Jared Wickerham - Getty Images
See update at bottom. -- TZ
Should the Maloofs decide that the rebuild has failed, or that it needs to be looked at with a new set of eyes, the path forward is woefully unclear. The Maloofs' own status is such that it's really impossible for fans to even come up with a prayed-for progression of change in the front office, assuming that fans want that at all.
Replacing a general manager midseason isn't terribly rare or obnoxious. After all, major personnel decisions primarily happen at three points: before the trade deadline (usually February, but March this year), at the draft (late June) and in free agency (July). Preparing for the draft and putting the team's cap structure in place for free agency, requires much of the first half of the calendar year. Now is key prep time for the most critical moments of the season. Waiting until the end of April to replace a personnel boss is, I fear, to wait too long.
But if you replace Geoff Petrie in Sacramento, you replace the entire front office. Interim coaches are allowed to manage players and strategies ... but you don't want an interim GM managing the very future of the basketball team without perfect comfort. Sacramento's entire front office is a Petrie production, through and through. Wayne Cooper has been with Petrie forever; Mike Petrie is, uh, literally a Petrie creation and Shareef Abdur-Rahim is more green than Humboldt County. You can't remove Petrie, promote his deputy and expect anything different. Cooper is Petrie, more or less.
So you hire a new GM. Sacramento is in relative shambles, though the two cornerstones have looked solid for stretches this season (a long stretch in DeMarcus Cousins' case) and the rook is doing well these days. But the owners are said to be broke, the arena issue remains up in the air (ever take an interview at a business that has no clue if it will be moving up to halfway across the country in six months?) and the team doesn't have a whole lot of assets. It's not an optimal spot to take a GM job.
Luckily, dozens of highly qualified NBA personnel and cap folks desperately want a GM job, so great candidates would pop up. Imagine you get one. How does he build a staff? Who would come over to this situation midseason to work for what we would assume would be a first-time GM?
Take a guy like David Griffin, Dennis Lindsay or Sam Hinkie -- respected No. 2 guys in their front offices, ones who have interviewed for GM jobs but never got there or turned a bad fit down. Say the Maloofs hire Griffin and fire Petrie in one fell swoop ... what next? Griffin isn't taking anyone from the Cavaliers' front office midseason, so you'd think. He's not going to be able to hire his own scouts and assistant GMs right away -- there would be temporary fixes at best, with some potential carry-over (like Abdur-Rahim, Fat Lever and Jerry Reynolds). Is that the change this franchise needs? Is a new head good enough?
Of course, imagine a new owner comes in sometime after the arena funding plan is approved. You would imagine he'd want his own GM. The very spectre of that possibility could take one or two of the targets off of the candidate list; people don't really care for instability and uncertainty. As a fan, I'd prefer one clean reboot: new owner, new GM, coach decision, franchise direction, boom boom boom. None of the ad-hoc stuff.
But in my opinion, there's no way Petrie should be handling the reins entering another potentially critical period. We don't need another John Salmons trade. We can't afford another John Salmons trade. As a fan, I'd feel more comfortable with a new voice and an uncertain future than with the current regime, under whom the future has become pretty close to depressing.
***
I hate to bury the lede, but there are rumblings on the rumor mill that, for the first time in their ownership of the club, the Maloofs are seriously considering replacing Petrie. Joe and Gavin continue to respect and think highly of his skill, but they won the last internal family battle over the club (staying in Sacramento vs. challenging Stern and filing for relocation, which George and the ladies wanted). If losses continue to pile up, especially bad losses, Joe and Gavin may lose this battle, and we may lose Petrie.
And yes, it is extremely unnerving to sit on the same side of an issue as George Maloof.
***
UPDATE: OK, I am not as clever as I thought I was, and that's not surprising. I thought I could write about this subject without coming straight out and delivering the news that, yes, according to people around the league, the Maloofs have been calling around in an attempt to find a replacement for Petrie this season. But since the news is a thing, I wrote it up on the mothership. I stress that there is nothing imminent, but that the Maloofs have very recently been preparing for a break-up. Hence, my pondering ponder on how you get there from here. Sorry for any confusion.
1 recs | 390 comments
No way this should happen midseason.
That’s just being way to trigger happy. I support keeping Petrie, but even if he goes, it shouldn’t be midseason.
LightningStrike5 - January 30, 2012
why not?
As noted this is the critical point of the season where were prepping for the off season. We don’t need another Salmons
kuhreem - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Sure, Geoff by no means is a perfect GM.
and Salmons has been playing terrible. But that is Petrie’s fault? NO GM with their crystal ball could have forseen a career .373% 3 point shooter over 10 years shoot for only .222%.
And to top it all off, terrible teams usually aren’t terrible for long due to the fact they get a few #1 picks. Is it Geoff’s fault we got fucked in the 2009 draft and ended up with Reke over Blake? Is it Petrie’s fault the Maloofs only want to spend 70% of the max salary cap? If it wasn’t for Geoff we would be doing alot worse.
ridingthebench - January 30, 2012
Good god, YES!
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I disagree.
Nobody could possible know Salmons shooting % would drop TWELVE % from 3 point land and 7% from 2 over 1 year from a consistent shooter of 10 years. Just like nobody could forsee 2 out of our 5 starters out for an extended period of time. People want Petrie to go out and get AK47. Well wake up and smell the roses, he doesn’t want to come here. So get used to the fact that we will only pick up mediocre free agents from this point on, unless we have a shot for a championship run. Team is only as good as its weakest link… and in this case its the Maloofs.
It is easy for us spectators to step back and criticize a GMs every move AFTER the fact. Hindsight is 20-20.
ridingthebench - January 30, 2012
possibly*
ridingthebench - January 30, 2012
That's a red herring
Salmons had a bad year last year. If he just matched his performance last season, it would be a bad trade. He’s 32 years old and he’s never exactly been a ray of sunshine on the court. And we all know how it goes when you bring him off the bench.
Plus, we’ve got him for two more years after this.
The day the trade happened, it was roundly derided here and ACROSS THE COUNTRY. That’s not hindsight, my friend. If we were so-so on the trade then, but killing it now, that’s hindsight.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I was expecting a temporary fix at the 3 spot til we found a more suitable 3 in the free agency of 2012, in the draft, or hopes of Donte and or Honeycutt stepping up. If John Salmons played D, shot from the 3 at 38% as well as he did last year then it was a big improvement from our previous Small Forward play of Donte or Casspi. And I get the feeling that is what Geoff was hoping for.
If I could do it all over again, I would rather have Beno back. At least he was a true PG and a veteran leader on the floor. But at that time many thought MT23 was going to be the man next to Reke.
I guess I am 1 of the few who think the Kings are in a good situation despite having another losing record. We got a young core with some potential All-Stars in Reke and DMC. Another lottery pick from a deep draft and a ton of cap space going into 2012. Did the fans really expect more this year from the YOUNGEST team in the NBA during a lockout year?
ridingthebench - January 30, 2012
Trends
PER for John Salmons over the last 3+ years:
2008-9: 16.03
2009-10: 14.70
2010-11: 12.89
2011-12: 7.15
And the general (perhaps overwhelming) consensus among those that track salaries is that John Salmons had one of the worst contracts in the league – certainly worse (by a mile) than the contracts of Beno Udrih or Francisco Garica.
Petrie has done some great things over the years, but this trade was/is indefensible. Statistically, financially, however you want to look at it. And the funniest part is that the deal was made out of pure desperation to fill the small forward spot…and Salmons really isn’t a small forward!
Epic fail.
section214 - February 2, 2012
I sense we are pretty much screwed in this matter
Petrie seems to be mailing it in – but if you replace him, Lloyd Christmas and Harry Dunne are making the replacement pick.
I guess you grind it out until the arena and ownership issues get resolved, then hope a competent ownership group can replace the wax dummy in the front office that used to be Geoff Petrie.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Harry is actually down in Aspen running the worm store
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
That's in California too. Perfect!
defender96 - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Harry owns the Raiders now
EJ08 - January 30, 2012
lol
DiegoKing - January 30, 2012
*sigh
Perhaps the time has come. I’m just more worried about who the Maloofs would pick to replace him.
caseycheesecake - January 30, 2012
Pritchard?
How about Pritchard? We seem to have success with former Portland Front Office?
What’s he doing these days?
_Jeeta - January 30, 2012
As you can tell...
by all the questions marks – I’m very curious.
_Jeeta - January 30, 2012
i agree
Or why not poach someone from the Thunder front office. They seem to be doing well with the same plan.
kuhreem - January 30, 2012 via mobile
The thunder front office has been excellent but......
They have been extremely patient. Too patient for my liking right now. This team needs to be fixed sooner than later.
On the flip side even though they were patient they stockpiled assets. Something we haven’t really done. I can deal with being patient on spending big money as long as we’re making moves to stockpile assets. Like Pritchard did with the Blazers & Presti did with the thunder.
Allbenji - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Tough to stockpile what you don't have.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Eff me, I hate that picture.
Gonna read the article now.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
I am not averse to change...
But does anyone have any faith in the three stooges to make a good decision?
andy sims - January 30, 2012
i do
They hired/kept petrie after all
kuhreem - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Petrie was already in place
And he was the one responsible for building that great team the 1st year the Malindas took over.
It’s the Maloofs who need to go. It’s pretty evident Geoff can do great things when his hands aren’t tied to that anchor known as “The League Minimum Salary Floor”
Dirkula - January 30, 2012
But does he still have passion for the job?
Or is he just going through the motions?
Shizzo - January 31, 2012
Greene'd
for saying it like it is.
SayWhat? - January 30, 2012
We Want Burkle - Calp Calp Calp Calp Calp
I like Petrie, but if we fire him, then the Maloofs have no one else to blame. Maybe if we still suck, then they will sell since it seems like they don’t know how to win.
SharkKings49 - January 30, 2012
You spelled clap incorrectly 5 times in a row...impressive.
jjham15 - January 30, 2012
It's not just an error, it's a MEME!
Rise the Hot Hand! Calp-Calp-Calp-Calp-Calp
SierraSpartan - January 30, 2012
Super fail
Tried typing it before a meeting and didn’t proof read. Probably a good time for this gif….
SharkKings49 - January 30, 2012
Approves
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Here's the thing--
The Maloofs will not voluntarily sell the team. They know that once they do, they will never again own an NBA franchise, and they view that ownership as a status symbol in the world to which they most desperately want to belong.
There will be no sale of the team until either they are absolutely and completely without any other financial options, or the league forces them somehow to sell.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
I.E. A lot worse before it gets better...
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Rec'd for the reality check
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Unfortunately I think you're right.
Aykis16 - January 30, 2012
Probably right
But whenever I need to cheer up I think about the prospect of Burkle (realistic or not).
SharkKings49 - January 30, 2012
SharkKings49 will be out of the bathroom in a few minutes.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
You won't want to go in that bathroom for at least an hour
SharkKings49 - January 30, 2012
I disagree,
If the ESC goes thru, the Maloofs will be forced to stay by the NBA. That means the end of their big TV Contract deal in Anaheim. They would be forced to make their money off revenue sharing and ticket sales, after stadium rental and players salaries and with no parking revenue, their return on their investment wouldn’t support their life style.
The new arena and an upcoming young core, could make the value of the franchise sky rocket and give them the opportunity to move their capital to a more lucrative venture. Once the building of the ESC starts, it’s only a matter of when a great offer comes along until they sell. They have little assets left, and can’t afford to have all their eggs in one basket. After losing the Palms, I’m sure they are more aware of that then ever.
HighTops - January 30, 2012
It's possible.
But the bottom line is that nobody knows what their financial situation is, and I honestly think that selling the Kings would be a move of last resort for them.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
I remember when we replaced this washed up coach named Adel-something to shake things up
Worked so well then, let’s try it again. Wonder if Musclebrain is interested in a front office job.
SavageBeast - January 30, 2012
That coach was so addled
that we went with the guy who was a good pitchman, and then after him an even better pitchman.
TheFifthMookie - January 30, 2012
Pitchman
No wonder they sucked. Should have been coaching baseball…
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Lolol.
HarveySpecter - January 30, 2012
Obviously you dump a coach with a great record because you need change
and other coaches have absolutely brill powerpoint presentations. Facepalm. I would mow Adelman’s lawn for a year if he came back.
HarveySpecter - January 30, 2012
I'll trim the hedges while you clip the grass
RJinFairOaks - January 30, 2012
Rock, meet Hard Place
Anyway you cut it, it seems like a giant finger crossing exercise.
As much as it pains me to say, if the rumor mill is true, I suppose the Maloofs do deserve some credit for realizing that GP ain’t what he used to be. Now they just need to realize that they’re part of the problem too and can only resolve that issue by selling the team, preferably to Burkle!
outrider - January 30, 2012
Maloof possibility of selling...
I have to think they are close to being broke, as in flat broke. Their Maloof Cup is pretty much DOA… they never held the event in the OC (surprise surprise) and they do not have any events schedule for 2012. The Cup was their last “Look at me now” holding since we all know the Palms is no longer a Maloof venture.
So the Kings are it for the boys and they cannot spend what needs to be spent to make the KIngs be a viable NBA team that can produce a quality product. Weak wallets and a new GM will not fix what is wrong. New ownership that lets GP do what he needs to do without handcuffs or zapping dog collars is… that is what we need to hope for.
kromeace - January 30, 2012
I'd love to know where they earn money these days. What businesses do they have left?
folsomfella - January 30, 2012
So the Kings are it for the boys
Along with what shares they have left of Wells Fargo
kromeace - January 30, 2012
Somone's buying my bat shit insanity
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
FWIW, I always buy you bat shit insanity
but I also wear my shoes in the pool, so take that however you will…
Mike Garza - January 30, 2012
I'd never heard before that Joe and Gavin wanted to stay all along.
Also, doesnt there come a point where George doesnt get to run a second family business into the ground?
TrojanCBB - January 30, 2012
Let's see...we would prefer NBA GM experience, also experience with the Kings. I hear this guy may be available...
CORRRLISSSS!!!
SierraSpartan - January 30, 2012
Classic picture!!
He must not have been quite at full boil for this picture- his face isn’t quite purple enough!
outrider - January 30, 2012
The mad penis lives
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
He produced several doodie balls in his underwear after this one
EJ08 - January 30, 2012
I rec'd this
but not because I agree with it. Now is not the time to change the front office, since none of the plausible outcomes of this change are meaningful due to ownership meddling and cost controls being equally part of the problem.
I don’t want to see GP go unless there’s a whole ownership change and franchise re-boot top to bottom to go with it.
TheFifthMookie - January 30, 2012
A lot of sense, here.
Let Petrie do the draft, and hope like hell the Ed Hardy Boys are so pressed for frosted tips money that they have to sell to the dreamy Ron Burkle.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
so much winning here
RJinFairOaks - January 30, 2012
Every time I see this picture, I get the douche-chills
It makes me wonder what teenager Joe borrowed his outfit from. He’s like the male version of the middle-aged woman who abruptly starts to wear her 16 year-old daughter’s mid-riff shirts and “Juicy” sweatpants.
Olde Greg - January 30, 2012
forget petrie, I want to know more about this woman
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Everything about this upsets me
I disagree with a lot of Petrie’s recent moves, but I also wonder how we would judge him if we knew the parameters he’s been working within. The Maloofs obviously know, but they would expect success regardless of how restrictive they’ve been.
It might be time for GP to go, it might not. It is definitely time for the Maloofs to go.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
What you said made sense but those parameters seemed pretty open when he made the trade for Salmons...
and the pickup of Outlaw.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
And whether you like Westphal or not
It sounds like Petrie pushed him on top of a grenade then kicked him out the door.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
But that goes back to the original issue
What kind of coach could Petrie hire with the budget the Maloof’s gave?
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
I agree with that point
I’m talking about process though. Petrie’s hard to reach, Petrie’s not communicating with the fans, and Petrie allowed Westphal to take all the blame for the Cousins fiasco (which apparently, he was on board with at the beginning). There’s been more player dissension the last few seasons than I can remember going back to the Polynice era.
It’s possible our expectations of Petrie are too high, but it’s hard to shake the feeling that he just doesn’t give a shit anymore.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I agree
It feels like he doesn’t care anymore. But I still think it’s a chicken or the egg situation. I’ve been known to check out when I was working for incompetent morons. I’ve also had times where I checked out of a job, but it had nothing to do with the boss, I just didn’t care anymore.
I think it might be time for Petrie to go, but I don’t think we can know one way or the other as long as the Maloofs are running the show.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
Agree with the Maloofs being the root of the problem...
but I cannot defend any of Petrie’s moves. The problem goes all the way to ownership but us as fans probably need David Stern to clean house here.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
If we're asking for Stern to fix us
Then God help us all.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
Ya, Stern can't even sell the team he currently owns.
Until the Hornets get the number 1 pick in the 2012 draft that is…
Wonderchild - January 30, 2012
Yeah I know...right? But I don't see any other way since the Maloofs have refused to sell
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
I hear there are some at the YMCA.
HarveySpecter - January 30, 2012
Salmons added salary long term
But very little additional salary this season or the next. Outlaw added $3 million a year. While $4-5 million in a year is a lot, it is very little in the NBA. If that’s your proof that Petrie had free reign, I respectfully disagree.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
This
I think if Petrie really had free reign, he would have sweetened the pot for acquiring one or more of the Crawford/Kirilenko/Dalembert combo.
Wonderchild - January 30, 2012
I think the fact Petrie put out competitive offers for them shows that he had a little more wiggle room to work with than you think.
The fact they didn’t come here is because our team is horrible right now. If Portland had such a bigger offer than ours, then why did Crawford take so much time to decide?
AK wasn’t coming unless he was vastly overpaid over multiple years. I read we offered him around $9m a year.
The whole Dalembert thing was just weird to begin with.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
What I meant to say by "sweeten the pot" was "overpay"
Ill give you Crawford. I wasn’t a fan of his on this team because he didnt bring anything new to what we already had, and is a much better fit with Portland long term anyways.
But take Dalembert for instance. He took a $7Mil with a team option, partially guaranteed 2nd year. Tell me if we offer him 2yr/$20 mil that he doesn’t stay.
Same with Kirilenko, although to a lesser degree. If we offer AK47 3yr/$30 mil that he wanted, he probably would have signed him here, and we may have not had to add Outlaw in the first place. And we would not be complaining of Salmons’ 36 minute per night brick-chucking demonstrations on a daily basis.
Wonderchild - January 30, 2012
Salmons is going to be making $8m/$7.5m/$7m over the next three years. Add on top of that Travis Outlaw's $4m for another 3 years and you basically have Kevin Martin money locked up for 3 years...
and that’s for 2 guys who are pretty unproductive.
My main point is that his moves have been ineffective. Why even make the trade for Salmons in the first place? Why pick up Outlaw? Those moves were totally unnecessary. I fail to see the Maloofs forcing Petrie’s hand in picking those guys up.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
Two separate points
First off, I’m not saying the Maloofs are telling Petrie which moves to make. I’m suggesting that he has very tight limitations around what he can do salary wise.
Second, the salary numbers you portray aren’t the whole picture. Beno was making, essentially, $7 million/year for the next two seasons. So adding Salmons equates to a little more than $1 million in extra salary per season this year and next. Additionally, that trade also meant picking up Jimmer at $500,000 less this season, and $600k less for next season.
As for Outlaw, his contract is $3 million per season over 4 years, not the other way around. And that money helped the Kings reach the salary floor for this season. In other words, it’s money the team had to spend anyway.
I didn’t like the Salmons trade, Outlaw has looked like a bad pick up. But neither of those moves indicates Petrie has had free reign to build the team as he sees fit. They paint a picture of a man operating under strict rules on how much he can spend.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
The salmons trade had nothing at all to do with spending constraints.
Nothing. It isn’t like he dumped beno for a second round pick. He TOOK ON salary. it was a straight talent/team needs assessment, that was and is a complete, dismal, fireable-offense failure.
I hate outlaw as much as the next guy, but at that price that wasn’t a bad move.
the hickson trade was horrible also.
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Yes, he took on salary
Nobody is arguing that. But here was the situation:
Kings were drafting Jimmer and planning to re-sign Thornton. Beno would’ve been getting $7 million a year to be the team’s 3rd or 4th guard.
The small forward situation was already bad. The team had just traded Casspi, and had Donté and Cisco (who is more of a 2 than a 3).
We do not know for certain, but it is not a stretch to imagine the Maloofs would not greenlight a trade that added significant salary. This is a distinct possibility, but we do not know for sure. This is the basis of my argument. I’m not saying that Petrie is without blame, simply that we cannot assign blame because we do not know how constrained Petrie has been by the Maloofs.
So the Kings traded a player who would have been overpaid as a 3rd or 4th guard, and got a veteran wing for slightly more money. Money that, once again, they had to spend to meet the spending floor.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
But there was no spending floor at the time
This was prior to the new CBA being reached, wasn’t it? Or was that issue pretty much dialed in even back at the time of the draft?
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Good point
I believe a higher salary floor was assumed, but it was not known. The spending floor argument would apply more to the amnesty waiver claim on Outlaw.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
Hard to tell.
They may have already known what it was going to be…
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Exactly!
That is the critical issue in determining whether or not Petrie should be completely responsible and fired. Because how can field a winning team if he isn’t allowed to spend money.
If they had allowed him to spend money and he blew it then that is a different story, but that isn’t what has happened.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
You mean like Indiana?
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Nice point.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
So, you point at the rare exception. OK, but acknowledge that it is one.
Indiana is the rare exception. How many teams in the top ten in spending make the playoffs compared to how many in the bottom ten?
When you have almost 100% compared to next to nothing the rare exception is not a lot of support.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
I agree that it's an exception
But if you’ve got an allegedly Hall of Fame caliber GM, should you get hosed on the Salmons deal, or the Hickson deal, or the Outlaw signing?
Shouldn’t you be able to find a “diamond in the rough” coach, rather than Theus/Natt/Musselman/Westphal?
Couldn’t you have a team whose sum is greater than their parts? We’re still looking at a lot of square pegs in round holes quite a long ways into the rebuilding process.
Should our GM be more worried about covering his own ass by knifing his head coach in the back or should he have been more hands on with the Cousins fiasco from the beginning?
The reputation of this franchise and front office are about as low as they’ve been in the last fifteen years, and that’s not all on the cheap spending owners.
I’m just talking about adequate performance in difficult circumstances. Is that really asking so much?
P.S. I’m still waiting for evidence that Petrie has built a winner for any coach not named Rick Adelman.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I'm still 100% in favor of the Hickson deal.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
I'm not
I don’t mind Hickson so much, but there’s clearly a reason that Cleveland (a rebuilding team, by the way) would give up on a young talent like Hickson, especially after he performed very well for them down the stretch last year.
If it was just Casspi for Hickson, or Casspi and a second rounder for Hickson, I’d be ok with it. But Petrie has limited ability to deal a future first round pick in a larger deal.
He’s effectively removed some bullets from his gun.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
The question may be what gun is he packing...
Have the Maloofs handed him a BB gun and we expect him to bring down enough meat to feed the fan base?
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
I'm talking about a very specific transaction though
Two lower rung teams dealing young players? I’m not sure he needs the Maloofs to give him an Uzi to get that one right.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Let's stop talking about what petrie has to spend for a minute
And talk about what HE.s getting paid.. Where does he rank in GM.s salary wise? And at what point do we expect some return on that investment other than getting taken on every trade, every hire, every signing. The guy just isn’t getting the job done and hasn’t for a long time.
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
I am pretty sure he just took a pay cut.
Probably had to do that to keep his job. Otherwise, they looked all set to hand over the reigns to Jason Levien.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Good points
Petrie has had his successes and failures. I think he is great scouting talent, but the rest of it? Meh.
Personally, I am not a Petrie fan and see him with less reverence than many on here, but I think it is completely wrong to let him take the fall for the Maloofs. It is just not ethical.
I think that he is doing as adequate of a job as possible given an inability to spend any money. Look at the trades and moves over the last few years. He took money back on almost every deal. He cut contracts and payroll.
The owners dictate priorities and winning games by getting quality talent has not been their priority. Their money, their priorities. Their priority has not been winning games.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
If you want ethics, I think some colleges still have a course in it.
And I’ll sell you the test answers at a good price.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
LOL!
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Yeah, he ain't GM Isiah Thomas.
Between him and Jordan? Just say no.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Ive seen this point made before and I just dont get it
“well we had to do something at sf, we’d just traded casspi…” PETRIE traded Casspi (with a draft pick) And his plan to replace him included trading DOWN in the draft to get a john salmons.
I assume that casspi was supposed to be somewhat of a project when drafted. I don’t understand why we gave up on him so early. at least he gives a damn… Something that we alredy KNEW salmons didn’t.
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
He also reportedly offered AK47 around $9m a year...if that was true, then he had some $$$ to work with.
And with the Salmons/Outlaw move…those were his decisions. He made those choices on his own. I don’t care if it’s pennies on the dollar relative to the NBA…those were poorly made basketball moves.
I do agree that Petrie is working on a tight budget but that doesn’t give him another pass for his latest moves. He hasn’ t made a sound decision in quite some time. Remember when he wanted to give Bonzi a 5-year/$35m contract? Or how about trading Spencer Hawes with nothing to show for it right now? Or sending a protected first round pick and Casspi for Hickson (not so much the player but the fact our pick is locked up for a handful of years)? Just to name a few.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
Again
I’m not saying he is without fault. I’m simply saying it is difficult to tell how much of it is Petrie’s fault, and how much is the Maloofs.
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
yeeesh
AK47 sounds amazing on this team right about now
TheFifthMookie - January 30, 2012
This title NEEDS to read:
The
DifficultSIMPLE Path To A Post-PetrieMaloof KingsSmills9133 - January 30, 2012
Caption: I see Larry and Curly, but where's Moe?
Wait…wrong thread.
Wonderchild - January 30, 2012
Here's the problem
If the Maloofs can’t hire a descent coach what makes you think they will hire a better GM then Petrie? Anytime the Maloofs decide to make a basketball decision on their own look what happends? Be carefull for what you wish for.
AyyJude - January 30, 2012
I'm hoping for Burkle
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
"Hoping for Burkle"
Sounds like the title of the sequel to “Small Market, Big Heart”.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Good luck with that.
Again, the Maloofs will not sell to anyone unless forced, either by their own financial insolvency or by the league.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
So you're saying there's a chance?
Wonderchild - January 30, 2012
Riiiiiiight.
Yes. Go with that.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
True it's now 2012
Look what ‘hope’ has done for us
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
Sad, depressingly sad, but that makes a lot of sense.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
honestly
I’d take my chances on that.
Seriously
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
In what way?
You want to hold out for the Maloofs to go flat broke? You’re willing to lose until then?
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
no
I’m just saying it ain’t out of the realm of possibly (that the Maloofs would be forced into a bad spot to sell soon)
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
You potentially underrate their proximity to broke.
Tom Ziller - January 30, 2012
I would not want to wish being broke on anybody, but if there were anybody it would be the Maloofs...
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Nobody knows for sure.
It’s possible that everyone else is underrating their ability to rebound.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
honest question
How much cash flow do you think they are seeing? How much money do you perceive them as having lost?
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
Well, right now attendence is up and they're still getting the parking revenue
and then they have revenue sharing and Luxury Tax sharing to look forward to. But they’ve the City loan and the NBA loan to pay back.
Once the ESC is build, a lot of that changes. They start paying rent, lose the parking revenue, the higher Luxury Tax penalties go into affect which should cause more team to get under the Luxury Tax so they’ll be a smaller pot to split among more teams. If the team doesn’t get better, this years attendance will drop.
If the team is worth $300M and they could retire their loans from the sale of the Natomas property, they could walk away with $200M after splitting the proceeds with their partners. $200M with a 6% return is only $12M per year. But, after the ESC is build that might be a better return than they’ll get with the team. Their only chance for a big score is by getting the big TV & Radio contracts in Anaheim.
HighTops - January 31, 2012
well yeah I know but technically was just asking LPA around how much money she thinks they lost and how much their cash flow (with all their other businesses) has changed
by the way, just letting you know but technically they are paying rent right now (it’s the minimum payments on the loan)
wallywagon11 - January 31, 2012
I'd argue that the Maloof's coaching decisions have one big descent.
Jim Les - January 30, 2012
I know.
That one made me chuckle.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
Petrie is the architect of the greatest Sacramento Kings team of all time.
He’s also probably gotten way more leeway for his mistakes because of it. I also think that he’s been operating with one or two hands tied behind his back because of the Maloofs’ money troubles (see Martin, Kevin trade).
I wouldn’t mind someone younger, hungrier, with something to prove in the driver’s seat, but as long as the Maloofs are owners I don’t see anyone in the driver’s seat having the resources to make the changes necessary.
Aykis16 - January 30, 2012
They'll put a guy in the driver's seat, but give him no gas money and think the steering wheel is for roulette.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
We need BILLY BEAN!
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
He was courageous for coming out of the closet, I will give him that
Dont see how that would translate to NBA talent evaluation, though.
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
BEANE like Greene..don’t forget your extra vowels!
Widowwolf - January 30, 2012
I am 100% in agreement.
If the team isn’t sold fairly quickly, I’m guessing that this ends badly for Sacramento.
Hoops Mike - January 31, 2012
The root of the problem can only be dug up by Stern.
The Maloofs have said repeatedly and admantly that they’re not selling the franchise. They gave up everything they’ve owned EXCEPT the Kings. If we all want a solution, we need to hope for David Stern to proclaim the Maloofs as financially insolvent to run an NBA franchise.
If we get this ESC deal done, I think this will only help our cause. With a new arena, there will need to be a ton of money invested into personnel to keep public interest going. How bad will it look if we have this shiny new ESC with the same horrible product? Attendance will not be able to sustain if the product is bad. I would hope Stern realizes this and will do something about it.
Not trying to make Stern out to be some sort of savior…let alone a good person…but he is the one guy we need to uproot the Maloofs.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
...also, I would think with the whole Burkle thing, Stern has his eye on the happenings.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
I'm not sure of the leverage Stern has to 'force' the Maloofs to sell.
They may be able to drag this fiasco out for quite some time.
Hoops Mike - January 31, 2012
WTF? I mean really...
What exactly do we expect to change? This team is exactly where it is going to stay and NOTHING is going to change.
Are we expecting Petrie to sign anybody else or make trades? No, not really so what is the problem here. All Petrie is going to do is the draft and that is it. The Maloofs are not going to take on more salary or sign a FA. Trades are out because who exactly are we going to trade away?
I guess I have to just say that this sounds more like Petrie being a scapegoat for the Maloofs. I would be for the sacking of Petrie if the Maloofs would commit to spending money like they promised, had done that, and we still sucked.
Taking on one more year of salary, with no real increase in salary this year, for Salmons cleared the way for Jimmer and MT to play instead of Beno. It was not really spending anything. Passing on Dalembert and signing a backup big in Hayes to start is not opening up the pocket book. It was saving enough money to sign MT without increasing payroll.
Petrie has his faults and I am not really a fan, but the ownership is the main problem here. Petrie should be a scapegoat for the Maloof’s cheapness. He can’t do much more with what he has been given by the owners to work with.
We can’t expect to win many games when the minimum salary allowed is $48.3 million and the team pays $48.9 million. Just enough to barely be above the minimum.
The Maloofs need to stop using Petrie as a scapegoat and sell the Kings if you can’t afford it.
Bring on Burkle!
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
You make some good points
But the Salmons trade alone is almost a fireable offense. Trying to defend it is…well, I’ll just disagree with you.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Yes...agree.
What was the point of that trade? Did we really need to pick up a guy that’s due $8m this year and $7.5m next? All this to move back in the draft, get rid of Beno, and draft Jimmer?
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
I am not saying it was a good trade.
Can’t stand Salmons much myself either. I just think it was all that the Petrie could probably do given the inability to spend money and go above salary minimum.
But what really burned my behind was that the Maloofs red-headed mouthpiece pointed at that trade to say the Maloofs were spending money like they promised.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
A very important "not" was missing there
Petrie should not be a scapegoat for the Maloof’s cheapness.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Get out the Big Book of Bylaws!
Can we amnesty ownership?
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Fire everyone
In this environment, no one should be safe or secure. But nothing changes if the ownership remains the same. Until the Maloofs are out of the picture, it’s just more change for the sake of change.
section214 - January 30, 2012
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Exactly
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
Yikes
TZ fleshes out a bit of what he wrote at the tail end:
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2012/1/30/2759089/geoff-petrie-sacramento-kings-gm-rumors
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I fear this franchise is in perpetual limbo until this ESC situation gets resolved
New owners are not going to buy the team without a new arena on the horizon and the Maloofs wont get approval from the league to move unless the ESC effort completely fails and the city gives up on it (which isn’t happening with Mayor KJ at the helm)
Wonderchild - January 30, 2012
agreed
Its obvious still this team needs new ownership…and capital
kuhreem - January 30, 2012 via mobile
What gets lost
More than anything is Petrie not admitting his mistakes. Obviously you don’t want to throw an under achiever you traded for under the bus (salmons) but I’m also not hearing ‘yeah we’ve had hits and some misses’ Replace Petrie….with great respect.
kuhreem - January 30, 2012 via mobile
He doesn't say anything at all, pro or con.
Which I kind of respect.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Definitely
How do you admit mistakes in trades or drafts without completely trashing a player?
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
maybe petrie
Should film a It Gets Better video. That would put me at ease a little more.
kuhreem - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Zip for GM!!
It may sound twee, but anyone who spends 5 mins on here knows he knows his shit. Why not?
Rickyflip - January 30, 2012 via mobile
That is supposed to be Ziller for GM
Thank you, iPhone autocorrect
Rickyflip - January 30, 2012 via mobile
andy sims - January 30, 2012
I'm done with Ziller and done with this site
We can’t afford another John Salmons trade my ass. If that is the analysis that goes into franchise decisions, then the franchise is not long for Sac.
Holmdel - January 30, 2012
What?
How is what Ziller wrote affecting franchise decisions, and what about this post is it that you find so offensive? The idea that the Salmons trade has turned out to be less than glorious for the Kings?
I’m completely puzzled by this.
LeaguePassAddict - January 30, 2012
Yeah, that whole post made little sense to me
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I did not say what Ziller wrote is "affecting" franchise decisions. I find the analysis of this post for why you fire GP to be...
…pathetic. It boils down to “we can’t afford another Salmons trade”. If you fire a GM for one inconsequential trade that didn’t pan out, then you are unmoored as a franchise.
On the Salmons trade: We traded a guy who wouldn’t play for a guy who starts. And the financial commitment was not consequential. Sure, Salmons has underperformed, in hindsight, but he still is our best 3. For this to be a “fireable” offense means you are either struggling to find fireable offenses or you’ve got a dangerous hair trigger.
Holmdel - January 30, 2012
He's not our best three
The trade was ridiculed nationwide. And turns out the majority might have been right on this one.
Sorry to see you go though, if this is really going to drive you away.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
The trade wouldn't be nearly as bad if we hadnt friggin ALREADY SEEN salmons' act
We knew he was an iffy teammate. A ball hogging chucker. An overrated defender. A hangdog eeyore. And we acquired him AGAIN anyway.
I know you guys love the relationship analogies… It’s like taking back your girlfriend from 2 years ago who cheated on you, wouldn’t put out, AND was ugly and had a drug habit. And you knew all this. You don’t even think shes changed. But your self esteem is so low you dont think you can do better.
Geoff petrie should have just passed out after he drank all that bartles and james whilst listening to the cure, but instead he drunk dialed the milwaukee bucks, and here we are….
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Come on Holmdel
you know obviously it’s not just that one move. I get you disagreeing but you know full well it’s not just that one move.
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
check this link out...where I air my grievances with Ziller's position on...
…firing GP in more detail, and let me know which move you think Ziller was forgetting, because I just think the case against Petrie is, as I say, pathetic.
http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2012/1/6/2687282/fired-paul-westphal-just-tip-of-the-iceberg-for-kings#87937015
Holmdel - January 30, 2012
I used to be a big TZ fan, found him very likable, was very grateful for him to put together this quality site...
…and loved the community…but now more and more I find him to be vindictive and frankly a hack. And so I’m done. This post is just the final buzz kill for me.
Holmdel - January 30, 2012
I never liked Ziller. Takes too long to look him up in the phone book.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
It's funny.
When the losses pile up for (checks the calendar) six straight seasons, opinions on leadership tend to change!
How is this post vindictive? Are you mad we disagree? I’m not mad we disagree. Hell, me, Aykis and 214 all disagree on this subject, and I haven’t egged their houses.
Yet.
Tom Ziller - January 30, 2012
And why did you have to drag Fredette through the mud?
Such an ass.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Lit a fire in his belly
His shooting % proves me right.
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
section214 - January 30, 2012
wow
this might sound kind of weird, but if I were to ever pull the “I’m done with this website” card, I would almost feel honored to get Curly Bill treatment
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
smells like someone died
good thing Doc Holliday didn’t have the KIngs training staff.
John Takanikos - January 30, 2012
Awesome.
Juan Primo - January 30, 2012
Ah, that's right
You’re the “Petrie can do no wrong” guy. My bad, carry on.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I read it a few weeks ago and honestly thought it was a good read
However, there come points in life where frankly you are to just have to agree to disagree. And unless you think Tom is somehow commiting libel or has some great powers in this, I dunno what the big deal is. It’s okay to disagree.
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
Even so
Ziller isn’t writing an editorial on why Petrie should go. He is writing about the rumours of his impending departure, using the Salmons trade as the most recent example of why it is being entertained. If you want reasons, read 90% of this site from the last few weeks.
Rickyflip - January 30, 2012 via mobile
no, his editorial was a couple weeks ago
Holmdel - January 30, 2012
Exhibit G - January 30, 2012
LMAO
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
If you are arguing that the Salmons trade wasn't as bad in the front windshield than the rear glass
then I’d agree…but it was still an iffy trade from the start.
I DEFINITELY think many people here are using this 20-game sample size as a red herring towards GP, however.
RJinFairOaks - January 30, 2012
Funny
I was just reading through the StR thread announcing the trade. I’d guess the responses were about 45% mortified, 40% horrified, 5% unsure, 5% IPWT, and 5% drunk or stoned (site standard I believe).
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Those reactions were relatively exaggerated at that time, as well
(my opinion at the time, of course). There is a lot of “I told you so” going on with results from Salmons, and I think that result (successful prediction) is more luck than statistical skill.
RJinFairOaks - January 30, 2012
I'm not so sure, actually
Salmons had a really down year last season, he’s on the wrong side of 30 and we were all familiar with his personality. There were plenty of statistical reasons to believe that he was a bad pickup – and a quote from Zach Lowe at SI made the rounds in that thread as well:
No doubt, there was plenty of exaggeration. But you didn’t have to be lucky to predict what we’re seeing in Salmons now – although I’ll admit he’s been even worse than most of us thought he’d be.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I think you have to clarify vis a vis his personality.
He’s not a negative influence, he just doesn’t light up a room when he walks in. I don’t think listing it as an issue is fair to do.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
I take it he means
another “black hole” personality. That’s the whole point for me – not only is Salmons bad – he’s also an AWFUL fit for this team.
thelettere - January 31, 2012
I didn't like the trade either, guys
Particularly because I valued the consistency and reliability we had from Beno, and also because I felt like Beno was developing chemistry with Tyreke.
My only point is this: if Salmons were putting up even his career-worst numbers at this point, this would not be a stake in the heart of Petrie on StR. That’s all.
RJinFairOaks - January 30, 2012
Perhaps not a stake in the heart
But then again, he’s not putting up career-worst numbers at this point.
Wait, actually he is. ;)
otis29 - January 30, 2012
If you were on twitter on the day of
You could tell that I was in the 45%. I also seem to recall calling jjham15 and greeting him with a “JOHN EFFING SALMONS?!?!?!?!” and just kind of repeating myself for the next half hour.
Aykis16 - January 30, 2012
I'm surprised the number was only 45%...I recall a lot of backlash.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
Ziller's commentary can be hit or miss
I actually think Aykis16 has consistently produced better content for the website. But whether you like the editors or not, where else are you going to get your fix of Kings news? SacBee? I don’t think so…
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
Okay, suspected this but still, interesting to see it actually written this way
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
What a load of shit.
KJ showed his cards to Stern, and told the Maloofs to get the fuck back to the kids’ table.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Clearly Gavin was very very very motivated to be on the let's fight the league side of things though
it ain’t no secret when their debts were due either
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
damn it meant George
so much fail
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
The passage is right
george STILL wanted to go all in even after kj showed the nuts. At the very least, joemer and gomer knew they were done.
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
at the very least
they didn’t go to war with the league and if anyone had a huge massive interest in going to war with the league in court it’s George
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
He was trying to save the Palms
George thought he could do that by moving the team and getting a loan from Samueli.
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
this.
RJinFairOaks - January 30, 2012
I'm setting up a meeting with George RE: Magic Beans
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Wear your Power Balance bracelet
Those beans will sell themselves!
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Yep.
Carl - January 30, 2012
I have no idea what happened here
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
And George still stomped his feet ...
… and went to bed without supper.
Tom Ziller - January 30, 2012
That's all true
but I seem to remember, there being conflict between the family on whether to attempt to spite the league, or let this play out another year. I think Ziller accurately separated where each sibling was on that issue.
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
I personally feel it's time for some new blood and a new vision
Petrie had a great run right out of the gate, but now, not so much. I don’t agree that the Maloofs are the big reason he’s made such shi*ty moves. I believe he’s out of touch a little with today’s NBA. He’s gotten a little lucky, but with the Kings in their condition, the Salmons trade and the contract given to Travis Outlaw would’ve gotten lesser GM’s canned already.
Tom A~! - January 30, 2012
FRIEND ME, TOM.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
I see this move in a entirely different prospective
Sorry, I’m late to the thread, so if someone has already mentioned this, I didn’t read all 100 comments.
I think that the Maloofs are going ahead with their plan to move the Kings to Anaheim. And, have talked to Petrie about it and Petrie declined to move to Anaheim with the team. So, the Maloofs are searching for his replacement should the Mayor’s efforts to build the ESC fail.
If they are going to apply for relocation in March, the time is now to seach for a new GM so he can get a feel for the team and organization before next summer. And, he’ll have more than enough time to build his staff before the move and the draft.
HighTops - January 30, 2012
Why do you think Petrie would opt out of a job, especially when his stock is at a real low point?
andy sims - January 30, 2012
Well, he's 64 years old this April
He’s spent his entire Basketball career in small market towns. School at Princeton, drafted by Portland, worked in Portland after his Basketball career ended, then came to Sacramento.
I’ve read where he and his wife like the atmosphere of the smaller markets, and I just don’t believe he’d move to LA. And, I just can’t see him starting over in a new town at his age.
HighTops - January 31, 2012
I'm going to disagree with you on this one
and only because there are waaaaay too many variables still before they can just assume they are moving to Anaheim now. Unless they are 100% on board with an anti-trust lawsuit against the NBA, don’t see it going doing this way. They would be better off approaching it differently even if they do desire Anaheim.
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
the only thing they have done so far is hire a company to look for candidates
They don’t have to be 100% certain, in fact it’s because they aren’t certain that Johnson can get the ESC done that they need to move on this so their ready if it doesn’t get done.
And, if it does get done, they send a check to the head hunters and say thanks but never mind.
HighTops - January 31, 2012
I'll give you about $200 million reasons why they aren't going to Anaheim
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Plus $5-10 million worth of brick and I'm not talking about Salmons' jumpshot.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012
So, maybe they go to Kansas City
The point is the same. If Johnson fails and the ESC doesn’t go thru, they will move the team somewhere. And, GP may not want to go with them.
HighTops - January 31, 2012
I don't care if Geoff Petrie gets fired....
….but without the Maloofs leaving as owners it makes no difference as far as whether you replace GM’s. In part because it would just mean the Maloofs would hold on for as long and as hard as possible as owners regardless of whether the Kings stay in Sacramento or not.
Whatever the case may be, Geoff Petrie is not infallible. He no longer can survive all his mistakes as a GM/Prez of BBall Ops (whatever) and deserves to be fired. But if this whole firing bit is a way to justify moving the franchise (without knowing the upcoming terms of an arena), or just a way to pacify an understandably angry fanbase it makes no sense.
I think the Maloofs will find that few people in Sacramento believe in them anymore Geoff Petrie or no. Which, again, comes back to the arena issue any way you slice it. And, I suspect, how much juice and will the NBA has in A) coughing up any money for a new arena and B) how much pull the Maloofs have in not coughing up any said dough for a new arena along with the NBA’s share.
Money, money, money. The Maloofs don’t got it, and they desperately want to retain ownership. This is the only play they have left, and in that respect given Petrie’s recent performance (hands tied or not) is not good enough to merit a real reason to keep Petrie. In some ways this might be the best thing that ever happens in the effort to keep the Kings in Sacramento. With no reason to keep the Kings in Sacramento, the pretense is over for the Maloofs. The jig will drop, and their ownership reign/terror on Sacramento will be over one way or another. Some finality to this whole clusterfuck of a situation is one pleasing bi-product that hopefully will come out of all this. Because if we don’t get a resolution soon, I’m thinking with all the negative energy from all comers the franchise may just implode in one of those ball of fires only John Carpenter could concoct.
(I posted this @ SBN. Just thought I should post it over here to share, umm, let’s call it the love. Due to the uniqueness of the situation, I thought I would share this here.)
pookeyguru - January 30, 2012
section214 - January 30, 2012
That's the line that went through my head as well
Welcome home pookey!
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Not coming back. Nor is it my home.
But yeah, thanks.
pookeyguru - January 30, 2012
I know, just messing with you
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Hey pook
How you feeling about Tyreke and DMC these days? ;)
outrider - January 30, 2012
About 23,000 words long, that's how he's feeling.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
And bravo to you sir
For counting!
outrider - January 30, 2012
I can also do that with toothpicks.
andy sims - January 30, 2012
A true renaissance man
if there ever was one!
outrider - January 30, 2012
Absolutely REC Pook, and good to see you again!
Dirkula - January 30, 2012
+1
Normdog - January 30, 2012
Outstanding take.
Right there with you.
Hoops Mike - January 31, 2012
I don't agree with the Salmons trade take at all
A real GM, not me sitting on my couch planning the future, is accountable to all of the actual games, even this year’s. You can’t just roll into a season without a plausible alternative at each position. Before Salmons arrived there were none of those on the Kings roster. You can’t go into a season with Garcia/Greene as your plan to play actual NBA games where people pay money to watch them. With that said, Salmons has been terrible, much worse than anyone could have reasonably expected.
Here is the other side of the coin. Petrie knew he was taking Fredette. That means Beno just flat out had to go. I know for some inexplicable reason Beno has loyalists around here, and I get it a little from last year, but Beno would have just been in the way of Fredette on this team. They are redundant, and if you wanted Fredette, Beno had to go.
Unfortunately, because of one of Petrie’s worst decisions, the Beno extension, ne was essentially untradable. The only way he could be gotten rid of is to take something unappealing back. So, you get rid of the guy that has to go at a position you don’t need, for a guy with a horrible contract at a position you do. Was Petrie doing cartwheels of joy getting Salmons? Of course not. But he’s an actual NBA player and when they’re going to play real games for a full season something had to be done at small forward.
Again, Salmons has been terrible, although I will say he at least seems to be making an attempt to fit in, which I give him some credit for. Perhaps he’ll get his act together and at least get back to being the guy we all disliked rather than being historically bad.
Grasul - January 30, 2012
Plus you downgrade Jimmer’s value while downgrading Beno’s value. For a team that wants to improve, you can’t simply downgrade 2 assets simultaneously.
pookeyguru - January 30, 2012
Unless the goal wasn't to take off yet.
We might be in a holding pattern(in regards to rebuilding), getting that last lotto pick and moving forward in Free agency this summer after Salmons is amnestied while using this season as ‘training’ camp. Being that it’s a shortened season, it lessens the hurt from sucking so bad. We don’t exactly know the details to the game plan, this is all speculation.
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
Jimmer's been much more of a shooting guard than a point guard thus far
Look how many minutes Isiah Thomas has gotten this year – that is who would have lost playing time – not Jimmer.
thelettere - January 31, 2012
The moves up until this past off-season we're part of a plan
to get as far under the cap as possible. Petrie succeeded in that task as we had the most cap space in the league. I don’t see all those salary dumps and deals to get us to the salary floor as failures because those moves were part of a long term vision.
The moves this past off-season have been failure after failure. The Salmons trade. The Outlaw signing. The J.J. Hickson trade, although pretty much a wash as Omri has not performed either. The failed signings you can’t really put on Petrie because he made the offers and the Maloofs were willing to commit the $$.
Now I don’t know if this off-season is enough that he should be fired but there is no questions the mistakes are adding up.
StevenG - January 30, 2012
When do we put up our Championship banner for most available cap space?
andy sims - January 30, 2012
We were losing and capped out. Not a good combination.
It made sense to go young, get under the cap and rebuild. That’s what Petrie did. Admittedly that cap space has not been utilized as we all hoped it would. But again, that’s not all on Petrie.
It takes two teams to make a trade. We were reportedly involved in a draft day trade with San Antonio for Parker. They decided to keep him. We were reportedly in the mix for Deron Williams. They took New Jersey’s deal. We even contacted LeBron’s people. If you know of a significant trade or signing that we passed on purely because of financial reasons please let me know (Beasly comes to mind but I don’t think he makes a huge difference on this team).
No we don’t “win” anything for having cap space. But it is a major tool when you are trying to build a winner.
StevenG - January 30, 2012
Hard to make deals when you don't pick up the phone
otis29 - January 30, 2012
If that is true you're right.
StevenG - January 30, 2012
Seriously?!
Shizzo - January 31, 2012
Im torn...
I actually think Petrie has obviously done some amazing things (the glory years were all Petrie as far as im concerned) but he has had some duds. But I think they balance out.
For every Quincy Douby or Tariq Abdul-Wahad there is a Predrag, Gerald Wallace or Kevin Martin. I mean the guys draft record is impeccable if you ask me. I cannot think of a GM with a better record in terms of the draft.
On his coaches I think he has struggled but we also must question how badly he was handcuffed by finances and also remember that while he brought in Musselman, Theus, etc he also is the one who brought us Adelman.
On trades I think he is again in the positive as some of the deals he made were great, Webber, Brad Miller, Doug Christie, etc BUT where have those quality moves been recently when you need it most?
Bottom line is this guy is one of the best in the business and his body of work shows it. The question to me is does he still have that same passion and still have that same skill? Is it simply time to change for the sake of change? Hard to say.
Only thing I know is I hope they do nothin unless they have a great candidate in their back pocket. Give me Weaver and I think I would be happy but if you do it and bring in a nobody of value.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
I think Petrie is great at what he does
But I think he’s a 90’s GM in the year 2012. The league has passed him by.
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
Sounds like Adelman talk again.
caseycheesecake - January 31, 2012
Difference is
Adelman’s continued to have some success.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Petrie needs to be fired NOW?
This is crazy. I remember back in 2007-2008ish when this whole blog was entirely pro-Petrie. THAT is when I would argue that Petrie did some truly awful GMing deserving of getting the boot. That was when the team had regressed for 5 straight years, Petrie had signed middling contracts annually (Shareef? Salmons? Beno?), the team was in no-mans’-land of not good enough to make the playoffs, not bad enough to have a top 5 pick, and the team’s hope for the future was Kevin freaking Martin.
But unbelievably, Petrie all of a sudden woke up, and in mid 2008-2009 the entire team was blown up like it should have been three seasons prior. 2009 we get Tyreke, 2010 we get Demarcus, both of whom have superstar type potential. 2011 he makes the Landry-Thornton trade and get the third wheel of our young explosive trio, and you’re looking at one of the more promising young cores in the entire league.
Petrie has spearheaded a FANTASTIC rebuild process these last few years. Who would you take over Tyreke who went after him? What about Demarcus? Hell, even the guys taken after Jimmer haven’t shown much. And you all want to get rid of him now after his best bit of GMing in nearly a decade because the team isn’t improving fast enough? Because we traded down three spots while still getting the draftee we wanted for a guy we can very well amnesty this summer? Because we traded a draft pick that Cleveland won’t see for a while and took a flyer on an explosive young PF kid who isn’t panning out yet?
Put away the pitchforks people. This is a rebuild, and there is enough crap outside of the GM’s control (from the lockout, to the Dalembert saga, to Paul Westphal’s ego issues, to having 40% of our starters in and out of the lineup) that have been shortcircuiting the rebuild already and slowed it down. Abraham Lincoln once said “You don’t change horses in the middle of the river”. The time to form an angry mob to run Petrie out of town is when Tyreke and Demarcus show that they are busts. Not because we traded for John Freaking Salmons or because Westphal was out of control.
The OKC Thunder only became a playoff contender a season after they had fired their retread of a coach (Carlisimo). And even then, they had their entire lineup together for an entire lottery-bound year without injury issues and didn’t have to deal with a lockout-lengthened offseason and lockout-shortened regular season. The time to fire Petrie is after his core of Reke/DMC/Thornton fails, not when the irrelevant Salmons/Hickson periphery flyers don’t pan out.
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
You made one point in particular that I really think fans are missing
And that is that most of the arguments against Petrie lately are for the most part irrelevant arguments.
By that I mean trading Beno who would have been your 4th guard this season for Salmons and essentially taking on a little more salary is not as deadly as fans make it out to be. You gave up a FOURTH freaking guard whether we like it or not he wouldnt have played much ahead of Jimmer so regardless of whether Salmons has bombed you didnt give up much and you are still hardly above the salary floor.
As I said before if you have another great GM lined up I can understand it I guess but if you plan on dumping a great GM for the sake of change then I question the whole deal.
Or In trading for Hickson who has not played well thus far in Sac. Lets not forget this was a guy who was a key piece in the Amare negotiations, a guy who has played some quality 16/9 type of basketball. He hasn’t panned out but what did you lose in Omri, not much it seems. And who knows what comes of that pick so right now that deal is far from a major complaint of mine.
For those who argue that he hasn’t been able to bring in a veteran to pair with the young guys yet I can understand that but the people who want to hang him on his Salmons or Hickson deal, or even worse the fans who are uneducated enough to question his draft record are simply grasping at this point.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
I don't see those as irrelevant arguments at all, and they weren't "harmless" transactions
Tell me this, when Petrie moved down from the #7 pick in the draft, do you think he knew that Brandon Knight was going to fall that far?
Do you realize that Petrie’s not able to move any future first round picks (well, in the next four or five years) as part of a larger deal due to the Hickson trade?
I’m torn on whether Petrie should go now, to be honest. The Whiz Kids would probably just screw up the next hire. But there’s no way in the world you can convince me anymore that Petrie is a “great GM”.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Would you rather have Brandon Knight than Jimmer on this team right now?
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
I might indeed
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Well then you're calling Petrie's drafting record into question
Good luck with that one
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
Oh my
He’s never made a poor draft choice? I think Petrie’s extremely gifted in that area, and I don’t believe it.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
You're swimming against the tide here
Petrie’s been on point far more than he’s missed. So once again…
Good luck
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
Am I?
You think the tide would agree that Jimmer is going to be a better professional player than Brandon Knight?
Good luck to you on that.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
No, I don't think Knight will be a better pro than Jimmer
And neither does Petrie, who’s been right more often than not. So yeah Good luck
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
This is actually a very interesting question
Personally, I saw the Jimmer pick as a pick that was made based on a variety of factors, but I’m not sure how much it was based purely on who would be the better pro. Knight is a point guard who needs the ball in his hands to facilitate the offense. Why spend another first round pick on a guy who would need Reke’s touches. Jimmer, although a high usage player in college, is easily conceived as a player who could spread the floor and create space for Reke’s strengths.
Whether I agree with drafting based on team need versus best player available is a different discussion altogether, but that’s how I viewed the pick.
Also worth noting that Petrie has a track record of falling for undersized shooters, with mixed results in the pros.
Exhibit G - January 31, 2012
Wouldn’t it be cool to have a PG who doesn’t need the ball to facilitate an offense?
caseycheesecake - January 31, 2012
Haha
Point taken.
Exhibit G - January 31, 2012
Francisco Garcia over David Lee?
Quincy Douby?
Tariq Abdul-Wahad?
Ryan Robertson over Todd McCullagh (I’ll give him a pass on Manu Ginobili)
Heck, you might even make a case for Stephen Curry over Tyreke Evans, but I won’t go there.
nbrans - January 30, 2012
I didn't say he doesn't miss
But I would say he’s done well more often than not. Ironically, that time when he was trying to put bandaids on the franchise was his worst era of drafting in his career (I mean, Garcia then Douby then Hawes? Ick)
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
I'd say he's a good but not unfallable drafter.
I wouldn’t say he’s matched, say, San Antonio’s record of success.
nbrans - January 30, 2012
San Antonio's record is probably tops in the league
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
Curry over Evans?
Heresey
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
Since when is "swimming against the tide"
a valid argument against something? Facts and popular opinion only occasionally, and never necessarily, correlate.
thelettere - January 31, 2012
The importance of this escaped me until now
Just connected the dots (i’m slow sometimes)- he’s basically hamstrung himself by not being able to throw in a first rounder to potentially sweeten any deal. Ouch.
outrider - January 30, 2012
And this is not actually true
Once the team misses the playoffs, that pick is fair game for trade
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
If that's the case...
…then i feel better
outrider - January 30, 2012
Will that be after the trade deadline?
Will there be potential great deals Petrie could have made at this year’s deadline but couldn’t because he didn’t have access to a first rounder?
Every subsequent year’s first rounder is in cold storage until we miss that year’s playoffs.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Thats all hypothetical at this point
The last truly big deadline deals I can remember are the Carmelo trade and the Iverson trade. Both worked out horribly for the team giving up the young assets/picks. If those are the deals we are missing out on then good riddance.
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
I see
Petrie’s limited his options, but that’s all right because none of those options would be any good.
Now THAT is hypothetical.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Oh noes, Petrie's limited his hypothetical options that historically would have sucked anyways?
Someone save us from impending doom.
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
The doom isn't impending
It’s here. It’s a dysfunctional franchise that is getting its doors blown on the court for the fourth consecutive season.
But he’s a GREAT GM!
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Yup, doom is here because Petrie traded a protected first rounder
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
Actually, everything is perfect now because we have JJ Hickson
See how that works?
otis29 - January 30, 2012
Yes, thank you for artfully demonstrating the Straw Man fallacy. Let me show you what I learned from you.
Petrie is the scourge of the Earth. He’s to be blamed for global warming, Vietnam, and 9/11. Worst human since Adolf Hitler.
Thanks for the lesson in Failed Logic 101
Scirocco - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Actually
Petrie is our savior and rides a Pegasus to work each day. He’s to be credited with getting a man on the moon, killing Bin Laden and chocolate covered Oreos. He’s the greatest human since FDR.
Gee, this is fun.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Nah.
He’s the devil. He’s single-handedly responsible for the Adam getting kicked out of heaven. If he’s not fired then Armageddon is imminent.
Please continue.
Scirocco - January 31, 2012
Actually it's because the team that he is in charge of assembling
Is an uncompetitive, ill conceived mess. Again. Still. I really can’t see how theres a controversy over how bad a job hes been doing. The record speaks for itself and it’s indefensible.
Oh, the trade you reference was pretty bad as well.
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
The problem I have
Is that when Petrie WAS doing a crappy job everybody was up in arms defending him to high hell. Now that he’s actually doing the right thing (not perfectly mind you), because its not happening fast enough, NOW people want to form an angry mob about it?
Its short-sighted and demonstrates how most fans and analysts are simply unable to see the big picture.The forest, not the trees.
And I honestly believe Ziller is still biased because Petrie traded Kevin Martin, possibly because of his relationship with Thorpe, or some other reason. Its personal and irrational.
Scirocco - January 31, 2012
Uh, maybe because that was a bad trade?
Kevin Martin for a glorified 6th man PF spun into a glorified 6th man SG? Would you seriously rather have Marcus Thornton than Kevin Martin? I sure wouldn’t.
nbrans - January 31, 2012
Honestly, Martin was mailing it in that year
When he came back from injury, he just looked like an anachronism of the past. The team had become Tyreke’s by then and Martin’s value was tanking by the game.
Besides the fact I like Thornton better. He’s the better defender, can actually create for himself off the dribble, and is younger.
Scirocco - January 31, 2012
Forest from the trees?
Martin was coming off an injury and, shocker, bounced back to his former self when he was healthy. At best Petrie sold low and got a pretty pitiful return. I don’t think Thornton is a much better defender, he doesn’t get to the line like Martin, and yeah, he’s younger, but Martin’s still only 28.
nbrans - January 31, 2012
They're similar players, and I don't mind picking one way or the other
It may have been an injury that made Martin bounce back, or it could have been a change in scenery and having a good coach in Adelman. Who knows? Petrie got Landry who was pretty productive for us that year, and flipped him into Thornton who’s been an explosive gamechanger at times. In my opinion, the trade went pretty well.
You could take Martin over Thornton, but what tips the balance for me is the age factor (22 vs. 28, a very significant difference), Thornton’s ability to create off the dribble being more conducive to clutch time success (as opposed to Martin whose style falters when Refs swallow their whistles), and that he’s a better defender (even if slightly so, which is arguable).
Scirocco - January 31, 2012
Draining threes at a better clip doesn't falter when refs aren't blowing.
caseycheesecake - January 31, 2012
You sure about that?
I believe you can’t trade consecutive picks. And by dealing the pick before, making the playoffs next year, next year’s pick in 2013 would be due to the Cavs in which 2 consecutive year of picks are traded. Since that scenario is a possibility, I do not believe we can trade the pick until AFTER drafting that player.
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
You can trade pick for pick in the same year
So yeah, we can still use it. Ours will be a lottery pick and we trade with a playoff team who’s looking for one more piece and can lose one productive piece to make another area of the team better.
LOUiECOG - January 31, 2012
I can understand frustration
But to say he hasnt been a great GM is not looking at this fairly.
Who has drafted better than Petrie?
The guy has been an NBA Executive of the Year I think twice and runner-up as well on occasion.
He has 9 playoff seasons in 16. Very easily could have had an NBA Championship under his belt. What other GM’s have had such success in a small market? They are few and far between. There are not very many RC Buford’s in the world.
Im just saying by comparison you put his record against most GM’s, his accolades, his draft record, you will see there are not many who have been better than him.
(BTW, I too would rather have Knight than Jimmer personally but I think the marketing had already dictated the Jimmer pick for a financially struggling team.)
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
If we drafted Jimmer for marketing
We would have drafted Rubio as well, IMO.
He’s not a great GM any more. He hasn’t built a winner for any coach other than Rick Adelman. His franchise has won 33, 38, 17, 25 and 24 games over the last 5 seasons and is on pace to have a similarly miserable record this time around, with plenty of blowouts to boot. His coach lasted SEVEN games this season and Petrie shivved him on his way out. The Kings front office has an awful reputation around the league right now.
There’s evidence that Petrie WAS a great GM, not that he IS a great GM.
otis29 - January 30, 2012
I disagree on Rubio
I think if Rubio was a player going in the late lottery they gladly would have but they had a chance to get a big time player that year in Tyreke and took it. Last year I dont think many people had clear cut favorites among Kemba, Knight, Jimmer, Leonard, Biyombo, etc. I truly feel they rolled the dice on one that for sure would make money and could potentially be the better player on top of that.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
I get you know.
I think we are only disagreeing on the details now. You are summing him up by the last five years, while I was looking at the complete body of work. I can understand your take now more.
I still respectfully disagree as I do still think he is one of the better GM’s as he in my opinion has been in a very tough spot to succeed.
Bottom line though for me is 35-0 as in 35 playoff wins under management of Petrie compared to zero by any other Sac GM. I have to appreciate something I havent had form anyone else and also be hesitant to expect more from others.
Like I said I wish he could do more to get an experienced guy in here again like he did with C-Webb to pair with the kids BUT I am hesitant to give up on him now unless there is a better alternative to be had.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
From what I gather
Kings weren’t very high on Knight. Their choices were Jimmer or Kemba as 1a and 1b (They would’ve been happy with either I think, maybe Jimmer a little more) and then I think they seriously considered Vucevic after that.
Aykis16 - January 30, 2012
Interesting.
I actually like Vucevic alot.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
So did the Kings.
And Doug Collins went on the record as saying the Sixers were worried Sacramento would take Vucevic at 10.
Aykis16 - January 30, 2012
I keep hearing Beno referred to as a 4th guard
I disagree. Maybe eventually but Tyreke is a big part of your franchise & Tyreke plays better with Beno. He hasn’t played well next to MT23 & Jimmer has been awful until recently.
If Beno is still here he’s starting next to Reke, or should be at least.
Allbenji - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Also.....
Yes we needed a SF. Is Salmons really a SF? Not really, so there’s that.
Allbenji - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Great so because we were drafting Jimmer there was a need to trade
Beno, move down in the draft, take on more money, and stockpile crappy SFs.
Think there were better avenues.
Sactown_Loyalty19 - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Didn't you answer your own question?
I think there was a lot of patience as Petrie’s various half-rebuilds and kinda-sorta-rebuilds were taking shape given his success with the vintage Kings. Now that the latest rebuilding effort looks like it needs a serious reboot and we’re on our fourth post-Adelman coach and looking nowhere near promising… now’s not the time to fire him because, according to you, Petrie has finally seen the light?
What light?! That Beno/Salmons trade you’re calling no big deal was trading young for old, less salary for more salary, and down in the draft. How in the eff does that have anything to do with a rebuilding effort? How do you tie up a draft pick for JJ Hickson, someone who is not vastly more promising than the guy you’re giving up and who doesn’t even fill a position of need? How do you stand on the sidelines of a player management fiasco and make the Kings the joke of the league yet again?
People were willing to give Petrie the benefit of the doubt when he was overpaying Mikki Moore and holding onto Bibby and Miller way too long, but there comes a point when “rebuilding” starts looking a hell of a lot like wandering in the wilderness.
nbrans - January 30, 2012
Those weren't rebuilds
Those were perfuming up a pig. This is the first true rebuild he’s gotten to in nearly a decade. The franchise was floundering around for way too long. THAT is a fireable offense. Not when after he blows up the thing and starts from scratch right in the middle of watching the new product develop.
The Beno/Salmons trade is not a fireable offense. Neither is the Hickson trade. What would be a fireable offense is if Tyreke/Cousins/Thornton fail. Thats Petrie’s core. Not messing around with irrelevant outside options that do not effect the cap nor do they effect the actual rebuild.
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
I think you're missing my point
If Petrie is rebuilding then he’s doing a crappy job at it. You don’t trade young for old while you’re rebuilding, take on more salary for an additional year, and move down in the draft. You don’t match your known headcase of a franchise center with an out of touch blowhard of a coach and then stand behind the scenes when it blows up on the franchise. You don’t tie up a draft pick you may need to bring a true centerpiece via trade, because lord knows no one is coming via free agency.
It’s all fireable. This is the NBA. Petrie’s had a longer run than just about anyone and people have been fired for far, far less than the above paragraph. There’s turnover in this business and it’s cutthroat. It’s time for fresh, motivated blood.
nbrans - January 30, 2012
Being cutthroat for the sake of being cutthroat is not a recipe for success in the NBA
-Saying he traded young for old (Beno for Salmons), took on more salary (which didn’t affect our ability to offer money to anyone plus with a salary floor to meet), and moved down in the draft (to get the same guy we would have had anyways) is all rhetorical gloss on the situation that did not make a substantial difference in reality.
-Westphal was brought in before Cousins was, there was hardly any preplanned matching one way or the other.
-The draft pick is only tied up in midseason deals, and looking at their history I say thanks but no thanks. Its perfectly tradeable in the offseason.
This is the NBA. You don’t miss the forest for the trees. I maintain that if Reke/DMC/Thornton fail, then thats it for Petrie. Not because of these minor issues that have hardly moved the franchise in one direction or the other. Its all about the big picture, not the miniscule details
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
The Kings will be paying Salmons $7.5 million in 2013/2014
A year after Beno would have come off the books. That’s $7.5 million that could be used on extending young players, on a trade, or, if a miracle were to happen, a free agent. And for a worse player. And having moved down in the draft. That is a substantial difference in reality and is a heck of a lot more than rhetorical gloss.
On the Westphal/Cousins thing, I didn’t say it was a preplanned match, but once the match is made you don’t stand by blindly and let the whole thing blow up to high heaven.
You don’t mess around with draft picks like that. Isiah Thomas traded one of those “Oh we’re going to be good in a few years” protected draft picks in the Stephon Marbury and it ended up being a lotto pick.
Even if this all depends on Reke/DMC/Thornton somehow forming a core….. maybe you have a better crystal ball than I do. I don’t see it. They look like mismatched black holes to me.
nbrans - January 30, 2012
If you're amnestying that player, the only difference is in the pocket book of the maloofs
maybe he saw the writing on the wall and said screw you?
Smills9133 - January 30, 2012
Come on now
You know just as well as I do that the 7.5 million owed to Salmons isn’t preventing ANY team from extending their young players with Bird Rights provisions in the CBA. And with the Amnesty clause, there may not even be a Salmons next year. Salary differences are negligible.
A worse player? Beno has hardly been lighting up the league. Better than Salmons yes, but negligibly so.
Moved down in the draft? The entire point of having a higher draft pick is to have a better chance to pick the guy you want. He still got his man. Once again, negligible.
Yes, ALL of the above is simply spin on the aspects of a move that has not worked out, but has hardly affected anything at all.
My point still remains that if the Reke/DMC/Thornton core fail, then its worth firing Petrie. I may not have a crystal ball, but I’m willing to give this core a shot. The draft pick may come back to haunt them some 5+ years in the future, but again thats all connected to the success of the aformentioned core. Its about the forest not the trees.
Scirocco - January 30, 2012
How much time or what signs would you need
before concluding that this core is a failure/success?
thelettere - January 31, 2012
to conclude that this core is a failure?
thelettere - January 31, 2012
I think by the end of the year if the core hasn't made signifcant progress
Tyreke is really inconsistent right now, but at least there is a coach teaching him. DMC is finally developing some semblance of consistency because the coach is asking him to do less. Thornton is out right now, but when he comes back I want to see a defined role for him.
I’m not looking at win loss record. I bring up the OKC Thunder again; they were 4-29 when they fired their retread coach, and won 23 games that year. But the core was making significant progress. Durant was moved to his natural SF position. Westbrook was given a role and was starting to make strides to stardom. They started developing roles and areas where their young talents were being effective and ended the year on a .500 type clip. They also had a lot of time to play together without significant injuries, and finally got behind the whole Seattle relocation saga.
I want to see the same kind of strides. Not necessarily in the record, but in how the team is gelling and playing together
Scirocco - January 31, 2012
I think the Salmons trade failure is overblown
We traded mediocre and got mediocre back. The rest is semantics. It’s not like we traded Ricky Rubio or something.
NewEraKings - January 30, 2012
amen!
lonelykingsfaninPH - January 30, 2012
Petrie, Maloofs, WP and Pookey????
I agree with those who feel the Maloofs are the ultimate problem, and difficult to change things in Kingsland until or unless they go. However, Petrie’s moves, as of late, are bad to horrible. The most egregious, in my opinion, was the way he allowed WP to almost run Cuz out of town. That was inexcusable. In fact, the only good thing GP has done lately is fire WP.
Lastly, and I hope it doesn’t bring up issues, why does Pookey not post on STR anymore?
amonk81 - January 30, 2012
Petrie's fault?
His drafts have been good, trades not so but it’s difficult for sac to get any talent which is willing to come. C Webb was basically run out of town. FA almost impossible, that leaves journeymen FA’s. From what I hear Westphal pushed hard for Salmons so FO was stuck trying to help him. Small markets have to build through the draft and find complimentary players through FA and trades. I think if we get ESC Maloofs will be exposed for broke as they won’t have money to contribute or NBA contributes and forces sale behind the scenes. Either way ESC is our only hope in more ways than one.
Rfdong - January 30, 2012
Another thing
It’s not his fault he was given a save money directive last two years only to have oodles of cap space with no FA wanting to come on top of working for Ma-brokes.
Rfdong - January 30, 2012
Only the last two years?
andy sims - January 30, 2012
How are his trades not so good?
I would say its a mixed bag when it comes to his history of trades.
Webber, Miller, Christie, Bibby, Bonzi, etc were all very strong trades favoring the Kings and in recent years he has been quiet besides the obvious blow-up or cost cutting trades they finally made. He has had a few duds but overall I feel he has got the better of more trades then he has lost.
I do wish again that he had been more active recently BUT I also think its probably easier to make deals when you have talent someone wants. It is hard to make deals when rebuilding as teams are going to want your best players not your scrubs so I guess Im glad he at least seemed to show patience as it could have been worse.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
Are you sensing any themes in era from when these good trades occurred
Yes, it’s hard to make trades when you have an untalented roster THAT YOU PUT TOGETHER YOURSELF
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
I liked the Hawes for Dalembert trade
Even if Dalembert walked because we got Hayes instead. Peja will always be well loved, but the Peja for Artest trade worked out in the Kings favor too. Thornton was a good pick up as well.
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
Hayes instead of hawes looks AWESOME right now
Perhaps spencer required coaching? Whooda thought that a 19 year old 7 footer wouldn’t develop right away? No, the one year of dalembert was totally worth giving up on ANOTHER of the great drafters draft picks…
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
Petrie drafts great
But the average Petrie draft pick is here for about three years before he trades them or lets them get away. They become stars elsewhere.
NewEraKings - January 31, 2012
Ahh, so Petrie is in charge of developing talent now too?
I thought the GM was supposed to bring talent in and the coaches were in charge of developing it.
This whole time I’ve been thinking about this all wrong…
Wonderchild - January 31, 2012
My point is that Petrie drafts them, but doesn't keep them
NewEraKings - February 2, 2012
lol, this is what you said when Hawes was traded. I don't see a lot of patience for the 19 year old 7 footer.
Crocoduck - January 31, 2012
Nice on tracking that down.
it doesn’t change the fact that the guy is now playing well elsewhere, while he couldn’t here under the coaches hired by petrie. I’m just a reactionary anonymous dumdum on a blog. I’m not being paid millions of dollars to put together a competitive team and failing.
Lets take a look at petries last few drafts, since the cw seems to be that he is very good at that (even among those who criticize his other moves)
2005. Cisco @ 23. A serviceable player for a few years, now overpaid by petrie and looking like he barely belongs in the league.
2006. Q-doob at 19. No comment necessary.
2007. Spence @ #10. Regardless of lchristmas’s thoughts upon the trade, spence lasted 3 undistinguished years here and then was traded for a one year rental on a guy who then walked for nothing. Not a successful pick.
2008. Jt at #12. A decent selection, certainly can’t call it a home run or a failure. Drafted singletary and ewing jr. relatively early in round 2, neither of whom were good enough to stick on a bad team.
2009. Tyreke. Been talked to death. I would argue that petrie was slotted into this pick, he made the pick most other gms would make, and I won’t kill him or give him that much credit for however tyreke turns out. omri. Was looked upon as a steal early, then fell into our awful coaches doghouse and was then given up on too early and sent off in a bad trade. Brockman. Solid 2nd round pick.
2010. DMC. see comments re tyrekes draft position. DMC was looked at as maybe the most talented player in that draft and I give petrie not a lot of credit for having him fall into his lap. whiteside. Who knows.
2011. Jimmer, tyler, isiah. I like jimmer, but many people think we should have drafted a pg, or kept beno and drafted a sf instead of bending over for the horrible salmons trade. Jury out on the 2nd rounders. Isiah looks like a good pick so far, but I’m not crowning his ass yet. Hes also had some pretty bad games.
Summary… I dont think petries draft record is as good as its made out to be. the last “diamond in the rough” he really found was kevin martin. you also can’t really evaluate his drafts without considering the bad trades that sometimes follow.Please
Please don’t go searching my comment history for my snap judgments on these moves. I readily admit this is 100% hindsight, but thats the only way someone like petrie can be judged. Hindsight and the wins and losses.
He gone.
lchristmas - January 31, 2012 via mobile
As far as Spence playing well elsewhere
Isn’t it possible that he’s gotten better over the years from developing as a player? I don’t think PW was a good coach as far as developing talent, but I also think that he was a Maloof hire more so than a Petrie one (he was the biggest name for the lowest price).The trade for Daly made sense at the time, and I’m not sure why the let him walk. I think something weird happened, not sure if Petrie was behind that or not.
As far as his draft record goes I’m going to have to disagree with you. I think if you look at the draft records of other GM’s you’d find Petrie has one of the better ones. Maybe not the best, but I’d say he’s up there.
I also don’t think hindsight is the best and only way to judge something like this. I think there are unpredictable factors, such as injuries, that can ultimately effect the outurn of moves. If Hayes is never the same player again due to ongoing shoulder issues, would it be fair to kill Petrie and argue in hindsight and say that he should’ve never let Daly walk instead?
If you want him gone fine. I don’t see why you wouldn’t be nervous about who the Maloofs would replace him with is beyond me. I personally think they had more say in the recent coaching hires than Petrie, so I have little faith. It can get worse.
Crocoduck - January 31, 2012
I totally agree.
DMC was a no-brainer.
I’m still not sold on Tyreke. Rubio looks like he may end up being a better player, and he WANTED to come here.
I think Petrie’s drafting has been solid – not spectacular. His strength used to be the deal. he would rectify mistakes quickly. We’d trade overvalued players for under-utilized players. I’ve seen NOTHING from Petrie since he drafted Kevin Martin.
Hoops Mike - January 31, 2012
Yes...
BUT that untalented roster isn’t as untalented as you may think. Do you think he couldnt bring in a quality talent for DMC or Tyreke? Of course he could, but thats not how you rebuild. You dont give up your young building blocks. When you are a small market team more often than not you have to develop your own talent and get lucky with the lottery.
Until the last three years he didn’t really have much of value to trade away as they were just starting a rebuild. They didn’t have good FA talents to deal away they had to blow it up lose (much worse) for a couple years and actually get some top 5 picks. Now they have two of the top rookies from the last two years. If they take the third and 4th year steps that other elite players have it will work out well if they don’t then the rebuild continues.
My point I guess is just that while I wish in hindsight he would have blown it up sooner that is the reason the rebuild was delayed and that he cannot go and trade now as the pieces of value are the necessary building blocks at this point. You could give up Tyreke tomorrow for Paul Pierce and win more games but where would you be in two years compared to Boston? They are at the point where they have to wait on DMC and Reke now (and to a lesser extent Jimmer) to see if they can take the next steps.
It’s not as quick a process as we would like it to be. The Sonics/Thunder had one of the more impressive turnarounds of a franchise. Yet they still lost 60 games their first year with Durant. The next year they added Westbrook and lost 59 games. Then they went and gave Brooks the full-time gig, kept their team primarily intact with no major changes besides adding Harden/Maynor and all of a sudden they were winning 50 games. It shouldn’t be a shocker that this team hasn’t turned the corner yet in my opinion. Now if they are still this way next year, then I will be disappointed as I do feel DMC and Tyreke are not far away from turing a corner.
WebberDynasty - January 30, 2012
I can't see a legit GM candidate taking the job with the Maloofs still in place
Which means if they replaced Petrie now, it would probably be with the Eric Musselman of GM candidates. And we all know how that turned out.
I’d rather stick it out with Petrie and let the new owners – when, not if – make the selection.
NewEraKings - January 30, 2012
I agree. Petrie is ranked 9th among GM's ,
How do you rate Geoff Petrie against other NBA GMs?
22%Among the very best
266 votes.47%Above average
574 votes.24%Middle of the pack
290 votes.4%Below average
52 votes.1%Among the very worst
24 votes
this is how we voted. now the maloofs are searching for another GM ? sorry guy’s but i rather see the maloofs go first.
Beer_man - January 31, 2012
All this proves is that 69% of the voters are in a deep, dark pit of denial
lchristmas - January 31, 2012 via mobile
Respectfully disagree
I would not replace Petrie with most of the existing GM’s, and that poll was about GP vs. other current NBA General Managers. When you look at the current list, he is indeed middle of the pack to slightly above average, in my opinion. This does not mean that he does not deserve to be replaced – I just wouldn’t replace him with the bulk of the current NBA General Managers.
section214 - January 31, 2012
I don't know how you can justify anything above
“middle of the pack” given the recent track record. How can you be above average when your team is in the lottery every year and all your trades and fa signings are tire fires? I don’t see it.
lchristmas - January 31, 2012 via mobile
By reviewing the list of current GMs
It is a very unimpressive list, overall.
section214 - January 31, 2012
To wit -
Masai Uriji of Denver has done a pretty good job in his short stint. Chris Wallace has done more right than wrong in Memphis. Sam Presti has made the most of his many opportunities in OKC. RC Buford of San Antonio has always been a favorite of mine. And Kevin O’Connor has been pretty solid in Utah. Those are the current GMs that I would perhaps take over Petrie.
Guys like Mitch Kupchak of the Lakers, Donnie Nelson of Dallas, John Paxson of Chicago and Pat Riley of Miami are bigger question marks, as they benefit heavily from being GMs in more desirable and solvent markets.
Larry Bird has always been thought of as a moron until a few weeks into this season. Danny Ainge was a blithering idiot right up to the trade for KG and Allen, and he’s likely heading towards “What have you done for me lately” land.
I may have overlooked one or two guys, but by and large there you have it – When you compare Petrie’s overall track record to the guys on this list and factor in the benefits and detriments of each locale, he’s about average.
And I say this not as a defense of him, but as a cautionary tale when it comes to replacing him – And Adelman begat Musselman, who begat Theus, who begat Natt, who begat Westphal, who begat Smart…
section214 - January 31, 2012
If you want a good laugh, take a look at the Suns.
Crocoduck - January 31, 2012
I've never thought of Larry Bird as a moron
Wasn’t that long ago he was coaching for an NBA title. Great coach; jury still out on him as a GM.
But look at the moves he has made in a rebuilding situation, blowing up the team by trading Artest, Steven Jackson, etc., trading for Hibbert and Collison, drafting fairly well (Granger, George), it’s hard to complain much.
NewEraKings - February 7, 2012
Could this be another Maloof Money-Saving Move? Can the Executive Management to save a
few hundred grand a year? I wouldn’t doubt it. I think Petrie and staff have had a good run and it may be time for new blood.
Natomaser - January 30, 2012
Patience is a virtue.
I’ll admit that these past few years have been difficult, but fire Petrie? Give me a break. Since I was a fan before the C-Webb era, maybe I give Petrie more slack than most who grew up around the winning team that Petrie built when he first came to town. Rebuilding franchises take time. How long did it take Chicago after Jordan retired (the second time)? How long did it take the Lakers after Magic retired? How long were the Celtics total crap? The Kings will be back on top as long as Petrie is in charge. Patience is a virtue.
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
6 years of utter shit isn't a "past few years"
Mike Garza - January 30, 2012
I'm sure that I'm in the minority on this one
but I actually like the Kings roster this year. I really hope they don’t blow up the team — GM included.
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
I've been a kings fan forever
And guess what, when the team sucked forever, people got fired. We are in year 6 of this “rebuild” with no plan and no end in sight. Thanks for your service, geoff, good bye and good luck…
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
you're right
why didn’t Petrie trade Brad Miller for Lebron James? And we didn’t get nearly enough for Mike Bibby. We should’ve at least got Bosh for him.
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
totally agree
It’s ridiculous we couldn’t pry Lebron from Cleveland. We could have had the big three here in Sac and we clearly blew it.
wallywagon11 - January 30, 2012
This joke has been done better, and worse, thousands of times
You know what we could have got for mike bibby? How about SOMETHING?
lchristmas - January 30, 2012 via mobile
I disagree
my version of that joke has been the best yet. Give Petrie a few more years. It was 10 years between the Showtime Lakers and Shaq and Kobe era. Petrie made Sacramento relevant once, I have faith that he’ll do it again. Plus, I want to see Tyreke and DMC play together for a few years. If things haven’t turned around by then, I’ll grab my torch and pitchfork.
who betta than kanyon? - January 30, 2012
After a few years, Reke's contract will be up
If we stay anywhere close to where we are now, he won’t be staying.
HarveySpecter - January 31, 2012
So, after four more years of this #### then you'll have seen enough?
Job thinks you are being a bit too patient
lchristmas - January 31, 2012 via mobile
Have faith. Just remembah, the Force will be us. Always.
And cue my Hedo-Wan Kenobi picture again.
HarveySpecter - January 30, 2012
Fire Petrie!!!
I need a job.
elfboy_ - January 30, 2012
Darn it all to that bad place
I finally get a chance to sit down and read my almost daily fix of StR and I miss out on a good one. All the stars are out including but not limited to multiple sims, pookey, Ziller, Aykis, Section – and all of the daily regulars. This is StR at it’s best.
The only thing I haven’t seen is a capper from CowboyRon with a “Fire Petrie!”
FWIW, I am glad that this post was made. The Sacramento Kings are in a state of crisis, once again. And yes, we can find plenty of Petrie flaws but the buck stops at the top with the Malindas and their stopped bucks
With no money there is little hope for improvement. The Head Coach gets the lowest salary, the GM the lowest salary, and the payroll ditto, lowest again. No stars are in the future – no star FAs, no star Head Coaches, no star GMs. That realization alone makes this post a beauty.This team is being fornicated with a limp male organ as long as the current ownership group is ante-ing up pennies at the hundred dollar table. Petrie, (or Kevin Pelton or Sam Presti or RC Buford or Jerry West) are otherwise irrelevant, and if you want blame, make the owners own up. Replacing Petrie just shifts the blame to the next GM instead of where it belongs.
betweentheeyes - January 30, 2012
Well said
CowbellKings - January 30, 2012
I'm always confused by this logic
Westphal’s flaws didn’t absolve Cousins of his own. Nor do the Maloofs flaws absolve Petrie.
It’s not an either/or, black or white situation. The Maloofs are terrible owners, and Petrie is a mediocre GM. There is plenty of evidence accumulating that Petrie quite frankly doesn’t give a shit at this point.
Now, I realize the Maloofs are convenient bad guys, but Petrie’s crapped the bed on everything recently from coaches to free agent signings to the terribad Salmons and Hickson trades.
Having to fire your coach 7 games into the season is Petrie’s fault because he didn’t care enough to control the situation. When it became clear his own laziness was being exposed, he let Westphal take the fall for the entire thing.
The Maloofs are weak owners. And Petrie is a weak GM. Both things can be equally true.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Best take on this in this section by far!!!
Tom A~! - January 31, 2012
I get this logic completely.
There definitely is enough brown stuff to smear around in the dung heap that is our current franchise. It gets hard to parse out the most egregious offal in the heap.
I honestly don’t get how you cannot think that the worst and most offensive turds in this heap are the owners. And I think that is where many people come to this perspective.
They see the ownership as being SO bad that they can’t truly assess Petrie’s latest trades and moves. It is hard to figure out just how good or bad he may be doing because we don’t know the politics and restrictions he is operating under… Seems pretty straightforward to me.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
Sure, I see that the owners are terrible
And are clearly the biggest issue here. But I have trouble blaming them for the moves that Petrie’s made which are clearly not done with the team’s pocketbook in mind.
If Petrie is agreeing to make moves like the Salmons deal, or fire Westphal seven games into the season after setting him up, only because the owners are trying to “Major League” their way out of town – well, why should I have any respect for the guy at all? Then he’s just a willing accomplice.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
How is the Salmons deal not related to their pocketbook?
They were able to basically swap Beno for Salmons and add no salary to this year. Sure, they added another year of salary, but did not go above minimum salary this year. Basically a wash AND they needed to unload Beno to make room for high draft pick at PG. How is that unrelated to their pocketbook?
Do you really think the Maloofs were going to let Petrie go above minimum salary to get a SF or do anything else? Because that seems to be implicit in the point you are making and I completely disagree that this was ever an option. No matter what rumors circulated.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
That caveat's not a throwaway
There was no minimum salary in place when this trade was made!
And technically, they did go above minimum salary to sign Travis Outlaw (another SF option), did they not?
otis29 - January 31, 2012
No, they had to sign Outlaw or somebody else just to make minimum
They actually had to sign somebody else to meet minimum. The minimum salary allowed is $48.3 million and the team pays $48.9 million. This team is just $600k over the minimum. They needed to sign Outlaw just to make the minimum.
And your point about there being no minimum at the time the deal was done is just not really relevant and off-base. Clearly teams knew what the minimum was likely to be set at. That point wasn’t an issue in the negotiations at any point and had to have been agreed on pretty early.
Also, the Maloofs were NEVER going to approve more salary in THIS year. Is another year insignificant to the team and franchise. No, it is a significant factor, but not to the bottom line of the franchise for THIS year. That is why adding another year was OK to them.
If you really want to completely ignore my very valid points here then go ahead. No sweat off my back. And if you really do refuse to consider that Petrie is restricted from doing much by financial constraints and want to fault him for attempting to do what he could DESPITE that, fine.
Do that, but just consider the possibility that he really may have had absolutely zero ability to spend and is probably just trying to hold the franchise together on a shoe string.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
P.S.
I know that you have been a critic of GP for a long time. I know and understand that. I have been as well and for the valid past faults you have pointed out, but in this situation the criticisms of him may not apply as they once did. They may not fairly take into account the current situation.
And truth be told, it doesn’t matter if he stays or goes because he has no option to do much here beyond the present circumstance. I just think he should stay until new ownership takes over.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
Who's ignoring who's points?
You are really trying to claim that the Salmons deal was done due to the financial constraints of the organization, and not because Petrie wanted Salmons the player? Sorry, you can’t sell me on that, no matter how hard you contort.
Link?
We’ve had this debate around here before, and to be fair – I wasn’t ready to give the Maloofs the benefit of the doubt for signing a guy before they signed him. But – do you or do you not believe that there was a tangible offer on the table for Kirilenko?
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Agree to disagree then
And that is probably the only place we might agree on.
I have no faith in the Maloofs ability or willingness to spend money, but can understand how you might want to believe them on that one.
Personally, I look at what people do rather than what they say they will do. Especially when what they actually do contradicts what they said.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
You do know we have a general election coming this November?
These guys are the experts at lip service.
betweentheeyes - January 31, 2012
True....
The spin machines of the Maloofs are like lawn mowers compared to the combine harvesters coming this November.
I must say, though, that I am shocked and surprised that the BS PR of the Maloofs worked so well. They said they were going to spend money to win games and have not done that, are barely at league minimum, and yet nobody makes an issue of it or calls them on it.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
otis29 - January 31, 2012
People believe what they want to believe
Politics, Religion, Finances, Relationships – Sports as well.
betweentheeyes - January 31, 2012
Trudat
caseycheesecake - January 31, 2012
Oh really?
How about some journalism exercised on this subject? How about some media on how broke the Maloofs are and whether or not they can really afford this team? Because that story line, that narrative, went away.
Scratch your head there all you want, but I see the blame game getting played and Petrie, who has enough problems, taking a load of hits when even the membership here thinks the Maloofs are the biggest part of the problem.
We have had piece after piece on Petrie. How about some balance and we start hearing something about the Maloofs and their bottom line? I guess it is just easier to go along with the Maloof talking points.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
I think the reason for this dichotomy is that we have established some faith in Petrie annd expect more
There is about 2% trust in the Maloofs and we expect no good
betweentheeyes - January 31, 2012
You should do a fanpost
And add a poll about how people feel about the Maloofs. They get a ton more scorn around here than Geoff Petrie ever has or ever will.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Sorry, I reread your post
And you’re clearly talking about the site editors.
So tell me this, in your whole three weeks or so on the site, you’ve been able to determine StR’s ongoing opinion of the Maloofs and Petrie?
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Sorry again
That came off way more harsh than I intended. I’ll just say this. There’s very little debate here about the Maloofs – I’d think the opinion of most of this site, including the people running it, are in line.
Hell, I think I was one of the last ones defending these guys. And that was a looong time ago.
So the Petrie debate is really about Petrie. The ineptitude of the Maloofs is pretty much always assumed.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
can I claim early Anti-Maloof status?
wallywagon11 - January 31, 2012
I am sorry as well. It wasn't really clear in my post.
I am talking about the media as a whole, including StR and other sources. I would add that the subtext of every piece written by TZ that I have read (for the last several years) addresses spending to some degree and Maloof accountability, but I think that gets kind of lost as subtext.
In my book, either the Maloofs are broke and it is on them or they aren’t and Petrie is just screwing up more than usual. I would actually like to know just how broke they are or unwilling to spend on salary so this question can be answered.
CowbellKings - January 31, 2012
Petrie is not blameless. He is responsible for the moves made, even if he is restrained or directed by the Malindas.
“just following orders” is both a truthful and convient excuse. I argue that the degree of difficulty in performing a “winning” job is so small that it is no wonder his skills are called into question. The restrictive nature of the operating budget for this franchise infers that no matter whom the GM is they are programmed to fail no matter what the level of their expertise may be. Hey, and bobbing up to break the surface of the minimum salary cap and the min. coach and GM payrolls are only the parts we know about.
If Geoff Petrie responsible? Yes, he is on the GM nameplate. But he is damned both ways: He could leave and say he couldn’t work under these conditions (perhpas heightening his reputation) or he can stay and make the most of a bad situation – someone has to be the GM, why not him? It beats staying home and watching Paula Deen play in the lard.
betweentheeyes - January 31, 2012
Did someone say they needed to be " fornicated with a limp male organ!?"
HELLO!
Dirkula - January 31, 2012
my two cents...
I remember back to 2009 during post-draft analysis David Aldridge mentioned that the Kings needed to acquire talent, that the team needs to be in the talent acquiring business. And Aldridge was right, not just to put a better product on the court, but you need talent to trade/move pieces and create cohesion in a system/identity/philosphy. Although Westphal has made the analysis more difficult the past couple of years has been a vetting process.
Adjustments will be made (ie Jeff Green was a high draft pick for OKC but he’s no longer with the team). Although some people are disappointed with the pre-lockout draft/decisions, the post-lockout draft and FA period is the other side of the coin that will be stronger and more important to the future of this team. GP shouldn’t be fired. He has had success in the past, his rebuild is a work in progress and has acquired young talent, and I would trust him during this critical period over a No. 2 man. No. 2 men are not infallible as well.
getPGwithbounce - January 31, 2012
who are we going to get to replace petrie ? jerry sloan ? maloofs are so freakin cheap we are better off with petrie or we are going to end up with the same results when adleman was fired. i say the maloofs go first and maybe then we can talk about replacing a Petrie. we have cheap owners , how much is petrie getting payed ? didn’t he take a pay cut , NO GM ranked higher than petrie is walking thru the doors while maloofs are still owners.
Beer_man - January 31, 2012
You really think Petrie's "ranked" high by anyone outside of Sacramento these days?
otis29 - January 31, 2012
The problem is, the pool of candidates who will take the job are worse than Petrie
Wait for the new owners. Be careful what you wish for.
NewEraKings - January 31, 2012
Do we know that for sure?
otis29 - January 31, 2012
I don't think we know that for sure.
I’m sure there are plenty of good options for a replacement. But I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest they will go with the cheapest option possible. That’s what scares me the most.
Crocoduck - January 31, 2012
Connect the dots
Unsure ownership, may not be in the city next season, low pay, crappy team: is that a situation you want to walk into if you are a bright young GM prospect? Probably not.
But it probably sounds appealing if you are a retread just trying to get a job. Kind of like our coaching carousel in recent years. No thanks. I’ll just stick with the devil I know for now.
NewEraKings - January 31, 2012
There are 30 of these jobs available
And they don’t come up often. Plus – one way or another, the Kings future (and permanent home and ownership situation) are going to be resolved in the next year or two.
I can see someone other than a retread wanting to get in that position.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
You're going to get what the Maloofs are willing to pay for,
and that won’t be much. Fire Petrie (I’m really not against it at this point), but don’t expect to see much improvement under the current ownership.
section214 - January 31, 2012
I agree with this to an extent
But, similar to Westphal, I’m curious if Petrie’s doing more longterm harm than good at this point – and if replacing him isn’t addition by subtraction.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
And that thought has some legs
I mean, what do you have to lose at this point?
This team is still very, very young, so the jury is still out on a lot of Petrie has done over the last couple of years. But trading Udrih/Casspi/#7 pick/future 1st round pick for Salmons/Hickson/#10 pick? Guh!
section214 - January 31, 2012
Man, I would love to be wrong about Petrie
Because I do think what he was able to accomplish in this market without a true superstar (getting us within a few bad calls/made free throws from the NBA Finals) was amazing.
But his recent history is so diametrically opposed to that time period. He’s made a few moves to clear cap space, but it’s taken almost as long as if he’d just let all those bad deals expire on their own.
And we hear the rumblings that he’s hard to reach on the phone, or that he’s not up to speed on the latest advanced statistical analysis. Add in a pinch of Westphal/Cousins debacle, plus the continued lack of disclosure to the fans who buy the tickets – it gives me the picture of a guy who’s already out the door, and he’s just waiting for the push.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Blamegame sucks...
Petrie, as many have stated, is doing the best he can with the hand he is given to play. There’s no doubt he’d be a lot smarter working for owners willing to spend, coming from a big market area. This man has not suddenly lost it…but it seems he has owners who believe they know more than they do, and interfere with day to day decisions. Look at the bench they bought: Hickson, Outlaw, Garcia, Greene… Luckily Thomas and Fredette have been bright spots… Ultimately, the owners have to pay for players.
IF this team(now with a solid nucleas of Evans, Thornton, Cousins, Thompson, and Hayes), actually stays together and add some pieces, they could be very fun and entertaining…as well as winners.
This team is symbolized by Tyreke Evans…fans are howling for him to hurry up and hit potential…many scream for him to be shifted to a forward spot. Ridiculas! Tyreke offers a tremendous upside and advantage over other points guards physically, and in his three years he is showing remarkable improvement in his weak areas(assists, shooting outside, reognizing situations), especially considering last year’s injuries, and that in three years he has had 3 coaches. That his fault? At this point he reminds me of Alex Smith of the Niners…waiting for an organization to get itself together. What ever happened to the blame starting at the top? MALOOFS!
We Kings’ fans have to keep up the Hope(all we got), cheer, and give this young team Time…that same Time we are weary of wasting.
zzsjolt - January 31, 2012
Is this true? How do you know this? If this is true, why does Petrie keep signing extensions?
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Whoops, missed reply button to zzsjolt
otis29 - January 31, 2012
I only surmise…but do you think he signs independent of ownership?
kings are as low as it goes on payroll…that’s not Petrie. seems he does what he can with a huge city/arena problem, a coach-a-year approach(they didn’t know last year and all lay-off Westphal was not the man? Then 7 games later they figure it out?
Around the NBA, what exceptional athlete or coach is rubbing his hands in glee, saying, “Can’t wait to work in Sacramento!”
zzsjolt - January 31, 2012
I guess my question is
Why do you think Westphal is on the Maloofs? Why isn’t that Petrie?
No doubt about it, this franchise is in woeful shape, from the top to the bottom. But at best you’re giving Petrie credit for “not being the Maloofs”, and not for actually doing anything productive.
There’s an incessant need for some to blame either Petrie or the Maloofs, but not both.
I’m blaming both.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Agreed 100% on this
You can’t give credit to GP for the good stuff and blame the owners for the bad, or vice versa. If Petrie does/did not have control over these decisions, then he is toothless as a GM, and as a result his existence or non-existence does not matter. I think the truth is that he has been somewhat handcuffed by the financial parameters that he has been given, but within that he has still made the decisions (Westphal over Brooks or possibly Thibodeau, for example).
section214 - January 31, 2012
...
I am saying you can’t play high stakes poker without cash…Petrie does what he can.Take Dalembert as an example: why would he want to sign with Sacramento unless for much more money?
The Positive part of my post ? Petrie has again assembled a solid core(very young!): Evans, Cousins, Thornton, Hayes, Fredette….not bad to build from… If Thompson is added, and any other player(Honeycutt, Thomas, Hickson…)emerges, Petrie has built an excellent core.
zzsjolt - January 31, 2012
I've always been a big Petrie fan, but here's the problem
The constraints of working under current ownership gives GP a lot less room for error. That said, he understood the landscape when he renewed his contract. He has done a good job in the draft over the past couple of years, but he failed to hire a coach that could develop that talent. That is a major fail.
Other marks against him include his inability to mediate the Kevin Martin situation, which ultimately led to selling him low. Casspi for Hickson would be a non-deal if not for the fact that he ultimately forfeited a 1st round pick to make the deal, which makes this a very bad deal if you support the notion that 1st round picks in the hands of GP have good value. And trading a mediocre player (Udrih) for a worse player (Salmons) while taking on more contract and moving down 3 slots in the draft is the kind of deal that would have us laughing at Billy King or Isiah Thomas or Khan(!!!) had any of them made that type of deal.
There was a time where Petrie had amassed a ton of good will through the first 10 years of his GM efforts. But he has pretty much burned through that with these recent deals and bad coaching hires. To his credit, if he is fired he has not left the cupboard bare. But there is a ton of work left to do to return this franchise to relevance, and I understand anyone that doubts Petrie’s ability and nimbleness to get it done.
section214 - January 31, 2012
One of the curiousities when describing the typical NBA GM
>Is he a total Eff up (Billy King, Isiah Thomas, Elgin Baylor, Bryan Colangelo, Wes Unseld, Michael Jordan, Kevin McHale, ? Danny Ferry? etc?
>He was a total Eff up but things are finally working out? (David Khan, Chris Wallace, Elgin’s replacement)? (The opposite is Otis in Orlando)
>Hey not bad, huh? Portland, Denver, MIlwaukee, Philly
>Seem to be pretty clued in – Riley, Donnie Nelson/Cuban, Daryl Morey, RC Buford, Sam Presti, Kupchak.
A decade ago, Petrie was in the last category, now he is with the goon squad. TImes changed, fortunes changed, did Petrie adapt? If you were Kevin Pritchard (as an example) would you want to come to SacTown for a few bus tokens and a bag of chips knowing that you have a job to gain but a reputation to lose by working for the Malindas who just fired a former twice awarded Exec of the Year and that the chance of making the playoffs this year is between zero and none?
Coaching and GM-ing is a reputation game – your smarts work if you win otherwise you are just another loser. The Kings are the basement level for guys who were kicked off the ground floor or who want to show what they can do, aka Los Desperados.
betweentheeyes - January 31, 2012
Great take
section214 - January 31, 2012
Exactly
And that’s why it’s better to stick with Petrie rather than bring in some buffoon for the sake of change.
NewEraKings - February 2, 2012
Petrie got played by Dalembert
Sad as that is to say. And how about allowing your head coach to release a public statement that disrespects your best young talent – then having to fire the coach seven games into the season when the thing blows up?
I’m sure that’s the Maloofs fault somehow.
otis29 - January 31, 2012
Petrie sucks. So do the Maloofs. End of story.
Ninja King - January 31, 2012
Insightful, concise...
COMMENTING ON THIS THREAD IS NOW CLOSED. DRIVE SAFELY.
Vote Quimby.
andy sims - January 31, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Sactown Royalty to post a comment.