Kings reportedly getting 10 nationally televised games this season
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
The tv coverage can sorta suck, as does having the start time jerked around on doubleheaders but imho the benefits are many and include: getting the best refs, media exposure enhances the narrative and understanding what the team is capable of, players getting recognized for all-star and end of season awards. This can translate into better treatment from officials, enhancing our stature for future FAs (or players agreeing to workout instead of declining ahead of draft night), and overall happiness. Which can lead to more wins.
I think in the playoffs we got a little glimpse of the fact that this kings team is built for national broadcast. The team's fun to watch, the arena atmosphere makes for a great background. National sports writers will say what they need to say to make their readers happy but broadcasters know a show and they see it.
There are National pundit type people picking us to finish between 1st (bless their overzealous hearts) and 10th, with the vast majority in the 3rd through 7th spot. It would make sense to get the fans interest in a probable playoff team for marketing purposes, especially one that took the league by storm last year even throughout all the "paper tiger" talk.
The (Sa)bonus caveat is while Morant serves his 25 gamer you have Fox emerging as a true marketable presence and face of the league story. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see more marketing material include Fox and Sabonis, and even Keegan and Monk, this upcoming season, with a couple dives into "just who is this Sasha Vezenkov guy anyway" sprinkled in to the narrative.
Buckle in folks. In honor of VF21 let me tell you that we are in for a ride!
The (Sa)bonus caveat is while Morant serves his 25 gamer you have Fox emerging as a true marketable presence and face of the league story. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see more marketing material include Fox and Sabonis, and even Keegan and Monk, this upcoming season, with a couple dives into "just who is this Sasha Vezenkov guy anyway" sprinkled in to the narrative.
Buckle in folks. In honor of VF21 let me tell you that we are in for a ride!
22 total nationally televised games... I'm nervous. I'm really hoping last year wasn't an outlier. Can we sustain our offense? Nearly every core player had a career year last year:
- Fox: best season as a pro, made his first all-nba team
- Sabonis: best season as a pro, made his first all-nba team
- Huerter: best season as a pro, made 40% of his 3s for the first time in his career
- Murray: broke NBA 3PM record
- Monk: arguably had his best season as a pro
Good news is outside of HB, the entire core is just entering their prime, or still young players in the league like Keegan and Davion. So career best seasons aren't outside the norm. Should be expected very good players continue to get better. I don't think last year was a 21 Giants situation where a bunch of 33+ year old vets all randomly had amazing seasons that vaulted them to a 107 win season
i
I think our big bet is leaning into continuity and stability with a great coaching staff and a united FO heading into year 2. I honestly don't remember an off-season since Adelman where the only questions about the Kings org was how good can they be? No FO drama, no bad coach, no FO coup attempts, no firing a popular coach mid-season and pissing off the franchise player, no giving George Hill $60 million to play ahead of your #5 pick, no questioning who the franchise cornerstones/leaders of this team are. Just how do we improve on last season?
And we should have most of our answers at the end of the season of what direction we need to go in. Does Davion break out? Does Keegan have the ability to be an on-ball scorer/#2 option for a playoff team? Who stays and who goes of the Huerter/Monk/Davion trio? Do we keep all of them? Is Vezenkov just a guy, or is he an elite NBA floor spacer? Coincidentally, we get all our FRP's back to facilitate a major shake-up if it's needed.
i
I think our big bet is leaning into continuity and stability with a great coaching staff and a united FO heading into year 2. I honestly don't remember an off-season since Adelman where the only questions about the Kings org was how good can they be? No FO drama, no bad coach, no FO coup attempts, no firing a popular coach mid-season and pissing off the franchise player, no giving George Hill $60 million to play ahead of your #5 pick, no questioning who the franchise cornerstones/leaders of this team are. Just how do we improve on last season?
And we should have most of our answers at the end of the season of what direction we need to go in. Does Davion break out? Does Keegan have the ability to be an on-ball scorer/#2 option for a playoff team? Who stays and who goes of the Huerter/Monk/Davion trio? Do we keep all of them? Is Vezenkov just a guy, or is he an elite NBA floor spacer? Coincidentally, we get all our FRP's back to facilitate a major shake-up if it's needed.
Last edited:
The number of nationally televised TV games per team is so very effed up. Something needs to change there. "Change" as in to make things more fair and equitable... or else the Lakers and Celtics will forever have larger fan bases.... and the Warriors will fade back into obsolescence once Curry is done being a draw (not even before he retires).
Here's a random but effed up example, in case you are happy with the 11-15 national TV games the Kings have this season, and in case you don't understand the point I'm trying to make about being equitable and fair. Why does the Utah Jazz only have 2-5 national TV games? The Jazz have been a stellar franchise for decades, always trying to be competitive (more so than the Kings at least). In trying to be perpetually competitive, the Jazz have contributed to enhancing the NBA product. Yet, the NBA's "reward" for them is just 2-5 national TV games? Really? While the Lakers and Warriors have 25-30?? How is that fair and who made up the rules regarding distribution? The Kings have 11-15 national TV games this season because the team is in a good place right now... but what happens when they're not?
I want to make up the "rules" for whoever made these "rules" about national TV game distribution. Gosh, I would have so much fun with that... well, it would be lots of fun for me, not so much for them, lol. What you do unto others, can be done unto you. This is the principle on which Western culture is based upon, right? Does everybody not subscribe to this principle? Cause if not, then I may need to start going back to basics too. #WakeUpCall
Here's a random but effed up example, in case you are happy with the 11-15 national TV games the Kings have this season, and in case you don't understand the point I'm trying to make about being equitable and fair. Why does the Utah Jazz only have 2-5 national TV games? The Jazz have been a stellar franchise for decades, always trying to be competitive (more so than the Kings at least). In trying to be perpetually competitive, the Jazz have contributed to enhancing the NBA product. Yet, the NBA's "reward" for them is just 2-5 national TV games? Really? While the Lakers and Warriors have 25-30?? How is that fair and who made up the rules regarding distribution? The Kings have 11-15 national TV games this season because the team is in a good place right now... but what happens when they're not?
I want to make up the "rules" for whoever made these "rules" about national TV game distribution. Gosh, I would have so much fun with that... well, it would be lots of fun for me, not so much for them, lol. What you do unto others, can be done unto you. This is the principle on which Western culture is based upon, right? Does everybody not subscribe to this principle? Cause if not, then I may need to start going back to basics too. #WakeUpCall
Last edited: