NY Post: Petrie to sign extension

#61
im pretty sure Doc Rivers came out and said that if they had the 1st overall pick, the C's were definitely going with Durant, and they had Pierce at the time. Obviously its easy to say that now, but still. I think one of the rules of drafting is that you have to take the best talent available, not necessarily the best fit.

IMO, let Petrie linger around a bit longer and then we'll assess. We've got a new arena, the owners SAY theyre going to spend, so if he cant do anything with that, then let him walk. But for now i just dont know who would be better, especially considering that our owners have a tendency to hire the cheapest options available.
Oden was still the best talent available at the time. 7'0's with his offensive skill set and defensive potential come around maybe a couple times a decade. We can all play Captain Hindsight and say Portland should have taken Durant, but that's not how reality works.
 
#63
Casspi and a pick for Hickson couldn't have possibly been a financial decision. We took back more money, and a much longer contract when we sent Udrih to Milwaukee for Salmons. We didn't need Outlaw when we signed him.

Both of those decisions were at the behest of Westphal. He told Petrie he needed Salmons and JJ Hickson/
 
#66
you do have to support to coach to a degree though. Its rare to find a front office and coaching staff that arent working together in regards to the vision of the team
 
#67
The draft is not the problem. Never was. It's more sort of the "trade for John Salmons, twice, sign Travis Outlaw off Waivers, sign Chuck Hayes, but let Samuel Dalembert walk, essentially give a draft pick to get rid of Omri Casspi, hire Eric Musselman, hire Reggie Theus, hire Kenny Natt, hire Paul Westphal" part that's the problem.

Petrie has taken two of his last six first-round draft picks, and turned them into a negative draft pick. That's a neat trick.
Won't comment on Dalembert situation. Too much smoke to figure out what exactly happened. It does seem that we made an offer, and a good one at that, but he probably used that as leverage. Could the FO have managed it better? Maybe. But, seems like there was some attempt at least to bring him back.

As for coaches, I think the one we missed out on was Scott Brooks. He was a local guy, was part of the coaching staff, wanted to stay, and with a 20/20 hindsight, would have been a great choice. I guess at that time though, all of us were clamoring for a "name" coach. Not many were interested in coming over during that time though, as those who remember the ugly Stan Van Gundy episode might recall, and we ended up with Reggie instead. Had Brooks been hired, and not proved very successful (possible, given our team then), we might have been baying for Geoff's blood even louder, calling him lazy, and taking the easy way out by hiring the local boy, without putting in effort in getting someone big to coach the team.
 
#68
Well let's see how "bad" Petrie has drafted the past 4 years:

2008 Jason Thompson
2009 Tyreke Evans
2010 Demarcus Cousins (+acquiring Marcus Thornton!)
2011 Jimmer Fredette, Tyler Honeycutt (2nd round) + Isaiah Thomas at #60

Lets see, our starters are........ oh yeah, someone drafted in each of the past 4 years (giving Tyreke the benefit of the doubt). Hmmm, and this isn't good? Sure seems Petrie is a keeper.
Its easy to draft well when your team consistently sucks and you always get a lottery pick. I coulod do it...you could do it.
 

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#69
Won't comment on Dalembert situation. Too much smoke to figure out what exactly happened. It does seem that we made an offer, and a good one at that, but he probably used that as leverage. Could the FO have managed it better? Maybe. But, seems like there was some attempt at least to bring him back.

As for coaches, I think the one we missed out on was Scott Brooks. He was a local guy, was part of the coaching staff, wanted to stay, and with a 20/20 hindsight, would have been a great choice. I guess at that time though, all of us were clamoring for a "name" coach. Not many were interested in coming over during that time though, as those who remember the ugly Stan Van Gundy episode might recall, and we ended up with Reggie instead. Had Brooks been hired, and not proved very successful (possible, given our team then), we might have been baying for Geoff's blood even louder, calling him lazy, and taking the easy way out by hiring the local boy, without putting in effort in getting someone big to coach the team.
Didn't we also interview Thibs, and then turn around and hire Westy? Pretty sure we passed on both Thibs and Brooks.
 
#70
Won't comment on Dalembert situation. Too much smoke to figure out what exactly happened. It does seem that we made an offer, and a good one at that, but he probably used that as leverage. Could the FO have managed it better? Maybe. But, seems like there was some attempt at least to bring him back.
I like it how people like to re-write history to make Kings look good.

First we renounced the bird rights to Dalembert to get rid off the cap hol
Secondly we offered Hayes the big deal.
Hayes signed with us.
His contract was voided due to heart concerns
We make contract offer to Dalembert and he publicly came out and said he expect to sign with the Kings within 24 hours
Hayes got cleared so we rescinded out offer to Dalembert and bumped up Hayes' offer by a million.
Dalembert goes on to sign with Houston for LESS money than what we offered.

The important fact to remember here is that we rescinded our offer as soon as we found out Hayes has been cleared and Dalembert himself publicly said that he expected to sign with Sacramento within 24 hours and this was a day before we rescinded our offer.

To me that is not Dalembert using us for leverege, to me that's Kings not doing their business in a professional manner.
 

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#71
I like it how people like to re-write history to make Kings look good.

First we renounced the bird rights to Dalembert to get rid off the cap hol
Secondly we offered Hayes the big deal.
Hayes signed with us.
His contract was voided due to heart concerns
We make contract offer to Dalembert and he publicly came out and said he expect to sign with the Kings within 24 hours
Hayes got cleared so we rescinded out offer to Dalembert and bumped up Hayes' offer by a million.
Dalembert goes on to sign with Houston for LESS money than what we offered.

The important fact to remember here is that we rescinded our offer as soon as we found out Hayes has been cleared and Dalembert himself publicly said that he expected to sign with Sacramento within 24 hours and this was a day before we rescinded our offer.

To me that is not Dalembert using us for leverege, to me that's Kings not doing their business in a professional manner.
I agree. The problem is going after Hayes instead of Daly, and then only going back to Daly when the heart situation popped up. Daly became second fiddle to Hayes, which is a mindnumbing move from our FO, especially without another big lined up. We still don't have a backup center,and Hayes is still playing himself into shape. Not sure when he got so fat, but as a vet I would have expected him to keep himself in better condition. But came back from his injury looking like he hung out at McDonalds every night.

After we signed Hayes, both Petrie and Westy said our frontline was complete and they were happy with it. Says a lot.
 
#72
I agree. The problem is going after Hayes instead of Daly, and then only going back to Daly when the heart situation popped up. Daly became second fiddle to Hayes, which is a mindnumbing move from our FO, especially without another big lined up. We still don't have a backup center,and Hayes is still playing himself into shape. Not sure when he got so fat, but as a vet I would have expected him to keep himself in better condition. But came back from his injury looking like he hung out at McDonalds every night.

After we signed Hayes, both Petrie and Westy said our frontline was complete and they were happy with it. Says a lot.
Dalembert didn't want to come here. It wasn't going to happen. Taking less money to play somewhere else says it all.
 

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#74
Dalembert didn't want to come here. It wasn't going to happen. Taking less money to play somewhere else says it all.
I find that hard to believe given he and his agent tried to come here over the course of a couple years, and were very happy when he was traded here. Then something happened. Given your limited response which doesn't even acknowledge the chain of events pointed out above your post, I'd guess you're lacking a little info on the situation. Not that simple, and no I'm not trying to be rude at all.
 

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#75
I don't remember us interviewing Thibodeau.
http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/articles/2009/05/21/thibodeau_to_interview_with_kings/

Also mentioned after the interview here.
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=60237

Still don't know why we passed on both he and Brooks. Seems the Maloofs can be had by a good salesman. If my chain of events is correct, we interviewed both Brooks, Thibs and Theus and went with Theus, then in 09 interviewed both Westy and Thibs, and went with Westy. The news10 article if I'm reading correctly, said we interviewed Thibs the summer we hired Theus, and then again the summer we hired Westy, meaning we passed on him on two separate occasions. Disappointing imo.
 

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#76
http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/articles/2009/05/21/thibodeau_to_interview_with_kings/

Also mentioned after the interview here.
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=60237

Still don't know why we passed on both he and Brooks. Seems the Maloofs can be had by a good salesman. If my chain of events is correct, we interviewed both Brooks, Thibs and Theus and went with Theus, then in 09 interviewed both Westy and Thibs, and went with Westy. The news10 article if I'm reading correctly, said we interviewed Thibs the summer we hired Theus, and then again the summer we hired Westy, meaning we passed on him on two separate occasions. Disappointing imo.
I think the Kings can be sold easily by someone who doesn't want much of a salary.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#77
http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/articles/2009/05/21/thibodeau_to_interview_with_kings/

Also mentioned after the interview here.
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=60237

Still don't know why we passed on both he and Brooks. Seems the Maloofs can be had by a good salesman. If my chain of events is correct, we interviewed both Brooks, Thibs and Theus and went with Theus, then in 09 interviewed both Westy and Thibs, and went with Westy. The news10 article if I'm reading correctly, said we interviewed Thibs the summer we hired Theus, and then again the summer we hired Westy, meaning we passed on him on two separate occasions. Disappointing imo.
Well, that sure looks like a mistake, doesn't it?
 
#78
Dalembert didn't want to come here. It wasn't going to happen. Taking less money to play somewhere else says it all.
Please carefully read the previous 2 posts immediately before your post.

I don't understand why you cannot understand those 2 posts. Dalembert took less money from Houston because there was no choice - the Sacramento Kings offer to him was already rescinded (to get back Hayes who end up getting 1 million more than his previous contract). If Petrie really wants Dalembert, they could have done better negotiating with him even at the very beginning. It wasn't Dalembert's fault. It was all Petrie being Petrie - not seeing the value of a shot-blocking big.

Are you Petrie's relative? J/K:p
 
Last edited:

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#79
I don't remember us interviewing Thibodeau.
yeah, he was one of the three that year, interviewed him, Rambis, Westphal. We did not take the chance. Probaly scared us by talking about how he'd build a team aroudn the defense first and the offense would follow. That doesn't fly in the land of the Kings.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#80
Well, that sure looks like a mistake, doesn't it?


How can you call it a mistake? have you seen Thibs? Ugly little troll looking guy who talked aobut slwoing the game down and playing defense all the time. BOR-RING!

Now Theus on the other hand had great hair and a killer smile, and Westy had been working on a fab tan for years before we hired him. I mean who the hell would YOU hire?
 
#81
yeah, he was one of the three that year, interviewed him, Rambis, Westphal. We did not take the chance. Probaly scared us by talking about how he'd build a team aroudn the defense first and the offense would follow. That doesn't fly in the land of the Kings.
While hiring Westphal obviously backfired, it made some sense to a degree to bring in an "experienced veteran coach" over 2 rookie head coaches in Rambis and Thibs for our team.
 
#82
How can you call it a mistake? have you seen Thibs? Ugly little troll looking guy who talked aobut slwoing the game down and playing defense all the time. BOR-RING!

Now Theus on the other hand had great hair and a killer smile, and Westy had been working on a fab tan for years before we hired him. I mean who the hell would YOU hire?
You make a good point. :)
 
#83
I like it how people like to re-write history to make Kings look good.

First we renounced the bird rights to Dalembert to get rid off the cap hol
Secondly we offered Hayes the big deal.
Hayes signed with us.
His contract was voided due to heart concerns
We make contract offer to Dalembert and he publicly came out and said he expect to sign with the Kings within 24 hours
Hayes got cleared so we rescinded out offer to Dalembert and bumped up Hayes' offer by a million.
Dalembert goes on to sign with Houston for LESS money than what we offered.

The important fact to remember here is that we rescinded our offer as soon as we found out Hayes has been cleared and Dalembert himself publicly said that he expected to sign with Sacramento within 24 hours and this was a day before we rescinded our offer.

To me that is not Dalembert using us for leverege, to me that's Kings not doing their business in a professional manner.
I was not trying to make Kings/Petrie look good. Just giving my opinion.

I do remember that we made an offer to Dally when Hayes's medical condition became an issue. I'm just not sure what discussions, if any, took place prior to that. That's all.

If the Kings/Dally couldn't come to terms (money, years, plans), it was logical to pursue someone else. I can understand the logic that we should have overbid if necessary to keep him, but can understand the opposite too, particularly from the owners' perspective.

And thanks to rainmaker about us interviewing Thibs. Seems like it was the post Theus phase though, when we hired PW. In hindsight, it was of course a mistake, just like Brooks. But having experienced rookie coaches in Theus and Kenny, would rookie coaches have been very welcome, particularly when an experienced coach like PW was available.
 
#86
I like it how people like to re-write history to make Kings look good.

First we renounced the bird rights to Dalembert to get rid off the cap hol
Secondly we offered Hayes the big deal.
Hayes signed with us.
His contract was voided due to heart concerns
We make contract offer to Dalembert and he publicly came out and said he expect to sign with the Kings within 24 hours
Hayes got cleared so we rescinded out offer to Dalembert and bumped up Hayes' offer by a million.
Dalembert goes on to sign with Houston for LESS money than what we offered.


The important fact to remember here is that we rescinded our offer as soon as we found out Hayes has been cleared and Dalembert himself publicly said that he expected to sign with Sacramento within 24 hours and this was a day before we rescinded our offer.

To me that is not Dalembert using us for leverege, to me that's Kings not doing their business in a professional manner.
Those trying to spin things to make the King's FO look good aren't the only ones trying to spin things.

Dalembert's announcement that he was signing with the Kings, the Kings pulling the offer and him signing with the Rockets was wham-bam. There was a big question at the time if the Kings pulling the offer was because they had gotten wind they had been played. I wasn't in any of their conversations so I don't know but on the surface it doesn't look like the Kings were the only ones not doing the business in a professional manner.

At the end of the day, Dalembert's team misjudged the market for him just like the Kings misjudged how much they would miss what he brought. Both sides lost.
 
#87
apart from the occasional flub, petrie's draft record has been pretty exceptional. that said, the kings have already acquired their young cornerstone pieces through the draft. we don't need petrie's drafting acumen at this stage of this current kings team's development. instead, we need petrie to reapply his nose for talent to the free agent pool and to the trading block, or we need a new gm. its that simple. if the kings are unable to acquire complementary talent for the blossoming stars on their roster, then this team will not win, those players will walk, and its straight back to the lottery for another 3-5 years. i'm no longer interested in the lottery. i'm no longer interested in petrie's ability to make the most out of high draft picks, because he's done it. we're good to go on that front. i'd rather he was hunting around for late first round steals because the kings made it back to the playoffs, and in order for the kings to get back to the playoffs, they have to make the most of their signing and trading possibilities. john salmons, jj hickson, travis outlaw, and chuck hayes just aren't cutting it. petrie got thornton right, though. that was a stellar move. so he's capable. we know he can still do it. its time for him to do it some more...
despite my measured, intentional post above, reading the following article damn near makes me want to show up at geoff petrie's doorstep with a lawnmower:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7714701/how-annoy-fan-base-60-easy-steps

i was rather shaky on my warriors history prior to the second don nelson era. i didn't realize just how badly that team was mismanaged, year in an year out, for over thirty seasons. i mean... ****, i was exhausted by the time i got to the end of that article, and so incredibly thankful to root for our loser of a team with it's bright future. demarcus cousins/tyreke evans/marcus thornton is beyond infinitely preferable to andrew bogut/stephen curry/klay thompson, and the history that precedes them. geezus...
 
Last edited: