Only in a few cases. The poison has worked in largely the opposite way. The problem is its easy and sloppy mentally to personify evil. Oh, they're the evil ones over there, and over here are the good ones. Ironically being a fan of an irrelevant ball bouncing exhibition is one of the few places where such simplistic thinking ever has legitimate cause -- you are relieved of nuanced thinking when they wear red, and you wear purple. Then its obvious they are evil and you are good. Many sports fans embrace sports fandom for exactly that simple release.
But even fan thinking should not apply as its happened here. Here the Maloofs were evil you see. Its easy, and quick, and simple and doesn't tax the brain much to make it out that way. The Maloofs just were evil. And now the new ownership is good. And that provides all the answers that are needed. That's the poison. That's the effect of all the Maloof antics.
The truth of course is that people aren't all good, and they aren't all evil. There are murderers who love their mom, their are philanthropists who had to step on necks to get in a position to help. And there were Maloofs, who from a basketball operations standpoint were the owners of the very best teams in franchise history...as well as later the owners during another dark age as they tried to steal it. What made their recent decisions "evil" was not that it was the Maloofs making those decisions, it was that the decisions sucked and/or had slimy motives. That's the "evil" as it applies to an NBA front office. And Vivek and Co. now making the current decisions has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the quality or "good/evil" of those decisions. Unless of course you have been poisoned, conditioned by the Maloof is evil chant, which was necessary to save the team, and the Vivek is good response natural to lavish upon a savior. Then its simple. Maloofs made evil moves. Vivek makes good ones. Which doesn't make you so much a Kings fan at the moment as a Vivek and Co. fan.
My standards for judging moves have never nudged once. They didn't nudge in 2002 when I lauded our front office's moves, in 2005 when I mocked them, in 2009-10 when I lauded them again, or the last few years when I have attacked them relentlessly. And they certainly haven't moved an inch just because a new rich guy stuck his name over the door. Off the court for Sacramento that's all nifty and good news. For the Sacramento Kings as a basketball team, that's irrelevant. All that matters is the moves. Make moves like the Kings have the last few years and you will suck, whether the Maloofs make them, Vivek makes them, Pat Riley makes them, or The Great Spaghetti Monster comes down from on high to make them. Make moves like the Kings did in the early 2000s and you will be great. And I don't care whether the Maloofs make them, Vivek, makes them, or whoever. But a great many putative Kings fans do.
In the classic logic square:
Maloof Move Vivek Move
Good Move Bad Move
There are a lot of people almost flat out denying the possibility of 2 of the 4 outcomes: Good Maloof Move (which is irrelevant) or Bad Vivek Move. There is your poison. Its a poison to the ability to reason.
Well, you went a lot of places I didn't go. Yes, I did refer to the Maloofs, but I was mostly referring to the results, of which they happened to be a part. Regardless of who the owners were, a climate of losing was created. Rename the owner Godzilla if you will. All I care about is the direction the team took, and how the climate that was created can not only poison the team, but the fan base. Losing mentalities are hard to reverse if left in place too long. Particularly if you don't have a couple of elite players to help in that regard.
I'm not calling the Maloofs the bad guys, and Vivek and Co the good guys. There's no doubt that for a period of time, the Maloofs were loved here. At the moment, the new owners are loved here. All that can change of course, just like it did with the Maloofs. I think the difference between you and I comes down to two different approaches. I'm not one to just jump to conclusions about people and decisions that they may have made. Give me a project, and I'll sit and study it for two weeks before I lift a hand toward starting it. I care about results, and I'm a believer that haste makes waste. As a result, I won't pass judgement on someone's plan, until I see the entire plan. Until that happens, its just a puzzle to me with a lot of the pieces missing.
I wasn't always that way. When I was young I made snap judgments on just about everything, and I ended up being wrong as many times as I was right, maybe more. So from your point of view, I may be late to the party with criticism at times. In this instance with new ownership, I'm going to be patient. I'm not going to be critical of a move they make, just because I don't quite understand why they made it. I was as confused as everyone else by the Landry move. I didn't see it as disastrous, but I didn't see Landry as a big need. Unless your contemplating another move sometime in the future. A move that I'd know nothing about.
As I've stated many times, I'm a results oriented person, and I don't think anyone can possibly judge the results without one game being played, and at least a couple of seasons of drafting and making trades having passed. Well, obviously you can pass judgement! You can call them stupid, or rank amateurs if you want. But from my perspective that's premature. Which gets back to my original point. To me its premature, but its actually quite normal, when the team culture has been nothing but losing for as long as it has, regardless of whose responsible. The fans have already heard too many pep talks before every season. Just because someone new is leading the cheer, it doesn't change the negative vibe that's been attached to this team. Only positive results will change that.
So because my approach is different than yours, it doesn't mean I'm giving them a free pass. I can be as critical as you, but at the same time, I'd like to believe that my criticism is fair, and not just reactionary. I'm not saying there's a right or wrong way, I'm just telling you my way. I'll certainly agree that your way is far more entertaining than mine.
