There are 57 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

2011-2012 Sacramento Kings Thread

The NBA is a huge piece of crap to 80% of us commoners.
Originally posted by Muggins:
The NBA is a huge piece of crap to 80% of us commoners.

The ratings say otherwise.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Muggins:
The NBA is a huge piece of crap to 80% of us commoners.

The ratings say otherwise.

Have fun with YOUR NBA. You already said Thanks soo...
Originally posted by Muggins:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Muggins:
The NBA is a huge piece of crap to 80% of us commoners.

The ratings say otherwise.

Have fun with YOUR NBA. You already said Thanks soo...

You're the one that says he doesn't like it but continues to post in this basketball thread.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
You're the one that says he doesn't like it but continues to post in this basketball thread.

Um HI. This is the Sacramento Kings thread. Go back to your Pretend NBA League thread.
The NBA and the Kings piss me off. But I still watch. Sad but true. I hate a mojority of the teams, the way it's covered, but love the plays and especially the playoffs. The league will fine. Very popular, more so than since Jordan left.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
There are two examples of collusion amongst players, and that's in Miami & New York, and like I said...nothing's changed in terms of the rules from the days when Kings fans were rabid, in love with the NBA, and packing Arco every night. We've had only one team successfully build their squad through players colluding via free agency, or even through free agency at all. Every other contender has built their team through traditional means.

Boston = Traded for KG, traded for Allen, drafted Pierce, drafted Rondo
Spurs = Drafted Duncan, drafted Manu, drafted Parker
Lakers = Traded for Kobe, traded for Pau, traded for Nash, traded for Howard
OKC = Drafted Durant, drafted Westbrook, drafted Harden, drafted Ibaka

I just don't see how this is different from any other era aside from the 70's. The nature of a sport where it's 5-on-5, the best players play 80% of the game, and the playoff series are 7 games instead of 1 all lead to a structure where there's only gonna be a select few contenders at any given time.

50's = Dominated by the Lakers & Celtics
60's = Dominated by the Celtics
80's = Dominated by the Lakers, Celtics, & Pistons
90's = Dominated by the Bulls
00's = Dominated by the Lakers & Spurs

The only thing that's stopping the Kings from doing what they did in their heyday again is the ineptitude of their upper management.

I will never, ever agree with you that Nash and Howard didn't basically choose where they went. MIA and LAL, as currently constituted, both had superstar players build a super team. And like I said, this is a new trend that won't go away IMO. OKC is a good example of the traditional way, but damn that is big time luck and REALLY hard to do. Also, owners like Cuban don't come around too often. The Kings have s*itty owners, but how about the rest of the NBA?

The NBA is changing. The Lakers are a super team just like the Heat because the players decided that. Everyone else, the odds are against you big time. The OKC team is really, really rare. Good for them. Everyone else in the near future? No hope really.
Thanks, BuZzRuBneK36
Originally posted by Rubberneck36:
The NBA and the Kings piss me off. But I still watch. Sad but true. I hate a mojority of the teams, the way it's covered, but love the plays and especially the playoffs. The league will fine. Very popular, more so than since Jordan left.

The league will make a lot of money because of star power, the "big" teams doing great and the international market. Doesn't mean that small and mid market fans won't feel like they are getting screwed. But, money is always the most important thing.
Originally posted by sacniner:
Originally posted by Rubberneck36:
The NBA and the Kings piss me off. But I still watch. Sad but true. I hate a mojority of the teams, the way it's covered, but love the plays and especially the playoffs. The league will fine. Very popular, more so than since Jordan left.

The league will make a lot of money because of star power, the "big" teams doing great and the international market. Doesn't mean that small and mid market fans won't feel like they are getting screwed. But, money is always the most important thing.

Go kings! Thought we needed something positive.
Originally posted by Muggins:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
You're the one that says he doesn't like it but continues to post in this basketball thread.

Um HI. This is the Sacramento Kings thread. Go back to your Pretend NBA League thread.

Yes, and I've talked a lot more Kings basketball in it than you have. It's funny...you guys brought up the NBA in it's entirety, not me. Do you want me to leave you alone so you can get back to not talking about the Kings?
Originally posted by sacniner:
I will never, ever agree with you that Nash and Howard didn't basically choose where they went. MIA and LAL, as currently constituted, both had superstar players build a super team. And like I said, this is a new trend that won't go away IMO. OKC is a good example of the traditional way, but damn that is big time luck and REALLY hard to do. Also, owners like Cuban don't come around too often. The Kings have s*itty owners, but how about the rest of the NBA?

The NBA is changing. The Lakers are a super team just like the Heat because the players decided that. Everyone else, the odds are against you big time. The OKC team is really, really rare. Good for them. Everyone else in the near future? No hope really.

There's a difference between a player wanting to play somewhere and players colluding to get there. Of course players want to play for the Lakers, that's no different than any marquee franchise in any sport. But neither player comes to the Lakers without another team saying yes, and without the Lakers giving up significant value to get them. Heck, the Lakers weren't even Howard's first choice. He wanted to go to Brooklyn, but they didn't have what Orlando wanted. The Lakers gave up the 2nd best player in the trade, and by far the most valuable piece being offered by anyone for Howard. Nash took 2 1st Round picks, 2 2nd round picks, and a large trade exception. And Howard's not even guaranteed to re-sign, but the Lakers rightfully have enough faith in the culture they've built to believe there's no way he'd leave.

Give me one reason why Bibby/Christie/Peja/Webber/Divac/Jackson/Hedo/etc couldn't happen again, either in Sacramento or anywhere else. The reason there's "no hope" for most of the league is because most of the league doesn't know how to run their franchise properly, and make moves like what the Warriors have done, where they cap their ceiling as being an eventual 5th seed at best.

OKC & Portland are the only teams that have attempted to do an intelligent, ground up rebuild, at least until recently. (we'll see where Portland was derailed by injuries to Roy & Oden, and OKC is where they are. You have about 5-6 teams in the league that really know what they're doing, IMO. I'd bet you that we're adding Orlando to that mix in a couple of years too.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
There's a difference between a player wanting to play somewhere and players colluding to get there. Of course players want to play for the Lakers, that's no different than any marquee franchise in any sport. But neither player comes to the Lakers without another team saying yes, and without the Lakers giving up significant value to get them. Heck, the Lakers weren't even Howard's first choice. He wanted to go to Brooklyn, but they didn't have what Orlando wanted. The Lakers gave up the 2nd best player in the trade, and by far the most valuable piece being offered by anyone for Howard. Nash took 2 1st Round picks, 2 2nd round picks, and a large trade exception. And Howard's not even guaranteed to re-sign, but the Lakers rightfully have enough faith in the culture they've built to believe there's no way he'd leave.

Give me one reason why Bibby/Christie/Peja/Webber/Divac/Jackson/Hedo/etc couldn't happen again, either in Sacramento or anywhere else. The reason there's "no hope" for most of the league is because most of the league doesn't know how to run their franchise properly, and make moves like what the Warriors have done, where they cap their ceiling as being an eventual 5th seed at best.

OKC & Portland are the only teams that have attempted to do an intelligent, ground up rebuild, at least until recently. (we'll see where Portland was derailed by injuries to Roy & Oden, and OKC is where they are. You have about 5-6 teams in the league that really know what they're doing, IMO. I'd bet you that we're adding Orlando to that mix in a couple of years too.

Yes, the Lakers had to make a deal to get Howard. But, they at least had the oppurtunity to. The Kings for example, even if they had great owners, would never even have that oppurtunity in today's NBA. Also, the Howard trade was a no brainer where they came out ahead. Bynum is really good, but Howard is the bonafide best center in the NBA, not like it was a hard trade to do from the Lakers end.

The Kings lineup you mentioned can happen again, but like I said, it's just extremely hard to do. Not sure what the odds are for a team like the Kings to have that kind of lineup, but the entire time they have been in Sac they have only had one run like that. They came in 1985 so I'm not sure when we'll see that again. To the contrary, the Lakers or Knicks for example have a much easier road to get good. They can just get the best FAs and players with one year left. I swear I'm not b*tching, I'm just calling it like it is. That's reality. At least the Lakers have the oppurtunity to make these deals that are no brainers.

If you took an honest look at the rest of the teams in the NBA, with the ground up approach, I think we'll see that it doesn't work most of the time. It's just really hard to do and rare. This is why most fans of the "other teams" in the NBA get frustarated. I still love the NBA, but I think this is reality.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Muggins:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
You're the one that says he doesn't like it but continues to post in this basketball thread.

Um HI. This is the Sacramento Kings thread. Go back to your Pretend NBA League thread.

Yes, and I've talked a lot more Kings basketball in it than you have. It's funny...you guys brought up the NBA in it's entirety, not me. Do you want me to leave you alone so you can get back to not talking about the Kings?

I'm not going to argue with you about some stupid crap like this lol. But yeah, don't talk to me alright! Knock it off!
Originally posted by sacniner:
Yes, the Lakers had to make a deal to get Howard. But, they at least had the oppurtunity to. The Kings for example, even if they had great owners, would never even have that oppurtunity in today's NBA. Also, the Howard trade was a no brainer where they came out ahead. Bynum is really good, but Howard is the bonafide best center in the NBA, not like it was a hard trade to do from the Lakers end.

The Kings lineup you mentioned can happen again, but like I said, it's just extremely hard to do. Not sure what the odds are for a team like the Kings to have that kind of lineup, but the entire time they have been in Sac they have only had one run like that. They came in 1985 so I'm not sure when we'll see that again. To the contrary, the Lakers or Knicks for example have a much easier road to get good. They can just get the best FAs and players with one year left. I swear I'm not b*tching, I'm just calling it like it is. That's reality. At least the Lakers have the oppurtunity to make these deals that are no brainers.

If you took an honest look at the rest of the teams in the NBA, with the ground up approach, I think we'll see that it doesn't work most of the time. It's just really hard to do and rare. This is why most fans of the "other teams" in the NBA get frustarated. I still love the NBA, but I think this is reality.

I see very few teams committing to a ground up approach. I see MANY more teams making moves in an overvalued market (Free Agency) and committing to mediocrity. For example, the Nash Era ends in Phoenix and what do they do? Throw $10M per year at Goran Dragic and try to sign Eric Gordon to a max deal. The Hornets...instead of being patient and using the appeal of Anthony Davis on his rookie contract + a ton of cap space to attract big time FAs, they give Ryan Anderson $9M and Eric Gordon a max deal. The Warriors...sign Lee to that ridiculous deal, then trade for Bogut & Jefferson & sign Landry & Jack. I could go on and on. These teams have committed to mediocrity. I've very curious to hear from you which teams have committed to a true ground up approach in your opinion, and have failed. The only team I can think of that fits that description is Portland, and that's because of terrible luck with injuries.

The Lakers got Howard because they had the best asset available on the market. Of course it was a no-brainer for them, but the only reason the other team said yes is because the Lakers had the most desirable trading piece. The part that I feel you're overlooking is that the Lakers had ZERO chance to acquire either Dwight Howard or Steve Nash via free agency. As a result, they had to give up assets in order to get them. The only reason that those is because they hit a home run on a draft pick several years before when they selected Andrew Bynum. The only reason Phoenix says yes to a deal to the Lakers is that they were willing to give up far more for him than anyone else would have.

You say that the Kings couldn't make this deal in the modern NBA, even with great ownership, and I'd say..."why not"? 14 years ago, a malcontented superstar was on the trade block, and you did exactly what the Lakers did...you put the best asset on the table (Mitch Richmond) and you were able to acquire him. He was a cocky kid from Michigan who had no interest in Sacramento, yet you were still able to keep him because he would have been crazy to leave that situation.

What's different now, sac? (aside from your ownership) Who are the teams in the NBA that have really tried to rebuild from the ground up, but it hasn't worked out? I'm someone who loves strategic games like chess, Warfish, and things of that nature, and IMO there are very few teams who know how to play the strategy game that is the composition of an NBA roster.