[Grades] Grades v. Magic 11/3/2016

So how many of Boogie's teammates did NOT disappoint this game?

  • 0

    Votes: 9 25.0%
  • 1

    Votes: 17 47.2%
  • 2

    Votes: 7 19.4%
  • 3

    Votes: 2 5.6%
  • 4

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 5

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 7

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 8

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 9

    Votes: 1 2.8%

  • Total voters
    36
  • Poll closed .
The last 6 mo it has been cuz has no talent around him and that's why we lose. Now it's he has plenty of talented vets. Which is it? Honestly, it really doesn't matter. Kings and/or cuz will move on soon. It's up to Vivek to show the league he isn't at sh!t crazy. I cringe every time I see him.
Let me explain it, short & crisp, the way I see it:
  1. First 3 seasons Cuz DIDN'T have enough veteran talent around him.
  2. Last 2 seasons Cuz DID have veteran talent around him (Gay, Rondo, Collison, and even KK, Casspi & Belz...) but an old-fashioned pace-crazed trio of Owner+GM+Coach derailed the team.
  3. This season Cuz DOES have veteran talent around him (Gay, Collison, Lawson, Afflalo, Temple, KK, Casspi, Toliver...) with modern, D-first, good people as GM+Coach, so no derailing should occur.
I hope that makes the case clear.
 
Last edited:
Don't know 'bout Brick. I say they're not less talented NOW. :cool:
Care to ellaborate on why you think otherwise?
They fit what their team needs them to do. They have high bball IQ. Have accepted and know how to move the ball on offense. Afflalo, DC look for their own shot first. Ty just turns the ball over too much. Basically a poor mans rondo. Sure he racks up assists but I'd prefer a free flow offense where assists are spread out.
 
Let me explain it short & crisp the way I see it:
  1. First 3 seasons Cuz DIDN'T have enough veteran talent around him.
  2. Last 2 seasons Cuz DID have veteran talent around him (Gay, Rondo, Collison, and even KK, Casspi & Belz...) but an old-fashioned pace-crazed trio of Owner+GM+Coach derailed the team.
  3. This seaon Cuz DOES have veteran talent around him (Gay, Collison, Lawson, Afflalo, Temple, KK, Casspi, Toliver...) with modern, D-first, good people as GM+Coach, so no derailing should occur.
I hope that makes the case clear.
So then when we start competing for 30 wins you will finally accept cuz isn't Lebron and actually is part of the problem? No not saying it's all him.
 
See, this is the flaw in your thinking that underpins everything.

Yes we are.

And in fact we have been doing nothing but competing since the season began. Compete for a title? Of course not. But its kind of a myth that that's a common thing that all teams have coming out of a rebuild. Is Toronto a title contender? No. But they got their guys and went with it. Detroit? No. Utah, with all their youth? No. When your main guys reach a point in their careers where they are capable of winning, then that's it. You either trade them and go back to fiddling with kids for more years, or you start loading up on vets and put together a competitive team to get them to the playoffs.

And our team is NOT undertalented to accomplish the relatively modest task of making the playoffs. Here's what a solid playoff team from last year looks like talentwise:

#1 Damian Lillard
#2 CJ McCollum
Mason Plumlee
Alan Crabbe
Shabazz Napier
Ed Davis
Evan Turner
Noel Vonleh
Pat Conaughton
Al-Farouq Aminu
Jake Layman
Meyers Leonard
Festus Ezeli
Maurice Harkless
Tim Quarterman

Now I know Turner was drafted ahead of Cousins and all, but I can't ever recall saying, OMG, they have Pat Conaughton!!! And those are the level teams we have to outcompete. Not Golden State. Not San Antonio. Teams with a star, 1 or 2 support guys, and then a bunch of various vets held together by a strong coach. Well that describes us too. Phoenix is young. Dallas is 0-5 and may be done. New Orleans is 0-6 and probably already is done. The Lakers have won a few, but I'll eat my hat if their kiddie corps keeps them in it the whole way. Minny is very young, although talented enough maybe they overcome it. Houston was bad defensively and hired Mike D'Antoni to fix it. Memphis is going through an identity crisis and we'll have to see who stays healthy and not decrepit for them. Denver is young. OKC is leaning so hard on one guy. There's nothing extraordinary about a well coached team with a major star and a bunch of roleplayers crashing the playoff party this year. Its not going to take 50 wins.

P.S. its nowhere near a given Rudy goes, although to be safe I continue to consider trades to move him for pieces during the season. Nonetheless I wasn't the only person who noticed him walking off the court with his arm around Joerger's shoulder after our first win. And he's certainly not playing like a guy checked out. Winning cures many ills. Being featured doesn't hurt either. If he likes the coach, if we win, if the locker room is sane and the Golden1 crowds remain loud, its not a given.

Portland did exactly what I'm advocating that we should do! They had a crumbling veteran core left after Aldridge ditched them for San Antonio but they didn't panic and load up on veterans, they dumped everyone over 25 and loaded up on a bunch of kids instead. And they picked the right kids:

Al-Farouq Aminu was undervalued because he can't shoot but he's a steady defender and he's solid on the boards. He got to Portland and worked on his shot and turned into a good young starting SF. I've been pleading for us to pick up defensive studs Ed Davis and Maurice Harkless for years. Allan Crabbe was picked up with a 2nd round pick and just signed a $75 million dollar contract. He's another guy I wanted us to target in free agency but of course he's too expensive for our "fiscally responsible" ownership. CJ McCollum was the 10th overall pick in 2013 and now he's a 20 ppg guy and a solid second option. Mason Plumlee is just a solid dirty work big that they targeted to replace Aldridge and he's still on his rookie deal too so he'll be a restricted FA after this season. Noah Vonleh is the only kid who hasn't panned out so far but he's still just 21. (Evan Turner, Festus Ezeli, and Shabazz Napier weren't on the team last year)

All the experts picked them to win 25 games before the season started because they seem to have the same problem identifying talent that you do. Once the season starts, it doesn't matter what you've done in the past only what you're capable of right now. If you get a bunch of kids who fit your system then you're going to keep getting better and you have the ability to re-sign them. Instead we have a bunch of veterans who have either never been more than bit players on their previous teams or their career arc is already on the downswing and they probably shouldn't be starters anymore.

Here's the thing about the Lakers -- as much as I love mocking their futility, they cleared out the big contracts and they have young emerging talent at multiple positions now. Whatever they do next you can probably pencil in Russell, Ingram, and Randle into their starting lineup for quite awhile. Or if someone like James Harden decides he's fed up with losing in Houston they're the kind of kids you can actually combine with a couple picks to trade for a superstar. Even the hapless Sixers have a more promising future than we do now with Embiid, Simmons, and Saric all young and very good.

Maybe you're right. Maybe a combination of MVP level performance from DeMarcus, CoY worthy effort from Joerger, and improved BBIQ across the board is enough to punch our ticket for the playoffs. It doesn't look like it to me though. So far this season we have two players who could start on a playoff team (both producing so far above their career averages that it can't be sustainable) and maybe 4 quality deep bench guys. Among the kids, Ben McLemore has been your favorite punching bag for 3 years and he's outperformed all of our veteran acquisitions so far and single-handily kept us in games. At what point do you throw in the towel and acknowledge that the influx of mediocre veterans isn't working?
 
Ty just turns the ball over too much. Basically a poor mans rondo. Sure he racks up assists but I'd prefer a free flow offense where assists are spread out.

Do you mean the same Ty Lawson that is averaging only 1.5 TO pregame this year and is in the top 10 in the league with an assist to turnover ratio of 4.0? I squint long enough sometimes it feels like you might have some good points but then I start to fact check you and keep getting let down :(
 
So then when we start competing for 30 wins you will finally accept cuz isn't Lebron and actually is part of the problem? No not saying it's all him.
I sure will (if we suck again this year).
Will you be able to do the same and admit you were wrong by mid-season?

Shall we make a head-to-head crow-eating appointment for January?
 
Last edited:
Do you mean the same Ty Lawson that is averaging only 1.5 TO pregame this year and is in the top 10 in the league with an assist to turnover ratio of 4.0? I squint long enough sometimes it feels like you might have some good points but then I start to fact check you and keep getting let down :(
Maybe you are drinking the same Kool-aid he does.
 
I sure will (if we suck again this year).
Will you be able to do the same and admit you were wrong by mid-season?

Shall we make a head-to-head craw-eating appointment for January?
Sounds good to me
 
Deja vu - another 30+ win season coming. Bring in the same core, expect the same results. .250 on the road, .500 at home. Another 8-12 draft pick. Mix, repeat, fleece.
 
Last year we had the talent too. It was amusing watching how snowblind the fanbase had become through all the losing. But we beat good teams, elite teams, on their home floor. That is borderline impossible to do if you don't have talent. What scuttled us last year wasn't talent, it was losing to all the BAD teams.

And our hot streak was impressive, but the way it ended was telling too. The team quit . Quit on the coach. I am not even entirely sure given the obvious disappointment and lack of fight post-break if there may not have been an attempt to get Karl fired.

Regardless, the obvious conclusion last year is we had the talent to win, but we did not have the will to win. We were immensely distracted and fighting ourselves. So we walked into tough gyms and beat great teams. And then we'd come home and lose to lottery teams.


And none of that distraction is evident this year. The only thing still broken and not on the right page is the fanbase. You guys are a mess and wouldn't know good fortune if it landed on your nose at this point. Or actually its closer to say wouldn't believe it and would try to ignore it. but that's not the way it works. In some ways its very egocentric. There is nothing special or magical about the Kings. Same rules apply to them as the rest of the league. Good coach, big star, coach and star get along, 2nd weapon. Apply veteran roleplayers. Play defense. Voila! What do you know, a solid team.

Last year Dave Joerger coached a Memphis team so injury ravaged that only 1 of their 5 starters played more than 56 games, and that was Zach Randolph with 68. They had 28 players run through town. All Stars Matt Barnes and Jamaychel Green were the only two players to break 70 games. 37 year old Chris Anderson started 14.. Ryan Hollins started 9. Jordan Farmer 10. Lance Stephensen was brought in as a reclamation project and played a major role down the stretch. And they STILL had a winning record and made the playoffs. But oh noes we're Sacramento he can't do it with this roster if we stay reasonably healthy? Poppycock.


IMG_1061.JPG
 
Haha. If u call facts koolaid I will drink it all day long. As I said, you could actually make some valid points if you didn't have a propensity for exaggeration to get a rise out of people.
It's called trolling. It works almost every time.
Most of us (me included) can't resist responding to provocations.
 
Last year we had the talent too. It was amusing watching how snowblind the fanbase had become through all the losing. But we beat good teams, elite teams, on their home floor. That is borderline impossible to do if you don't have talent. What scuttled us last year wasn't talent, it was losing to all the BAD teams.
To me a lot of that was simply teams not getting up to play us cause we are crap, it's hard for elite teams to get up for games against crap teams most the time they simply go through the motions so it's really not impossible at all it's human nature.
 
Portland did exactly what I'm advocating that we should do!

...and ended up right back almost exactly where we are. They win games when their 26yr old star goes into god mode. Lose the ones he doesn't. The second option has mehed thus far. The rest of the starters are a stack of borderline scrubs who few other teams would start. And they had to drop huge money to get mediocre talents to stay or come to town. They aren't even really developmentally aged young. Young vets except for Vonleh for the most part. But Lillard and McCollum were old rookies, and are already Cousins' age. Everyone else pretty much between 24-28, by which time most players are who they are going to be. Its not some panacea. Just a team trying to put together a group behind its star that can reach the playoffs.
 
Last edited:
...and ended up right back almost exactly where we are. They win games when their 26yr old star goes into god mode. Lose the ones he doesn't. The second option has mehed thus far. The rest of the starters are a stack of borderline scrubs who few other teams would start. And they had to drop huge money to get mediocre talents to stay or come to town. They aren't even really developmentally aged young. Young vets except for Vonleh for the most part. But Lillard and McCollum were old rookies, and are already Cousins' age. Everyone else pretty much between 24-28, by which time most players are who they are going to be. Its not some panacea. Just a team trying to put together a group behind its star that can reach the playoffs.

Portland had the 4th youngest team in the league last year! Sure I guess in the sense that any player who's been in the league a few years is technically a veteran you could say they have a veteran team now but the point stands that they picked up a bunch of kids with restricted free agency protection last year to build that team while we just picked up a bunch of 30 year olds on 1 or 2 year deals. Those situations are not even remotely comparable. They're also a winning team already and used their money this summer to bring in some veterans (Turner and Ezeli -- who are both younger and better than any of the veterans we picked up) while we're hoping to get where they were last season with a much older roster. But the biggest difference between Portland and us right now is that their solid second option* is 25 and he's already been signed to a 4 year extension. Our solid second option is 30, an unrestricted free agent this summer, and has let it be known publicly that he's not interested in coming back. They have a team (and a young team at that) while all we have is a franchise player.

*You're calling McCollum's performance 'meh' so far this season but it's still better than Rudy was last year. How much are you going to lean on a 6 game sample size to make a point? Last year McCollum was #18 on the leading scorers list. Only OKC, GS, and TOR had a more prolific second option.
 
...and ended up right back almost exactly where we are. They win games when their 26yr old star goes into god mode. Lose the ones he doesn't. The second option has mehed thus far. The rest of the starters are a stack of borderline scrubs who few other teams would start. And they had to drop huge money to get mediocre talents to stay or come to town. They aren't even really developmentally aged young. Young vets except for Vonleh for the most part. But Lillard and McCollum were old rookies, and are already Cousins' age. Everyone else pretty much between 24-28, by which time most players are who they are going to be. Its not some panacea. Just a team trying to put together a group behind its star that can reach the playoffs.
We must not be watching the same team.
 
I'm really not trying to be Mr. doom and gloom here by the way, although I can see why it might seem like it. I was mad this summer so I took a few months off to calm down. At this point I'm just being pragmatic. The roster situation doesn't look very good so let's fix it. And Portland is actually a good example of how fast you can turn things around with a few smart moves. The bad news is that Vlade hasn't really done anything yet that will help us long-term but the good news is he hasn't done anything yet that will hurt us long-term either (with the possible exception of that 2019 pick if we lose Cousins). We added four first round players this year -- let's turn those guys into assets. If we keep the pick this year that's basically free money -- an asset that pretty much everyone expected us to lose. Rudy surely has some trade value as a top 20 scorer even with an expiring contract. There's no reason to go down with the ship hoping for a long-shot playoff berth. Next season is our make or break season with Cousins -- let's start planning for it right now.
 
First, can I get a guarantee from you that I'll live to 90 too? Would mean a lot to me. Ok, about blowing it up. We've sort of been doing that in a half a$$ way for some time now, and as a result, we've wasted 5 or 6 years that should have been meaningful, and wern't. We've changed 7 players this year if I've counted correctly, and did a similar thing last year. We've had a coaching marathon followed closely by a revolving door for our GM's..

One thing I know is, that if you keep changing the coaches, GM's and the players, your never going to win anything. Joerger has it right. You have to build a culture, an identity as a team. The only way to do that is to establish a stable front office, and coaching staff. History tells us, that unless your real lucky, your going to struggle for a while. Its going to take some time, and fans tend to be impatient, especially when the team has already wasted several years trying to put a band aid on a bleeding artery.

My point is, I don't necessarily disagree with you. I might disagree on what a blow up means, but not on the premise. We have the best center in the NBA, and if you can rebuild from scratch, and he's willing to take the journey with us, then I do everything I can to keep him. After that, no one would be safe if the right deal comes along. Now I'm not going to sit here and blow smoke up you know where, and tell you that Vlade is gods gift to the GM position. To be honest, I don't know. Only time will determine that. But for the present, we have to put our faith in him.

OK, now to picking talent. Vlade has the final say, but he gets input from multiple sources. It's not like he's isolated in his office looking at film, reads DraftExpress, and then decides. Sometimes, it 's not so much about the talent, but how the talent fits what your trying to build. That's where I think the Kings have made some mistakes. Simply because I don't think the Kings knew what they were trying to build. It kept changing from year to year. So were back to building a culture.

The question I have is, do the fans have the stomach for going through a rebuild? Everyone wants to win now, right now, and that's not likely to happen. Oh we'll probably be better than last year, but unless your really building a foundation, it doesn't matter. Other than Cousins, the only other player of late that the Kings have stuck with is McLemore, and it looks like maybe, just maybe they'll finally get rewarded. The fans have less patience than management. A young player has some bad games, and he's a bust. They want him gone. You can't run an organization like that.

I have it from a good source that you're going to live into your 90s. So a 4-year rebuild is no problem. Also, since I'm such an optimist:p let's assume that a Cousins' trade would actually yield a couple of very promising young players and a very high draft pick or two. If such would occur, a rebuild wouldn't take a decade like we've seen with the Kings. (The reason I'm having Cousins' being traded in a blow it up rebuild scenario is that there is just no ammo other than Cousins on this team that would accomplish the goal). Again, the assumption of the rebuild scenario is that you have a management that knows what they are doing and I certainly wouldn't bet the farm on that. But regardless, if the management isn't good, this team isn't going anywhere anyway.
 
I have it from a good source that you're going to live into your 90s. So a 4-year rebuild is no problem. Also, since I'm such an optimist:p let's assume that a Cousins' trade would actually yield a couple of very promising young players and a very high draft pick or two. If such would occur, a rebuild wouldn't take a decade like we've seen with the Kings. (The reason I'm having Cousins' being traded in a blow it up rebuild scenario is that there is just no ammo other than Cousins on this team that would accomplish the goal). Again, the assumption of the rebuild scenario is that you have a management that knows what they are doing and I certainly wouldn't bet the farm on that. But regardless, if the management isn't good, this team isn't going anywhere anyway.
The part I don't understand is why you get rid of a guy who might be the best at his position in the whole darn world. As to Boogie's emotional side which always gives room for argument, I point to his demeanor with the national team. Maybe all he needs to be that perfect example of deportment is to have a great coach and be on a winning team. He's the only Kings player I enjoy watching. Rudy this year has been good but he doesn't do anything a guy his size can't do. I feel like we have been blowing up the team whether it be with coaches or players every year the last decade. A coaching change is a big deal.

I think we need stability for once.
 
And Portland is actually a good example of how fast you can turn things around with a few smart moves.

Portland's very smart moves had them starting off last season 4-9, and proud owners of a 7 game losing streak going into mid-November.

Their talent is mediocre at best, and chemistry and getting on the same page doesn't happen overnight for newly constructed teams.
 
Portland's very smart moves had them starting off last season 4-9, and proud owners of a 7 game losing streak going into mid-November.

Their talent is mediocre at best, and chemistry and getting on the same page doesn't happen overnight for newly constructed teams.
Raise your hand if you think this Kings team talent is even mediocre. Tho, I will say it's also about leadership and attitude. Blazer have resilience and togetherness. Kings have "blame the ref" mindset or yell at your teammates mindset
 
The part I don't understand is why you get rid of a guy who might be the best at his position in the whole darn world. As to Boogie's emotional side which always gives room for argument, I point to his demeanor with the national team. Maybe all he needs to be that perfect example of deportment is to have a great coach and be on a winning team. He's the only Kings player I enjoy watching. Rudy this year has been good but he doesn't do anything a guy his size can't do. I feel like we have been blowing up the team whether it be with coaches or players every year the last decade. A coaching change is a big deal.

I think we need stability for once.
The only reason to get rid of Cousins is if you are unconditionally and irrevocably convinced that the team exists in a state where both
  1. ... It is "literally" impossible to build a contending team around DeMarcus Cousins; that we haven't merely been doing it horribly wrong for seven years, but that it can't actually be done. And,
  2. ... DeMarcus Cousins is, nonetheless, good enough that we will never be truly bad enough to get the franchise player we need to affect a 'true' rebuild, as long as he's here.
If you believe that both of those things are true, then yeah, you'll want to get rid of Cousins. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense.
 
The only reason to get rid of Cousins is if you are unconditionally and irrevocably convinced that the team exists in a state where both
  1. ... It is "literally" impossible to build a contending team around DeMarcus Cousins; that we haven't merely been doing it horribly wrong for seven years, but that it can't actually be done. And,
  2. ... DeMarcus Cousins is, nonetheless, good enough that we will never be truly bad enough to get the franchise player we need to affect a 'true' rebuild, as long as he's here.
If you believe that both of those things are true, then yeah, you'll want to get rid of Cousins. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense.

2 notes about the conditions:

1. It doesn't have to be "impossible" to build around him, all that matters is that we failed to do so and don't have the believe we can fix that in the remaining time frame (while considering the decreasing trade value of him the longer we wait).
You can believe that to be true while still thinking that DMC is a great player, it's just we failed miserably for 7 years to build around him and it doesn't seem like we are in the right direction to do so with him becoming an expiring contract next year.

2. An alternare condition is simply that we'll be better off with the value we can get in a trade, taking into account the fact we failed to get any meaningful player bext to DMC outside Rudy (who's going to leave) and considering that tanking with Cousins won't work- both because of your 2nd condition and more importantly because even if we can get our hands on a young star through the draft, by the time he'll be ready to contribute DMC might be long gone.
 
The part I don't understand is why you get rid of a guy who might be the best at his position in the whole darn world. As to Boogie's emotional side which always gives room for argument, I point to his demeanor with the national team. Maybe all he needs to be that perfect example of deportment is to have a great coach and be on a winning team. He's the only Kings player I enjoy watching. Rudy this year has been good but he doesn't do anything a guy his size can't do. I feel like we have been blowing up the team whether it be with coaches or players every year the last decade. A coaching change is a big deal.

I think we need stability for once.

First, because this team can't be anything more than .500 for as far as the eye can see, due to picking in the middle of the draft, and the poor FAs this team can get due to the terrible rep of the franchise. Second, Cousins can see the foregoing and is not going to stick around, even you want him to.
 
2 notes about the conditions:

1. It doesn't have to be "impossible" to build around him, all that matters is that we failed to do so and don't have the believe we can fix that in the remaining time frame (while considering the decreasing trade value of him the longer we wait).
You can believe that to be true while still thinking that DMC is a great player, it's just we failed miserably for 7 years to build around him and it doesn't seem like we are in the right direction to do so with him becoming an expiring contract next year.

2. An alternare condition is simply that we'll be better off with the value we can get in a trade, taking into account the fact we failed to get any meaningful player bext to DMC outside Rudy (who's going to leave) and considering that tanking with Cousins won't work- both because of your 2nd condition and more importantly because even if we can get our hands on a young star through the draft, by the time he'll be ready to contribute DMC might be long gone.
  1. That doesn't refute anything that I said, and I never made the argument that acknowledging that we've failed to build around Cousins requires the belief that Cousins is not a great player. Those two beliefs are mutually exclusive, even though they are often both held by the same people.
  2. This is just restating my first point in a way that makes it more palatable for people who want to rationalize getting Cousins out of town. If you believe that there's some "magic bullet" trade that we could make for Cousins, that would make us better than we could be with Cousins (not better than we are with Cousins, better than we could be with Cousins), then that suggests that one believes not only that we have failed to build a team around Cousins, but that it's not worthwhile to try, because I don't think that anybody can sit there and actually say that we've made a good faith effort to build a team around Cousins's strengths since Cousins has been a Sacramento King. We've tried, maybe, twice in seven years to run a system that plays to his strengths (and, it should be noted, got frustrated and impatient when it didn't translate into an immediate turnaround both times), but without the complementary players that would have made it work. The rest of the time, we've been throwing **** against the wall, and hoping to get lucky.
 
I'm really not trying to be Mr. doom and gloom here by the way, although I can see why it might seem like it. I was mad this summer so I took a few months off to calm down. At this point I'm just being pragmatic. The roster situation doesn't look very good so let's fix it. And Portland is actually a good example of how fast you can turn things around with a few smart moves. The bad news is that Vlade hasn't really done anything yet that will help us long-term but the good news is he hasn't done anything yet that will hurt us long-term either (with the possible exception of that 2019 pick if we lose Cousins). We added four first round players this year -- let's turn those guys into assets. If we keep the pick this year that's basically free money -- an asset that pretty much everyone expected us to lose. Rudy surely has some trade value as a top 20 scorer even with an expiring contract. There's no reason to go down with the ship hoping for a long-shot playoff berth. Next season is our make or break season with Cousins -- let's start planning for it right now.
It's really hard to have faith in Vlade's GM abilities. I don't want to fire Vlade this early already, but why the hell did Vivek hire him in the first place? Almost completely 0 experience in any FO. I don't understand how someone like Vlade got the nod over someone like Travis Schelnk.

Is it the nostalgia factor that Vivek wanted for Kings fans? It's like if the Rockets hired Yao Ming for GM. Why would you do that? Or if Orlando hired Shaq as GM. BUT, Vlade was never as good as those guys for their relative teams. So it's even more out of the blue.

I can't help but feel like the sooner we get a qualified GM, the better we will be moving forward. I love Vlade as a player, but I don't like him as a GM.
 
It's really hard to have faith in Vlade's GM abilities. I don't want to fire Vlade this early already, but why the hell did Vivek hire him in the first place? Almost completely 0 experience in any FO. I don't understand how someone like Vlade got the nod over someone like Travis Schelnk.

Is it the nostalgia factor that Vivek wanted for Kings fans? It's like if the Rockets hired Yao Ming for GM. Why would you do that? Or if Orlando hired Shaq as GM. BUT, Vlade was never as good as those guys for their relative teams. So it's even more out of the blue.

I can't help but feel like the sooner we get a qualified GM, the better we will be moving forward. I love Vlade as a player, but I don't like him as a GM.

Vivek showed his hand this summer ... he has very little interest in being an active participant in the team. He wants to fly in for the games and write checks and that's about it. Which is fair. He got the arena built which was what needed to happen. And I can see why Vlade inherited the job. He's a people person and a steadying influence in the front office which probably felt like a breath of fresh air after everything Pete D'Alessandro pulled. Probably he should be President and not GM but I wouldn't say he's doing a terrible job so far either. I didn't like the Cauley-Stein pick because of all the guys we passed on, but this year's draft was at least interesting and unexpected. If even 2 of those 4 players become solid pros it was a pretty good use of a lower lottery pick and unwanted veteran. Rondo, Koufos, Belinelli, Butler, and Mbah-a-Moute still look like solid signings on paper they just didn't work out very well (mostly because of George -- who was hired by someone else). Unfortunately "not terrible" isn't going to get us very far. He's got experienced front office help now and it's easy to forget that they work as a team even if Vlade is the one with the final say. Every year there are more opportunities to get better. So I don't think we need to fire Vlade. I just think he needs to stop chasing that 8 seed and be a little more patient about building a team one piece at a time.
 
Back
Top