The direction of the Carter/Randolph signings

pdxKingsFan

Well-Known Member
#62
Not being a wise ass but what do you actually consider tanking? Right now Vegas has got them as the worst team in the West

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/19590072/nba-odds-all-30-nba-teams-win-2017-18-nba-title
I know this wasn't directed at me but tanking is what Philly did (for years), deliberately putting horrible product on the court to stock draft picks. It's what many people advocated the Kings do (which they didn't) for years which was when it was clear the team was going nowhere to just bench every talented player and lose. It's pretty clear they are rebuilding and will struggle big this season. But they are trying to build through the core they have established and brought in some guys they hope will grow that core. I'd argue we've committed to a rebuild for the first time since we lost Webber, but we're trying to do so without allowing for a "losing is ok" culture.
 

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
Contributor
#63
I know this wasn't directed at me but tanking is what Philly did (for years), deliberately putting horrible product on the court to stock draft picks. It's what many people advocated the Kings do (which they didn't) for years which was when it was clear the team was going nowhere to just bench every talented player and lose. It's pretty clear they are rebuilding and will struggle big this season. But they are trying to build through the core they have established and brought in some guys they hope will grow that core. I'd argue we've committed to a rebuild for the first time since we lost Webber, but we're trying to do so without allowing for a "losing is ok" culture.
And with so many 1-3 year players in the NBA, they did it in a much shorter time frame than those that were tanking one pick a year. Now it is time to see what we have and what we may still need to get in the coming years.
 
#64
I know this wasn't directed at me but tanking is what Philly did (for years), deliberately putting horrible product on the court to stock draft picks. It's what many people advocated the Kings do (which they didn't) for years which was when it was clear the team was going nowhere to just bench every talented player and lose. It's pretty clear they are rebuilding and will struggle big this season. But they are trying to build through the core they have established and brought in some guys they hope will grow that core. I'd argue we've committed to a rebuild for the first time since we lost Webber, but we're trying to do so without allowing for a "losing is ok" culture.
I appreciate your view but see it differently. Aren't the Kings deliberately putting out a bad team too? I don't think the front office thinks this team is a contender. Rebuilds don't happen overnight, I expect the Kings to be bad for the foreseeable future and get top picks (excluding the 2019 pick). I think the Kings rebuild will be similar to Philly's, being one of the worst teams in the league for multiple years and having the opportunity to turn this thing around by getting potential franchise players at the top of the draft.
 

gunks

Well-Known Member
#65
I think we're gonna try to be good by 2019.

It'll suck to pull a Nets and lose a top pick. Without incentive to tank, I doubt Vlade will keep the team this young after next offseason.

We're gonna have a try out year, get another high draft pick, and then load up on vets next summer.

We may not be a playoff team in '19, but we'll be heading in the right direction, and will hopefully be losing a mid/late lotto pick, as opposed to a top 10.
 

jcassio

Well-Known Member
#66
Not being a wise ass but what do you actually consider tanking? Right now Vegas has got them as the worst team in the West

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/19590072/nba-odds-all-30-nba-teams-win-2017-18-nba-title
My opinion: Always playing hard (to win), playing younger players to develop them and/or to see what you got to work with in the future, and all the while improving, are acceptable ways of losing without intentionally tanking to improve your draft position. As long as you're building for the future, and as long as that future isn't so far off that you can't even see it, I'm OK with it. And I believe most Kings fans are, too.
If you feel it necessary to suggest that what I previously described could be considered a version of tanking, I would say that I understand that tanking can have its gray areas. But I don't feel that what I just described is "tanking."
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Contributor
#67
I think we'll struggle and compete for a top 3 pick this year. A lot of people think some of these moves have put us back into that 8th worst team in the league mode, but 2/3rds of our roster are on their rookie deals and those guys are expected to contribute.

I think what people don't get is that cleaning house and bringing in a few proven winners and guys on the same page as the coach changes so much about how we are perceived around the league, by the refs, by other players and their agents. We've already seen an entire shift, just had one of our assistants in the FO poached from under us by a huge market team, when has that happened?!? I expect this will translate in ways we won't see right away or acknowledge.
Thank you.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Contributor
#68
I appreciate your view but see it differently. Aren't the Kings deliberately putting out a bad team too? I don't think the front office thinks this team is a contender. Rebuilds don't happen overnight, I expect the Kings to be bad for the foreseeable future and get top picks (excluding the 2019 pick). I think the Kings rebuild will be similar to Philly's, being one of the worst teams in the league for multiple years and having the opportunity to turn this thing around by getting potential franchise players at the top of the draft.
Deliberately putting out a bad team? Nope. They're rebuilding from the ground up and IMHO they're FINALLY doing it the right way. I don't think there are many fans around here who expect miracles. What we do expect, however, is to see the front office, the coach and the players ALL on the same page for a change. We don't (at least I don't) expect a lot of wins but I do expect and pretty much demand heart, hustle, energy, effort, focus, determination AND NO FREAKING DRAMA!
 

pshn80

Well-Known Member
#69
At the price they paid, I don't like those signings. Going for Vets is a win-now move, no matter how you slice it, and the Kings are not at that stage of the game.. They should've been in full 'asset acquisition mode'...

Why 2 years for Zach Randolph? Why?!?!

Now, there was no Harrison Barnes to be had, but these moves remind me of Utah paying Joe Johnson and Boris Diaw about $20MM last summer instead of going after Harrison Barnes, who would've been way better last year than those 2, he'd have gotten tons of starts with their injury riddled season, and of course moving forward,he'd have covered their ass for Hayward walking.................. I hope there isn't an overlooked move like which was available that comes back to look like a no-brainer in just a few months time..


You pay players to play not to mentor IMO, thats what the rest of the staff gets paid for... Even thru the lens of being mentors, those 2 aren't going to be as helpful as George Hill, who you will see talking non-stop when he's on the bench...


I think they should've gone for assets with potential. Potential to improve and potential to be real trade-assets down the line or even at this upcoming trade deadline. Or at least 1 year rentals, to sacrifice some flexibility for Zach Randolph seems crazy to me and frankly favoritism.

The Kings were in a position to bid on RFA's and run the price up on teams, the real head-scratcher to me is why Zach Randolph when JaMychal Green is clearly much better at this stage and has the potential to play at a high level for years.

Kentavious Caldwell Pope would've been great here too as far as I'm concerned, I don't care if they have Buddy, the Kings aren't in a position to be that kind of picky/choosey, IMO.
Don't happen to agree with you but there is room for both of us. And neither of us is on the scene and knowing what they want to accomplish. I feel very comfortable with Vlade in charge.
 

pdxKingsFan

Well-Known Member
#70
I appreciate your view but see it differently. Aren't the Kings deliberately putting out a bad team too? I don't think the front office thinks this team is a contender. Rebuilds don't happen overnight, I expect the Kings to be bad for the foreseeable future and get top picks (excluding the 2019 pick). I think the Kings rebuild will be similar to Philly's, being one of the worst teams in the league for multiple years and having the opportunity to turn this thing around by getting potential franchise players at the top of the draft.
They are putting out a young team with a lot of players they expect to build around - while it is certain that not everyone will meet expectations, they are all going to be given the opportunity to rise and shine. They may be bad next year but we didn't sign a bunch of filler either. It will be ok to be bad and take lumps this year but this year only. 2019 we don't own our pick and so we are gunning for a quick turnaround.
 

Sac.1989

Well-Known Member
#71
DMC isn't a kid anymore though and unlikely to take direction from vets at this point. He had vets when he was here (Caron Butler, one of the best citizens in the NBA... didn't not fix the problem apparently).
True. Caron was a late addition though (5 years demarcus was a king without any true vets) and any positively he could have left was offset by the fact that he was with us during the drama days of George Karl.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Contributor
#73
@TheNBPA: Half man, half amazing. Most Influential Veteran goes to the one and only @mrvincecarter15. #PlayersVoice https://t.co/V0lRvzh1Xf

Fellow players vote Vince Carter THE Most Influential Vet. That is respect right there. Hammers home the point of how good this signing was. Carter and Temple together doesn't suck.
So ironically it looks like we got the best and the worst... #KANGZ.
 

bajaden

Well-Known Member
#77
Deliberately putting out a bad team? Nope. They're rebuilding from the ground up and IMHO they're FINALLY doing it the right way. I don't think there are many fans around here who expect miracles. What we do expect, however, is to see the front office, the coach and the players ALL on the same page for a change. We don't (at least I don't) expect a lot of wins but I do expect and pretty much demand heart, hustle, energy, effort, focus, determination AND NO FREAKING DRAMA!
There's a difference between putting out a team, that by the nature of it's makeup, will likely lose a lot of games, and putting out a team that has no intention of winning. I don't think the Kings brought in Randolph, Hill, and Carter to teach the youngsters how to lose. I think they want them to go out and try to win every single game. I think they also know that because of all the youth on the team, they're not going to win many games. Point being, that there's a difference between trying to lose, and losing while trying to win.

I think Vlade came with a vision of the kind of team he wanted to put on the floor. I think he also realized that if he did indeed give Cuz that huge contract, he was then locked into a team that complimented Cousins abilities. That big contract would also limit Vlade's ability to add talent to the team through freeagency. I'm not here to argue the merits of trading Cuz one way or the other. I'm simply pointing out that Vlade had a vision, and obviously felt he couldn't pursue that vision without making the moves he made.

If for some reason the Kings come together, everything clicks, and they become the miracle team of 2018, then so be it. That's not a bad thing if they do it with all the youth on the team. The future would look far brighter with a team made up of a bunch of 22 year old's who haven't reached their potential yet, than a team made up of Cousins, and a bunch of aging solid veterans. One team has an optimistic future, and the other is a temporary pretender. And that's not a knock on Cousins. The only reason that team would make the playoffs is because of him.
 

Chupacabra

Well-Known Member
#78
Not being a wise ass but what do you actually consider tanking? Right now Vegas has got them as the worst team in the West

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/19590072/nba-odds-all-30-nba-teams-win-2017-18-nba-title
To tank is to deliberately lose games in order to gain a high draft pick. We have a roster full of young players and while theyre very talented, they lack the experience in the NBA and the experience playing together that is needed to win games. This does not equate to losing games on purpose.
 
#79
To tank is to deliberately lose games in order to gain a high draft pick. We have a roster full of young players and while theyre very talented, they lack the experience in the NBA and the experience playing together that is needed to win games. This does not equate to losing games on purpose.
Then what did Philly do? Do/did you consider them tanking? They had/have a roster full of young talented players that lack NBA experience and the experience playing together that is needed to win games.
 

Suicide King

Well-Known Member
#80
Then what did Philly do? Do/did you consider them tanking? They had/have a roster full of young talented players that lack NBA experience and the experience playing together that is needed to win games.
Traded away the teams most productive players.
Refused to sign free agents.
Spent as little as possible.
Drafted players who were injured or overseas.
Hoarded picks through trades.

This was their method. This does not include anything on a game to game basis such as minutes distribution, line ups or playing style.
 
#81
Traded away the teams most productive players.
Refused to sign free agents.
Spent as little as possible.
Drafted players who were injured or overseas.
Hoarded picks through trades.

This was their method. This does not include anything on a game to game basis such as minutes distribution, line ups or playing style.
"Traded away teams most productive players"

Kings traded away Boogie

"Refuse to sign FA's"

Excluding Hill both the Carter and Zbo signings aren't FA's that will help you win. Excluding Hill they brought in no players to help them get more W's for this season IMO

"Spending as little as possible"

As far as I can tell we have the 24th highest payroll out of 30 teams. I wouldn't consider us big spenders

"Drafted players that were injured or overseas"

If healthy Embiid may soon be an MVP candidate. They didn't reach for Noel he was projected at being the top overall pick but because of injury he fell to Philly at 6. In that deal they also got a future 2014 which I believe they turned into Saric who seems to be a core piece of their team. So yes they were injured but most teams wouldn't have passed on those players.

"Hoarded picks through trades"

Two years in a row Sac traded down in the draft for more picks or players stashed overseas (Bogdan). When Sac traded down the past two years they ended up with multiple picks in the same draft. Philly decided to bank on future pics.

I Don't see much of a difference.
 

Suicide King

Well-Known Member
#82
"Traded away teams most productive players"

Kings traded away Boogie

"Refuse to sign FA's"

Excluding Hill both the Carter and Zbo signings aren't FA's that will help you win. Excluding Hill they brought in no players to help them get more W's for this season IMO

"Spending as little as possible"

As far as I can tell we have the 24th highest payroll out of 30 teams. I wouldn't consider us big spenders

"Drafted players that were injured or overseas"

If healthy Embiid may soon be an MVP candidate. They didn't reach for Noel he was projected at being the top overall pick but because of injury he fell to Philly at 6. In that deal they also got a future 2014 which I believe they turned into Saric who seems to be a core piece of their team. So yes they were injured but most teams wouldn't have passed on those players.

"Hoarded picks through trades"

Two years in a row Sac traded down in the draft for more picks or players stashed overseas (Bogdan). When Sac traded down the past two years they ended up with multiple picks in the same draft. Philly decided to bank on future pics.

I Don't see much of a difference.
I have no interest in trying to convince you the 76ers tanked for several seasons on purpose. If you choose to believe the rest of the basketball world is wrong about this fact, that's on you.

No offense intended.
 
#84
I have no interest in trying to convince you the 76ers tanked for several seasons on purpose. If you choose to believe the rest of the basketball world is wrong about this fact, that's on you.

No offense intended.
Ding, ding, ding winner winner. Never said they didn't tank simply said Sac was doing the same thing. BTW I was responding to someone that posted a comment today on a post I did from Aug 5th
 

Suicide King

Well-Known Member
#85
Ding, ding, ding winner winner. Never said they didn't tank simply said Sac was doing the same thing. BTW I was responding to someone that posted a comment today on a post I did from Aug 5th
"In the first 26 months on the job we added more than one draft pick (or pick swap) per month to our coffers. That’s more than 26 new picks or options to swap picks over and above the two per year the NBA allots each club. That’s not any official record, because no one keeps track of such records. But it is the most ever. And it’s not close. And we kick ourselves for not adding another handful."

Tell me again how this is what the Kings are doing?
 
#86
"In the first 26 months on the job we added more than one draft pick (or pick swap) per month to our coffers. That’s more than 26 new picks or options to swap picks over and above the two per year the NBA allots each club. That’s not any official record, because no one keeps track of such records. But it is the most ever. And it’s not close. And we kick ourselves for not adding another handful."
Tell me again how this is what the Kings are doing?
Are there different levels of tanking or is Philly the only team that has tanked? Yes Philly is an extreme example but it's the same idea the Kings are doing. Did the Lakers tank last year? They signed vets in Moz and Deng? Because they had those players on the team did you consider them not tanking?
 

Suicide King

Well-Known Member
#87
Are there different levels of tanking or is Philly the only team that has tanked? Yes Philly is an extreme example but it's the same idea the Kings are doing. Did the Lakers tank last year? They signed vets in Moz and Deng? Because they had those players on the team did you consider them not tanking?
I don't understand, is it your contention that anyone not in the playoffs has tanked? I have read this entire thread, I know which comment you refer to. You asked what @jcassio considered tanking and cited that espn has us slated to finish last in the West. What I am not understanding is what the point your trying to make is and why. If your arguing levels of tanking, at what point do you consider a team not tanking? Playoffs? Is every team that finishes bottom of their respective conference tanking? Have the Nets been losing on purpose, even without owning their own picks?

Trying to understand the point of this direction in discussion in this particular thread. If I am not mistaken, those in the let's lose for the 2018 pick camp saw the veteran signings of Hill,Carter and Randolph as counterproductive to tanking. It was seen as more a win now set of signings, which some feel is a mistake in the long run.
 

bajaden

Well-Known Member
#88
"Traded away teams most productive players"

Kings traded away Boogie

"Refuse to sign FA's"

Excluding Hill both the Carter and Zbo signings aren't FA's that will help you win. Excluding Hill they brought in no players to help them get more W's for this season IMO

"Spending as little as possible"

As far as I can tell we have the 24th highest payroll out of 30 teams. I wouldn't consider us big spenders

"Drafted players that were injured or overseas"

If healthy Embiid may soon be an MVP candidate. They didn't reach for Noel he was projected at being the top overall pick but because of injury he fell to Philly at 6. In that deal they also got a future 2014 which I believe they turned into Saric who seems to be a core piece of their team. So yes they were injured but most teams wouldn't have passed on those players.

"Hoarded picks through trades"

Two years in a row Sac traded down in the draft for more picks or players stashed overseas (Bogdan). When Sac traded down the past two years they ended up with multiple picks in the same draft. Philly decided to bank on future pics.

I Don't see much of a difference.
Dude, believe what you want. Frankly I don't give a damm what you believe. But just for the hell of it, lets concede the point to you. The Kings are trying to tank so they can get the best player in the draft. So what? Am I going to be upset with we end up with Marvin Bagley next summer? No! Matter of fact, I'll be a happy camper. I don't expect the team to win many games, but I expect them to try, and that's the difference. I happen to believe that yes, the players they brought in, were brought in to do the very thing they said. Mentor the young players.

And, if you think Cousins was traded so we could tank, then your either not thinking clearly, or all you care about is trying to prove your point while sacrificing your credibility.
 

bajaden

Well-Known Member
#89
I don't understand, is it your contention that anyone not in the playoffs has tanked? I have read this entire thread, I know which comment you refer to. You asked what @jcassio considered tanking and cited that espn has us slated to finish last in the West. What I am not understanding is what the point your trying to make is and why. If your arguing levels of tanking, at what point do you consider a team not tanking? Playoffs? Is every team that finishes bottom of their respective conference tanking? Have the Nets been losing on purpose, even without owning their own picks?

Trying to understand the point of this direction in discussion in this particular thread. If I am not mistaken, those in the let's lose for the 2018 pick camp saw the veteran signings of Hill,Carter and Randolph as counterproductive to tanking. It was seen as more a win now set of signings, which some feel is a mistake in the long run.
You said it far better than I.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Contributor
#90
You said it far better than I.
No, you both said it quite well.

I don't expect the team to win many games, but I expect them to try, and that's the difference. I happen to believe that yes, the players they brought in, were brought in to do the very thing they said. Mentor the young players.

And, if you think Cousins was traded so we could tank, then your either not thinking clearly, or all you care about is trying to prove your point while sacrificing your credibility.
That, in a nutshell, is what I think CelticsFan doesn't understand.