The not blaming Karl 100% thread.
- Thread starter Dbeltz24
- Start date
Haha a set-up? Go look at his Win-Loss record as a King. That's really all you need to see. And last time I checked, he's a King. I will repeat not a sniff at the playoffs since he has been here. Not even close. So far the most games they have won as he has been a King was when they went 29-53. That is 25 games under 500. So just incredible that you defend him as a winner. He can put up all the numbers in the world, all that will matter is whether it's an W or L. And all we have seen the past 5 years is L after L after L.
This is the reason people are insinuating you are a troll. People disagree about things all the time on here. Personally, there are times when I'd like to slap brick. But we argue in a way that reflects an understanding of the game and at least a willingness to consider what someone else posts. From post 1, you've come on here tossing wild punches and ignoring any response that doesn't allow you to escalate.
I'm not a mod so have at it. Just friendly advice that it usually doesn't end well and you'd be missing out on the best kings forum around.
I'm not a mod so have at it. Just friendly advice that it usually doesn't end well and you'd be missing out on the best kings forum around.
People can post metrics. Or advanced stats. When at the end of the day, I'm tired of losing season after losing season as a Kings fan. So that is why all I will care about is whether or not the team gets the W, not whether a certain line up has a plus minus. And if trading away DC can get us 2-3 players that will help us win, that's what I am for.
Because he is the superstar. If he is going to want to take the credit for when they win, then he will be responsible for the L's pilled up. Same theory goes for every superstar, and the QB's in the NFL. If you get paid the most, and are the best player on the team, you will be responsible for the W-L records. Fair or not, its the way it is.
If the FO is considering firing Karl at some point (now or after the season) and are interrsted in Thibodeau, they need to make a move soon.
The Nets announced they will start interviewing for their head coach position starting Monday.
While we know our roster is much more attractive than the Nets, you never know.
The Nets announced they will start interviewing for their head coach position starting Monday.
While we know our roster is much more attractive than the Nets, you never know.
Nuggets have an extremely bright future.
Nikola Jokic is going to be so damn good in a few years if they develop him correctly. He's probably 3rd on my overall boards of rookies.. a bit high, but I think he's deserved it.
Out of topic, but I really hope Vlade goes after Joffrey Lauvergne. Tons of potential there. The Nuggets are just stacked with high upside players.
I'd honestly take their team over ours right now.
Nikola Jokic is going to be so damn good in a few years if they develop him correctly. He's probably 3rd on my overall boards of rookies.. a bit high, but I think he's deserved it.
Out of topic, but I really hope Vlade goes after Joffrey Lauvergne. Tons of potential there. The Nuggets are just stacked with high upside players.
I'd honestly take their team over ours right now.
By this line of reasoning the 02-03 Wizards were so bad that even Jordan could not help... in every career be it playing, coaching or slinging hot dogs if you hang around long enough your skills fade and you cease to be as effective as you once were. In his prime Karl was a fiery presence who got his players moving and could run up a hefty win total during the regular season and that coach belongs in the Hall of Fame right next to Don Nelson. That coach also never set foot in the Kings locker room. The befuddled old man you see trying to answer questions in post game interviews is the same guy who can not find answers to the Sixers and Brooklyn from court-side. I hate to be disrespectful of the man but when you say your best on ball defender is Curry and you like the defensive intensity of WCS but one never sees the court while the other is sitting wile your opponent is building a double digit lead then you should not be confused by the teams lack of defensive intensity.
You keep ignoring the fact that basketball is a team game. Just because the Kings haven't had a winning season with Cousins, it doesn't mean he is not a winning player. It's seriously short sighted to look at it that way. For instance, if Cousins was playing with 4 other toddlers on the court, he would lose every game. Is that blame really on him? Does that make him any less of a star? Of course not. Little Johnny & Timmy just can't stay in front of their man on defense. This example is obviously an exaggeration, but you can still apply this argument to his past teammates and coaches.
As Brick pointed out, the numbers actually show that we do win when he's on the floor. If you take away Cousins, we are as good as the Sixers. Cousins presence alone increases our win total by around 20 (record w/ Cousins vs. record w/0 Cousins). I'd like to see you find 5 other players who have that impact.
Look at this way..
Player A takes a team that would win 40 games and gets them to 55 wins.
Player B takes a team that would win 10 games and gets them to 30 wins.
With your logic, you would say that Player A is a winner because his team is over .500 while Player B is a loser who you'll never be able to win with. Obviously, this line of thinking is completely incorrect. Player B produced 5 more wins than would Player A, yet you still would like to call Player A a winner because he has better teammates/coaches. SMH
As Brick pointed out, the numbers actually show that we do win when he's on the floor. If you take away Cousins, we are as good as the Sixers. Cousins presence alone increases our win total by around 20 (record w/ Cousins vs. record w/0 Cousins). I'd like to see you find 5 other players who have that impact.
Look at this way..
Player A takes a team that would win 40 games and gets them to 55 wins.
Player B takes a team that would win 10 games and gets them to 30 wins.
With your logic, you would say that Player A is a winner because his team is over .500 while Player B is a loser who you'll never be able to win with. Obviously, this line of thinking is completely incorrect. Player B produced 5 more wins than would Player A, yet you still would like to call Player A a winner because he has better teammates/coaches. SMH
We aren't saying player A or player B. Demarcus is top 10 in the league and he doesn't have a winning record. The other 9 have made the playoffs before and has had a winning season.
LeBron took Larry Hughes, Boobie Gibson, Sasha Pavlovic, Ilgauskas to the finals. And it was also coached by a useless Mike Brown.
I find it ridiculous that DMC hasn't been able to lead his team to one winning season or playoff game. Even with Rondo and Gay as teammates this year they are 8 games under .500. I've seen worse teams get more success than the Kings, so DMC will be held accountable for 5 losing seasons.
LeBron took Larry Hughes, Boobie Gibson, Sasha Pavlovic, Ilgauskas to the finals. And it was also coached by a useless Mike Brown.
I find it ridiculous that DMC hasn't been able to lead his team to one winning season or playoff game. Even with Rondo and Gay as teammates this year they are 8 games under .500. I've seen worse teams get more success than the Kings, so DMC will be held accountable for 5 losing seasons.
The problem with the team is effort. I'm not going to be an armchair GM and say what needs to be done as I can't go into the locker room and hear what is going on. But it's something serious that's for sure.. Cancer needs to be cut out if is the coach or the players or both and I don't think anyone is safe, even DMC
You find it ridiculous because you don't take the time to assess the situation. You're taking an extremely lazy approach looking at the team's record and claiming that Cousins isn't a winner. Perhaps, if you had evidence to backup your claim that Cousins isn't a winner other than the team's record (which just so happens to reflect the team's performance not Cousins) you may actually be able to persuade some people.
Not lazy, as stated before, all I need to see is the team's record. All your metrics and numbers will not change the way I perceive him. He checks himself out of games with T's and suspensions, injury prone. And when not getting a call, he won't Sprint back on D. That will never inspire a ball club to have a winning atmosphere.
Right, because they prove your statements wrong hence taking the lazy approach.
Technicals & suspensions? Oh no. How can we ever be a competitive team? The Clippers & Thunder are in the top 3 this year in technicals yet they are both very good teams. Technicals are a part of the game, and Cousins doesn't even lead the league in this category.
Injury prone? Are we talking about DeMarcus Cousins? If you remove the games that he missed due to that freak illness he had last year. Cousins plays in over 90% of his games. That's better than Curry, Durant, Davis, George, Griffin, & Paul. He is not injury prone.
Interesting. Last time I checked, the Kings win when Cousins is on the floor despite him not sprinting back when not getting a call. Is it a negative? Yes, but it's something you live with if that player is helping you win when he is on the floor.
You really should provide some factual evidence next time you decide to post. You're not doing yourself any favors.
Technicals & suspensions? Oh no. How can we ever be a competitive team? The Clippers & Thunder are in the top 3 this year in technicals yet they are both very good teams. Technicals are a part of the game, and Cousins doesn't even lead the league in this category.
Injury prone? Are we talking about DeMarcus Cousins? If you remove the games that he missed due to that freak illness he had last year. Cousins plays in over 90% of his games. That's better than Curry, Durant, Davis, George, Griffin, & Paul. He is not injury prone.
Interesting. Last time I checked, the Kings win when Cousins is on the floor despite him not sprinting back when not getting a call. Is it a negative? Yes, but it's something you live with if that player is helping you win when he is on the floor.
You really should provide some factual evidence next time you decide to post. You're not doing yourself any favors.
I just keep hearing more and more excuses giving Demarcus a pass for being apart of a below 30 win team year in and year out. You guys will post what ever advanced metric for Boogie so you will just put it all on the coaches head. Your right, I'm sorry. All hail boogie for having a positive plus minus on the floor. Thanks for 28 wins a year. Let's just keep getting lottery picks, as long as Demarcus has a positive stat line, We can blame players 2-15 and the HC. Love it.
Apparently the USA national team thought enough of Boogie to put him in the mix to win gold the last time around and put him on the short list again this time. He's now a 2x all-star. He's arguably the top center in the league and the ONLY thing keeping the Kings even remotely close to the playoffs.
And some here think he is the problem???? Pull your heads out, will you? He ain't perfect, but he isn't the largest problem we have by FAR.
And some here think he is the problem???? Pull your heads out, will you? He ain't perfect, but he isn't the largest problem we have by FAR.