My 2009 Sacramento Kings.

by jjham15 on May 10, 2009 1:21 PM PDT Comment 40 comments

To lead off, the title of this post is meant to pay homage to the ending of the television series Scrubs- one of my long time favorite shows which effectively ended this last Wednesday. This post should be looked at as one guy’s vision (sort of a JD day dream) for what I wish/hope could be the 2009-10 Sacramento Kings.

I have long been a supporter of Geoff Petrie. We all know his well-documented attributes as a drafter and architect of the Kings pseudo dynasty-1998-2005ish. My vision for the Kings, written with Petrie in mind, requires the hiring of the right coach (this time around), some luck in the lottery and a move to secure another player from the 2009 draft class. While I believe this plan to be feasible, it is certainly not he only road to redemption that I see for Petrie and our Sacramento Kings.

Geoff Petrie created a standard for Kings fans during the Webber/Divac era that we are now lacking. Aided by two great big men, an amazing coach and substantial role players the Kings played a brand of basketball that captivated the masses and spoiled us as fans. I believe that with two pieces available in the 2009 draft and players currently on the roster, Petrie may be able to recreate the magic of years gone by.

Eddie Jordan is the beginning. A seasoned coach, Jordan has the chops to command a room and the ideology to match Geoff Petrie’s vision. The Princeton offense is what we crave, certainly having the next Chris Webber would be nice but Rick Adelman showed us that even a limited athlete like Brad Miller can solidify a playoff team if used correctly. By bringing in Jordan, Petrie can return to drafting, trading and signing players that fit a system he is comfortable with, not these patchwork MLE castoffs that have brought the franchise to where it is now.

Now for the “no shit Sherlock” moment of this post. Blake Griffin will be a star and would really help speed the rebuild process of the Kings. Armed with interior post skills that Chris Webber never had, Griffin, matched with Thompson and Hawes, would create a frontcourt that Rick Adelman would kill for. A three-man rotation of physical, high basketball IQ players who can all play inside, pass and rebound is a dream for any coach, but imperative for a Princeton style offense. Rubio has skills, Jason Williams type flash, but the addition of Griffin instantly makes this team deadly in the post.

Geoff Petrie learned quickly that having flash sells tickets but having a steady, controlled influence wins games. I believe that for all of his faults, it was actually the addition of Mike Bibby and the subtraction of Jason Williams that made the Kings consistent contenders. This type of player is available again in this draft. It will cost something, I’m not sure how much, but landing Davidson’s Stephen Curry is like trading for Mike Bibby all over again. Is the 23rd and the 31st pick enough? I do not know, but I certainly offer it to the teams sitting in the 8-10 range and sweeten the pot with a future pick or taking on a one year bloated contract if need be. Davidson would instantly open the cutting lanes for Kevin Martin, open the interior for Hawes, Thompson and Griffin and ease the stress of both Garcia and Noccioni as primary perimeter shooters. Curry isn’t a pure point but the Princeton offense requires a shooters and no one shoots the ball like a Curry.

I believe that this 2009 Sacramento Kings team fights for the 8th seed but more importantly contends for the next decade. Sure Kevin Martin isn’t the defender that Doug Christie was but Christie couldn’t score, slash or draw fouls like Martin. Garcia and Noccioni will never be the pure shooter that Peja is but they both bring a competitive spirit and fire that Peja always lacked. Divac and Webber might both be Hall of Fame players but they never had a 3 big rotation like Hawes, Thompson and Griffin (Sorry Scot Pollard). The Kings need to find a Divac or Webber type leader out of this group but once acclimated to each other and Eddie Jordan/the Princeton offense I believe that they could exceed the offensive potency of the great Petrie/Kings teams of the past.

Make it happen GP-

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

5 recs | Comment 40 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Not to rain on the parade

but the major downside I see to this team is defense, and possibly not enough basketballs to go around with martin and curry in the same backcourt.
That being said, I understand that I’m being pretty nit-picky considering we are the worst team in the nba and two draft picks on a relatively off year isn’t going to take you from worst to first.
I personally would prefer more of a pure point guard as we have seen with teams like the suns (when nash arrived) and the bulls this year, a point guard can turn a team around quicker than any other position. For that reason and the current nba rules that lend themselves to point guard play, I’m a Rubio backer.

by Travis Mays Hayes on May 10, 2009 6:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

defense smefense.

To be completely honest, I think defense is an effort and scheme thing that can withstand poor individual defenders. In the original Batman movie (Michael Keaton) the Joker tainted cosmetic products which if used by themselves were totally harmless but when used in combination they became deadly. I think the Kings found those combination’s and it eventually killed them. You can get by with a poor defender at the point and/or the two and still be effective. When things really went wrong is when they mixed Bibby (lipstick) and Miller (deodorant)- both horrendous defenders- at two key positions while two or three coaches were forced to keel over with stupid grins on their faces. You can’t have a point guard who can’t stay in front of any one and a center who doesn’t play help defense.

I don’t think Curry is going to have a tough time staying in front of defenders but I think he is going to get muscled by stronger players. Hawes and Thompson are much better defenders than Miller/SAR/Moore(who draws a nice charge but couldn’t swat an 8 year old girl’s shot) which should help Curry when he needs someone to pick up weak side help. Martin should improve defensively and Garcia and Noccioni are both quality defenders.

This team would score a ton of points. They would also rebound a ton which always helps the defensive numbers. I think that between effort guys like Thompson, Garcia, Noccioni and in this scenario, Blake Griffin, the Kings might be able to hustle themselves through their collective defensive liabilities. Remember, you only have to outscore your opponent- who cares if its 115-108 or 98-91.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on May 11, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I love the analogy

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 12, 2009 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hell no, im a ricky rubio fan too!! i would love to see Ricky Rubio running the point, but i believe we need at least 1 more big, so if we get the first pick Petrie can’t afford to pass on Griffin. I mean imagine Shawes, and J.T., and Griffin in the front court !!!!!!!! just thinking about that makes me want to wet my pants. So im hoping the Kings can pull a miracle and get Griffin!! if that doesnt work out than Rubio or even Jennings, MAN I WAS CHECKING OUT jENNINGS ON YOUTUBE THAT BOY IS THE TRUTH!! FUCKIN SICK REMINDS ME SO MUCH OF J- WILL!!!!!!!!!! EITHER WAY THE 2009 KINGS WILL BE BETTER THAN LAST YEAR! ANYBODY RUNNING THE POINT IS BETTER THAN BENOS BITCH ASS

by slamson on May 10, 2009 8:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ritalin

Question: What kind of bear is best?

by otis29 on May 11, 2009 8:34 AM PDT up reply actions 7 recs

It's what's for dinner.

A lonely Kings fan in a sea of gold and purple...

by Jaycee on May 11, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 6 recs

The other white pill.

Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'

by iashwash on May 11, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 6 recs

But I hate pills

Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta rec otis, jaycee and iw

That would be one funny green trifecta.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 11, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree about getting Griffin,

but get some Depends man.

by dbfish on May 12, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice post JJ, I liked it because it pretty

accurately reflects my vision of where I would like to see the team as well. I would welcome Rubio, be excited about drafting Rubio, but my King’s Dreams start with the drafting of Blake Griffin. There is no doubt that we need a pg to replace Beno and with the abundance of 1’s in the draft there is a handful of players I think will be available to the Kings with either the 23rd or 31st pick if we indeed keep them.

My preference for Griffin is totally subjective, the team will be better with whoever we draft but what i saw this fall and winter convinced me that he has “it”, that he will be a star and besides his awesome athletic ability and drive I think he will also bring a drive to win and has the character to fill the leadership void on the team.

As the poll showed this site is evenly divided when it comes to Griffin/Rubio or Rubio/Griffin depending on how you look at it and if we are lucky enough to get the first or second pick we are going to be a substantially different and hopefully much better team next season. Of course, the same is true if we draft third as well and as Aykis has so consistently posted we can do no worse than fourth.

Nice post JJ.

"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley

by Bluejohn on May 11, 2009 12:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice post man

I too dream of what i would think would be a ‘final solution’ on an interior rotation that could quickly have a chance to be amongst the best in the league.

As ExG and I have both said, Curry seems like a GP guy (and GP is usually right), so I could see him selling out those other two picks to get there.

Hell, I’d love to have two quality rookies rather than 1 quality and two big maybe’s.
If we get the #1 and Griffin, I’d be overjoyed to see Petrie package some things to get whichever of the PGs, Curry, Evans,(other) he prefers.

He’d be my freakin’ Hero.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on May 11, 2009 1:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice post

Rec’d

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 11, 2009 2:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Good Job

As much as I like Rubio ….the thought of 10 years of Hawes Thompson and Griffin is damn enticing.

by ElRonToro on May 11, 2009 5:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Love the idea jj. I want two starters...

…which I know is greedy, but that’s what we need to get back on track quickly.

I have gone through all the possibilities, and it basically boils down to two different (highly unlikely) scenarios:

First, we get the first pick, leverage the position, trade down a spot and pick up Rubio as well as additional first round picks. This should enable us to get two good players. In this scenario, the ideal situation is to get the first pick, trade with OKC (or someone in the 2 spot) and pick up enough ammo to trade for Amare (OKC picks, Houston picks, Donte Greene and Kenny Thomas=Rubio and Stoudemire.) Yeahahhh baby.

Second ideal scenario, we, again, get the first pick. Keep it. Draft Griffin. Package the Houston pick, Donte and the 2nd rounder or next year’s pick, to move up and grab one of the top point guards. Ideal situation, trade next year’s pick (unprotected—that’s right, I said it), plus the Houston pick, and move up to 2-5 and get Rubio, Evans, Jennings or whomever Petrie desires. Griffin and Rubio. Sexy as hell.

by R-Man on May 11, 2009 9:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd sure be tempted to 'go' for it this year

If GP thinks there are two guys he can get
(starters)
I don’t know if I could swallow unprotected 2010 unless it was for a top 5 guy though.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on May 11, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

and is this the draft to go for 2 top 5's?

One of the key reasons I chose to write about Curry is because I think he is a starter day one. He has defensive limitations and he isn’t really a finisher but his ability to shoot, both as a pick and pop and as a set shooter draw me to him. Jennings, Evans and even Ty Lawson might be higher ceiling prospects but Curry fits the system that I believe Geoff Petrie plans on returning to and can be had around #8.

Now what the 8 pick will cost is an interesting discussion. Don’t discount the 14 million in cap space the Kings have as a leveraging tool to get other teams under a dwindling threshold. Would Washington give up a top 5 for #23, #31 and the Kings taking on Eton Thomas (7+ mill) for a year? Anything the Kings would lose could be recouped at the deadline with 16 million in Thomas’s to trade. I don’t mind dealing Donté, he may be one of the few pieces that GP can or will deal at this point.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on May 11, 2009 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In what is accepted as an unspectacular draft, why trade away next years' chance?

by betweentheeyes on May 11, 2009 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Draft

I think this year is considered unspectacular in terms of top-tier stars. But the second tier is incredibly deep this year.

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 12, 2009 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The unprotected 2010 pick...

…is only if we get the 2nd or 3rd pick. I would even give up an uprotected 2010 and the 23rd pick if it got us Rubio this year. Next year’s draft may be better when you look at the total talent, but it is very hard to get into the top 2 or 3 picks in any draft, and that is where you usually find the real difference makers. Hell, we could end up with the worst record and the 4th pick this year, so I don’t mind giving up an unprotected pick for a sure thing (and by sure thing, I mean the placement of the pick and not the player).

Bottom line: I would take that gamble if it got us Rubio (or whomever Petrie likes) because it ensures that we get a top 2 player. Plus, it enables your team and young players to grow together now, which (hopefully) gets us to where we want to go even quicker.

by R-Man on May 12, 2009 6:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ahh!

Dreams are a great thing. Who knows? Crazier things have happened…1985 Knicks get Ewing instead of the Kings. Keep praying to the basketball gods and it could happen.

by dbfish on May 12, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

David Stern?

What is this basketball God you speak of?

Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'

by iashwash on May 12, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A vision of the future, and no Ike?

for shame

by LPKingsFan on May 11, 2009 10:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

am i the only one who disagrees with this?

How is Griffin a lock to be good? In fact i think Rubio is more likely to be the better of the two. Why do i think this, Griffin is a short PF who can only dunk on guys his own height. How did Griffin not destroy Hansbrough? Hanshbrough is tht next Mark Madson!!! IF anything Rubio’s basketball IQ would translate over from Spain to the NBA. At least he would be able to beat people with his IQ and he played well against CP3 D-Will and J-Kidd, what happens when he’s playing Steve Nash, Derrick Fisher, Arron Brooks or any other PG who isn’t in the top 5? He would get the better simply because he is smarter. And if he can only pass half as well in NBA as he did in spain, with K$ and JT’s athletic ability then i see clips of lobs, and a sweet pick and pop with Hawes. Rubio is the way to go. Griffin couldn’t get passed UNC, Rubio played well against a HOF and the top 2 PG’s in the NBA….

by shadowchicken on May 12, 2009 1:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think you can judge...

…Rubio’s potential success in the league based on his Olympic performance. He played well, sure…but so did Patty Mills and we aren’t talking about him as a potential #1 pick. The style of the international game, and Rubio’s years of playing under those rules probably gave him an advantage over the NBA players.

And the UNC argument is ludicrous as well. It’s an unfair argument, in that you don’t know how well Rubio would have played in a similar situation, just as you don’t know how Griffin would have played on the Spanish team.

By the way, Griffin put up 23 and 16 against UNC.

I can’t wait to see Rubio beat NBA players with his IQ. That should be interesting.

Wait, why am I taking this much time to rebut shadowchicken? That might be the first sign of insanity.

Question: What kind of bear is best?

by otis29 on May 12, 2009 6:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not for nothing

But attempting to slam Griffin for not being able to get past the eventual national champs in spite of the fact that he owned Tyler Hansbrough in that game does not exactly further your case. Griffin had 23 points and 16 rebounds in that game (with at true shooting percentage of 72%), while Hansbrough posted 8 and 6.

If Rubio did not exist, would you still have such disdain for Griffin? Or do you feel that it bolsters Rubio’s case when you denegrate Rubio?

I’d be happy with either one at this point.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 12, 2009 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well put

I prefer Rubio. But if we get Griffin I believe he will help our team. My support of Rubio is not a knock on Griffin. It’s simply a support of Rubio.

I prefer Rubio only because my gut instincts tell me that I like Rubio better, and I’m not 100% convinced about Griffin. If we get Griffin, I will look forward to him proving me wrong.

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 12, 2009 7:47 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Yes Ex G!!!

Well, I don’t think as highly as Griffin which is why I’m supporting the idea to select Rubio if the Kings are in that position.

Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on May 12, 2009 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Uhmm

How did Griffin not destroy Hansbrough?

Did you watch the game or even look at the boxscore?
He did.
I think Hansbrough’s quote after the game was
’I’ve never played against a guy like Griffin before’

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on May 12, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

quit living in the past, bro

your show is over and divac is dead.

by DustyG on May 12, 2009 10:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I can sense the optimism flowing out of your post!

Way to give fans a good name!

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 12, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's kinda my point

The Fanpost is well-crafted and thoughtful, no doubt—but I don’t understand why future success has to be modelled on past success. I feel that the optimism in this post is backward-looking and seems almost whiny. I understand we have a system, and that players who are like players who worked well in the system might be more likey to succeed in that system. I think that we have seen success one way, and we shouldn’t limit ourselves to thinking that only by reproducing that can we be successful.

Quit living in the past, trying to get players that fit in 1998. We have different team and will achieve success in different ways.

And no one on this site is not a fan, so to whom am I giving us fans a bad wrap? To me, the belief that the future can only be as good as the past is pessimistic, that’s why I posted.

by DustyG on May 12, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

but I think as soon as there is a little more of a future to look forward to

- it will take care of itself.
Its been wretched in King’s land lately.
Its inevitable right now that we’re still looking backwards somewhat.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on May 12, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now see

That was a well-though-out, comprehensive argument. And it can raise a valid point, leading to valid discussion.

Isn’t that far more constructive than:

quit living in the past, bro
your show is over and divac is dead

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 12, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I guess I feel like an incomprehensive comment can get a point across sometimes. And sometimes it’s hard to muster a comprehensive comment to a post that rubs you the wrong way. Also, I feel like being critical of an idea that (I feel) is backwards IS constructive.

by DustyG on May 12, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But hasn't this team been very unsuccesful as well?

First up, I want to clarify one thing:

While I believe this plan to be feasible, it is certainly not he only road to redemption that I see for Petrie and our Sacramento Kings.

The Kings have tried to bring in non-Petrie players in the recent past with pretty lousy results. Salmons, Artest, SAR, Moore, and Thomas are not conventional Princeton style players and all have been ushered out one way or another (or should be in Thomas’ case). If Petrie is going to continue to run this franchise, I believe it is in the best interest of everyone to stick with the plan that made him really successful in the past. If Petrie isn’t the answer then by all means switch it all up and bring in players and coaches that fit the style of play of the incoming regime.

Phil Jackson runs the triangle offense and the Lakers GM brings in players to fit that system. Jerry Sloan runs the pick and roll, loves hard nosed players and needs perimeter shooters to make it all work- and that is what he gets from his GM. Geoff Petrie is the face of this franchise (at least for now), the coaches and players that he brings in should fit the ideology of the system in place. In my post, I pointed to both Griffin and Curry as players I believe fit the current system. There are other players that also fit this system but I personally believe (along with almost every NBA expert on the planet) that Griffin is the best player available in the 2009 draft and I would love the Kings to land him. I also think that Curry is the best pure shooter in the draft, something Petrie looks for in a player. The combination of these two would instantly improve both the interior and perimeter offense of the Kings.

Oh, and Vlade Divac is not dead, he just doesn’t play professional basketball anymore.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on May 12, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

First, with regards to your subject line: Yes, this team has been bad…in the past. Should we think that they are going to continue to be bad in the future? Probably not, especially with some new talent added to the mix. Im sure you agree, it’s just the fixation with the past that is frustrating me.

Second, not all of our bad players can be dismissed as Non-Petrie players just as some of the successes are not merely by virtue of them being Petrie players. I think many of us can fall into a trap of being slaves to the system. Blake Griffin will be good in any system. Is he specially suited for oursover another? Prolly not as of now. IMO, system-specific evaluations are MOST valuable for established players, or teams with a very specific need to fill. We can tweak the system to suit players and vice-versa.

Is there a way we can make a successful team that is not much like the 1998 Kings but is still Petrie-esque? I hope so, cause we can’t revive Vlade’s corpse! He’s gone, man!

I like the system as well, and I think we should stick with it. But trying to recreate the 1998 personel—rather than just getting guys who work within the system—seems like living in the past. For me there is just a big difference between saying “We can get a player like Bibby was” and “We can get a PG that works well in the system”.

I think we should stick with The Plan, but I think The Plan is ‘Make a good team using the princeton-style offense’ rather than ‘Recreate the 1998 team’. After all, The Plan for the 1998 team was ‘Make a good team using the princeton style’.

by DustyG on May 12, 2009 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I'm always impressed

when a well though out, well thought out argument takes place. Well done Dusty.

Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on May 12, 2009 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's kinda my point

Quit living in the past, trying to get players that fit in 1998. We have different team and will achieve success in different ways.

And no one on this site is not a fan, so to whom am I giving us fans a bad wrap? To me, the belief that the future can only be as good as the past is pessimistic, that’s why I posted.

by DustyG on May 12, 2009 12:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs