Simmons on DMC and Reke's Trade value...what say you guys?
- Thread starter Geoff
- Start date
Will this mythical "other guard" be able to do all of the things that Tyreke DOES do well on the court? Because that is where the complaints lose all perspective. Tyreke not passing the ball enough on the break or whatever is a flaw. Its a negative. But its a wart on an otherwise sensationally talented package. It can be pointed to and you can say wart! wart! and that's fine. But at the point where you say wart! and then say well we'll fix that wart by giving the ball to..Ramon Sessions! Yay for Sessions! He doesn't have that nasty wart! At that point its passed into idiocy. There are NO perfect players in the league. Zero. Zilch. And in particular there are no perfect 21 yr old in this league, nor have there ever been. Its not about the wart. The wart is just one extra trait in a whole pile of traits. And that whole pile of traits is taller than jsut about anybody else's pile. So you want to take away the ball form the guy with the pile of traits you better have a DAMN good player in midn to take it, you better have thought of fit, team balance, defense, and a whoiel crapload of other things. Because otherwise all you have done is let your fascination with a wart blind you to the larger realities of the situation.
Because Kings fans have a natural tendency to want to tear apart anything that could be moderately successful. This goes back to the good old "C-Webb is washed-up" argument. Its not a matter of being able to have too much of a good thing, it's a matter of not being about to have enough of a good thing without someone complaining about it being too much.
Tyreke has the capacity to learn. PW doesn't have the ability to teach. I agree with those who say that we have a great core of talent for the future, but in order for something to happen, someone has to make it happen, and right now both the development of the team and Tyreke's development is going nowhere.
Last year everyone was talking about how one we get a real post threat and a shot blocker it's going to be all over for the league. No one would dare come near our rim with Dally there to intimidate them, Tyreke was going to reke havoc in the opponents' paint, and teams would have to pick their poison between being abused by Tyreke or by Cousins. Well, that hasn't really happened so far, and now everyone is playing the same tune they were last year, saying that NEXT year we are going to be the new OKC.
Like I said, this won't happen on it's own, and with PW refusing to offer any type of coaching to Tyreke besides giving him the ball and telling him to go one on five, while staging a weak "confrontation" with him to try and make it seem as if he is hodling Tyreke accountable for mistakes as much as the others, it's not going to happen under Westphal's watch. In order for Tyreke to have a chance to really become successful as a leader who actually makes his teammates better, he needs a coach who will be able to teach him how to do that, and our team will not be successful until he learns.
The more time goes by, the more I become on board with the idea of trying to bring back Adelman. I think he would be the perfect coach to get Tyreke to utilize his talents in the most productive manner and also be on the same page with Cousins and the rest of the team. Westphal should stay until the end of the season, but we should have a real coach signed by May.
Last year everyone was talking about how one we get a real post threat and a shot blocker it's going to be all over for the league. No one would dare come near our rim with Dally there to intimidate them, Tyreke was going to reke havoc in the opponents' paint, and teams would have to pick their poison between being abused by Tyreke or by Cousins. Well, that hasn't really happened so far, and now everyone is playing the same tune they were last year, saying that NEXT year we are going to be the new OKC.
Like I said, this won't happen on it's own, and with PW refusing to offer any type of coaching to Tyreke besides giving him the ball and telling him to go one on five, while staging a weak "confrontation" with him to try and make it seem as if he is hodling Tyreke accountable for mistakes as much as the others, it's not going to happen under Westphal's watch. In order for Tyreke to have a chance to really become successful as a leader who actually makes his teammates better, he needs a coach who will be able to teach him how to do that, and our team will not be successful until he learns.
The more time goes by, the more I become on board with the idea of trying to bring back Adelman. I think he would be the perfect coach to get Tyreke to utilize his talents in the most productive manner and also be on the same page with Cousins and the rest of the team. Westphal should stay until the end of the season, but we should have a real coach signed by May.
I expected people to disagree with me. I just don't think Tyreke could have a team build around him, and I don't think Tyreke can be a "role player" on a team built around anyone else.
The way I see it is that Evans is REAL good when he dominates the ball in a 1v1 scenario. Because he is so dominant how could you find players that are also good than can fit around a playstyle like Evans? I see people wanting Granger (including myself), but how would Granger be any good when he doesn't get touches? Vasically I would like to see Evans moved to SG full time and see how well he could play off the ball and go from there.
Has there been any teams recently that have won championships around a ball dominant PG? The PG is the guy that's supposed to set up the offense but if he's sitting there dribbling the ball down to 10 seconds each time down the floor and the rest of the team in those 14 seconds are standing around waiting then only bad things happen imo. I know this isn't the case 100% of the time but I do see a lot of it, and YES BRICK, I still watch every kings game
We just see different things, but I have been known to pick apart Evans game pretty much since we had the college thread a few years back. I watch about 90% of the Memphis games too
The way I see it is that Evans is REAL good when he dominates the ball in a 1v1 scenario. Because he is so dominant how could you find players that are also good than can fit around a playstyle like Evans? I see people wanting Granger (including myself), but how would Granger be any good when he doesn't get touches? Vasically I would like to see Evans moved to SG full time and see how well he could play off the ball and go from there.
Has there been any teams recently that have won championships around a ball dominant PG? The PG is the guy that's supposed to set up the offense but if he's sitting there dribbling the ball down to 10 seconds each time down the floor and the rest of the team in those 14 seconds are standing around waiting then only bad things happen imo. I know this isn't the case 100% of the time but I do see a lot of it, and YES BRICK, I still watch every kings game
We just see different things, but I have been known to pick apart Evans game pretty much since we had the college thread a few years back. I watch about 90% of the Memphis games too
Last edited:
I expected people to disagree with me. I just don't think Tyreke could have a team build around him, and I don't think Tyreke can be a "role player" on a team built around anyone else.
The way I see it is that Evans is REAL good when he dominates the ball in a 1v1 scenario. Because he is so dominant how could you find players that are also good than can fit around a playstyle like Evans? I see people wanting Granger (including myself), but how would Granger be any good when he doesn't get touches? Vasically I would like to see Evans moved to SG full time and see how well he could play off the ball and go from there.
Has there been any teams recently that have won championships around a ball dominant PG? The PG is the guy that's supposed to set up the offense but if he's sitting there dribbling the ball down to 10 seconds each time down the floor and the rest of the team in those 14 seconds are standing around waiting then only bad things happen imo. I know this isn't the case 100% of the time but I do see a lot of it, and YES BRICK, I still watch every kings game
The way I see it is that Evans is REAL good when he dominates the ball in a 1v1 scenario. Because he is so dominant how could you find players that are also good than can fit around a playstyle like Evans? I see people wanting Granger (including myself), but how would Granger be any good when he doesn't get touches? Vasically I would like to see Evans moved to SG full time and see how well he could play off the ball and go from there.
Has there been any teams recently that have won championships around a ball dominant PG? The PG is the guy that's supposed to set up the offense but if he's sitting there dribbling the ball down to 10 seconds each time down the floor and the rest of the team in those 14 seconds are standing around waiting then only bad things happen imo. I know this isn't the case 100% of the time but I do see a lot of it, and YES BRICK, I still watch every kings game
The question then becomes how good can he become at those things that are currently his weaknesses? We all know what his strengths are, but in order to become a franchise-level player, the kind that can win rings, he needs to become very good at running a team offense, controlling the pace (and no, playing at only one pace the entire game is NOT controlling the pace. A good team needs to be able to play a half court offense AND run, AND know when to switch from one to the other) and playing off the ball. His outside shot I'm not really worried about at this point, but until he can prove that he can turn those weaknesses into strengths, then banking on him to lead us to a ring is ridiculous.
Cousins, on the other hand, I think we can bank on, mainly because there are just so few good centers in the NBA, but also because he probably has the highest BBIQ on this team. He may be immature, but the kid is smart, and he's one of the quickest learners I've seen in basketball. No doubt in my mind he will become a superstar. But with Tyreke, he is playing in a league that has an abundance of superstar guards, and he has a lot of climbing up the ladder to do in order to be able to outmatch Kobe, Wade, Deron, CP3, Rondo, Rose, etc.. Just because the "unbiased" Kings fans think he is the next LeBron doesn't get us a ring (and BTW the real LeBron doesn't have one yet either...). He has to make it happen or it just won't happen.
I expected people to disagree with me. I just don't think Tyreke could have a team build around him, and I don't think Tyreke can be a "role player" on a team built around anyone else.
The way I see it is that Evans is REAL good when he dominates the ball in a 1v1 scenario. Because he is so dominant how could you find players that are also good than can fit around a playstyle like Evans? I see people wanting Granger (including myself), but how would Granger be any good when he doesn't get touches? Vasically I would like to see Evans moved to SG full time and see how well he could play off the ball and go from there.
Has there been any teams recently that have won championships around a ball dominant PG? The PG is the guy that's supposed to set up the offense but if he's sitting there dribbling the ball down to 10 seconds each time down the floor and the rest of the team in those 14 seconds are standing around waiting then only bad things happen imo. I know this isn't the case 100% of the time but I do see a lot of it, and YES BRICK, I still watch every kings game We just see different things, but I have been known to pick apart Evans game pretty much since we had the college thread a few years back. I watch about 90% of the Memphis games too
The way I see it is that Evans is REAL good when he dominates the ball in a 1v1 scenario. Because he is so dominant how could you find players that are also good than can fit around a playstyle like Evans? I see people wanting Granger (including myself), but how would Granger be any good when he doesn't get touches? Vasically I would like to see Evans moved to SG full time and see how well he could play off the ball and go from there.
Has there been any teams recently that have won championships around a ball dominant PG? The PG is the guy that's supposed to set up the offense but if he's sitting there dribbling the ball down to 10 seconds each time down the floor and the rest of the team in those 14 seconds are standing around waiting then only bad things happen imo. I know this isn't the case 100% of the time but I do see a lot of it, and YES BRICK, I still watch every kings game
We just see different things, but I have been known to pick apart Evans game pretty much since we had the college thread a few years back. I watch about 90% of the Memphis games too
January:
Evans 39.3min 19.3pts (.450 .313 .750) 4.8reb 6.3ast 2.5stl 0.7blk 2.8TO
Cousins 28.4min 17.2pts (.460 .500 .680) 7.8reb 2.5ast 1.1stl 1.0blk 3.1TO
TEAM PPG: 101.9 (NBA Rank: 10th (just ahead of Miami)
TEAM FG%: .461 (NBA Rank: t13th (with Chicago, Orlando, OKC)
February (obviously messed up by small sample size and by Cousins suspension and Reke's foot):
Evans 41.0min 22.2pts (.450 .313 .750) 5.5reb 5.5ast 0.8stl 0.8blk 4.3TO
Cousins 33.3min 17.4pts (.460 .500 .680) 11.7reb 1.7ast 1.3stl 1.0blk 4.4TO
TEAM PPG: 100.0 (NBA Rank: 11th (between Miami and Orlando)
TEAM FG%: .451 (NBA Rank: 21st (between Houston and Charlotte)
Evans is putting up All Star numbers, Cousins is putting up near All Star numbers, everybody else is scoring and shooting at or above the league average. And yet here we go with these tired old dinosaur speculatiuons about how there isn't room for the two guys to work together...and yet they are already doing it, at age 20/21. And how the offense will never be able to function with Reke at the helm...and yet it has been functioning just fine with Reke at the helm. Unless you would like to give Pat Riley, Stan Van Gundy, Tom Thibodeau etc. calls to tell them how their offenses just aren't elite material.
There are only a couple of possibilities about why this nonsense is continuing to go on, not nationally amongst ignoramuses who haven't been paying attention, but right there, in Sacto, amongst its own fans. Some of them could be not paying attention, some could be completely unrealistic appraisal of how good/how the other teams in the league function; which BTW ties into Sacto fans' long and destructive history of having an inferiority complex the size of Texas; and then there are the agendas -- people who don't want it to be right, who would rather be right themselves than see things actually working when they were sure they wouldn't. Well that's tough. The above are the facts of the situation. We've had a fully functional offense for months now, helmed by a fully functioning ROY last year, and seconded by a fully functioning (when not in foul trouble) rookie this year. People are getting theirs, and we've been competing with teams nobody thought we could compete with.
Kings fans need a reset. Stop whining. Stop looking elsewhere for that greener grass. And start realizing just how promising events taking place right under your own noses are.
Last edited:
Two observations, for those who insist on comparing Tyreke to some of the egomaniacal stat hogs of the late 90s and early part of the past decade, what about Tyreke's personality is it that leads you to believe he will go down that road? And secondly, I think Simmons is not entirely off base in believing that some on the team may not like playing with Evans, but that has as much to do with the team being so young and these players also not having established clear roles for themselves either, more than a few were used to being the greatest thing ever on teams they have played for in the past. That's where vet leadership comes in and we are lacking. Cisco ain't bad but unfortunately he came onto this team once it had already hit the skids and so whatever leadership he is providing it is still tainted by being an under .500 player. Hopefully we can pick up a real leader at the deadline or in the offseason when Tyreke and Cousins are really ready to take off.
There is an interesting discussion to have whether Tyreke's style of play is conducive to winning basketball or not, but I feel like we've already had that discussion. Several times over. The jury is still out. But the ironic thing about this discussion to me, coming as it does from Bill Simmons' column, is that the only tangible reality being referenced here is the current win-loss record of the team. Everything else is heresay and a few misquoted statements over the past two years. And all of us who watch this team regularly know that this is not a losing team right now. We've been playing very well (until the last two games anyway) and Tyreke has been a huge part of that.
I said in the draft order thread that I thought our record could easily be much better right now if we hadn't gotten all the easier matchups during a stretch of the season when the team hadn't yet figured out how to play as a team. They've figured it out now but the competition is much tougher so we're still suffering close losses. The win-loss result is the same, but seeing beyond that, there has been tangible growth. There are signs that this current team is competitive and capable of taking down some very good teams. And if our record were better than it is right now, there'd be very little justification for Simmons branding Tyreke, as others already are, as a losing player. Or more specifically, as a player who doesn't make the players around him better. We all know Simmons does not watch Kings basketball. Like every other NBA fan around the country he just reads the box scores and the headlines.
That's all this is about. A bunch of stupid numbers which indicate very little. The stuff about the selfish gene or whatever isn't even worth debating.
I said in the draft order thread that I thought our record could easily be much better right now if we hadn't gotten all the easier matchups during a stretch of the season when the team hadn't yet figured out how to play as a team. They've figured it out now but the competition is much tougher so we're still suffering close losses. The win-loss result is the same, but seeing beyond that, there has been tangible growth. There are signs that this current team is competitive and capable of taking down some very good teams. And if our record were better than it is right now, there'd be very little justification for Simmons branding Tyreke, as others already are, as a losing player. Or more specifically, as a player who doesn't make the players around him better. We all know Simmons does not watch Kings basketball. Like every other NBA fan around the country he just reads the box scores and the headlines.
That's all this is about. A bunch of stupid numbers which indicate very little. The stuff about the selfish gene or whatever isn't even worth debating.
Ughh the team is just young and frankly speaking not filled with enough experienced, solid players that you can rely on. We're talented sure, as in we've got tonnes of upside, but save for maybe Beno and Tyreke you can't really depend on guys to give you certain numbers without forcing the issue. Even Beno has been playing badly the last few weeks and Tyreke sometimes gets his stats at the expense of team play. I don't want to talk about the whole team play thing because I don't think you should speculate about it. For all we know if Tyreke wasn't just ISO-ing the whole way we may have just put ourselves out of the game, or maybe if he shared the ball more guys would play better and we'd have won more games. Either way there's no way you can predict it/find out and the only thing that matters is the W-L result.
Honestly, if I was Steve Nash, I would hesitate passing the ball as much as well. Pick and roll, OH LOOK JASON THOMPSON IS OPEN - throws a nice bounce pass. Which JT then proceeds to fumble and lose out of bounds/not finish. So I can understand why Tyreke may be a bit selfish at times, especially when he's got it going, and so I'm going to withhold my judgement until we get some vets and a better team overall.
In my opinion, the biggest problem is not so much Westphal nor the lack of talent on the team/lowest payroll blablabla, but the combination of the two. I think Westphal can be a decent coach, but he's not a guy who gets a whole lot more out of your players than they would have otherwise, i.e. there is no system that really makes use of each player's limited strengths such that the value of each player is magnified. Our players are talented, but because of the way that they run their offense you don't end up seeing a team offense. Instead you see good penetration by Tyreke, nice post move by Cousins, Omri with a 3, Donte with an alleyoop, JT putting back shots. But they are all individual plays instead of smaller components of an overall system. Evidence - when one guy is doing something, the others aren't.
Don't know if that made sense ... but yeah that's my opinion. Problem isn't Reke/DMC/Beno/Westphal individually. Problem is that they're all together.
Honestly, if I was Steve Nash, I would hesitate passing the ball as much as well. Pick and roll, OH LOOK JASON THOMPSON IS OPEN - throws a nice bounce pass. Which JT then proceeds to fumble and lose out of bounds/not finish. So I can understand why Tyreke may be a bit selfish at times, especially when he's got it going, and so I'm going to withhold my judgement until we get some vets and a better team overall.
In my opinion, the biggest problem is not so much Westphal nor the lack of talent on the team/lowest payroll blablabla, but the combination of the two. I think Westphal can be a decent coach, but he's not a guy who gets a whole lot more out of your players than they would have otherwise, i.e. there is no system that really makes use of each player's limited strengths such that the value of each player is magnified. Our players are talented, but because of the way that they run their offense you don't end up seeing a team offense. Instead you see good penetration by Tyreke, nice post move by Cousins, Omri with a 3, Donte with an alleyoop, JT putting back shots. But they are all individual plays instead of smaller components of an overall system. Evidence - when one guy is doing something, the others aren't.
Don't know if that made sense ... but yeah that's my opinion. Problem isn't Reke/DMC/Beno/Westphal individually. Problem is that they're all together.
Actually, Kings fans are so starved of real legacy and talent that they are quick to annoint anyone sniffing 20 points and whatever other stats you guys wanna throw out as an all star and savant of our franchise. Kevin Martin? You guys know who you are. Playoffs this season? Justin Williams = beast? Jesus Christ. From reading a good chunk of this board it sounds like Kings fans live in their own little bubble and know nothing of the NBA landscape as a whole. BEAT LA BEAT LA. LA couldn't care less about the Kings. Kings fans see it as David and Goliath, but Goliath (and reality) see it as Goliath and a fly buzzing around.
The other side is just pushing back against these other crazies.
The other side is just pushing back against these other crazies.
You are correct but after trying to sound understanding of the sitaution of being the fan of a team that has sucked far more often than being good, you call some its fans crazies. I have been on several other team's boards and there are crazies everywhere. How the craziness is expressed depends on the team they are following. Listening to Lakers fans whine and consider suicide when their team is near a 50/50 seaons is crazy to me. It's absurd.
To bring statistics into what I say, over decades, a team should win 50%. That's average. All things being equal (and they aren't) over time, a team should average a 50/50 season. That is statistics and makes sense as mathematically it is true.
In Sacramento, hitting 50% is good news although not spectacular. Right now winning 50% would be wonderful. On the other hand there is the brand of craziness that looks at a 50/50 season as the end of the world. Is that rational? We are all fans but we react in different ways depending on the team we folllow. Crazy fans are everywhere and saying that the optimistic fans here are a bunch of crazies is uncalled for.
To bring statistics into what I say, over decades, a team should win 50%. That's average. All things being equal (and they aren't) over time, a team should average a 50/50 season. That is statistics and makes sense as mathematically it is true.
In Sacramento, hitting 50% is good news although not spectacular. Right now winning 50% would be wonderful. On the other hand there is the brand of craziness that looks at a 50/50 season as the end of the world. Is that rational? We are all fans but we react in different ways depending on the team we folllow. Crazy fans are everywhere and saying that the optimistic fans here are a bunch of crazies is uncalled for.
That's a silly statement that lives on mainly because nobody challenges its myopia. In a rebuilding season maybe the very LAST thing that matters is W/Ls. Its not how you judge progress or potential until you have your ducks in a row. Now I actually thinnk we have enough ducks lining up at this point that if Reke is healthy it has come time to break through and start winning a few more down the stretch. But winning a few more or losing a few more this season doesn't mean much of anything. It didn't the year before OKC got good. It didn't the year before Boston pulled off its instant turnaround strategy. It doesn't for us.
This season is about the intangible stuff that pepole who know basketball should be able to see and enjoy. Who's got talent. How does everything fit. Who's not developing and will have to be replaced. Winning is only the "only thing that matters" when winning is the primary goal of your team at the moment. When you are rebuilding, it is not. We are trying to win next year, 3 years from now, 5 years from now, not this year. And we are "winning" our rebuild rather wildly. We have acquired young star talents and all the capspace in the world to supplement them. The game is not over yet, but we are out to a big lead.
This season is about the intangible stuff that pepole who know basketball should be able to see and enjoy. Who's got talent. How does everything fit. Who's not developing and will have to be replaced. Winning is only the "only thing that matters" when winning is the primary goal of your team at the moment. When you are rebuilding, it is not. We are trying to win next year, 3 years from now, 5 years from now, not this year. And we are "winning" our rebuild rather wildly. We have acquired young star talents and all the capspace in the world to supplement them. The game is not over yet, but we are out to a big lead.
The "other side" is just showing a level of stubborn basketball obliviousness that while not surprising, can get annoying.
3-4 years ago I was being accused by many of the same people of being a negative nancy because I did not believe our #8 seed pushes and Artest/Martin/Bibby type teams had any potential or future. I didn't believe Martin or Bibby was an All Star, and after a little pause because of the obvious talent, concluded that Artest was too unstable to get anything done with. I wasn't amused by stubby defenseless Shareef/Miller/Mikki type frontcourts. Now I was right on basically all counts, but we'll get to that in a minute. The key point here is that there is not and never has been anything homer about my basketball anlaysis. When we were at the top of the league I said so and beat mercilessly on the whiny fans and haters constantly tearing at the edge of a truly great team. When we headed south I saw it coming and said so, and while I tried to be gentler with the homers than the haters, I wasn't about to back off honesty when it came to what should have been our obviously flawed approach to the rebuild.
And now we come to today, and the worm has turned once again. And haters, I am calling you out again. Some of you are just blind as bats. Some of you are just so accustomed to thinking of and calling the Kings losers that you can't shake the habit. Some of you don't watch the games and just see the boxscores. As with the last generation of haters, some of you got stirred up by the Poisonous snake over at the Bee with yet another player fetish gone wrong -- this one (Rubio) ironically never even reaching the Kings. Whatever the root causes a lot of you are again missing what is right in front of you. You can't see it because of agendas, or cheap winning is everything mottos, or letting playing style preferences guide your acumen, or whatever. And I'm calling it out. And those of you who are just honestly confused and missing what is going on should ponder that. Because I have no sort of homer history, because I've been right a hell of a lot. And because I am not remotely alone and am joined by many of the most balanced observers in the Kingdom --people who have called a spade a spade good or bad -- in seeing the prmise here. Some of you can't be salvaged -- you have actually crossed over to WANTING the team to fail, which makes you more akin to a fan of a different team than a fan of the Kings. But those of you who are still fans, and who would actually like the things the homers are saying to be true, but just can't/won't beleive them, need to take a another hard look. Things are going on underneath the W/L surface with this team, and they are things to be legitimately excited about.
3-4 years ago I was being accused by many of the same people of being a negative nancy because I did not believe our #8 seed pushes and Artest/Martin/Bibby type teams had any potential or future. I didn't believe Martin or Bibby was an All Star, and after a little pause because of the obvious talent, concluded that Artest was too unstable to get anything done with. I wasn't amused by stubby defenseless Shareef/Miller/Mikki type frontcourts. Now I was right on basically all counts, but we'll get to that in a minute. The key point here is that there is not and never has been anything homer about my basketball anlaysis. When we were at the top of the league I said so and beat mercilessly on the whiny fans and haters constantly tearing at the edge of a truly great team. When we headed south I saw it coming and said so, and while I tried to be gentler with the homers than the haters, I wasn't about to back off honesty when it came to what should have been our obviously flawed approach to the rebuild.
And now we come to today, and the worm has turned once again. And haters, I am calling you out again. Some of you are just blind as bats. Some of you are just so accustomed to thinking of and calling the Kings losers that you can't shake the habit. Some of you don't watch the games and just see the boxscores. As with the last generation of haters, some of you got stirred up by the Poisonous snake over at the Bee with yet another player fetish gone wrong -- this one (Rubio) ironically never even reaching the Kings. Whatever the root causes a lot of you are again missing what is right in front of you. You can't see it because of agendas, or cheap winning is everything mottos, or letting playing style preferences guide your acumen, or whatever. And I'm calling it out. And those of you who are just honestly confused and missing what is going on should ponder that. Because I have no sort of homer history, because I've been right a hell of a lot. And because I am not remotely alone and am joined by many of the most balanced observers in the Kingdom --people who have called a spade a spade good or bad -- in seeing the prmise here. Some of you can't be salvaged -- you have actually crossed over to WANTING the team to fail, which makes you more akin to a fan of a different team than a fan of the Kings. But those of you who are still fans, and who would actually like the things the homers are saying to be true, but just can't/won't beleive them, need to take a another hard look. Things are going on underneath the W/L surface with this team, and they are things to be legitimately excited about.
Last edited:
