George Hill traded

[dckingsfan]

The Celtics and Sixers are working with top 3 draft picks.

The Kings plan is good for a long term rebuild - that hasn't changed.

Neither the Celtics or the Sixers bought short-term veteran contracts during the rebuild.

The Kings plan is still bad for a long-term rebuild. It is short-sighted.

That was my point, they didn't have too.

The Kings plan is in the 2nd yrs so too early to judge. It's not bad for a long term rebuild the way they are doing it. They have had more assets then they could handle. They needed vets to balance out the roster. Not a bad plan. Just not the way you would have done it.

That is the death but a thousand cuts mantra...

[benchmobbin02]

Neither the Celtics or the Sixers bought short-term veteran contracts during the rebuild.

The Kings plan is still bad for a long-term rebuild. It is short-sighted.

That was my point, they didn't have too.

The Kings plan is in the 2nd yrs so too early to judge. It's not bad for a long term rebuild the way they are doing it. They have had more assets then they could handle. They needed vets to balance out the roster. Not a bad plan. Just not the way you would have done it.

That is the death but a thousand cuts mantra...

With the draft positions they have been in its actually the a credit to them that they have assembled this group. Now it's about developing them which the vets were part of the plan in achieving to get back on point.

[dckingsfan]

That was my point, they didn't have too.

The Kings plan is in the 2nd yrs so too early to judge. It's not bad for a long term rebuild the way they are doing it. They have had more assets then they could handle. They needed vets to balance out the roster. Not a bad plan. Just not the way you would have done it.

That is the death but a thousand cuts mantra...

With the draft positions they have been in its actually the a credit to them that they have assembled this group. Now it's about developing them which the vets were part of the plan in achieving to get back on point.

No, that is where you are totally missing it - it is continuing to hoard assets WHILE you are developing your current assets.

That is why the current plan never made sense... It was a selling point to fans only - and even that didn't work.

[benchmobbin02]

That is the death but a thousand cuts mantra...

With the draft positions they have been in its actually the a credit to them that they have assembled this group. Now it's about developing them which the vets were part of the plan in achieving to get back on point.

No, that is where you are totally missing it - it is continuing to hoard assets WHILE you are developing your current assets.

That is why the current plan never made sense... It was a selling point to fans only - and even that didn't work.

Where you're missing it is that the vets were part of the development plan and were very important this year.

The plan made sense and worked. The young players have gained valuable knowledge, on and off the court, by their own admission, from the vets. The fans have bought in as well, so you're dead wrong there too. We are currently 3rd in the league in home attendance pct at 100.2%. It's not just the new building but the new young team that has people enthused to show up and support.

[dckingsfan]

With the draft positions they have been in its actually the a credit to them that they have assembled this group. Now it's about developing them which the vets were part of the plan in achieving to get back on point.

No, that is where you are totally missing it - it is continuing to hoard assets WHILE you are developing your current assets.

That is why the current plan never made sense... It was a selling point to fans only - and even that didn't work.

Where you're missing it is that the vets were part of the development plan and were very important this year.

The plan made sense and worked. The young players have gained valuable knowledge, on and off the court, by their own admission, from the vets. The fans have bought in as well, so you're dead wrong there too. We are currently 3rd in the league in home attendance pct at 100.2%. It's not just the new building but the new young team that has people enthused to show up and support.

Learning from the vets is just so much fluff... attendance, yes for the short-term and that was what it was all about.

[benchmobbin02]

No, that is where you are totally missing it - it is continuing to hoard assets WHILE you are developing your current assets.

That is why the current plan never made sense... It was a selling point to fans only - and even that didn't work.

Where you're missing it is that the vets were part of the development plan and were very important this year.

The plan made sense and worked. The young players have gained valuable knowledge, on and off the court, by their own admission, from the vets. The fans have bought in as well, so you're dead wrong there too. We are currently 3rd in the league in home attendance pct at 100.2%. It's not just the new building but the new young team that has people enthused to show up and support.

Learning from the vets is just so much fluff... attendance, yes for the short-term and that was what it was all about.

That may be the most misguided thing I've heard on this forum...

The plan was to put a product out there that enticed the fans and built for the future and they have succeeded in that. It was a plan that had many parts and had short term milestones, of course, but there is no denying that this is a long term build. It's set up that way and the team executives have said it many times. Only short sited fans that think we are in the same boat as the SIxers, Lakers and Celtics would think otherwise.

[City of Trees]

It was a very conservative approach where we saw both pros and cons as time went along.

Big picture: sitting at the All Star break not many rookies taken in the top 10 are playing as good as Fox. Bogdonavic won the MVP in rising star, Buddy Hield led the game in scoring and is showing potential to be an 18+ppg scorer, Jackson is improving as a role player, and Skal has been a disappointment.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app

[dckingsfan]

It was a very conservative approach where we saw both pros and cons as time went along.

Big picture: sitting at the All Star break not many rookies taken in the top 10 are playing as good as Fox. Bogdonavic won the MVP in rising star, Buddy Hield led the game in scoring and is showing potential to be an 18+ppg scorer, Jackson is improving as a role player, and Skal has been a disappointment.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app

That's fine - some make it some not so much. If you collect enough assets, draft well and have a coaching staff hell-bent on development, you are fine.

If you go the short-term route - not so much. And then the vets get disgruntled if they don't play and impart bad habits.

[dckingsfan]

Where you're missing it is that the vets were part of the development plan and were very important this year.

The plan made sense and worked. The young players have gained valuable knowledge, on and off the court, by their own admission, from the vets. The fans have bought in as well, so you're dead wrong there too. We are currently 3rd in the league in home attendance pct at 100.2%. It's not just the new building but the new young team that has people enthused to show up and support.

Learning from the vets is just so much fluff... attendance, yes for the short-term and that was what it was all about.

That may be the most misguided thing I've heard on this forum...

The plan was to put a product out there that enticed the fans and built for the future and they have succeeded in that. It was a plan that had many parts and had short term milestones, of course, but there is no denying that this is a long term build. It's set up that way and the team executives have said it many times. Only short sited fans that think we are in the same boat as the SIxers, Lakers and Celtics would think otherwise.

You are absolutely in the same boat as the Sixers of a couple of years ago. Wow. Okay, I will go away.

[benchmobbin02]

Learning from the vets is just so much fluff... attendance, yes for the short-term and that was what it was all about.

That may be the most misguided thing I've heard on this forum...

The plan was to put a product out there that enticed the fans and built for the future and they have succeeded in that. It was a plan that had many parts and had short term milestones, of course, but there is no denying that this is a long term build. It's set up that way and the team executives have said it many times. Only short sited fans that think we are in the same boat as the SIxers, Lakers and Celtics would think otherwise.

You are absolutely in the same boat as the Sixers of a couple of years ago. Wow. Okay, I will go away.

Of course go off topic again and then bail. Sign of a false and failing argument. Good riddance.

[dckingsfan]

That may be the most misguided thing I've heard on this forum...

The plan was to put a product out there that enticed the fans and built for the future and they have succeeded in that. It was a plan that had many parts and had short term milestones, of course, but there is no denying that this is a long term build. It's set up that way and the team executives have said it many times. Only short sited fans that think we are in the same boat as the SIxers, Lakers and Celtics would think otherwise.

You are absolutely in the same boat as the Sixers of a couple of years ago. Wow. Okay, I will go away.

Of course go off topic again and then bail. Sign of a false and failing argument. Good riddance.

Okay, I'll stay - I was leaving so that you didn't have to defend your weak arguments

Tell me why the Kings aren't like the Sixers of two years ago? Other than the stupid vet contracts.

[benchmobbin02]

It was a very conservative approach where we saw both pros and cons as time went along.

Big picture: sitting at the All Star break not many rookies taken in the top 10 are playing as good as Fox. Bogdonavic won the MVP in rising star, Buddy Hield led the game in scoring and is showing potential to be an 18+ppg scorer, Jackson is improving as a role player, and Skal has been a disappointment.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app

That's fine - some make it some not so much. If you collect enough assets, draft well and have a coaching staff hell-bent on development, you are fine.

If you go the short-term route - not so much. And then the vets get disgruntled if they don't play and impart bad habits.

A team can have short term goals they want to achieve that are part of the long term plan. It's what we have done. Only the short sited, like I said, won't see the whole picture.

[benchmobbin02]

You are absolutely in the same boat as the Sixers of a couple of years ago. Wow. Okay, I will go away.

Of course go off topic again and then bail. Sign of a false and failing argument. Good riddance.

Okay, I'll stay - I was leaving so that you didn't have to defend your weak arguments

Tell me why the Kings aren't like the Sixers of two years ago? Other than the vet contracts.

I knew you were a liar

Well, the vet contracts are a large part of what we are discussing so that isn't excluded.

Also, market size, new ownership and arena, lack of top tier draft picks.

[dckingsfan]

Of course go off topic again and then bail. Sign of a false and failing argument. Good riddance.

Okay, I'll stay - I was leaving so that you didn't have to defend your weak arguments

Tell me why the Kings aren't like the Sixers of two years ago? Other than the vet contracts.

I knew you were a liar

Well, the vet contracts are a large part of what we are discussing so that isn't excluded.

Also, market size, new ownership and arena, lack of top tier draft picks.

Nope - same as Philly - are you intentionally lying?

[benchmobbin02]

Okay, I'll stay - I was leaving so that you didn't have to defend your weak arguments

Tell me why the Kings aren't like the Sixers of two years ago? Other than the vet contracts.

I knew you were a liar

Well, the vet contracts are a large part of what we are discussing so that isn't excluded.

Also, market size, new ownership and arena, lack of top tier draft picks.

Nope - same as Philly - are you intentionally lying?

None of the things I noted are "like Philly"?

You've shown your hand as a troll with no basis for your argument. You Only want to be "right" and get the last word. You have to resort to repeating what I've said, even when it makes no sense as a response from you.

We're done here.

[dckingsfan]

I knew you were a liar

Well, the vet contracts are a large part of what we are discussing so that isn't excluded.

Also, market size, new ownership and arena, lack of top tier draft picks.

Nope - same as Philly - are you intentionally lying?

None of the things I noted are "like Philly"?

You've shown your hand as a troll with no basis for your argument. You Only want to be "right" and get the last word. You have to resort to repeating what I've said, even when it makes no sense as a response from you.

We're done here.

Of course go off topic again and then bail. Sign of a false and failing argument. Good riddance.

[benchmobbin02]

It was a very conservative approach where we saw both pros and cons as time went along.

Big picture: sitting at the All Star break not many rookies taken in the top 10 are playing as good as Fox. Bogdonavic won the MVP in rising star, Buddy Hield led the game in scoring and is showing potential to be an 18+ppg scorer, Jackson is improving as a role player, and Skal has been a disappointment.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app

I think you're right. And looking at the big picture is the important part. This team is a pot of potential. Even calling Skal a disappointment is relative for a kid that is 21 has only played 70 or so games and was barely used enough or effectively in college. They need to be looking down the road 3-4 years with these guys. The Warriors didn't get to unit they have now or to the playoffs til the fourth year of their rebuild. And a lot of guys that started that journey didn't finish it.

[dckingsfan]

Yes, you will have lots of players that don't make it through the rebuild. That is why you want to collect assets and not aging NBA players. That is the road to continue to stay in the lottery.

Even picking up 2nd round draft picks is worthwhile. Having Shumpert or Randolph on your team just limits your flexibility. It is the basis of a bad plan.

Young players mostly improve by playing and listening to their coaches - not by watching old players play. And if you need an old vet on the bench - pay him the vet minimum.

I think the signings of Carter, Randolf and Hill set the rebuild back a year - but my opinion.

[SacKingZZZ]

Yes, you will have lots of players that don't make it through the rebuild. That is why you want to collect assets and not aging NBA players. That is the road to continue to stay in the lottery.

Even picking up 2nd round draft picks is worthwhile. Having Shumpert or Randolph on your team just limits your flexibility. It is the basis of a bad plan.

Young players mostly improve by playing and listening to their coaches - not by watching old players play. And if you need an old vet on the bench - pay him the vet minimum.

I think the signings of Carter, Randolf and Hill set the rebuild back a year - but my opinion.

I agree with the exception of Carter or if they fit your team like a glove. Drafting a top 5 PG then signing a 20 million dollar one was a mistake. I'm OK with picking up 1 year, low money experience, or even huge 1 year deals if that's what it takes, but signing players to 12-20 million dollar a year contracts even beyond what their value is to a contender for more than one year just hamstrings your cap, as it did with the Kings. Flexibility is just as important and acquiring assets. Playing them over young players is a coaching issue, not a GM one necessarily unless the GM created a false scenario to get them signed in the first place.

[dckingsfan]

Yes, you will have lots of players that don't make it through the rebuild. That is why you want to collect assets and not aging NBA players. That is the road to continue to stay in the lottery.

Even picking up 2nd round draft picks is worthwhile. Having Shumpert or Randolph on your team just limits your flexibility. It is the basis of a bad plan.

Young players mostly improve by playing and listening to their coaches - not by watching old players play. And if you need an old vet on the bench - pay him the vet minimum.

I think the signings of Carter, Randolf and Hill set the rebuild back a year - but my opinion.

I agree with the exception of Carter or if they fit your team like a glove. Drafting a top 5 PG then signing a 20 million dollar one was a mistake. I'm OK with picking up 1 year, low money experience, or even huge 1 year deals if that's what it takes, but signing players to 12-20 million dollar a year contracts even beyond what their value is to a contender for more than one year just hamstrings your cap, as it did with the Kings. Flexibility is just as important and acquiring assets. Playing them over young players is a coaching issue, not a GM one necessarily unless the GM created a false scenario to get them signed in the first place.

Can't disagree with any of that... I guess to add - it takes the pressure off the coach to play the youngsters if the vets aren't around.