Rebuilding
- Thread starter steelevt
- Start date
In reply to:
I'm dealing with one fact: had Bibby not been traded for expirings, the payroll budget (and accompanying taxes) would have been an absolute fiasco. That's not something which is debatable, all one has to do is to look at the numbers.
To say that it was the beginning of a rebuild isn't implausible, but you're attributing a motive to management which has, as yet, nothing concrete to support it. We definitely weren't rebuilding last summer, Moore's contract looked like a bandaid intended to last until 2010-11. Then the trade deadline approached, and Petrie had to unload someone, or the Maloofs were going to be paying tax on a lottery team, a situation which might jeopardize the job security of even someone like Geoff. We gained one youngish player, whose potential is uncertain, but lost two others who were arguably better matches for our team. Did they waive a useless oldster and try to get one of those players back? There was no sign that they did.
Maybe it's the start of a rebuild, or maybe not. Everyone's free to jump to whatever conclusions they want, whenever they want, I'm just saying that I'm holding out for some sort of evidence to confirm that it's started. As much as I'd love to be able to attribute non-cost cutting motives to the Bibby trade, I'm going to expect to see some changes to reality before I can do that. Wishfully thinking that management is now on the same page as me isn't enough, anymore. I've been doing that for about 4 years now.
and
I'm dealing with one fact: had Bibby not been traded for expirings, the payroll budget (and accompanying taxes) would have been an absolute fiasco. That's not something which is debatable, all one has to do is to look at the numbers.
To say that it was the beginning of a rebuild isn't implausible, but you're attributing a motive to management which has, as yet, nothing concrete to support it. We definitely weren't rebuilding last summer, Moore's contract looked like a bandaid intended to last until 2010-11. Then the trade deadline approached, and Petrie had to unload someone, or the Maloofs were going to be paying tax on a lottery team, a situation which might jeopardize the job security of even someone like Geoff. We gained one youngish player, whose potential is uncertain, but lost two others who were arguably better matches for our team. Did they waive a useless oldster and try to get one of those players back? There was no sign that they did.
Maybe it's the start of a rebuild, or maybe not. Everyone's free to jump to whatever conclusions they want, whenever they want, I'm just saying that I'm holding out for some sort of evidence to confirm that it's started. As much as I'd love to be able to attribute non-cost cutting motives to the Bibby trade, I'm going to expect to see some changes to reality before I can do that. Wishfully thinking that management is now on the same page as me isn't enough, anymore. I've been doing that for about 4 years now.
Yeah I remember saying how SAR was a bad signing and that he wasn't going to be any more effective than Kenny and some crazy SAR lovers tried to tell me I was on drugs and SAR would be even better than C-Webb or some garbage like that.
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
actions speak louder than words. if the maloofs were seriously looking at rebuilding they would've yanked reggie to the side and demanded he play the younger players or requested geoff make the necessary moves to rebuild. none of which really happened.
AyeCarly
G-League
As was pointed out by someone else on the board, Billy Owens a #3 lotto pick was parlayed into the Rock, who in turn was parlayed into Webb.
(3rd)Billy Owens >>> (5th)Rock + (9th)Thorpe >>> (1st) C-Webb
So technically it did take a high pick (Owens) to get to that championship contending level. If it can be done without a high draft pick it would take some amazing low draft picks which Petrie has a history of making (KMart, Peja, Hedo and Hawes IMO looks to have a brighter future than bigs taken prior to him s.a. Noah, Wright, Jianlan).
AyeCarly
G-League
We've all seen glimpses of what the team can do without Ron. I'd like for Petrie to trade him for the best possible pieces we can get. That's what I think Petrie is waiting for. It's like stock, you don't panic and sell if it's value falls, unless you know it's peaked, rather hold onto it till you can get the best return. Ron's value probably has reached its peak and we know it has fallen, but I think it is on the rise again. Teams contending (Dallas, Phoenix, etc...) could really use a guy like Ron. If Ron is traded or if let go at the end of the year, then we'll be certain the team is rebuilding, cause you only get rid of your best player when you are rebuilding, i.e. Memphis, Minnesota.
You're acting as though the Bibby trade was years ago. It wasn't. And you're acting as though the Maloofs actually tell their coaches what to do on a daily basis. They don't.
I'm willing to wait and see what happens now that they've been upfront about using the "R" word AND have stated publicly their support for and trust in Geoff Petrie. I always try and see the glass half-full, though, because I don't understand the fun in always being depressed.
I think, BTW, they have "yanked Reggie to the side" and pretty much made it clear to him that it's now about team development and rebuilding. It was his first year. He made mistakes, the Maloofs made mistakes. Bottom line, however, is he's no longer a rookie coach. He'll be held to a higher standard this coming season and won't be allowed the luxury of some of his rookie mistakes. Reggie is not a stupid man. I'm reasonably sure he knows he should have done some things differently and, following that, I'm almost positive he'll make the necessary adjustments.
But I do understand those of you who are fed up with waiting. I just don't see the benefit in continuing to flagellate the deceased equine over it.
tyrant
Starter
RIP miyagi
G-League
whats sad is that our stay at the top was extremely brief. we went from "building" for more than a decade, then up and coming playoff team for 2-3 years, then at the top for 2 years, and now we are rebuliding. oh well, at least this rebuilding team is really competitive unlike a lot of the others.
SacKings7
Starter
While its better for the fans, being competitive while rebuilding is actually hurting us. Instead of having a top 5 draft pick, we have to settle for 10th or worse
quick dog
Starter
Admittedly, I can finally appreciate the possible "need" to tank to secure an excellent NBA lottery pick, but I enjoyed this year more than any of the previous three years.
I must be the only guy around that really likes Reggie. Then again, we came from the same "hood", me a decade earlier.
I must be the only guy around that really likes Reggie. Then again, we came from the same "hood", me a decade earlier.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
What about the cervesa. Its getting warm.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Coangelo, if thats how his name is spelled, said at the pre-draft camp that there will be players in this draft that are taken in the second round that will be better than some of the players taken in the top ten. Especially with the bigs.. So choose wisely.
tyrant
Starter
we havent had any luck with players we've drafted since the early 2000's. im hoping that can change. i feel we need a trade more than anything
HighFlyingMonkey
Starter
That is a huge stretch IMO. By that same logic, one could say THE reason we acquired Artest because he was traded for Peja who we got in the draft. Almost every single trade made can be justified that way. I think the best you can do is to have valuable assets, and get lucky with the right trade. The Celtics had a ton of assets which landed them KG and Allen. It takes a combination of getting lucky via the draft, FA and trades to build a great team.
The Suns got their franchise player via a lucky Free Agent signing (Nash)
The Lakers got theirs with a lucky draft pick who only wanted to come to LA (Kobe) and a pulled a trade when the stars aligned (Gasol)
The Celtics got theirs by pulling off trades when the stars were aligned (KG/Allen) and by an excellent draft pick (Pierce)
The Rockets got theirs by pulling off a trade when the stars were aligned (Tmac) and striking gold in the lottery (Yao)
The Jazz got theirs by trading up in the lottery to grab a guy who they were extremely lucky wasn't selected earlier (Deron), and by a pure chance FA signing (Boozer).
My point is, getting lucky is absolutely paramount to building a contender. Sure, you can point to the Cavs and the Hornets who got a gamechanging franchise player by sucking and getting in the lottery. But CP3 and Lebron aren't in every draft. And you don't know whether that player is going to be selected first, second, third, fifth, ninth, or wherever.
Take this draft for example; the only player with that kind of potential is really Derrick Rose. And the Bulls are likely to select him, who were originally slotted to pick 9th, but got lucky with a 1% chance of landing the first pick.
I think the best a team can do is to acquire as many valuable assets as possible and get under the salary cap. Then, hopefully, make a move when the timing is right.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
That is not a huge stretch, it is a direct progression. And the key to the direct progression is talent, or perceived talent. A high pick is so incredibly valuable it can net you, either directly, or via trade, a level of talent that you otherwise can almost NEVER acquire.
We have had two great franchise leading players, both were the direct result of a single high draft pick. If we are not drafting #3 that year, but #10 or #12, there is no way on God's green earth that any team is going to trade us a player of Mitch Richmond's caliber for a late lottery pick. If we do not have a player of Mitch Richmond's caliber, there is no way on God's green earth that any team is going to trade us a player of Chris Webber's caliber. And of course if we do not have a player of Chris Webber's caliber...there is every way that every team in the league would still have been happy to dupe us into Kenny Thomas.
High draft picks in the NBA might very well be THE single most important asset you will ever acquire. Certainly in a rebuild. People fight it and fight it and fight it, but they are the lifeblood of the league. In every system there are always keys and weaknesses to exploit. In the system of the NBA, those picks are the key.
Last edited:
HighFlyingMonkey
Starter
Well, according to that logic, almost every trade made in the NBA could be somehow tied to high draft picks.
And yes, high draft picks are valuable. But they aren't the ONLY assets that get traded around. The key is to have assets, where draft picks are only one of the kind. Expiring contracts are also assets. Proven talent is also assets.
tyrant
Starter
I think that is exactly his point. At the moment we have limited assets. We have no big expirings, limited talented vets, no cap space, and a middling pick. This means that we really can't trade up for a better pick, we can't trade a pick for a talented vet, and we can't trade expirings for a talented vet.
If the key is to have assets, and we don't have many, what's the best way to get more??? By doing poorly and getting a better draft choice! You can say signing a talented vet is a good way to do it, but what vet is going to come to a small market bad team? The basic truth is to get more assets we need to do badly next year to get a chance at a top level draft choice.
FakeInjury
Bench
I think the more draft picks we get the better. I still can't believe K9 Thomas is just sitting on his chair all summer, he could be in the mix, and he is a game changer. If he boosts his trade value, it could lead to a game-breaker trade, mid next season. I.E. Ron and K9 for Anthony Parker and Jorge Garbahosa and Jamario Moon + filler and one 2nd round picks.
tyrant
Starter
first of all, i have no idea of who these people are. next thing, if k9 got off the bench he would lower his trade value instead of increasing it. yes, he's that horrible. ron artest is the best we have. and i think he should stay. he's a commodity. we have kevin martin (asset) we have brad miller (asset). get rid of both.
Last edited:
tyrant
Starter
i was a pretty big kevin martin fan when he began in the league. but he's not as good as i thought he would be. with him as our best player we'd probably always come short of making the playoffs. he's talented, but with another piece he could be a more valuable asset to build with.
JerN820
Bench
Not sure if this is a good subject for my first post, but it never hurts to try and bring in a young proven talent in a trade while using the draft to rebuild. This is what the franchise needs. K Mart is a good young talent to build around. As we all know, one way or another they need to do something about the PG and PF positions. Also looks like Ron isnt going anywhere unless we somehow sign and trade him.
SacKings7
Starter
We don't need to sign him. It appears he isn't opting out, so he would be under contract. Not sure if there's a waiting period to trade him after he decides not to opt out..
JerN820
Bench
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Tyrant, I'm a little confused. In one post you said that we should trade both Miller and K Mart, and then in a later post you said he would be piece of the puzzle to build with. I would agree that at this point in time, K Mart is not a franchise player, but is a very good support player. However, he has improved each year, and we don't know how much more improvement is possible. He may be what he is, or he may raise it to another level. Either way, he's valuable.
I realize that our standards have been raised since the early days of this franchise here, but we also have to keep it real. Patience is difficult when your used to winning. But experience in my life has taught me that emotion based decisions, combined with impatience, usually lead to bad decisions.
I also understand that some of you have no faith in Petrie or the Maloff's. Its basicly a subjective opinion, and therefore up for argument. One that I'm afraid is a waste of time, and therefore won't get into.
We have three young assets. Hawes, Martin, and Cisco. All three could be starters or potential starters. Our other assets are Artest, Salmons and Miller. All three could be starters or potential starters. Their value is another of those subjective arguments. In reality, their value is what someone is willing to pay for them.. After that we have Douby, Williams, Moore, the incapable and the unable in KT and SAR..
So when one steps back and takes a look. We have three building blocks for the future. If you want to throw in Douby and Artest, we have five. Throw in Salmons and you have six. Structure wise, I would say were a little fragile at this point, so being careful to make the right move is important. I'm not suggesting that we remain stagnant, but that any move we make have serious thought behind it.
On another subject, how many high draft picks did the Lakers give up to get Gasol??? Sometimes you just have to be in the right place and be lucky..
I realize that our standards have been raised since the early days of this franchise here, but we also have to keep it real. Patience is difficult when your used to winning. But experience in my life has taught me that emotion based decisions, combined with impatience, usually lead to bad decisions.
I also understand that some of you have no faith in Petrie or the Maloff's. Its basicly a subjective opinion, and therefore up for argument. One that I'm afraid is a waste of time, and therefore won't get into.
We have three young assets. Hawes, Martin, and Cisco. All three could be starters or potential starters. Our other assets are Artest, Salmons and Miller. All three could be starters or potential starters. Their value is another of those subjective arguments. In reality, their value is what someone is willing to pay for them.. After that we have Douby, Williams, Moore, the incapable and the unable in KT and SAR..
So when one steps back and takes a look. We have three building blocks for the future. If you want to throw in Douby and Artest, we have five. Throw in Salmons and you have six. Structure wise, I would say were a little fragile at this point, so being careful to make the right move is important. I'm not suggesting that we remain stagnant, but that any move we make have serious thought behind it.
On another subject, how many high draft picks did the Lakers give up to get Gasol??? Sometimes you just have to be in the right place and be lucky..
Oh good grief. Can you be any more obvious in your attempt to just stir things up? Martin isn't as good as you thought he would be????? I'm calling shenanigans. Show a link to a post where you specifically talk about how good Kevin is going to be.
This is just silly.
tyrant
Starter
bajaden, kevin martin has gotten better every year. however, there are things about his game that doesnt give us confidence that he can put the team on his back. the kings should consider shopping martin because we would get more in return. to me, that is primary option #1. now, martin can be a very valuable piece on a contending team, but the kings are not a contending team. there is no way possible that we will get a franchise player without letting go of artest or martin. one of them is going. a good draft pick doesnt exist even in our dreams. the kings have had 0 luck from the draft since the beginning of time. we got to where we were in '02-'03 through trades and intelligent moves. jim jackson, keon for example. how do we get back to contending status? trade our best player for another asset and rely on some expiring contracts.
in a nutshell
option #1 trade martin
option #2 trade artest/miller/etc, bring in some more expirings or someone thats gona be the real face of this franchise. because we're not going anywhere if martin is the best player on the team.
in a nutshell
option #1 trade martin
option #2 trade artest/miller/etc, bring in some more expirings or someone thats gona be the real face of this franchise. because we're not going anywhere if martin is the best player on the team.
