SI.com: Too little, too late

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/kelly_dwyer/03/14/champs.chumps/index.html

Too little, too late

Poor start will ultimately doom Kings' playoff push

By Kelly Dwyer


Champs

• The Kings have been an interesting case all season long, mainly because they're a talented and potentially pleasing bunch to watch, and partially because their underachieving November, December and January made them look right silly. Yes, coach Rick Adelman was given plenty of new parts and asked to create cohesion on the fly, but he's done it before, and the players he was given were right for his system. And his "system," if executed properly, doesn't take a genius to understand: Mike Bibby nails shots, Brad Miller sets screens and nails shots, Shareef Abdur-Rahim works the low block and nails shots and Bonzi Wells garners garbage points and nails shots.


The late-January trade that sent Peja Stojakovic (doesn't shave, nails shots) to Indiana for Ron Artest (pushes people, nails shots) seemed to act as the panacea that sent this team spiraling back toward respectability, but it shouldn't have taken such a dramatic maneuver. Adelman should have had this crew on its best behavior by Thanksgiving at the latest. Nobody thought this was a 60-win team, mind you, but certainly a strong enough group to return to the playoffs without a Hail Mary deal.


Sacramento's a game over .500 now, and it would be in the playoffs if the season ended sometime this afternoon. After dropping their first two games with Ron-Ron on the payroll, the Kings have won 14 of 19 as Miller has regained his clutch touch, Artest has befuddled defenders with oddly timed post-ups and Kevin Martin has emerged as a pleasant surprise to anyone who may have overlooked his contributions last year.


Now for the tough part. Although they've had their moments against the West's top four seeds (compiling a 5-5 record against Dallas, Phoenix, Denver and San Antonio), the Kings are not going to be able to do much beyond making a competitive go against those relative powerhouses.


Somehow, that seems beneath this veteran roster. Even though the return to form has been pleasant to watch, for the Kings, 2006-07 can't get here fast enough.
 
yeah well kelly your opinions are like *** holes everybody has one. more to the point you suck and the Kings don't
 
16 teams are not in the playoffs right now. Why not write an article on those teams. Or if you want to say a team is not going to go far in the playoffs. Don't talk about the 8th seed because that is every year. Instead talk about teams like Denver that because of the new alignment system are lucky enough to get the 3rd seed instead of being in one of the bottom 3 seeds.
 
And Denver was supposed to be a top team this season after going crazy since Karl came in late January last year. I didn't think it'd happen because of injuries.
 
Wow Kelly.......your first SI article? Cute. Really. You even spelled all the words right. Good for you.



Idiot.
 
Regardless of the gender of the writer, the 'article' is just a space filler.

There is no reasoning or supportive data to back up the claim that the Kings wont progress.

I mustn't let myself get stressed by reading such drivel.

The reality, as anyone with half a brain could deduce, is that post the Peja / Artest trade our Kings are a better unit. They are playing better basketball, there seems to be better chemistry on court, we are giving up less points per game and winning more.

The ride continues........

GO KINGS
 
Go ahead and write a little message to him, he responded very quickly to me, about 10-15mins!


hi Meghan,

not sure what you're getting at here, but I am sending
my stock reply: I DO think the Kings are making the
playoffs, and I don't write my own headlines. Cheers,

KD

---


Submitted by Meghan (NerdieMeghan@gmail.com)

Hometown
Sacramento

Question
Why don't you write an article about someone NOT in
the playoffs, if you are just going to write teams off
like this about the Sacramento Kings.
 
I thought it was more funny than insightful analysis. That's pretty sad, considering it is supposed to be the latter and not the former.
 
Well done Meghan.

His article reads negatively from start to finish, so if his editor came up with the title to the piece it doesnt surprise me that it doesnt have an optimistic ring to it!

It would have been nice if he had tried to justify his slant to you. but of course, his few paragraghs are without foundation so thats not such an easy task. (It would probably take him longer to think of a few remarks that could be substantiated as to why he thinks the Kings will fail than it took for him to knock out the whole article!)

His suggestion to you that he believes the Kings will make the playoffs doesnt redeem him. His piece is only fit for loo paper.
 
I think it's just a different take on the Kings' resurgence than all the other media outlets have been taking of late (which has been pretty much a lovefest, really). The point seems to be, to me at least, that while it's great the Kings are playing well again, he thinks they should have been playing better before. Of course, his point may be misguided considering that the chemistry change can't be overlooked, but one negative piece among the slew of recent positive ones isn't going to ruin my day.
 
Warhawk said:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/kelly_dwyer/03/14/champs.chumps/index.html


Now for the tough part. Although they've had their moments against the West's top four seeds (compiling a 5-5 record against Dallas, Phoenix, Denver and San Antonio), the Kings are not going to be able to do much beyond making a competitive go against those relative powerhouses.

Y'know, all this guy said was that the Kings made a good trade, they played well to end the season, but because of a poor start they wouldn't be able to move past the first round (though they would compete). And that's exactly what happened.
 
Back
Top