Ok, honestly, this post will likely show my ignorance of the game. . but i know worst case scenario is that people here will just correct me and i'll be all the wiser/smarter/better fan anyway. .
I'm pretty stoked at the trades. . it just seemed to bring some needed closure (still waiting for the last dog of a contract to go). I've now started thinking about some of the tried and true teams that have managed to stick it out for a while and of course, there are a milion + 1 reasons why they're always around (management, smart trades, coaching etc) but part of it is that there is a certain style, character or identity that teams exude (i did a search on the site and most post that mention this need for identity belong to Ziller). . . .
The lakers have adopted the triangle.
The Jazz have always run the pick and roll
Spurs pride themselves in sticking to the fundamentals
Detroit always seem to have a no-frills pure hustle aura about them.
The Rockets like the inside/outside game
Then we have other styles teams have tried to adopt with varying degrees of success and longevity - small ball, run and gun.
You could argue that most of this is down to the coach?. . Pat Riley, regardless of wherever he would be, would always lay down a system of intensity, sacrifice etc. . .
At the end of the day, im just wondering what do the Kings look like? What are they meant to look like? I know Natt is a long time Sloan disciple, and i guess i can see glimpses of the Sloan-system, but goodness we're so far away you could argue the kings show glimpses of any style. . .
As a fan, yeah its been painful watching the losses, but more than that, i've just always struggled to see 'who' or 'what' my kings are? What character or style do you see or want them to have??? A lot of us have crunched numbers, analysed stats, calculated possibilities. . .i guess my concern/question is a bit more existential in nature