Draft pick watch/Playoff race/Who the **** knows thread

SacKingZZZ · Post #1 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 7:20 am

Pick a direction! Any direction!

Draft pick watch:

As of right now we are firmly planted at the 12th spot in the lottery. yay...

Playoff race:

We are 2 games below .500! Wow...problem is the current 8th seed team (Golden State) is a jaw dropping 10 games above .500!!! Bigger wow (has the west ever been this tough!?). We have won 4 straight and 7 of the last ten.

We are facing a pretty easy schedule right now. Things get a bit tougher with 9 of our next 12 games on the road however. Very tough schedule as well with the perceivable exception of Seattle, Charlotte, and Miami. So, we'll see what that brings, which number will go up? Our draft selection or our win total? Time will tell.

If we can could we keep track of these numbers somewhere? Maybe this thread?

_SRV_ · Post #2 » by **_SRV_** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 10:52 am

The freaky thing is that out of the 5 teams we're up agianst Utah is 9-1, GS and Rockets are 7-3, Denver is 6-4, and Portland "sucks" at 5-5 in the last 10 games.
No one is slowing down, and top 8 teams are on 60% with Portland very close at 9, it's a crazy year in the western conference, the closest thing I remember is the year Memohis had 50 wins at 6th place in Nash's last year in Dallas.

Fola314 · Post #3 » by **Fola314** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 4:10 am

^I believe we were the 6th seed with 50 wins also, the year of the Webber trade, in which we faced Seattle in the first round.

Looking at the standings we are definitely in a bad spot. We are 6 games back of 8th seed, and 7 games ahead of the team below us in the West (LAC).

7. Den 28-18 -
8. GS 29-19 -
9. Por 27-19 1
10. Hou 27-20 1.5
11. Sac 22-24 6
12. LAC 14-30 13

As far as the lottery...
Ind 19-29
Chi 18-28
NJ 20-27
Atl 19-24
Sac 22-24
Was 24-22

SacKingZZZ · Post #4 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 6:19 am

Wow, pretty soon we may be out of the running for a top 8 pick.

Post #5 » by **pillwenney** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 7:36 am

I just came up with a really weird, crazy idea.

What if we didn't worry about clearing salary for the next couple years (until after Brad, Kenny and SAR expire), and therefore decide to trade Mike for another big contract with an extra year of salary--possibly for a really bad player. The easy example here would be Darius Miles in Portland. Now you're probably saying "what the hell is wrong with you Mitch?" Okay, my thinking is that if we do that, Portland is shaving off a year of salary plus getting a fine player at a position of need, which means, we can ask for pretty much whatever we want as filler besides Oden, Aldridge, and Roy. The problem we run into here is that they don't have a like a mid-level, good but not untradable prospect (like, say, a Tyrus Thomas) to give up, but I bet we'd be able to get their pick this year and our choice of two other prospects. I probably wouldn't do that specific trade, but I just wanted to throw the idea out there of doing a trade like that.

In fact I just found a better example--Bibby to the Clippers for Mobely/Williams and the right to swap picks, or something like that. I don't know, I'm just throwing ideas out there.

Another idea that could be interesting could be taking advantage of the fact that we know Jordan wants to win now. So a possibility could be trading Brad to Charlotte for necessary filler and what is currently the #8 pick. We could wait to do this in the summer though, when we can actually see where they'll pick will be.

Post #6 » by **KF10** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 7:41 am

mitch you are crazy...

Eh, you do bring up legitimate points. And at least these wacky ideas of yours are fresh.

SacKingZZZ · Post #7 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 8:04 am

Well I think the smart thing to do is wait on the guys we can wait on, like Bibby and Miller. Artest we can't, if he's here by the deadline we get nothing but the 7 million or so off the books which doesn't help anytime soon. Bibby should be dangled on draft night.

OGSactownballer · Post #8 » by **OGSactownballer** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 7:11 am

_SRV_ wrote:The freaky thing is that out of the 5 teams we're up agianst Utah is 9-1, GS and Rockets are 7-3, Denver is 6-4, and Portland "sucks" at 5-5 in the last 10 games.
No one is slowing down, and top 8 teams are on 60% with Portland very close at 9, it's a crazy year in the western conference, the closest thing I remember is the year Memohis had 50 wins at 6th place in Nash's last year in Dallas.

Keep one thing in mind here. So far this year besides GS not having Jackson to start the season (which immediately changed their team when he came back), Houston is the only team ahead of us in the standings that has had a serious injury issue to deal with to this point in the season.

To emphasize and illustrate my point, the Spurs just lost Tony Parker - a key player - and they immediately dropped two of three and freaked and signed Stoudamire off waivers. Any and all of these teams are one key injury away from being average - just like we were before our top three players all came back.

It"s a long season, and these eight teams are NOT going to all win 60 games - they CAN'T. Don't forget that in the second half of the season they will all start playing each other for conference position and start beating each other up pretty good.

Post #9 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 7:54 am

OGSactownballer wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Keep one thing in mind here. So far this year besides GS not having Jackson to start the season (which immediately changed their team when he came back), Houston is the only team ahead of us in the standings that has had a serious injury issue to deal with to this point in the season.

To emphasize and illustrate my point, the Spurs just lost Tony Parker - a key player - and they immediately dropped two of three and freaked and signed Stoudamire off waivers. Any and all of these teams are one key injury away from being average - just like we were before our top three players all came back.

It"s a long season, and these eight teams are NOT going to all win 60 games - they CAN'T. Don't forget that in the second half of the season they will all start playing each other for conference position and start beating each other up pretty good.

No, but it's still not a stretch to think that they might all win 50 games, and that's still a nearly impossible total to reach.

Regardless, I think Petrie will wait until the deadline to decide what to do. If one of them (well, actually it would need to be 2 of them) come down with a serious injury before the deadline, we don't have any more serious injuries, and we find a way to play well consistently (which we haven't done yet--even when winning 7 of our last 10, we played like crap against Chicago and Seattle), then I could see him justifying keeping this team together as is.

_SRV_ · Post #10 » by **_SRV_** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 9:52 am

OK Kings are still 11th in the west, 4.5 behind 10th seed (Portland).
Kings have the 12th pick currently, 3.5 games ahead of 11th pick (Chicago)

yunggunz · Post #11 » by **yunggunz** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 1:25 pm

OGSactownballer wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Keep one thing in mind here. So far this year besides GS not having Jackson to start the season (which immediately changed their team when he came back), Houston is the only team ahead of us in the standings that has had a serious injury issue to deal with to this point in the season.

To emphasize and illustrate my point, the Spurs just lost Tony Parker - a key player - and they immediately dropped two of three and freaked and signed Stoudamire off waivers. Any and all of these teams are one key injury away from being average - just like we were before our top three players all came back.

It"s a long season, and these eight teams are NOT going to all win 60 games - they CAN'T. Don't forget that in the second half of the season they will all start playing each other for conference position and start beating each other up pretty good.

I think the Nuggets are near the top in player games missed due to injury (for like the 4th year running). They have missed melo, camby and najera for several games each, nene and atkins (starters) for practically the entire season, and hunter for a large chunk of it.

Smills91 · Post #12 » by **Smills91** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 2:08 pm

yunggunz wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I think the Nuggets are near the top in player games missed due to injury (for like the 4th year running). They have missed melo, camby and najera for several games each, nene and atkins (starters) for practically the entire season, and hunter for a large chunk of it.

There's no conceiveable way you surpass the Kings Bibby 37 games, Martin 17 games, Artest 14 games, SAR 42+ games. There's just no way.

Monsters Inc. · Post #13 » by **Monsters Inc.** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 3:58 pm

yunggunz wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I think the Nuggets are near the top in player games missed due to injury (for like the 4th year running). They have missed melo, camby and najera for several games each, nene and atkins (starters) for practically the entire season, and hunter for a large chunk of it.

Well I have Camby on my fantasy team and he's only missed like 1 or 2 games before this 2 game stretch he's on right now (due to his knee). So Camby doesn't really count.

The Kings at full strength the entire season I think would put them right up there with Portland fighting for that 8th seed. Theus has gone beyond expectations. He's really a very good coach. The team is looking good and they are one of the most effective teams coming out of a timeout.

yunggunz · Post #14 » by **yunggunz** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 4:26 pm

Smills91 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

There's no conceiveable way you surpass the Kings Bibby 37 games, Martin 17 games, Artest 14 games, SAR 42+ games. There's just no way.

Nuggets are at 114 for player-games missed due to injury. Kings have been beat up too. Both sides have been devastated by injuries.

SacKingZZZ · Post #15 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Wed Feb 6, 2008 6:30 am

_SRV_ wrote:OK Kings are still 11th in the west, 4.5 behind 10th seed (Portland).
Kings have the 12th pick currently, 3.5 games ahead of 11th pick (Chicago)

Isn't that crazy! Damn, the west is tough this year. Almost 5 games behind a 10 seed and we are almost at .500.

_SRV_ · Post #16 » by **_SRV_** » Thu Feb 7, 2008 9:32 am

Oh dear god we suck! We lose against freaking Seattle in Arco, and Portland wins over Chicago which keeps us at same distance for Chicago but get us 1 more game away from Portland.
Oh yeah, and 4 losses, 4 F'ing losses, is what separates the 1st and the 8th seed in the west.

Smills91 · Post #17 » by **Smills91** » Thu Feb 7, 2008 1:02 pm

yunggunz wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Nuggets are at 114 for player-games missed due to injury. Kings have been beat up too. Both sides have been devastated by injuries.

I'm just counting games the STARTERS have missed. Are you telling me the Nuggets have lost 100+ games amonst the STARTERS? Brad Miller missed last night, notch up another starter gone for the Kings.

SacKingZZZ · Post #18 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:02 am

Well, as of Feb. 12 we sit at 23 wins and 27 losses.

The 8th seed battle consists of 2 teams 11 games over .500. So if they were to maintain their pace to win that number 8 you would need 47 wins and about 35 losses. I'd say it is highly likely that the old 45 win total might be the bottom end of hope this year for that 8th seed.

The loss column is what we need to look at now. At 27 that might mean as little as 8 more losses and we are out, and most certainly at 10 more we are gone for sure. We have to win somewhere in the neighborhood of about 70% of our remaining games to have a real shot. That is not good.

But... the battle to not make our pick worse than it is, is raging on! We are pretty solid in that 12th spot right now. Eh, not too unhappy because that might make Petrie take a PF (and there may be quite a few good ones in this range and lower!), we need another 1st to make it easier to swallow for me though.

Post #19 » by **pillwenney** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:06 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:Well, as of Feb. 12 we sit at 23 wins and 27 losses.

The 8th seed battle consists of 2 teams 11 games over .500. So if they were to maintain their pace to win that number 8 you would need 47 wins and about 35 losses. I'd say it is highly likely that the old 45 win total might be the bottom end of hope this year for that 8th seed.

The loss column is what we need to look at now. At 27 that might mean as little as 8 more losses and we are out, and most certainly at 10 more we are gone for sure. We have to win somewhere in the neighborhood of about 70% of our remaining games to have a real shot. That is not good.

But... the battle to not make our pick worse than it is, is raging on! We are pretty solid in that 12th spot right now. Eh, not too unhappy because that might make Petrie take a PF (and there may be quite a few good ones in this range and lower!), we need another 1st to make it easier to swallow for me though.

This is what I was saying in the other thread. Assuming that our chances at Beasley and Rose are shot (they are), and assuming that we consider Mayo more of a SG (I do), then the only player at a position of need for us (thinking specifically PG or PF) that we'd probably miss out on by staying put would be Bayless, according to current mocks.

_SRV_ · Post #20 » by **_SRV_** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:57 am

This is sad, we may not make the POs, but I would've loved for us to finish above the 50% mark (Seattle and Memphis would've put us there), just for the moral victory in it.
The most likely scenario is Kings at the 12th or 13th pick, we won't outsuck eastern conference non-PO teams, and if Portland falls we may replace them, other than that, just the a big run the unpredictable clips might improve our lottery position.