Theus on Sportscenter

[Fresno King]

Now he's a playoff analyst on Sportscenter... using that TNT experience for an offseason job.

Looks sharp, as usual.

ESPN Anchor: "We know you don't like to be on the outside looking in during the playoffs, so good luck in making the postseason next year."

Theus: "We will be (in the playoffs next year). We will be."

Also said he was very pleased with the team's progress this season.

 

[Bricklayer]

There is a certain irony to having Reggie Theus as a playoff analyst. Looks the part, dresses the apart, if he eventually gets fired could even see him auditioning and moving over to the studio fulltime. But the guy was almost the Shareef of his era, played in 17 playoff games in his 13 years in the league, and is off to the same type of start as a coach.

 

[RunNGun]

There is a certain irony to having Reggie Theus as a playoff analyst. Looks the part, dresses the apart, if he eventually gets fired could even see him auditioning and moving over to the studio fulltime. But the guy was almost the Shareef of his era, played in 17 playoff games in his 13 years in the league, and is off to the same type of start as a coach.

How many rookie coaches have made it to the playoffs their first year? And if they did, what star player allowed them to do so? Guaranteeing a playoff appearance next year may be a bit much right now, but there is no reason why the Kings cannot compete for a spot next year (unless another 50+ win season will be the requirement in the west). If the Kings won half the "shoulda-won" games against bad teams then they would have been a +.500 team. Most seasons that gets you a playoff spot.

 

[Superman]

How many rookie coaches have made it to the playoffs their first year? And if they did, what star player allowed them to do so? Guaranteeing a playoff appearance next year may be a bit much right now, but there is no reason why the Kings cannot compete for a spot next year (unless another 50+ win season will be the requirement in the west). If the Kings won half the "shoulda-won" games against bad teams then they would have been a +.500 team. Most seasons that gets you a playoff spot.

Do you think the West is going to be easier or harder next season? The only playoff teams that may see a significant dropoff are Denver and Phoenix, but Golden State and Portland take their spots. The Clippers played the entire year without two of their regular starters. I don't doubt that the 8th seed will have to win close to 50 again next year.

We may lose Artest and trade Miller this summer. I highly doubt we make the playoffs next season without making some serious roster changes. I know that Reggie was just talking the talk and I doubt anyone holds him to his statement unless the Kings actually do make the playoffs. But the playoffs are an unlikely prospect, the way things are looking right now.

 

[Bricklayer]

How many rookie coaches have made it to the playoffs their first year?

Quite a few actually -- I could name at least a dozen without even thinking about it (just to fire them off to prove the point Riley, Avery, Adelman, Bird, Dunleavy, Popovich, Carlisle, Tomjanovich, Ainge, Westphal, either Van Gundy etc.).

But that obviously wasn't the point of my post. And if it had been the point of my post, it surely would have included the disclaimer "and big bleeping whoop if we get in the playoffs as a #8 seed pimple on the conference's ***". Minus the opportunity to do real damage its just a shallow all show no substance exercise for the tourists.

 

[Gary]

If I had to guess the playoffs next year I would say the top teams will be New Orleans, Lakers, and Utah (winning their divisions). Teams that have a chance to make the playoffs are Houston, Portland, Denver, San Antonio, Dallas, Golden State, and Phoenix. There is ten teams right there.

Teams moving on up:

Portland is obviously on the way up because of the pick this year, and adding Oden to the mix.
Lakers as long as they have Gasol, Kobe, and Bynum are going to be a power.
Utah - Jazz have the "other" young PG phenom in Williams. The team isn;t the youngest, but they have the base, and the right coach for him.
New Orleans - Hornets have arguably the best PG in the NBA, and a young PF. Chandler, and Peja are still young enough to make excellent role players for years to come.


Vultures could be circling:

San Antonio - How long can they ride Duncan before it's all over?
Phoenix - Will Shaq last the whole season? How long will Nash hold up?
Denver - Camby? Iverson? How long will those two last? Carmello can't do it on his own.
Dallas - Kidd might not have been the best trade, and now they are stuck with him.
Golden State - What if the W's lose Baron to free agency?
Houston - without that 20+ game win streak they would have had trouble making the playoffs this year.



Teams looking up at the ten teams above looking to take one of the spots:

Sacramento - Kings have one of the best SG/SF rotations in the league and a good young center. Improved this year record wise even though the competition got better.
Clippers - Clippers have Brand back, and Livingston, but will they be the same? Brand isn't that young, and who knows if Livingston can make a full recovery? BUT Thorton, and Kaman are great starts to a good team.

Cellar teams next year:

Seattle or Oklahoma? - Kevin Durant, and Green are good starts, but it's obvious they are a few years away from contention.
Minnesota - T-Wolves have Jefferson, and a top pick this year. They played well late in the season, but are going to be at best a 30 win team next year.
Memphis - heh.... no way.. Conley is going to be good, and Gay is already, but they need to make some personnel changes because the team doesn't mesh very well. Warrick is not a PF either so I wish they would stop playing him there. Also, it's safe to say Milicic is a bust

 

[fnordius]

Guaranteeing a playoff appearance next year may be a bit much right now...

Particularly when so many are waiting for the rebuild to start.

 

[One and Done]

Theus has a great camera presence, but was a little rusty last night. I'm sure he'll shake the rust off soon, though. And talk about good publicity for the Kings...

BTW, great post and speculation, Gary. Couldn't agree with you more.

One thing is, that people are expecting waaaay too much out of Oden. He's got pure talent, size, and upside, but people need to remember/realize how raw of a prospect he was coming out of college, especially on the offensive end. Also, keep in mind that no one has ever come out of microfracture surgery 100% the same (Amare has been the closest, at 95% IMO). Oden's going to need some time to develop, so don't expect an instant impact from him in 08-09. However, I do believe that Pritchard will make some good moves at the PG and SF position...and keep your eye out for Fernandez if he crosses the pond.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

B.ut that obviously wasn't the point of my post. And if it had been the point of my post, it surely would have included the disclaimer "and big bleeping whoop if we get in the playoffs as a #8 seed pimple on the conference's ***". Minus the opportunity to do real damage its just a shallow all show no substance exercise for the tourists.

I disagree with it being meaningless. Sure if we traded away all of our young players just to get the #8 seed with older veterans that would be pointless. However, having a core of young players with a couple of veterans that gets the 8 seed even to be slaughtered is a positive. Shoot, the '99 Kings that lost to the Jazz in 5 had no chance of winning the championship that year, but I wouldn't call it an excercise in futility. It built momentum, gave our young guys valuable playoff experience, attracted free agents and inflated the trade value of all of our players. If a core of Martin, Garcia, Hawes, Williams, Douby, Salmons and this year's pick can take us to the 8 seed with Artest and Miller that's good progress and has real value for the franchise.

 

[VF21]

If a core of Martin, Garcia, Hawes, Williams, Douby, Salmons and this year's pick can take us to the 8 seed with Artest and Miller that's good progress and has real value for the franchise.

And if Artest is gone, it'll be even better.

 

[fnordius]

However, having a core of young players with a couple of veterans that gets the 8 seed even to be slaughtered is a positive.

If we ever get down to two veterans, I'll be dancing in the street. I won't even care whether we make the playoffs or not.

 

[bajaden]

If we ever get down to two veterans, I'll be dancing in the street. I won't even care whether we make the playoffs or not.

Watch out for the cars... Seriously though, I think you need a couple of good veteran players. They just have to be the right one's.

 

[JayBird]

But that obviously wasn't the point of my post. And if it had been the point of my post, it surely would have included the disclaimer "and big bleeping whoop if we get in the playoffs as a #8 seed pimple on the conference's ***". Minus the opportunity to do real damage its just a shallow all show no substance exercise for the tourists.

Have kings fans really become THAT spoiled after our '98-2004 run, that we are now just too good for the 8th seed? I agree with Sptsjunkie - if we traded away our young guys for old talent, sneaked into number 8, and got trounced by SA or LA, then yes, "big bleeping whoop". But if the young guys get us the number 8 seed, then LET us get trounced in the first round. At least we're there. The same way we were there against Seattle in '95 (or 96?) and the Jazz a few years after that... I don't remember much moaning and groaning from Kings fans back then. We were just thrilled to finally be there, and after a few years off from the playoffs, I miss that feeling.

Face it, this team is not just going to pull a Miami stunt. We are too good for a top 5 pick, probably too good for a top 10 pick. If Petrie/Maloofs were going to blow up the team, it would have happened by now. So we're looking at anywhere from a 10-20 pick next year anyway, why not get excited about a number 8 seed while we're at it? I know the sentiment many of you share is that there is a WORLD of difference between a #13 pick (lottery) and let's say a #18 pick (playoffs), but I'm just not convinced. Even so, with Petrie's proven ability to draft well, that is not something I am too concerned about. Bring on the playoffs.

 

[bajaden]

San Antonio, Phoenix, Denver, Dallas. I was looking over their rosters a couple of days ago and its obvious that the window of opportunity is going to be closing on them. Dallas in particular might have problems as soon as next year. Kidd is 35 yrs old. E. Jones is 37 and Dampier is 33. Nowitzki still has some years left at 31, but with no one around him it could be tough.

The Spurs aren't far behind with Bowen at 37 yrs of age and Finley at 35. Duncan is just 32, and Ginobili 31, and they still have Parker, but they seemed to coast a little more this year and finally woke up when they realized they were just on game away from being out of the playoffs.

With the Suns you have Shaq at 36, and Nash at 34. Hill is certainly looking at the grand reaper at 36. But of course they a young Bell ar 31.

Denver barely made the playoffs this year and Camby and AI arent getting any younger either. But not to worry, they always have the realible Nene to save them.

If the Warriors lose Davis, their done. They have some young talent on the team, but Davis is the motor that makes them run. Literaly and figuratively.

 

[Bricklayer]

Have kings fans really become THAT spoiled after our '98-2004 run, that we are now just too good for the 8th seed?

ALL teams are too good for the 8th seed -- it is a loser's goal, acceptable only as a stepping stone to better things. If you aren't stepping, then you are wasting your time, and playing to lose much moreso than that team tanking to get the #1 pick. At least they have ambition. At least they have the guts to try.

And yes, the playoffa in our first year in Sacto were a complete waste. We were a joke and did not know it. The playoffs in '95 or whatever were also a complete waste. The only difference there is that if you squinted in true homer fashion you might dream of more that would follow. Since there never was, it was a pointless exercise -- we weren't in the playoffs at all. The "playoffs", as the name indicates, are a tournament to determine who will be champion. We had no shot, none. We were a technicality -- the designated Washington Generals just to filll out the bracket. And yes, the fact that it was all we had does indeed make us vaguely pathetic in that era.

Now if you are like Portland, and nab the #8 seed next year as the first of a long line of playoff runs wiht all the talent you need to one day be a #5 seed, then a #3 seed, then a #1 seed and contender etc., then #8 is acceptable. If you are Atlanta and hope that you have enough young talent to be dangerous as a contender one day, then fine. If on the other hand you do it with one young starter, and then a bunch of 30 yr old vets, you are a joke. Worse yet, you are blatantly insulting the intelligence of your fanbase.

 

[BMiller52]

ALL teams are too good for the 8th seed -- it is a loser's goal, acceptable only as a stepping stone to better things. If you aren't stepping, then you are wasting your time, and playing to lose much moreso than that team tanking to get the #1 pick. At least they have ambition. At least they have the guts to try.

And yes, the playoffa in our first year in Sacto were a complete waste. We were a joke and did not know it. The playoffs in '95 or whatever were also a complete waste. The only difference there is that if you squinted in true homer fashion you might dream of more that would follow. Since there never was, it was a pointless exercise -- we weren't in the playoffs at all. The "playoffs", as the name indicates, are a tournament to determine who will be champion. We had no shot, none. We were a technicality -- the designated Washington Generals just to filll out the bracket. And yes, the fact that it was all we had does indeed make us vaguely pathetic in that era.

Now if you are like Portland, and nab the #8 seed next year as the first of a long line of playoff runs wiht all the talent you need to one day be a #5 seed, then a #3 seed, then a #1 seed and contender etc., then #8 is acceptable. If you are Atlanta and hope that you have enough young talent to be dangerous as a contender one day, then fine. If on the other hand you do it with one young starter, and then a bunch of 30 yr old vets, you are a joke. Worse yet, you are blatantly insulting the intelligence of your fanbase.

And what if you do it with 3 or 4 young starters and a few young players off the bench? For example, and I'm not saying this will happen but just throwing the scenario out there-

We keep Artest or Salmons, 1 of them starts at SF. Martin starts at SG. Miller is dealt and Hawes has a breakout year. The guy we drafts is starter calibre and is in our rotation next year, even if he doesn't actually start but lets say he's getting 20+ MPG. Lets say we have Beno at PG and Shelden, Cisco, Douby as contributors off the bench. Is that a wasted effort? Because I think the playoff experience could help the guys like Hawes, Beno, our pick, Cisco, Shelden, Douby, even KMart.

 

[JayBird]

ALL teams are too good for the 8th seed -- it is a loser's goal, acceptable only as a stepping stone to better things. If you aren't stepping, then you are wasting your time, and playing to lose much moreso than that team tanking to get the #1 pick. At least they have ambition. At least they have the guts to try.

And yes, the playoffa in our first year in Sacto were a complete waste. We were a joke and did not know it. The playoffs in '95 or whatever were also a complete waste. The only difference there is that if you squinted in true homer fashion you might dream of more that would follow. Since there never was, it was a pointless exercise -- we weren't in the playoffs at all. The "playoffs", as the name indicates, are a tournament to determine who will be champion. We had no shot, none. We were a technicality -- the designated Washington Generals just to filll out the bracket. And yes, the fact that it was all we had does indeed make us vaguely pathetic in that era.

Now if you are like Portland, and nab the #8 seed next year as the first of a long line of playoff runs wiht all the talent you need to one day be a #5 seed, then a #3 seed, then a #1 seed and contender etc., then #8 is acceptable. If you are Atlanta and hope that you have enough young talent to be dangerous as a contender one day, then fine. If on the other hand you do it with one young starter, and then a bunch of 30 yr old vets, you are a joke. Worse yet, you are blatantly insulting the intelligence of your fanbase.

And what were the '99 Knicks like? You know, that vaguely pathetic, loser-goal-driven team that went to the finals?

All I'm saying is, anything can happen in the playoffs. The warriors proved that less than a year ago. Even with the kings' current roster (which i hope doesn't return in its entirety next season), when they played to their full potential, they were pretty damn difficult to beat (evidenced by wins over every division winner this season). Who is to say they can't put together a string of 4 such games in 7?

I don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence, and up until a season ago, i was all about tanking and blowing up and starting all over. But Petrie's proven he's just not going to do that, and now I'm just tired of losing. So if the choices are, play hard and get as close to 45-50 wins, nab an 8th spot, and see what happens from there (all the while securing a #15-20 pick), versus the kings version of "tanking", which we've seen the last 2 years, and end up with a #10-15 pick, I say playoffs. Realistically, pure tanking is just not an option, because like I said earlier, if Petrie wanted to do this, I think it would have happened by now. Just my .02.

Sorry for continuing in the hijacking of this thread. Um... Theus looks good in suits. Yay.

 

[Superman]

Quite a few actually -- I could name at least a dozen without even thinking about it (just to fire them off to prove the point Riley, Avery, Adelman, Bird, Dunleavy, Popovich, Carlisle, Tomjanovich, Ainge, Westphal, either Van Gundy etc.).

D'Antoni, no?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

And what were the '99 Knicks like? You know, that vaguely pathetic, loser-goal-driven team that went to the finals?

Are you referring to the Knicks team that got throttled in the Finals, and haven't been heard from since? Is that what you aspire to? And, supposing that it is, here's why that couldn't happen to us: 1) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, the top teams in the west aren't teams that are in any immediate danger of falling off. In fact, with the exception of the Spurs, the top four teams in the west are all young, and will continue to be the top teams in the west for a while, 2) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, there aren't any other teams that are already better than us that are threatening to be the next team to break through (Portland), 3) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, we don't have a team where we have a prohibitive matchup that favors us (Heat) to where we can score an upset...

And, the oft-overlooked 4) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, we don't have a Hall-of-Famer on our team. A lot of people like to ignore the fact that Ewing played the first eleven games of the playoffs that year; he wasn't too injured to play until the Eastern Conference Finals, and it could be fairly argued that they wouldn't even have made it to the ECF if he hadn't been able to play for as long as he did.

So, unless you see 1) the Lakers, Hornets and Jazz falling off any time soon, 2) a top-tier team in the west that we would actually be considered a good bet to upset (like with Golden State and Dallas) and 3) a future Hall-of-Famer on the Kings that would be able to get us through the first two rounds through force of will, let's not try to aspire to be the 1999 Knicks, okay?

 

[fnordius]

And what were the '99 Knicks like? You know, that vaguely pathetic, loser-goal-driven team that went to the finals?

Funny, I never looked at them that way. I thought they were Ewing's legendary defensive team, which only sputtered when they were having injury problems. But they were, by then, a pretty old team, so it only took a couple more years for them to become the pathetic losers you described. Pity for them that they took their fan base and income for granted, so never really got around to doing a proper rebuild.

...blowing up and starting all over. But Petrie's proven he's just not going to do that, and now I'm just tired of losing.

I really hope that you're wrong. If all we'll get in the next 2-3 years is the Muss Kings with minor roster variations and improved coaching, I'm not going to watch that. That show wasn't interesting enough the first time for me to sit through years of reruns, whether they get the #8 seed or not. I want to see team play, and above all, I want to see a team that's moving towards a brighter future. Until that happens, my TV's going to stay dark.

 

[JayBird]

Are you referring to the Knicks team that got throttled in the Finals, and haven't been heard from since? Is that what you aspire to? And, supposing that it is, here's why that couldn't happen to us: 1) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, the top teams in the west aren't teams that are in any immediate danger of falling off. In fact, with the exception of the Spurs, the top four teams in the west are all young, and will continue to be the top teams in the west for a while, 2) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, there aren't any other teams that are already better than us that are threatening to be the next team to break through (Portland), 3) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, we don't have a team where we have a prohibitive matchup that favors us (Heat) to where we can score an upset...

And, the oft-overlooked 4) unlike with the Knicks in 1999, we don't have a Hall-of-Famer on our team. A lot of people like to ignore the fact that Ewing played the first eleven games of the playoffs that year; he wasn't too injured to play until the Eastern Conference Finals, and it could be fairly argued that they wouldn't even have made it to the ECF if he hadn't been able to play for as long as he did.

So, unless you see 1) the Lakers, Hornets and Jazz falling off any time soon, 2) a top-tier team in the west that we would actually be considered a good bet to upset (like with Golden State and Dallas) and 3) a future Hall-of-Famer on the Kings that would be able to get us through the first two rounds through force of will, let's not try to aspire to be the 1999 Knicks, okay?

I'm not "aspiring" to be the Knicks... just used them, along with the Warriors (and Nuggets of '94) to show that the number 8 seed isn't there just to lose. Any team can beat any other team on any given night, that's the beauty of sports. That's why we watch. If this wasn't true, every 1 seed would beat every 8 seed, every 2 over 7, and so on, until Boston beats LA in the finals. There. I spared you 2 months of wasting time actually watching the games. Upsets do happen, sometimes 8 seeds beat top seeds, so we shouldn't be so content with being a number 11 seed, with a pick that's 5 slots higher. That's all I'm saying. I enjoy watching the Kings play in May. I don't enjoy watching them LOSE (which would more than likely happen if they're an 8 seed), but I would take that over playing the "word game" and reading about the "TDOS" in every other thread. All I'm sayin...

I DO see the bigger picture. I do want to rebuild be relevant again. But, Petrie won't pull the plug and tank, so we're stuck in mediocrity. While we're there, is it that wrong to wanna throw in a couple playoff games in the mix, even if they are losses?

Maybe if we show some signs of life, make the playoffs, win a game or two(or...gasp...a series), a big name FA would actually want to come here. Or, we can stay in 10th-11th (cuz we don't suck enough to slip below the Seattle's, Memphis's, and Minnesota's of the world), and twiddle our thumbs while we sign amazing prospects like John Salmons, Reef, and Mikki Moore. Weeeee!

 

[Kingster]

Theus: "We will be (in the playoffs next year). We will be."

No wonder Theus wants Artest on his team: they both make outlandish predictions with nothing to back it up.

 

[Kingster]

If I had to guess the playoffs next year I would say the top teams will be New Orleans, Lakers, and Utah (winning their divisions). Teams that have a chance to make the playoffs are Houston, Portland, Denver, San Antonio, Dallas, Golden State, and Phoenix. There is ten teams right there.

Teams moving on up:

Portland is obviously on the way up because of the pick this year, and adding Oden to the mix.
Lakers as long as they have Gasol, Kobe, and Bynum are going to be a power.
Utah - Jazz have the "other" young PG phenom in Williams. The team isn;t the youngest, but they have the base, and the right coach for him.
New Orleans - Hornets have arguably the best PG in the NBA, and a young PF. Chandler, and Peja are still young enough to make excellent role players for years to come.


Vultures could be circling:

San Antonio - How long can they ride Duncan before it's all over?
Phoenix - Will Shaq last the whole season? How long will Nash hold up?
Denver - Camby? Iverson? How long will those two last? Carmello can't do it on his own.
Dallas - Kidd might not have been the best trade, and now they are stuck with him.
Golden State - What if the W's lose Baron to free agency?
Houston - without that 20+ game win streak they would have had trouble making the playoffs this year.



Teams looking up at the ten teams above looking to take one of the spots:

Sacramento - Kings have one of the best SG/SF rotations in the league and a good young center. Improved this year record wise even though the competition got better.
Clippers - Clippers have Brand back, and Livingston, but will they be the same? Brand isn't that young, and who knows if Livingston can make a full recovery? BUT Thorton, and Kaman are great starts to a good team.

Cellar teams next year:

Seattle or Oklahoma? - Kevin Durant, and Green are good starts, but it's obvious they are a few years away from contention.
Minnesota - T-Wolves have Jefferson, and a top pick this year. They played well late in the season, but are going to be at best a 30 win team next year.
Memphis - heh.... no way.. Conley is going to be good, and Gay is already, but they need to make some personnel changes because the team doesn't mesh very well. Warrick is not a PF either so I wish they would stop playing him there. Also, it's safe to say Milicic is a bust

Our competition is Portand, Lakers, Utah, NO, and Houston (Yao will be back), as well as Seattle/OK, Minn, and Memphis, and then maybe a couple of the others. That's our competition 2-3 years from now. Next year we'll be in mediocre city, so who the heck cares? How many times did we get beat by those 3 young teams this year, and we, with our veteran laden team for the most part? That's a major warning sign. When you can't beat the inexperienced teams, just whallop them, because you're vets are outmatched physically and athletically so much that their experience and smarts can't make up the difference, you are in deeeeeeeeeep trouble down the line unless you make MAJOR changes. And I don't want to hear that our team just couldn't get psychologically up for those young athletic teams. Our team was outmatched athletically by those teams, that's why lost so many. Trouble lies ahead. How long has Milwaukee been mediocre? Double it by two - that's the risk the Kings face.

 

[Kingster]

I disagree with it being meaningless. Sure if we traded away all of our young players just to get the #8 seed with older veterans that would be pointless. However, having a core of young players with a couple of veterans that gets the 8 seed even to be slaughtered is a positive. Shoot, the '99 Kings that lost to the Jazz in 5 had no chance of winning the championship that year, but I wouldn't call it an excercise in futility. It built momentum, gave our young guys valuable playoff experience, attracted free agents and inflated the trade value of all of our players. If a core of Martin, Garcia, Hawes, Williams, Douby, Salmons and this year's pick can take us to the 8 seed with Artest and Miller that's good progress and has real value for the franchise.

We can't progress with Artest on the roster.

 

[fnordius]

No wonder Theus wants Artest on his team: they both make outlandish predictions with nothing to back it up.

Don't think of it as a prediction, think of it more like this.

 

[VF21]

And fnordius wins the thread.

 

[kennadog]

Too funny, fnordius.

 

[Fresno King]

That was so soothing... and funny at the same time.

 

[Sluggah]

hahaha. awesome fnordius

 

[fnordius]

Now if I could just come up with some posters to inspire Kings fans...

piksi, you busy?