how long has sacramento been "rebuilding"
- Thread starter tyrant
- Start date
It's so funny that people say that Moore making an average of 6 million a year is an "absurd amount of money" yet there are players on other teams like Adonal Foyle that make 9 million a year and don't get off the bench, Foyle has two left feet, bad hands, misses dunks is a 6 10" center which is short. Moore is athletic, 7 foot, runs the floor hits from outside and dunks on you.
check out foyle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkoNgq-O3R4
and this is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOE-bbkTNfM
compare that to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdeu4NXpzi0&mode=related&search=
check out foyle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkoNgq-O3R4
and this is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOE-bbkTNfM
compare that to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdeu4NXpzi0&mode=related&search=
And yet Career:
Foyle: 19.1min 4.4pts (.477 .000 .501) 5.0reb 0.5ast 0.4stl 1.7blk 0.9TO
Mikki: 16.1min 5.6pts (.540 .182 .741) 3.5reb 0.6ast 0.3stl 0.5blk 0.9TO
They don't award points for style. Both guys are at a similar level. One scores more and has dreadlocks. The other rebounds and blocks shots (you know, big man stuff).
P.S. as an aside, Adonal actually has a better contract for us at this point -- ends cleanly after 08-09 9team option whihc obviously will not be picked up). Wouldn't mind seeing him show up in a Kings uni. Maybe attached to O'Bryant, so long as what we sent back the toher way was part of the Brad/Kenny/Reef/Salmons quartet of long term back breakers.
Have we started yet? I must have missed that memo.
Signing Mikki Moore and bringing in Mike Wilks for a tryout does not feel like rebuilding to me.
I think GP's hands are tied by the bad contracts he doled out to Miller and Bibby. He can't make a significant move to rebuild the team - so he's trying to stay as competitive as he can given the talent on the FA market.
Signing Mikki Moore and bringing in Mike Wilks for a tryout does not feel like rebuilding to me.
I think GP's hands are tied by the bad contracts he doled out to Miller and Bibby. He can't make a significant move to rebuild the team - so he's trying to stay as competitive as he can given the talent on the FA market.
Would you prefer the term "excrement"? 
As in "this offseason has been excrement?"
Or "our team is awash in excrement?"
Or "if Geoff does not pull off several of the late offseason moves that were once a trademark back before he jumped the shark and became the West Coast's Kevin Mchale, come opening night he will deserve to have a bag full of steaming excrement dumped over his head on national TV?"
As in "this offseason has been excrement?"
Or "our team is awash in excrement?"
Or "if Geoff does not pull off several of the late offseason moves that were once a trademark back before he jumped the shark and became the West Coast's Kevin Mchale, come opening night he will deserve to have a bag full of steaming excrement dumped over his head on national TV?"
Would you prefer the term "excrement"?
As in "this offseason has been excrement?"
Or "our team is awash in excrement?"
Or "if Geoff does not pull off several of the late offseason moves that were once a trademark back before he jumped the shark and became the West Coast's Kevin Mchale, come opening night he will deserve to have a bag full of steaming excrement dumped over his head on national TV?"
As in "this offseason has been excrement?"
Or "our team is awash in excrement?"
Or "if Geoff does not pull off several of the late offseason moves that were once a trademark back before he jumped the shark and became the West Coast's Kevin Mchale, come opening night he will deserve to have a bag full of steaming excrement dumped over his head on national TV?"
And if we only win 25 games with all those new faces, we get a much better shot at an even better new face in the draft next summer. So what's the problem?
But you're making a basic assumption that you and Petrie have the same outlook and vision for the team.
I don't think it's solely about losing, regardless of those who want to completely put the team in the crapper. I've never thought that way, and I think it's pretty apparent by now those who do subscribe to that theory are limited to posters on message boards and not the guys being paid the big bucks.
We don't know how Moore and Wilks will be utilized or to what purpose they've been acquired. I personally subscribe to the theory that Moore, a seasoned legit 7-footer, is someone worth having around if for no other reason than to give Hawes a better role-model than Brad Miller.
I don't think it's solely about losing, regardless of those who want to completely put the team in the crapper. I've never thought that way, and I think it's pretty apparent by now those who do subscribe to that theory are limited to posters on message boards and not the guys being paid the big bucks.
We don't know how Moore and Wilks will be utilized or to what purpose they've been acquired. I personally subscribe to the theory that Moore, a seasoned legit 7-footer, is someone worth having around if for no other reason than to give Hawes a better role-model than Brad Miller.
I'm not really making any assumptions about Petrie's view, just responding to your suggestion that winning is good, and so is losing.
My main concern is that we seem to have no plan. We'd have to struggle to rise to mediocrity, but we're not rebuilding. We aren't freeing cap space, unloading unwanted players, building around youth, or doing anything else which indicates any sort of long-term plan. We can't win, and we're not trying to lose. Instead, we seem to be in a holding pattern where we overpay players to come to Sac for a couple of 32-win seasons, while we're waiting for half of the team's contracts to expire. Maybe that's it, maybe Petrie knows precisely what he's doing, and is working hard to maintain the status quo. It's just hard to think of why he should consider the status quo to be in any way desirable.
My main concern is that we seem to have no plan. We'd have to struggle to rise to mediocrity, but we're not rebuilding. We aren't freeing cap space, unloading unwanted players, building around youth, or doing anything else which indicates any sort of long-term plan. We can't win, and we're not trying to lose. Instead, we seem to be in a holding pattern where we overpay players to come to Sac for a couple of 32-win seasons, while we're waiting for half of the team's contracts to expire. Maybe that's it, maybe Petrie knows precisely what he's doing, and is working hard to maintain the status quo. It's just hard to think of why he should consider the status quo to be in any way desirable.