My take on all this "superstar" talk....

pilot305

G-League
Look, no superstar in their prime will ever want to sign with a team in a small market town like Sacramento. Sorry but thats reality! Now a superstar who is in their "twilight" of their career and who has already won a championship, might just to get that last fat payday....and thats just a MAYBE. A troubled superstar might sign with us until he cleans up his act and then signs with a bigger market team (anyone come to mind?) . Or a superstar who has been injury-proned may..just may.. to get that bigger paycheck (more names come to mind). I was born and raised in Sacramento and i love it to death BUT the fact of the matter is, the only way we'll be a championship team is to have a core of "good" players that can play balance offense and DEFENSE. And if we're smart, in the off season, we must sign Tyreke to a lifetime contract (ok, that was joke). Anyhow, i may be criticized here but thats just how i feel. GO KINGS!!!
 
I agree with you to an extent. I'm one who's both realistic and optimistic. I know Sacramento isn't the most desirable market, but I can still hope for a miracle to happen.

No need to be so pessimistic when free agent signings are still so far away. Don't give up hope so easily.
 
I agree with you.

A balanced team is more realistic for this franchise than gambling on a superstar. In my opinion, the Kings need to model themselves after the Larry Brown Detroit Pistons team (game wise) and the Popovich San Antonio Spurs (personnel wise).

The Pistons were a TEAM and played amazing hardnosed team defense with everyone knowing their role and contributing. The Spurs are a smaller market team that has won championships because they drafted high quality players who are disciplined and have quality character traits.

A combination of the two team models would improve this team significantly. Plus, the team would not need to overspend on a superstar that may or may not pay off.

The Kings appears to be going in that direction:
-Westphal appears to be a defensive minded coach with significant teaching and winning history.
-The roster is filled with tough, disciplined players with quality character traits. (Landry, Reke, Casspi, Brock)
-The Kings landed a player with the physical skills to be dominant at their position. (Reke)

A superstar would be great, but signing two quality players under this model would be more realistic and just as beneficial.
 
Our best bet to aquire another franchise caliber player to pair with Tyreke is through the draft, however just because we have cap space open don't assume that means we are limited to going after free agents, we actually have trade pieces that a lot of the other under the cap teams don't. If they swing and miss in free agency they have little to trade, if we draft a big man then we have at least one young big who will likely have little to no role if we want to make a move for a vet big to work as their mentor.
 
Our best bet to aquire another franchise caliber player to pair with Tyreke is through the draft, however just because we have cap space open don't assume that means we are limited to going after free agents, we actually have trade pieces that a lot of the other under the cap teams don't. If they swing and miss in free agency they have little to trade, if we draft a big man then we have at least one young big who will likely have little to no role if we want to make a move for a vet big to work as their mentor.

Another franchise player through the draft would be awesome, but I believe unrealistic. It takes some serious luck to get a franchise player through the draft.

If the Kings are unable to sign a marquee player, I want the Kings to sign Camby/Haywood and Steve Blake. Then I want the Kings to draft Cousins or Whiteside.

The Kings would then have a veteran interior presence desperately needed and another distributor that can run the offense until Tyreke learns hows to do so. Camby/Haywood would also be available to tutor the new big we draft in interior defense (either Cousins or Whiteside).

This allows the Kings to be competitive, while allowing the younger players to grow and develop into the Spurs/Pistons/(Barkley Era Suns) team we are trying to be.
 
Last edited:
We have one, most championship teams outside of the "star-less" Pistons have had 2 or 3.

If we draft in the top 5 our chances of aquiring a 2nd are pretty decent.
 
We have one, most championship teams outside of the "star-less" Pistons have had 2 or 3.

If we draft in the top 5 our chances of aquiring a 2nd are pretty decent.

I'm assuming that your talking about stars and not superstars. Its rare for a team to have two superstars. But one superstar and one or possibly two stars, yes. Such as Jordan and Pippen.

I do agree that if we can pick in the top five, preferly in the top four, our chances of picking a star are pretty good. There are two players in the top four that could be superstars. Wall and Turner. No guarantee's of course. But I think both, will at worse be stars.
 
Well I know there is a lot of nitpicking over superstar/star and in general I do tend to come down on the exclusive side of the superstar argument. But I think you need the second star to at least be a borderline superstar, who if not a true superstar would be a perennial all-star caliber player.
 
I'm assuming that your talking about stars and not superstars. Its rare for a team to have two superstars. But one superstar and one or possibly two stars, yes. Such as Jordan and Pippen.

I do agree that if we can pick in the top five, preferly in the top four, our chances of picking a star are pretty good. There are two players in the top four that could be superstars. Wall and Turner. No guarantee's of course. But I think both, will at worse be stars.
Exactly what I meant. Yours was definitely the clearer answer. :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top