How do you know Vlade has the team headed in the right direction? Is that what it's called when you trade off stars and rebuild? Way too simple of an answer and its the easy way out because now fans are left to overvalue the young players and believe that we got,a star out of these guys. Seen this before. The chances are its not going to happen.
Joerger and Divac recap the season
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
You're right. We could be rebuilding for the next 5+ seasons and we'll still be heading in the "right direction". It's all for not if you don't land yourselves a star player, and that's the hardest to find when you're not drafting top 3 or top 5 and rather in the 7-10 range.
whozit
Starter
Don't know that he does, just don't want to assume that he doesn't.
There's a difference between overvalueing the youngsters and keeping an open mind. Do you remember before they were getting any burn them being labeled along the lines of being busts? Was too early then and too early now, either way.
Hope is better than despair. Not saying you're either one
whozit
Starter
Ever have to appease a boss while changing course? Have you noticed him having contingency plans?
I'm curious what the team will look like at the start AND end of next season. Might give a better indication if the team is following a long term plan or floundering depending on which way the wind is blowing.
jcassio
Starter
Love your post! I don't usually agree with all you include in a post, but in this case, I think we're on the same page. The only thing I might add is that we all know that Vivek didn't give Vlade complete authority over basketball decisions (as Vlade has suggested a few times). This isn't to excuse Vlade from any bad decisions he has made; rather to understand that Vlade's authority (over basketball decisions) has been a more of a progression than a flipped switch, and, as long as Vivek is the managing partner, Vlade will always have to get his sign-off before implementing his basketball decisions.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Well, chances are it will. Truth is, no one knows and all you and I have are our opinions. You choose to take the negative route, and I'm taking the positive route. As far as taking the easy way out. Of what? Is there a trial going on here that I don't know about? The easy way out of his discussion is to simply think that everything that Vlade does is wrong, and that the team is doomed no matter what they do. Life is complicated, and the decisions we make in life are equally complicated. Vlade made a very tough decision to trade Cousins, and that's open to criticism. However, at this point we have no idea what the results of that trade will be. So your welcome to believe what you want.
From my point of view, and it's a biased one, I happen to like the style of basketball the team was playing after the trade. I'm not a fan of isolation basketball, and so from my point of view that part of the change is refreshing. That doesn't mean I didn't like Cousins, or that I don't like Gay. I'm just not a fan of that type of basketball. That also doesn't mean that a team can't win with that style of play. Once again, it has to do with my preference. I don't want to go into a huge discussion about why the Kings needed to change directions, because it would be a very long post. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this subject.
I don't really think I'm being negative at all. How about being in the neutral camp of.....show me......I've been fairly optimistic.....I'm just saying that I'm not so sure we are going in the right direction.
In all honesty, at least as far as Vlade is concerned, your posts have (at least to me) been much closer to negative than neutral. I think all that bajaden is really saying is we all have our own POVs. I might post something I think is neutral but others might perceive it as negative.
There's room for all sides, provided we remember we're all here because we're Kings fans and although our ideas on how to make the team better might differ, we all want the same thing in the end.
Last edited:
This.
I believe Vlade is slowly but surely bringing the front office around to what he envisioned when he accepted the challenge of running it.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I don't think anyone would disagree with that last sentence. The next question should be, why were we always drafting in the 7 to 10 range? Easy answer! Because we never committed to a rebuild. The Maloof's didn't want to start a rebuild, because they were trying to sell the team, and wanted it to look competitive. Vivek came in, sitill breathing the air from the bay area, and thought he could just throw a switch, and suddenly the team would turn into a playoff team. It had to be for the grand opening of the new arena. So again, the necessary rebuild was put off, and when you combine the last couple of years from the Maloof's with the first couple of years from Vivek's ownership, you end up with 5 or 6 wasted years.
None of that is Vlade's fault. He inherited the results of that along with a fan base that didn't trust anything the Kings front office did, and a national media that couldn't wait for the next misstep. Vlade decided, that if he was going to fail, he was going to fail trying to build a team that he wanted. Of course he had to get Vivek on board. And lets be clear, I don't think there's a GM in the NBA, that doesn't have to get the owners permission to trade the teams best player. He found out that getting permission to trade Cousins didn't seem to be an option. So he tried to do it Vivek's way. Which of course delayed the rebuild yet another year.
So the answer to why we were always drafting at 7 to 10 is because we were in denial for the last 6 or so years. We were afraid to bite the bullet and start over. No owner wanted to look the fan base in the eye, and say you know what, were not a very good team, and we need to tear down what we have and start over. Not a good PR move if your trying to sell tickets. And the longer you put it off, the more difficult it becomes to do, because you been blowing smoke up you know where for the last few years.
If we want to blame anyone, then blame Vivek. When he bought the team, he had carte blanche to come in and clean house. Start over! I think the entire fan base would have been behind him, and it would have been his right to do so. Instead, he tried to sell the public a bill of goods. Perhaps he even believed it himself. The mistakes he made were unbelievable. He thought he could do it his way, and found out otherwise. Then, to make matters worse, he came back and repeated those mistakes.
Vlade has tried to bring some sort of cohesion and direction to the team. (my opinion) He inherited a mess, and as a result he tripped over some of mess along the way. Some of that was probably unavoidable, and some of it was lack of experience. And those mistakes are rightfully pointed out. But he's also made some very good decisions, and some decisions that we have yet to know the outcome. Personally, I'm willing to cut him some slack and take a wait and see attitude. This turnaround isn't going to happen overnight. We're not going to find the next Michael Jordan in the draft, so quit expecting that. But, if were lucky, we may find the makings of a future star. Maybe two? Maybe not! Stay tuned...
I asked why he is so sure we are headed in the right direction. Pretty fair question. I've backed Vlade since he's been hired. Liked many of his moves, preached patience on the rooks, praised his hire of Joerger, praised his FA signings since the goal was playoffs. And now with the trade of Cousins, which obviously I was against, but now I'm in the show me camp, I'm a negative poster. That is rich. I'm not so sure we are going in the right direction. That's not being negative.
IT erupted for 53 points last night to take a 2-0 lead on Wash in the semi-final. I would say he can play, and I have been saying that. Wall got 40 but his team lost.
The Kings could have traded Cousins and kept IT for instance.
It is easy to forget at one time the Kings had three 20 + point scorers in Cousins, Thomas, and Gay. Now we have none.
The Kings could have traded Cousins and kept IT for instance.
It is easy to forget at one time the Kings had three 20 + point scorers in Cousins, Thomas, and Gay. Now we have none.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Well, since your last sentence had the word, NOT, in it, I would say it leans more to the negative side than the positive side. Maybe I wasn't paying attention in English class. Look, I have listed all the things I think shows the Kings are moving in the right direction. What it comes down to is a matter of perception. Yours is different than mine. But lets be clear. When I say the Kings are headed in the right direction, that's a positive perspective. When you say you don't think they are. That my friend is not neutral. That's the opposite opinion of mine, and therefore negative. Hey, it's not a sin or a violation of the law to have your opinion.
Three seems to be one major issue that keeps coming up, as the biggest mistake Vlade made. That's the trading of Cousins. I think it's two separate issues. One is, was it a good idea to trade Cousins? The other is, did we get enough for him, and was it handled badly? You can have two separate answers. To the first one, the jury is still out. But if Vlade puts together a team that becomes competitive and regularly makes the playoffs, then the answer might be yes. To the second one, the answer is probably no. we didn't get enough for him, and yes, it was handled badly. I understand that the people who thought Cousins was the Kings, any future result will never make up for his departure. They'll always argue that we could have been even better with him than without. As there's no way to prove or disprove it one way or the other, it's not worth arguing.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Here's a question for you, or anyone out there. Who is the bigger star right now? Cousins, or Isaiah? I'm sure if your in Boston, you'd say Isaiah, and maybe the national media would as well. But when IT was here, Cuz was the big star, and IT was thought of as a support player. I never argued for him to be traded, but I thought at the time that he would better suited coming off the bench as our change of pace sixth man. In an ironic way, Cousins was indirectly responsible for IT's departure. The entire focus of the Kings was building around Cousins, and they seemed to think at the time, that Cuz and IT were oil and water, so they got rid of Isaiah. Huge mistake!
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
Even before Vivek ever arrived, the Kings had a multitude of opportunities to bring more talent in next to Cousins and then see if it all works out. Rather than doing so, the Kings botched every draft pick possible leaving them in a impossible situation on whether they wanted to do the inevitable now or later. They chose later, I don't blame them. I would of traded him in the summertime or next season but that's just me. All in all, I'm glad it's over with, it's time to start the search again, it might take a while or we might luck into another star, hopefully the next one stays put.
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
That core of players had one thing in common...none of them was willing to defer more shots. Also zero defense played among them three...gave up more than they put up.
ockingsfan
Starter
Here is the thing about the rise of IT.
He needed someone to hand the keys to the team to him, which the Kings were not willing to do, because we had DMC. Phoenix was not willing to do it, because they had Bledsoe and Goran (at the time) on their team.
He found the coach in Boston that was willing to take the chance and hand IT the keys to team and he has proven to be star.
I think that IT and DMC could had coexisted and done well, but the Kings were never going to hand IT the keys to the team, as long as DMC was in town.
If he was still on the Kings with DMC, IT would had been good (probably 20 pts/ 6 assists per game good), but he would not had been Boston IT great!
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
he also had a team of defensive players to make up for his inefficiencies on that end
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Nearly every players in the league's history has had deficiencies. Maybe Jordan and LBJ didn't. So there's nothing new to the idea that players must complement each other's strengths and weaknesses on the court. IT is no different.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
The question was why were we always drafting in the 7 to 10 range. I answered that question. I wasn't justifying the reasons, just pointing them out. I care about results. When the results have been bad for a long period of time, a losing mentality and culture develops. When a new GM is brought in, he comes in with a new agenda. New idea's, of what kind of team he wants to build. But the losing culture and mentality that he had no part in creating, still exist, making his job more difficult. Not from a fans perspective, but from a league perspective.
The first thing a team, and the fan base needs to do in order to move forward, is to stop looking backward. Just my opinion.
I agree, there's just no sense clinging to the past. Except for Vlade (and Vivek, who is not going away), everyone who can be blamed for this mess is gone. Cousins, IT, PDA, Mullin, Karl, Rondo, Carl Landry, Maloofs, whoever you want to blame the last 10 years on... All gone.
Ok, I guess Rudy is still here but he won't be for long even if he signs his option - I actually hope he does and can't play and it forces us to save that money for a year or opens up a trade deadline deal.
We do have a relatively experienced and exciting young coach, some draft picks, a few promising first and second year guys on the roster, a couple overseas stash-aways and we aren't in salary cap hell. I don't expect us to turn it around next year, but we'll get another pick in 2018 and hopefully spend a little the following off season since we don't have a pick in 2019.
I'm bummed about some of the stuff that happened but I'm actually glad we have a lot of flexibility and if we don't make any more rash decisions and commit to the process I think we'll be ok in 2 or 3 years time.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
My personal opinion is that IT is an alpha dog, and so is Cousins. Both wanted to be the guy, and only one could. And, I'm not suggesting that they couldn't get along, or that they didn't like one another, but that had both stayed, Neither would have risen to their current heights. I wonder what the outcome would have been for IT, and for the Kings, had the team decided to trade Cousins and keep IT. I realize that was never going to happen, but would the Kings be a better team today than they became with Cousins?
And please, for those that keep saying that all we had to do was go out and get the right players to surround Cousins with. At one point we had Cousins, Gay, and IT, and we still lost. So me thinks there were a lot of other circumstances involved. I'm not pointing any fingers, but how many coaching changes did we have? Anyway, I'm tired of rehashing the same old stuff over and over again. And so as I'm doing just that, while criticizing it, I'll stop!
HndsmCelt
Hall of Famer
There have been successful teams multiple Alphas that played at a high level even when there were personality conflicts (Shaq and Kobe come to mind) I think the add issue here was that both these players had/have chips on their shoulders the size of the rock of Gibraltar that while motivating them also make things difficult for them,each in his own way. For DMC it is seen in the on court behavior that has plagued him through out his career. As for IT it gives him the worst case of hero-ball play I have ever seen. Together they were a bad mix and coaches and GMs should take this into account when building teams with/around them. Those chips can fuel as serious fire inside these guys and can also burn down a team.