George Hill is mad. (Twitter)
- Thread starter SLAB
- Start date
Okay fair enough let’s look at that.
The closest year to the Kings current year would be Steph’s 3rd year and Klays 2nd
Steph 38 min. 23 points
D. Lee 37 min. 18.5 points
Klay. 36 min. 16.6 points
Jack. 30 min. 12.9 points
Landry. 23 min. 10.8 points
Barnes. 25 min. 9.2 points.
Bogut. 24 min. 5.6 points
So it’s close but Steph and Klay were clear leaders in minutes and points. Barnes was coming along. The warriors had 2 young guys averaging over 15 points..
Now the current Kings
Fox. 27 min. 10.1 points
Zach. 26 min. 15.2 points
Hill. 25 min. 9.0 points
Temple. 25 min. 7.8 points
Willie. 25 min. 10.2 points
Bogdan. 23 min. 9.7 points
Heild. 23 min. 12.5 points
In the case of the King’s no young guy is getting big minutes and the offense is not running via the young guys but ZBo. The kings don’t have any young guys over 15 points.
The big difference is the Warriors were leading with their young guys and supplementing with vets. The kings are leading with Vets.
The closest year to the Kings current year would be Steph’s 3rd year and Klays 2nd
Steph 38 min. 23 points
D. Lee 37 min. 18.5 points
Klay. 36 min. 16.6 points
Jack. 30 min. 12.9 points
Landry. 23 min. 10.8 points
Barnes. 25 min. 9.2 points.
Bogut. 24 min. 5.6 points
So it’s close but Steph and Klay were clear leaders in minutes and points. Barnes was coming along. The warriors had 2 young guys averaging over 15 points..
Now the current Kings
Fox. 27 min. 10.1 points
Zach. 26 min. 15.2 points
Hill. 25 min. 9.0 points
Temple. 25 min. 7.8 points
Willie. 25 min. 10.2 points
Bogdan. 23 min. 9.7 points
Heild. 23 min. 12.5 points
In the case of the King’s no young guy is getting big minutes and the offense is not running via the young guys but ZBo. The kings don’t have any young guys over 15 points.
The big difference is the Warriors were leading with their young guys and supplementing with vets. The kings are leading with Vets.
Well, obviously, we all have the right to believe what we want to believe. I just don't think it's credible to suggest that our veteran free agents (and their agents and advisors) were all lied to and thought we were going to be a playoff team this year. Or even if you're just suggesting that Hill was the ONE who believed this lie, it's just a bridge too far for me. I think the story was inspired by the emoji story and not much else.
Here is the thing, the Kings have like 9 players in their 1st or 2nd year, and one 3rd year (WCS). Coach Joeger is still trying to figure out which players are ready for prime time and which are not, thus the players minutes may not be as high as one might like.
And, until some of the young players start to step up and take those minutes from the other young players, including from the vets, I suspect that the Kings will be spreading the minutes among the youth for now.
Eventually though, if these players start to mature and improve, which young players usually do, hopefully in 2-3 years we will be a consistent playoff caliber team.
And, until some of the young players start to step up and take those minutes from the other young players, including from the vets, I suspect that the Kings will be spreading the minutes among the youth for now.
Eventually though, if these players start to mature and improve, which young players usually do, hopefully in 2-3 years we will be a consistent playoff caliber team.
This is why I wasn't going to play your game! Any example can always be torn to bits because it isn't exactly the same. But how can it be exactly the same when every situation is different? This is Vlade's plan, good or bad. Vivek seems to have put his trust (for the time being) in Vlade. I don't think Vlade and Joerger are in lock-step on the plan, but I think they trust each other. When's the last time you could say that about a King GM and coach?
Sorry you feel that way. I don't know your credentials but I have no reason not to believe a beat writer with a connection to Hill and with no history of fake news nor any reason to make up a story out of no where. The article was published in the Salt Lake Tribune. They are a very reputable source, it wasn't just on someone's Twitter feed or posted on Facebook.
Seems pretty out of line to resort to calling someone a troll over this post. You can refute the article just like someone has the right to believe it. None of us really know the real story.
Just because someone doesn't align with your thinking does not mean they deserved to be called a troll. Believe it or not, not every single thing the Kings do or not do should be praised just like not every single thing the Kings do or not do should be criticized.
The only absolute allowed is the absolute insistence that there is no absolute.
Just because someone doesn't align with your thinking does not mean they deserved to be called a troll. Believe it or not, not every single thing the Kings do or not do should be praised just like not every single thing the Kings do or not do should be criticized.
The only absolute allowed is the absolute insistence that there is no absolute.
Last edited:
Riiiiiiiight. Saying they aren't rebuilding when they have an excessive amount of young guys is just a stretch because Zbo helps us win. You just have to wrap your head around the view that Joergermdoesnt believe in just throwing young guys out there for 30 plus minutes to most likely fail. Clearly not unusual.
But some of these young guys HAVE gotten extended minutes when they are playing at a high level...Fox, Mason, Hield, Jackson, Bogi....WCS if you want to count a 3rd year guy.
But some of these young guys HAVE gotten extended minutes when they are playing at a high level...Fox, Mason, Hield, Jackson, Bogi....WCS if you want to count a 3rd year guy.
So a team has to mimic another team's strategy to be successful? And rebuilding can only be done a certain way? That's like saying you can only succeed in the NBA if you have a picture-perfect shooting style. Or that you're doomed unless you can do an alley-oop.
Trying to answer your question is like playing War Games.
Trying to answer your question is like playing War Games.
Hey, but you know what? He/she didn't call the poster a troll. They said it was a troll-post and a clown-post. In my world there's a big difference between calling someone stupid and saying they did something stupid. Same difference here. I don't think we should tolerate name calling that's meant to belittle, offend or embarrass. But criticizing their actions should get a lot more leeway IMO.