How we rebuilt the last time

[joejoe]

It might help to remind everyone how we “rebuilt” the last time in 98-99. (I’m sure that I’ll get some details wrong, so please correct me). We went from a 0.33 winning % in 97-98 to a 0.54 % in 99 (that was the year of the strike). There was A LOT that happened 98-99:

1. We sent our franchise player, good guy, the “Rock,” Mitch Richmond for talented by pouting, malcontent Chris Webber who was on his third team already. Richmond was heading downhill, and bitching about his contract, but he was near at the top of his game. I hated that move. Webber came because he was branded a trouble maker, pot head, unintelligent (think of that Michigan phantom time out). In any case, he was major talent, but we paid for him straight up with our major talented player.

2. We got “Predrag-who????” to leave Europe and come to the U.S. He was our 96 draft pick. The Kings were one of the first teams to exploit the under-scouted teams in Europe. That route isn’t possible anymore, unless we look to China, perhaps. In any case, we got him through a stealth draft selection. He was unknown here.

3. Vlade agreed to come here. He was a “legit” center, probably just past his peak. I’m not really sure why he decided to come here. Maybe because of Peja? What legit centers are available to come here now? Specifically, what centers that are better than Brad?

4. We drafted Jason Williams at number 7. He too was a pot head and trouble maker (at least that was his reputation, and it didn’t help that he was buds with Randy Moss). This was a big gamble, and we drafted him higher in the draft than most expected. (Nowitzki and Paul Pierce came next). J-Dubb was so exciting and fun to watch. He probably even helped us win a game or two!

5. I think we also benefited from the L-train retiring and giving us some more funds to pick up Vernon Maxwell and others.


6. We also got a legit, big time coach in RA.

7. And the Maloofs took over controlling ownership.



8. Talk about major overhalls, of the 19 players who we paid in 97-98, only 3 were around at the end of the 99 season:



[FONT=&quot]Corliss Williamson [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Olivier Saint-Jean (changed name)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Lawrence[/FONT][FONT=&quot] Funderburke[/FONT]



As I came up with this list, it seems to me that there may be a lot more to rebuilding than just getting one high draft pick.

 

[DocHolliday]

I don't think you can do what was done before again. No one knew how crafty Geoff Petrie was back then. Now, since most of the move's he makes are beneficial to the Kings more than the other team in one way or another people are skeptical about dealing with him.

I don't know if you can pull off what was pulled off before.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

As I came up with this list, it seems to me that there may be a lot more to rebuilding than just getting one high draft pick.

I call straw man.

It takes a special kind of tunnel vision to draw that conclusion, or to think that arguing against said conclusion proves anything; NOBODY of repute on this board has even HINTED that all it takes is getting one high draft pick.

But it's definitely a good START.

 

[joejoe]

...NOBODY of repute on this board has even HINTED that all it takes is getting one high draft pick.

Then I'm in good company!

But it's definitely a good START.

Is it really a good start? Here were the Kings' draft picks #s from 1989-1998:

1
7
3
7
7
8
13
14
11
7

Currently, the Kings have the 9th worse record in the league. Given how difficult it is to move up position in the draft (the odds are awful) that means the Kings will have the 9th pick. That's just about what the Kings averaged over the ten years before the Last Great Turnaround.

I would argue that a draft pick didn't help the Kings much at all in the past. In fact, the drafting of Jason Williams was probably one of the factors of lower importance, of the list that I outlined.

My guess at what matters the most? Probably the fact that the Maloofs came in ready to kick some butt and spend some money. They hired a big name coach and created a new culture. The players forgot that Sacramento was a place where one should "lose." Unfortunately, the Maloofs may have lost a bit of interest in Sacrmento Basketball lately.

 

[Bricklayer]

Is it really a good start?

Yes.

We got an absolute gift in the Webber trade. A once in a lifetime opportunity that does not come up again -- we were able to trade for a potential franchise player while he was still young for a smaller player on the downside. Loved the move then, but its not one you can replicate. (As an aside, Webb was on his second team, not third).

Once you realize/accept that you just aren't going to duplicate that trade -- indeed no longer have anyone of Mitch's perceived level to make that trade with even if there were a foolish franchise out there looking to move a superstar caliber talent -- you still have to duplicate the OUTCOME of that trade. Which is to say you still have to find a way to get a young franchise player in here. And the way nearly everybody does that is the draft.

Let me give you my own set of numbers:
#9
#1
#1
#9
#3
#3
#1
#5
#1
#5
#7/#3

Those numbers would be the picks that anchor basically all of the league's power teams right now*, except for the Lakers (Kobe was a #13 pick acquired on draft day from Charlotte for Vlade) and Pistons (spare parts). They ALL got bad to get good. Drafted their studs, and then built their teams from there. Time to join the party.

*Dallas (Dirk), San Antonio (Duncan), Houston (Yao), Phoenix (Amare), Denver(Melo), Utah (Williams), Cleveland (LeBron), Minnesota (Garnett), Orlando (Howard), Miami (Wade), Chicago (Heinrich/Gordon)

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Is it really a good start?

Uhh... yeah! Exactly how do you think that teams end up with players like Dwight Howard, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Dwyane Wade and Yao Ming in the first place, huh? They sure as hell didn't trade for them; they got them in the lottery. And how do you think they got in the lottery? By sucking real hard, that's how.

I mean, seriously: are you actually trying to use the Kings ****ty draft history as some kind of evidence that improving in the draft can't be done? Are you REALLY trying to do that?

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

I think that alot of what happened with the renassaince back in 98' was being at the right place at the right time, and common sense, as opposed to shrewd wheeling and dealing. I think Petrie had a vision. I wonder what he has now?? It's got to be alot more cloudy of a picture than back then, obviously.

edit: and I remember that Jim Thomas was still the owner back then, and GP had walked out and was leaving at one point. But you kinda had a better view of everything with young, energetic new owners in the waiting, knowing that brighter days were ahead. In the NBA in this day and age, I think its going to take alot more to shore up everything in a short amount of time, like was done before...I dont think its possible...but who knows.

 

[joejoe]

Yes.



Let me give you my own set of numbers:
#9
#1
#1
#9
#3
#3
#1
#5
#1
#5
#7/#3

Those numbers would be the picks that anchor basically all of the league's power teams right now*, except for the Lakers (Kobe was a #13 pick acquired on draft day from Charlotte for Vlade) and Pistons (spare parts). They ALL got bad to get good. Drafted their studs, and then built their teams from there. Time to join the party.

*Dallas (Dirk), San Antonio (Duncan), Houston (Yao), Phoenix (Amare), Denver(Melo), Utah (Williams), Cleveland (LeBron), Minnesota (Garnett), Orlando (Howard), Miami (Wade), Chicago (Heinrich/Gordon)

Here are the anchors from the current ten worst teams in the league:

4 NY (Marbury)
2 SAC (Bibby)
4 NO (Paul)
10 ATL (Johnson)
19 POR (Randolph)
2 CHA (Okafor)
5 SEA (Allen)
10 BOS (Pierce)
8 PHI (Miller)—but they’ve had three number
one’s in the last month, Webber, Iverson,
Smith, so who knows what the hell is going
on???
3 MEM (Gasol)

These picks aren't too bad. Except for Randolph in POR, all top ten picks, which is where the Kings are headed.

Look, I certainly agree that a high draft pick that is talented (let's forget Pervis Ellison) would be helpful. No question about it. But I guess the question is how to best move forward. I think I've made the case that the Kings' Last Big Turnaround was NOT through drafting high (even though they had many high picks). Instead, it was through trades and FAs.

I'd like to see some hard numbers on which strategy works best. Build a team through the draft, or assemble one through FA/Trade? If we look at the last few winners and dynasties (Miami, Detroit, Lakers, San Antonio, Bulls), only San Antonio and the Bulls drafted their main guy (I'd argue that Shaq was more important than Wade for the Heat, but others wouldn't).

Maybe the Kings don't have much in the way of trade bait, but I don't think this is true. Artest, Bibby, Miller, and even SAR and KMart are worth something.

And to clarify, Webber was released by three other teams by the time we got him (he was drafted by Orlando, but played with GS and Wash).

 

[Bricklayer]

Here are the anchors from the current ten worst teams in the league:

4 NY (Marbury)
2 SAC (Bibby)
4 NO (Paul)
10 ATL (Johnson)
19 POR (Randolph)
2 CHA (Okafor)
5 SEA (Allen)
10 BOS (Pierce)
8 PHI (Miller)—but they’ve had three number
one’s in the last month, Webber, Iverson,
Smith, so who knows what the hell is going
on???
3 MEM (Gasol)

These picks aren't too bad. Except for Randolph in POR, all top ten picks, which is where the Kings are headed.

Look, I certainly agree that a high draft pick that is talented (let's forget Pervis Ellison) would be helpful. No question about it. But I guess the question is how to best move forward. I think I've made the case that the Kings' Last Big Turnaround was NOT through drafting high (even though they had many high picks). Instead, it was through trades and FAs.

I'd like to see some hard numbers on which strategy works best. Build a team through the draft, or assemble one through FA/Trade? If we look at the last few winners and dynasties (Miami, Detroit, Lakers, San Antonio, Bulls), only San Antonio and the Bulls drafted their main guy (I'd argue that Shaq was more important than Wade for the Heat, but others wouldn't).

Maybe the Kings don't have much in the way of trade bait, but I don't think this is true. Artest, Bibby, Miller, and even SAR and KMart are worth something.

And to clarify, Webber was released by three other teams by the time we got him (he was drafted by Orlando, but played with GS and Wash).

So much here...

1) First, that list of yours doesn't make sense. Only 5 of those guys were drafted by their current teams: Randolph, Paul, Okafor, Pierce and Gasol. the rest are just random trade pieces. And of course the very reason those teams could get those guys as random trade pieces is because they aren;t that good. Of the 5 above, Gasol has led his team to perennial playoff status -- they just got screwed by injury. Paul looked set to lead his team to the playoffs, then they too got screwed by injury. Pierce has led his team to the ECF. Only Randolph and Okafor have done little, and that is why they may one day join the ranks of the traded.

2) no, a high draft pick "that was talented" would NOT be helpful. He would be everything. That is what a superstar is. People fight that notion kicking and screaming and throwing things all the time, but its because frankly they don't get it. No superstar = no title. No elite team. NBA basketball is not a democracy. Its not football where you have particular positions and guys only play one side of the ball, have rules whether they can touch it etc. Its not baseball, where there is almost no interaction between the players and so very limited bleedover effect. Its a game where there are only a handful of players on the court, the court is small, and everyone does everything while interacting with everyone. A dominant superstar can on one possession kick the *** of every single player on the opposing team while making every one of his guys better. There is even a well developed "superduperstar" theory that says that even a superstar isn't enough -- you need a Top 5 first ballot HOF type to pull it off. History supports that notion, although its I think its too grey to be canonical. But you need a great one either way. You get one in the draft, that's everything. You can prance around all you want wasting time shuffling around secondary talents and never get anywhere. In one draft, you can be passed up by a team that gets it.

3) the Webber thing is obviously a technicality at best -- it was a draft day swap for Penny Hardaway, a mega top of the draft trade. He never played for Orlando, might at best have held up their jersey once. He played one year in Golden State, actually gave up on them, not the other way around, and then four in Washington. Then us.

4) You do NOT trade KMart in a rebuild. That should be obvious. rebuild = youth. It = being good 3-4 years down the line. In fact one of our great assets in a rebuild is that we already have one good young piece. We actually nab a superstar, we may already have his running mate, or at least one of them. We already found Peja.

5) Which brings me to this: we drafted both Peja and JWill, two pretty big parts of our early success. And not so early success for that matter. Actually we also drafted Corliss, who turned into Doug. All in the lottery. We made ONE trade, and signed ONE major free agent to create our turnaround year. But the trade is not something we can duplicate, and we neither have the caproom or impact prospect out there in the FA market this time.

6) Dwayne Wade was quite obviously the man who brought the ring home for Miami. We have 1/2 exceptions to the draft a superstar rule. The one is the Pistons. But they stand alone and as a one shot freak occurrence during a crappy down year. A freaky year in many many ways for many teams. No great teams at all. No great scorers, all the stars were hurt or down. Strange year. In any case, the Lakers however clearly play by their own rules. the Sacramento Kings never in a million years sign Shaquille O'Neal. Never have a remote shot. Because they play in Sacramento, adn the Lakers are the LAkers and play in L.A. Actually how the Lakers got Kove too since he woas only going to play for them. They're not even an exception -- they play by no rules. If we were on a Laker board right now we could be having a wonderful discussion about how if we cleared enoguh room we could just go steal some other team's star and become champions again. We are not on a Lakers board, so we have to play by the same rules that nets everybody else their superstars: the draft. This draft.

 

[Packt]

We've been looking at other teams with high draftees, but I think it's important to remember that the Kings during our best years were anchored by none other than a #1 pick. We didn't draft him, but that is beside the point. It's also important to remember we traded a #5 pick still putting up good numbers, our very own franchise player, to get that #1. And we got that #5 by trading away a #3.

Don't expect to be able to trade for a talented and productive #1 pick again, at least not without giving up a high lottery pick.

We're not talking about Kwame Brown here, Webber was producing and barely at the beginning of his prime. The odds of that happening again are probably even worst than winning the NBA lottery. I honestly believe that there is so much venom towards Webb because NBA fans from his previous stops recognized the talent and feel jipped because it didn't work out for them. It must've hurt badly to see things working out here in Sac.

And to clarify, Webber was released by three other teams by the time we got him (he was drafted by Orlando, but played with GS and Wash).

GS traded 3 future 1st rounders for him, and their #3 pick Penny Hardaway. No wonder Oakland fans blame Webb for their franchise's failures. But they got 3 first rounders and Guggs, a former 6th pick back from Washington when they traded him. No wonder Tom Knotts hate Webb.

 

[nbrans]

Can't we all just agree that the formula is some combination of drafting, free agency and trades? All three are important, but no championship team is built the same way.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Don't expect to be able to trade for a talented and productive #1 pick again, at least not without giving up a high lottery pick.

We're not talking about Kwame Brown here, Webber was producing and barely at the beginning of his prime. The odds of that happening again are probably even worst than winning the NBA lottery.

Well, it could happen again... if Petrie has some incriminating pictures of the Logo that he's been saving for a rainy day, and somehow convinces him to trade us Gasol for Bibby...

You want to talk about wild trade fantasies? Suck our way to the #1 pick, draft Oden, and then trade for Gasol. Pick up a half-decent free agent PG, and we're ready to roll NEXT season.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Well, it could happen again... if Petrie has some incriminating pictures of the Logo that he's been saving for a rainy day, and somehow convinces him to trade us Gasol for Bibby...

You want to talk about wild trade fantasies? Suck our way to the #1 pick, draft Oden, and then trade for Gasol. Pick up a half-decent free agent PG, and we're ready to roll NEXT season.

that sounds perty good to me..

 

[acisking]

Well, it could happen again... if Petrie has some incriminating pictures of the Logo that he's been saving for a rainy day, and somehow convinces him to trade us Gasol for Bibby...

You want to talk about wild trade fantasies? Suck our way to the #1 pick, draft Oden, and then trade for Gasol. Pick up a half-decent free agent PG, and we're ready to roll NEXT season.

I say even Gasol wouldn't be enough to make this team a legitimate contender in the West. At best it would lead to late playoff exits, just giving the ownership false hope to keep going after it. Rebuilding, and I mean really taking things apart and stating from scratch, is not just our best option....its our ONLY option to eventually win it all. So if we get Oden we'd be VERY stupid to do anything but keep him and rebuild so Sac can make a REAL run at a championship one day.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I say even Gasol wouldn't be enough to make this team a legitimate contender in the West.

You don't think that Gasol + Oden = contender? Because that's what I actually said...

 

[LPKingsFan]

You don't think that Gasol + Oden = contender? Because that's what I actually said...

I bet that's what Memphis and their league worst 9-30 may have in mind.

 

[kyo2002]

Okay, my head hurts after reading through this post. A lot of you guys are statistic freaks (in a good way) and Bricklayer is a deductive argument genius, but I remember today's game in which Grant Napear said "the Knicks are 1 and 11 after trailing in the third" or something like that. The Knicks won the game.

I won't talk about the Maloofs impact on the Kings, what I will talk about is Pete Carrill. I think Carrill was behind the Kings offense and not Adelman. His offense fit the talent on the team. Divac and Webber were great players for just such a system especially Webber's high post game. Peja and Bibby fitted well in it. I don't know about Christie though; that offensive system also requried high basketball IQ which all five starters have. Everyone hates Bibby now but he still displays the highest offensive IQ on the team.

I don't know the details but I remember Mark Cuban hiring all sorts of coaches for his players. I think he had a coach teach Nowitzki mental toughness. I also remember that Lebron spent his first summer developing a 3pter. I don't know what Kobe do during his summers but what is clear is that his game is always improving. The Kobe with Shaq and the Kobe now are two different players. He reads the defense and attacks the basket much better now despite his athleticism going down.

I remember that year Chandler and Curry came out. Both those guys seem to have it all; size, strength, and quickness, even youth. I think they have not lived up to expectations thus far give or take some. Curry should rebound better and Chandler should sky hook everything. Gilbert Arenas was a nobody in the draft. He had to prove himself. He worked at it. His shot improved tremendously. He's a superstar now. I don't need to say anything on Ben Wallace.

Players do come into the league with different attributes which makes them better or worse, but even superstars have to have development. I don't remember the Kings developing any players in the Maloof era. Gerald Wallace was a great project but all his blocks and steals were already a part of his game. Martin is a great scorer but all those angle shots and that signature spin were already patented. Drafting someone like Duncan do make any team better, trading for Webber did it for the Kings, signing Ben Wallace has made Chicago somewhat better, but these things are easier said than done. The truth is that teams have to develop their players. Petrie is smart enough to understand that. His last statement to the team last year in the lost to the Spurs was for each player to take a hard look at themselves in the mirror. Like Circa 1985 Fan said Petrie had a vision in mind in the Webber era. Now it seems that he’s going for skilled multi-purpose and position players. The drawback being slow, no skill big men get excluded; something the Kings need. I think the reason behind Petrie’s moves is defense. All these players he’s signing are scorers who can do other things as well. This would allow the coaches to focus on developing the players’ defensive skills instead of having to do double the work and teach offense as well. The only problem now is that the Kings do not really have any defense coaches. I’m thinking mentor not head coach. I’m almost certain this is the current rebuilding process.

I'll also add this is maybe why this current team seem to have no cohesion offense wise.

 

[Catalyst]

Can't we all just agree that the formula is some combination of drafting, free agency and trades? All three are important, but no championship team is built the same way.

Word. I agree with that.

People seem to forget the Pistons when they say you cannot win without a superstar.

 

[BJax24]

Then I'm in good company!


Is it really a good start? Here were the Kings' draft picks #s from 1989-1998:

1
7
3
7
7
8
13
14
11
7

Currently, the Kings have the 9th worse record in the league. Given how difficult it is to move up position in the draft (the odds are awful) that means the Kings will have the 9th pick. That's just about what the Kings averaged over the ten years before the Last Great Turnaround.

I would argue that a draft pick didn't help the Kings much at all in the past. In fact, the drafting of Jason Williams was probably one of the factors of lower importance, of the list that I outlined.

My guess at what matters the most? Probably the fact that the Maloofs came in ready to kick some butt and spend some money. They hired a big name coach and created a new culture. The players forgot that Sacramento was a place where one should "lose." Unfortunately, the Maloofs may have lost a bit of interest in Sacrmento Basketball lately.

better hope we can trade for a high draft pick and gred oden comes out

 

[Gargamel]

If we were on a Laker board right now we could be having a wonderful discussion about how if we cleared enoguh room we could just go steal some other team's star and become champions again. We are not on a Lakers board, so we have to play by the same rules that nets everybody else their superstars: the draft. This draft.

Haha. No chance of clearing enough room any time soon.

Not saying that Sac has a Kobe or even a Lamar, but here are two theories Kupchak used that Petrie may want to entertain.

a) Risk trading a named guy like Miller or Bibby for someone w/ supposed upside (think Caron for Kwame). Know going in that the trade may be a dud and you're really screwed if so.

Corrollary: Risk on bigs, not smalls. Don't even risk on tweeners like Thomas. Mihm, Kwame, Bynum in 2 offseasons.

b) Think outside of the box w/ that draft pick (Bynum was scouted by 2 teams because he didn't even have much HS exp). Took him over Sean May, who just came off an NCAA title, got a lot of criticism for it for the first year. If nothing is there, trade it.

 

[Gargamel]

Word. I agree with that.

People seem to forget the Pistons when they say you cannot win without a superstar.

The Pisterns had Rasheed and Ben Wallace. That's the difference. They had Billups and Prince in the backcourt. They had a scoring swingman to boot. That's a lot of defense and a good inside-outside attack. Sheed was an unstoppable post scorer when his mind was right. Underrated player because he's an idiot. It also didn't hurt when Scott Williams sat on Malone's knee in Dec.

Detroit's title is the exception to the norm.

 

[Catalyst]

Detroit's title is the exception to the norm.

VERY accurate statement, but exception to the norm is still an exception.

 

[Gargamel]

VERY accurate statement, but exception to the norm is still an exception.

Or you could argue that altho they lacked a superstar, they were a strong defensive team w/ top quality bigmen -- that is a championship norm.

 

[beb0p]

Here are the anchors from the current ten worst teams in the league:

4 NY (Marbury)
2 SAC (Bibby)
4 NO (Paul)
10 ATL (Johnson)
19 POR (Randolph)
2 CHA (Okafor)
5 SEA (Allen)
10 BOS (Pierce)
8 PHI (Miller)—but they’ve had three number
one’s in the last month, Webber, Iverson,
Smith, so who knows what the hell is going
on???
3 MEM (Gasol)

Why don't you try these numbers:

06. Heat - Shaq (#1), Wade (#5)
05. Spurs - Duncan (#1), Glenn Robinson (#1)
04. Pistons - Rasheed Wallace (#2), Chauncey Billups (#3), Hamilton (#7)
03. Spurs - Duncan (#1), Robinson (#1), Steve Smith (#5)
02. Lakers - Shaq (#1)
01. Lakers - Shaq (#1), Isaiah Rider (#5)
00. Lakers - Shaq (#1), Glen Rice (#4)
99. Spurs - Duncan (#1), Robinson (#1)
96-98. Bulls - Jordan (#3), Pippen (#5), Harper (#8)
94-95. Rockets - Olajuwon (#1), Thorpe (#9)
89-90. Pistons - Aguirre(#1), Thomas (#2)

They are all championship teams. And all are lead by a player in the top 3 pick. In the last 16 years, only the Bulls and the Pistons have won without being lead by a #1 pick.

What this means is that our current "suckiness" that only places us 9th in the pecking order is not "good" enough. To rebuild quickly we have to suck even more. Much, much more to give us a better chance at the top pick.

Right now, we have a #2 (Bibby) and #3 (SAR) on our team. History tells us teams without a #1 should spread the wealth around by having several top picks. So, if we can land the top 3 pick, especially in this draft, History tells us we'll be back to championship form in a hurry.

 

[kupman]

Why don't you try these numbers:

06. Heat - Shaq (#1), Wade (#5)
05. Spurs - Duncan (#1), Glenn Robinson (#1)
04. Pistons - Rasheed Wallace (#2), Chauncey Billups (#3), Hamilton (#7)
03. Spurs - Duncan (#1), Robinson (#1), Steve Smith (#5)
02. Lakers - Shaq (#1)
01. Lakers - Shaq (#1), Isaiah Rider (#5)
00. Lakers - Shaq (#1), Glen Rice (#4)
99. Spurs - Duncan (#1), Robinson (#1)
96-98. Bulls - Jordan (#3), Pippen (#5), Harper (#8)
94-95. Rockets - Olajuwon (#1), Thorpe (#9)
89-90. Pistons - Aguirre(#1), Thomas (#2)

They are all championship teams. And all are lead by a player in the top 3 pick. In the last 16 years, only the Bulls and the Pistons have won without being lead by a #1 pick.

What this means is that our current "suckiness" that only places us 9th in the pecking order is not "good" enough. To rebuild quickly we have to suck even more. Much, much more to give us a better chance at the top pick.

Right now, we have a #2 (Bibby) and #3 (SAR) on our team. History tells us teams without a #1 should spread the wealth around by having several top picks. So, if we can land the top 3 pick, especially in this draft, History tells us we'll be back to championship form in a hurry.

.....or we can end up with any one of these 33 players. They are all top 3 picks over a 13 year span, which leaves only 6 players out of 39 that were top 3 picks who got a ring. (I even took out 1-2 guys who got rings late in their careers when the played off the bench).

Yao Ming
Jay Williams
Mike Dunleavy
Kwame Brown
Tyson Chandler
Pau Gasol
Kenyon Martin
Stromile Swift
Darius Miles
Elton Brand
Steve Francis
Baron Davis
Michael Olowokandi
Mike Bibby
Raef LaFrentz
Keith Van Horn
Allen Iverson
Marcus Camby
Shareef Abdur-Rahim
Joe Smith
Antonio McDyess
Jerry Stackhouse
Grant Hill
Chris Webber
Shawn Bradley
Anfernee Hardaway
Christian Laettner
Larry Johnson
Kenny Anderson
Billy Owens
Derrick Coleman
Gary Payton
Chris Jackson

 

[fnordius]

.....or we can end up with any one of these 33 players. They are all top 3 picks over a 13 year span, which leaves only 6 players out of 39 that were top 3 picks who got a ring. (I even took out 1-2 guys who got rings late in their careers when the played off the bench).
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/anfernee_hardaway/index.html
[......]
Christian Laettner
[......]

Question: Why did you include Christian Laettner from 1992 (the #3 pick) but leave out #1 (Shaq) and #2 (Mourning) who represent 5 rings between them? No Tim Duncan? (#1, '97) LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony (#1 and #3, 2003), etc?

Doesn't seem like very meaningful statistics when you intentionally cut out many of the best players.

 

[uolj]

The point isn't that it you are guaranteed to succeed if you get a high draft pick. The point is that you are virtually guaranteed to fail if you don't.

Please provide the list or any other evidence that you can win without drafting a superstar.

 

[beb0p]

.....or we can end up with any one of these 33 players. They are all top 3 picks over a 13 year span, which leaves only 6 players out of 39 that were top 3 picks who got a ring. (I even took out 1-2 guys who got rings late in their careers when the played off the bench).

Yao Ming
Jay Williams
Mike Dunleavy
Kwame Brown
Tyson Chandler
Pau Gasol
Kenyon Martin
Stromile Swift
Darius Miles
Elton Brand
Steve Francis
Baron Davis
Michael Olowokandi
Mike Bibby
Raef LaFrentz
Keith Van Horn
Allen Iverson
Marcus Camby
Shareef Abdur-Rahim
Joe Smith
Antonio McDyess
Jerry Stackhouse
Grant Hill
Chris Webber
Shawn Bradley
Anfernee Hardaway
Christian Laettner
Larry Johnson
Kenny Anderson
Billy Owens
Derrick Coleman
Gary Payton
Chris Jackson

Out of this group I counted at least 11 players who played a big part in leading their teams to the conference finals or beyond.

That's a damn good %. And if some of those guys on the list weren't injured and guys like Yao, Brand, and Gasol enter their prime, the % will go up even more.

And I counted about 16 guys who would make the Kings an instant lock for the playoff if that player had joined us in his youth.

Point is, that list has many players that would make a GM drool...

 

[kupman]

Question: Why did you include Christian Laettner from 1992 (the #3 pick) but leave out #1 (Shaq) and #2 (Mourning) who represent 5 rings between them? No Tim Duncan? (#1, '97) LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony (#1 and #3, 2003), etc?

Doesn't seem like very meaningful statistics when you intentionally cut out many of the best players.

The list includes the top 3 draft picks from 1990-2002 who have not obtained a ring.

 

[kupman]

Please provide the list or any other evidence that you can win without drafting a superstar.

winning makes superstars (whom were all drafted at some point).