Our FO/Ownership Has Let The Fans Down

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Like always people tend to look at the end result and not the symptom. Why did Dalembert accept less money to play for Houston?! Every asked yourself that question? I assume your answer is because he didn't want to be here? My question is why?!

Good franchises, those that have clear plan, culture and know what they are doing can keep their own free agents. Our team can't. If someone wants to get away so bad that he is prepared to take less money, it means that something in our franchise stinks. I think our attitude from the end of last season until this very day was stand offish to Dalembert. We were never really keen on him and were never really wanting him back. We had other plans. We wanted Chuck Hayes. Never mind that we got shorter, lost interior defence, lost shot blocking, lost in rebounding...never mind all that. We want to play sexy we don't want to win ugly and go far. We would rather play junk ball and score 120 but keep our opponent to 119. Now that we lose Hayes and all of sudden we start kissing Dalembert's *** again and which point any normal human being that has any self respect would be pretty pissed off by that.

We keep saying how we are offering more money but FAs keep turning us down because we are small market team. That is bull****! Other small market teams don't seem to have that problem. They not only keep their FA but they get others in. They have a clear plan. A blueprint on how to get to the ultimate goal. We don't and never have. I can understand not being able to attract the superstars. That is understandable! But what we need as a team are role players that fit. History will say those guys will go anywhere where they can get the money and/or the team that they are signing with has a clear direction. We lack that and that and only that is the reason why we are not getting players into the team. Its got nothing to do with it being Sacramento and everything to do with the direction this team is choosing to head in.

No no no, you couldn't be more wrong. I don't expect you to read all of my posts, I really don't. But I have said many times that the reason we lost Dalembert was because we didn't handle him right last season.

A few things factor into this, the biggest being relocation. Aside from the Hornets who do not have an owner, Sacramento is easily the least stable organization. Who would want to sign here long term, buy a house .. settle down the family, and then have to move again a year later? No one, especially when there were so many other options this offseason. Its not just because we are a small market, it is because he are the worst situation out of all of the small markets.

Also, I'm not sure how much fun this team is to be around. Westphal jerking the rotations around has to be frustrating. For all the things Evans and Cousins do, they have to be frustrating to play with. That is just reality.

The Kings suck. The owners suck. No one wants to play here. Not because its Sacramento, its because we haven't sniffed the playoffs in years, we have poor owners, and we have the worst arena in sports. That is why we can't sign anyone and that is why Dalembert left. It wasn't the money, that is my point. We wanted him, we offered him the best deal, and he turned it down. What can you do at that point?

And I disagree that Chuck Hayes meant we would want to 'win sexy'. Winning with a 6'6 post defender .. a big time scrapper is the definition of winning ugly. I liked the move because, if you think about it, we went after the one player who's defense to offense ratio is the biggest in favor of defense out of the entire free agent class.

This is after trading for Salmons (a move I hated) but he is known for his defense. We are making a real effort to become a more desirable place this season. Dalembert actually mentioned how he liked the Salmons move because it brought more veterans on board. Hayes would make this a more desirable place too. And hopefully by next years free agent class we will have a new arena plan in place, making this an even more desirable team to play for.

Its a process that we have royal ****ed up the past 5 years, but I have seen a change for the better in the past year or so. We are trending in the right direction. Losing Dalembert hurt bad, sure. But it wasn't a money issue, which is at least something to hold on too.

 

[Chupacabra]

generalizations + panic = this thread

 

[bajaden]

We haven't played one regular season game yet, and there are some on this fourm that can't wait to jump on the negativity bandwagon. Frankly, those people disgust me. I'm sure they don't care what I think, so my thoughts are immaterial to them. And therein lies the problem with those people. They have their own agenda, and they could care less what anyone else says. What I truely don't understand is why they're still Kings fans? They don't seem to like most of the players we've aquired. They don't like the management. They don't like the ownership. So why the hell don't you guys just go root for another team? You'd be happier, and I can assure you that I would be happier.

I'd be more open about this if, just once in a while I heard a positive post from some of the usual suspects. But no, its the same old mantra over and over and over again. Little if anything factual. And by factual I mean something that can be proven. Example: To know for a fact that we didn't even call the agent of, lets say Tyson Chandler, and therefore make the statement that we didn't even try. But no one can make that statement, because there's not proof either way. But that doesn't matter. Why? Because there's a futher statement that just covers it all. The Kings front office has no great plan in place, and therefore, not respectable freeagent would want to come here. In other words, if all else fails, its still the Kings management fault because of, well, just because!!@!

I've got a fact for you. There are no elephants in my living room. You know why? Because on a daily basis, I spray with anti-elephant spray. That fact must be true, right? Yeah, its about as true as the crap being thrown around on this thread. And please don't respond to this post! Because your wasting your time. I don't give a tinkers damm what you think, and thats the worse possible insult I can throw at you. I'm sure you could care less what anyone else thinks.

 

[TehSwimGuy]

I have to agree with above. If we got into the playoffs, albeit even last seed, and built from there, I guarantee that we'd see a couple bigger players come in. Maybe not all at once, but here or there we'd attract a higher caliber player, because all players of a high caliber want to be on a team that will at least be in the playoffs.

When you're not even sniffing at last seed, then yes, no one wants to go there. It's not only due to small market or Sac, it's because it's a heavily losing product.

It was hard to tell the last couple seasons if even the coaches had their **** together, though I'm hoping for different this year with Bobby J and Christie lending advice.

 

[pshn80]

I'm "let down" but not by the FO. Petrie in my mind does not "love" the status quo. Circumstances have not fallen our way with a couple of key situations. I ain't the end of the world. But I am let down.

Amongst poor choices I believe we have to live with our roster as it is until a good trade opportunity arises. You can bet Petrie and ownership will be on top of this. Even with that kind of interest plus money we are not guaranteed a slick, satisfying, winning answer. But I believe the FO will keep at it until we have improved.

I am let down but the upside of that is my seeing the "new" and young guys play more than the would have. Some will probably come through for me and some won't but I'm looking forward to it anyway.

Finding a good trade will require waiting until closer to the trade deadline, whenever that is - but a while down the road.

 

[Section 101]

Sorry but I don't feel let down at all. My expectation basically happened which is nothing. I still think it's all show for the Maloofs and spending money. It's like they wanted the Kings out in the news after FA, but really didn't want to offer competitive bids.

 

[TehSwimGuy]

Maybe a side note, but I really wish we had Adelman back. As much as people loved to hate him, he knew what he was doing when it counted, and I think he would really carve the new guys into a respectable team. I feel like he had discipline and coached well, but we ran him out of town, and haven't had great coaching since.

Whenever I see Westphal, I always imagine a pushover who the players walk on.

 

[pshn80]

I see that for some the love for the Kings doesn't include the Maloofs, Petrie, or Westphal. I'm sorry to see that but they are here and will be so let's get on with it. To enjoy these threads, as I do, you have to put up with a lot of experts that you don't agree with. Aw, our threads.

 

[kingsnation]

The Clippers will regret the Deandre Jordan contract. The Knicks are paying an injury-prone and one-dimensional Tyson Chandler $15 million a year for the next four years. Nene (also injury-prone) will be making $17 million+ in the final years of his contract.

In a market like this, in a league like this, sometimes you do what you gotta do. I don't think any of those teams will regret those contracts if it helps to create a consistently winning and playoff culture for those franchises. Why did Jordan, Chandler and Nene get those contracts?

First because there are very few big men in this league who are currently difference makers. Who can affect BOTH sides of the ball in a positive way.

Second, windows to actually win a NBA Title stay open very shortly in this league. If you're the Clippers, you have CP3, you have Blake - go out and make sure you keep Jordan. Make your run now. You have the pieces, make CP3 happy and do your all to win NOW, even if it means overpay. The Knicks have Melo and Amare. What's their missing piece? A defensive-minded center who just pushed the Mavs to winning their first title? You BETTER go out and get him and if necessary, overpay. Who gives a rip what happens over the course of the contract if it actually lands NY a title?

When will overpaying ever NOT be necessary in the NBA? We already know that NO ONE wants to come play for Sac. We've seen it for years. That's never going to change unless we spend. Yes yes I know we offered the most for Dally and that's good. But why not spend our money and go get someone like a Gasol. Break the bank for a big man who can change the culture of your team over the next 1/2 decade and see what happens! Would we have had enough? Who knows? But the point is take the gambles and the risks. Because right now I have this awful feeling that next summer we're going to be having this exact same discussion.

Windows are small in the NBA and if we're not careful, we're going to look back and realize that we expected Reke and DMC to develop and succeed with John Salmons and JJ Hickson.

 

[Chupacabra]

In a market like this, in a league like this, sometimes you do what you gotta do. I don't think any of those teams will regret those contracts if it helps to create a consistently winning and playoff culture for those franchises. Why did Jordan, Chandler and Nene get those contracts?

First because there are very few big men in this league who are currently difference makers. Who can affect BOTH sides of the ball in a positive way.

Second, windows to actually win a NBA Title stay open very shortly in this league. If you're the Clippers, you have CP3, you have Blake - go out and make sure you keep Jordan. Make your run now. You have the pieces, make CP3 happy and do your all to win NOW, even if it means overpay. The Knicks have Melo and Amare. What's their missing piece? A defensive-minded center who just pushed the Mavs to winning their first title? You BETTER go out and get him and if necessary, overpay. Who gives a rip what happens over the course of the contract if it actually lands NY a title?

When will overpaying ever NOT be necessary in the NBA? We already know that NO ONE wants to come play for Sac. We've seen it for years. That's never going to change unless we spend. Yes yes I know we offered the most for Dally and that's good. But why not spend our money and go get someone like a Gasol. Break the bank for a big man who can change the culture of your team over the next 1/2 decade and see what happens! Would we have had enough? Who knows? But the point is take the gambles and the risks. Because right now I have this awful feeling that next summer we're going to be having this exact same discussion.

Windows are small in the NBA and if we're not careful, we're going to look back and realize that we expected Reke and DMC to develop and succeed with John Salmons and JJ Hickson.

The reason why im fine with us not overpaying for one of this years free agent bigmen is the same reason that I think it didnt happen; Demarcus Cousins is coming off of his rookie year. This guy will more than likely be better than all of the aforementioned players. Why would you go break the bank on Marc Gasol when you already have Cousins? Doesnt make sense to me.

 

[king07]

Don't panic idiotz and get over it.

 

[Kingster]

Like always people tend to look at the end result and not the symptom. Why did Dalembert accept less money to play for Houston?! Every asked yourself that question? I assume your answer is because he didn't want to be here? My question is why?!

Good franchises, those that have clear plan, culture and know what they are doing can keep their own free agents. Our team can't. If someone wants to get away so bad that he is prepared to take less money, it means that something in our franchise stinks. I think our attitude from the end of last season until this very day was stand offish to Dalembert. We were never really keen on him and were never really wanting him back. We had other plans. We wanted Chuck Hayes. Never mind that we got shorter, lost interior defence, lost shot blocking, lost in rebounding...never mind all that. We want to play sexy we don't want to win ugly and go far. We would rather play junk ball and score 120 but keep our opponent to 119. Now that we lose Hayes and all of sudden we start kissing Dalembert's *** again and which point any normal human being that has any self respect would be pretty pissed off by that.

We keep saying how we are offering more money but FAs keep turning us down because we are small market team. That is bull****! Other small market teams don't seem to have that problem. They not only keep their FA but they get others in. They have a clear plan. A blueprint on how to get to the ultimate goal. We don't and never have. I can understand not being able to attract the superstars. That is understandable! But what we need as a team are role players that fit. History will say those guys will go anywhere where they can get the money and/or the team that they are signing with has a clear direction. We lack that and that and only that is the reason why we are not getting players into the team. Its got nothing to do with it being Sacramento and everything to do with the direction this team is choosing to head in.

You bring up a key point: Why Chuck Hayes and not Dalembet (at least at the beginning). I doubt that it had to do with the fact that Hayes is "sexy". He's a blue collar non-finesse player. There must have been other factors involved. My guess it had more to do with character and work ethic.

 

[Prince_XY]

Like always people tend to look at the end result and not the symptom. Why did Dalembert accept less money to play for Houston?! Every asked yourself that question? I assume your answer is because he didn't want to be here? My question is why?!

Good franchises, those that have clear plan, culture and know what they are doing can keep their own free agents. Our team can't. If someone wants to get away so bad that he is prepared to take less money, it means that something in our franchise stinks. I think our attitude from the end of last season until this very day was stand offish to Dalembert. We were never really keen on him and were never really wanting him back. We had other plans. We wanted Chuck Hayes. Never mind that we got shorter, lost interior defence, lost shot blocking, lost in rebounding...never mind all that. We want to play sexy we don't want to win ugly and go far. We would rather play junk ball and score 120 but keep our opponent to 119. Now that we lose Hayes and all of sudden we start kissing Dalembert's *** again and which point any normal human being that has any self respect would be pretty pissed off by that.

We keep saying how we are offering more money but FAs keep turning us down because we are small market team. That is bull****! Other small market teams don't seem to have that problem. They not only keep their FA but they get others in. They have a clear plan. A blueprint on how to get to the ultimate goal. We don't and never have. I can understand not being able to attract the superstars. That is understandable! But what we need as a team are role players that fit. History will say those guys will go anywhere where they can get the money and/or the team that they are signing with has a clear direction. We lack that and that and only that is the reason why we are not getting players into the team. Its got nothing to do with it being Sacramento and everything to do with the direction this team is choosing to head in.

We could have been better against the odds if we have a very good GM.

I think a lot of us are over-rating Petrie. Some even think he is a genius. One of the post blamed everything (from owner, players, coach, arena, to location) but never mentioned the infallible Petrie. It's amazing.

 

[sidney]

You bring up a key point: Why Chuck Hayes and not Dalembet (at least at the beginning). I doubt that it had to do with the fact that Hayes is "sexy". He's a blue collar non-finesse player. There must have been other factors involved. My guess it had more to do with character and work ethic.

Passing and defense. Same reason he probably like Kirilenko. Delembert is not exactly a big ball movement facilitator

 

[Superman]

In a market like this, in a league like this, sometimes you do what you gotta do. I don't think any of those teams will regret those contracts if it helps to create a consistently winning and playoff culture for those franchises. Why did Jordan, Chandler and Nene get those contracts?

First because there are very few big men in this league who are currently difference makers. Who can affect BOTH sides of the ball in a positive way.

They got those contracts because they're 6'10" or above and can block shots from the weakside. We're talking about Keon Clark, without the weed smoke (maybe). There's a situation that's developed in the NBA that says that if you grab 7+ rebounds and block 1.5+ shots, and you're taller than 6'10", you should make at least $8 million a year. Brendan Haywood got five years, $55 million. It's a shock that Dalembert didn't get that kind of money.

Nene is a good offensive player. I understand the demand there, but with his injury history, I don't see them NOT regretting giving him $67 million.

Second, windows to actually win a NBA Title stay open very shortly in this league. If you're the Clippers, you have CP3, you have Blake - go out and make sure you keep Jordan. Make your run now. You have the pieces, make CP3 happy and do your all to win NOW, even if it means overpay. The Knicks have Melo and Amare. What's their missing piece? A defensive-minded center who just pushed the Mavs to winning their first title? You BETTER go out and get him and if necessary, overpay. Who gives a rip what happens over the course of the contract if it actually lands NY a title?

If that kind of deal helps them win a title, then great. But there's a reason the owners pushed for shorter contracts. A four year deal is probably not that big of a long-term worry, but five or six? Yeah, that's setting you back.

In the Knicks case, or the Clippers, you are in position to contend, or at least right there on the brink. So you go out and overpay for a defensive center who can be the missing link for your team. You don't if you're the Kings, you just won 26 games WITH Dalembert, and you are still a step away. I would rather have him than not, but not for the kind of money that defensive centers are getting these days.

It seems like maybe we could have had him for three years, $24 million, or something like that. Which is unfortunate. I could deal with that, actually.

When will overpaying ever NOT be necessary in the NBA?

When teams stop overpaying. It's the whole reason there was a lockout to begin with.

We already know that NO ONE wants to come play for Sac. We've seen it for years. That's never going to change unless we spend. Yes yes I know we offered the most for Dally and that's good. But why not spend our money and go get someone like a Gasol. Break the bank for a big man who can change the culture of your team over the next 1/2 decade and see what happens! Would we have had enough? Who knows? But the point is take the gambles and the risks. Because right now I have this awful feeling that next summer we're going to be having this exact same discussion.

We had no chance at Gasol. Memphis maxed him out on a four year extension. They were gonna match any offer. The Clippers were probably going to match any offer for Deandre Jordan. Would it have made anyone here feel better had the Kings gone out and offered those guys big money, just for them to stay with their teams? Not me.

Windows are small in the NBA and if we're not careful, we're going to look back and realize that we expected Reke and DMC to develop and succeed with John Salmons and JJ Hickson.

Money is even more important under the new CBA. We need to make sure we can offer Reke and DMC the money they will demand when their contracts are up. No sense throwing $40-60 million on someone just because they happen to be a certain height, knowing full well they don't make your team good enough to compete.

 

[Chupacabra]

^ Well put.

 

[rainmaker]

We could have been better against the odds if we have a very good GM.

I think a lot of us are over-rating Petrie. Some even think he is a genius. One of the post blamed everything (from owner, players, coach, arena, to location) but never mentioned the infallible Petrie. It's amazing.

Some on here simply don't criticize anything in our organization, or are uncomfortable doing so, because apparently it's not how a fan should behave, and if we criticize, we mind as well go root for another team, since a true Kings fan only see's good in the decisions his team makes.

All hail Petrie. All hail the Maloofs. Any decision they make shall not be criticized.

 

[Superman]

Some on here simply don't criticize anything in our organization, or are uncomfortable doing so, because apparently it's not how a fan should behave, and if we criticize, we mind as well go root for another team, since a true Kings fan only see's good in the decisions his team makes.

All hail Petrie. All hail the Maloofs. Any decision they make shall not be criticized.

Can I just say something here?

That's complete and utter bull****.

Carry on.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

In a market like this, in a league like this, sometimes you do what you gotta do. I don't think any of those teams will regret those contracts if it helps to create a consistently winning and playoff culture for those franchises. Why did Jordan, Chandler and Nene get those contracts?

First because there are very few big men in this league who are currently difference makers. Who can affect BOTH sides of the ball in a positive way.

Second, windows to actually win a NBA Title stay open very shortly in this league. If you're the Clippers, you have CP3, you have Blake - go out and make sure you keep Jordan. Make your run now. You have the pieces, make CP3 happy and do your all to win NOW, even if it means overpay. The Knicks have Melo and Amare. What's their missing piece? A defensive-minded center who just pushed the Mavs to winning their first title? You BETTER go out and get him and if necessary, overpay. Who gives a rip what happens over the course of the contract if it actually lands NY a title?

When will overpaying ever NOT be necessary in the NBA? We already know that NO ONE wants to come play for Sac. We've seen it for years. That's never going to change unless we spend. Yes yes I know we offered the most for Dally and that's good. But why not spend our money and go get someone like a Gasol. Break the bank for a big man who can change the culture of your team over the next 1/2 decade and see what happens! Would we have had enough? Who knows? But the point is take the gambles and the risks. Because right now I have this awful feeling that next summer we're going to be having this exact same discussion.

Windows are small in the NBA and if we're not careful, we're going to look back and realize that we expected Reke and DMC to develop and succeed with John Salmons and JJ Hickson.

It all depends on what "breaking the bank" means. To what degree I'd be willing to overpay a player would depend on how good they were and how certain I was that signing them would make my team a playoff team immediately.

Seeing as how Chandler/Gasol/Nene all signed contracts worth 14-15$ million a year, I’m assuming it would have taken an offer of 17$, 18$, even 20$ million a year to even get them to consider coming here.

Would I love to have any of those guys on the team? Yes. Do I think they’re anywhere near good enough to warrant 17-20$ million? No!

15$ million would have been about my limit for them. If that wasn’t enough, and it clearly wasn’t, then let them sign somewhere else. You have to have a ceiling you won’t go over to sign a particular player and be willing to not go over it even if it means having no chance to sign them.

Basically, the only players that are worth the risk of taking a “money is no object” approach to are legitimate stars like LeBron, Carmello, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, Deron Williams, etc.

You start throwing out superstar contracts to non-superstar players and more often than not you end up with Jason Richardson/Rashard Lewis type contracts that end up being an albatross around your team’s neck.

 

[ParniValjak]

You bring up a key point: Why Chuck Hayes and not Dalembet (at least at the beginning). I doubt that it had to do with the fact that Hayes is "sexy". He's a blue collar non-finesse player. There must have been other factors involved. My guess it had more to do with character and work ethic.

Playing "sexy" does not mean that Hayes can shoot, dunk or post up! He might be limited fro. That aspect but my reference to "sexy" play was to do with oir obvious love affair with passing bigs! The team had come out and said that we planned to run a lot of offense through Cousins and Hayes! Hayes offensive skill set allows us to do that because of his ability to pass the ball hence the reference to winning sexy!

 

[Kingsguy881]

Some on here simply don't criticize anything in our organization, or are uncomfortable doing so, because apparently it's not how a fan should behave, and if we criticize, we mind as well go root for another team, since a true Kings fan only see's good in the decisions his team makes.

All hail Petrie. All hail the Maloofs. Any decision they make shall not be criticized.

Now this is an excellent post!! Petrie is an IDIOT. He should have went out and paid big money to ANYONE!! Lets throw $100 million at DJ Augustin!! Trade Tyreke for Darren Collison cuz he's a true pg. Then max out Collison!! Lets throw big money at Mr. Kris Kardashian because he's a free agent!!!

Smh at the panic/stupidity in this thread. Moving on to the next thread.

 

[rainmaker]

Now this is an excellent post!! Petrie is an IDIOT. He should have went out and paid big money to ANYONE!! Lets throw $100 million at DJ Augustin!! Trade Tyreke for Darren Collison cuz he's a true pg. Then max out Collison!! Lets throw big money at Mr. Kris Kardashian because he's a free agent!!!

Smh at the panic/stupidity in this thread. Moving on to the next thread.

The only stupidity I see is an exaggerated assumption, that I or anyone else, is campaigning for the completely fabricated moves you suggested above. Only an idiot would think that's what anyone is calling for.

 

[Kingsguy881]

The only stupidity I see is an exaggerated assumption, that I or anyone else, is campaigning for the completely fabricated moves you suggested above. Only an idiot would think that's what anyone is calling for.

Ok then, you tell me what all star free agents that were on the market that either
A) Did not resign with their own team or
B) Resigned for a reasonable amount of money to where we would have had something left over to give Reke and Cousins their money when they come due or
C) The Kings were not in discussions with to at least show interest

??

Please??

 

[rainmaker]

Ok then, you tell me what all star free agents that were on the market that either
A) Did not resign with their own team or
B) Resigned for a reasonable amount of money to where we would have had something left over to give Reke and Cousins their money when they come due or
C) The Kings were not in discussions with to at least show interest

??

Please??

I'm not regurgitating my entire stance. I've stated as recently as yesterday exactly what my stance is, and what I would've done, or how I would have approached free agency.

Go read it. Since you haven't read what I've posted, quit these blind assumptions.

 

[rainmaker]

Can I just say something here?

That's complete and utter bull****.

Carry on.

There are members on here who have no problem absolving our FO/ownership from blame, for a lot of the decisions they've made.

Don't care if you see it that way or not, or missed those posts. For you to say it's complete and utter bull****, means it's never happened before. Sure......

 

[Kingsguy881]

I'm not regurgitating my entire stance. I've stated as recently as yesterday exactly what my stance is, and what I would've done, or how I would have approached free agency.

Go read it. Since you haven't read what I've posted, quit these blind assumptions.
......

I did. All you said was that Dalembert wasn't retained because of the Chuck Haues signing, which then backfired for a reason that nobody could have predicted. It was a whole lot of bitching moaning and whining for no reason. You state that the FO did nothing to upgrade our frontline completely ignoring the fact that we picked up JJ Hickson who looks to be a strong contributer. You're wasting mine and everybody else's time because you have some self servient issue to whine about nothing without waiting to see how it all fits and plays out for a young team LOADED with talent and searching for an identity. Go be a Laker fan. They are win-now which apperently you are seeking out. But our Kings team has to be built, not bought, so if you are not patient enough to watch a small market team rebuild then find a greener pasture and stop wasting our time with this whiny drivel.

 

[Glenn]

I did. All you said was that Dalembert wasn't retained because of the Chuck Haues signing, which then backfired for a reason that nobody could have predicted. It was a whole lot of bitching moaning and whining for no reason. You state that the FO did nothing to upgrade our frontline completely ignoring the fact that we picked up JJ Hickson who looks to be a strong contributer. You're wasting mine and everybody else's time because you have some self servient issue to whine about nothing without waiting to see how it all fits and plays out for a young team LOADED with talent and searching for an identity. Go be a Laker fan. They are win-now which apperently you are seeking out. But our Kings team has to be built, not bought, so if you are not patient enough to watch a small market team rebuild then find a greener pasture and stop wasting our time with this whiny drivel.

This is getting a bit personal, don't ya think?

 

[Kingsguy881]

This is getting a bit personal, don't ya think?

Probably but we are 2 games into a preseason where nobody knows anything about this team beyond the fact that they are searching out an identity, they are loaded with talent, and they have issues with turnovers and injuries. This board is absolutely LITTERED with whiny complainy threads/posts. I'm not searching for everyone to be all song and roses and dances, but constructively critical posts. Not everyone is going to be happy with the direction of the team but at the very least come up with something other than the OP. THAT was just difficult to stomach with a straight face. Honestly, if my best friend had said that to me I would have slapped him. It said absolutely nothing other than the Kings wanted to sign Chuck Hayes, they signed him, something happened beyond anybodies control, and the Kings didn't retain Sam Dally. And a whole buncha other pointless crap. I might have taken out my frustrations on reading all this crap littered on this board on the OP, you're right.

 

[TehSwimGuy]

I did. All you said was that Dalembert wasn't retained because of the Chuck Haues signing, which then backfired for a reason that nobody could have predicted. It was a whole lot of bitching moaning and whining for no reason. You state that the FO did nothing to upgrade our frontline completely ignoring the fact that we picked up JJ Hickson who looks to be a strong contributer. You're wasting mine and everybody else's time because you have some self servient issue to whine about nothing without waiting to see how it all fits and plays out for a young team LOADED with talent and searching for an identity. Go be a Laker fan. They are win-now which apperently you are seeking out. But our Kings team has to be built, not bought, so if you are not patient enough to watch a small market team rebuild then find a greener pasture and stop wasting our time with this whiny drivel.

I'm going to try and say this as least offensively as I can, since everyone is sniping at one another. But you seem to take offense at any criticism of the Kings.

Last I checked, adding J.J. Hickson isn't really any majorly strong contribution to the Kings. Maybe for his price tag, it is. Besides Fredette, how much more talented are we than last year?

And talent is good, talent is great. But we also need the mental discipline and drive of a championship-caliber team. We've been "rebuilding" for what, 5 years or so?

Point being, you only have so long to "wait and sit to see how it all plays out". When Evans and Cousins contracts are up, if the Kings are still stagnant and haven't been to the playoffs or shown their potential, teams that want them will offer both money and a championship possibility. And rightfully so, they'll leave Sac.

 

[Kingsguy881]

I wonder if the OKC board was littered like this going into Westbrooks second season....