With yet another ineffective coach replaced by a question mark in a suit, I thought it was a good time to turn the microscope to another professed deficiency ailing the Kings: personnel decisions.
In other words, how Geoff Petrie has performed recently. Considering trades and free agency both have too many unknown factors involved for an outsider to accurately gauge his success rate (owner/budget constraints, negotiations with other teams, Sacramento's perception as a destination, etc), I decided to focus purely on the draft and tried to be as objective as possible.
What follows is my best effort to analyze the raw data available.
Basically, here's what you're looking at:
I took a look (with the help of basketball-reference.com) at the Kings top draft pick since the team picked Kmart in 2004. I figured the best way to evaluate the decision is to look at the player's WS/48 (which is an estimated percentage of how many wins they contributed to per 48 minutes). To my knowledge, this is built on a list of stats, not just shooting percentage or A/TO ratio.
I noted the first Kings player drafted, his draft number, his WS/48, and then compared it with the three best players based on WE/48 taken after him. Since the stat is based purely on contributions on the court, and since several of these players have already become journeymen, the strength of their respective teams and the systems they play in are rendered insignificant.
Now admittedly, this is just an exercise in number-crunching and doesn't tell hte whole story. Also, there are anomalies - for instance, Ian Mahinmi, taken by the Spurs at No. 28 in 2005 has posted a .186 for his career, while Monta Ellis, taken by the Warrior at 40 that year is at .075 (league average is .100). I have disregarded many guys who, like Mahinmi, have played in significantly fewer games than the rest of the draft class (Mahinmi is at 98 games played while Eliis is at 384).
The numbers show a consistent slide in both draft position and the contributions of players the Kings draft (and keep - see Jon Brockman). Not all these guys are stars. In fact, given their draft position, the majority show to very valuable role players and mid-level starters, suggesting a pattern of missing on available talent that continues through last year.
This is not to heap all the blame for the current play of this team on its GM, a lot of other teams missed on most of these guys too and the draft will never be a purely scientific endevour. But I think this is a fairly eye-opening account of raw data. The talent was obviously out there. I don't think he should be fired, but sometimes you have to acknowledge a pattern of failure and correct it.
Ingest and react...
I didn't feel there was enough data this season to warrant an evaluation, but just so you know, Jimmer is at -.031 thus far. Just the messenger.