Hoopsworld: The Kings Summer Report

delete if this has been posted already

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_13743.shtml
Last Updated: Aug 9th, 2005 - 16:07:20



The Kings Summer Report



By C. Sawyer
for HOOPSWORLD.com

Aug 9, 2005, 16:02









http://www.hoopsworld.com/printer_13743.shtml




WHAT IT TAKES TO WIN – A SUPERSTAR AND A SIDEKICK

And it sure doesn’t hurt if the sidekick is a superstar too.

It’s summer and we are in the midst of teams attempting to position themselves to win, or at the least to get some cap room for next year. But most teams want to win and win now.

In the past few years the
Sacramento Kings have gone from a roster full of talent with the likes of Chris Webber, Mike Bibby and Peja Stojakovic plus a bench that had Bobby Jackson, Hedo Turkoglu, and Scot Pollard – a team just some free throws away from the Finals, to a team that seemed to be scotch-taped together, ultimately bowing out in the first round against Seattle. So will the 2005-6 season be one of rebuilding, reshuffling or winning.

Granted, with all the turmoil the Kings faced last season they finished up with a surprising 50-32 record, followed by a surprising unceremonious exit in the first round. To try to right this ship the Kings have given up Cuttino Mobley to free agency, traded Bobby Jackson and Greg Ostertag for Bonzi Wells, traded a future second round draft pick for Jason Hart, and will probably lose Maurice Evans and possibly Darius Songaila. There is still more to be done as the Kings still need some support at the 3 and 4 positions. They could do another trade or they could just get some bench support via the free agent market. However none of what they have done so far makes them look anymore like a
Championship team than they did last season.

The closest the Kings have been to looking like a Championship team was the 2001-2 season. They fit the bill of a winner. A superstar in Chris Webber, a sidekick in Mike Bibby, talented role players and a deep bench. The recent history of Championship teams is one of a superstar, a sidekick and role players, with the exception of Detroit, but as the say goes "the exception proves the rule."
Just looking at recent years:
2004-5: San Antonio had Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili
2003-4: Detroit – alas the exception
2002-3: San Antonio again with Duncan plus David Robinson
2001-2, 2000-1, 1999-2000: Los Angeles had
Shaq and Kobe, (sorry Kobe but Shaq was the superstar and #8 the sidekick) plus a list of role players from Horry to Fisher to Shaw, etc.
1998-9: The * year but San Antonio still won with Tim Duncan and David Robinson
1997-8, 1996-7, 1995-6: Chicago with Jordan and Pippen
1994-5, 1993-4: Houston with Hakeem Olajuwon and Drexler in 95 and Thorpe in 94
1992-3, 1991-2, 1990-1: Chicago’s first three-peat and it started with Jordan and Pippen

I could go on, there were the 1988-89 and 1989-90 Pistons with Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars (however once again Detroit probably is the least convincing in this argument); the 1986-87 and 1987-88
Lakers with Magic and Kareem and Worthy; etc…..


Now take a look at the Kings, they are a team with no superstar, two sidekicks, and guys who are trying to figure out what role they are supposed to play. Right now the Kings are just not at that level. The big question then is can they get there and if so how.

Detroit’s model of "team" play is a nice one to try to emulate but history proves that the best way to win is to build around a superstar.
 
No offense, Camino, but that is one of the biggest wastes of space I've seen recently. What exactly is this guy trying to say? There is NOTHING new in that article IMHO...

I think some of our own members have consistently done a much better job of assessing the Kings.
 
VF21 said:
No offense, Camino, but that is one of the biggest wastes of space I've seen recently. What exactly is this guy trying to say? There is NOTHING new in that article IMHO...

I think some of our own members have consistently done a much better job of assessing the Kings.
LOL X 1,000,000
 
VF21 said:
No offense, Camino, but that is one of the biggest wastes of space I've seen recently. What exactly is this guy trying to say? There is NOTHING new in that article IMHO...

I think some of our own members have consistently done a much better job of assessing the Kings.

i hide nothing:)
 
You have to love pro sports philosophized onto a piece paper, its so clear cut and easy. Its like how a bowling ball and a feather hit the ground at the same time in a vacuum. :)
 
captain bill said:
umm...where is the kings summer report? and why did i just read this?

lol

for real. the kings summer report: the kings used to be a title contender. wtf?
 
Hey! Neato! This looks fun and easy! I wanna play sports columnist too! Ok, here goes....

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bulls Summer Report



By P. X. Pusher
for KINGSFANS.com
Aug 9, 2005, 19:02



WHAT IT TAKES TO WIN – A SUPERSTAR AND A SIDEKICK


And it sure doesn’t hurt if the sidekick is a superstar too.

It’s summer and we are in the midst of teams attempting to position themselves to win, or at the least to get some cap room for next year. But most teams want to win and win now.

In the past few years the Chicago Bulls have gone from a roster full of talent with the likes of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen and Dennis Rodman plus a supporting cast that consisted of Luc Longley, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, and the highly underrated Ron Harper – a team that just wrapped up it's 6th NBA Finals Championship with a glorious final shot by Jordan against the Utah Jazz. So will the 2005-6 season be one of rebuilding, reshuffling or winning.

The closest the Bulls have been to looking like a Championship team was the 1997-1998 season. They fit the bill of a winner. A superstar in Michael Jordan, a sidekick in Scottie Pippen, talented role players and a deep bench. The recent history of Championship teams is one of a superstar, a sidekick and role players, with the exception of Detroit, but as the say goes "the exception proves the rule."
Just looking at recent years:
2004-5: San Antonio had Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili
2003-4: Detroit – alas the exception
2002-3: San Antonio again with Duncan plus David Robinson
2001-2, 2000-1, 1999-2000: Los Angeles had Shaq and Kobe, (sorry Kobe but Shaq was the superstar and #8 the sidekick) plus a list of role players from Horry to Fisher to Shaw, etc.
1998-9: The * year but San Antonio still won with Tim Duncan and David Robinson
1997-8, 1996-7, 1995-6: Chicago with Jordan and Pippen
1994-5, 1993-4: Houston with Hakeem Olajuwon and Drexler in 95 and Thorpe in 94
1992-3, 1991-2, 1990-1: Chicago’s first three-peat and it started with Jordan and Pippen

I could go on, there were the 1988-89 and 1989-90 Pistons with Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars (however once again Detroit probably is the least convincing in this argument); the 1986-87 and 1987-88 Lakers with Magic and Kareem and Worthy; etc…..


Now take a look at the Bulls, they are a team with no superstar, two sidekicks, and guys who are trying to figure out what role they are supposed to play. Right now the Bulls are just not at that level. The big question then is can they get there and if so how.

Detroit’s model of "team" play is a nice one to try to emulate but history proves that the best way to win is to build around a superstar.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

...and that concludes my informative report on the Bulls this summer.
 
Last edited:
Wow. That was really good, Pixie!

I wish more people would take the time to post really insightful pieces instead of the drivel that other guy wrote.



























;)
 
Last edited:
Hey, did anyone notice that the spurs won a championship? And how about that Duncan, huh? Is he some kind of player or what? Also, Chris Webber is not a king anymore. I like puppies. They are soft and cuddly. In other news, Larry Brown left the Pistons on really bad terms. What's that all about? Sometimes I just say, "gee golly, what are all these guys thinking?" He might go to Cleveland is what I heard. In basketball, we have a hoop and a big orange bouncy ball. Sometimes it's smaller and has funny logos on it, and I can't figure out what that means.
 
Back
Top