List the good things we should be happy about drafting # 4 instead of #1

Sure the Kings got hosed again...so let's just look at the bright side of it..

1. We'll see more of JT and Spence frontline. (No Griffin)
2. We'll have a bigger salary space for picking at lower draft.
3. Our cap space for Free Agency just increased a million more. LOL
4. We might be getting Brandon Jennings (who I think is has the most potential in this draft)
5. We might get one of the bigs from the Clippers (Kaman, Camby).
6. We will continue to be under the radar, not much expectations again.
7. We will continue to be untelevised in ESPN who has a lot of dumb commentators.
8. Petrie has a chance to show his genius in surprising the draft again.
9. :confused::confused::confused:
 
1. 4 is a 3 player difference from 1
2. lower salary for the player we pick
3. we have a slight idea whom the other teams will pick
4. we have two other picks to utilize
5. in chinese culture 4 is an unlucky number being the kings with a myriad of bad luck we can reverse it the law of likes repel
6. lower expectations for the one we draft.. could be a steal or a dark horse
7. Petrie will FINALLY earn his paycheck and show some magic

and last but not the least

8. were not the clippers

thats something to be happy about
 
what a thread !!!

what is next ?

list all good things we should be happy about Robert Horry hitting that three !

list all good things we should be happy about game 7 in 2002 !

list all good things we should be happy about Webber's injury in 2003 !
 
That way when Blake Griffin BUSTS, it wont be on our shoulders.




wait.. that kinda sounds nasty..... you know what i mean
 
what ARE the chances of him being a bust?

i know hes an athletic freak but i read somewhere his knees were a problem?
 
11. The new area will finally get built! ...because the fans will finally decide they're tired of living with the curse of whatever INDIAN BURIAL GROUND Arco Arena was built on top of.
 
I felt all along the #2-4 picks would give the Kings the chance to get a new starting PG.. and that is what they will get unless Thabeet slips. Let's face it, though, without a good PG, you cannot win games.
 
sorry, NO good thoughts here. All I can see is another season of suckiing it up to eventually get screwed by the lotto again next season. F- the NBA, this sucks, bad.
 
sorry, NO good thoughts here. All I can see is another season of suckiing it up to eventually get screwed by the lotto again next season. F- the NBA, this sucks, bad.
C'mon. Is the lottery system perfect? No. But every player on every team in the league was drafted via that system, so like it or not, it is "fair". The Kings will at least get one good player from this draft (hopefully a new starting PG... fingers crossed); look at next season this way:

The Kings will have:
-five new players/contracts (minimum, I could see Diogu and BJax potentially returning) and one of those players is a #4 pick in the draft and hopefully the Kings will get good players at 23 and 31 as well.
-A new head coach (hopefully a good one)
-a Kenny Thomas-sized expiring contract to trade

A great, playoff bound year? No, but I bet they are not the worst in the league next year... not even bottom three.
 
I felt all along the #2-4 picks would give the Kings the chance to get a new starting PG.. and that is what they will get unless Thabeet slips. Let's face it, though, without a good PG, you cannot win games.


Tell that to the Lakers. ;)
 
Well, since we aren't likely to improve our team in any significant way this year, despite having the worst record in franchise history this year, we'll have another shot at it next year.
 
1) kings don't have to be disappointed when blake griffin measures 6'6" w/o shoes and 6'7 1/2" with shoes at the combine

2) kings won't be tempted to draft the next euro flop that came with big hype, i.e. darko, andrea baragini

3) petrie can draft the player with the biggest upside, instead of the most hyped player when drafting at #4, since the big hype players will be gone (i.e. griffin, thabeet, rubio)
 
Indian Burial Ground?

Wait...

Is that actually true?

I'd always half-jokingly suspected it, but recently I did see another reference to Arco being built atop an Indian burial ground....so now I want to know too!! :eek:

(Of course the question may be shifting from "Is it?" to "Can somebody prove that it's not???")
 
I'd always half-jokingly suspected it, but recently I did see another reference to Arco being built atop an Indian burial ground....so now I want to know too!! :eek:

(Of course the question may be shifting from "Is it?" to "Can somebody prove that it's not???")
Basically, it is a story made up to explain our bad luck. I mean, there must be something to blame, right?

Environmental requirements make it almost impossible that there was prior Native American habitation on the site. This would have been evidenced through historic review and not digging up anything at all during construction.

Personally, I'm more in line with the theory that God hates the Kings. ;)
 
**CRICKETS**

stewieinshockanimation.gif
 
Basically, it is a story made up to explain our bad luck. I mean, there must be something to blame, right?

Environmental requirements make it almost impossible that there was prior Native American habitation on the site. This would have been evidenced through historic review and not digging up anything at all during construction.

Personally, I'm more in line with the theory that God hates the Kings. ;)


Well, that's good to know. And your theory also offers a reasonable explanation... Hey, check out that scorch mark where Dime Dropper used to be! :D
 
Back
Top