Throwdowns > Closed

Marlins Fan said 06/23, 12:21 AM
I'd pick an expansion team, no question. Here's why:

For one, the Kings suck. I would want nothing to do with that roster, with the exception of DeMarcus Cousins. At least with an expansion team you get to pick and choose your roster; by taking over the Kings you'd be saddled with all the baggage they're already ladened with.

And let's be honest... Sacramento is a fairly loyal basketball town and even there the Kings could not succeed. I realize Seattle is a strong basketball town as well, but why the hell would you want to take over somebody's failed business venture? If I trusted my own business acumen, which I do, I would definitely want to be able to start at square one, instead of square negative-twenty or wherever the Kings are right now.

Here's another reason: you said the ex-Sonics staff wouldn't be able to help much because Seattle has a new arena. I agree.

So why the heck would the Kings staff be able to help? It's a new arena to them, too. Might as well hire your own staff, your own players, etc.

In summary, I would rather start my own enterprise and do it all myself instead of trying to ressurect somebody else's failed franchise.

Good luck.

Marlins Fan said 06/24, 12:23 AM
1) The salary cap.

Yes, the Sonics would be operating under a staggered cap. But that's really no big deal considering they'd be choosing from the 9-12 players on the rest of the teams. So obviously we're not talking about any max contracts or anything. None of players available for the expansion draft would have a contract large enough to put Seattle in any kind of dangerous cap position, so the cap is irrelevant in this situation.

2)Anthony Davis/Harrison Barnes

I definitely wouldn't be drafting Harrison Barnes because I think he's all hype. Sure, I'd miss out on Davis. IF David Stern made this situation possible before the end of next week, which seems HIGHLY unlikely. More realistic scenario sees the Seattle arena receiving a team next year at the earliest, and there's no telling who might be entering that draft. Either way, it won't be the UniBrow. It's a "what if" scenario but the draft pick aspect is a big enough variable that we can't really even argue it without falling back on straight up conjecture.

3)Expansion draft

Yeah... I'm fine with that. I'd rather pick from the entire NBA's 9-12 roster players than be saddled with the sorry ass Kings.

Marlins Fan said 06/25, 09:58 PM
Tyreke Evans is completely lost. He got off to a great start in his rookie year but he's hit the wall, big time, to the point where the Kings' front office folks are debating whether or not they want Evans playing small forward now, or keep playing point guard even though he seems ill-suited at that spot. Cousins is ultra talented but he's also probably the biggest head case in the entire NBA. Isaiah Thomas and Jimmer have some talent but neither one is capable of being a franchise leader. And Salmons is terrible. He's the real reason the Kings are debating moving Evans to SF.

Like you said yourself, transferring Sac-Town's destitute basketball franchise to Seattle is not going to make them compete (or in your words, H*lls no) so I just don't see the benefit. Granted there is the potential for having a slightly higher draft pick, but even that would come at the expense of another cellar-dwelling season, which makes the draft pick a whole lot less appealing.

Way I see it is this: if you're going to start over in Seattle, then just start over. Pick a new front office, a new roster, etc. Start at square one and try to build a winner. The Kings are proven losers.

GL