LPKingsFan
All-Star
I simply read it as the "best stuff" the Kings would have been willing to trade for Lawson.
The Official "Lies the media is telling about the Kings" thread.
- Thread starter NoBonus
- Start date
I simply read it as the "best stuff" the Kings would have been willing to trade for Lawson.
sono
Starter
I don't think the media has a bias against us... I think that they have a really bad yet unbiased image of the Kings organization.
I think that almost any poster here will agree that this franchise wasn't exactly a model for how to do things right... and where many of us kings fans see change- the media is not so eager to join in on the optimism.
The criticisms about Rondo didn't start when he came for Sacramento, and the Koufos signing for example recieved very positive review by the national media.
The off-season grades are traditionaly lazy columns, but they did mentioned we got better as a team... I think our negative grades on this pieces is driven by the fact the media (and many here too) see these moves as giving up assets to get better know and supports the idea that we need to get to the playoffs to keep Cousins:
In that regard I think in many people eyes this season became "playoffs or bust" and because the national media doesn't see us as having a chance to get to the playoffs the grades are going to be bad.
If we will win enough that sentiment will change in the media, but I won't expect it to change anytime before that...
And it's not like we are not giving them stuff to work with- from Karl's statements to Cousins cryptic tweet to Malone verifying negative rumors (4 on 5 for example) to Vlade's honesty (verifying the Karl-Cousins rumors) and of course the overall ridiculousness of Vivek's behaviour and statements... so let's stop focusing on the media and just... hang loose.
Agree, but not sure about the unbiased image of the Kings organization part. Those FO clowns not named Vlade damaged the Kings reputation so bad that everything throws against the Kings wall sticks so naturally and the most humiliating part is they don't care about the credibility of their news sources. I guess, they wouldn't dare to do the same thing with reputable franchises.
The Hammer
All-Star
All it takes is for us to start winning and all this crap goes away. It's so simple. Also they'll all look like idiots when that happens.
whozit
Starter
Won't argue that point and it's why I put the disclaimer that it's Bucher. However, it's a change however slight in the narrative of the Kings.
Double-K
Starter
So we are supposed to be happy with someone not claiming we are the most dysfunctional team in the NBA, and instead we are in a race with two other teams that makes the top 3 most dysfunctional... i don't see that as much of a compliment...
Also Ric Bucher... even if he said that we were the best franchise in the NBA I wouldn't get excited.
whozit
Starter
This team has floundered for how long? The very notion that there MAY be a plan is a departure from the well deserved scorn the team has garnered for itself. Looking forward to the start of the season and seeing the games played.
I agree with that.
I just disagree that there was anything positive in the things Bucher said, he said our plan is bad but he can understand it and that we are still top 3 in dysfunction- nothing positive about that...
Also the teams he put as next to are not teams I would call dysfunctional...
The 76ers have a weird(ish) plan in which they want to be really bad until they believe they can be really good, you can disagree with it (which is much more about your philosophy of what count as "winning")- but they do have a plan and a very clear one, and they have done a remarkable job at aquiring assets and maximizing the profit in their deals:
The Jrue Holiday trade got them amazing value, the MCW trade got them amazing value, the draft day trade in which they were able to take the guy they originally wanted (Saric) while blackmailing Orlando with Payton was genius, they made great value on selling cap space (recently to us) and nabbed nice players on low picks- some of them they already moved for assets (KJ McDaniels).
The 76ers may have different goals than most teams in the NBA- but they are very good at what THEY do... in no way, shape or form they are dysfunctional.
And the Knicks aren't that bad with Phil- they cleaned the deck from bad contracts, tanked last season when they had their pick, grabbed Porzingis (solid bet) and made a nice trade selling Hardway much higher than his value and picking up Jerian Grant and signed a few role-players on tradeable contracts (O'Quinn is a still in this market) to try and make a run to relevance and showcase their guys in a year they have no reason to tank cause they don't own their pick.
The only dysfuctional move they made was the signing of Derrick Williams... they are still among the worst run teams just based on past years (and obligations they have already made), but I'm surprised Phil doesn't get more respect considering his past, he might be an overpaid GM who's old school and give weird quotes- but there's a method to his madness... and I believe he knows where his team is goink
.
gunks
Hall of Famer
Not to mention, we have a shadow over our team named Vivek.
Adds a certain random element to everything. Dude is impatient, a moron when it comes to basketball, and wants to have control (he's backed off, but for how long?!).
As long as Vivek is the owner, we will probably continue to do dumb stuff as a franchise. Thank god we have Vlade (Vivek's sole good decision as the "Irritant").
Adds a certain random element to everything. Dude is impatient, a moron when it comes to basketball, and wants to have control (he's backed off, but for how long?!).
As long as Vivek is the owner, we will probably continue to do dumb stuff as a franchise. Thank god we have Vlade (Vivek's sole good decision as the "Irritant").
neeI agree with that.
I just disagree that there was anything positive in the things Bucher said, he said our plan is bad but he can understand it and that we are still top 3 in dysfunction- nothing positive about that...
Also the teams he put as next to are not teams I would call dysfunctional...
The 76ers have a weird(ish) plan in which they want to be really bad until they believe they can be really good, you can disagree with it (which is much more about your philosophy of what count as "winning")- but they do have a plan and a very clear one, and they have done a remarkable job at aquiring assets and maximizing the profit in their deals:
The Jrue Holiday trade got them amazing value, the MCW trade got them amazing value, the draft day trade in which they were able to take the guy they originally wanted (Saric) while blackmailing Orlando with Payton was genius, they made great value on selling cap space (recently to us) and nabbed nice players on low picks- some of them they already moved for assets (KJ McDaniels).
The 76ers may have different goals than most teams in the NBA- but they are very good at what THEY do... in no way, shape or form they are dysfunctional.
And the Knicks aren't that bad with Phil- they cleaned the deck from bad contracts, tanked last season when they had their pick, grabbed Porzingis (solid bet) and made a nice trade selling Hardway much higher than his value and picking up Jerian Grant and signed a few role-players on tradeable contracts (O'Quinn is a still in this market) to try and make a run to relevance and showcase their guys in a year they have no reason to tank cause they don't own their pick.
The only dysfuctional move they made was the signing of Derrick Williams... they are still among the worst run teams just based on past years (and obligations they have already made), but I'm surprised Phil doesn't get more respect considering his past, he might be an overpaid GM who's old school and give weird quotes- but there's a method to his madness... and I believe he knows where his team is goink
I totally understand the Sixers strategy. In fact, knowing more about how they both operate I think Hinkie would've been the perfect GM for Ranadive if Vivek actually had patience. Both believe in the power of any edge in information, of thinking outside the box and defying conventional NBA norms and of optionality. For Hinkie it isn't about developing players or building a team - it's about asset acquisition and flexibility. His patience and shrewdness have been really impressive to me so far.
But here's the thing. The entire strategy still hinges on getting a superstar either through the draft (the Cavs with LeBron, the Spurs with Duncan) and/or having the assets to trade for them (the Celtics getting KG and Ray Allen). And right now the Sixers are about to go into year 3 with Hinkie at the helm and their best asset is Nerlens Noel. I really like Noel, but he's a high level complimentary piece, not a star. Watching him in SL (more so than in college) I'm not sure Okafor is a star either. The two of them together should actually make a nice yin & yang as a frontcourt but the Sixers are still going to be awful next season and Embiid may be headed for a Greg Oden like career arc. All that capspace and all those draft picks aren't going to get the Sixers anywhere if they don't start striking gold in the draft.
And as for Phil Jackson, I don't think he had a bad summer as a GM. But the biggest issue is that the Knicks still have a 31 year old Carmelo Anthony as their centerpiece. His contract becomes less of an albatross as the salary cap explodes but he's still the only star player on the Knicks and they are in a weird position where they aren't giving him immediate help but also aren't going after a full rebuild. I think that's an odd formula moving forward.
Last edited:
Telemachus
Starter
My problem with Hinke is that he has to start winning at some point. Philadelphia has been worse than the Kings the past 3 years, but the Kings are considered disfunctional while Hinke is considered a great GM.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
A philly style rebuild is certainly an interesting counterfactual to consider. But given that the fan base had some momentum with the new ownership, after years of Maloofery and relocation dramas, I understand why they wanted to win sooner rather than later. They invested a lot of money in the team and ESC, and I could imagine that empty seats and low win totals were not an appealing proposition from the business side.
NoBonus
Starter
Best point yet. "Rebuilding" should have a phase of tearing down and a phase of building up... I look a the Kings and think it is about time they started building up again... the real question is how long do you tear down for? I cannot imagine that you are going to do much different for your team if you tear down for two years or ten years. The whole point of the tear down is to clear cap space, get a high draft pick or two and rebuild. The Kings and Philly had too long a period of tear down... horrible for the team and the fans.
My point wasn't that I liked the 76ers strategy, but that you can't call it dysfunctional (like Bucher did)...
They picked a long-term strategy, and they are excuting it perfectly- that just can't be called dysfunctional.
The fact they didn't pick a superstar isn't their fault- it's not like they picked a bust when a better player was available- they got great value from the MCW pick, and picked Noel outside of the top 5 in one of the worst draft in years, they had bad luck getting only the 3rd pick in a draft with 2 clear stars (Parker and Wiggins) and they picked the only one who had superstar potential... Okafor remains to be seen.
You can question their strategy as getting a superstar might be harder than it seems- and for all of the faults the lottery system has it did proved it's worth thus far with the 76ers... one of my favourite trivia facts on the NBA is that ever since the draft gains is current form only one(!) number one pick brought the team that picked him a championship, that man is Tim Duncan of course who joined an already solid team that suffered injuries and decided to tank for him... so the path to greatness doesn't necessarily goes through the draft.
All of that being said- they made a long-term plan, stuck with it and executed it perfectly... this is not dysfunction. Does that plan counts on luck- yes (at least short-term) but they made all the right moves according to their plan- that's not dysfunction.
That's mainly because they've been bad on purpose while we were trying to be good, also their path was much less dysfunctional than ours... the 76ers doesn't view (at least by their words) a team that will make first round exists in the weak east as winning... and again that's more about philosophy... their goal has been to gather assets and this is a list of the draft rights they hold:
1. 2016 first round draft pick from L.A. Lakers
L.A. Lakers' 1st round pick to Philadelphia (via Phoenix) protected for selections 1-3 in 2016 and 1-3 in 2017 and unprotected in 2018.
2. 2016 first round draft pick from Miami
Miami's 1st round pick to Philadelphia (via Cleveland) protected for selections 1-10 in 2016 and unprotected in 2017.
3. 2016 first round draft pick from Oklahoma City
Oklahoma City's 1st round pick to Philadelphia (via Cleveland to Denver) protected for selections 1-15 in 2016 and 1-15 in 2017; if Oklahoma City has not conveyed a 1st round pick to Philadelphia by 2017, then Oklahoma City will instead convey its 2018 2nd round pick and 2019 2nd round pick to Philadelphia.
4. 2016 first round draft pick from Sacramento
Philadelphia has the right to swap its 2016 1st round pick for Sacramento's 2016 1st round pick protected for selections 11-30.
5. 2016 second round draft pick from Denver
Denver's 2016 2nd round pick to Philadelphia.
6. 2017 first round draft pick from Sacramento
If Sacramento conveys a 1st round pick to Chicago in 2016, then Philadelphia has the right to swap its 2017 1st round pick for Sacramento's 2017 1st round pick; if Sacramento does not convey a 1st round pick to Chicago in 2016, then Philadelphia has the right to swap its 2017 1st round pick for Sacramento's 2017 1st round pick protected for selections 11-30.
7. 2018 first round draft pick from Sacramento
Sacramento's 1st round pick to Philadelphia protected for selections 1-10 in 2018 (conveyable if Sacramento conveys a 1st round pick to Chicago in 2016) and unprotected in 2019.
8. 2018 second round draft pick from Brooklyn
Philadelphia will receive the more favorable of Brooklyn's 2018 2nd round pick and Cleveland's 2018 2nd round pick and Charlotte will receive the less favorable of these two picks.
9. 2018 second round draft pick from Cleveland
Philadelphia will receive the more favorable of Brooklyn's 2018 2nd round pick and Cleveland's 2018 2nd round pick and Charlotte will receive the less favorable of these two picks.
10. 2018 second round draft pick from L.A. Clippers
Philadelphia will receive the more favorable of the L.A. Clippers' 2018 2nd round pick and New York's 2018 2nd round pick and New York will receive the less favorable of these two picks.
11. 2018 second round draft pick from New York
Philadelphia will receive the more favorable of the L.A. Clippers' 2018 2nd round pick and New York's 2018 2nd round pick and New York will receive the less favorable of these two picks.
12. 2019 second round draft pick from Milwaukee
Philadelphia will receive the more favorable of Milwaukee's 2019 2nd round pick and Sacramento's 2019 2nd round pick and Sacramento will receive the less favorable of these two picks.
13. 2019 second round draft pick from New York
New York's 2019 2nd round pick to Philadelphia.
14. 2019 second round draft pick from Sacramento
Philadelphia will receive the more favorable of Milwaukee's 2019 2nd round pick and Sacramento's 2019 2nd round pick and Sacramento will receive the less favorable of these two picks.
15. 2020 second round draft pick from Brooklyn
Brooklyn's 2020 2nd round pick to Philadelphia.
16. 2020 second round draft pick from New York
New York's 2020 2nd round pick to Philadelphia.
17. 2021 second round draft pick from New York
New York's 2021 2nd round pick to Philadelphia.
Sure a lot of these picks are second rounders, but the value of draft picks in general is only going to get higher as the cap rises and the rookie scale stay set, also the ability to lock a player you like for 4 years and have him as a RFA is HUGE- just look at how many guys stayed put this summer...
If the 76ers wanted, they could have probably trade all this assets- and use the massive amount of cap space they hold to create a east playoff-contender team in a blink of an eye- that's not what they are aiming for.
You can dislike their plan... but their execution is flawless.
EDIT: the buisness side is probably also happy, the 76ers (maybe their biggest achievement) made a big amount of fan buy-in on the strategy... they are constantly paying only at the salary floor and they are getting the same money they would have got from local TV deals (set numbers), the revenue sharing system of the NBA and also the bonus any non-taxpayer get from the lucury tax taken by other teams.
Ticket sales are probably down, but I doubt it equates to the money they are earning by paying the lowest salary possible and geting the non-taxpayer bonus... this is only going to get better financially as the new TV deal kicks in and ticket sales become a much lower precentage of NBA teams income...
Donald Sterling was famous for putting crap teams on the court, paying the minimum salary mandated by the league and enjoying the league revenue sharing system to make money even with an empty arena.
Last edited:
Their other problem is the fact that with the league revenue growing by leaps and bounds, it is harder to "poach" a superstar via trade. It seems like everyone will have the $$$ to re-sign what superstars they currently have.
Here is the thing with the Philly rebuild- you just have to win a championship. There is no other way their rebuild is a success. If you are objectively horrible for several years, and do so intentionally to be great, then you better damn well become the champ one day. If you are objectively horrible for several years, but do so unintentionally, you are a lot more happy with good or great, even if there is no title. Take our beloved 2000 era Kings. Did we want to win the title? Sure. Do we look back on those 6 or so years less fondly because we never won the title? I don't. It was a lot of fun to be relevant, to play big games, to be on the center stage. It was fun because we were so bad, and so comically inept, for so long, that we all got a lot of joy in just being relevant, even if we never won the title. No one ever told us "we have to be intentionally really bad for a long time to win a championship," so we never held the lack of championship against the management. But, I feel like if your plan is to tank and be horrendous for 5 years to win a championship, you better win it all.
Imagine you have the opportunity to quit your $100k job to work on trying to develop a one million dollar idea. If you fail to develop that idea after 10 years, then you would have been better off just keeping your job. Or if you only develop a $500k idea, you would have been better off keeping your job. The point is that if you make the intentional decision to quit your job and pursue the million dollar idea, that decision was only smart if you succeed in developing the million dollar idea in 10 years.
Same is true here. Fast forward 10 years. If Philly wins a championship, their fans won't care than 2013-2017 was a black hole of despair. But if they haven't won a championship, do you think their fans will be happy that they intentionally sucked for 5-6 years to get a slew of 40-50 win teams? If you tell me that in 2022, neither the Kings or Sixers has won a title, I would be much happier being a Kings fan trying to win this year, playing for the 8 seed, being in the playoffs, and being relevant, than sitting through depressing April games with Tony Wroten and Robert Covington as my stars.
I don't care how successful Philly becomes. The ONLY way I would rather be them is if they win a title. I wouldn't put up with 5 years of intentionally trying to be bad if there is no pay off.
Imagine you have the opportunity to quit your $100k job to work on trying to develop a one million dollar idea. If you fail to develop that idea after 10 years, then you would have been better off just keeping your job. Or if you only develop a $500k idea, you would have been better off keeping your job. The point is that if you make the intentional decision to quit your job and pursue the million dollar idea, that decision was only smart if you succeed in developing the million dollar idea in 10 years.
Same is true here. Fast forward 10 years. If Philly wins a championship, their fans won't care than 2013-2017 was a black hole of despair. But if they haven't won a championship, do you think their fans will be happy that they intentionally sucked for 5-6 years to get a slew of 40-50 win teams? If you tell me that in 2022, neither the Kings or Sixers has won a title, I would be much happier being a Kings fan trying to win this year, playing for the 8 seed, being in the playoffs, and being relevant, than sitting through depressing April games with Tony Wroten and Robert Covington as my stars.
I don't care how successful Philly becomes. The ONLY way I would rather be them is if they win a title. I wouldn't put up with 5 years of intentionally trying to be bad if there is no pay off.
CuzistanKing
G-League
Great post! I'm perplexed by the admiration for the 76s strategy. Assets are only good if they produce something valuable (i.e. a championship) in a reasonable time frame. Not to mention, in the NBA your assets have automatic expiration date (players age and/or get hurt, contracts expire) so your window automatically resets every 3-4 years anyway. It seems to me that smart teams either a) strike gold in a draft and rebuild around that gem in 2-3 years; or b) build a winning environment and "retool" on the fly (by giving other teams' stars a reason to come over). What Sixers are doing is like buying lottery tickets every day and hope you strike gold eventually. Sure it could work, but by no means is that the only, or even the smartest strategy you can pursue, given conventional wisdom. Doing ridiculous stuff in the name of "thinking outside the box" doesn't necessarily translate well in the NBA (reference: Ranadivé, Vivek).
On topic, I think a lot of local people do not realize that the condescension and ridicule we see today is a direct result of last December's fiasco. In our minds, those are two completely separate worlds (new regime, new strategy, new players etc.) but for a lot of national guys - it's still the same team that not only shot itself in the foot, but actually strapped grenades to both of its ankles, pulled the pins and jumped out of a plane without a parachute. One is the continuation of another, and nothing will change the narrative except winning some basketball games.
I somewhat agree with this post, and it does make some very good points- but again it's all hanging on what you call winning.
Anyway one of the biggest achievements of the 76ers management was to sell the "hope" to the fans who seemed to have (at least some of them) buy-in... so i wouldn't call this year a despair- seeing the 76ers fans treat the draft lottery like a playoff series is comical- but it also shows you there is buy-in and that they successfully sold the vision of hope and the future for the 76ers... i personnaly think that this doesn't have to end with rings to be a success- a contender for a long time will be enough.
And it's not like this is going on for such a long time, or that the alternatives was good- the Bynum trade (better known as the Howard trade) stripped the team from most of his building blocks... they won 34 games when they were trying to win the season before tankpalooza began... their star was the injury prone Jrue Holiday- and as we now know (since the league fined them for it) when they traded him they already knew he was hurt.
They sucked for 2 years thus far... and chances are they weren't very good anyway at the time (and when I say not very good I mean out of the playoffs out east).
This doesn't have to take that long- the moment they grab a star they can start transitioning... and what they have done thus far was to maximize their option to do so. if they think Ben Simmons is that guy and they can grab him, they are now looking at a team with Simmons, Noel and Okafor- with Saric ready to come over, that's a good young core even if Embiid never recovers (and it does seems to go that way).
They have no bad contracts which mean they have an almost infinite amount of cap space to sign nice additions... and yeah they also have 3 more first rounders in 2016 alone (if OKC makes the playoffs, Miami is not one of the worst 10 teams and the Lakers doesn't have a top 3 pick- all very probable and if not they will get those picks after that) and one coming from us down the pipe to go along with a gazzilion (I think it's the correct term for this numbers) of 2nd rounders following that.
Sure, it's a gamble... but I like the hand they gathered much better than a treadmill borderline playoff team in the east built around Jrue Holiday...
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
You would think a guy of Phil's credentials would know when he is in no man's land.
I agree with that.
I just disagree that there was anything positive in the things Bucher said, he said our plan is bad but he can understand it and that we are still top 3 in dysfunction- nothing positive about that...
Also the teams he put as next to are not teams I would call dysfunctional...
The 76ers have a weird(ish) plan in which they want to be really bad until they believe they can be really good, you can disagree with it (which is much more about your philosophy of what count as "winning")- but they do have a plan and a very clear one, and they have done a remarkable job at aquiring assets and maximizing the profit in their deals:
The Jrue Holiday trade got them amazing value, the MCW trade got them amazing value, the draft day trade in which they were able to take the guy they originally wanted (Saric) while blackmailing Orlando with Payton was genius, they made great value on selling cap space (recently to us) and nabbed nice players on low picks- some of them they already moved for assets (KJ McDaniels).
The 76ers may have different goals than most teams in the NBA- but they are very good at what THEY do... in no way, shape or form they are dysfunctional.
And the Knicks aren't that bad with Phil- they cleaned the deck from bad contracts, tanked last season when they had their pick, grabbed Porzingis (solid bet) and made a nice trade selling Hardway much higher than his value and picking up Jerian Grant and signed a few role-players on tradeable contracts (O'Quinn is a still in this market) to try and make a run to relevance and showcase their guys in a year they have no reason to tank cause they don't own their pick.
The only dysfuctional move they made was the signing of Derrick Williams... they are still among the worst run teams just based on past years (and obligations they have already made), but I'm surprised Phil doesn't get more respect considering his past, he might be an overpaid GM who's old school and give weird quotes- but there's a method to his madness... and I believe he knows where his team is goink
Knicks not dysfunctional? Carmelo Anthony and Phil Jackson are at odds. Their star players is pissed at the direction of the team and openly called the GM a liar. Fans want Fisher canned. If you are going to give Phil slack for cleaning up the team's past mistake, you would have to do the same for Vlade.
randymoss1881
Starter
I'm happy we don't have to do the draft stuff and wishing they pan out. I like the Vet way Vlade took surround your franchise player and 2nd bananna with players ready to go and let's roll
1. "Carmelo Anthony and Phil Jackson are at odds":
for a thread titled "lies the media is telling", you sure do sound positive about that... all he did was send a "cryptic tweet" (sounds familiar?) about the Hardaway... even in the blown up paranoid article about it stated:
"One person who spoke to Anthony on Friday said the message was an attempt to signify he still had trust in Jackson and general manager Steve Mills, despite his disappointment over Hardaway’s departure and the selection of Porzingis, whose name was not mentioned."
"Later, in an Instagram comment to a fan posted Friday night, Anthony said of Porzingis, “I can’t wait either. He’s a steal.’’- damn that does sound bad...
2. "Their star players is pissed at the direction of the team and openly called the GM a liar":
First of all I didn't know they have star "players" in plural... second unless I missed something and Stephen A Smith became a NYK basketball star no one openly called Phil a liar, and the fact Smith used the fact Knick fans booed Porzingis as a proof- when they always boo the pick- is pretty comical.
3. "Fans want Fisher canned":
So NYK fans aren't patient... how is that surprising?
4. "If you are going to give Phil slack for cleaning up the team's past mistake, you would have to do the same for Vlade":
And what makes you think I don't??? find one post by me where I crticize or praise Vlade about something that isn't his doing... It's not giving him slack, it's common sense- how can I blame a GM for something that was done when he wasn't there?
The Knicks still suck... and it's not going to change very soon, but they are making steps in the right direction imo. Phil doesn't deserve a 10 (or a 9) for his work as a GM... but I don't know what drives people to call their CURRENT front office dysfunctional... and the same exact thing applies to Vlade.
We can go back and forth on whether or not Anthony is displeased with the current Knicks situation. Some sources say he was furious and others say he has calmed down since draft night. Although it's hard to imagine Anthony is somewhat disappointed considering he signed a long term deal and the Knicks essentially struck out on acquiring high level players during free agency. Also, the Knicks won 37 games before phil took over and then 17, the worst in franchise history.
Vlade got rid of Stauskas who was a mistake because he takes away minutes from Ben and you cannot play them at the same time. Landry's contract was abysmal. Thompson's time simply ran out. These were good moves, but were nationally denounced because the Kings supposedly could have gotten more for these players. It was addition by subtraction.
Vlade got rid of Stauskas who was a mistake because he takes away minutes from Ben and you cannot play them at the same time. Landry's contract was abysmal. Thompson's time simply ran out. These were good moves, but were nationally denounced because the Kings supposedly could have gotten more for these players. It was addition by subtraction.
No, it's really not. There's a reason he's been called "Puker" by many of the old-timers around here.
Similar threads
