On the flipside:
a) its not as if these events had just happened, and everybody noted them and went on. Blame in fact was assigned. To Vivek specifically. So at the point you have been falsely accused (if it is false) the desire to set the record straight is a much more powerful one than a desire to keep something behind closed doors. After all what's the point of that? Everybody already decided Vivek was the villain and an idiot. The whole point of closed doors it to shield any one person from that blame. Well, the blame fell anyway. If it happened to fall on you, you might justly be expected to try to return it to the rightful owner.
b) because of the major stink of everything that went on the entire Kings brand was damaged, to the degree of its a stupid loser franchise, and specifically with a standard attack line that since Vivek is still there, things can never get better. So again, for the sake of the Kings reputation, for money, to be able to sign free agents, etc., you might very well decide to open up (truthfully or untruthfully) and point the finger at people no longer with the organization so you can say, look, we had bad apples, they have been purged now, we're fine at this point, come sign with us!
The decision to go to the press and tell his side of the story is a good one -- though puzzling that it would have taken this long. I don't have any problem with Vivek giving interviews or attempting to explain why he made some of the mistakes he made. In fact, I think he should do it more. If I never read another article speculating about what Vivek
might be thinking or doing that would be perfectly fine with me. Cut them off at the pass and get your story out first. But if he's always going to come across as this aggressively defensive, than perhaps he'd be better off just keeping quiet. Sometimes it isn't just what you say but how you say it. This all amounts to a non-apology apology...
"I'm sorry things went wrong but I bought a team with a broken down old arena and no staff and then had to (shocker) get a new arena built, sell tickets, and hire a staff." Isn't that exactly what you signed up for when you bought the team?
"I hired the wrong people and let them order me around against my better judgement but then I dismissed all of them (but only) after they fired my coach and pissed off Shareef enough to make him sue the organization." Sure I guess it can't all be your fault if you're never around, but is it better to have a meddling owner or an absentee owner who has no idea what his employees are doing? I'm paraphrasing of course, but is this unfair? That's essentially what he's saying.
Remember when he first got here he said he was going to hire people smarter than himself and hold them accountable. He gave the impression of being actively engaged and ready to apply his business acumen and outside-the-box thinking to reinvigorate a tired and broken down organization. Now we see that was all bluster and PR facade. How was he holding Pete D'Alessandro accountable while he lobbed (metaphorical) grenades at our coaching staff? Most of us could see the smoke on the horizon there at least a year before he was finally dismissed. Maybe if he was as clued in as we are he would have seen it too. And he was the public face of both the Stauskas pick and the Malone firing and now he wants us to believe that he just let himself get played. Of course I believe him! Why would you intentionally create the impression that you're that naive? This is not an improvement as far as I'm concerned. Particularly because someone who manages to make themselves look even
less competent while attempting to dispel reports of their perceived incompetence is seriously lacking in self-awareness. This is a man who labeled himself the "Chief Irritant" with pride who is now hiding behind his checkbook:
"Well tell them that I'll write them a check." It's hard for me to reconcile these two statements on the surface. But then I look at what the organization has done since he took over -- the meandering self-defeating personnel decisions, the stream of embarrassing leaks and bad press, the confusing front office hierarchy, the long periods of indecisiveness followed by rash decisions (like hiring George Karl at the All-Star break) -- and it adds up to an organization which has taken on the personality of it's owner in all the worst ways. The Maloofs were a whole other kind of problem but none of
these problems were inherited -- they were created by the decisions Vivek made.
You want people to respect you? Earn their respect. It's really that simple. Malone didn't talk much but his actions told you what he was about. Vivek has done a lot of talking mostly with disastrous results. If he really wants to know why players are avoiding Sacramento like the plague despite a brand new arena, a successful young coach, an enthusiastic fanbase, and an affable superstar on the roster (who has more friends around the league than enemies regardless of what certain local columnists may think) he really needs to take a good long look in the mirror. Considering the results he's had to date, maybe he
should move to Sacramento and be more hands-on. That would require a level of self-awareness he has yet to display though. Sure seems to me like nothing has changed. I see no reason to try and be cute about it. I had every reason to love this man after he helped save the team and so I gave him the benefit of the doubt at every turn, but I have my limits. I don't like him, I don't like what he's done with the team, and my enthusiasm for Kings basketball is currently at an all-time low because of it. I used to root for a basketball team, now I mostly just cringe at the circus act which has taken their place. I'm not speaking for anyone but myself. Maybe things will eventually change. I'm just not going to invest any more mental energy on this team until I seem some indication that the circus is gone for good.