Why do you want to lose?

[Spike]

I understand people want to make changes, but a major theme I keep hearing is: "that way we can lose some games and get a better draft pick."

Why on earth would you ever want to put yourself in a position to LOSE games?! As a basketball coach, I cannot fathom this, draft pick or not. This isn't the NFL, where you can guarantee yourself a pick. I find it dishonest as a fan to want to wish a bad game (or 50) on a team you enjoy cheering even with the potential for future success. Is there anyone else besides Oden (if he comes out) who would make as big an impact? (Don't say Noah )

Again, to clarify, I understand when rebuilding losses will mount up, and that is not my bother. My bother is people hoping and wishing for losses...it just doesn't make sense. You can rebuild and still hope for your team to win games.

 

[Bricklayer]

I understand people want to make changes, but a major theme I keep hearing is: "that way we can lose some games and get a better draft pick."

Why on earth would you ever want to put yourself in a position to LOSE games?! As a basketball coach, I cannot fathom this, draft pick or not. This isn't the NFL, where you can guarantee yourself a pick. I find it dishonest as a fan to want to wish a bad game (or 50) on a team you enjoy cheering even with the potential for future success. Is there anyone else besides Oden (if he comes out) who would make as big an impact? (Don't say Noah )

Again, to clarify, I understand when rebuilding losses will mount up, and that is not my bother. My bother is people hoping and wishing for losses...it just doesn't make sense. You can rebuild and still hope for your team to win games.

I sometimes think that people really don't understand the life cycle of an NBA team. Losing, losing BIG, is every bit as much of a normal and natural part of a team's development as the winning years are. It is absolutley how you reload on talent, and most critically, how you acquire the young franchise cornerstone talent that top teams need to build around.

And no this isn't football, and that is precisely WHY its far more important in this league, than in any other major one I can think off, to get that top pick. A superstar caliber player means far more in basketball than it does in football (either football) baseball, hockey etc. Small court, few players, all players can do everything -- no set positions/roles. Acquiring the mega player is the ultimate bonanza in basketball. And as I detailed in another thread a couple of days ago every single contending team in the league with the exception of the Pistons has drafted 1 or more high lottery picks at the core of their current team (Lakers are a borderline case). Thsoe damn dishonest fans in Miami (Wade #5 pick) Dallas (Dirk #10 pick) Spursland (Duncan #1pick) etc. etc. must really be crying in their beer right now about how terrible it is to be int eh title hunt every year.

Scenario #1:

Win 44, draft #17
Win 43 draft #16
Win 41
Win 45
Win 39
etc.

Scenario #2:

Win 29 (draft #6)
Win 35 (draft #10)
Win 42
Win 48
Win 55
etc.


One of those two teams has a winning future, and its not the shortsighted one.

 

[VF21]

The only problem with playing to get the top pick is that we don't control the selection of the ping-pong balls. It's still pretty risky to play to the lottery...

And logic aside, I totally agree with the concept that it's almost impossible for a fan to root for his team to lose. And fans certainly aren't going to spend $300 or so to go to a game to watch a team tank...

It's a tricky situation and I think there's a good reason why some teams try to avoid it.

 

[love_them_kings]

The only problem with playing to get the top pick is that we don't control the selection of the ping-pong balls. It's still pretty risky to play to the lottery...

And logic aside, I totally agree with the concept that it's almost impossible for a fan to root for his team to lose. And fans certainly aren't going to spend $300 or so to go to a game to watch a team tank...

It's a tricky situation and I think there's a good reason why some teams try to avoid it.

I agree. While I can see the benefit of having a top pick, I am completely incapable of rooting for the team to lose. I love going to the games & watching the games, but if the Kings flat out said that they were tanking the season to go for a top pick I think I'd tune out for a season & come back later.

 

[hammystyle]

Is there anyone else besides Oden (if he comes out) who would make as big an impact? (Don't say Noah )

6' 10" 220 lb Kevin Durant. He's averaging 22 ppg 10 rpg 2 blocks 1.5 steals 93% FT 41% 3-Pointer. The guy is a freak and a future supserstar. Think Andrei Kirilenko on defense and a taller Tracy McGrady on offense.

The fact is, it looks like a very talented draft. Particularly with tall, athletic players with actual skills, something everyone knows the Kings need desperately. Basically if there was ever a year to go in the tank, this is the one.

I would normally agree that its all about winning. But Brick laid it out pretty well, its tough to see anything happening with this team over the next few years other fighting for 7th and 8th seeds with a first round exit...and that's like the best-case scenario.

 

[hrdboild]

Actually, I think the people rooting for their team to lose are the shortsighted ones. Because the goal there is instant gratification. We tank this season, then we get a top pick in this years draft, then we get a lot better next year rather than a little bit better. You're basically hoping to cheat the system by losing on purpose. Over time it's naturally going to even out. Every team is going to have ups and downs. We were all lucky enough to witness a Sacramento team at it's peak a couple of years ago. And you see the same thing with all championship teams. You're building for that one year when you can peak, and hopefully peak with a championship. Once that's over, you've got to find a new core and a new strategy for building your team. And that's been going on here. But we don't need to root for the Kings to lose. Maybe it's time for Utah to get a shot. Maybe Golden State is finally figuring things out. Maybe Clippers fans should get to watch some playoff games too. And in a couple seasons we'll be back and ready to contend again. GM's have got to think about the bottom line. If you go on a seesaw like that tanking seasons and then winning big, can you count on fan loyalty? I think the general strategy is to keep winning as many games as you can every year and then see what you can do to get better when it's over. Identify which players are a part of the future and which can be moved. When you start dumping talent on purpose hoping to get the big score, what happens when you get the number 7 pick instead of number 2 and it doesn't pan out? You're looking at another full season of losing and increasing fan apathy. That's not a good situation to get into if you're a GM and want to keep your job.

 

[Spike]

It's a tricky situation and I think there's a good reason why some teams try to avoid it.

Nonetheless we are apparently driving towards this situation fairly quickly, lest we witness a Christmas miracle.

I guess I'll be paying a little more attention to college hoops this year to see who may fall in Sacramento.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

Actually, I think the people rooting for their team to lose are the shortsighted ones. Because the goal there is instant gratification. We tank this season, then we get a top pick in this years draft, then we get a lot better next year rather than a little bit better. You're basically hoping to cheat the system by losing on purpose. Over time it's naturally going to even out. Every team is going to have ups and downs. We were all lucky enough to witness a Sacramento team at it's peak a couple of years ago. And you see the same thing with all championship teams. You're building for that one year when you can peak, and hopefully peak with a championship. Once that's over, you've got to find a new core and a new strategy for building your team. And that's been going on here. But we don't need to root for the Kings to lose. Maybe it's time for Utah to get a shot. Maybe Golden State is finally figuring things out. Maybe Clippers fans should get to watch some playoff games too. And in a couple seasons we'll be back and ready to contend again. GM's have got to think about the bottom line. If you go on a seesaw like that tanking seasons and then winning big, can you count on fan loyalty? I think the general strategy is to keep winning as many games as you can every year and then see what you can do to get better when it's over. Identify which players are a part of the future and which can be moved. When you start dumping talent on purpose hoping to get the big score, what happens when you get the number 7 pick instead of number 2 and it doesn't pan out? You're looking at another full season of losing and increasing fan apathy. That's not a good situation to get into if you're a GM and want to keep your job.

Nobody's saying to lose on purpose. To rebuild, generally some of your better players are traded for picks/exprings, and you have a losing season or two, not because of losing on purpose, but because it's setting up for an overhaul in the offseason.

Fan apathy normally builds when an organization is seemingly doing nothing to solve their woes and suck year after year (a la Portland). If the shortsighted ones jump ship during just one year of sucking, then they're bandwagoners.

And the problem with incrementally adding pieces to this team is that there is no cog to hold them all together. Championship teams and contenders are built around a player or two. If there's any draft year to pick up a solid franchise piece in the last 5 years or so, it's this one. Yes, it appears even more so than the 2003 draft.

 

[Obadicus]

Yeah lets get a few draft picks, expiring contracts and have a couple losing seasons then fans won't show up and we'll be moved out of sacramento.... no thanks. And you do not have to have losing seasons to rebuild and have a shot at championship.

 

[Bricklayer]

Actually, I think the people rooting for their team to lose are the shortsighted ones. Because the goal there is instant gratification. We tank this season, then we get a top pick in this years draft, then we get a lot better next year rather than a little bit better. You're basically hoping to cheat the system by losing on purpose. Over time it's naturally going to even out. Every team is going to have ups and downs. We were all lucky enough to witness a Sacramento team at it's peak a couple of years ago. And you see the same thing with all championship teams. You're building for that one year when you can peak, and hopefully peak with a championship. Once that's over, you've got to find a new core and a new strategy for building your team. And that's been going on here. But we don't need to root for the Kings to lose. Maybe it's time for Utah to get a shot. Maybe Golden State is finally figuring things out. Maybe Clippers fans should get to watch some playoff games too. And in a couple seasons we'll be back and ready to contend again. GM's have got to think about the bottom line. If you go on a seesaw like that tanking seasons and then winning big, can you count on fan loyalty? I think the general strategy is to keep winning as many games as you can every year and then see what you can do to get better when it's over. Identify which players are a part of the future and which can be moved. When you start dumping talent on purpose hoping to get the big score, what happens when you get the number 7 pick instead of number 2 and it doesn't pan out? You're looking at another full season of losing and increasing fan apathy. That's not a good situation to get into if you're a GM and want to keep your job.

No, its about controlling your own fate, and having a plan rather than just wobbling around in midair and evenutally falling to earth in a disorganized heap. "Just letting what happen that may" is not a plan, its a muddle.

As far as fan loyalty -- Sacramento's fanbase is currently eroding. Nobody likes to talk about it as afterall they are the greatest fans and blah blah blah, but its this, its insufferable mediocrity with no end in sight, that kills fanbases. The arena isn't full, not close despite what they say. You nab a top young talent or two, and even if you lose in the short term, the fanbase is reenergized. They've got something to look forward to. If its a long term losing mire...sure. But that's precisely why if you do it, you make it quick, sharp, and hopefully short. Dive in, with a plan, with certain pieces (likely Ron and Kevin) set aside, scoop up all the yougn talent you can in as short a period as you can, and rebound back up. Take a depressing decline that takes 5 years, and shorten it down to 1. Then its up to the basketball acumen of your front office to determine how long the rebuild is. As it is, all we have to do is rebuild to a .500 team to be just as good as we are now. You make good moves you could be back to that level in two years.

 

[BMiller52]

If Artest and Bibby play like they can I think this team can be better than they are. They're a bit below .500 right now despite a lot of injuries, our best players playing like crap and hopefully recovering from their injuries, having a new coach who doesn't know the roster too well, and we're missing a rebounder/shotblocker/interior defender. IMO if we get that guy, get healthy, and Artest and Bibby play like they can then we can be a lot better than .500. Don't forget that we've had a lot of things stacked against us this season.

 

[Bricklayer]

Don't forget that we've had a lot of things stacked against us this season.

a) so have a lot of other teams, Golden State has had injuries to all of its top players and a new coach, New Orleans has has major injuries to both Peja and West, Kobe started the season injured fo rhte Lakers, Phoenix has has the whoile Amare rehab thing going, TMac is down again in Houston, not to mention the Bonzi troubles, Josh Howard was down in Dallas, the Nuggets frontcourt has been a mess again as they lost Kenyon, and Nene for most fo the early going etc. etc. Almost every team can make similar claims.

b) so we get back over .500, so mayeb we win 46. That falls squarely into the "big whoop" column. Pointless. There are 6 teams in the West on pace to win 50 this year. Far too many between us and the prize. This is not our time, not our window. We had one, but that shut a few years ago. We may have one again in the future. But it won't be with this crew, and it won't happen at all if we don't prepare for it.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I don't "want" to lose, what I don't want is to win in such a fashion that it ultimately defeats the bigger picture of winning a championship one day.

 

[SacKings384]

I don't think anyone ROOTS for their team to lose. What I believe is that people are trying to find a rope to grab on to. Or, trying to see the bright side of things if you will. Instead of wallowing in misery from a loss some like to think "Hey, at least we get a high draft pick." And like many I think some of the fans are unhappy with the middle ground mediocraty we seem to be in. At this point we're hovering around .500. We are not in contention for a championship, or even a second round in the playoffs for that matter, but we don't stink enough to get a franchise changing rookie. So I think some people would simply prefer that this team gets blown to bits and starts fresh. Rather than continuing to win a couple games here and there that serve little purpose as far as good direction is concerned. I love watching the Kings. I would like to see them go in a new direction, but I also just can't stand constant losing. So it's really a matter of preference and direction.

 

[BMiller52]

a) so have a lot of other teams, Golden State has had injuries to all of its top players and a new coach, New Orleans has has major injuries to both Peja and West, Kobe started the season injured fo rhte Lakers, Phoenix has has the whoile Amare rehab thing going, TMac is down again in Houston, not to mention the Bonzi troubles, Josh Howard was down in Dallas, the Nuggets frontcourt has been a mess again as they lost Kenyon, and Nene for most fo the early going etc. etc. Almost every team can make similar claims.

b) so we get back over .500, so mayeb we win 46. That falls squarely into the "big whoop" column. Pointless. There are 6 teams in the West on pace to win 50 this year. Far too many between us and the prize. This is not our time, not our window. We had one, but that shut a few years ago. We may have one again in the future. But it won't be with this crew, and it won't happen at all if we don't prepare for it.

The Nuggets are a few games above us, GS is right with us, we've had some bad breaks like the Orlando game and the Miami game, New Orleans is right around .500, Dallas is a contender, LA is a borderline contender, etc. If we had a shotblocker rebounder like even Dalembert I'd be that we'd have about 3 more wins.

 

[HndsmCelt]

There is a HUGE differnece between "playing to loose" and planning for a rebuild/not worring aobut your record. A team compsed of old vetws with expiring contracts and young kids who sould not see court time on a "contending" team is NOT that bad a thing and watching them develop, win a few and muddle through a season desinged to clear cap space and enter the draft with a top pick is tollerable for MOST fans. Sure a few yeras back when Kiki gutted the Nuggs a few band wagon fans might have left but once they landed Mello, Nene, Boozer and co for the next seaons a lot MORE fans came back and tickts sales went up.

Ocasionally a team can build on the fly and remain competitive but in generaly those attmempts fail beceause to get tallent you have to trade tallent. Top FA's more often than not resign with their old team and the ones that don't FREQUENTY sign for too much money with too little game left. So the onlt shue fire way to infuse a lot of new tallent is to draft it, an in the long run the higher your picks the more tallent you get.

Few fans want to belive their beloved team is dying a death by a thousand cuts, and since no cut by it's self is fatal when this is going on the optimistic fan or Homer, sees an up side to the change and calles is a win. For example bonzi walks and most of his sallery goes to John Salmons, so the optimist say's "Hey we are just fine, better off even. Now Martin gets a start, and Salmons is doing prety good out there while Bonzi is hardly playing... Heck I'd say we sure dodged a bullet there." The problem there of course is that Martin's minuts only wnet up a little and no one can expect John Salmons to tke over and punish the Spurs in the paly offs. So bit by bit the tallent drains away but since th team makes the paly offs every year the Homer keeps saying all we need is _________ and we will be in great shape next season. Yet here we are in the situation where not one of the Kings starting 5 is as good as the their counter part on the 02 team and that INCUDES Mike Bibby.

It's understandable that fans are overly optimistic, and that most of us prefer the subtle kind flesh woulds the team takes each off season to the wholesale gutting of our beloved team that a true rebuild calls for but there you are in the end with aa team that limps by season after season hopeing that a 18th pick with turn into the next Ben Wallace.

Sorry folks the ONLY way to jump start this team is bring in a top draft pick, no ammount of Quincy Doubys, Francisco Garcias or even Kevne Martins are going to get the job done. And yes the Kings may well squeek into the Play offs and might even give their first round rival a little competiton but all that means is another 15-18 pick... excuse me if I don't get excited at this prospect.

 

[Freakout]

The Nuggets are a few games above us, GS is right with us, we've had some bad breaks like the Orlando game and the Miami game, New Orleans is right around .500, Dallas is a contender, LA is a borderline contender, etc. If we had a shotblocker rebounder like even Dalembert I'd be that we'd have about 3 more wins.

Problem is you can't get that shotblocker/rebounder without giving up someone valuable. Which is Brick's point.

You could add Joakim Noah, Tiago Splitter, Al Horford, etc.... while keeping talent on your team.

 

[BMiller52]

Not if we want to suck bad enough to actually get them.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I don't think anyone ROOTS for their team to lose. What I believe is that people are trying to find a rope to grab on to. Or, trying to see the bright side of things if you will. Instead of wallowing in misery from a loss some like to think "Hey, at least we get a high draft pick." And like many I think some of the fans are unhappy with the middle ground mediocraty we seem to be in. At this point we're hovering around .500. We are not in contention for a championship, or even a second round in the playoffs for that matter, but we don't stink enough to get a franchise changing rookie. So I think some people would simply prefer that this team gets blown to bits and starts fresh. Rather than continuing to win a couple games here and there that serve little purpose as far as good direction is concerned. I love watching the Kings. I would like to see them go in a new direction, but I also just can't stand constant losing. So it's really a matter of preference and direction.

anyone who prefers consistent mediocrity over losing a season or two for draft picks is not capable of seeing the big picture and just wants instant gratification.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Problem is you can't get that shotblocker/rebounder without giving up someone valuable. Which is Brick's point.

You could add Joakim Noah, Tiago Splitter, Al Horford, etc.... while keeping talent on your team.

splitter isn't much of a shot blocker, good defender but more man D than help. thabeet is the guy i would LOVE for the kings to get, but they'd probably need at least a top 5 if not top 3.

 

[tjobrien]

The only problem with playing to get the top pick is that we don't control the selection of the ping-pong balls. It's still pretty risky to play to the lottery...

And logic aside, I totally agree with the concept that it's almost impossible for a fan to root for his team to lose. And fans certainly aren't going to spend $300 or so to go to a game to watch a team tank...

It's a tricky situation and I think there's a good reason why some teams try to avoid it.

Good points have been raised, let me add my take.

I'm basically in favor of us losing and getting a good draft pick. People keep saying you can't guarantee a pick. Untrue. You just can't guarantee a Top 3 pick. If you have the worst record in the league, you will get no worse than #4. And in a loaded draft like this, #4 will be pretty dang good.

Also, I'm NOT openly rooting for us to lose. But when we lose I, as a way of looking at the brightside, say to myself, "Well, at least we're a game closer to Oden!"

And to those who say it goes in cycles. Yes and no. Only if you know what you are doing. The Kings were awful for 15 years. How did they suddenly get good? Was it random? Was it a cycle? No. After a decade of blowing draft picks and alwas being not quite bad enough to get a great draft pick, they got a GM who knew what he was doing. He drafted wisely, made shrewd trades and signings, and good a good coach. Has Petrie lost that touch? We shall see over the next couple of seasons. If you expect us to continue the road we are on, making band-aid trades and signings and suddenly "cycle" into another good team, you've got another thing coming. Think of how many teams have been terrible or mediocre for the last decade or longer.

We need a plan to rebuild. I hope Petrie realizes that this team can't get it done. You need to do everything in your power to unload the bloated contracts of Kenny Thomas and Brad Miller. You need to hope that Bibby opts out. You need to get some good young players through the draft. And then you need to accumulate some cap space over the next couple of seasons and then make a splash in free agency in 2008. It will be a rough couple of seasons, but it will be worth it.

Let's hope the Kings are still in Sacramento when that day come.s

 

[Jer]

I'm not necessarily in favor of losing, but to me, every loss makes it all the more obvious that serious changes need to be made in the Kings' master plan. Right now it seems that we're trying to "get by" with the guys that we have, and Barkley's commentary the other night of how we're not a rebuilding team nor a contending one had some truth to it.

Tanking a season to get a high draft pick is dumb. However, I don't mind losses since the more we lose, the more it changes our mindset from "Hey, we can get by with Bibby/Miller/Artest!" to "We need to rebuild and make serious changes". Bibby, Artest and Miller aren't going to get any better at this stage of their careers.

In my opinion, if we stay with the former mindset, the best we'll be able to do is run in place. I'd much rather have a few poor seasons and make progress towards a championship in the future than consistently be mediocre.

 

[rumpled]

Good points have been raised, let me add my take.

I'm basically in favor of us losing and getting a good draft pick. People keep saying you can't guarantee a pick. Untrue. You just can't guarantee a Top 3 pick. If you have the worst record in the league, you will get no worse than #4. And in a loaded draft like this, #4 will be pretty dang good.

Also, I'm NOT openly rooting for us to lose. But when we lose I, as a way of looking at the brightside, say to myself, "Well, at least we're a game closer to Oden!"

And to those who say it goes in cycles. Yes and no. Only if you know what you are doing. The Kings were awful for 15 years. How did they suddenly get good? Was it random? Was it a cycle? No. After a decade of blowing draft picks and alwas being not quite bad enough to get a great draft pick, they got a GM who knew what he was doing. He drafted wisely, made shrewd trades and signings, and good a good coach. Has Petrie lost that touch? We shall see over the next couple of seasons. If you expect us to continue the road we are on, making band-aid trades and signings and suddenly "cycle" into another good team, you've got another thing coming. Think of how many teams have been terrible or mediocre for the last decade or longer.

We need a plan to rebuild. I hope Petrie realizes that this team can't get it done. You need to do everything in your power to unload the bloated contracts of Kenny Thomas and Brad Miller. You need to hope that Bibby opts out. You need to get some good young players through the draft. And then you need to accumulate some cap space over the next couple of seasons and then make a splash in free agency in 2008. It will be a rough couple of seasons, but it will be worth it.

Let's hope the Kings are still in Sacramento when that day come.s

Couldn't agree more. I'd rather go 82-0 but we are on a downswing in the NBA team life cycle so I have to settle for being excited to see who GP might pick up with a top 10 pick. Despite the fact that he strikes out sometimes I still believe in his eye for talent. We've been drafting mostly in the 20's for a long time and he still comes up with Pejas and Geralds and Martins. And now he went and got us some Douby. We are luckier than a lot of teams as far as the front office goes, lets just say that.

Actually, "After a decade of blowing draft picks and alwas being not quite bad enough to get a great draft pick, they got a GM who knew what he was doing." seems a little too kind. I remember it as more of a decade of brutally bad draft picks and stupid trades. I can't remember them all, Bobby Hurley and Never Nervous Pervis come to mind...it was basically like sucking every year then drafting whoever Dick Vitale said would be good during the NCAA tournament.

Okay I was curious to see some bad draft nostalgia so I looked up all the first round picks of the Sac era. Makes GP look pretty good I think.


Pick
#
6 1985 Joe Kleine C Arkansas
17 1986 Harold Pressley SF Villanova
6 1987 Kenny Smith PG North Carolina
18 1988 Ricky Berry SF San Jose State
1 1989 Pervis Ellison PF Louisville
7 1990 Lionel Simmons SF LaSalle
14 1990 Travis Mays PG Texas
18 1990 Duane Causwell C Temple
23 1990 Anthony Bonner PF St. Louis
3 1991 Billy Owens SF Syracuse
27 1991 Pete Chilcutt PF North Carolina
7 1992 Walt Williams SF Maryland
7 1993 Bobby Hurley PG Duke
8 1994 Brian Grant PF Xavier

(Petrie years)
13 1995 Corliss Williamson SF Arkansas
14 1996 Predrag Stojakovic SF (Greece)
11 1997 Tariq Abdul-Wahad SG San Jose State
7 1998 Jason Williams PG Florida
16 2000 Hidayet Turkoglu SF (Turkey)
25 2001 Gerald Wallace SF/SG Alabama
28 2002 Dan Dickau PG Gonzaga
26 2004 Kevin Martin SG Western Carolina
23 2005 Francisco Garcia SF/SG Louisville
19 19 2006 Quincy Douby PG/SG Rutgers

 

[xyrin]

Couldn't agree more. I'd rather go 82-0 but we are on a downswing in the NBA team life cycle so I have to settle for being excited to see who GP might pick up with a top 10 pick. Despite the fact that he strikes out sometimes I still believe in his eye for talent. We've been drafting mostly in the 20's for a long time and he still comes up with Pejas and Geralds and Martins. And now he went and got us some Douby. We are luckier than a lot of teams as far as the front office goes, lets just say that.

Actually, "After a decade of blowing draft picks and alwas being not quite bad enough to get a great draft pick, they got a GM who knew what he was doing." seems a little too kind. I remember it as more of a decade of brutally bad draft picks and stupid trades. I can't remember them all, Bobby Hurley and Never Nervous Pervis come to mind...it was basically like sucking every year then drafting whoever Dick Vitale said would be good during the NCAA tournament.

Okay I was curious to see some bad draft nostalgia so I looked up all the first round picks of the Sac era. Makes GP look pretty good I think.


Pick
#
6 1985 Joe Kleine C Arkansas
17 1986 Harold Pressley SF Villanova
6 1987 Kenny Smith PG North Carolina
18 1988 Ricky Berry SF San Jose State
1 1989 Pervis Ellison PF Louisville
7 1990 Lionel Simmons SF LaSalle
14 1990 Travis Mays PG Texas
18 1990 Duane Causwell C Temple
23 1990 Anthony Bonner PF St. Louis
3 1991 Billy Owens SF Syracuse
27 1991 Pete Chilcutt PF North Carolina
7 1992 Walt Williams SF Maryland
7 1993 Bobby Hurley PG Duke
8 1994 Brian Grant PF Xavier

(Petrie years)
13 1995 Corliss Williamson SF Arkansas
14 1996 Predrag Stojakovic SF (Greece)
11 1997 Tariq Abdul-Wahad SG San Jose State
7 1998 Jason Williams PG Florida
16 2000 Hidayet Turkoglu SF (Turkey)
25 2001 Gerald Wallace SF/SG Alabama
28 2002 Dan Dickau PG Gonzaga
26 2004 Kevin Martin SG Western Carolina
23 2005 Francisco Garcia SF/SG Louisville
19 19 2006 Quincy Douby PG/SG Rutgers

He's never drafted a PF or C, and that scares me, alot.

 

[rumpled]

He's never drafted a PF or C, and that scares me, alot.

Well yeah, but that means we're DUE.

I formatted out the second rounders actually, thats where the project big man seems to get taken. I don't think he dislikes tall men, I just think late in the first round you first try to find a guy who seems like a sure bet to even _have_ a career. Here's the link to the whole draft history page if you're interested.

http://thedraftreview.com/teams/sacramento.htm

I'm not saying GP is perfect at all, just that he does a better job than most of finding starter-quality talent in the depleted pool that is available in the late picks. A _lot_ of names on that first list basically had the Mateen Cleaves career.

Boozer comes to mind as one big we really whiffed on drafting, there might be some other project C or PF who slipped who we missed out on but I can't think of any.

Whups I'm sorry Mateen, I didn't mean that. You were a great college player.

 

[Venom]

Petrie drafted Brian Grant, a power forward. And in the second round that year he drafted another PF, Michael "The Animal" Smith. Both players were dirty work kind of guys. Drafting late first PFs typically means you are drafting guys who would have gone ALOT higher had they actually been productive in college, or who have glaring weaknesses in their game. For example, Fazekas will go in the late first this year. Clearly he falls in the glaring weakness category.

My only problem with Petrie's drafting is that he tended to draft guys who would fit his specific system that he was trying to promote. That's fine in the late teens and twenties, but he whiffed on two franchise players in Pierce and Nowitzki in order to take Jason Williams. That hurts.

 

[rumpled]

Petrie drafted Brian Grant, a power forward. And in the second round that year he drafted another PF, Michael "The Animal" Smith. Both players were dirty work kind of guys. Drafting late first PFs typically means you are drafting guys who would have gone ALOT higher had they actually been productive in college, or who have glaring weaknesses in their game. For example, Fazekas will go in the late first this year. Clearly he falls in the glaring weakness category.

My only problem with Petrie's drafting is that he tended to draft guys who would fit his specific system that he was trying to promote. That's fine in the late teens and twenties, but he whiffed on two franchise players in Pierce and Nowitzki in order to take Jason Williams. That hurts.

I believe Petrie got here _after_ Grant and Smith were drafted, but I'll check. People talk about drafting to fit the system like its some sort of fact, but I've never seen any evidence that we aren't just trying to get the most talented player available. Which, in the late rounds, is almost always a guard. There's just more short people to choose from in the world.

There's exceptions of course like Boozer and Ben Wallace...but 99% of the glaring weakness big men that go late wash out or become marginal backup help. Nobody seems to notice this though and every year we're hot for the latest Jerome James.

I get it though, I want the next KG too. Hence, my interest in seeing the draft...I got off-topic with the stuff about GP as a talent evaluator. Sorry.

 

[Catalyst]

Bricklayer and HndsmCelt, both of you seem to be highly in favor of rebuilding, and have given ample reasons as to why we should.

Now, my question for both of you is how should we rebuild?

What players do we move, which players do we target?

Do we keep our expiring contracts and go for cap space, or do we trade for young players and go that route?

 

[Vlade4GM]

Good points have been raised, let me add my take.

I'm basically in favor of us losing and getting a good draft pick. People keep saying you can't guarantee a pick. Untrue. You just can't guarantee a Top 3 pick. If you have the worst record in the league, you will get no worse than #4. And in a loaded draft like this, #4 will be pretty dang good.

Also, I'm NOT openly rooting for us to lose. But when we lose I, as a way of looking at the brightside, say to myself, "Well, at least we're a game closer to Oden!"

And to those who say it goes in cycles. Yes and no. Only if you know what you are doing. The Kings were awful for 15 years. How did they suddenly get good? Was it random? Was it a cycle? No. After a decade of blowing draft picks and alwas being not quite bad enough to get a great draft pick, they got a GM who knew what he was doing. He drafted wisely, made shrewd trades and signings, and good a good coach. Has Petrie lost that touch? We shall see over the next couple of seasons. If you expect us to continue the road we are on, making band-aid trades and signings and suddenly "cycle" into another good team, you've got another thing coming. Think of how many teams have been terrible or mediocre for the last decade or longer.

We need a plan to rebuild. I hope Petrie realizes that this team can't get it done. You need to do everything in your power to unload the bloated contracts of Kenny Thomas and Brad Miller. You need to hope that Bibby opts out. You need to get some good young players through the draft. And then you need to accumulate some cap space over the next couple of seasons and then make a splash in free agency in 2008. It will be a rough couple of seasons, but it will be worth it.

Let's hope the Kings are still in Sacramento when that day come.s

very good points. well said.