He knows how to build a team. He built the teams that made the playoffs eight years in a row.
Anybody who doesn't give him credit for building an amazing team wasn't paying attention. And I'm sure that everyone on this board was paying attention.
But it's been a long time since he build that team, most of what he's done since has been to cut costs somewhat, mainly by dismantling the bench. He also traded out aging guys for mismatched bits and pieces, and signed a fading star and a role player to contracts that nobody can get excited about. Adelman kept everyone overperforming so that the decline wasn't so obvious, but relations with the Maloofs were strained. Petrie failed to salvage things by either patching up things between them, or by getting the Maloofs to mind their own business.
Now the questions we're facing aren't about whether he knows how to build a team, but whether he knows how to rebuild one, and whether he can get the Maloofs to let him do it. And the answers are yet to be seen.
agreed.
the past three years has been a serious decline for the franchise. making the playoffs feels like less of an accomplishment when a little over half the teams in the league makes it every year.
While a little over half the teams in the league make it every year, it's not the same teams.
Making the playoffs eight times in a row IS significant.
As I noted elsewhere there is a tiny tiny silver lineing and it is this: The team clearly has a significant amount of tallent but no where near enough to "get er done" but this means that there IS tradeable players on the squad. A consolidation of tallent, and a sharp eye to the 08 off season and draft COULD resurect this franchise in a hurry.
I am excited about the future of the Kings; ask yourself this: can you ever remember there being as much young talent and potential on the squad?
I would argue that Bibby, Cisco, Martin, Price, Williams, SAR, Salmons, and to a lesser degree Douby are all tallented tradeable pieces. Artest is tallented and somewaht tradeable. Miller harder to move but uniquelly tallented in terms of passing and range for a big... harder to trade. The record speaks for it's self there are lots of worse teams out there soem probablly playoff bound... the problem is NOT that this team compleetly sucks, if it did we would be compeeting with Boston and Memphis for a top 3 pick. The problem is virtually the same as it was LAST YEAR at this time: too tallented to reap in the draft not talllented enough to do anything meanigfull unless you count first round exists as meaningfull. The big difference is that last season a lot of fans actually DID count a first round exit as meaningfull.What talent? It does have Martin. Cisco looks to be a keeper as a sixth man. Who else? Bibby and Miller - two players who play 5 years older than they are? Artest, the nutcase? This team is down there with the Bucks and Seattle. I'd rank it below the Grizzlies because they have a better core than the Kings and they are going to get an extremely good player in the draft. (Good move Grizzlies - lousy move Kings). Philly is better and has 2 picks in the draft. I'd certainly rank it below Charlotte. What teams are this bad, this old, and have as pathetic a talent base as the Kings? Maybe a handful.
The problem is virtually the same as it was LAST YEAR at this time: too tallented to reap in the draft not talllented enough to do anything meanigfull unless you count first round exists as meaningfull. The big difference is that last season a lot of fans actually DID count a first round exit as meaningfull.
And yet the off season brougt more of the same off season sitting on the hands that the past 3-4 off seasons had. Sorry as much fun as last years last gasp was the Kings managment had two good choices... beef up the front line and try to get serious with this line up or take advantage of an opertunity to trade off tallent for expiring contracts and position for the draft. Mismangament opted for the BAD idea of prety much staying pat, and firing the coach that got the best performace out of last years mediocre team replacing him with... well we all KNOW what they replaced him with. So now here we are.I don't blame people for seeing last season's first round exit as meaningful, especially with the way the season started.
Artest breathed new life into a team that was otherwise DOA. It was fun to watch them crawl back into the playoffs and make the Spurs sweat in the first round.
Plus, first round exits can be important building blocks for a franchise on its way up -- just like our early ones in the 90s with Utah and the Lakers.
And at the time with the Artest trade and a full offseason of trades ahead, most of us thought the franchise would be heading back up, using the playoff appearance as a stepping stone.
I disagree wholeheartedly. I'd be prone to concede this point if Artest had an albatross contract, but that's not the case either.
There are a number of other moves that have put obstacles in the path of this rebuild - a step that no one in upper management has admitted we're even going to go through. Webber for unmoveable trash (and throwing Matt Barnes in that deal), huge contracts to Bibby and Miller, which everyone of us supported at the time, John Salmons being overpaid, and others. To say that trading Peja for Artest is hurting the franchise's chances of getting back into contention is a bit much.
.
Anybody who doesn't give him credit for building an amazing team wasn't paying attention. And I'm sure that everyone on this board was paying attention.
But it's been a long time since he build that team, most of what he's done since has been to cut costs somewhat, mainly by dismantling the bench. He also traded out aging guys for mismatched bits and pieces, and signed a fading star and a role player to contracts that nobody can get excited about. Adelman kept everyone overperforming so that the decline wasn't so obvious, but relations with the Maloofs were strained. Petrie failed to salvage things by either patching up things between them, or by getting the Maloofs to mind their own business.
Now the questions we're facing aren't about whether he knows how to build a team, but whether he knows how to rebuild one, and whether he can get the Maloofs to let him do it. And the answers are yet to be seen.
Yeah, except this time he's not going to be able to con Memphis into trading us Pau Gasol for Mike Bibby, which is essentially what he did with the Richmond trade.If he can build a team out of this - Mitch Richmond (respects), Walt Williams, Brian Grant, Spud Webb, Olden Polynice, Michael Smith, Lionel Simmons, Alaa Abdelnaby, Randy Brown, Bobby Hurley (respects), Duane Causwell, Trevor Wilson, Henry Turner - then I don't doubt that he can rebuild a team. That's essentially what he did anyways. It's not like he got an expansion team and got to handpick whoever he wanted. He got a team that had little to no moveable assets and turned it into a playoff machine. He can do it again...
We had to improve from being a non-playoff joke every year to being a contender, which was a step that took several seasons. We were on the rise for four years before the WCF plateau. The step backward could easily be contributed to injuries (Webber, Bibby, Miller, Bobby Jackson, etc.) Had San Antonio suffered a potentially career-ending injury to their franchise player, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be a five-year contender. It's easy to stay on top when you have a player like Tim Duncan. And RC Buford has surrounded him with complementary players that know how to get the job done. Winning a couple along the way hasn't hurt them, either.agreed.
the past three years has been a serious decline for the franchise. making the playoffs feels like less of an accomplishment when a little over half the teams in the league makes it every year. this squad was a contender for two years (2002, 2003), and that's it. that is where petrie's great accomplishments ended.
if the playoff streak were more along the lines of san antonio (who have been contenders since 2003...that's FIVE years they've been contending), then it would be laudable. but except for 2002 and 2003, we've just been a roadblock to get over in the playoffs.
Yeah, except this time he's not going to be able to con Memphis into trading us Pau Gasol for Mike Bibby, which is essentially what he did with the Richmond trade.
This isn't 1998 anymore; nobody's going to trade us what we need for what we've got.
And sign me up for the Petrie is incompetent camp, if that's the actual logical leap you're making... But yeah, he's lost it, AFAIC. And I've seen you make the case here that Petrie's had his hands tied by the Maloofs, but the only thing that tells me is that the owners no longer have unqualified faith in the guy to make this team a winner. And, if the guys signing the checks don't believe in him, then why the hell should I?
We got Martin a year later. I don't think we even had any picks in 2003 draft.We still made solid acquisitions (trading Pollard and Turkoglu for Miller, drafting Kevin Martin) that very offseason
My feelings exactly.A little over three years ago, we had the top record in the NBA. Now, all of a sudden, the man who put that same team together has no credibility? I just can't wrap my mind around it. Sorry.
Relief would be a VERY poor choice of words. The "relief" I felt when they announced Musselman was being hired was roughly equivalent to the "relief" one feels when one realizes that, by stepping into an ankle-high pile of dog****, they managed to avoid falling down an open manhole. You end up covered in **** either way, it's just to what extent are you covered in ****?However, you didn't mention the fact that these very same guys that appear not to "have unqualified faith in the guy" are the same ones who were this close :: snaps fingers :: to hiring Whisenant to coach the Kings last summer. Now I know you're a big WNBA and Monarchs fan, Slim, but I believe that you were as opposed to having a guy with no experience be named head coach. Not only that, you were probably relieved to hear that we were going with Musselman instead, even though he probably wasn't your first choice.
And some Kings Fans no longer view the GM of their team as the best GM in the league...I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I know that's how I felt. And I'm quite sure that you, like me, are not the Joe and Gavin Maloof fan you were five years ago when they offered to mow Webb's lawn. Kings fans no longer view the owners of their team as the best owners in the League.
Relief would be a VERY poor choice of words. The "relief" I felt when they announced Musselman was being hired was roughly equivalent to the "relief" one feels when one realizes that, by stepping into an ankle-high pile of dog****, they managed to avoid falling down an open manhole. You end up covered in **** either way, it's just to what extent are you covered in ****?
And some Kings Fans no longer view the GM of their team as the best GM in the league...