06 Kings as good as previous years?

[Axel]

Despite their horrible start, the Kings are 21 and 9 in their last 30 games, and are back into the playoffs again. I was always a fan of the Kings teams in years past with Peja, C-webb, Bibby, Christie and Vlade.. but since the addition of Ron Artest, this years team is playing comprable to previous years (and would be on pace for a 57 win season w/ the above stat).

I dont think the Kings are as strong inside as they were, but they are better defensively and can now shoot FTs.. they also have a pretty good bench.

What do you guys think.... is this new look Kings team as good as years past? Are they better suited for playoff success?

[joejam999]

I think I would take the 01-02 team over this one.

[NNpF]

They're definitley not as deep as they were before.

I think I would take the Divac, Webber, Stojakovic, Christie, Bibby line-up with Songaila and Gerald Wallace coming off the bench.

[[Q]]

the 01 team was definitely the best... Bobby Jackson was a huge spark off the bench, along with Pollard who was decent at guarding Shaq. THeir bench is pretty weak now.

[benji]

but they are better defensively

Better than what? They're 13th on defense. In 2003 they were second. 6th in 2002, 7th in 2001, 11th in 2000.

They're better defensively than the last two years, but their offense is much worse.

They finished the year 22-10, and their pythag over that span is 21-11 so it does seem legit. Certainly not like the Celtics of last year.

[Axel]

Better than what? They're 13th on defense. In 2003 they were second. 6th in 2002, 7th in 2001, 11th in 2000.

That statistic is skewed because it does not exclude the time before Ron Artest was traded to Sacramento. I know the whole season is important, but why factor in time without him since they'll be playing with him in the playoffs?

I think I would take the Divac, Webber, Stojakovic, Christie, Bibby line-up with Songaila and Gerald Wallace coming off the bench.

Thing is, Gerald Wallace hardly averaged 10 mpg, and was not a factor for the Kings. Songaila was only effective for them last year, which was more of a transition year and they weren't serious contenders. Also, I think Brad Miller is a huge improvement over Divac, who only averaged 7 boards/10 pts over his seasons in Sacramento.

The only position they seemed to have become deficient in is PF, and the combo of Kenny Thomas and Shareef fill in the gap Webber left.

Just my 2 cents.

[benji]

That statistic is skewed because it does not exclude the time before Ron Artest was traded to Sacramento. I know the whole season is important, but why factor in time without him since they'll be playing with him in the playoffs?

Well, provided he doesn't committ a flagrant foul level four.

However your point is sound.

Kings defense for the season: 102.7
With Artest: 100.1
Without Artest: 105.3

Their defense with Artest is 7th, which means they're as good as the 2001 team defensively. Certainly not a defensive powerhouse like that 2003 team however.

If the 2002 team had won the title like they should've we wouldn't be having this conversation. I think 2002 is still the Kings team to beat.

Divac may have only average 7 boards a game over his season in Sacramento but he was the Kings most important offensive player and a a fantstic defensive player.

[artestfighttrainer]

I'll take the ol' Kings with cwebb and co. over this year's but next season you never know they could be the best Kings team ever with Ron Ron on board.

[VlaDiv]

Divac may have only average 7 boards a game over his season in Sacramento but he was the Kings most important offensive player and a a fantstic defensive player.

The Divac and Webber kings were legit contenders. This team is first round fodder.

[Axel]

The only thing they lost with Vlade was acting ability.

[VlaDiv]

i guess it's love or hate with vlade. Some people assume I'm from where he's from, but I'm not even european or serbian, I just liked his skills. And he had three double-double seasons while leading centers in assists so it wasn't all acting

[cyanide]

The Kings are good now with Artest, but talent-wise, the Webber and Divac Kings were stronger. Given that the Kings now have Miller to replace Divac and that Webber was sometimes a "cancer," with Bibby more experienced in the game, and a player in Artest that can shut down the opposing team's best offensive player, the Kings might be able to sneak past the first round, but that's not likely.

[Keo]

The 2000-2003 Kings were a much more deep and sound ball club. Webber, Peja, Bibby, Vlade, Christie was just dominant. There were 2 Years where they would've won it all had it not been for the Lakers, but that's another story. Old Kings>New Kings.

[Its_asdf]

Don't forget about Bobby Jackson coming off the bench. When that guy was healthy, he was a constant sixth man of the year candidate. I think that the Kings are a lot younger than previous years and their bench doesn't have as much depth/experience.

[sucram]

i think, on paper their lineup is still incredibly impressive. I for one, 'like' them better compared to previous years. Always liked Ron. But was never really a C-Webb or Vlade fan. Also, i have always hoped Shareef was blessed with another chance. All and all they certainly have some 'guns' starting. I think they could challenge SAS, maybe 6 games or so?

[Andrew]

Statistically they might be comparable but given the expectations and likely playoff result for this year's team, I don't think you could call them as good as some of the previous Kings teams that were legitimate threats to win it all.

[John WB]

I think the '02 squad that made it to game 7 of the WCF vs. the Lakers and probably should have won the series was the best, but I'm hoping this squad prooves otherwise. I'll be watching every game of the series vs. the Spurs. Should be some great games and I'm hoping for another 1 vs. 8 upset.