Why are the Kings so bad? Now I am no basketball player for sure, and I have been a Kings fan since my first NBA basketball game in 2002 at Arco. I, like a ton of other Kings fans, want nothing more than a winning Kings team.
So it is that time when the Kings have a losing record and the trade deadline is in a few days and what do the Kings do?
After reading, watching and listening to every NBA thing I can about the Kings, this is what I came to believe. Changing the owner, the GMs, coaches, and players over and over doesn't win games. Neither does bad defense, turnovers, and bad shot selection. Also, one star player (DMC or Fox) cannot lead or win enough games to have a winning season. Basketball is a team sport.
What I found in my analytics is the Kings have NO TALENT. Now everybody on the Kings was a better basketball player at 10 years old than I ever was. They are good players, so why can't they win?
Here's is what I found. First the disclaimer: Stats from NBA.com/Stats, and NBA definitions of contracts. The Kings have a roster of what?
Fox: 3 years in the NBA, on last year of Rookie contract (#5 draft pick)
Hield: 4 years in the NBA, first year of Veteran contract
Barnes: 8 years in the NBA, on a Veteran contract
Bagley: 3 years in the NBA, on third year of a Rookie contract, but has missed a ton of games (#2 draft pick)
Holmes: 5 years in the NBA, on a Veteran contract.
Joseph: 9 years in the NBA, on a Veteran contract
Bjelica: 5 years in the NBA, on a Veteran contract.
Whiteside: 8 years in the NBA, on a Veteran minimum contract
Parker: 6 years in the NBA, on a Veteran contract, hasn't played more than 30 game minutes for the Kings
Haliburton: Rookie in the NBA (#12 draft pick)
Third Unit bench players
James: 1 year in the NBA, on a Rookie second round contract
Jeffries: 1 year on 2-way contract, on Rookie contract
Ramsey: Rookie in NBA, on a Rookie second round contract
Woodard: Rookie in NBA, on a Rookie second round contract
2 way players
Guy: second year on 2-way contract
Metu: 1 year in the NBA on a 2-way contract
If I did my research right, Richard Jefferson is right, there is No Talent on the Kings as they are mostly inexperienced rookies. I didn't say bad, but inexperienced. Out of 14 NBA players, 7 are on Rookie contracts, 1 is a first year Vet, and 1 doesn't really play. Lets not count injuries.
So what is my point? On this site alone there seems to be a trade every veteran mentality for draft picks and younger assets. How many rookies do the Kings need? If bad defense, mistakes and turnovers are the problem, then more rookies is not the answer.
The head hunters want Walton fired for what? Another head coach to coach experience? Looking at the coaching staff behind Walton, there is another experienced head coach, a candidate to be head coach, and a ton of coaches who are actively talking and working with the players on every time out in every game. That doesn't look like a coaching staff that is not working. The players are not uprising like the Hawks did.
So again Why Change? When you have No Experienced Players, keeping the veterans who play and teach the rookies is all you can do. Trading away Barnes for more assets is not the answer. Yes there are a few players on the Kings that the business side of the trading them is needed. I feel more young players and a ton of draft picks in late first round doesn't make the Kings win any more games.
NBA Experience is what is needed. (BBIQ)