Well... Bye.

[rainmaker]

No.

But in Vivek's case, he's got the money to own an NBA team (and part owner of Warriors before) as a result of being so smart. And PDA (who is also a lawyer) has credentials to show as being qualified to be GM. Vivek and PDA are probably more knowledgeable in running a basketball team than all the fans here collectively - by virtue of their experience alone however short it may be.

No, success in one field or a sector doesn't equate to automatic success in another. There's very wealthy businessmen who own sports teams across sports, both nationally and internationally and some are wild successes, others spectacular failures, and many which fall somewhere between. There's also plenty of GMs with good resumes who've done poorly and vice versa.

But as far as Vivek, many here have more experience when it comes to the game of basketball than he does.

By your argument, if Vivek decided to buy majority control of Victoria's Secret tomorrow, he'd be an expert on women's lingerie. If you went to court tomorrow on some charge, would you have Vivek represent you because "he's got money" or would you hire a proven lawyer? I'd call Bricklayer far before I'd call Vivek, as despite not being worth billions he's got experience in the field.

If having money equated to being a successful basketball owner, then we wouldn't have sucked so much for the majority of our existence, nor would a number of other teams. Wealthy owners fail and wealthy owners succeed, all the time.

BTW, the guy with more experience than either PDA or Vivek combined? Michael Malone. Grew up in a basketball family. Father was a coach. Raised around the game. He's basketball lifer. If knowledge and experience mean anything to you, which you're arguing it does, you should be furious over Malone's firing.

 

[randymoss1881]

No, success in one field or a sector doesn't equate to automatic success in another. There's very wealthy businessmen who own sports teams across sports, both nationally and internationally and some are wild successes, others spectacular failures, and many which fall somewhere between. There's also plenty of GMs with good resumes who've done poorly and vice versa.

But as far as Vivek, many here have more experience when it comes to the game of basketball than he does.

By your argument, if Vivek decided to buy majority control of Victoria's Secret tomorrow, he'd be an expert on women's lingerie. If you went to court tomorrow on some charge, would you have Vivek represent you because "he's got money" or would you hire a proven lawyer? I'd call Bricklayer far before I'd call Vivek, as despite not being worth billions he's got experience in the field.

If having money equated to being a successful basketball owner, then we wouldn't have sucked so much of the majority of our existence, nor would a number of other teams. Wealthy owners fail and wealthy owners succeed, all the time.

BTW, the guy with more experience than either PDA or Vivek combined? Michael Malone. Grew up in a basketball family. Father was a coach. Raised around the game. He's basketball lifer. If knowledge and experience mean anything to you, which you're arguing it does, you should be furious over Malone's firing.

I will always side with the guy who bleeds basketball over a rich guy who just bought the team.

 

[BringMonarchsBack]

It just seems like it's the same old stuff with this organization except with new people running the show. It's hard for me to see a bright side through all of this if the team management plans on doing what they are rumored to believe in. It's scary. It's haunting how much of a train wreck this organization is.

On a brighter note: one positive to look forward to is the new arena and Ranadive possibly bringing back the Monarchs

 

[Prince_XY]

By your argument, if Vivek decided to buy majority control of Victoria's Secret tomorrow, he'd be an expert on women's lingerie. If you went to court tomorrow on some charge, would you have Vivek represent you because "he's got money" or would you hire a proven lawyer? I'd call Bricklayer far before I'd call Vivek, as despite not being worth billions he's got experience in the field.

And what exactly do I have (or most of us as fans) in terms of owning an NBA team or running an NBA team?

Correct.

NADA.

If you are to buy an NBA team and run it, would you get more information and therefore consult a fan like Brick OR would you ask a previous part owner (and now an NBA owner) like Vivek?

If you are to hire a GM, would you really consider a fan from this board (even a lawyer like Brick who's got no experience in running an NBA team) more than another lawyer like PDA who's got years of experience "inside the NBA"?

No pun intended, but I think you are nuts if you will say you'll go for Brick.

BTW, the guy with more experience than either PDA or Vivek combined? Michael Malone. Grew up in a basketball family. Father was a coach. Raised around the game. He's basketball lifer. If knowledge and experience mean anything to you, which you're arguing it does, you should be furious over Malone's firing.

I like Malone and I agree the timing of firing him was bad, especially considering the reasons Vivek and PDA came out with. But I cannot be furious of his firing, because he was indeed NOT a very good coach. Malone had terrible in-game adjustments, ineffective substitution patterns, and he is a very inexperienced coach not suitable for this team.

What kind of an NBA coach would have the idea of giving the ball to an under-performing rookie at crunch time?

I could have forgiven the blunder if Stauskas is a number 1 or 2 pick or if Stauskas was having an extra-special performance for that night.

I can understand if that was a high school game he was coaching. But this is NBA where millions and millions of dollars are being spent just to win and we needed every win we could get.

If I was Vivek, I could have fired Malone for thoughtlessly wasting my money during that game.

Was he on dope during that game or it just shows us how terrible of a coach he is and would be?

 

[dude12]

And what exactly do I have (or most of us as fans) in terms of owning an NBA team or running an NBA team?

Correct.

NADA.

If you are to buy an NBA team and run it, would you get more information and therefore consult a fan like Brick OR would you ask a previous part owner (and now an NBA owner) like Vivek?

If you are to hire a GM, would you really consider a fan from this board (even a lawyer like Brick who's got no experience in running an NBA team) more than another lawyer like PDA who's got years of experience "inside the NBA"?

No pun intended, but I think you are nuts if you will say you'll go for Brick.


I like Malone and I agree the timing of firing him was bad, especially considering the reasons Vivek and PDA came out with. But I cannot be furious though of his firing, because he was indeed not a very good coach. Malone had terrible in-game adjustments, ineffective substitution patterns, and he is a very inexperienced coach not suitable for this team.

What kind of an NBA coach would have the idea of giving the ball to an under-performing rookie at crunch time?

I could have forgiven the blunder if Stauskas is a number 1 or 2 pick or if Stauskas was having an extra-special performance for that night.

I can understand if that was a high school game he was coaching. But this is NBA where millions and millions of dollars are being spent just to win and we needed every win we could get.

If I was Vivek, I could have fired Malone for thoughtlessly wasting my money during that game.

Was he on dope during that game or it just shows us how terrible of a coach he is and would be?

FYI, Stauskas wasn't supposed to get the ball on that play and I don't have a link but it was said by Napear during his show. And personally, I think PDA has made good moves but this firing was bad. Unprecedented. Your really going to go against all of the "experts" in the NBA as well because most of the experts agree with us lowly forum posters.

 

[Prince_XY]

FYI, Stauskas wasn't supposed to get the ball on that play and I don't have a link but it was said by Napear during his show.

I think this poster probably answers your question better. Actually, it does not matter whether Stauskas was supposed to get the ball. The stupid mistake was just magnified by the fact that Stauskas got the ball. It should never happened if Malone is competent enough to have cared about basketball coaching 101. This was why I thought Malone was either using drugs or probably he is just flat out not a good coach.

That is the part that I DO NOT understand. I cant see any scenario where bringing in Stauskas with the game on the line is a good coaching move. He was not shooting the lights out. His defense was porous, and he looked scared.

Your really going to go against all of the "experts" in the NBA as well because most of the experts agree with us lowly forum posters.

I think this time around WE, (you call lowly forum posters), succumbed to bite those so-called "experts" bait. Some of those "experts" don't even have time to watch and observe how the Kings play and therefore did not see the repeated mistakes of Malone in coaching. They just went about the win-loss record which should have been better if we had a better coach. And some of those nicer experts, for wanting to be politically correct, gave consoling statements to cheer-up Malone.

Can you imagine the repercussion if any of those people (Kings players, coaches, or even Vivek and PDA) will say something like "Yeah, coach Malone sucks and that is why he got fired".

Remember when majority in this forum agreed to the decision to let IT go and most articles we read say it was a mistake?

 

[dude12]

I think this poster probably answers your question better. Actually, it does not matter whether Stauskas was supposed to get the ball. The stupid mistake was just magnified by the fact that Stauskas got the ball. It should never happened if Malone is competent enough to have cared about basketball coaching 101. This was why I thought Malone was either using drugs or probably he is just flat out not a good coach.


I think this time around WE, (you call lowly forum posters), succumbed to bite those so-called "experts" bait. Some of those "experts" don't even have time to watch and observe how the Kings play and therefore did not see the repeated mistakes of Malone in coaching. They just went about the win-loss record which should have been better if we had a better coach. And some of those nicer experts, for wanting to be politically correct, gave statements to cheer-up Malone.

Can you imagine the repercussion if any of those people (Kings players, coaches, or even Vivek and PDA) will say something like "Yeah, coach Malone sucks and he deserves to get fired".

Remember when majority in this forum agreed to the decision to let IT go and most articles we read say it was a mistake?

Lol...you believe what you want to believe. If it makes you happy, then roll with it.