DeMarcus Cousins' Past Teammates

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I have seen people on this board who say that being in the middle is not the right place to be exactly because you could spend years spinning your wheels not being able to rise above mediocrity. Then I see people happy with the moves Vlade has made. And how exactly do the moves made over the last year not end us up in the no-man's land middle of mediocrity? I think that question is entirely fair.

The question is not fair. I'll elaborate on why momentarily.

... I just see a disconnect between past statements about being caught in the middle and the expectations for this team. Look, you have a said numerous times that the last place you want to be is in the middle - no man's land. I agree with that sentiment. To my mind, THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE THIS TEAM IS.

Except that you're wrong; that's not where this team is. From where this team actually is, mediocrity would be a step up. That's the reason why the question is unfair: you are looking at these moves as if we have made a long-term commitment to these guys, or have a lot of cap space tied up in them, and we don't. In an offseason where every journeyman under the sun got paid beaucoup bucks, we signed all these guys to short deals, and short money. We are fairly unequivocally not trying spin our wheels trying to rise above mediocrity. What we did was make moves to help us get from 'terrible' to 'mediocre', while still maintaining the flexibility to replace all these guys when we're ready to take the next step from 'mediocre' to 'good'.

If we'd signed Afflalo or Barnes to four-year max deals, or signed Temple or Patterson to the full MLE, I might be a little closer to understanding why you're concerned about the team 'settling' for mediocrity but, in the first place, we didn't do any of those things. And, in the second place, I reject the premise outright, because we're not settling for mediocrity. We can't be settling for mediocrity, you know why? Because we're still looking up at mediocrity, that's why; we can't 'settle' for it until we actually get there.

 

[Padrino]

"A young coach"? You've got to kidding me. We have a young up and coming team; we know that because, among other things, our coach is young! What we have is ONE very good young player in Cousins. And then we have WCS, who is not at all a known quantity when it comes to his future value. That's it. "Young pieces"? Oh, yeah, like Ben McLemore!? Like our project draft that could easily take three years before they might shave in the NBA, if they even make it in the NBA? This is worthy of a PR guy for a general manager: "young coach," young pieces," and the one I really love - "It's a process." Oh yeah, I've taken it all out of context. I get it now - you're not talking about this Kings' team. You must be talking about that Kings' team in another dimension.

i'm not sure what it is that you expect from the kings front office, or what you even think that this team is, for that matter. it's not clear to me that you even know what you think. one minute, you describe the kings this way:

the last place you want to be is in the middle - no man's land. I agree with that sentiment. To my mind, THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE THIS TEAM IS. So tell me how you see this team getting out of the middle?

the next minute, you say this:

Like our project draft that could easily take three years before they might shave in the NBA, if they even make it in the NBA? This is worthy of a PR guy for a general manager: "young coach," young pieces," and the one I really love - "It's a process."

so which is it? are the kings spinning their wheels in the middle? or are the kings a team too young and inexperienced to improve in any immediate sense? and more to the point, what is it that you want? are you imagining a fairy tale in which the kings are able to land impact free agents, or one in which they had a high enough draft pick this season to bring in a young impact talent, or one in which they're able to trade their spare parts for a true impact player? what do YOU believe this franchise should DO, given the tremendous hurdles they most overcome on the path to legitimacy? or are you just shouting at storm clouds?

here's a simple exercise. let's break this off-season down into its component parts:

DRAFT

i agree with the general consensus that papagiannis was a rather large reach of a pick at #13, and that there is little likelihood of him developing into a contributor any time soon. i certainly had my preferences for whom the kings should select with that pick, but who among the draft prospects available to the kings at any of the positions they occupied was likely to move the needle this season?

i like wade baldwin a fair amount, but he's not a blue chip prospect, nor is he the kind of player you hand the reigns to right away. young PG's often struggle to be a net positive on either side of the ball in their early seasons--and it's not as if this kings team needed to exacerbate its turnover problem any further. truth be told, there wasn't a single prospect that the kings could turn to for immediate help. they were all going to be projects to some degree or another. and sure, at least one rookie from beyond the top-10 is probably going to make a surprise impact for some team this season. but who's it going to be? and how can you know? the kings rolled the dice on the guys they liked. hopefully something sticks. as always, the draft is a crapshoot.

FREE AGENCY

the kings chased the likes of ryan anderson at the opening of free agency, but balked at the prospect of paying him the $20 million per that it would require to sign him. it had been made clear that he would love to play for his hometown, but the kings chose not to overpay an aging player with a considerable injury history who was unlikely to live up to such a contract. smart decision, in my book. and when it became obvious that no other free agents of note were going to sign here, they were swift and decisive in signing lesser talents to inexpensive and short-term contracts. they kept their cap sheet clean for the future and brought in blue collar utility players that coach joerger can work with. what else should they have done on this front? got on their knees and begged? vlade divac himself is just about the most impressive free agency signing in this franchise's 31-year history in sacramento, unless you want to count the one-year experiment to reanimate the career of rajon rondo.

TRADE

this remains TBA. however, kf.com is loaded with bright basketball fans, and the most realistic-seeming trade scenario kf.com has come up with to bring back an impact player involves shipping out some combination of rudy gay, ben mclemore, and kosta koufos for eric bledsoe, a dynamic PG with a troubling injury history that might give phoenix enough cause to part with him, especially given their logjam in the backcourt. that's about the best we could hope for, and even that scenario seems unlikely to be consummated, at this point. i have to imagine the teams would have reached an agreement by now if they were interested in pursuing such a deal.

so again, what do you even imagine that this team should do? or are you just being churlish for the hell of it, eternally the devil's advocate, but without much in the way of purpose or an overarching point? most among the kings' basketball literate fans are aware of the impossible corner that the team is in; it took the franchise far too long to build around demarcus cousins, so now they have to "make lemonade" and hope that it works, otherwise it's back to the drawing board for yet another rebuild--and worse, with future draft picks still to be conveyed.

 

[IfAt1st]

In an offseason where every journeyman under the sun got paid beaucoup bucks, we signed all these guys to short deals, and short money. We are fairly unequivocally not trying spin our wheels trying to rise above mediocrity. What we did was make moves to help us get from 'terrible' to 'mediocre', while still maintaining the flexibility to replace all these guys when we're ready to take the next step from 'mediocre' to 'good'.

Thumbed up for the proper spelling (and use) of beaucoup.

It's the little things, people.

 

[Kingster]

This year's team is not complete so I think all the angst is premature. Let's wait until the summer is over. I understand you like to stir people up but I'll pass.

I agree. The picture is pretty muddy right now and it is difficult to know what the strategy is or whether there is a strategy to get out of the middle (or theoretically a gigantic move could be made to extricate the Kings from the middle).

 

[Kingster]

so which is it? are the kings spinning their wheels in the middle? or are the kings a team too young and inexperienced to improve in any immediate sense? and more to the point, what is it that you want?

It's obvious the Kings are in the middle. I thought that was self-evident from my previous posts. The best player is 25 years old with limited time left on his contract. He's surrounded by mediocre vets and young projects (or busts in the case of McLemore) who will take years for significant production on the court, if they ever have production on the court. Looking forward are mid-level drafts, which notoriously have much more of project nature to them because of one and done, FA being a ridiculous joke because of this team's reputation and won-loss record, and you're left with a Hail Mary trade possibility to get out of the middle. How do those dynamics fit into the Vlade "strategy" going forward? (If there is a strategy). How does a soon expiring contract of Cousins jibe with the personnel moves over the last two cycles? How does picking projects jibe with his soon expiring contract? How does picking up FA vets, either over the hill or very soon to be over the hill, fit with a strategy to get out of the middle? I thought I was pretty clear about what I want - I want a strategy to get this team out of the middle. Heck, at this point, I'd be happy with a strategy, period.

 

[Kingster]

The question is not fair. I'll elaborate on why momentarily.


Except that you're wrong; that's not where this team is. From where this team actually is, mediocrity would be a step up. That's the reason why the question is unfair: you are looking at these moves as if we have made a long-term commitment to these guys, or have a lot of cap space tied up in them, and we don't. In an offseason where every journeyman under the sun got paid beaucoup bucks, we signed all these guys to short deals, and short money. We are fairly unequivocally not trying spin our wheels trying to rise above mediocrity. What we did was make moves to help us get from 'terrible' to 'mediocre', while still maintaining the flexibility to replace all these guys when we're ready to take the next step from 'mediocre' to 'good'.

If we'd signed Afflalo or Barnes to four-year max deals, or signed Temple or Patterson to the full MLE, I might be a little closer to understanding why you're concerned about the team 'settling' for mediocrity but, in the first place, we didn't do any of those things. And, in the second place, I reject the premise outright, because we're not settling for mediocrity. We can't be settling for mediocrity, you know why? Because we're still looking up at mediocrity, that's why; we can't 'settle' for it until we actually get there.

LOL! Ok. Maybe we're fighting to be in the middle. I guess I'm just a tad more "optimistic." I guess. The FA cap flexibility is an issue that frankly I almost dismiss out of hand. Why? Because the terrible reputation of this team, it's small market nature, and it's horrible win-loss record over the last decade, leave us with the crumbs, irrespective of cap space.

 

[Padrino]

It's obvious the Kings are in the middle. I thought that was self-evident from my previous posts. The best player is 25 years old with limited time left on his contract. He's surrounded by mediocre vets and young projects (or busts in the case of McLemore) who will take years for significant production on the court, if they ever have production on the court. Looking forward are mid-level drafts, which notoriously have much more of project nature to them because of one and done, FA being a ridiculous joke because of this team's reputation and won-loss record, and you're left with a Hail Mary trade possibility to get out of the middle. How do those dynamics fit into the Vlade "strategy" going forward? (If there is a strategy). How does a soon expiring contract of Cousins jibe with the personnel moves over the last two cycles? How does picking projects jibe with his soon expiring contract? How does picking up FA vets, either over the hill or very soon to be over the hill, fit with a strategy to get out of the middle? I thought I was pretty clear about what I want - I want a strategy to get this team out of the middle. Heck, at this point, I'd be happy with a strategy, period.

there is a strategy, even if you lack the vision to see it. as i've noted repeatedly, it could be called a "make lemonade" approach, and it's blindingly obvious to those paying attention: for lack of top-tier talent acquisition, you attempt to craft a hard-nosed defensive identity around demarcus cousins that prizes length, veteran poise, and toughness. with a coach like dave joerger--who has been proven to excel with such a roster--it's entirely possible that the kings can become a playoff team despite the talent gap they face and the hurdles they must overcome to repair their reputation.

so, instead of flailing about like amateurs as they have for the past few years, the kings are doing the slow and joyless work of rebuilding that damaged reputation by staking it on a strong team culture and identity. the only way you change the narrative is by changing the culture. the dysfunction must quiet down. the organization must stabilize. the roster must become much better defensively. and the team must win some games, even if that means occupying "the middle" for some indeterminate amount of time. only then can you become a destination for a worthwhile free agent to consider, and a destination that potential trade targets don't resent.

since the kings were not in a position to sign impact talent, they chose to bring in tough veterans on inexpensive short term contracts. since the kings were not in a position to draft impact talent, they chose to pick long-term projects as insurance for a future in which there is no guarantee that demarcus cousins returns. i don't understand why this is so difficult for you to grasp. it's pragmatic. it makes sense. it offers the possibility of both short-term and long-term improvement. again, make lemonade.

what would you have the kings do instead? you identify the problems that everybody at kf.com is already aware of: the kings are never in a position to draft top tier talent, the kings don't have the clout to sign top tier talent, and, apart from demarcus cousins, the kings lack the assets necessary to engineer a trade for top tier talent. you say you want a strategy, but you offer no alternative to what the kings' front office is currently doing, or any insight into how it might be accomplished given the very apparent problems that you've identified.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

LOL! Ok. Maybe we're fighting to be in the middle. I guess I'm just a tad more "optimistic." I guess. The FA cap flexibility is an issue that frankly I almost dismiss out of hand. Why? Because the terrible reputation of this team, it's small market nature, and it's horrible win-loss record over the last decade, leave us with the crumbs, irrespective of cap space.

You are working with an unusual definition of "optimistic."

 

[Kingster]

there is a strategy, even if you lack the vision to see it. as i've noted repeatedly, it could be called a "make lemonade" approach, and it's blindingly obvious to those paying attention: for lack of top-tier talent acquisition, you attempt to craft a hard-nosed defensive identity around demarcus cousins that prizes length, veteran poise, and toughness. with a coach like dave joerger--who has been proven to excel with such a roster--it's entirely possible that the kings can become a playoff team despite the talent gap they face and the hurdles they must overcome to repair their reputation.

so, instead of flailing about like amateurs as they have for the past few years, the kings are doing the slow and joyless work of rebuilding that damaged reputation by staking it on a strong team culture and identity. the only way you change the narrative is by changing the culture. the dysfunction must quiet down. the organization must stabilize. the roster must become much better defensively. and the team must win some games, even if that means occupying "the middle" for some indeterminate amount of time. only then can you become a destination for a worthwhile free agent to consider, and a destination that potential trade targets don't resent.

since the kings were not in a position to sign impact talent, they chose to bring in tough veterans on inexpensive short term contracts. since the kings were not in a position to draft impact talent, they chose to pick long-term projects as insurance for a future in which there is no guarantee that demarcus cousins returns. i don't understand why this is so difficult for you to grasp. it's pragmatic. it makes sense. it offers the possibility of both short-term and long-term improvement. again, make lemonade.

what would you have the kings do instead? you identify the problems that everybody at kf.com is already aware of: the kings are never in a position to draft top tier talent, the kings don't have the clout to sign top tier talent, and, apart from demarcus cousins, the kings lack the assets necessary to engineer a trade for top tier talent. you say you want a strategy, but you offer no alternative to what the kings' front office is currently doing, or any insight into how it might be accomplished given the very apparent problems that you've identified.

OK. Now we're getting somewhere. If I have this right, you believe that "the strategy" is not to avoid the middle, but to accept "the middle." That it is difficult to extricate the team from the middle, but that there is no other choice. That the defensive talent surrounding Cousins will more than likely yield "the middle," but that you're ok with that because you don't see a better alternative. Is that an accurate summary? If so, I'm in agreement with the fact that that strategy, more than likely, gives us the middle, and that the middle is very difficult to get out of, and that Divac appears to be embracing, or at least acknowledging the middle, with his "strategy". I can agree with that. I actually find that view to be quite honest. Personally, I'd rather blow it to Kingdom Come to give this team a better chance down the line than the 7th or 8th slot in the playoffs for the next several years, but I respect those who are ok with that approach. At least it's dealing with reality.

 

[Padrino]

OK. Now we're getting somewhere. If I have this right, you believe that "the strategy" is not to avoid the middle, but to accept "the middle." That it is difficult to extricate the team from the middle, but that there is no other choice. That the defensive talent surrounding Cousins will more than likely yield "the middle," but that you're ok with that because you don't see a better alternative. Is that an accurate summary? If so, I'm in agreement with the fact that that strategy, more than likely, gives us the middle, and that the middle is very difficult to get out of, and that Divac appears to be embracing, or at least acknowledging the middle, with his "strategy". I can agree with that. I actually find that view to be quite honest. Personally, I'd rather blow it to Kingdom Come to give this team a better chance down the line than the 7th or 8th slot in the playoffs for the next several years, but I respect those who are ok with that approach. At least it's dealing with reality.

how do you know that blowing it up gives this team "a better chance down the line"? what guarantees are there? and how long does it take? until 2019? 2021? 2023? consider this: the kings haven't had a draft pick in the top-3 since 1991, despite all of the losing that's accompanied their 31 years in sacramento. and their lottery selections in that span could largely be characterized as p*ss poor, if we're being very kind. it's been bust after bust after bust across decades, with the occasional good fortune of a player like demarcus cousins falling into the kings' laps--and even he arrived here with a series of red flags!

now, that damnable history certainly doesn't dictate what a new kings front office could accomplish in future drafts, but that history does say a lot about the luck required of a "blow it to Kingdom Come" kind of strategy. and even if you do manage to score the first pick in the draft, you'd better pray to the basketball gods that it's during a year in which karl-anthony towns is there for the taking, rather than, say, anthony bennett. that's many layers of luck that you're embracing in the alternative strategy you've presented. personally, i'd rather stake this team's future on effort and poise than on luck, because the former can be achieved with the kind of strategy that vlade divac and ken catanella are currently employing, while the latter is just an empty husk of "hope" to sell to a fanbase desperate for a better tomorrow.

see, i'm perfectly content with "the middle," because the kings have not actually occupied "the middle" since 2006, when they earned the eighth seed in rick adelman's final season with the franchise. they've been in "the bottom" for ten f***ing years. that's a third of my lifetime in which the kings have occupied the basement of the western conference. so hell yes, give me "the middle." fact is, when you're at "the bottom," climbing up to "the middle" is a necessary step towards legitimate contention. very few teams are able to make the leap from basement dweller to overnight contender. it just doesn't happen. even the outlier warriors of recent vintage were a sixth seed two years in a row before their world-beating explosion.

that said, it's reasonable to ask if a demarcus cousins/dave joerger partnership can transform the kings into a contender. i have no idea. the kings are going to need to acquire more talent eventually, and probably sooner rather than later. but in the meantime, i want to see them build a solid foundation out of sound defensive principles and maximum nightly effort. win some games, get above .500, earn an eighth seed, watch the fans lose their minds in a brand new arena during the playoffs, and who knows what might follow? the free agent class of 2017 is much stronger than this summer's class, and while the kings are unlikely to be in a position to sign a true impact talent even if everything goes right this season, they could surely add another quality piece or two to the puzzle. again, they're building a team, rather than hoping for one to form from luck and timing, factors that are always out of every single team's control.

 

[Dime Dropper]

OK. Now we're getting somewhere. If I have this right, you believe that "the strategy" is not to avoid the middle, but to accept "the middle." That it is difficult to extricate the team from the middle, but that there is no other choice. That the defensive talent surrounding Cousins will more than likely yield "the middle," but that you're ok with that because you don't see a better alternative. Is that an accurate summary? If so, I'm in agreement with the fact that that strategy, more than likely, gives us the middle, and that the middle is very difficult to get out of, and that Divac appears to be embracing, or at least acknowledging the middle, with his "strategy". I can agree with that. I actually find that view to be quite honest. Personally, I'd rather blow it to Kingdom Come to give this team a better chance down the line than the 7th or 8th slot in the playoffs for the next several years, but I respect those who are ok with that approach. At least it's dealing with reality.

How do you propose a team like the Kings go from terrible to great without going to that middle bracket? I would like a tangible answer.

Every single top team in the NBA, with the exception of anomalies like the Cavs with LeBron etc., have to become mediocre before making that next step.

Mediocrity is terrible when the team doesn't have upside or potential for progression. It's not the same as when the team's superstar is 25. Getting Cuz a taste of the playoffs is going to be paramount to keeping him here. Though I don't think you actually want to keep him here, which might explain why you are ignoring context.

 

[Telemachus]

OK. Now we're getting somewhere. If I have this right, you believe that "the strategy" is not to avoid the middle, but to accept "the middle." That it is difficult to extricate the team from the middle, but that there is no other choice. That the defensive talent surrounding Cousins will more than likely yield "the middle," but that you're ok with that because you don't see a better alternative. Is that an accurate summary? If so, I'm in agreement with the fact that that strategy, more than likely, gives us the middle, and that the middle is very difficult to get out of, and that Divac appears to be embracing, or at least acknowledging the middle, with his "strategy". I can agree with that. I actually find that view to be quite honest. Personally, I'd rather blow it to Kingdom Come to give this team a better chance down the line than the 7th or 8th slot in the playoffs for the next several years, but I respect those who are ok with that approach. At least it's dealing with reality.

You keep trying to make it look like there is only option A or option B. It isn't that simple. While it is true that a team doesn't want to get stuck in the middle, almost every team has to spend time there on their way up. The trick is to avoid the pitfalls that keep you from progressing past that point. That means you have to leave room for improvement.

I believe that Vlade has accomplished that. They have several young players on the the team with potential for improvement. They have another talented player set to join the team next year in Bogdanovic. They also gave themselves the opportunity to be players in next year's free agency when the cap increases again with a much better FA crop. All of these things can give the Kings the ability to improve past mediocrity. What they do with them will determine if they succeed or not.

 

[bajaden]

I don't think this is rocket science. If your a bad team, which we have been, you start to rebuild your team. There are several ways you can approach that. Through the draft. Through free agency. And through trades. Or a combination of all three. To do it through trades, you need assets. To do it through free agency, you need cap space. Barring cap space or assets, your left with the draft, unless you've squandered your picks away. regardless of your approach, seldom does a team jump from the bottom to the top.

Rebuilding requires patience, and a lot of thought. Quick fixes seldom work. As a matter of fact, they're like drugs, they make you feel good for a moment, and then you feel worse. Your treading water at best. Rebuilding requires having a plan. An idea of what kind of team you want, and then filling the roster with the type of players that fit that plan. That is seldom done overnight, and requires patience. It requires hiring a coach that fits that plan, and a owner that is on board. Think of it as a multi-step program. With every step, if done properly, the team improves, and moves up the food chain. So it's inevitable, barring rare exceptions, that you will move from bad, to mediocre.

But, if you get lucky those rare exceptions do occur. However I don't think luck should be a part of any plan. If it falls your way, fine, but don't expect it. Where I agree with Kingster is that it's possible to get stuck in mediocrity. But there's a difference between that fate befalling you, and aspiring to it. No one on this forum aspires to mediocrity. We just understand that there's a process you have to go through to get to the top, and mediocrity is one of the stepping stones. To think you can go from the bottom to the top in one step is unrealistic.

None of us want the Kings to follow in the footsteps of the Atlanta Hawks. The Hawks problem is that they didn't manage their cap very well. They had assets to trade, but feared parting with any of them. They had no cap space to work with, and they were drafting at the bottom of the draft every year. From that perspective, they had the worse of all worlds, except they made the playoffs every year. Could that fate befall the Kings? Sure, but it's not a goal, and Kingster seems to imply that it is. You have to walk before you can run as they say. Were's not even walking yet, and my knee's are getting sore from crawling.

Now I would like to say that I'm privy to the Kings plan. I think I have an idea in the long term, but not in the short term. Some things are obvious, and some aren't. I don't expect to know. Therefore, I have to trust, and be patient. I realize that there hasn't been much of a reason to trust the organization the last 6 or 7 years, and patience isn't a word many want to hear anymore. However, I think mediocrity would look pretty good to most around here for a year or so. As long as we don't get comfortable there.

 

[Kingster]

how do you know that blowing it up gives this team "a better chance down the line"? what guarantees are there? and how long does it take? until 2019? 2021? 2023? consider this: the kings haven't had a draft pick in the top-3 since 1991, despite all of the losing that's accompanied their 31 years in sacramento. and their lottery selections in that span could largely be characterized as p*ss poor, if we're being very kind. it's been bust after bust after bust across decades, with the occasional good fortune of a player like demarcus cousins falling into the kings' laps--and even he arrived here with a series of red flags!

now, that damnable history certainly doesn't dictate what a new kings front office could accomplish in future drafts, but that history does say a lot about the luck required of a "blow it to Kingdom Come" kind of strategy. and even if you do manage to score the first pick in the draft, you'd better pray to the basketball gods that it's during a year in which karl-anthony towns is there for the taking, rather than, say, anthony bennett. that's many layers of luck that you're embracing in the alternative strategy you've presented. personally, i'd rather stake this team's future on effort and poise than on luck, because the former can be achieved with the kind of strategy that vlade divac and ken catanella are currently employing, while the latter is just an empty husk of "hope" to sell to a fanbase desperate for a better tomorrow.

see, i'm perfectly content with "the middle," because the kings have not actually occupied "the middle" since 2006, when they earned the eighth seed in rick adelman's final season with the franchise. they've been in "the bottom" for ten f***ing years. that's a third of my lifetime in which the kings have occupied the basement of the western conference. so hell yes, give me "the middle." fact is, when you're at "the bottom," climbing up to "the middle" is a necessary step towards legitimate contention. very few teams are able to make the leap from basement dweller to overnight contender. it just doesn't happen. even the outlier warriors of recent vintage were a sixth seed two years in a row before their world-beating explosion.

that said, it's reasonable to ask if a demarcus cousins/dave joerger partnership can transform the kings into a contender. i have no idea. the kings are going to need to acquire more talent eventually, and probably sooner rather than later. but in the meantime, i want to see them build a solid foundation out of sound defensive principles and maximum nightly effort. win some games, get above .500, earn an eighth seed, watch the fans lose their minds in a brand new arena during the playoffs, and who knows what might follow? the free agent class of 2017 is much stronger than this summer's class, and while the kings are unlikely to be in a position to sign a true impact talent even if everything goes right this season, they could surely add another quality piece or two to the puzzle. again, they're building a team, rather than hoping for one to form from luck and timing, factors that are always out of every single team's control.

Why I want it blown up is another subject entirely that I touch on below. The subject I'm more interested in now is what is Divac's strategy and what he's happy with. I think you're right - his strategy incorporates the middle, accepts the middle, even embraces the middle, despite that being in the middle is very difficult to extricate yourself from if you have mediocre talent. That's fair. It's reasonable. Like I said at the beginning: Is this a situation in which if you can't get what you want, be happy with what you have? Some like Divac and you are happy with what you have. I don't find fault with that. I just like to be clear on where we're coming from. If you're enthusiastic about being in the middle, and the long term consequences of being in "Middle Earth," more power to you. I just think that as fans we should clearly see what this strategy gives you, and then it is up the fans to determine if that strategy is ok with them.

As for my view on blowing it up, here are my premises and conclusions. One, the Kings are in the middle because their aggregate talent has a mediocre ceiling, consisting of one very good player, mediocre vets, and project draftees. Two, because they are in the middle, and for reasons I have already described, they are more than likely destined to be there for many years, until at some time in the future they voluntarily give up on mediocrity and blow it up, or they crater for circumstances beyond their control. Three, and this is my personal preference, I would rather watch several youngins with high ceilings and high motivation lose, and with the anticipation of great things to come, (See T-Wolves) than watch a middle of the road team that is going to be spinning it's wheels for the next several years, only to find itself in the same position of being blown up and starting what should have already started years ago.
I see the Kings, because of their history of draft disaster over the last several years, as having dug themselves an impossible hole to get out of if they continue on in their incremental middle-of-the-road strategy. The dye has been cast for Divac. His only choice, in my view, is whether he wants to blow up the mold, or not.

As an aside, I would like to add that the stuck-in-the-middle scenario applies particularly to small market teams like the Kings who have been woeful in their drafts. Big market teams have a better chance of getting the star FA by virtue of the fact that they are big market. If the Lakers or Miami had the exact same players as the Kings, I'd be more inclined to see the possibility of getting out of the middle.

 

[kingsboi]

Why I want it blown up is another subject entirely that I touch on below. The subject I'm more interested in now is what is Divac's strategy and what he's happy with. I think you're right - his strategy incorporates the middle, accepts the middle, even embraces the middle, despite that being in the middle is very difficult to extricate yourself from if you have mediocre talent. That's fair. It's reasonable. Like I said at the beginning: Is this a situation in which if you can't get what you want, be happy with what you have? Some like Divac and you are happy with what you have. I don't find fault with that. I just like to be clear on where we're coming from. If you're enthusiastic about being in the middle, and the long term consequences of being in "Middle Earth," more power to you. I just think that as fans we should clearly see what this strategy gives you, and then it is up the fans to determine if that strategy is ok with them.

As for my view on blowing it up, here are my premises and conclusions. One, the Kings are in the middle because their aggregate talent has a mediocre ceiling, consisting of one very good player, mediocre vets, and project draftees. Two, because they are in the middle, and for reasons I have already described, they are more than likely destined to be there for many years, until at some time in the future they voluntarily give up on mediocrity and blow it up, or they crater for circumstances beyond their control. Three, and this is my personal preference, I would rather watch several youngins with high ceilings and high motivation lose, and with the anticipation of great things to come, (See T-Wolves) than watch a middle of the road team that is going to be spinning it's wheels for the next several years, only to find itself in the same position of being blown up and starting what should have already started years ago.
I see the Kings, because of their history of draft disaster over the last several years, as having dug themselves an impossible hole to get out of if they continue on in their incremental middle-of-the-road strategy. The dye has been cast for Divac. His only choice, in my view, is whether he wants to blow up the mold, or not.

As an aside, I would like to add that the stuck-in-the-middle scenario applies particularly to small market teams like the Kings who have been woeful in their drafts. Big market teams have a better chance of getting the star FA by virtue of the fact that they are big market. If the Lakers or Miami had the exact same players as the Kings, I'd be more inclined to see the possibility of getting out of the middle.

Practically my thoughts as well. It can't be said enough on how badly the Kings have dug themselves in a hole with all their draft blunders and the talent they did have, giving it away like it was a piece of candy. That alone will hold this team back from winning with Cousins at helm IMO, it's inevitable, but the Kings do not have a good chance of being more than an average ball club and it's too damn bad considering they have a top 10 player, which is why teams rebuild year after year in the first place. If Cousins was drafted maybe two or three seasons ago, they would be better off...but not now when he is entering his 6th year with a contact extension looming on the horizon. I know some of us are content with just being an average ball club considering all the turmoil and 20 win seasons the team mustered up. I can't jump on that, that's not exciting to me...I will still root for them regardless because I'm a fan until I'm not longer on this earth, but it's too damn bad that when it's all said and done...the team was unable to make it work with Cousins IMO.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Why I want it blown up is another subject entirely that I touch on below. The subject I'm more interested in now is what is Divac's strategy and what he's happy with. I think you're right - his strategy incorporates the middle, accepts the middle, even embraces the middle, despite that being in the middle is very difficult to extricate yourself from if you have mediocre talent. That's fair. It's reasonable. Like I said at the beginning: Is this a situation in which if you can't get what you want, be happy with what you have? Some like Divac and you are happy with what you have. I don't find fault with that. I just like to be clear on where we're coming from. If you're enthusiastic about being in the middle, and the long term consequences of being in "Middle Earth," more power to you. I just think that as fans we should clearly see what this strategy gives you, and then it is up the fans to determine if that strategy is ok with them.

You're still creating a false ultimatum, though. You are presenting your argument in a way that makes it sound like you think that the simple act of trying to get from Point A to Point B, en route to arriving at Point G is, in itself, settling for Point B. Which is false. You want to bypass all the stuff in between, and go straight from Point A to Point G. And we can't.

That doesn't mean that we're "happy" with Point B. It's just that most of us reasonably understand that Point B is a necessary stepping stone to get to Point C, which is, in turn, a necessary stepping stone to get to Point D, and so on. You are framing your argument in a way in which you are misinterpreting a stepping stone for a landing spot; that's where the disconnect is. No disrespect, but you're coming off like the guy who always went straight to the Warp Whistle on Level 1 of Super Mario 3, and skipped straight to Level 8, without going through all of the other levels. Well, when you're in one-player mode, you can do that, but the NBA is always in multiplayer mode, and sometimes the Timberwolves gets the Warp Whistle, instead. Which means that we have to take the long way around. You shouldn't confuse that with being happy with the situation; we're not going to get to Level 5 and be like, "Mission Accomplished!"

Now, you can argue over whether you think that any of Divac's moves will work, and there's a conversation to be had on that level. However, comma (and I say this as a self-professed Divac hater), there's no real reason to believe, based on his actions, that Divac is settling for anything.

 

[mac]

how do you know that blowing it up gives this team "a better chance down the line"? what guarantees are there? and how long does it take? until 2019? 2021? 2023? consider this: the kings haven't had a draft pick in the top-3 since 1991, despite all of the losing that's accompanied their 31 years in sacramento. and their lottery selections in that span could largely be characterized as p*ss poor, if we're being very kind. it's been bust after bust after bust across decades, with the occasional good fortune of a player like demarcus cousins falling into the kings' laps--and even he arrived here with a series of red flags!

now, that damnable history certainly doesn't dictate what a new kings front office could accomplish in future drafts, but that history does say a lot about the luck required of a "blow it to Kingdom Come" kind of strategy. and even if you do manage to score the first pick in the draft, you'd better pray to the basketball gods that it's during a year in which karl-anthony towns is there for the taking, rather than, say, anthony bennett. that's many layers of luck that you're embracing in the alternative strategy you've presented. personally, i'd rather stake this team's future on effort and poise than on luck, because the former can be achieved with the kind of strategy that vlade divac and ken catanella are currently employing, while the latter is just an empty husk of "hope" to sell to a fanbase desperate for a better tomorrow.

see, i'm perfectly content with "the middle," because the kings have not actually occupied "the middle" since 2006, when they earned the eighth seed in rick adelman's final season with the franchise. they've been in "the bottom" for ten f***ing years. that's a third of my lifetime in which the kings have occupied the basement of the western conference. so hell yes, give me "the middle." fact is, when you're at "the bottom," climbing up to "the middle" is a necessary step towards legitimate contention. very few teams are able to make the leap from basement dweller to overnight contender. it just doesn't happen. even the outlier warriors of recent vintage were a sixth seed two years in a row before their world-beating explosion.

that said, it's reasonable to ask if a demarcus cousins/dave joerger partnership can transform the kings into a contender. i have no idea. the kings are going to need to acquire more talent eventually, and probably sooner rather than later. but in the meantime, i want to see them build a solid foundation out of sound defensive principles and maximum nightly effort. win some games, get above .500, earn an eighth seed, watch the fans lose their minds in a brand new arena during the playoffs, and who knows what might follow? the free agent class of 2017 is much stronger than this summer's class, and while the kings are unlikely to be in a position to sign a true impact talent even if everything goes right this season, they could surely add another quality piece or two to the puzzle. again, they're building a team, rather than hoping for one to form from luck and timing, factors that are always out of every single team's control.

I was pretty much saying the same thing from when we were looking at hiring Karl. People were saying that Karl hadn't made it out of the first round etc, that he couldn't lead us to be a contender. I'm at the point where I frankly don't care how we play, or whether Cousins is on the team or not, or whether Keith Smart is our coach. Give me small ball, give me junk ball, give me grind it out defense, start 5 players under 6ft, start 5 7 footers. I just want to be able to root for our team in April and May. And if we're stuck in Joe Johnson Hawks mediocrity so be it, 8 years of 1st round exits beats 8 years of no playoffs which we've already endured.

 

[KingsFan80]

Letting IT walk still stings. Hurts to even think about.

 

[King Baller]

Letting IT walk still stings. Hurts to even think about.

 

[Kingster]

You're still creating a false ultimatum, though. You are presenting your argument in a way that makes it sound like you think that the simple act of trying to get from Point A to Point B, en route to arriving at Point G is, in itself, settling for Point B. Which is false. You want to bypass all the stuff in between, and go straight from Point A to Point G. And we can't.

That doesn't mean that we're "happy" with Point B. It's just that most of us reasonably understand that Point B is a necessary stepping stone to get to Point C, which is, in turn, a necessary stepping stone to get to Point D, and so on. You are framing your argument in a way in which you are misinterpreting a stepping stone for a landing spot; that's where the disconnect is. No disrespect, but you're coming off like the guy who always went straight to the Warp Whistle on Level 1 of Super Mario 3, and skipped straight to Level 8, without going through all of the other levels. Well, when you're in one-player mode, you can do that, but the NBA is always in multiplayer mode, and sometimes the Timberwolves gets the Warp Whistle, instead. Which means that we have to take the long way around. You shouldn't confuse that with being happy with the situation; we're not going to get to Level 5 and be like, "Mission Accomplished!"

Now, you can argue over whether you think that any of Divac's moves will work, and there's a conversation to be had on that level. However, comma (and I say this as a self-professed Divac hater), there's no real reason to believe, based on his actions, that Divac is settling for anything.

If the aggregate talent ceiling of the Kings was good enough to mature and get us eventually to Level 7 or 8 (e.g. OKC and T-Wolves), I'd be very content to be at our current residence of Level 4. But if it's Level 4 for years on end because the aggregate talent ceiling is mediocre, resulting in being stuck at Level 4, then I'm not satisfied. Time to start a new game. The T-Wolves experience didn't just happen as you imply. It happened because of well executed strategy, tactics, and yes, good fortune. As for Divac, he's been taking an incremental ad hoc approach to have been given a bad hand. He can think and feel he's not settling, but it doesn't matter one way or the other.

The other factor, which I haven't brought up directly, is Cousins. If he perceives a stuck-in-the-middle problem (he's "confused" about the Divac draft), the whole debate may be moot because he may blow it up of his own accord.

 

[whozit]

If the aggregate talent ceiling of the Kings was good enough to mature and get us eventually to Level 7 or 8 (e.g. OKC and T-Wolves), I'd be very content to be at our current residence of Level 4. But if it's Level 4 for years on end because the aggregate talent ceiling is mediocre, resulting in being stuck at Level 4, then I'm not satisfied. Time to start a new game. The T-Wolves experience didn't just happen as you imply. It happened because of well executed strategy, tactics, and yes, good fortune. As for Divac, he's been taking an incremental ad hoc approach to have been given a bad hand. He can think and feel he's not settling, but it doesn't matter one way or the other.

The other factor, which I haven't brought up directly, is Cousins. If he perceives a stuck-in-the-middle problem (he's "confused" about the Divac draft), the whole debate may be moot because he may blow it up of his own accord.

Good coaches play to the team's strength, the hand they are dealt. It could be argued that Vlade tried to play to the hand he was dealt last year, i.e. Karl and this year he has changed the hand dealt. How it plays out remains to be seen.

New coach and new hand, so your saying if the Kings can reach the playoffs this year you will be very content. Welcome to the club.

 

[gunks]

It's getting pretty TDOS up in here

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

If the aggregate talent ceiling of the Kings was good enough to mature and get us eventually to Level 7 or 8 (e.g. OKC and T-Wolves), I'd be very content to be at our current residence of Level 4. But if it's Level 4 for years on end because the aggregate talent ceiling is mediocre, resulting in being stuck at Level 4, then I'm not satisfied. Time to start a new game. The T-Wolves experience didn't just happen as you imply. It happened because of well executed strategy, tactics, and yes, good fortune. As for Divac, he's been taking an incremental ad hoc approach to have been given a bad hand. He can think and feel he's not settling, but it doesn't matter one way or the other.

Why do you keep operating from the premise that assumes that we're going to spend years on Level 4, when we haven't even made it to Level 3 yet?

 

[Bricklayer]

Alirght, we're getting a little stale in here. August is traditionally the nadir of TDOS, but I swear if Vlade doesn't give us a little something fresher to talk about I'm going to start up a thread about Mr. Hanky The Christmas Poo.

 

[ParniValjak]

Alirght, we're getting a little stale in here. August is traditionally the nadir of TDOS, but I swear if Vlade doesn't give us a little something fresher to talk about I'm going to start up a thread about Mr. Hanky The Christmas Poo.

I doubt that anything happens to be honest. I don't think we will trade Rudy at this stage unless we get a solid deal which is probably unlikely.

I also doubt any of those solid PGs that are still available sign with us in the next few weeks as I see that more likely to happen closer to the training camp.

In terms of Rudy, I would rather lose him for nothing in FA that trade him for average package of players. At least with cap space you can sign a solid role player of our choice and bit burn cap on other team's trash!