Is Petrie's Time Up?

Post #1 » by **ICMTM** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 3:52 pm

I'm just asking. We've been through four coaches in the last four seasons. Our roster has not improved, but there has been the feeling out there for a while that our roster needed more attention to fixing than our coaching situation.

Do you feel Petrie is able to get it done? Is he being handcuffed by the owners or has he gone inept?

Post #2 » by **KingInExile** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:40 pm

ICMTM wrote:I'm just asking. We've been through four coaches in the last four seasons. Our roster has not improved, but there has been the feeling out there for a while that our roster needed more attention to fixing than our coaching situation.

Do you feel Petrie is able to get it done? Is he being handcuffed by the owners or has he gone inept?

The Maloofs were the ones leading on coaching decisions going back to not renewing Adelman's contract. They were the ones sold on Musselman's Power Point presentation, they were the ones who decided that Theus was their guy (before throwing him under the bus a year and a half later). They have also been the ones who wanted the team to compete the last couple of years instead of start rebuilding. There have been enough instances of them micromanaging (to the detriment of the organization) to not point the finger of blame directly at them.

Sure, Petrie has done some things that have not been all that helpful or productive. But when you have to work in a crappy situation, you're going to end up smelling pretty bad without trying.

darkadun · Post #3 » by **darkadun** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:07 pm

I don't think Petrie's time is up, and it would be foolish to get rid of him IMO. Who would take up the reins of GM that would be a improvement?

Petrie is patient and that is what I like about him. Sure, he has made some mistakes and perhaps didn't start rebuilding as soon as he probably should have. But he doesn't make rash choices and do a trade that would destroy the franchise. He looks at the big picture & long term.

Being a NBA GM is not a easy task with so many variables going into each decision. I don't envy that job.

cdt3 · Post #4 » by **cdt3** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:22 pm

It would be a huge mistake to get rid of Petrie. Do you think some rookie GM is going to come out of nowhere and lead us to the promised land and trade KT and Brad for Bosh? It is just not happening. Is it Petrie's fault the Maloofs have made Martin untouchable because he is cheap the Kings most tradable asset? When the same thing happened when they took over the franchise they traded the old star SG for a young PF named CWebb. Now they are making the same trade impossible for Petrie.
You have seen how long it takes to replace a great coach and great players now you want to add to it replacing a great GM?

kevin44 · Post #5 » by **kevin44** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:58 pm

Since we are the worse team in the NBA, yes his time is up. 4 coaches in 4 years is bad, but if we had some talent it wouldn't matter who coached.

RIPskaterdude · Post #6 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:18 pm

With the salary cap getting lower and 2010 looking more and more unrealistic, yes, I think Petrie's time might be up soon. However, I think in respect, the Maloofs might throw out a "retirement" package and let him leave peacefully. If we don't make any more trades this season and somehow, don't end up with a top 3 pick....

KM44 · Post #7 » by **KM44** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:08 pm

Ya, this is bad news bears. I wouldn't say it's completely his fault, but we still suck and he's in charge, so...

I think if he can swing a trade for expirings for miller and we sign Marvin Williams and get a PG in the draft, his job could be saved. If not...

RIPskaterdude · Post #8 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:14 pm

Petrie used to be one of the best, but there's no doubt he's FAR below superior talents such as Sam Presti (damn, OKC is going to be GOOD now).

rpa · Post #9 » by **rpa** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:28 pm

kevin44 wrote:Since we are the worse team in the NBA, yes his time is up. 4 coaches in 4 years is bad, but if we had some talent it wouldn't matter who coached.

The Spurs were 1 of the worst teams in the NBA some years ago too; guess they shoulda fired their entire front office as well huh? The Celtics were pretty atrocious during Ainge's first couple years; they shoulda fired him too, huh?

When the owners:
a) Refuse to rebuild
AND
b) Refuse to go into the tax

Then the GM's hands are pretty much tied. We've drafted some very good players in the past few years but the Maloofs have pretty much forced Petrie to try and compete but also forced him to stay under the tax. So on 1 hand you get "sign Shareef/Mikki Moore to help us win" and then on the other hand you get "but we won't pay the tax so dump Mike Bibby for expiring contracts". The Maloofs' problem is that they got in at the top and think that the Kings got there BECAUSE of them. Now, these idiots think they have the Midas touch and should be running the team.

I wouldn't call guys like Presti superior talents; what exactly has he done? He shed payroll to rebuild (as the Maloofs should have let Petrie do) and then took advantage of it in the form of draft picks and money trades. Take away Durant (a luck of the draw pick) and the Thunder are probably in a worse hole than the Kings are right now.

Petrie has a track record of good results, do people just think that he forgot how to be a good GM or something? Wrong; the Kings' coaching situation should tell you ALL that you need to know about why the Kings are as bad as they are now: because we have horrible ownership (yes, I said it, the Maloofs are horrible owners).

Post #10 » by **KF10** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:31 pm

I'm still in favor for Petrie all the way. I agree with mentioned reasons above. The only things I was against was the Bibby trade. (And looking back in hindsight, several MLEs signings were questionable)

cdt3 · Post #11 » by **cdt3** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:34 pm

We will never reach the level Petrie made. The Maloofs forced the Adelman firing and Petrie letting go of Bibby and we have not recovered from the loss of his clutchness. Petrie lays out deals but the Maloofs make the last call and the have the money or don't have the money for deals right now. The Maloofs were the idiots that thought they could replace Adelman with anyone and win. The Maloofs thought they could trade a hall of fame level PG in Bibby and just replce him like that. We had the perfect storm for success, the perfect owners hired the perfect GM who hired the perfect coach and perfect guard/player combo. Now the Maloofs they think they are the geniuses who were the GMs, but they weren't GMs.

GM's build their teams around their coaches style for their teams to be successful. And yes the multiple coaches do make a difference because Beno and Mikki and Artest sent packing was for Theus' run and gun system. And Bibby was sent packing for Musselman's system. The only mistake Petrie has made was Shareef who didn't work out but was a good gamble for a 18/8 guy. Petrie has rebuilt us for the Princeton again and we are a lottery PG away from success. If you trade him in the middle of rebuilding it will set us back years.

The Tyson Chandler trade sounds like a Maloof trade. A guy who puts up 8/8/1.5blocks in 30 minutes a night for $11.5 million a year, when Shelden could put up 12/8/1 in 30 minutes for $3.3 million.The Maloofs are all about Hype and underachieving players not about talent. I wondered why Petrie would bring in Mikki Moore who is totally against what he stands for no hype and all overachieving at the same time he brought in Shelden a quiet overachiever. I would take a guy like Shelden who doesn't get pushed around over a scrub like (8/8) Chandler or (4/4) Moore who get pushed around by the wind. Expect the Kings to draft Griffen when we have invested in our last 4 other #1 or trades for bigs. The Detroit Lions picked the biggest and prettiest WR or QB every year for 5 years with Matt Millen when they had no line to protect them or defense to put their offense on the field. The Lions franshise have never recovered from their obsession with athletic WRs and 40 times. The Maloofs are the one who aren't letting Shelden play since he is not fancy enough. I have lost total respect for this franchise now that the Maloofs have given in to the hype machine. This is the direction the Kings are headed for without the long term vision of Petrie who balances the Maloofs short term vision. It would be bigger than Bibbylike trade-Adelman firing level franchise ruining mistake.

rpa · Post #12 » by **rpa** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:34 pm

kingsfan10 wrote:I'm still in favor for Petrie all the way. I agree with mentioned reasons above. The only things I was against was the Bibby trade. (And looking back in hindsight, several MLEs signings were questionable)

But like I said, those moves were almost certainly done at the urging of the Maloofs. Because:
a) Keeping Bibby would have put us into the luxury tax this year (and they refuse to pay that)--plus he'd played like complete ass for the past year and a half.
b) They wanted to try and compete (even if the team was going nowhere).

I HIGHLY doubt that Petrie signs Shareef or Moore if the Maloofs had given him the green light to rebuild. He knows that getting under the cap is a KEY in rebuilding (that's how we got Vlade--a catalyst in our last rebuilding effort).

Post #13 » by **Wolfay** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:39 pm

You just don't give up on a two-time exec of the year. I don't understand some of you.

rpa · Post #14 » by **rpa** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:42 pm

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:With the salary cap getting lower and 2010 looking more and more unrealistic

I think that a lower 2010 cap actually helps the Kings because then other teams have less money to spend on free agents and thus the free agents will be more dispersed. Or, consider that the Kings could also be the conduit by why another team makes cap space--with the Kings receiving a very attractive sweetener in the process.

RIPskaterdude · Post #15 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:45 pm

Wolfay wrote:You just don't give up on a two-time exec of the year. I don't understand some of you.

Sam Mitchell was COY in 2007....and he is working, where, now?

Post #16 » by **KF10** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:46 pm

rpa wrote:
The Spurs were 1 of the worst teams in the NBA some years ago too; guess they shoulda fired their entire front office as well huh? The Celtics were pretty atrocious during Ainge's first couple years; they shoulda fired him too, huh?

When the owners:
a) Refuse to rebuild
AND
b) Refuse to go into the tax

Then the GM's hands are pretty much tied. We've drafted some very good players in the past few years but the Maloofs have pretty much forced Petrie to try and compete but also forced him to stay under the tax. So on 1 hand you get "sign Shareef/Mikki Moore to help us win" and then on the other hand you get "but we won't pay the tax so dump Mike Bibby for expiring contracts". The Maloofs' problem is that they got in at the top and think that the Kings got there BECAUSE of them. Now, these idiots think they have the Midas touch and should be running the team.

I wouldn't call guys like Presti superior talents; what exactly has he done? He shed payroll to rebuild (as the Maloofs should have let Petrie do) and then took advantage of it in the form of draft picks and money trades. Take away Durant (a luck of the draw pick) and the Thunder are probably in a worse hole than the Kings are right now.

Petrie has a track record of good results, do people just think that he forgot how to be a good GM or something? Wrong; the Kings' coaching situation should tell you ALL that you need to know about why the Kings are as bad as they are now: because we have horrible ownership (yes, I said it, the Maloofs are horrible owners).

I agree everything what you said. But I don't think the Maloofs are horrible owners. Yes, they are putting Petrie in a tough place but isn't like they had total control over him. Over the past, the Maloofs just PRAISED Petrie to the extent that they were *** kissing him. The Maloofs has a winning mentality. Look at our success early in the decade. They hate to lose and they hate to lose money too.

If they were horrible, they would have moved the hell out of Sacramento.

Post #17 » by **KF10** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:48 pm

rpa wrote:
But like I said, those moves were almost certainly done at the urging of the Maloofs. Because:
a) Keeping Bibby would have put us into the luxury tax this year (and they refuse to pay that)--plus he'd played like complete ass for the past year and a half.
b) They wanted to try and compete (even if the team was going nowhere).

I HIGHLY doubt that Petrie signs Shareef or Moore if the Maloofs had given him the green light to rebuild. He knows that getting under the cap is a KEY in rebuilding (that's how we got Vlade--a catalyst in our last rebuilding effort).

Fair enough. That makes sense I guess.

rpa · Post #18 » by **rpa** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:55 pm

kingsfan10 wrote:I agree everything what you said. But I don't think the Maloofs are horrible owners. Yes, they are putting Petrie in a tough place but isn't like they had total control over him. Over the past, the Maloofs just PRAISED Petrie to the extent that they were *** kissing him. The Maloofs has a winning mentality. Look at our success early in the decade. They hate to lose and they hate to lose money too.

If they were horrible, they would have moved the hell out of Sacramento.

They're horrible owners because they refuse to get out of the way of the people that they hired to do the job. IMO micromanaging is 1 of the top signs of a horrible owner/chief/manager. Hire people that know what they are doing and then get the **** outta their way.

Post #19 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:27 pm

rpa and KIE are completely right. The struggles of this team can be linked very clearly to the Maloofs' micromanagement.

But even with that, we're in a decent position. We've got good young talent, the potential to add more this year, and even if we don't get a big FA in 2010, having those big expirings lined up before that, and just having the cap space after that are both very nice situations to be in.

And you especially don't get rid of Geoff because, with everything else, he still pretty clearly has an outstanding eye for young talent. Every year, no matter the pick, we're able to say "well, even if it seems weird, it's Geoff, so it'll probably turn out better than anyone expected". Do you guys realize how lucky we are to have a GM where you can say that? I mean that is extremely rare.

Post #20 » by **Wolfay** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:03 pm

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:
Wolfay wrote:You just don't give up on a two-time exec of the year. I don't understand some of you.

Sam Mitchell was COY in 2007....and he is working, where, now?

How the hell can you even compare that with what Petrie has done? Again, I don't understand some of you.