Kings/Beech

Home for all your discussion of basketball statistical analysis.
rlee
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:58 pm

Kings/Beech

Post by rlee » Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:56 pm


J.E.
Posts: 818
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by J.E. » Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:21 pm

Would be interesting to know who decided to end it

Beech, sort of, knew what he was getting into when he took the job. But maybe it was even worse than he thought

Crow
Posts: 6208
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:10 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Crow » Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:37 pm

Divac probably gets replaced within 2 years.

Kings in playoffs? 3-5-7 or more years away? We'll know better by December.

J.E.
Posts: 818
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by J.E. » Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:45 pm

Crow wrote:Divac probably gets replaced within 2 years.
I guess you're probably right, but one has to wonder why it hasn't happened already, and what that means long term

Crow
Posts: 6208
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:10 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Crow » Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:32 pm

Luke Bornn hired. I assume influenced by Vivek.

Rotating analytics people has some rationale. Shows us your stuff then lets see someone else's.

rlee
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:58 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by rlee » Thu Apr 20, 2017 11:10 pm


Statman
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Arlington, Texas
Contact:

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Statman » Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:46 pm

Crow wrote:Luke Bornn hired. I assume influenced by Vivek.

Rotating analytics people has some rationale. Shows us your stuff then lets see someone else's.
Before the 1st draft under Vivek - Kings did that online competition, inviting people to rank a bunch of college draftees & do a write up on how the rankings were created.

I did it - thank God I used an approach that differs incredibly with how I do things now (& it used my own college ratings that I didn't explain in any REAL detail & that can't just be duplicated easily). It was pretty much a draft model I pulled out of my ass in 7 days honestly - but it did help me get the idea planted that pushed along the much better work I did later.

Anyway - the award was the "winner" being invited to the Kings draft war room. PLEASE someone correct me if I'm wrong here - but I believe they traded their #1 pick & no one was ever declared a winner of that comp. But, I'm sure they tried to wring as much out of that free info they got from many sources as they could.

Oh, btw, my message to Mr. Vivek: if you actually are considering hiring me in the future (I got feelers, but have zero clue if Kings know anything at all about me) & you scrub my online history, I'm not mad at you - I knew what I was getting into, trying trying that quick stab at "foot in the door" like many others. You got free ideas from me (& I expect many many others), you aren't the only NBA owner I've given some amount of free info or ideas to. Foot in the door thing is tough in this field.


Crow
Posts: 6208
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:10 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Crow » Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:56 pm

Now they add Scott Perry. Assistant at several places but with what primary skills and what primary accomplishments? The press generally hasn't gotten to rating below GM yet. Anyone have detail?

is this "one team" or rival factions? By design or not?

rlee
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:58 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by rlee » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:31 am

Perry generally respected but 2 things are strange:

1) He favored trading for Cousins but was overruled by Hennigan
2) Skiles complained of Hennigan & Perry undercutting his authority by coddling players...a management/coach dynamic that also has caused problems in Sacramento

Crow
Posts: 6208
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:10 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Crow » Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:24 pm

I heard but forgot the second. Didn't know the first.

Of the 4 biggest names in Kings management, at least 2 are probably gone in a few years.

Statman
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Arlington, Texas
Contact:

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Statman » Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:48 pm

Hey, thanks for correcting that for me, they obviously picked some kind of "winners" at some point. The article you showed was draft 3.0 - so it was their 3rd time doing it. The one I remember was the 1st in 2012 - & they traded the pick. I never found confirmation if they ever chose anyone, but now I assume they did if they chose others later.

Their scouts & the analysts agreed on Stauskus in that 2014 pick in the article. My draft model at that time really hated that pick (older retrodiction: http://hoopsnerd.com/?p=867 ) - had him 22nd best draftee among the college players. Of course, my model liked Noah Vonleh, Jordan Adams, or Jarnell Stokes in that area - & none of them have blown up either. Of the players their scouts may have not nixed (assuming they would have nixed Adams & Stokes at that high spot) - I probably would have been pushing for Vonleh or TJ Warren, maybe followed by Elfrid Payton or Ennis or Harris if I had to go lower in the model.

Statman
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Arlington, Texas
Contact:

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Statman » Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:49 pm

Crow wrote:I heard but forgot the second. Didn't know the first.

Of the 4 biggest names in Kings management, at least 2 are probably gone in a few years.
Agreed. I can't believe Divac is still there.

rlee
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:58 pm

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by rlee » Sat Apr 22, 2017 4:33 pm

The 3.0 doesn't refer to the 3rd time for Vivek (rather some sort of claim that it is a third generation approach to drafting).

Vivek's group purchased the Kings after the 2013 season.

Statman
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Arlington, Texas
Contact:

Re: Kings/Beech

Post by Statman » Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:56 pm

rlee wrote:The 3.0 doesn't refer to the 3rd time for Vivek (rather some sort of claim that it is a third generation approach to drafting).

Vivek's group purchased the Kings after the 2013 season.
Ah, ok, I was just confused I guess. One thing I distinctly remember is wondering how they were going to have someone in the draft war room after trading their pick - so obviously my reconstruction of this in my head is all messed up. As you were.

Anyway, my main point - an approach like this (crowd sourcing draft models by use of a competition for a draft room trip as a reward) would be something that could garner a team access to possibly many approaches & ideas without really spending much $$ at all relatively speaking.

Post Reply