The future thread

[KM44]

Well I didn't really understand your first paragraph because I didn't want to read the whole thing, but basically you are saying bibby wasn't good enough to win and the kings weren't good enough to win. That is wrong and you are wrong- straight up. We had the talent, the coaching, the point guard to do it.

Second paragraph: that is beno on paper. When we signed him, that's what he was. This year, he has still played solid defense (meaning he can stay in front of his man and get around screens, not a playmaker), he can make passes and he isn't a top option at all.

The current great teams all have solid pg's, but I would be that every one of those teams would take nash over any of them. So what this comes down to is that you think his ceiling is arenas, I think it's nash.

Curry is in only his first year of being a PG and he's averaging like 6-7 assists per game on a mediocre team. The guy can play ball, and given the right opportunity, he can do great things.

[pillwenney]

If we drafted Thabeet (who I really don't like, but if Petrie believes he will become a premiere player then okay), then maybe Curry will be nice.

But overall, I want my big (ala Duncan, Garnett, Amare, Dwight, Yao, etc.) having the ball at the end not my guard (Ellis, Arenas, AI, Bibby, Johnson, etc.)

Almost no teams work like that. Some teams may design a play to get a big the shot, but that's pretty much it--especially if you have a big that isn't a great free thrown shooter. Hedo is really the main option down the stretch in Orlando. And of course Kobe was when Shaq was with the Lakers.

Right, and how many teams win titles?

Unless you have a team full of allstars at every position ('04 Pistons), or a superstar top 5 player (Jordan, Kobe, Wade), you will need to give the ball to your big in order to win.

Most teams aren't like that. But most teams win nothing.

Okay, most successful teams also aren't like that. Pierce got it as often as KG in Boston. Wade in Miami. It's relatively even in San Antonio. In Detroit it was most often Chauncey.

You do need a strong post option to be a successful team, but how many game-winning shots come from the post? Almost none.

[SacKingZZZ]

Again, this is under the idea that we drafted Griffin or bring in a premier big.

Who cares what our style is right now, you mold your style around your franchise player.

Would you really turn down Duncan cause he doesn't fit our style compared to a player like Amare of West?

Geoff Petrie does and part of our problems is that he repeatedly drafts players that fit into a certain mold and they proceed to be coached improperly.

[deNIEd]

Mitch -

Right, the game winning shot doesn't have to come from the post, but the game winning play comes from the post. Wade and Kobe were open cause Shaq is in the paint. Ray Allen and Pierce didn't get the double every time because KG was near the basket. Parker and Manu / (the millions of three pointers from random players) exist because everyone thinks the ball is going to Duncan, if they collapse he kicks. Orlando has a bazillion threes because of Dwight. You design the play for the big (like you said) not for your guard.

KM44 - If we were good enough we would have won. We didn't make free throws and couldn't rebound. End of story.

On paper or off paper, there isn't a single person alive that thinks Beno is a great defensive player. Rondo is a good defender. Kidd is a good defender. Harris is a good defender. Westbrook will be a great defender. Billups is a good defender. Beno is nothing.

Curry and Nash are nothing alike, so I really don't know where you get that comparison. Again, what has Nash won? What has Bibby won?

[Nicky Nix Nook]

Okay, most successful teams also aren't like that. Pierce got it as often as KG in Boston. Wade in Miami. It's relatively even in San Antonio. In Detroit it was most often Chauncey.

You do need a strong post option to be a successful team, but how many game-winning shots come from the post? Almost none.

+1 Does that mean you are for Curry over Holiday?

Denied- this basically comes down to philosophies. If you believe that building a better version of our old team plus a little more luck will get us a championship then Curry is the best option. If you believe we can perfect a Spurs type style of play then Holiday is probably a better fit.

Also as far as the need for a good/great post player to be elite, my idea involved us getting Curry AND Griffin.

ANYWAY lets just substitute my future lineup with a Curry?/Holiday? and discuss my scenario. I am more interested in that than a Curry vs. Holiday comparison.

[pillwenney]

Mitch -

Right, the game winning shot doesn't have to come from the post, but the game winning play comes from the post. Wade and Kobe were open cause Shaq is in the paint. Ray Allen and Pierce didn't get the double every time because KG was near the basket. Parker and Manu / (the millions of three pointers from random players) exist because everyone thinks the ball is going to Duncan, if they collapse he kicks. Orlando has a bazillion threes because of Dwight. You design the play for the big (like you said) not for your guard.

That just isn't true. Shaq wasn't in half the time at the end of games because of his free throw liability.

And anybody that knows how basketball at the end of games works knows that it rarely comes from post play. Penetration is far, far more common.

Regardless, if it's just about having a threat in the post, I'd say Spencer is well on his way to potentially being that kind of player.

[deNIEd]

I believe that a pick and pop team isn't ideal and you really shouldn't mold yourself after that style. Petrie did the best he could w/ the given pieces at the time, which turned out being not good enough. Since we are starting over, we shouldn't immediately go back to what we once were, simply cause we were once that. If we have a choice, I'd take Pistons/Spurs style 1000/1000 times over '02 Kings/Suns/Mavs.

Your idea involving (PG)/Griffin, is one that I think most of us have. (Which is what brought up my point, Holiday fits w/ Martin/Griffin soo much better than Curry).

(Holiday/Jennings/Curry/Teague/Mills)/Martin/____/Griffin/Hawes
is the dream I think for all of us (except for sackingzz who wants odom )

[pillwenney]

I believe that a pick and pop team isn't ideal and you really shouldn't mold yourself after that style. Petrie did the best he could w/ the given pieces at the time, which turned out being not good enough. Since we are starting over, we shouldn't immediately go back to what we once were, simply cause we were once that. If we have a choice, I'd take Pistons/Spurs style 1000/1000 times over '02 Kings/Suns/Mavs.

Your idea involving (PG)/Griffin, is one that I think most of us have. (Which is what brought up my point, Holiday fits w/ Martin/Griffin soo much better than Curry).

(Holiday/Jennings/Curry/Teague/Mills)/Martin/____/Griffin/Hawes
is the dream I think for all of us (except for sackingzz who wants odom )

Woah--not comparable. At least not except for the Mavs of recent years. But regardless, Dallas lost in 06 because they were a team based around iso's and Haslem did an outstanding job on Dirk (and they could do nothing defensively against Wade). Phoenix lost because they couldn't really guard anybody effectively. The Kings didn't lose for any pure basketball reasons. They ultimately lost because they were mentally weak.

[Nicky Nix Nook]

what about my scenario of having (just for your sake because I still like Curry) Holiday/Martin/Odom/Griffin Hawes

everyone gets what they want. turn Miller and Salmons into pure expiring/picks and free up enough space to sign Odom. (best FA in 09 IMO)

I used to like Millsap but I believe we can get DeJuan Blair who is a clone of him but with a higher ceiling IMO and WAY cheaper. And with Boozer probably bouncing Utah will probably want to hold onto Paul.

[deNIEd]

Dallas I meant earlier, when they were trying to clone us.

But I believe that the mentality comes partly from the style we play. Our style relied on outside shots and finesse not brute strength. I think it's a lot more satisfying and boost in confidence when you get a great slam dunk in front of someone's face, opposed to shooting a three over someone. When you look at the teams that are strong mentally, there is a trend among style of play/defense and their mental toughness. When you play a steady slow game, you're less prone to giant mood swings compared to fast run and gun pick and pop styles.

*Although I'm glad, that someone else has stopped blaming the ref's and our bad luck for not winning. Yes, it was a huge factor, but if we made our free throws we would have won. End of story. No need to live in the past. Build a new team, and build a new contender*


For FA, I would wait 1 year until 2010, and attempt to sign JJ/Gay.

Go w/
Holiday/Martin/Garcia/Griffin/Hawes
Udrih/_______/Greene/Thompson/___
lineup for 1 year, and fill in needs after that.

[Nicky Nix Nook]

I believe that a pick and pop team isn't ideal and you really shouldn't mold yourself after that style. Petrie did the best he could w/ the given pieces at the time, which turned out being not good enough. Since we are starting over, we shouldn't immediately go back to what we once were, simply cause we were once that. If we have a choice, I'd take Pistons/Spurs style 1000/1000 times over '02 Kings/Suns/Mavs.

Your idea involving (PG)/Griffin, is one that I think most of us have. (Which is what brought up my point, Holiday fits w/ Martin/Griffin soo much better than Curry).

(Holiday/Jennings/Curry/Teague/Mills)/Martin/____/Griffin/Hawes
is the dream I think for all of us (except for sackingzz who wants odom )

Woah--not comparable. At least not except for the Mavs of recent years. But regardless, Dallas lost in 06 because they were a team based around iso's and Haslem did an outstanding job on Dirk (and they could do nothing defensively against Wade). Phoenix lost because they couldn't really guard anybody effectively. The Kings didn't lose for any pure basketball reasons. They ultimately lost because they were mentally weak.

Honestly I don't care if I sound like a cry baby "homer" but here's the facts:
Donaghy came out and said Laker/Kings series was rigged. I believe him for a lot of reasons.
Samake Walker's half court shot should not have counted, therefore Kings win. That's a fact. Kings would have smashed the Nets in the Finals and that's really the only thing that is up for question IMO because yes, we dont ACTUALLY KNOW that we would have beat the Nets but it would have been a great bet. In other years, Webber (1st or 2nd best player) going down plays a HUGE role in losing as well. That's why I think with a little better LUCK we could have the same style of team and win a championship. Don't forget that we were the best (if not top 3) defense in the leauge in 02-03.

[pillwenney]

Dallas I meant earlier, when they were trying to clone us.

But I believe that the mentality comes partly from the style we play. Our style relied on outside shots and finesse not brute strength. I think it's a lot more satisfying and boost in confidence when you get a great slam dunk in front of someone's face, opposed to shooting a three over someone. When you look at the teams that are strong mentally, there is a trend among style of play/defense and their mental toughness. When you play a steady slow game, you're less prone to giant mood swings compared to fast run and gun pick and pop styles.

*Although I'm glad, that someone else has stopped blaming the ref's and our bad luck for not winning. Yes, it was a huge factor, but if we made our free throws we would have won. End of story. No need to live in the past. Build a new team, and build a new contender*


For FA, I would wait 1 year until 2010, and attempt to sign JJ/Gay.

Go w/
Holiday/Martin/Garcia/Griffin/Hawes
Udrih/_______/Greene/Thompson/___
lineup for 1 year, and fill in needs after that.

I think it's true that there is a correlation there, although the dunking thing is silly (how many dunks do the Spurs get per game). But I don't think it is necessarily definitely going to end up that way. Like I don't think that because a certain way of playing can lead to a certain mentality that it definitely will. Especially since I genuinely believe that that team would have won the title next year had Chris been healthy.

And perhaps most importantly, I think we have to adapt this attitude to a certain extent, since it's most certainly how Geoff sees things, and not totally without merit.

[Nicky Nix Nook]

I believe that a pick and pop team isn't ideal and you really shouldn't mold yourself after that style. Petrie did the best he could w/ the given pieces at the time, which turned out being not good enough. Since we are starting over, we shouldn't immediately go back to what we once were, simply cause we were once that. If we have a choice, I'd take Pistons/Spurs style 1000/1000 times over '02 Kings/Suns/Mavs.

Your idea involving (PG)/Griffin, is one that I think most of us have. (Which is what brought up my point, Holiday fits w/ Martin/Griffin soo much better than Curry).

(Holiday/Jennings/Curry/Teague/Mills)/Martin/____/Griffin/Hawes
is the dream I think for all of us (except for sackingzz who wants odom )

Woah--not comparable. At least not except for the Mavs of recent years. But regardless, Dallas lost in 06 because they were a team based around iso's and Haslem did an outstanding job on Dirk (and they could do nothing defensively against Wade). Phoenix lost because they couldn't really guard anybody effectively. The Kings didn't lose for any pure basketball reasons. They ultimately lost because they were mentally weak.

Honestly I don't care if I sound like a cry baby "homer" but here's the facts:
Donaghy came out and said Laker/Kings series was rigged. I believe him for a lot of reasons.
Samake Walker's half court shot should not have counted, therefore Kings win. That's a fact. Kings would have smashed the Nets in the Finals and that's really the only thing that is up for question IMO because yes, we dont ACTUALLY KNOW that we would have beat the Nets but it would have been a great bet. In other years, Webber (1st or 2nd best player) going down plays a HUGE role in losing as well. That's why I think with a little better LUCK we could have the same style of team and win a championship. Don't forget that we were the best (if not top 3) defense in the leauge in 02-03.

Honestly though, I REALLY don't want to debate this topic especially considering this is the FUTURE thread not the PAST. So moving on...

[pillwenney]

Honestly I don't care if I sound like a cry baby "homer" but here's the facts:
Donaghy came out and said Laker/Kings series was rigged. I believe him for a lot of reasons.
Samake Walker's half court shot should not have counted, therefore Kings win. That's a fact. Kings would have smashed the Nets in the Finals and that's really the only thing that is up for question IMO because yes, we dont ACTUALLY KNOW that we would have beat the Nets but it would have been a great bet. In other years, Webber (1st or 2nd best player) going down plays a HUGE role in losing as well. That's why I think with a little better LUCK we could have the same style of team and win a championship. Don't forget that we were the best (if not top 3) defense in the leauge in 02-03.

Really? Because of Walker's shot? A) Donaghy never even mentioned that in his allegations. and B) That was at the end of half time.

[KM44]

^True that. Well so far I have come to a couple of conclusions.

I would like to trade some of our assets for another top 10 pick this year

Those picks should be a PF and a PG.

I think that I might actually want Lamar Odom on the kings! He would be the papa leading the younger guys and he would be an ideal mentor for a guy like greene

This is my dream team by the start of 2009:

Curry/Holiday/Teague-Udrih
Martin-Garcia
Odom-Greene
Griffin-(I don't know the draft well enough to see who we could get with either a late first or early 2nd)
Hawes-(but that pick would go here)

We get griffin with the #1 pick (huge assumption). We trade miller and salmons for another couple of firsts and expirings. We pair those expirings with thompson and get into top 10 (grizzlies). We take a PG with that pick. Then we sign Odom. That's a playoff team next year, contender for the next 5.

[Nicky Nix Nook]

That's a contender for more than 5 year IMO.

Also Im assuming you agree with my future plan?

[Nicky Nix Nook]

Honestly I don't care if I sound like a cry baby "homer" but here's the facts:
Donaghy came out and said Laker/Kings series was rigged. I believe him for a lot of reasons.
Samake Walker's half court shot should not have counted, therefore Kings win. That's a fact. Kings would have smashed the Nets in the Finals and that's really the only thing that is up for question IMO because yes, we dont ACTUALLY KNOW that we would have beat the Nets but it would have been a great bet. In other years, Webber (1st or 2nd best player) going down plays a HUGE role in losing as well. That's why I think with a little better LUCK we could have the same style of team and win a championship. Don't forget that we were the best (if not top 3) defense in the leauge in 02-03.

Really? Because of Walker's shot? A) Donaghy never even mentioned that in his allegations. and B) That was at the end of half time.

This is the last Ill talk about this topic just because it really doesn't interest me anymore BUT

I could have SWORN that Donaghy specifically used Kings/Lakers as an example of rigged games. Regardless, if games are/were rigged than Kings/Lakers was undoubtedly rigged. The NBA is a business first, and a basketball league second and I believe that games are rigged but I dont know to what extent.
Walker's shot adds 3 to the final score. We lost by 1. I highly doubt that if his shot did not count that it would have changed the future events and Lakers still would have won (but that is an ENTIRELY different philosophical debate)

[SacKingZZZ]

He implied there was a certain series that year that was indeed tampered with so to speak. His description actually narrowed it down to one possibility and that was the Lakers/Kings series since it was the ONLY one that fit that description.

[Nicky Nix Nook]

2 Ideas:

This is similar to another idea posted:

If we land the 1st or 2nd pick and we're ahead of OKC in the draft, we draft Griffin and trade him for Green and OKC's pick. Then at 5-7 range we take Curry (PERFECT for the Kings IMO). Then with our Hou pick we draft Dejuan Blair. Then we are left with a core that looks like this.

Curry/Udih
Martin/Garcia
Green/Salmons?/Greene
Thompson/Blair
Hawes/Blair

That is a championship contending team in 3-4 years.

OR

Trade Salmons to Tor for Parker and a first. Trade Miller/Moore to Mia for Marion.
We draft Griffin then trade Thompson and either Tor 1st or Hou 1st to Memphis for a 5-8 pick where we draft Curry. With the money we saved by trading Salmons and Miller we Sign Lamar Odom. Then depending on exactly what pick we traded we have room to draft another big. Dejuan Blair?

Curry/Udrih
Martin/Garcia
Odom/Greene
Griffin/Blair
Hawes/Blair

another championship caliber team in 3-4 years.

of course this all depends on drafting Griffin.

I would like to hear more input on these ideas.

[SacKingZZZ]

I like that 2nd look, just don't like Odom at the 3 in that situation. He is a good shooter, but not a great long distance one and I think Cisco at the 3 would actually be better for us. That or maybe even go after Hedo instead. He'd bring that 3 point shooting we need. If we have a legit PF like Griffin and a legit C that can shoot like Hawes I think Ciscos toughness and shooting will be the perfect compliment so I'd just keep him and not spend the dough.