There is plenty of blame to go around, and everyone involved in the fiasco that is your Sacramento Kings deserves at least a portion of responsibility. But if you had to pick one, or at least pick the one that deserves the most blame...
0 recs | 123 comments
Starts with Ownership
But I blame every one, including the players.
The Maloofs need to stop clinging to this team, If you cannot afford to stay competitive, sell to someone who can.
Robby1987 - January 17, 2012
The Maloofs need to stop clinging to this team, If you cannot afford to stay competitive, sell to someone who can.
Wonder if Ellison would be interested in buying the Kings? He was interested in the Warriors but apparently didn’t get a qualifying bid in place in time. Maybe he’d look at it as a good payback to take this team to a championship?
Skeptic con Urquell - January 17, 2012
if you believe that's how it went down with Ellison
then I have a bridge to sell you
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
No thanks I already got enough bridges.
but I believe it was reported that way, I wasn’t there in person though. I also know Ellison could have outbid Lacob if he had the chance so either he didn’t get the bid in or didn’t want the team. Point is that if he has any further inclination to get a team the kings would be a nice project and quite close to home for him and building the kings to dominate the warriors might have a special appeal to him? . Maybe he’ll get bored of his sailboat racing after the cup defense? Who knows, Ted Turner went from sailboats to baseball.
Skeptic con Urquell - January 17, 2012
I believe he is 0 for 2 in purchase attempts
but I could be wrong
ElRonToro - January 17, 2012
I believe he is 0 for 2 in purchase attempts
Don’t know, if that’s what you heard it’s probably true. But it would only mean he didn’t want to buy those 2 teams cause he has enough money to buy the whole league if he really wanted it.
Skeptic con Urquell - January 17, 2012
I don't think he is highly viewed by the league
at least thats what I remember on the NO purchase attempt. I think GS went to a lower offer. I am senile so I will look this up to confirm
ElRonToro - January 17, 2012
I was in the ballpark but not fully accurate
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlesports/2011/01/06/ellison-tried-to-buy-hornets-was-outbid-by-nba/
ElRonToro - January 17, 2012
I was in the ballpark but not fully accurate
Haha, I’m usually in the ball park but not fully coherent.
Thanks for the link. Apparently he was not serious about buying a team for a play toy :>)
At his net worth of 33 billion it would take .9% of his money to buy a team for 300Mil or 1.5 % of his net worth to buy a team for 500Mil ( or about the same financial suffering it cost me to buy a hotdog and beer at the afore mentioned ball park)
Skeptic con Urquell - January 17, 2012
More than anyone else!?
The Owners for sure.
2 years of hearing about a salary FLOOR solidifies that they are without question, out of their league.
I bet most fans of other teams don’t even realize there is a salary floor!
I don’t think Petrie has done a very good job lately either, but I imagine he is doing what his bosses are telling him to.
Dirkula - January 17, 2012
I concur with the sentiment that this team is on ownership.
Winning costs money.
Spend, Maloofs, and spend wisely (i.e. remove yourselves completely from any financial decisions. And management decisions…just remove yourselves).
The Crown Royal Gentleman - January 17, 2012
The Maloofs
The firing of Adelman has done more harm to this franchise than any trade, pick or signing.
Smills9133 - January 17, 2012
Yet the hiring of Tom Thibodeau could have made everyone forget Adelman
Instead of long for him. Adelman is not the end all to be all of coaches, it just seems that way given his successors.
bench_blob - January 17, 2012
i still get the firing of Adelman
But what I don’t get is the loss of the system the Kings had in place. They could had brought in a coach that had the same or a similar philosophy and kept the Princeton offense.
Bambooozled - January 17, 2012 via mobile
who?
seriously, I dunno of many coaches around in the NBA who run the Princeton.
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
didnt scott want to run it?
Bambooozled - January 17, 2012 via mobile
Didn't we think we were getting that from Eddie Jordan?
otis29 - January 18, 2012
PRINCETON?!?
andy sims - January 18, 2012
And predecessors
ElRonToro - January 17, 2012
The more times Adelman has to job hop, that is borne out
Adelman’s a fine coach, but it seems he wears out his welcome after a while.
Although I’m still clinging to my theory that Petrie can’t build a winning team for any coach other than Adelman. So maybe we should have either done everything possible to get Adelman back in the fold, or gotten rid of Petrie a long time ago.
otis29 - January 18, 2012
I wish that I had placed this poll when Westphal was still here
That said, no one is above reproach here.
Front Office – I still like the drafting of Evans and Cousins (and neither one was an automatic pick), and I think that Petrie did well here in spite of the team getting screwed in the lottery in consecutive years (not for nothing, but had the odds prevailed, the Kings would probably have Blake Griffin and John Wall right now). But he was too quick on the Kevin Martin trigger, the draft pick that was spent to obtain Hickson looks to be a brutal error, and the Salmons/10th pick for Udrih/7th pick looks to be ridiculously bad. And the coaching hires have gone from bad to worse.
Coaching – From Musselman to Theus to Natt to Westphal to Smart (I know – too early to call on Smart), no coach or his staff has been able to come in and establish their system to the betterment of the team and the players. Epic fail on their part.
Players – Regardless of the leadership (or lack of it) that is coming from above, at some point players have to be accountable for themselves, and I see very little of that from this squad. The team is very young, but there is a glaring lack of professionalism.
But my gold star goes to ownership. Check out these fun facts:
29th in salary, ahead of only Indiana (who is actually under the minimum cap at the moment.
The league average is $64m, and the median is $62m. The Kings are at $48m.
There are 10 NBA teams that are spending $20m more on player payroll than the Kings.
There are 7 teams that are spending at least one and a half times more than the Kings.
The Kings are within $10m of only 8 NBA teams when it comes to player payroll, and Indiana is the only one of those teams with a winning record.
And none of the fun facts stated above speak to the lack of investing at the front office or head coaching level.
Here’s calling for new ownership, one that would come in and clean house as needed from top to bottom.
section214 - January 17, 2012
Rec'd
CowbellKings - January 17, 2012
To be fair the Kings tried to spend money on free agents, uhhhhh...a bit this year.
They just took less money to play elsewhere.
adamsite - January 17, 2012
Jamal Crawford isn't a big name signing
Something weird happened with Dalembert, so to just write it off as him taking less money is not telling the whole story.
Kirelinko was never going to happen, any Jazz fan could have told you that
They gave the facade that they were making an attempt to spend, but in actuality they really werent
prowseinthehouse - January 17, 2012
Do we really know if they were or were not?
adamsite - January 17, 2012
Either way...
Either they gave a crappy attempt to make us think they were trying to spend for the sake of looking good, or that was just the crappiest attempt at spending money and improving the team I have ever seen
prowseinthehouse - January 17, 2012
Offseason Shenanigans
When I look at an organization like Golden State who had a busy offseason trying to outbid for some decent level free agents; but in the end they all wound up elsewhere. I find myself wishing we were at least in the hunt for some better proven talent like they were. Doing something to show any glimpse of a plan to stifle the uninspired to downright frustrating play of the teams over the past few seasons.
That’s when I got that feeling in my stomach that only comes with the realization of being envious of the Golden State Warriors franchise. I don’t know how much more pepto bismol I can swallow.
JerryandGrantstearswillcuremankind - January 18, 2012
Even if they were "trying" to spend money
Big free agents aren’t going to go to a terrible team/organization. Forget about the city. We had no problems getting players to sign when we were winning. Look at the Clippers, no one wanted to go there until BG became a phenom. It’s LA! But it wasn’t the storied Laker franchise. Well we don’t have any phenoms & our team/organization has a terrible rep to go with a bargain basement coach.
As far as who is to blame the most? I agree with everything section said. I will add the Pacers are much improved even though they have a low payroll. So Petrie can’t blame it all on the Maloofs. He has made some terrible moves. Before we had Tyreke & Cousins our team was terrible, but you knew what everyone role was on the team. They just weren’t very good players. Now we have some good players with no defined roles. Just a big mess talent that doesn’t fit. That’s on the GM.
Allbenji - January 17, 2012 via mobile
Indiana also built their new renaissance of a team through the draft.
Granger, George, Hibbert, Hansbrough.
They also have had some wonderful trades and free agent signings. Indiana is not not L.A. or N.Y but it is not a far cry from Sacramento as a destination.
adamsite - January 17, 2012
They are certainly the exception
section214 - January 17, 2012
Yet comparable eh? Minus the whole state-of-the-art arena thing.
adamsite - January 17, 2012
They are to be admired
But if you think that they are a workable model for success, I think that you’re living in a fool’s paradise. 9 of the 10 teams that are spending the least amount of money have losing records.
So yes, you can penny pinch and still come up with a winning team, inasmuch as you have a 1 in 10 chance.
section214 - January 17, 2012
Agree completely on the spending.
But in comparison to the roster management of those bottom 10 teams, the Kings leave something to be desired. Teams like Indiana, Houston, Utah, and the Thunder have been savvy in their management. That word “savvy” is something I can’t equate to Petrie at this point in time.
adamsite - January 17, 2012
toss Memphis in there as well.
adamsite - January 17, 2012
Memphis is at $71m, so you're comparing apples to apple cores there
And I’m not really all that impressed with most of the other budget rosters: Charlotte, Cleveland, Golden State, Houston, Minnesota, Toronto, Utah and Washington all have their positives and negatives. There isn’t a team in that bunch that has a GM that I would want, and Adelman is the only coach in that bunch that is even mildly impressive.
section214 - January 17, 2012
And to think
If one team had the right GM in place to make it work on a tight budget, it was certainly Sacramento…right?
otis29 - January 18, 2012
Why must you pour mercury in our wounds?
Shizzo - January 17, 2012
Step away from the ledge
I’ll admit that the rebuilding process has been long and difficult, but most of the moves have been pretty logical. No one needs to be dumped! The team put all of this money into Webber and Bibby and then Webber got injured. Webber’s injury really screwed the franchise for several years, but it’s not like the Kings could’ve predicted it and they would’ve been crazy to let Bibby walk. The Kings tried to make the best of a really horrible situation by trading Webber and Peja, but it didn’t work out and only prolonged the decline. Once the Kings realized that they had no choice but to rebuild via the draft, it shouldn’t have been a secret that it was going to take a few really bad seasons in order to acquire the talent needed to be successful. Building through the draft means shedding bad contracts and drafting players on rookie contracts — that’s why the team salary is so low. The Kings finally have some nice young pieces to build a team around and it’s just going to take some time for them to develop and gel together. Add a piece here and there (Hayes for example) and the team will be successful again going forward. I know it looks bad right now and no one wants to be on the wrong end of that pounding by Dallas, but the team (with a low salary) is definitely in a much better situation now then it has been in several years. I see light at the end of the tunnel — I couldn’t say that when Artest was the leader of the team and a gimpy Martin and Bibby were backing him up.
who betta than kanyon? - January 17, 2012
Webber injured his knee over 8 years ago
They have not seen the playoffs in almost 6 years.
I see absolutely no sign that current ownership is willing to invest in the team.
I have seen no recent front office moves (outside of the drafting of Evans and Cousins) that lead me to believe that they have a grasp on the situation.
I have seen no coach since Rick Adelman come in here and implement a system of any kind.
I see a team full of players that is not playing well together, and has not for the past several years.
It’s not a ledge that I am standing upon, yet I can see for miles. And I see no end to the Kings suckitude in sight. Not under current ownership, and probably not under the current front office.
section214 - January 17, 2012
Oh,
And that can’t be a light at the end of the tunnel – in a cost cutting move, the Maloofs had the light turned off.
section214 - January 17, 2012
in a cost cutting move, the Maloofs had the light turned off.
haha, and if the light were there odds are it’s a speeding freight train :>)
Skeptic con Urquell - January 17, 2012
The glass is half full!
I’m happy with DMC and Tyreke. They’re young and they make mistakes, but they have a lot of talent and I’m convinced that they’ll one day become All Stars. Only time will tell, but I have hope.
And say what you want about the Maloofs, but I don’t doubt their commitment to the team — you can see it every time Gavin nearly orgasms on the sidelines every time someone makes a huge shot. The Maloofs love the Kings so much that they’d rather give up the Palms then sell the team to Burkle. I just don’t believe the Maloofs have been cheap just for the sake of being cheap. The team decided to build through the draft and didn’t sign anyone because they were waiting for the CBA to be hammered out. Maybe if I was in the “We need to throw max money at Tyson Chandler” camp, I’d be disappointed with the ownership too. I wasn’t. If the Kings are going to get back in the playoffs, they’re going to have to be smarter than that.
who betta than kanyon? - January 17, 2012
I'd prefer
to see fewer orgasms from the brothers and more cash outlay, but maybe that’s just me.
section214 - January 18, 2012
First, I admire your positive attitude. But I think you need to take the blinders off. The Maloofs are not interested in keeping the team in Sacramento. Therefore, they will continue to put out an inferior product every year until the NBA says go ahead and move to the team. Then they will start to spend there money again.
mjjr42002 - January 18, 2012
Seriously dude, the webber injury?
I think the whole downfall started when the maloofs had to move from rochester
lchristmas - January 18, 2012 via mobile
I understand the whole frustration with the owners, however....(devil's advocate here)
The front office has been nothing to write home about the past few years. There have been horrible MLE contacts in recent memory. The nail in the coffin for me was the Salmons trade and Jimmer draft. I know…I know… Jimmer was apparently a Maloof pick, but why trade down and take on MORE salary in Salmons when you could have had Jimmer at the original pick. The Outlaw pickup was definitely a Petrie pick, as was Douby a few years back.
We should all not be blinded by the cult of Petire! I like the guy personally, and can’t think of anyone that I would rather have at this moment, but give credit where credit is due. Watching Leonard tonight playing for the Spurs has me envious of their management….hell, who wouldn’t be envious of the Spurs management. He ma be handcuffed by the Maloofs pocket book, but when other teams kind find D-League level talent and pull off trades like Wallace to Portland and Odom to Dallas for second round picks, why can’t our glorious Petrie pull a rabbit out of his hat…because honestly, most of us our optimistically expecting him to do so at anytime. When was the last time, however? ….Alright, tear me a new one…
adamsite - January 17, 2012
Great take
The only correction is that Portland had to come up with a pair of first round picks for Wallace, so he didn’t come to the Blazers for cheap.
The front office has been given very little financial wiggle room, but they sure have screwed the pooch recently with whatever room they have had.
section214 - January 17, 2012
Hmm
One of my biggest blames is the lockout. Part of the biggest problem is that the new schedule leaves us with little to no time to practice and get used to the new coaching style.
Also, two years of big salary cap space and we haven’t come away with any big free agents. I truly think we are an sf away from being a complete team that needs to mesh together and we will be far more competitive.
Granted, there are several other problems that can’t simply be solved by these two things but I think they have significantly impacted this team so far this year.
Czar Nickoli - January 17, 2012 via Android app
I'd have to throw in a PG too
I don’t think we need “pure” PG like most people think but still a quality starting PG(DJ Augustine would be nice)
Allbenji - January 17, 2012 via mobile
All of the above in the order you listed them:
1. Owners – The buck literally stops with them. I hope they sell soon.
2. FO – Their hands are tied, but bad decisions have made the situation worse than it has to be
3. Coaching staff – Westphal alone has set us back at least a season
4. Players – They are what they are, for the most part I think they are doing their best given the circumstance
Slam_Dunk - January 17, 2012
If I had to break it out by percentages,
I’d probably give ownership 50% of the blame, the front office 30%, with the remaining 20% split up among the coaches and players.
section214 - January 17, 2012
Agree. That seems about right.
Slam_Dunk - January 17, 2012
Yep
CowbellKings - January 17, 2012
Agree with you here
otis29 - January 18, 2012
Hmmm
Tremendous points. Many new players, two new systems with two coaches… it’s not possible to have cohesion, development under such circumstances. Impossible.
Given the Maloofs’ influence(little resources and actually thinking they know some hoop))
has a continually corroding influence…
We Kings’ fans have endured many a promise and false starts, but our history and accompanying frustration drive these discussions. It’s unfair to so swiftly judge this team until they have practices, and some home games. Let Coach Smart sift and sort until he settles on a rotation to develop; get Hayes back….and like it or not, this is our team, and constant playing of the blame game helps with venting…but positive breeds positive.
If the Kings gather some momentum, and this group begins to enjoy playing together, doing so effectively, then all this will be steps up the ladder..
zzsjolt - January 17, 2012
I hear you. I just don’t see it with this team. Look at there body language during games. They look like disinterested. There seems to be a lot of me first attitudes on this team and no real leadership.
mjjr42002 - January 18, 2012
I hope you all know where I stand on this.
Because I’ve suffered a traumatic brain injury, and don’t remember.
All I know for certain is that I’m now qualified to own an NBA franchise.
andy sims - January 17, 2012
Buck stops at ownership.
Yeah, everybody on that list is to blame. However, if there is a problem with the players, the coach and front office are supposed to handle that – and if front office is falling short, the owners are supposed to handle that. It’s the top of the chain of command, and so far the top of the chain in Sacramento appears satisfied with running a bottom-dollar operation.
We’re not getting better play until we get better players and coaches, we aren’t getting a better roster until we get a better front office, and none of that’s happening until we get owners with the initiative, will, and interest to do something about any…thing.
napg - January 17, 2012
This is great ammo for the Maloofs moving the team
feelgood - January 17, 2012
How so?
They tried to move the team last year, and the NBA blocked it, giving the City of Sacramento until 3/1/12 to have a concrete arena plan in place, or else the Maloofs would be permitted to move.
I just don’t see how this post or conversation has anything to do with whether the Maloofs stay or go. Are you inferring that we dare not say anything negative about the current state of the franchise, for fear that the spoiled little brats might take their ball and go home?
section214 - January 17, 2012
I'm with you, Section.
We should not feel as though we have to walk on eggshells, afraid to speak our minds, even if that means pointing blame and criticism at the Maloofs.
As fans, we obviously do not want the team to leave town. Major Kevin Johnson and many others are working tirelessly to have a concrete plan to have an arena in place, to satisfy the Commissioner, in a community effort to keep the team here.
The team may well be performing at an all-time low. What fans wouldn’t question what went wrong, especially after the Maloofs came out and implied they were going to open their wallets to acquire top talent and give their support to fans of Sacramento?
This thing isn’t over with yet. I am glad you are not ducking the obvious, pretending it is all okay, out of fear the Maloofs will attempt to use this open criticism of them as ammunition to make their exit. As the results of your poll show, many of us have our own criticism of the owners’ failure to make any substantial effort to improve the team, as they said they would.
It wasn’t too long ago they basically had one foot out the door. Had it not been for the uprising of fan support, the Here-We-Stay movement, and the eloquent actions of our Mayor, Kevin Johnson, they most likely would have been history.
We want the team to remain here in Sacramento, but we want an ownership which is committed to making the necessary improvements, toward making the team competitive and eventually once again showcasing championship contenders.
Slam_Dunk - January 18, 2012
You should read "Uncle Tom."
andy sims - January 17, 2012
LOL!
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
"Let's stay. Not because of any money issues but just out of love of the fans."
“Wait, what? A fan wrote an article on the interwebz with a poll? And people think we are the reason the team is losing? Oh no, that is it. Our fans have broken our hearts! Only thing we can do is leave!”
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
Im surprised the NBA season wasn't a choice.
Practice time I believe would make a difference. Remember Tyreke and his late night shooting after a series of bad FT percentages? Now look.
Zuriel Smith - January 17, 2012
If it were the season...
…then why are some teams thriving (or at least improving – see Minnesota) while we still suck?
napg - January 17, 2012
Probably because they have veterans
We have bunch of young players who haven’t been adequately developed since they came into the NBA and have been through so many coaches they probably feel dizzy.
CowbellKings - January 17, 2012
I have noticed the running teams have thrived early on
Portland, Chicago, OKC, Denver, Philly (taking advantage of the sloppy play) while the veteran teams are starting to come around (because of their experience), and the young inexperienced teams are getting blown out a lot. It sounds as though the shortened training camp argument carries some weight.
Wonderchild - January 18, 2012
Everything is the Maloofs' fault.
PurpleLoco - January 17, 2012
childhood obesity?
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
Yup
chenp22 - January 18, 2012
Well, just wake up, kiss the good life goodbye
lyrics from the Good Life
Slam_Dunk - January 18, 2012
Well, limited cases of adult obesity, at any rate.
andy sims - January 17, 2012
what about medical malpratice?
Bingo!
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
One thing is certain: All of these clowns are crappy dressers.
ExPFCWintergreen - January 17, 2012
They were pretty cute when they first came to town, then it took an ugly turn.
Slam_Dunk - January 18, 2012
My question
If Petrie is so hamstrung, why did he a) push Levien out, and b) stay in his position when all it can do is sully his reputation?
Because his reputation is going down the drain with every losing season at this point. If he felt truly hamstrung, wouldn’t he skip town? He already took a massive paycut to stay (which in itself is evidence of the Maloofs’ financial woes, so, hmm).
Blame everyone.
Tom Ziller - January 17, 2012
it's such a putrid situation
honestly, we are a solid 4 years now into a full on rebuild where we might have to overhaul again with the next year or two.
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
Because with his heart condition I conjecture that he sees this job as the last he will hold
He signed his last deal for “minimum” level GM salary but included upgraded positions for his son and for Wayne Cooper.
I contend that blame wise, with losing, everyone is at fault but responsibility starts at the top. If the team is losing for 6 seasons in a row what owners don’t start to change the front office? The ownership that knows they won’t spend any money, that’s who. The moves of Petrie are predicated by the constraints of ownership. Compound that with the extended time period of those monetary restrictions and add the normal ups and downs of all player movement (no one GM gets every trade or non-trade/resigning 100% correct, the better teams win enough to mute or at least dampen those faults and having a top flight coach helps).
Is Petrie to blame – heck yes, but remember his available options are limited and add a significant degree of difficulty (it’s harder to make 10G at the $5 blackjack table than the $100 min table).
The players are there to play. They aren’t tearing up the All Star voting polls, but they want to win as bad as anyone. Coaching is a joke because you are fishing for top flight coaching with bottom feeder money. Tom Thibs here? Sorry, but of your list of potential suitors would you pick the guy in the Tux with a corsage taking you to The French Laundry or the guy in the Ed Hardy T shirt with carnations and escorting you to Carl Jrs? For a prospective Coach you are taking this job to move up or to hang on.
Blame game percentages: 80% Malinda, 10% Petrie et al., 5%player and coaching, 5% Fans for putting up with this treatment for so long without screaming to ship the 2% bums (The Maloofs) out of town and keep the Kings here in Sacramento.
The other question that elephants this room is: How long will us fans put up with this load of equine excrement? We need to see if our Kings will exist in Sacramento next season, but once that summit is reached, will we fans kick those Malinda’s downhill or have to be talked off the ledge if they stay?
betweentheeyes - January 18, 2012
I have often wondered the same thing.
CowbellKings - January 17, 2012
This one is easy.
Everyone has been bad but if the owners won’t pony up the cash then you are screwed from the get go.
Blue Dog - January 17, 2012
Rec'd
for such a complete yet pithy summing up of the situation.
napg - January 17, 2012
at least we have Jimmer
By the way, he’s averaging the same amount of ast per game as Nash during his rookie season with 2.1 per game…
Bambooozled - January 17, 2012 via mobile
By the way ....
Nash is one of the most non typical and worse examples one can use to talk about projecting others.
By the way, Nash averaged 7.3 assists during his rookie season per 36 …
By the way, Nash had a 2.4/1.1 assit to turnover rate during his rookie season …
By the way, Nash had a 29.5% assist percentage during his rookie season …
Just sayin
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
just a thought.
Nash is from Canada too…and he likes soccer.
Bambooozled - January 17, 2012 via mobile
lol, very true
But can he pronounce the letter “o”?
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
By the way, he’s averaging the same amount of ast per game as Nash during his rookie season with 2.1 per game…
haha ,but nash had just come over from soccer at that time and thought one had to play with his feet, once he learned the rules his game took off.
Skeptic con Urquell - January 17, 2012
nah he took 2 or 3 years to play well
Bambooozled - January 17, 2012 via mobile
Cherry picking is fun!
otis29 - January 18, 2012
I blame Slamson
Because he is NAPG.
John Takanikos - January 17, 2012
No, I am.
napg - January 17, 2012
Lest we forget? We HAD Scotty Brooks and the Maloofs flicked him off like a dingleberry
because he was ….oh…..not an old, famous coach deserving of their discriminating largesse. Scott Brooks, the local boy made good. But No—o-o-o! The Maloofs wanted a coach with cachet….like Westphal!
Natomaser - January 17, 2012
The Maloofs hired Theus instead of Brooks, not Westphal
Technically speaking, I dunno many Thunder fans who like Brooks who they often complain has no system at all or plays and just gets by off of the talent of the team.
Just sayin.
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
What I meant was...LIKE Westphal. Not that he was the next stooge-in-sequence. At any rate,
Durant and Westbrook are not the whole team. OKC works because they have capable and willing role players. I am not saying Brooks is Phil Jackson Redux. But he is an up-and-comer. It’s a wise coach who positions himself to win. The fates were clearly with him. What I would like the Moneyball people on this siteto do is compile a list of the teams that, since…oh…since 2000, have had the most coaching and player turnover. That would be an interesting stat.
Natomaser - January 18, 2012
Not to take anything away from Scotty Brooks,
but it sure helps having Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant.
chenp22 - January 18, 2012
They would not have developed had they been in Sacramento under Theus, Natt, and Westphall.
napg - January 18, 2012
They would have been traded to another team, with the likes of Kevin Martin.
Slam_Dunk - January 18, 2012
This is a transitive issue
if i may bastardize the word.
it dates back to the release of adelman. i don’t think the maloofs had any idea how great an impact letting him go would have. and i don’t simply mean wins and losses.
i understand their letting him go, he kept getting them to the playoffs but seemed like the guy who just couldn’t get over the top, and they figured that the team was good enough, and they simply needed a change.
unfortunately, a coaching carousel followed which i know all too well from following the raiders. this eventually leads to westphal, which is where the current problematic season has been festering. (i’m not entirely sure that festering is an appropriate word in that sentence).
westphal’s problems have been well documented here, with his communication issues and general lack of a gameplan. neither of those have had quite the negative impact as has his complete lack of player development. which i suppose can be attributed to that no gameplan thing.
and this is where adelman’s release comes into play. with all of these younger, cheaper coaches that the maloofs tried and failed with, they needed a veteran coach with a resume which they could rely on. westphal looked like the man, and at the risk of yet another pr nightmare, they had to stick with him. no one was showing up to games, the team was getting ready to move. there was always the chance that the move would fall through, and canning another coach (especially one with the slightest bit of success in the past) would have further wrecked whatever image they had left. it’s really difficult to make yourselves look better while putting a wretched product on the floor and filled with instability at the coaching position.
fortunately for them, westphal made an ass out of himself and his team was terrible. firing him when they did was the perfect move, even if it was the only move they had left.
i don’t directly blame the maloofs for how terrible the team looks this year, that falls on westphal. they didn’t need to be championship material, but they can’t go around losing by 30 every other night. i want to blame petrie. i really do, but the kings were top bidders on most of the free agents out there which the kings were tied to. nobody wanted to come here. i accept that.
this is a roundabout way of saying that westphal isn’t a poll option, so to the ownership it goes!
Brannigan's Law - January 17, 2012
Zapp Brannigan? Is that you? You hit that bullseye...
And the rest of that house of cards fell like dominoes. Checkmate.
HarveySpecter - January 17, 2012
Bastardize all you want
But fix your shift key. You gave me an eye twitch with this one.
LeaguePassAddict - January 18, 2012
My Question Is:
I never agreed with the firing of Adelman. I thought the Magoofs did it in poor taste given how much he had done for the franchise.
And they did it with no plan for a successful successor to succeed him (Yes, I did that on purpose).
So they thought, "Ey! Let’s get rid of the head coach for some change, one of the winningest coaches in NBA history, and pick…..random guy #1, then #2, then #3….
And so it goes.
HarveySpecter - January 17, 2012
I know everyone likes to talk of the "firing" of Adelman
But just to clarify, he fulfilled his contract and was not offered a new one.
And let’s be real here – Adelman eventually gets on someone’s nerves enough where they don’t want to keep him around. From my limited understanding of the Kings situation, the team was frustrated with both their ability to communicate with Adelman and his apparent unwillingness to be more community oriented (something the Kings trumpeted as of incredible importance at the time).
I mean, come on – Houston did the same thing, and would rather have Kevin McHale coaching their team than Adelman.
So I’m guessing Adelman’s ability (or lack thereof) to work well with others is part of the problem.
And I agree with a poster above. I understand Adelman’s departure for the Kings, but the inability to find a decent head coach subsequently has been the real issue.
otis29 - January 18, 2012
Solidly recalled
And the straw that broke the camel’s back was when Adelman came out and as much stated that because he had no contract, he was basically a free agent and could test the waters. That was the end of any meaningful contract conversation between RA and the Kings.
section214 - January 18, 2012
Fair enough
Maybe I don’t recall correctly, but wasn’t that basically in response to rumors that the Maloofs were pursuing other coaches and such without letting Adelman know what the situation was?
I always seem to remember some underhandedness in the Maloof’s part. Maybe I’m mistaken however.
Personally , sure, maybe he didn’t work well with others, but unless there’s a solid replacement that you know is a better deal, and can get you closer to the championship, you don’t burn your bridges. The Maloofs torched that bridge and then when we got nada, we were in trouble.
HarveySpecter - January 18, 2012
Yeah,
Rick’s response was partly due to the fact that the brothers had spoken with Phil Jackson. Bottom line, both sides got into a dick measuring contest, and that was that.
section214 - January 18, 2012
I voted coaching staff.
I’m shocked it has the least votes. I don’t think we’re terrible because of the players.. it’s our offense.
CoolFinity - January 17, 2012
I think
a lot has to do with people thinking by coaching staff we are just talking about the current one, i.e. Smart.
wallywagon11 - January 17, 2012
But don't you blame ownership...
… for causing the coaching mess we have been in the past 5-6 years? They have had pretty heavy-handed involvement in letting Adelman go, and the subsequent disastrous coaching hires.
henryclemente - January 18, 2012
That's Petrie's baby IMO
otis29 - January 18, 2012
The Maloofs
Were the ones who were incredibly impressed with Musselman’s power point and research. I forget who the front-runner was before that, but I think the Boys pushed eMuss down Petrie’s throat.
LeaguePassAddict - January 18, 2012
And if Petrie allowed such an important decision to be "pushed down his throat"
What good is he?
otis29 - January 18, 2012
You don't follow through with your bosses crappy ideas?
I don’t see why you would think he should have power over them
prowseinthehouse - January 18, 2012
Uh, no I don't
But I’m in the type of specialized management position where my employers know I’m much more qualified than they are to make decisions on my own department.
And if you’re Geoff Petrie and you’re recognized as one of the best at your job in the world? That gives you even more reason to voice your opinion strongly or put your foot down.
And if you’re Geoff Petrie, a brilliant Ivy League guy and historically successful at what you do – and your employers continue to override you on matters of this type…what do you do? Do you find work where your viewpoint is taken seriously, or do you continue to sign extensions on your contract with the doofuses that keep forcing the bad decisions and make you look inept at the same time? I’d say the former – and if you “sit there and take it”, then what good are you anyways?
I’m certainly no fan of the Maloofs, but I’ve always suspected they get too much blame for the bad decisions Petrie has made and continues to make.
otis29 - January 18, 2012
I'm not disagreeing with that
but if the owners are steadfast about who they want as coach, which they seemed they were, what is he supposed to do? It seems he’s become jaded and is mailing it in at this point and I don’t think he wants to go anywhere else. At this point I’d see him retire over anything else, of course I know as much as anyone else here about the inner workings which is nothing.
prowseinthehouse - January 18, 2012
He's supposed to make sure they know it's a bad decision
And then he’s supposed to quit signing extensions. I mean, it’s certainly what I would expect from a substantive person.
I don’t see how your support of him in the reply above is supposed to make anyone appreciate him. He doesn’t want to go anywhere else, he might be jaded, so he’s just going with the flow?
That makes him as culpable as the ownership.
Isn’t the easier answer that he’s been onboard with the big decisions that have been made on the coaching and personnel side and people are running out of ways to blame the Maloofs for his mistakes?
otis29 - January 18, 2012
I'm not trying to support him
I was just questioning the part about saying that if he can’t override his boss he is useless. He can tell them all day they are making a bad decision (I’ve done this at my jobs too) but when the idiot boss still goes ahead then what can you do? I’m not saying he’s blameless and certainly not defending his recent moves, but trying to indict him because the ownership forced something on him isn’t the best way to prove your point.
prowseinthehouse - January 18, 2012
You're assuming that ownership forced something on him - I don't agree
I think that’s an offshoot of Petrie’s reputation as a bulletproof GM in these parts.
I’ve already answered your question numerous times. If the Maloofs were ignoring Petrie’s advice repeatedly and doing whatever the hell they wanted, Petrie should have quit.
The fact that he hasn’t is the most compelling proof I see that Petrie’s been onboard with the decisions this franchise has made.
otis29 - January 18, 2012
So you blame the ownership for hiring a bad coach?
Rather than Westphal for being a bad coach?
CoolFinity - January 18, 2012
Yup, I do...
… given that there is a pattern of the Maloof’s heavy-handed involvement in the coaching carousel starting with their firing of Adelman, getting dazzled by the presentations of bad hires Mussleman and Theus, being unimpressed and passing on Thibodeau, going cheap with Westphal. Etc…If you’re going to be that heavily involved, you better have a clue as to what you are doing. Clearly they don’t.
(Petrie’s culpability in all this is well discussed above, but short of quitting, how do you deal with clueless, broke, meddling owners like this?)
henryclemente - January 18, 2012
All of the above
CrownedPotential - January 18, 2012
I really wish there was a button to poll
It really is a mixed bag of everyone’s fault. Ownership, Coaching, Players, AND the Front Office.
CrownedPotential - January 18, 2012
It is absolutely all of them
That said, I think Petrie’s share of the blame has been understated. Has he been hamstrung by budgetary constraints? Sure. That doesn’t mean he couldn’t have made better choices, though. Let’s look at some moves he’s made in the past few years:
1. Salmons/10 for Beno/7 – Awful. Shouldn’t have given in to Westphal’s pleading for Salmons. He could’ve just taken Jimmer at 7 if he wanted him, and could’ve made a different deal for a small forward. He could’ve signed Matt Barnes or Mike Dunleavy Jr. in free agency for relatively cheap. Quincy Pondexter was traded for Greivis Vazquez; I have a hard time believing he couldn’t have beaten that offer. Mickeal Pietrus was waived; he could’ve been picked up for cheap. Corey Brewer was acquired for a future 2nd-round pick. Instead, not only did he move DOWN in the draft and pick up a terrible contract for a mediocre player, but he also picked up Travis Outlaw on a FOUR-year deal (that’s its own point). What a clusterf***. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
2. Travis Outlaw – Travis Outlaw on a one-year, $3 million deal, I could live with. Two years even. FOUR?? I know he had to choose between four years or not having Outlaw, but he made the wrong choice. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
3. Trading for Samuel Dalembert – For a rebuilding team, this deal really didn’t make a whole lot of sense. Yeah, Spencer Hawes wasn’t playing all that well, but he’s still only 23. Getting rid of Nocioni’s deal was nice, but the purpose was so they’d have money for the big spending spree they were supposedly going to go on this year, which not only didn’t happen, but never seemed to have a very good chance of happening. Maybe Hawes would’ve improved with the Kings like he has with the 76ers or maybe he wouldn’t have, but either way I would’ve liked to have found out. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options. He could’ve kept Hawes/Nocioni. He could’ve found another deal for a non-expiring player or something else. Who knows.
4. Francisco Garcia’s extension – No explanation needed. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
5. Beno’s extension – Too many years. One less year, and the Salmons deal probably never happens because an expiring $7 million contract really isn’t so bad. Five years didn’t seem necessary, but Geoff seems to like bidding against himself. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
6. Protections on the pick in the Hickson deal – The Kings really can’t trade a draft pick any time in the next several years now. Not sure what other options were on the table, but this seems like a mistake in itself. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
7. Mikki Moore signing – Didn’t really make much sense to me when he was signed, and I remember plenty of others scratching their heads as well. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
8. Bonzi Wells extension offer – Yes, he didn’t take it, but holy crap would this have been a horrendous deal. Six years, $36 million? Bonzi did more for the Kings in turning down this dumbass offer than he ever did in a Kings uniform. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
9. Kevin Martin deal – I know plenty of people liked this deal or thought it was necessary, but I didn’t like it. I think Petrie could’ve gotten a better deal that fit this team better if he’d kept shopping. Petrie was not handcuffed into making this move; he had other options.
Just some examples. I’m sure some people like(d) some of these nine moves, and I’m sure there are moves I didn’t name that people hate, but I don’t think the problem is Petrie being handcuffed by the Maloofs. If the two options are pay way too much to acquire an average player, or pay very little to acquire a slightly below-average player, give me option B; at least you don’t hamstring your roster by doing that. Petrie wasn’t obligated to make any of these moves; he made them all by himself. I think it’s time for a new general manager.
CaliforniaJag - January 18, 2012
Well, the poll is leveling out with 1100+ votes
And it seems pretty accurate. 50% owners, 25% FO, 20% players, 5% Coach Smart
Wonderchild - January 18, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Sactown Royalty to post a comment.