What do we think of Petrie now?
- Thread starter tyrant
- Start date
Not sure it's a matter of whether or not the Brothers Maloof trust Petrie, but instead cannot stay out of the team's business.
I think their overzealous behavior sometimes gets in the way of them getting in the way (does that even make sense?
).
And with respect to the Webber trade, I give Petrie more credit for pulling the trigger on that deal than the Maloofs. While I didn't favor that move, I can see Geoff making the call on that one simply from a financial perspective, regardless of the Maloofs influence...
I think their overzealous behavior sometimes gets in the way of them getting in the way (does that even make sense?
).And with respect to the Webber trade, I give Petrie more credit for pulling the trigger on that deal than the Maloofs. While I didn't favor that move, I can see Geoff making the call on that one simply from a financial perspective, regardless of the Maloofs influence...
SactoGreg said:
Not sure it's a matter of whether or not the Brothers Maloof trust Petrie, but instead cannot stay out of the team's business.
I think their overzealous behavior sometimes gets in the way of them getting in the way (does that even make sense? ).
And with respect to the Webber trade, I give Petrie more credit for pulling the trigger on that deal than the Maloofs. While I didn't favor that move, I can see Geoff making the call on that one simply from a financial perspective, regardless of the Maloofs influence...
I think their overzealous behavior sometimes gets in the way of them getting in the way (does that even make sense?
).And with respect to the Webber trade, I give Petrie more credit for pulling the trigger on that deal than the Maloofs. While I didn't favor that move, I can see Geoff making the call on that one simply from a financial perspective, regardless of the Maloofs influence...
As far as the Webber trade goes, we'll most likely never know for sure. I just can't help but feel Petrie - left to his own devices - could have brokered a better deal (and NOT at the last minute which screams of pressure from above) than what he got.
I agree, VF21.
My biggest two issues with the trade were:
1) It didn't improve the team from a basketball perspective (i.e.- didn't get enough in return for Webber).
2) It was done mid-year. Chemistry disaster!
But, what's done is done. Now Petrie, the Maloofs and the fans must live with their decision.
We may never see the fruits of this trade materialize...
My biggest two issues with the trade were:
1) It didn't improve the team from a basketball perspective (i.e.- didn't get enough in return for Webber).
2) It was done mid-year. Chemistry disaster!
But, what's done is done. Now Petrie, the Maloofs and the fans must live with their decision.
We may never see the fruits of this trade materialize...
That's an overly simplistic way of looking at things; a pair of twos will beat an ace-high, but that doesn't make a pair of twos a good hand. Saying that four roleplayers is better than one injured superstar, one roleplayer, and one paperweight, isn't saying much of anything at all. Also, Wells may or may not be > Mobley (and head-to-head comparison certainly doesn't support that argument), and he certainly hasn't proven himself to be >> Mobley.
Just don't try to make it out to be more than it is, that's all I'm saying.
Just don't try to make it out to be more than it is, that's all I'm saying.
First of all, it is that simple. The point being made is that Petrie undoubtedly improved the team, whether or not you agree or disagree with the pieces we've acquired. Although Reef is far from being a "role player", his acquisition along with the trades for Corliss, Kenny and Brian does say a lot about Petrie's cunning business moves. I don't understand why you devalue this at all. We now have a starting PF who is arguably better than Webber right now plus toughness on the bench. Maybe we don't have a dominant PF like Chris was when healthy, but the overall talent is hightened to near contention level.
If you do a career head to head comparison between Bonzi and Cuttino, you'll see that the only stat that Mobley has an advantage is in points per game. Just don't forget that Wells' minutes were limited in Memphis and that affected is over productivity. If you look at his tenure in Portland, you'll see that Bonzi's overall stats were better than Mobley's.
But stats don't tell the whole story. Bonzi is a more complete player. He may not have the 3pt accuracy as Cuttino, but has a better post game, plays better defense, is taller and much stronger. All the attributes that will make him more valuable to the Kings than Cat, thus....
Wells>>>Cuttino!
If you do a career head to head comparison between Bonzi and Cuttino, you'll see that the only stat that Mobley has an advantage is in points per game. Just don't forget that Wells' minutes were limited in Memphis and that affected is over productivity. If you look at his tenure in Portland, you'll see that Bonzi's overall stats were better than Mobley's.
But stats don't tell the whole story. Bonzi is a more complete player. He may not have the 3pt accuracy as Cuttino, but has a better post game, plays better defense, is taller and much stronger. All the attributes that will make him more valuable to the Kings than Cat, thus....
Wells>>>Cuttino!
It's not that simple. As is, I don't think the team is improved. I think things like leadership and experience playing together factor into any equation just like talent does. I also think how the pieces fit together affects the overall value. You might think Shareef, Thomas, Skinner and Williamson>>>Webber, Barnes and Bradley, but I think Shareef, Thomas, Skinner and Williamson<Webber, Barnes and Bradley simply because of the intangibles that Webber brought that the Kings don't have right now, and because only five guys play at a time. Also, Wells might be better than Christie overall, but is he really a better fit for the team?
There are actually a bunch of arguments that assert that your statement is incorrect. It's really not that simple.
There are actually a bunch of arguments that assert that your statement is incorrect. It's really not that simple.
I agree. Overall, I don't think the team is improved. My expectations for this year are lower than they were at this time last year. I still think we'll be good, but I don't think we're contenders. We are throwing some talent onto the court, but how they work together is going to be a big part of how good this team is this year. Comparing players on paper is just that, but sometimes the intangibles are difference makers.
Your expectations are lower than they were last year? Really?
Let's see. This time last year, we:
1) had a Webber coming out of injury calling out players,
2) a disgruntled Peja who wanted out,
3) a pissed of Vlade who decided to go to the Lakers,
4) a Bobby Jackson who some thought faked the seriousness of his injuries,
5) lost Gerald Wallace, Anthony Peeler and Tony Massenberg,
5) signed an unknown rookie SG from Western Somewhere U,
6) signed Ostertag to a 2yr contract at the MLE!!!, (How much did we sign SAR for?)
7) resigned Songaila,
8) signed Courtney Alexander and thought he might actually be something, AND
9) Blumenthal and Daniels were good enough to get spots on the roster.
ARE YOU SERIOUS???
Let's see. This time last year, we:
1) had a Webber coming out of injury calling out players,
2) a disgruntled Peja who wanted out,
3) a pissed of Vlade who decided to go to the Lakers,
4) a Bobby Jackson who some thought faked the seriousness of his injuries,
5) lost Gerald Wallace, Anthony Peeler and Tony Massenberg,
5) signed an unknown rookie SG from Western Somewhere U,
6) signed Ostertag to a 2yr contract at the MLE!!!, (How much did we sign SAR for?)
7) resigned Songaila,
8) signed Courtney Alexander and thought he might actually be something, AND
9) Blumenthal and Daniels were good enough to get spots on the roster.
ARE YOU SERIOUS???
I still don't understand after a few pages how last years team is better then what we have... CONSIDERING we haven't seen this team play together! How can someone make a judgement based on not seeing the current team play? Sure at the end of the season this is an arguement to entertain but right now makes no sense to me.
We haven't seen this years team yet, so to compare it to that one doesn't mean much to me. As Petrie said, we are a different team. I personally believe this team can't do any worse then the team that started off last year. We fattened up on weak teams and got crushed by the legit ones. If you look at the first half of last season, I think we were barely over .500 against the teams that made it in to the playoffs.
It should be obvious, we are discussing what we think, not what is fact. We are using facts and history to back up our opinions, but they are only opinions. Of course we can have an opinion as to whether this year's team will be better than last year's. It's just an educated guess based on a bunch of factors. Isn't that a huge part of what these message boards are, especially in the off season. It is not a question of whether the team is better than last year, it is a question of whether we think it will be.
So you weigh factors like offensive and defensive ability, balance, experience, etc. You look at the current roster and see that the team as constructed has never played together, and you factor that into the part of the equation that considers a team's experience and chemistry into how well they'll do. You also look at last year's roster and see that not only had the core of that team played together, but other than Miller they had been inches away from the NBA finals together, and been through years of playoff battles together. I think many are too quick to discount that factor. You look at defense and rebounding and see that they haven't improved (and might have gotten worse). You see that the number of scoring options has increased, and the likelihood of injury is probably lower. You add all these things together to come up with your guess.
It is not as simple at looking at talent and saying this team is better than that one. (And even if it was based on talent, I still think that last year's opening day squad rivaled the current roster in sheer talent).
It is not this simple, but as a starting point, let's look at the basic teams. The following takes into account things like leadership and experience and is a little generous against my personal viewpoint:
Miller == Miller
Webber >> Abdur-Rahim
Stojakovic == Stojakovic
Christie < Wells
Bibby == Bibby
Songaila/Jackson/Bench < Thomas/Hart/Bench
What makes this year's roster better than last year's? Where does your opinion differ? What is so obvious, plain or simple?
P.S. This thread is about how good a job Petrie has done. I wanted to point out that somebody can think that last year's opening day roster is better than the current roster and still think that Petrie is making the right moves for the team. These ideas are not mutually exclusive.
It is not as simple at looking at talent and saying this team is better than that one. (And even if it was based on talent, I still think that last year's opening day squad rivaled the current roster in sheer talent).
It is not this simple, but as a starting point, let's look at the basic teams. The following takes into account things like leadership and experience and is a little generous against my personal viewpoint:
Miller == Miller
Webber >> Abdur-Rahim
Stojakovic == Stojakovic
Christie < Wells
Bibby == Bibby
Songaila/Jackson/Bench < Thomas/Hart/Bench
What makes this year's roster better than last year's? Where does your opinion differ? What is so obvious, plain or simple?
P.S. This thread is about how good a job Petrie has done. I wanted to point out that somebody can think that last year's opening day roster is better than the current roster and still think that Petrie is making the right moves for the team. These ideas are not mutually exclusive.
1. Who was still better than SAR is.
2. Who's on-court performance is different from a happy Peja in what way?
3. Highly debatable, but he seemed used up and we had Miller.
4. By some you mean Grant Napear.
5. Martin was never expected to contribute no matter what school he was from
6. Big body to back up Brad, solid move. (Can't make Adelman play him)
7. Solid move.
8. Took a flyer on a guy who had bounced around. Same as Jason Hart.
9. And we'll have camp fodder this year as well, just like every other team in the league.
2. Who's on-court performance is different from a happy Peja in what way?
3. Highly debatable, but he seemed used up and we had Miller.
4. By some you mean Grant Napear.
5. Martin was never expected to contribute no matter what school he was from
6. Big body to back up Brad, solid move. (Can't make Adelman play him)
7. Solid move.
8. Took a flyer on a guy who had bounced around. Same as Jason Hart.
9. And we'll have camp fodder this year as well, just like every other team in the league.
I find it interesting that people say last year's roster was better than the current one and bring up chemistry as one of the reasons. Don't people realise that chemistry was shot this time last year??????
Webber and Peja didn't get along, Vlade thought he had enough of that and left for LA. The chemistry last year was ridicilous. Peja was moping around, and hence was less effective than he normally is.
Chemistry at this time last year was shot. We also can't make any sort of assesment on the chemistry of the current squad because the players have never played together.
Why can't we wait until the camp to make more educated guesses on this one.
Time will tell if this is the better squad than the one that started last year. One thing we can say is that this current squad is not as injury prone as the one from last year. You still have Peja and Miller who are injury prone but gone are Jackson and Webber. The key players we have signed up now generally don't miss many games so that one positive.
Webber and Peja didn't get along, Vlade thought he had enough of that and left for LA. The chemistry last year was ridicilous. Peja was moping around, and hence was less effective than he normally is.
Chemistry at this time last year was shot. We also can't make any sort of assesment on the chemistry of the current squad because the players have never played together.
Why can't we wait until the camp to make more educated guesses on this one.
Time will tell if this is the better squad than the one that started last year. One thing we can say is that this current squad is not as injury prone as the one from last year. You still have Peja and Miller who are injury prone but gone are Jackson and Webber. The key players we have signed up now generally don't miss many games so that one positive.
In what way? Honestly, on the court, how can you tell? Does he rebound less, play worse defense, refuse to pass to teammates? No, because none of those things are part of his game anyway. Peja shoots. He shoots when he is happy, he shoots when he is sad. And because he is so meek, it's not like him pouting is going to blow up a locker room like TO. If we really traded Webber to improve chemistry I have to think that is one of the dumbest moves of all time. You don't have to be best friends to play winning basketball. Now, you do have to have a burning desire to win, and be willing to do what it takes to put a W on the board. There needs to be respect and trust on the court that everybody is a warrior out there, but you don't need to hit the clubs together.
BRAVO!
Having said that, I am not ready to make any judgments about this year's team quite yet. I am optimistic that they will come to camp, that they will gel as a team and that they will step up and get the job done. I am NOT going to deride former players; I am not going to try and rewrite Kings history as some - meaning Les Jepson in this case - seem wont to do.
Your "facts" aren't facts, LJ. They're your opinions, which you're entitled to but just because you present a list, it doesn't mean everything on your list is true or even accurate. BTW, you have two #5...
As uolj has mentioned, this thread is about the kind of job we think Petrie has done. In that regard, I think he's done about as well as could be reasonably expected considering the restraints he's faced. I also do not think he's done.
GO KINGS!!!!!
Having said that, I am not ready to make any judgments about this year's team quite yet. I am optimistic that they will come to camp, that they will gel as a team and that they will step up and get the job done. I am NOT going to deride former players; I am not going to try and rewrite Kings history as some - meaning Les Jepson in this case - seem wont to do.
Your "facts" aren't facts, LJ. They're your opinions, which you're entitled to but just because you present a list, it doesn't mean everything on your list is true or even accurate. BTW, you have two #5...
As uolj has mentioned, this thread is about the kind of job we think Petrie has done. In that regard, I think he's done about as well as could be reasonably expected considering the restraints he's faced. I also do not think he's done.
GO KINGS!!!!!