It's Time Maloofs...Fire Petrie (chapter 3)
- Thread starter Ryle
- Start date
Wasn't he projected to go top 3 at one point? Did he test with an abnormal heart beat or something like that which made teams pass on him for non-basketball reasons? I thought the Blazers got a steal at the time. Ok, I should probably be directing those to nbrans.Ok, maybe there were one or two. My bad.
Maybe so, but now that the owners have come out and said that we are rebuilding (maybe not in so many words), and the move is underway, why the sudden urge to fire Petrie? We are actually doing what needs to be done....
It is ugly, and it takes some time.
Heuge
Starter
Not a sudden urge by any stretch. I will stick by my point that if your job is to make the team better and your team gets worse for 8 years running, you are not doing a good job. Over that period of time, there are no acceptable excuses.
Mike0476
Starter
Thanks to my Sac State account I was able to look through their Sacramento Bee archives and found some interesting tidbits.
PETRIE HAS REBOUNDED FROM DIFFICULT TIMES
SACRAMENTO BEE - Friday, June 3, 1994
Author: Mark Kreidler Bee Sports Columnist
"And the Blazers' GM consistently, steadfastly supported coach Rick Adelman, a friend whose reputation as an underachiever in Portland still rankles Petrie . A few days after Petrie resigned, Adelman was fired."
LEAVE PORTLAND FOR SACRAMENTO? WHY?
SACRAMENTO BEE - Thursday, June 2, 1994
Author: Mark Kreidler
"In hindsight, though, the people who know Petrie well can understand his decision, stunning as it was. Chalk it up to benign neglect by the Trail Blazers - and learn a lesson.
Petrie 's distress in Portland had three primary causes: Allen's impending dismissal of Adelman; an ongoing front-office confusion involving team vice-president Brad Greenberg; and the simple matter of a new contract to replace the one of Petrie 's that was just expiring.
Of the three, Petrie is quickest to knock down the Adelman angle - "That was never an issue," he said again Wednesday - but those in the Trail Blazers organization acknowledge he repeatedly made his case for Adelman with Allen and others in the front office. And while Petrie might not have departed over that issue alone, he clearly was upset at what he perceived as an unfair judgment of the coach, one of his closest friends.
"It's about loyalty," a member of the Kings' front office said. " Geoff is a terribly loyal person. That's something to be proud of, not covered up."
Too, Petrie 's relationship with Greenberg, though not irreparably torn, was becoming complicated. Greenberg, Portland 's VP for player personnel, made no secret of his desire to become a general manager - in essence, to take Petrie 's job - and that sat badly with Petrie . The day after his resignation was announced, Petrie answered a question by saying he didn't believe "in promoting yourself for another job when you already have one."
There is little chance of that in Sacramento; Thomas said in a telephone interview after returning to his Los Angeles home that Petrie will be "absolutely the man in basketball operations, no question. I don't want to lord that over anybody, but there is no doubt."
The Blazers? They were left without Allen's most trusted basketball adviser, without any immediate prospects to replace Petrie and - when Allen indeed fired Adelman a few days after Petrie resigned - without a coach. The NBA draft is June 29, and the free-agent signing period begins July 1."
FakeInjury
Bench
One point I feel needs to be made is, the kings haven't lost big-time talent to Free agency and any talent we aquire is kept or traded for equal or greater value under Petrie. The kings have had bad drafts, but they also had bad picks, so there is not much you can do when your pick is less attractive than later picks and earlier picks(high picks cost more-chances are that the player isn't worth more than the next guy). So Petrie is becoming a victim of circumstance(which i can identify with), but the circumstances are piling on pretty thick.
Petrie got lucky once in putting up the elite Webber/Divac team and some think he is a genius. Well, he got lucky because that team played defense under Adelman, otherwise it would not even have made the playoffs. But before and after that, what?
Had any of his assembled offensive-oriented team won any Championship?
No.
Just revisit all his gambles and you'll see that he is not that good after all.
Abdur-Rahim, Kenny Thomas, and Mikki Moore to name a few.
Of course, I'd rather have Petrie than have Isaiah Thomas or Michael Jordan as our GM.
.
Had any of his assembled offensive-oriented team won any Championship?
No.
Just revisit all his gambles and you'll see that he is not that good after all.
Abdur-Rahim, Kenny Thomas, and Mikki Moore to name a few.
Of course, I'd rather have Petrie than have Isaiah Thomas or Michael Jordan as our GM.
.
ZZE916
Bench
I was a season ticket holder for 23 years, but let them go this season. I have seen the ups and downs (mostly downs). NO team in ANY league stays dominant for long these days. It's a cycle, folks. And I hate to say it, but luck has a HUGE impact on a team's fortunes.
It seems like many people think other NBA tams have idiots for GMs. That's why we have seen posts like "Let's package KT and Douby, for _____". The reasons you would like to see them leave are the same reasons they would not be wanted by other teams (at this time). We got lucky when we went from perennial underdogs to contenders. Lucky and some shrewed dealings by GP. The trade of Richmond for Weber was not a popular one at the time. Fans of this team should start looking toward 2010 before passing judgement.
kingsnation
All-Star
No GM is perfect. Yes, all of the above were gambles and very regretful.
HOWEVER -- Petrie acquiring Peja, Webb, Bibby, Kevin were also all gambles. And those worked out pretty well IMO.
If you're going to blast him for the bad gambles, at least be fair and point out the ones that worked.
In what sense were Bibby and Martin "gambles?"
kingsnation
All-Star
Trading one of the cornerpieces and most popular players of all time of our franchise (J-Will) for a player that not many knew about who was the EXACT opposite of J-Will is IMHO, a gamble.
Imagine if Bibby didn't work out. We would've had Petrie's head for it.
Drafting Kevin was IMHO, aslo a gamble because he was virtually unknown.
I feel what you are saying kingsnation but the Bibby trade was a pretty easy deal to make, no matter how popular J-Will was. I don't think Bibby was an "unknown", he was the #2 pick the same year Williams was drafted and lead Arizona to a NCAA championship.
Drafting late in the first round is always a crap shoot, I don't know what you can call the Martin pick other than to say that Geoff has an eye for a certain kind of talent.
Drafting late in the first round is always a crap shoot, I don't know what you can call the Martin pick other than to say that Geoff has an eye for a certain kind of talent.
kingsnation
All-Star
Yes..
One thing though.. I didn't say Bibby was unknown - I said not many knew about him..
Difference being you can know of someone, but not know about what type of player he is or about his game. Mostly due to the fact that at the time, he was playing on a very bad Grizzlies team.
Should've clarified
One thing though.. I didn't say Bibby was unknown - I said not many knew about him..
Difference being you can know of someone, but not know about what type of player he is or about his game. Mostly due to the fact that at the time, he was playing on a very bad Grizzlies team.
Should've clarified
Trading Williams for Bibby was a no-brainer. Bibby had already established himself as the better PG, fewer mental lapses, no maturity issues. I know J-Will was popular, but at the time I thought the deal was insanely good for us. I could not have faulted Petrie for that move even if it hadn't worked out.
Martin was taken at #26. It's not like there was a lineup of proven guys that we passed on the get him. Looking at the second round, Duhon was available and had been pretty high-profile at Duke, but didn't go until midway through the second. Nobody else left was particularly notable.
kingsnation
All-Star
Well, Unfortunately not all fans are as level-headed..
Sasha, Beno, Varejao, Chalmers, Andre Emmett, Duhon, Ariza, Bernard Robinson...
It's debatable..but either way, with any of those... it'd be a gamble/risk.
FakeInjury
Bench
Petrie gets a passing grade for almost everything he has done, but he is simply not overachieving or underacheiving. He uses mid-level excpetions like they are going out of style. I would prefer he not spend cap or salary when it is obvious that no matter who he picks up, for whatever amount of money, the kings will be a sub .500 team. Its like he has never played NBA2k7.
Sptsjunkie
Starter
I don't think Petrie took a gamble in the Bibby trade. He angered a few loyal J-Will fans, but from a basketball perspective, the trade was largely seen as Petrie ripping off the Grizzlies. I think it was a great move by Petrie, but it was a heist, not a gamble.
Martin was a gamble though. It may have been the late first round. However, the pick had a lot of people scratching their heads. It was not a conventional pick and there were safer players Petrie could have drafted to insulate himself from criticism. I think you have to give him his due on that one.
FakeInjury
Bench
He should insulate himself by holding a "state of the union" type address to the fans of the sacramento kings. Then we wouldn't have to wildly speculate his questionable actions and inactions.
Gary
All-Star
Funny thread. All those Hilton Armstrong huggers.. I was one of them against drafting that stiff. I hated his game at UCONN, and knew he would be a bust.
kennadog
Dog On It!
Yeah, I'm sure that would stop all this.
Then we could spend all our time wildly speculating on what he really meant.
Last edited:
captain bill
All-Star
Certainly luck played a major role in Webber and Vlade coming to Sacramento but Petrie also showed he was very astute in assembling the complimentary pieces to make that team work and put it over the top- remember Webber was the cornerstone of the franchise years but those teams were always known for their depth and the fact that they could ball 1-12.
As for the gambles that failed, SAR was decently priced but given too many years on his contract. Even now given that he's paid not too much its not a completely awful deal. Moore is actually a rather good deal- a short contract, not paid too much, and say what you will about him but at the time the Kings had zero options behind Miller, KT and SAR in the front court. There was no alternative to MM.
KT of course is the biggest black spot on GP's resume- I hated that trade then and now. It's only gotten worse with KT's disappearing act- for a while he was actually producing decently.
Balance sheet=GP has been good for Sacramento. that is unarguable
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
If I may make a point of order:
The facts that you present are technically accurate, inasmuch as that stuff did actually happen when you said it happened, but I disagree with your contention that it was evidence of a rebuild on Portland's part. Just because you spend a lot of years in the lottery and getting good picks in the draft, doesn't mean that you're actually rebuilding: Were the Warriors rebuilding all those years they didn't make the playoffs? No. The Clippers? Hell no. Sometimes, when you spend significant periods of time in the lottery, it just means that you suck and are mismanaged, as the Blazers were when they were being run by Nash and Patterson. And just because you drafted someone that was on your team before they became what you have been building towards (Outlaw) doesn't mean that that's when your rebuild started. From my point of view, the Blazers didn't start their rebuild until this guy took over; I contend that the previous management had no direction whatsoever, didn't know what they wanted to do with the team, or how to get there, so I don't acknowledge anything that happened in Portland prior to Pritchard taking the reigns as contributing towards a rebuild. I also disagree with your apparent contention that the rebuild isn't complete until the team becomes title contenders: the Kings weren't still rebuilding in 1999-2000, when we were first round and out. Once you've built a team that can be a perennial playoff team, which I feel the Blazers have, everything after that is team development, which can perhaps feel like rebuilding, but is not, in my opinion... So, from my point of view, Portland's rebuild took three years, four if you count Pritchard's season as assistant GM, when he was involved in the decisions that led to trading for Roy, Aldridge and Rodriguez.
Not to get off on a tangent, but this line from the wiki entry astonishes me:
holy crap, i can't believe i missed those details. blazer fans must've been asking for patterson's head after that trade!!!
Circa_1985_Fan
All-Star
We cant fire this guy yet...he's drafted good the past 2 years, and we'll have a boatload of money after next year...we can judge him after seeing how he does then. The real question is: who would we have replace him if the Maloofs fire him before then??
Circa_1985_Fan
All-Star
...and you're so sure of this?? So are you going to petition all 30 NBA owners about whether they like gambling on NBA games...and after the whole Doheghy fiasco?? If the Kings move anywhere, my guess is: Kansas City. Vegas wont get any pro teams for another 10-20 years, AT LEAST! Just because our owners live there and are big shots there doesnt mean they want to swoop them up and move them...they'd be a good draw for about a season, but the honeymoon would wear off after then, PLUS...Las Vegas is Laker territory already(and yes, I know this because I lived there). Anyway, sorry for getting off topic...as far as the 'Fire Petrie' thing, I say give him until after 2010...this season and next are 'cleaning house' seasons leading up to getting PHAT cash in a year and a half. Work in progress...
Kingzrool
Starter
Fixed.
Similar threads
