ESPN ranks Kings even lower.....

[CruzDude]

The collective wisdom (?) of a committee of 25 ESPN writers in an article datelined 29-August has ranked the Kings #12 in the West for the coming year, below even the dreadful Clips, wobbling Nuggets and the self-destructing Warriors. Their summary:

Ron Artest is gone, and this is Kevin Martin's team now. His uncanny talent for high-efficiency scoring will be enough on some nights, but to really make noise the Kings need extraordinary contributions from ordinary players like Udrih, Salmons, Garcia, Moore and Miller. Good luck.

Top 4
Lakers
Hornets
Rockets
Jazz

Next 4
Spurs
Suns
Mavs
Blazers

then the Warriors, Nuggets, Clips, Kings, Wolves, Griz and Thunder.

That folks, is nasty. I agree with the top 4 but really have trouble believing the Spurs and Mavs can hang in there. Without Ginobli (he will do surgery), the Spurs are missing their 2nd best player plus they are the oldest team in the NBA. The Mavs could really send Cuban into orbit (I hope) and the Suns, well, they are the Suns for better or for worse.

The Clips have too many unknown castoff pieces to do very good, the Warriors lost their best players along with Monta Ellis, now out for 3-4 months, and didn't get better much less as good, and the Nuggest lost Camby, their Artest like defender without getting anything in return.

Where do I see the Kings? Right on the bubble depending on how quickly the "kids" come around and contribute and on how few injuries they hafe.

 

[Bricklayer]

The Clippers may not be so dreadful anymore with their biggest hole patched with an All Star talent, and a massive frontline. And the Nuggets may be wobbly...for a 50 win team. That still leaves them out of our rent district. Only the Warriors become interesting -- they had a dire offseason and you never know what Nellie's wackiness is going to create out of the remaining mess. Inspired coach of the year stuff? Or tear the team down stuff?

 

[6th]

Our youth is for the future. While I hope (and expect) that the Kings will be fun to watch, I think that the 11 or 12 spot is not unreasonable. We do not have the talent to make the playoffs against the other West teams.......not even close.

If you watch the Kings to see wins, you will be disappointed more often than not. If you watch the Kings to see a fun, youthful team, with talent you can see for the future, you will have a good time. I believe that anyone who watches just for wins vs losses will be very ticked off this year. Looking for the silver lining will be necessary for having a good time as a fan this year.....IMO.

 

[Löwenherz]

I think that's right around where the Kings should be.

 

[Smills91]

There's no way the Warriors finish ahead of the Kings, NONE.

 

[VF21]

Since Mr. S£im's feelings about power rankings are well known, I'll post this on his behalf:

I don't care what a group of writers think. In fact, the lower the better.

 

[JerN820]

Since Mr. S£im's feelings about power rankings are well known, I'll post this on his behalf:

I don't care what a group of writers think. In fact, the lower the better.

Very true. Yeah we'll have growing pains, but maybe we'll be able to come up and catch teams off guard. Especially the second half of the season, when some of these young players will have gained experience.

 

[Telemachus]

The Clippers may not be so dreadful anymore with their biggest hole patched with an All Star talent, and a massive frontline. And the Nuggets may be wobbly...for a 50 win team. That still leaves them out of our rent district. Only the Warriors become interesting -- they had a dire offseason and you never know what Nellie's wackiness is going to create out of the remaining mess. Inspired coach of the year stuff? Or tear the team down stuff?

Last time I checked, the Kings were better than the Clippers last season. And exchanging Brand and Maggette for Baron Davis and Camby is not likely to make them any better this season.
As for the Nuggets, I thought they were lucky to win 40 games last season (much less 50). They played way over their heads IMO, and losing Camby will be huge for them. They were a bad defensive team AND rebounding team with Camby, how much worse will they be without him. He averaged 13.1 rbs a game, 'Melo was second on the team with 7.4 rbs a game. I agree that the Warriors are in trouble this year. They have a run and gun team with no PG to run it. That is a dangerous place to be.

I see the top 8 spots in no particular order: Hornets, Lakers, Spurs, Jazz, Suns, Mavs, Blazers, & Rockets. I then see the Kings, Warriors, and Nuggets fighting for the 9th spot. Hoping to slip in if one or more of the others should falter.

 

[KiNgMyC]

Last time I checked, the Kings were better than the Clippers last season. And exchanging Brand and Maggette for Baron Davis and Camby is not likely to make them any better this season.
As for the Nuggets, I thought they were lucky to win 40 games last season (much less 50). They played way over their heads IMO, and losing Camby will be huge for them. They were a bad defensive team AND rebounding team with Camby, how much worse will they be without him. He averaged 13.1 rbs a game, 'Melo was second on the team with 7.4 rbs a game. I agree that the Warriors are in trouble this year. They have a run and gun team with no PG to run it. That is a dangerous place to be.

I see the top 8 spots in no particular order: Hornets, Lakers, Spurs, Jazz, Suns, Mavs, Blazers, & Rockets. I then see the Kings, Warriors, and Nuggets fighting for the 9th spot. Hoping to slip in if one or more of the others should falter.

Last time i checked, Brand didn't play much last season.

 

[Telemachus]

Last time i checked, Brand didn't play much last season.

No, you only played in 8 games last season. And the Clippers only won 23 games (15 fewer than the Kings). Asking for them to improve by 15 games is a lot to ask for by any addition. But they also lost Maggette (their leading scorer). Now they should cover his loss with Davis (if he stays healthy) and improve some with Camby. But not 15 games IMO. Not to mention that both Camby and Kaman are centers. One of them will have to play PF, which is not the strong position for either.

 

[CruzDude]

I see the top 8 spots in no particular order: Hornets, Lakers, Spurs, Jazz, Suns, Mavs, Blazers, & Rockets. I then see the Kings, Warriors, and Nuggets fighting for the 9th spot. Hoping to slip in if one or more of the others should falter.

Yeah, tend to agree, especially the "in no particular order" which may best sum up this coming season in the west. If the Kings progress and the "kids" start to contribute by mid-season, then the battle for the 9th spot becomes fun. However, of the top 8, any one of Lakers-Spurs-Suns-Mavs are one main injury away from joining the Kings in the fight for the 9th spot. IMHO

 

[Ryan]

It's going to be fun to watch the Lakers and Hornets duke it out for the top spot next year

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

General perception from national sports media holds it that our team is just Kevin Martin and a whole mass of upper level role players (Miller, Salmons), role players (Garcia, Udrih) and younglings--that's more of a recipe for rebuild rather than for straightaway competitiveness. Besides, it seems to me that much of what comprises the top 8 in those "rankings" have at least a threesome--you've got Nash/Stoudemire/Shaq, Howard/Kidd/Nowitzki, Roy/Aldridge/Oden (to a lesser extent), etc. so it's really quite valid for people at this stage, on paper, to tell us that we're not going to make the playoffs. As for the other teams, the Clips are definitely more talented than us on paper, as they're a team built for success with all the has-been vets they've loaded on their team, and their frontline is great. The Nuggets still have Iverson and Melo, and that's a lethal twosome still even if they can't D up. Warriors once had a threesome--Ellis, Jax and Maggette--but with Ellis down and great positional redundancy, I do think we can beat them in the standings especially with their no-D style of play. But to be any higher than 10th seed, I doubt it.

 

[Heuge]

Its hard for me to see us winning more then 20 games this year. 12th seems generous.

 

[GeraldWallace#3]

Way to be Mr. Optomistic Heuge.

lol

 

[BMiller52]

I think we'll be better than the Warriors but I dunno about the other teams.

 

[rhythmless]

Its hard for me to see us winning more then 20 games this year. 12th seems generous.

seriously... Homer mentality seems to be in full blast in this thread. You all mention that clips got worse, nuggs suck, etc, but we, just like the clips, lost our best player this offseason. The difference is that they replaced Brand with a defensive monster when healthy, while we got a role playing vet and a raw kid. Brad is a year older, a year slower. Yes, you will have development of the kids (hopefully), but these things happen at different paces, and to not concede that we are (or should be, barring all star births from our players) at the bottom of the barrel in a heavily stacked western conference is doing yourself a disservice.

 

[AriesMar27]

i kinda agree with espn... i dont see this team winning many games... unless they beat every mediocre east team and the 3 bad west teams... im guessing they'll win about 35 games at most.... if they win more than that i'll be happy but if they dont i wont be upset. this team just isnt very good.

 

[One and Done]

At the top, this season's Western Conference seems to be set with the Hornets and Lakers duking it out for the top seed. Utah, Houston, and San Antonio will likely follow suit.

It's after that in which brings up the real questions: who will battle out the last three seeds and following lottery positions?

Big questions are the performance of the aging Mavericks led by Jason Kidd as well as the always-thin Phoenix Suns, both led by new coaches. It's quite possible that both Phoenix, Dallas, and Denver could collapse this season and make a trip to the lottery. Then you've got the rise of Portland and the new-look Clippers biting at the bottom-seeder's coattails. It's going to be an interesting season in that regard.

I think GS is ranked way to high, and it's possible the Kings could have a better season than the Warriors. It's going to be tough running the show without a star Point Guard and rookies off the bench, but if anyone's capable of a creative way to salvage, it's Don Nelson.

Don't count out the T-Wolves for beating the Kings in the W-column. Their lineup is improved with a healthy Randy Foye, sharpshooting Mike Miller, and some nice (but not great) options off the bench in Gomes, McCants, and Smith. And if Kevin Love performs and stays injury-free, it's possible the Wolves could help us out in the race to the Ricky Rubio show.

It's going to be an interesting season. Sure, the top 5 in the West is pretty much set, but from there on, it's a guessing game. And IMO, ESPN's guesses are way off...

 

[Gary]

The Kings are about the same with or without Artest... But if we give a lot of the youngsters playing time (a lot of PT) then we could slip about 5-8 games which would put us at about 30 wins, and about the 11-12 spot in the west. So it's not unreasonable.

 

[SacKings384]

That's pretty much where I expect them to be. Pretty spot on in my estimation (I disagree with some of the order) but Kings are definitely as of right now below all of those teams mentioned.

 

[bajaden]

I hate to cop out, but check with me about 25 or 30 game into the season and I'll have an idea who's going to do what. The Kings could be improved, or they could take a couple of steps back. Thompson could come in and have an immediate impact, or he could be a couple of years away. So its a crap shoot at this point.

What I do know is that the Warriors will not be as good as last year. I think Denver is going to slide, as will the Spur's and definitely the Mav's. Now how far they slide is the question. I'm also not sold on the Suns, but I think they have enough to compete again this year. I also kind of agree about the Timberwolves. They could surprise some people this year.

At this point, I have the King's anywhere from 8th to 12th, depending on how the ball bounces, and what kind of shape Miller is in.

As an aside. If Reggie starts anyone other than Hawes at center in the first five games, I would fire him before the sixth game..

 

[FakeInjury]

The Kings are about the same with or without Artest... But if we give a lot of the youngsters playing time (a lot of PT) then we could slip about 5-8 games which would put us at about 30 wins, and about the 11-12 spot in the west. So it's not unreasonable.

I am eager to see if that is the case. Artest made us relevant almost every other game. If the kings are near .500 then you are right. But the more likely scenario involves going sub-.500 and not having enough gas left in the tank at the end of the season like Portland last year. What will bother me, is if, the kings drop off and the players' stocks do too.

 

[FakeInjury]

.

At this point, I have the King's anywhere from 8th to 12th, depending on how the ball bounces, and what kind of shape Miller is in.

As an aside. If Reggie starts anyone other than Hawes at center in the first five games, I would fire him before the sixth game..

I agree with your assessment involving Miller. I disagree with firing theus for not starting hawes. I would be more inclined to start Thompson at the Four and Mikki at the 5 because Spencer needs to prove he can make it happen off the bench before we trust him with the 1st and 4th quarters. Plus continuity suggesting keeping Hawes where he will be for most of the year. Wheras Thompson could easily hop and skip his way into the starting 5.

 

[Gary]

I am eager to see if that is the case. Artest made us relevant almost every other game. If the kings are near .500 then you are right. But the more likely scenario involves going sub-.500 and not having enough gas left in the tank at the end of the season like Portland last year. What will bother me, is if, the kings drop off and the players' stocks do too.

I see a drop though.. I don't see us winning 38-40 games this year. It won't be because we don't have Artest... If the kings play the youth more (i.e. Hawes/JT) then we might go through some growing pains and lose a few here and there. We won't have the (hate to say this) stability of the team last year. We knew we would be competitave when we threw out Bibby/Beno-Martin-Artest-Moore-Miller. But with Beno-Martin-Salmons/Garcia-Moore/JT-Brad/Hawes we might hit a few bumps.

I wont be upset as long as we see a future.. We could win 25 games, but if we see Martin/Hawes/JT all showing us that they will lead the team then I will be OK with it.

 

[ElRey]

I hate to cop out, but check with me about 25 or 30 game into the season and I'll have an idea who's going to do what. The Kings could be improved, or they could take a couple of steps back. Thompson could come in and have an immediate impact, or he could be a couple of years away. So its a crap shoot at this point.

What I do know is that the Warriors will not be as good as last year. I think Denver is going to slide, as will the Spur's and definitely the Mav's. Now how far they slide is the question. I'm also not sold on the Suns, but I think they have enough to compete again this year. I also kind of agree about the Timberwolves. They could surprise some people this year.

At this point, I have the King's anywhere from 8th to 12th, depending on how the ball bounces, and what kind of shape Miller is in.

As an aside. If Reggie starts anyone other than Hawes at center in the first five games, I would fire him before the sixth game..

I agree with you...the Western Conference will definitely not be as powerful and dominant as it has been the past 2-3 years or so with the drop off of the Suns, Spurs, Nuggets, and Warriors... Yes they're still better than us. But most of those teams are aging and all it takes is one of their star players to go down for them to slide dramatically. We have a young athletic team that can give some of these older more experienced teams trouble on certain nights. On paper, we are a 11th seed. We'll see how it plays out...injuries do happen...

 

[Sac.1989]

completely agree guys. I think its a fair evaluation right now before the seasons even started. But once its underway i think we deffinetly will supprise a few

 

[bajaden]

I agree with your assessment involving Miller. I disagree with firing theus for not starting hawes. I would be more inclined to start Thompson at the Four and Mikki at the 5 because Spencer needs to prove he can make it happen off the bench before we trust him with the 1st and 4th quarters. Plus continuity suggesting keeping Hawes where he will be for most of the year. Wheras Thompson could easily hop and skip his way into the starting 5.

At the end of last season when Miller was out, Hawes started all of those games, and played pretty well. Are you telling me now that he shouldn't start. I think you would get considerable arguement from him on that subject. He's our center of the future as it stands right now, and its time for him to get his chance whenever its available. To start Mikki and Thompson in his stead, would be a slap in his face.

 

[gunks]

Losing Ron will hit us harder then a lot of people think. Unless that is, Salmons steps it up big time. You never know though...Salmons/Garcia MAY be more effective then Artest/Salmons...If for no other reason then because Salmons pulls a KT whenever he has to come off the bench.

Still...RonRon was the closest thing to an impact player we had. Martin is good...But he isnt the type who could will a team to a win like Ron could at times. (Didnt Kevin's 50 pt night come in a loss to a cellar dweller?).

Plus: Miller is one year older. We still have Mikki Moore stinkin it up. Unless Thompson contributes we still have an awful PF rotation.


I dunno...I just hope a few allstars in the making appear in the '09 draft. We'll probably have a shot at one of them.

Beno>>>>Bibby though at this point. For all the belly aching from people on these boards about "Ron trying to play hero and losing the game" I saw Bibby do that on way more occasions while he was here. Fella turned from a great PG to someone who just jacked 3s all game at 30%. So thats a help.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

I can see this squad going either way, and it largely depends on how ready Thompson and Hawes are to contribute. Were solid at Pg, Sg, and SF. But if Thompson and Hawes show their youth, were stuck with another year of Zero interior D and blind monkeys could outrebound us. But if those two step up, Thompson could be the starter soon and Hawes makes a solid option off the bench behind Brad, and that frontcourt starts to look a little tougher.

I'm guessing 9th-11th seed