NyCeEvO wrote:What I'm seeing is a fusion of "Whether King should be fired for all of his deals that he's done", "whether he's responsible for us being 3-9", and " whether should he be fired for putting us in bad spot with no draft picks for the long term".
I think there are clear and obvious differences for each topic.
Do I think King should be fired for all of his bad deals? Yes, he should've been fired a while ago.
I've ripped on King plenty of times before for his trades.
Are the deals he has done been overpays? Yes of course. In fact, I was one of the few people who called the trade for D-Will an overpay as soon as it happened.
Do I feel he should be fired for mortgaging the future this badly? Oh yeah, of course. It was and still is an extremely foolish thing to do.
But what I'm not responding to is whether King is most responsible for our poor start and for that I'd say no.
Yeah, he should've been fired for his deals in the past and what our future looks like, but if we're solely talking about whether he deserves to be fired for us sucking right now, I don't think so.
We have tons of talent. A lack of talent is not what is causing the problem.
It's a lack of coaching and having a system.
Now, if you want to say that King is more responsible than Kidd because Billy had the final say on his hiring, then yes, I can see that. But what is an important factor for me is that King didn't even want to talk to Kidd but ownership came to BK and said 'hey, take a look at this. It might be good.'
I don't know the relationship that King has with Proky. We can sit here on the outside and think that BK should've just stuck to his guns and said 'no', but even in the interview with Proky during the MIA game, Proky said that he wanted to go with an unconventional approach. We have no idea if ownership's suggestion to BK to take a look at Kidd was merely a suggestion with no attachments or a 'hey, it would be in your best interest to look at Kidd' type of move.
Both King and Proky have said that Proky was the one who presented the idea to King. When your billionaire boss asks you to do something that you've already said 'no' to, you don't think you'd seriously re-think about doing it? Even if it came back to bite you, ownership has to look at themselves and say "hey, we did push for this."
The reason why I'm disagreeing is because the timing of the thread bump really coincides with our current poor play on the court.
This isn't something that been talking about through the summer and fall and therefore I'm looking at this in light of what's going on right now.
I haven't seen people flaming King since draft day and I think it's because we've beat the past and future issues to death so that there's really no need to talk about those anymore. [b]But what's stoking the fire is our present poor play which is reminding us of all the crap he did in the past and how it affects our future.[\b]
I definitely agree with you guys about the past and future stuff. The present is the only small area where I share a difference of opinion.
hit it there on the nose...
i will say its all tied together, the boston move was a desperate reach by King due to his past errors and **** ups IMO, the coaching hire was on him I mean, there was a legit class or pool of potential prospects to be hired however if he did this move bcuz the mgt team wanted then why are you here? they could go and buy a lap dog for cheap. You're the GM act like one...