How good do you think the currently constructed team can be?

[sdballer]

Where I think the disconnect comes from is Kings fans are tired of losing and want a winner now. I know I do and 100% of Kings fans support that notion. But the FO has different plans. They might want to have a few strong drafts around Cousins and then proceed to build your winner that way (the way every small-market super power does it). As stated before, we're not a team like the Nets who can go buy every huge contract off teams and instantly become a contender.

Someone will bring up Reke, but he's a non-issue. If the FO viewed him as a franchise player, then they would have matched. Simple as that. And clearly, no one else around the league did either. He's going to be in a super 6th man role in NO. I think he'll be great at it, but hardly a role of someone who a franchise views as a building block.

I don't really think its a matter of instant gratification as much as it is some sense of a plan to get to being a winner. We watched the franchise flounder for years with talent bleeds, redundant signings and missing needs unfulfilled. And this offseason felt to many of us like more of the same. Being a mid level lottery team for the next 3-4 years is a suspect way to build talent, especially as it could be a challenge to find a guy as talented as the one we let walk away. But even if that was the strategy, you'd still like to see the team approaching the moves they have made a bit more strategically.

In terms of Reke, the league is filled with guys making around the salary he is getting that are important (and sometimes not) pieces without being the franchise player. Regardless of whether the franchise wanted to match or not, we will massively struggle to find a two way talent of his level that wants to play here. And make no mistake, this franchise desperately needs CORRECTLY UTILIZED talent.

 

[Padrino]

Where I think the disconnect comes from is Kings fans are tired of losing and want a winner now. I know I do and 100% of Kings fans support that notion. But the FO has different plans. They might want to have a few strong drafts around Cousins and then proceed to build your winner that way (the way every small-market super power does it). As stated before, we're not a team like the Nets who can go buy every huge contract off teams and instantly become a contender.

Someone will bring up Reke, but he's a non-issue. If the FO viewed him as a franchise player, then they would have matched. Simple as that. And clearly, no one else around the league did either. He's going to be in a super 6th man role in NO. I think he'll be great at it, but hardly a role of someone who a franchise views as a building block.

no, the disconnect comes from the fact that a great many of us believed that a team properly built around demarcus cousins and tyreke evans would win sooner rather than later, given improved franchise conditions, a head coach with more than half a brain and a useful defensive philosophy, and roleplayers who effectively understand their roles. as it stands, the kings traded their second best player without getting a second best player in return, and there is a gaping hole in the roster's hierarchy as a result...

and, as i will continue to repeat, it is not easy to acquire a legitimate #2 when you're an undesirable small market franchise coming off seven straight losing seasons. free agency isn't kind to sacramento, and their table scraps aren't going to light up the trade block, either. so, i don't care if the FO viewed tyreke evans as a franchise player or not. they made a mistake letting him go for a roleplayer in grievis vasquez. just give this roster a quick up-down; it's quite the dropoff in talent from demarcus cousins to... well, whoever we want to debate is now the kings' second best player...

we also don't know what role tyreke will play for the pelicans. it's rather presumptuous to claim that new orleans doesn't believe he is "someone who a franchise views as a building block," or that they won't attempt to beef up eric gordon's value in order to trade him at a later date, thus paving the way for a potential starting role for tyreke...

whereas i simply don't give a **** what the new FO thought about tyreke evans, and consider it a mistake to let him walk regardless, you're projecting your view of evans onto the pelicans' FO after they've already signed him to a sizable contract. they'll figure out how they want to use him, and they may very well decide he's a "building block" after they've integrated him into their game plan. and, of course, they might not, but let's not pretend like the rumors that new orleans intends to bring evans off the bench represents their long-term intentions as a franchise...

 

[Padrino]

That's so far from true in the NBA as to be completely backwards.

There is no other sport, and no other professional sports league where great individual players have a larger impact than in the NBA. "Consumate team sport" sells well to middle schoolers who's mommies want to make sure they all get minutes. In the NBA context it means "Mario Chalmers, know your place, give the ball to LeBron, and get the hell out of the way". There is certainly an importance to your great players playing for the team, not themselves, but great players make the team. And we now only have one with that potential on the whole roster. If you want to continue to buy into the Mac hype that's fine, but even if you do, that's years down the line.

People will of course twist themselves in knots trying to deny the truth of that situation, they will throw out Denver, or Chicago last year or whatever. But the parity on those teams is not the parity of mediocrity. Its the parity of HOF coaches and tough veterans and stacks of talents above anything we have outside of DeMarcus. If you stack our projected lineup up against Denver's from last year, the only king who starts is DeMarcus Cousins. If we're even going to pretend to play with serious teams, he has to be great nearly every night, same as Dwight or Yao or Hakeem or any other great center stuck with not so great teammates. He has to be the centerpiece of everything we do and make everybody better. And if he doesn't seem quite ready for such a Herculean task...well there is our boggle. There is noone else now.

indeed.

in 28 years in sacramento, the kings have sported a winning record in exactly 8 seasons. 8!! of 28!! that's less than a third of the franchise's history in this city. the rest have been losing years that resulted from an absolute dearth of talent, not from a lack of some cute, cuddly notion of "team play." yes, it's important that a team plays together, but this is professional basketball, where talent wins out damn near every time...

 

[pshn80]

that's a nice sentiment until you look at the names on the backs of the jerseys of the various playoff teams in each conference. every once in awhile a team like the nuggets will ride their chemistry into the first round without a legitimate superstar, and swiftly exit thereafter. a team like the '04 champion pistons is even rarer. they're the exception that proves the rule...

as has been the case for half a century now, NBA basketball is most often won with impact players surrounded by lesser talents who understand their roles. a good coach who can manage those roles is usually an important ingredient, as well...

Yes, it's called good team basketball.

 

[Kingster]

I realistically see us somewhere in the range of 25-30 wins, actually. BUT, even if we do not increase our win total by that much, I will settle with it as long as the play on the court is improved, and the effort is there. I don't expect miracles overnight, I never do. Nor do I expect anyone else to expect the same. Those who are predicting playoffs are just being super delusional, and are probably way more optimistic about the season than the most optimistic fan base out there (whichever fan base that may be).

Right now, I look more for improved play and more effort than I do for wins and playoff berths. One step at a time.

My sentiments exactly.

 

[VF21]

With a starting lineup of

Grievis Vasquez
Marcus Thornton
Luc Richard Mbah a Moute
Patrick Patterson
DeMarcus Cousins

you really can't expect much unless Cousins blows up and becomes an All-Star, and Malone turns around the defense. If both of those things happen, and Mclemore plays well, we can reach an absolute maximum of maybe, maybe 40 wins. I expect around a 4-5 game improvement, unless Coach Mike hits the tank when he knows we can't make the playoffs.

The new ownership is NOT going to go into tank mode. They are working too hard to restore the faith of the average fan/season ticket holder in the franchise. They will not be doing anything to disappoint the fanbase, and no matter how much the idea of tanking to get a shot at Wiggins may appeal to some, fans have had enough of the losing. If they do not see honest effort and an attempt to win, things could get very ugly. And that doesn't even take into account our franchise center, who wants to win. Period.

You cannot put a team together and then undermine them without destroying some of the very culture you're trying to build. You just don't.

 

[VF21]

Where I think the disconnect comes from is Kings fans are tired of losing and want a winner now. I know I do and 100% of Kings fans support that notion. But the FO has different plans. They might want to have a few strong drafts around Cousins and then proceed to build your winner that way (the way every small-market super power does it). As stated before, we're not a team like the Nets who can go buy every huge contract off teams and instantly become a contender.

Someone will bring up Reke, but he's a non-issue. If the FO viewed him as a franchise player, then they would have matched. Simple as that. And clearly, no one else around the league did either. He's going to be in a super 6th man role in NO. I think he'll be great at it, but hardly a role of someone who a franchise views as a building block.

You had to go there, didn't you?

Counting down to total derailment of thread in three...

 

[Bricklayer]

The new ownership is NOT going to go into tank mode. They are working too hard to restore the faith of the average fan/season ticket holder in the franchise. They will not be doing anything to disappoint the fanbase, and no matter how much the idea of tanking to get a shot at Wiggins may appeal to some, fans have had enough of the losing. If they do not see honest effort and an attempt to win, things could get very ugly. And that doesn't even take into account our franchise center, who wants to win. Period.

You cannot put a team together and then undermine them without destroying some of the very culture you're trying to build. You just don't.

As of right now the evidence is quite the opposite. Pending further moves everything they have done says "tank". Not the mythical tank of telling guys to miss shots, but the normal NBA tank of just conveniently avoiding putting together the best team you could in a particular year. Keep them young. Rely on unproven guys. Don't pick up anybody major. Just let it flounder out a bit and oops! We lost a bunch of games! Imagine that? In polite parlance its called a "developmental year". And hey, it looks a helluva lot like what the Maloofs were doing when they conveniently didn't want to really press the whole W/L issue either. Unproven coach. Young talent. Cheap patches. Just let it play out. Different end goal, same process.

 

[VF21]

As of right now the evidence is quite the opposite. Pending further moves everything they have done says "tank". Not the mythical tank of telling guys to miss shots, but the normal NBA tank of just conveniently avoiding putting together the best team you could in a particular year. Keep them young. Rely on unproven guys. Don't pick up anybody major. Just let it flounder out a bit and oops! We list a bunch of games! Imagine that? In polite parlance its called a "developmental year". And hey, it looks a helluva lot like what the Maloofs were doing when they conveniently didn't want to really press the whole W/L issue either. Unproven coach. Young talent. Cheap patches. Just let it play out. Different end goal, same process.

I will agree to disagree. I think you and some others are being way too critical on this first series of moves by the front office. I detest the idea of tanking and always have. I think it's akin to cheating, if not the game then the fans who pay good money to go see and support their team. Having said that, I think there are differing definitions of tanking. What irritates me the most is the kind referred to by Darth Divac, where a team "goes into full tank mode" if they determine they're not making the playoffs. There's a big difference between intentionally losing games by not putting the best players on the court at key times and not being able to win games because you're in the process of doing a total remodel of a franchise that had found a way to get under the bottom of the barrel.

And at the risk of being hanged for heresy, I don't care that Tyreke Evans is gone. If you agree (which I do) with the assumption made by many that the front office felt they had to make a choice between Evans and Cousins, then it's pretty much a no-brainer that Evans is the one gone. I don't see it as making our team any worse than it already was. I see it as a pretty clear indication of the direction they want to take, a direction where every effort is going to be made to build a team around DMC. That's not going to happen overnight, although it always seems so easy to figure out on paper or on fan forums.

Vivek Ranadive is not the Maloofs. He's actually the poor guy trying to build a successful franchise out of the piles of dog poop the Maloofs left lying around. He and PDA and Malone have their work cut out for them. I don't expect nor demand perfection and, quite frankly, I don't even care if I fully understand every move they've made so far. I'm willing to support them in their efforts and not second-guess them until I think it's pretty obvious they've gone the wrong way. And I'm nowhere near confident in my ability to read their minds quite yet to jump off that particular cliff.

 

[bajaden]

That's so far from true in the NBA as to be completely backwards.

There is no other sport, and no other professional sports league where great individual players have a larger impact than in the NBA. "Consumate team sport" sells well to middle schoolers who's mommies want to make sure they all get minutes. In the NBA context it means "Mario Chalmers, know your place, give the ball to LeBron, and get the hell out of the way". There is certainly an importance to your great players playing for the team, not themselves, but great players make the team. And we now only have one with that potential on the whole roster. If you want to continue to buy into the Mac hype that's fine, but even if you do, that's years down the line.

People will of course twist themselves in knots trying to deny the truth of that situation, they will throw out Denver, or Chicago last year or whatever. But the parity on those teams is not the parity of mediocrity. Its the parity of HOF coaches and tough veterans and stacks of talents above anything we have outside of DeMarcus. If you stack our projected lineup up against Denver's from last year, the only king who starts is DeMarcus Cousins. If we're even going to pretend to play with serious teams, he has to be great nearly every night, same as Dwight or Yao or Hakeem or any other great center stuck with not so great teammates. He has to be the centerpiece of everything we do and make everybody better. And if he doesn't seem quite ready for such a Herculean task...well there is our boggle. There is noone else now.

Hmmm! I think your both right and wrong. I don't disagree that to win a championship, or even come close, you have to have a minimum of two stars, but just having those two stars won't net you much of anything if the entire group doesn't play as a team. In most minds, we had two stars last season in Cousins, and Tyreke. Or at least as close as you can get to having two stars, and we were terrible! Was it the fault of Tyreke and Cousins? No, it was the fault of a poorly conceived roster, and lousy coaching. Not saying we would have been contenders if we had played as a team, but we certainly would have been a hell of lot better.

Now, at present, we have just one perceived star. Not enough for sure. So whether we like it or not, patience is required. Here's an exercise for everyone to try. Instead of putting down the names of the players you think will start at each position, instead just write down Cousins name at either center or PF, and then instead of names, write down a job description for the rest of the positions in relationship to the style you want to play. After you get done, then look at the roster of proposed starters, and see if they fit the job description. Be honest! I did this before any moves were made, and the first glaring position was shooting guard. Just my opinion, but they may have looked at the roster the same way.

 

[VF21]

Hmmm! I think your both right and wrong. I don't disagree that to win a championship, or even come close, you have to have a minimum of two stars, but just having those two stars won't net you much of anything if the entire group doesn't play as a team. In most minds, we had two stars last season in Cousins, and Tyreke. Or at least as close as you can get to having two stars, and we were terrible! Was it the fault of Tyreke and Cousins? No, it was the fault of a poorly conceived roster, and lousy coaching. Not saying we would have been contenders if we had played as a team, but we certainly would have been a hell of lot better.

Now, at present, we have just one perceived star. Not enough for sure. So whether we like it or not, patience is required. Here's an exercise for everyone to try. Instead of putting down the names of the players you think will start at each position, instead just write down Cousins name at either center or PF, and then instead of names, write down a job description for the rest of the positions in relationship to the style you want to play. After you get done, then look at the roster of proposed starters, and see if they fit the job description. Be honest! I did this before any moves were made, and the first glaring position was shooting guard. Just my opinion, but they may have looked at the roster the same way.

Very interesting way to look at the problem facing PDA. I'm very interested to see what some of the responses will be.

 

[pshn80]

VF21 and baja, I agree with you both. Our FO is setting a direction and it is, in my view, to improve and start us toward much better things. Nothing they have done so far takes away from that. It's their ball game and they are doing fine. Please understand, I have no interest or talent to tell them what to do. Let's hang in there and enjoy the ride.

 

[Darth Divac]

The new ownership is NOT going to go into tank mode. They are working too hard to restore the faith of the average fan/season ticket holder in the franchise. They will not be doing anything to disappoint the fanbase, and no matter how much the idea of tanking to get a shot at Wiggins may appeal to some, fans have had enough of the losing. If they do not see honest effort and an attempt to win, things could get very ugly. And that doesn't even take into account our franchise center, who wants to win. Period.

You cannot put a team together and then undermine them without destroying some of the very culture you're trying to build. You just don't.

Even if Cousins and Mclemore play well, even if the roster changes defensively and our players develop chemistry, there's simply not enough talent on this roster to compete! Oh sure, we can improve, maybe reach 40 wins if we're super lucky. But there's not enough promise and not enough impact players to compete for a playoff spot, and too much of it to have a realistic change of getting a building block in the draft, because let's be real, no big-name free agent ever has or ever will come here.

 

[CruzDude]

I think you have touched the important element - basketball is a team sport not a Cousins/whoever sport. Good team guys can make a good team.

For example, the Spurs, Pacers and Griz. Really good teams without the superstars. The Heat have LBJ and he is the main cog in that wheel. Wade is a star/super-star. Bosh is not. He is a role player. As LBJ goes so goes the Heat. Period.

Vanadive and Malone have said they plan to develop their culture on the roster this year, to establish the defensive mindset and to get a roster who believe and accept their roles. Even Cuz will have a role to play as will the other starters. And who is a starter is not relevant for quite awhile. What group of players in the 5 positions bring together the "culture" and defensive mindset off of which everyone else plays. Manu and Harden were 6th men who were the cogs in their teams train. Bench guys like "Birdman" in Miami were very key in their success. Everyone of the top 5-6 teams have 1-3 key bench players who are key cogs in their engine.

Cuz, a guard and/or a forward could develop into the key cogs. But then the bench becomes critically important, as they were for the Kings in 2000-2004. A bench that holds leads or creates leads is as critical as starters. To achieve this kind of success, one cannot be concerned with wins and loses. A big section of fans want wins regardless. Nice sentiment but this year not realistic. If the wins come, great but first the culture, the mind set and buying into the plan and each players role. If we start to see that just after New Years I'm a happy camper. If by the All Star break we don't really see any progress toward a "team" concept with role plays, defense first and team play, then I'll not be so happy. But lets wait and see. Everything will be different this year.

 

[Darth Divac]

For example, the Spurs, Pacers and Griz. Really good teams without the superstars. The Heat have LBJ and he is the main cog in that wheel. Wade is a star/super-star. Bosh is not. He is a role player. As LBJ goes so goes the Heat. Period.

Vanadive and Malone have said they plan to develop their culture on the roster this year, to establish the defensive mindset and to get a roster who believe and accept their roles. Even Cuz will have a role to play as will the other starters. And who is a starter is not relevant for quite awhile. What group of players in the 5 positions bring together the "culture" and defensive mindset off of which everyone else plays. Manu and Harden were 6th men who were the cogs in their teams train. Bench guys like "Birdman" in Miami were very key in their success. Everyone of the top 5-6 teams have 1-3 key bench players who are key cogs in their engine.

Cuz, a guard and/or a forward could develop into the key cogs. But then the bench becomes critically important, as they were for the Kings in 2000-2004. A bench that holds leads or creates leads is as critical as starters. To achieve this kind of success, one cannot be concerned with wins and loses. A big section of fans want wins regardless. Nice sentiment but this year not realistic. If the wins come, great but first the culture, the mind set and buying into the plan and each players role. If we start to see that just after New Years I'm a happy camper. If by the All Star break we don't really see any progress toward a "team" concept with role plays, defense first and team play, then I'll not be so happy. But lets wait and see. Everything will be different this year.

I bet Vanadive has a lot planned for this team.

Hee hee, too late to edit, I've already seen it!

 

[CruzDude]

Even if Cousins and Mclemore play well, even if the roster changes defensively and our players develop chemistry, there's simply not enough talent on this roster to compete! Oh sure, we can improve, maybe reach 40 wins if we're super lucky. But there's not enough promise and not enough impact players to compete for a playoff spot, and too much of it to have a realistic change of getting a building block in the draft, because let's be real, no big-name free agent ever has or ever will come here.

Just couldn't pass this up. Vlade was a FA and became the centerpiece of the resurgent Kings in 1998. Trades in 98-99 took them to the promised land and at least 5 consecutive 50 win seasons. But it is true lately that FA's have not seen any benefit in coming to the Kings. Until 2013. Vasquez and Mbah a Moute are key FA's that should help the Kings get back into respectability. We all just have to have some patience and wait for the new regime to get a big hunk of the new season under their helt.

Correction
Tho not FA's Vasquez wanted to be here as did Landry. Not sure A Moute is back from Africa yet as haven't heard any press confernce. But down here in the desert we may not have heard all. CruzDude

 

[Bricklayer]

Hmmm! I think your both right and wrong. I don't disagree that to win a championship, or even come close, you have to have a minimum of two stars, but just having those two stars won't net you much of anything if the entire group doesn't play as a team. In most minds, we had two stars last season in Cousins, and Tyreke. Or at least as close as you can get to having two stars, and we were terrible! Was it the fault of Tyreke and Cousins? No, it was the fault of a poorly conceived roster, and lousy coaching. Not saying we would have been contenders if we had played as a team, but we certainly would have been a hell of lot better.

Now, at present, we have just one perceived star. Not enough for sure. So whether we like it or not, patience is required. Here's an exercise for everyone to try. Instead of putting down the names of the players you think will start at each position, instead just write down Cousins name at either center or PF, and then instead of names, write down a job description for the rest of the positions in relationship to the style you want to play. After you get done, then look at the roster of proposed starters, and see if they fit the job description. Be honest! I did this before any moves were made, and the first glaring position was shooting guard. Just my opinion, but they may have looked at the roster the same way.

The thing is that does not apply to stars. Now AFTER you have your stars in place, then sure, of course you take the rest of your positions and try to fit in appropriate roleplayers. But you don't try to slot in stars for "fit". You fit others to them, not the other way around. Lebron and DWade don't fit. Irrelevant except at the very highest championship level. They are stars, so good it overwhelms whatever conflict there is. If our front office is truly saying ok, we have Cousins. That's it, everybody else has to fit! Then they are essentially anointing Cousins one of the 10 best players of all time, because that's who you have to be to win it alone without another star. You have to be Hakeem. Even being Ewing won't do it.

Star 1. Star 2. Then we start slotting in guys who fit. You don't trade DWade for Nick Young because Young fits better as a spacer. You don't trade Westbrook for Grevis because you think Grevis will pass it to Durant more. Stars are difficult guys to "fit" precisely because they are better than all the pedestrian players who fit nicely into a limited little punch the clock mold. Stars do things differently. Its why they are stars. Its their genius. They may not always mesh perfectly. But they're still stars, which trumps basically any non star. The only real conflict might be if they play identical positions. After you have your guys sure. The thing Petrie could never do was understand the concept of "roleplayer" and how you build a team around stars. Smart was even worse, actively opposing stars in both his stops as head coach, and trying to be a basketball socialist where everybody had equal rights to the ball.

As an aside, Wade worked with Shaq. Magic worked with Kareem. Parker worked with Duncan. None of those "fit". But that's not the important factor there.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Vivek has said he won't (and by implication fans shouldn't) judge Kings by number of wins this season. OK, I won't. But with still very incomplete roster (hopefully more added soon), "prized" rookie replacing a "star," with new still relatively inexperienced PG running the show (along with various backcourt gunners by committee), SF void or at least run by committee as before, mostly coin toss inside except for Big Cuz, and to top it off a rookie head coach at the helm. No more than 34 wins but whose judging - right? Just GO KINGS!

 

[sdballer]

Just couldn't pass this up. Vlade was a FA and became the centerpiece of the resurgent Kings in 1998. Trades in 98-99 took them to the promised land and at least 5 consecutive 50 win seasons. But it is true lately that FA's have not seen any benefit in coming to the Kings. Until 2013. Vasquez and Mbah a Moute are key FA's that should help the Kings get back into respectability. We all just have to have some patience and wait for the new regime to get a big hunk of the new season under their helt.

Neither Vasquez or mbah a moute were free agents.

 

[VF21]

I bet Vanadive has a lot planned for this team.

Hee hee, too late to edit, I've already seen it!

It's a typo. Everybody makes them.

 

[VF21]

Even if Cousins and Mclemore play well, even if the roster changes defensively and our players develop chemistry, there's simply not enough talent on this roster to compete! Oh sure, we can improve, maybe reach 40 wins if we're super lucky. But there's not enough promise and not enough impact players to compete for a playoff spot, and too much of it to have a realistic change of getting a building block in the draft, because let's be real, no big-name free agent ever has or ever will come here.

And none of this counters my point.

 

[Darth Divac]

It's a typo. Everybody makes them.

I know, I was just poking fun.

 

[Darth Divac]

And none of this counters my point.

My point is, if we strive to win every game we possibly can, we'll be a below average to mediocre team, and improve at a sluggish pace. And so if we tank and receive a high draft pick we'll be a winning team much faster than if we squeeze every win we can get out of a low-talent squad.

 

[Bosnian Diehard]

Despite the comparisons of mirroring this offseason for us and last year's offseason for us, we have still had a much better offseason in 2013 than we had in 2102. The Kansas rookie which slid has skills that easily translate into the NBA (Shooting and athleticism). The SF who can play good defense doesn't think he has the abilities of Kobe Bryant on offense, this time around. Carl Landry provides a good bench option who can score. Finally, we brought in Greivis Vasquez, a pass-first point guard, at the expense of Tyreke Evans, a score-first point guard. Will we benefit from this transaction? We'll have to wait and see how everything plays out.

I think our win total, however, depends almost entirely on whether or not Cousins can provide a break out year and become the all star we have always wanted. With a break out season from Demarcus, and Malone's defensive coaching, i can see us achieving 40 wins. Without either of those two things, we can possibly get 28 wins, and with only one of the two bonuses, we can get around 35 wins this year.

 

[jcwkings]

I'm surprised so many are down on Carl Landry, does anyone remember how anemic our 2nd unit of Brooks, Thornton, Johnson, Hayes was last season? Landry gives us a legit 6th man who brings intangibles and will teach the young guys how to be a pro. He is a legit low post scorer in the NBA. Someone compared Landry to Thornton which is absurd. Thornton like McLemore are system players that are better off the ball, Landry is a legit option to iso in the post.

 

[VF21]

My point is, if we strive to win every game we possibly can, we'll be a below average to mediocre team, and improve at a sluggish pace. And so if we tank and receive a high draft pick we'll be a winning team much faster than if we squeeze every win we can get out of a low-talent squad.

You can argue that all you like but the point still remains that the vast majority of fans who shell over hard-earned money to see the games do NOT want to see a lackluster game. They want to be entertained. If they're no longer entertained, they quit coming and all you see are empty seats. People on fan boards argue incessantly about tanking for the future or a certain draft pick but you do not hear the average game attendee making those kinds of comments.

The Kings have had attendance problems for years. Now, with the new ownership group in place, that has turned around. They are NOT going to jeopardize that trend. If people go to the games this year and the product on the court is no better than years before (and I'm including things like ridiculous substitutions, sitting players for no apparent reason, etc.) the newly returned paying fan base is not going to be happy. And right now, those are the folks Vivek wants to get back in full fan mode. And full fan mode doesn't include watching a team tank. As tempting as it might be to try and get a shot at Wiggins, I'm betting it's not a chance Vivek is willing to take, especially if it might mean a return to apathy and absence on the part of the fans.

 

[sdballer]

I'm surprised so many are down on Carl Landry, does anyone remember how anemic our 2nd unit of Brooks, Thornton, Johnson, Hayes was last season? Landry gives us a legit 6th man who brings intangibles and will teach the young guys how to be a pro. He is a legit low post scorer in the NBA. Someone compared Landry to Thornton which is absurd. Thornton like McLemore are system players that are better off the ball, Landry is a legit option to iso in the post.

And I'm surprised that so many others are forgetting what Carl Landry did the last time he played for us. He is a legit low post scorer on a team that already has one when we were in desperate need of interior d. He was our biggest acquisition this offseason and now shares the position with at least 2 other guys that also can make a case for playing time.

Our bench now likely consists of IT/Mac/Fish/PPAT/Landry which has multiple guys that can score and none that really defend. If you want an ISO scorer, keep Reke who gives you a much needed penetrator and defender not a guy that does the same thing at a lower, shorter level than our star.

 

[The_Jamal]

Even if Cousins and Mclemore play well, even if the roster changes defensively and our players develop chemistry, there's simply not enough talent on this roster to compete! Oh sure, we can improve, maybe reach 40 wins if we're super lucky. But there's not enough promise and not enough impact players to compete for a playoff spot, and too much of it to have a realistic change of getting a building block in the draft, because let's be real, no big-name free agent ever has or ever will come here.

I disagree. If everyone on this roster was 30+, then I'd be worried about where our future was heading. The ceiling would be somewhere around 35-42 wins.

However, McLemore, McCallum, IT, Ppat, Cousins are all under 24 years old.
Mbah a Moute, Vasquez, and Thornton are 26.
JT just turned 27 a few days ago.
Landry and Salmons are the "old guys" at 29 and 33 respectively.

Add in what should be a vastly improved coaching staff, player development, and FO over the previous regime. And I think we're on the right track.

I also think the word "star" is thrown around too easily. Reke has not been a star. The FO and the rest of the league don't think so either judging by the FA interest he got. He's going to NO to be a super 6th man. A role he can definitely succeed in, but not a role you'd classify as a "building block"

And for those saying we didn't improve... well I call hogwash. We have 4 quality NBA bigs. 5 if you use Hayes sparingly as a defensive specialist. The bench, which was a huge weakness last season, all of a sudden could potentially see 3 of our starters from last season on it. From Brooks-Thornton-Johnson-Robinson-Hayes to IT, McLemore, Salmons, Landry, JT. A big weakness of last season becomes a strength this year.

Cousins now has a starting roster around him that can put him in positions to succeed. Vasquez is by far the best ball-distributor we've had since our Vlade/Webber days and will be actively looking to get Cousins the ball and get him easy looks. That's not something that should be under appreciated, especially with our "me first" rosters the past 4 seasons. Patterson (my choice to start next to Cousins) provides legit floor spacing and just a smart, tough, fundamentally sound role player who's going to help the team when he's on the floor. Patterson impressed a lot of us last season with his ability to just fit within the offense and look to make the smart plays. I think that is a valuable attribute we should take advantage of with the starters. Mbah is the same way with his defense and bball IQ. The guy knows exactly what his strengths are, what we will ask him to do, and he will not play outside of his strenghts (developing the Kobe mentality like Johnson). And I do honestly believe he has an All-defensive award or 2 if he played for NYK, LA, Miami for his career.

I think Thornton is the probably the most intriguing player on our roster this year, after watching for how Cousins develops. You could argue his role has been jerked around more than anybody on the team. And I do think he plugs right into the 2nd option role. The question is, can he get back to doing the little things again? Helping on the boards, creating for others, improving his D. His scoring will absolutely be fine. Its the other little things I'd like to see improve from him

 

[randymoss1881]

I'm still hoping at some point Morey caves and makes Asik available, and is interested in re-acquiring a certain former Rocket stretch 4. They just signed Camby, who, although old and not worthy of many minutes, did have some options in where to go. I'm wondering if they gave him some indications he'd get minutes backing up Howard.

I don't think they have a choice you just can't play 2 players who can't shoot passed 5ft Dwight has to play next to a shooting big. I said in a different thread the only trade I think that we can't compete with is a Ryan Anderson trade also asik salary next season is 14 mill Houston ain't paying that. Offer them Patterson, Thornton and Isaiah.

 

[The_Jamal]

And I'm surprised that so many others are forgetting what Carl Landry did the last time he played for us. He is a legit low post scorer on a team that already has one when we were in desperate need of interior d. He was our biggest acquisition this offseason and now shares the position with at least 2 other guys that also can make a case for playing time.

Our bench now likely consists of IT/Mac/Fish/PPAT/Landry which has multiple guys that can score and none that really defend. If you want an ISO scorer, keep Reke who gives you a much needed penetrator and defender not a guy that does the same thing at a lower, shorter level than our star.

Why do u just ignore the rest of Landry's career so easily? The guy has been incredibly productive at EVERY single stop he's been outside of his first stint with us. It would make more sense to say we, not Landry, was the problem no?