is not the time to try to improve the team. That time was last summer and the time may be next summer. It is not right now. Now we need a great draft choice. Getting a higher draft choice should be our goal. So we sign TWill???? I am not saying to tell the players to lose. That's flat out wrong. But certainly there are passive ways of encouraging losing and signing players to improve our team RIGHT NOW is not one of the ways.

I think what is worse is signing TWill before Smart has shown any ability to use IT/MT/Reke together efficiently, and at least somewhat make it work. But given Smart had/has not shown the ability to figure out the 3 guard rotation, to the point of just playing Reke at SF instead, why add another guard to the equation?

Try developing what you have correctly before adding more to it. And as expected, now the IT/MT/Reke/TWill rotation makes no sense. And I've been impressed by TWill, but now is not the time to add him into the mix, especially if Smart isn't willing to change the rotation and bring one of IT/MT off the bench. Now we have a guy on a 10 day taking crunch time mins away from the guys we're actually trying to develop and throwing the rotation off even more. When we got TWill I was afraid Smart would start injecting him at the wrong times and screw up our rotation even further, and so far that's what has happened.

I actually think a Reke/TWill backcourt with IT/MT coming off the bench might give us better results. Imposing backcourt on both ends, very good defensively, both can get to the rim, TWill can shoot from outside, and our bench would be twice as potent. But why even torture myself considering other options...

 

[Kingster]

I have no problem with going after T. Will. In fact, I think it was a good move. It's not a situation that if we didn't go after T. Will, then we could have gotten a big man of equal caliber. You either get him or you get nothing. We need a guy who can defend, and he seems quite capable of doing that. I'll take a 6'6" guy who can defend over a 6'11" who can't.

As for the article, the title is right. It's been a disastrous number of years for Kings basketball. We can quibble about the who's, why's and wherefore's, but the end result speaks for itself.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Kings are firmly occupying last place in Pacific Divison, have second worst record in WC, and going nowhere at this point. I don't mind quick cup of coffee look at a TWill to see if he's worth pursing with contract for next season. I'm sure there will plenty of open roster spots on Kings. Meanwhile, the draft is always a crap shoot and appears to be not that deep overall. No surprise, since a lot of top NCAA talent has been bleeding away from college B-ball for past couple of years with so many underclassmen going pro.

 

[Glenn]

I have no problem with going after T. Will. In fact, I think it was a good move. It's not a situation that if we didn't go after T. Will, then we could have gotten a big man of equal caliber. You either get him or you get nothing. We need a guy who can defend, and he seems quite capable of doing that. I'll take a 6'6" guy who can defend over a 6'11" who can't.

As for the article, the title is right. It's been a disastrous number of years for Kings basketball. We can quibble about the who's, why's and wherefore's, but the end result speaks for itself.

You don't get my point. Why do we want the team to improve at this particular point in time? Our goal RIGHT NOW should be to get the highest draft pick possible. There are no guarantees that we will get a higher pick by losing. Statistically, however, we have a better chance of a great pick the worse our record is and statistics are all we can influence at the moment. Improving our team does not move us toward our goal. Doing nothing at this point is better than signing anyone.

If you disagree that our next goal is to get the highest draft pick possible, we are just on different wave lengths.

 

[D13]

So what... whether some truths were touched on or not. The draft is important to build a team. The teams the article praises all got a break in the lottery, specifically the number one pick... I'd love to see how OKC would be without Durant (ok, no 2 pick).. and at the time they got him, Seattle was a perennial loser for some years under Presti anyway. Chicago? Yea, they sucked for some years too before Rose... you can argue they are still winning this year since his injury, but he turned that franchise around and started a winning mentality along with Thibs (after many coaching hit and misses). San Antonio?... them too. Everyone knows Duncan is what saved that franchise for the past decade.. even now with him older, take out Timmy D and see how they do in the playoffs this year. Clippers were forever losers till Blake Griffin. Cavs get Lebron and it put them as near contenders for some years.. So, I guess all those teams tanked... or at least got lucky in lottery too, but the article doesn't call them out. But still all got top picks in lottery to build around.

We haven't had that kind of luck, and there hasn't been many Lebrons, Dwights or Durant's the years we've been sucking anyway... there has been a Griffin though and with the best odds, we still screwed the pooch that year. Oh well.

Tanking happens.. the biggest culprit right now are the Bobcats, owned by the greatest NBA player of all time. But to say our front office does it on purpose is lame. Plain and simple we gotta have the worst luck in all draft lottery history... and being a small market hasn't helped to expand on that either.

If anything the league should make it even easier for the worst teams to get that high pick.. that would even out league and get teams moving up quicker... not year after year flailing in lottery hoping for a miracle.

 

[hrdboild]

I think it's long past time to admit that Geoff Petrie is just not very good at evaluating basketball talent, relative to his peers. He routinely overpays veteran free agents who are on the decline, overpays for our own free agents, and makes short-sighted trades to fix immediate needs rather than addressing long-term ones. He did have some home-run moves early in his tenure with the Kings -- bringing in Webber, Peja, Vlade, Adelman, and Williams/Bibby. But all of those moves happened more than 10 years ago and he's been cashing in the good will ever since with very little return. Perhaps he got complacent and lazy after winning executive of the year twice in three years. Perhaps the rest of the league got better at their jobs and he stayed the same. I don't really have an explanation for what happened, but the results speak for themselves. He's made a couple of good draft selections in the top 5 recently, but the GMs drafting above us made some huge mistakes (Thabeet, Wes Johnson) for that to happen. If Memphis and Minnesota make smarter picks those two years, we would literally have nothing to show for 7 years of rebuilding.

I'd love to see how OKC would be without Durant (ok, no 2 pick).. and at the time they got him, Seattle was a perennial loser for some years under Presti anyway

Presti had been the GM for less than a month at the time they drafted Kevin Durant.

 

[D13]

Presti had been the GM for less than a month at the time they drafted Kevin Durant.

My bad but I was also referring the couple years after with Durant developing... they got Westbrook on a high pick and Harden too. Didn't Presti hire Carlisimo also? He's made his mistakes. Scott Brooks only got a chance there by default.

 

[Bricklayer]

I agree with most of his list of our dumb moves...right up until he tried to extend it to claim that we hadn't drafted well. Or that our poor moves were significant in a franchsie sense. Dear Henry, allow me to suggest that the Thunder's beter minor moves are NOT why they win. They won for, dum dum dum, TANKING and aquiring a supersuperstar, and 3 great players with 3 Top 10 picks in the lottery. Odd huh? Our detail work has been shoddy at best, but without the great pillars you acquire via TANKING, and which we have now acquired, detail work is irrelevant.

Adn the overall point was meadering and nonsensical. But its Henry Abbot, so I wasn't expecting much.

 

[SacTownKid]

I have no problem with going after T. Will. In fact, I think it was a good move. It's not a situation that if we didn't go after T. Will, then we could have gotten a big man of equal caliber. You either get him or you get nothing. We need a guy who can defend, and he seems quite capable of doing that. I'll take a 6'6" guy who can defend over a 6'11" who can't.

As for the article, the title is right. It's been a disastrous number of years for Kings basketball. We can quibble about the who's, why's and wherefore's, but the end result speaks for itself.

Yet, even if he defends it doesn't count, doesn't meet the height requirements.

 

[Schmoe]

If the point is to lose games with a view toward the future, why aren't they playing the rookies more, playing overpaid fat veterans less, and leaving problem children released by other teams unsigned?

Come on, if we're going to tank, let's tank right!

 

[VF21]

Sorry but one person's blog on ESPN does not the truth make. I can think of at least 8 people right here on KF whose opinions I value much more than this guy, and I don't even agree very often with at least three of them.

 

[pshn80]

Anything new? I didn't notice anything I haven't seen posted on this site many times in the last years. Since by implication of the article we are grossly guilty of "tanking", we might as well cut the payroll and just start and play four players. Just think of the savings, the additional summer homes for the Maloof family.

Just a cheap shot in my book. Cross off ESPN.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

They won for, dum dum dum, TANKING and aquiring a supersuperstar, and 3 great players with 3 Top 10 picks in the lottery.

Not just top 10, but a #2, a #3, and a #4 in three consecutive years, hitting on the lotto balls two of those three years.

We had a consecutive #4 and #5, but we've never hit on the lotto balls. Give us a #1, #2, or #3 this year to pair with Reke/Cousins and in two years we'll be the model franchise for tanking rather than the cautionary tale.

 

[Npliam]

Not just top 10, but a #2, a #3, and a #4 in three consecutive years, hitting on the lotto balls two of those three years.

We had a consecutive #4 and #5, but we've never hit on the lotto balls. Give us a #1, #2, or #3 this year to pair with Reke/Cousins and in two years we'll be the model franchise for tanking rather than the cautionary tale.

So if the Kings get a #1, #2, or a #3 this year who are you going to get rid of to make shots for the new guy?

 

[Larry David]

The fact that Bonzi was too dumb to take it, does not negate the fact that offering the contract to Bonzi was a very bad move by Petrie. There were a lot of people, myself included, saying, "He had a nice season, but this is crazy. He's old and heavy for a guard."

It's yet another example of where Petrie is bad with a cap.

Petrie is great at making picks and very good at making trades. But not so good at managing a cap or properly paying players over the past few seasons.

It was a long run between the Peja and BJax great contracts and the deal he got IT to sign.

On the bright side, the owners are so broke that Petrie now always has cap space. On the down side, they might let him use all of it.

 

[Gliesian]

Anything new? I didn't notice anything I haven't seen posted on this site many times in the last years. Since by implication of the article we are grossly guilty of "tanking", we might as well cut the payroll and just start and play four players. Just think of the savings, the additional summer homes for the Maloof family.

Just a cheap shot in my book. Cross off ESPN.

I agree.
What is the author trying to say exactly? That tanking is bad because it degrades the integrity of the NBA? Then he says its good, but that GMs make bad teams on purpose because they know the players and coaches will try to win? Also, he makes no mention that free agents don't want to come to smaller markets and that our "terrible" GM and broke owners won't pay the extra Sacramento fee, because they know Cousins and Evans will need to be retained and its too early for the playoff run. Our only option is to draft. So please, put us on the chopping block and say that GP is ruining the NBA.

 

[fansinceday1]

Sorry but one person's blog on ESPN does not the truth make. I can think of at least 8 people right here on KF whose opinions I value much more than this guy, and I don't even agree very often with at least three of them.

The Kings record of futility is proof enough for me. I don't care who says it. And I personally do not see any light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[Bricklayer]

The Kings record of futility is proof enough for me. I don't care who says it. And I personally do not see any light at the end of the tunnel.

Now that last part is the silly part. Fans get realy too caught up in momentum both ways. Its etiher all light or all dark and they have a hard time turning corner's from one to another. But with the young talent on this team the light is blinding.

 

[SacTownKid]

The guy basically used the Detroit Pistons as a model of what Petrie should have done. You know, the team that drafted some decent talent then decided to bloat their cap for the next 200 years to keep a bottom 8 team in the league together. Yeah, I'd trade Petrie for that kind of brain power any day. If there's a knock on Petrie it's the knocks he was getting a few years ago when it looked as if he were attempting to follow the same type of pattern as the Pistons. Good thing he went into tank mode.

If the Kings weren't the youngest team in the league with what remains of a pretty soft cap he might have a gripe.

 

[Glenn]

So if the Kings get a #1, #2, or a #3 this year who are you going to get rid of to make shots for the new guy?

Davis is a defensive player as is MKG. They would be a perfect fit because they don't need the ball.

 

[Npliam]

Davis is a defensive player as is MKG. They would be a perfect fit because they don't need the ball.

There just aren't very many young players, especially players drafted 1,2 or 3 that aren't going to want the ball, even if they shouldn't really have it. As it is right now there aren't enough shots to go around. Adding a top lottery pick, even a defensive minded one won't change that at all.