Bad Teams

Some teams bounce off the bottom of the standings and head back to respectability. Other teams stick the to bottom of the standings and just never seem to get it together.

This is going to be one of the few posts I will write a bad team. In fact, it's about the worst team in the NBA for 2008-2009. I am talking about the Sacramento (formerly of Rochester, Cincinnati and Kansas City) Kings. Gone are the days when Chris Webber, Mike Bibby, Vlade Divac and Doug Christie pushed the Lakers to 7 games in the 2002 playoffs. Last year the sad Sac Kings were a woeful 17-65. That's a winning percentage of just over 20%. What went wrong?

A lot of things. Ron Artest was gone. Kevin Martin missed 31 games. They could not rebound and the could not defend the 3 (Orlando set a record for most 3s in a game...in Arco). The new kids on the team weren't able to pick things up. It's tough learning on the fly in the West where all eight playoffs positions are fiercely contested. Twenty-one different players played for the Kings during the 2008-2009 season. I don't have the stats compiled to tell you where that ranks among all thirty teams, but I can tell you that the Lakers and Magic only played 16 players each in '08-'09. Continuity seems counts.

But what is the cause and what is the effect? Are bad teams made worse because of all the shuffling of players or are they already bad and the shuffling happens as management tries to find a way to string together some wins? Does management want to string together wins if they have a shot at a lottery pick? There are a lot of variables that go on behind the scenes that we at fans can only guess at. Which brings me to the players on worst team, specifically, the best player on the worst team.

Kevin Martin was the best player for Sacramento in '08-'09, but how do you know if the best player on a bad team is really that good? The reason I question Kevin Martin at all, and Kevin Durant and Rudy Gay, is that they are all on bad teams. Somebody has to lead the team in scoring. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are a great players. Time will tell if Kevin Martin and the other basement stars will rise. I think most of them will. But it's perplexing to watch. Do their teams lose because other teams know they can double team the best player and shut them down because no one else will be able to pick up the slack? Or, do other teams just play them straight up because even if the best player does go off, no one else is going to be a legitimate 2nd or 3rd scoring threat, so the game will be in hand either way? How well would that player do if they were traded to a playoff team. The variables are piling up in my head.

You just have to suffer through the bad seasons and hope things get better. As a Dallas fan, I can assure you that the bad times can seem like they go on forever (see the 90s). But that is why bad teams draft higher. That is one boon to finishing last is that you have a better chance at picking first, or close to it. You might get LeBron James or you might get Kwame Brown, but hopefully you get help putting together a winner that fills the arenas. The team has to win to get anywhere. No one knows you when you are down and out. Take Kevin Durant for example. In all seriousness, I think he is a fantastic player, but it's all happening below the radar because the Thunder are a bad team. According to Kevin Durant's own twitter feed, when he tells people he plays basketball for the NBA, people tell him, "Keep working hard and you'll someday you'll be in the NBA."

Let's take a look at the last ten seasons and what happened to the teams that finished last:

• 1999-2000 Clippers finish 15-67. Drafted Darius Miles at #3 pick. Next year: 31-51
• 2000-2001 Bulls finish 15-67. Drafted Eddy Curry with #4 pick. Next year: 21-61
• 2001-2002 Bulls & Warriors finish 21-61. Bulls take Jay Williams at #2 and finish the next season at 30-52. Warriors take Mike Dunleavey at #3 and finish next season at 38-44)
• 2002-2003 Cavaliers and Nuggets both first 17-65. The Cavs take LeBron James with the #1 pick and improve to 35-47 the next year. Five years later they are in the NBA finals. The Nuggets took Carmelo Anthony at #3 and made the playoffs the next year with a winning record of 43-39.
• 2003-2004 Orlando finished 21-61 and drafted the next Superman, Dwight Howard with the #1 pick in the draft. Next season they finish 36-46. Five years later they are in the NBA finals.
• 2004-2005 Atlanta 13-69. The Hawks take Marvin Williams at #2 overall and improve to 26-56 the next season.
• 2005-2006 Portland finishes 21-61 and take LeMarcus Aldridge with the #2 pick. Portland improves to 32-50 the next season. Three years later the Blazers are the #4 seed in the West.
• 2006-2007 Memphis Grizzlies finish 22-60 take Mike Conley with #4. Next Memphis finishes year Memphis finish at 22-60.
• 2007-2008 Miami finishes at 15-67 take Michael Beasley. Next season they improve to a winning record of 43-39 which is enough to get them the 5th seed in the East. Dwyane Wade coming back from injury helped a little too.
• 2008-2009 Sacramento finishes 17-65. They select Tyreke Evans with the #4 pick. What happens in 2009-2010 is any body's guess.

Here's mine. It'll be tough for them to make the post season. The top 8, possibly 9 spots in the West will shuffle but I won't be any new teams in the mix. The Kings only real hope is to get another good draft pick. To get that, they must remain in the cellar for another year, like Edmund Dantes imprisoned in Chatea d'If in the Count of Monte Cristo. Perhaps the Maloof Family can put together something for the Free Agent Bonanza of Aught Ten. Lots of cap room available in 2011...