Starting lineup going forward - Fox, Buddy, Bogs, Barnes, WCS

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

reptilexcq2

Bench
#121
#121
The lineup of Fox, Hield, Bogi, Barnes and Willie seem to work out great. Kings have played some elite teams and were right there to win the games. Bagley eventually will start but he work so well with Giles coming off the bench helping fuse the 2nd unit....there is no reason to change it now.

Also, I wouldn't mind giving Cory more minutes over Burks. So far, Burks hasn't been doing much when he's out there.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#122
#122
Kingz19 said:
Bjeli never left the doghouse again tonight

If he doesn’t get burn in Minnesota of all places it’s safe to say he’s the odd man out going forward
Click to expand...
Joeger got lucky tonight F’ing around with a small ball line-up that shot 25% from 3, had a -7 plus minus and a -17 net rating. It’s not a line-up that worked at Denver, Golden State or OKC. It could well cost us in Minnesota.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#123
#123
reptilexcq2 said:
The lineup of Fox, Hield, Bogi, Barnes and Willie seem to work out great. Kings have played some elite teams and were right there to win the games. Bagley eventually will start but he work so well with Giles coming off the bench helping fuse the 2nd unit....there is no reason to change it now.

Also, I wouldn't mind giving Cory more minutes over Burks. So far, Burks hasn't been doing much when he's out there.
Click to expand...
You want to post some numbers to substantiate your comment.
 
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#126
#126
Let’s just wait and see against teams not ranked 1-2-3 in the West how the lineup works. To gauge a starting lineup on the road against Denver, Golden State, and Oklahoma City. That’s not very fair. After all none of the other starting lineups beat the warriors or the nuggets either.
 
Showtime

Showtime

Starter
#127
#127
Entity said:
Let’s just wait and see against teams not ranked 1-2-3 in the West how the lineup works. To gauge a starting lineup on the road against Denver, Golden State, and Oklahoma City. That’s not very fair. After all none of the other starting lineups beat the warriors or the nuggets either.
Click to expand...
We didn't have the new players in those games though. Moving Barnes from his natural position to a small-ball lineup potentially negates having our best team on the floor.

Fox/Yogi
Buddy/Bogi
Barnes/Brewer
Beli/MB3/Giles
WCS/MB3/Giles

That has way more balanced threats than anything we had with Shump and Jackson.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#130
#130
Entity said:
Let’s just wait and see against teams not ranked 1-2-3 in the West how the lineup works. To gauge a starting lineup on the road against Denver, Golden State, and Oklahoma City. That’s not very fair. After all none of the other starting lineups beat the warriors or the nuggets either.
Click to expand...
Perhaps but those other line-ups had a big lead going into the 3rd and the small ball line-up coughed it up.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#131
#131
Entity said:
Let’s just wait and see against teams not ranked 1-2-3 in the West how the lineup works. To gauge a starting lineup on the road against Denver, Golden State, and Oklahoma City. That’s not very fair. After all none of the other starting lineups beat the warriors or the nuggets either.
Click to expand...
You want to play a minus 17 line up big minutes against a must win Minnesota team?
 
Jkbiker

Jkbiker

Starter
#136
#136
So Dave goes to a 9 man rotation, Both Brewer and Bjelly both sit on the bench
Yogi,Burks,Marvin, Giles

Marvin plays with both units to get more minutes,
Bogie plays with both units also

Dave is experimenting with shorter rotation, 9 best players
but I am not sure if burks is better than bjelly

but you cant replace Burks with Bjelly ? Or can you hmmmm Bjeli played SF in Minn

If Marvin and Bogi splits tme on each squad

Maybe Yogi,Bjelly,Marvin, Giles as 4 bench players

I donno seems like too many bigs for a 4 man Bench
hmmm small bal starting 5
Big Man Bench

Gee how do we solve that?
Fox,Buddy,Barnes,Marvin,Willie
Yogi,Bogi,Brewer,Bjelly,Giles

There! Fixed it for ya Dave!
 
Last edited:
Showtime

Showtime

Starter
#137
#137
Let's also ignore the fact he's the second best deep shooter on the team behind Buddy, has very good advanced stats (in comparison with the rest of the team), and produces with relatively low usage. He doesn't need the ball, demand the ball, and still can have a huge impact. The Kings have won so many games with critical plays from him, and I while I understand Dave is trying to tune in a playoff rotation, I disagree that it should exclude a guy who has been a critical part of the team's success thus far.
 
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#138
#138
sactowndog said:
You want to play a minus 17 line up big minutes against a must win Minnesota team?
Click to expand...
Do you know how many minutes all 5 starters actually played on the floor at the same time? It was 7 minutes and 9 seconds. +1 in the first half -4 in the second half. Only played together for 2 min and 4 seconds I. The second half. Don’t act like we are seeing the starting lineup for 30 min a game. We aren’t.
 
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#139
#139
sactowndog said:
You want to play a minus 17 line up big minutes against a must win Minnesota team?
Click to expand...
Would please stop using that metric. It useless. Alec Burks was +6 according to your favorite stat line our best lineup would have been yogi, burks, buddy, Bagley, Giles. The +/- takes nothing into account. Raymond Felton was the leader for okc with +8 and Paul george was -2 as was Westbrook. So go to okc board and tell them that if Felton would have played more than either of those 2 guys they would have won the game
 
twslam07

twslam07

All-Star
#140
#140
Filtering down to lineups that include Barnes that have at least played 7 mins (yep, still far from a significant sample size):

Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Giles / Bagley = +43.8 (7 min)
Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Bagley / Cauley-Stein = +22.8 (27 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Cauley-Stein = +3.2 (39 min)
Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Bjelica / Cauley-Stein = -11.8 (33 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Koufos = -15.4 (7 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Bagley = -17.6 (8 min)
Barnes at SF: Ferrell / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Giles / Bagley = -65.0 (9 min)

These sample sizes are way too small to draw conclusions from, but it's tending to favor Barnes at SF. However, the new starting lineup still has a positive net rating despite playing 22 of it's 39 minute sample size against @OKC & @GSW (didn't play that lineup against DEN and only 1 min against PHO).

As Barnes settles in and starts shooting a normal % from three (no way is he going to continue shooting 25% fro three), I can see that lineups offensive rating jumping up even higher than (currently at 109.9 ) which will make that net rating climb even higher.

The whole point of playing Barnes at PF is that he is athletic, can score, and can shoot. Bagley at PF in these lineups has looked a lot more effective due to Barnes shooting slump. I'd imagine that when his slump ends, we will see the full potential of that lineup with Barnes at PF. Until then, we're basically starting a smaller, worse rebounding, & worse rim protecting Bagley.

Once Barnes' gets his shot back, we'll likely start to see that lineup paying dividends. I don't think it's a surprise that the net rating of that "small" lineup did well against MIA when Barnes shot 50% from 3 that game.
 
Last edited:
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#144
#144
Entity said:
Would please stop using that metric. It useless. Alec Burks was +6 according to your favorite stat line our best lineup would have been yogi, burks, buddy, Bagley, Giles. The +/- takes nothing into account. Raymond Felton was the leader for okc with +8 and Paul george was -2 as was Westbrook. So go to okc board and tell them that if Felton would have played more than either of those 2 guys they would have won the game
Click to expand...
Not using the metric as a player. Using that metric for a line up is very different.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#145
#145
twslam07 said:
Filtering down to lineups that include Barnes that have at least played 7 mins (yep, still far from a significant sample size):

Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Giles / Bagley = +43.8 (7 min)
Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Bagley / Cauley-Stein = +22.8 (27 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Cauley-Stein = +3.2 (39 min)
Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Bjelica / Cauley-Stein = -11.8 (33 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Koufos = -15.4 (7 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Bagley = -17.6 (8 min)
Barnes at SF: Ferrell / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Giles / Bagley = -65.0 (9 min)

These sample sizes are way too small to draw conclusions from, but it's tending to favor Barnes at SF. However, the new starting lineup still has a positive net rating despite playing 22 of it's 39 minute sample size against @OKC & @GSW (didn't play that lineup against DEN and only 1 min against PHO).

As Barnes settles in and starts shooting a normal % from three (no way is he going to continue shooting 25% fro three), I can see that lineups offensive rating jumping up even higher than (currently at 109.9 ) which will make that net rating climb even higher.

The whole point of playing Barnes at PF is that he is athletic, can score, and can shoot. Bagley at PF in these lineups has looked a lot more effective due to Barnes shooting slump. I'd imagine that when his slump ends, we will see the full potential of that lineup with Barnes at PF. Until then, we're basically starting a smaller, worse rebounding, & worse rim protecting Bagley.

Once Barnes' gets his shot back, we'll likely start to see that lineup paying dividends. I don't think it's a surprise that the net rating of that "small" lineup did well against MIA when Barnes shot 50% from 3 that game.
Click to expand...
Generally I agree with this statement. I have said if Bogi and Barnes were shooting well I would be fine with it. But both have been on an extended cold streak. We absolutely lose rebounding with that line-up as Bogi isn’t a great rebounder for a small forward.

You are fighting for a play-off spot with 3 of your most critical games right in front of you: @OKC, @Minn, and Clippers. Now is not the time to play Barnes at 4 and hope he comes out of his shooting slump. Beli, Bagley and Giles are all contributing more by every metric.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#146
#146
Jkbiker said:
So Dave goes to a 9 man rotation, Both Brewer and Bjelly both sit on the bench
Yogi,Burks,Marvin, Giles

Marvin plays with both units to get more minutes,
Bogie plays with both units also

Dave is experimenting with shorter rotation, 9 best players
but I am not sure if burks is better than bjelly

but you cant replace Burks with Bjelly ? Or can you hmmmm Bjeli played SF in Minn

If Marvin and Bogi splits tme on each squad

Maybe Yogi,Bjelly,Marvin, Giles as 4 bench players

I donno seems like too many bigs for a 4 man Bench
hmmm small bal starting 5
Big Man Bench

Gee how do we solve that?
Fox,Buddy,Barnes,Marvin,Willie
Yogi,Bogi,Brewer,Bjelly,Giles

There! Fixed it for ya Dave!
Click to expand...
Not to mention Dave already proved his guys tire out when playing 35 plus minutes at the Kings pace. After the Toronto debacle where the Kings were dead tired and blown out he went to a 10 man rotation. We then went 5-1 on our homestand with rested guys running players off the floor. Why go back to a 9 man rotation now? Why move from what worked back to what failed?
 
Entity

Entity

Hall of Famer
#149
#149
sactowndog said:
Not to mention Dave already proved his guys tire out when playing 35 plus minutes at the Kings pace. After the Toronto debacle where the Kings were dead tired and blown out he went to a 10 man rotation. We then went 5-1 on our homestand with rested guys running players off the floor. Why go back to a 9 man rotation now? Why move from what worked back to what failed?
Click to expand...
You are using road games vs the top 5 teams in the nba to prove your point. Then saying what worked was against 4 teams under .500. Has it not dawned on you yet that no matter what we do maybe it’s the level of competition
 
TaxMan

TaxMan

Starter
#150
#150
twslam07 said:
Filtering down to lineups that include Barnes that have at least played 7 mins (yep, still far from a significant sample size):

Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Giles / Bagley = +43.8 (7 min)
Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Bagley / Cauley-Stein = +22.8 (27 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Cauley-Stein = +3.2 (39 min)
Barnes at SF: Fox / Hield / Barnes / Bjelica / Cauley-Stein = -11.8 (33 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Koufos = -15.4 (7 min)
Barnes at PF: Fox / Hield / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Bagley = -17.6 (8 min)
Barnes at SF: Ferrell / Bogdanovic / Barnes / Giles / Bagley = -65.0 (9 min)

These sample sizes are way too small to draw conclusions from, but it's tending to favor Barnes at SF. However, the new starting lineup still has a positive net rating despite playing 22 of it's 39 minute sample size against @OKC & @GSW (didn't play that lineup against DEN and only 1 min against PHO).

As Barnes settles in and starts shooting a normal % from three (no way is he going to continue shooting 25% fro three), I can see that lineups offensive rating jumping up even higher than (currently at 109.9 ) which will make that net rating climb even higher.

The whole point of playing Barnes at PF is that he is athletic, can score, and can shoot. Bagley at PF in these lineups has looked a lot more effective due to Barnes shooting slump. I'd imagine that when his slump ends, we will see the full potential of that lineup with Barnes at PF. Until then, we're basically starting a smaller, worse rebounding, & worse rim protecting Bagley.

Once Barnes' gets his shot back, we'll likely start to see that lineup paying dividends. I don't think it's a surprise that the net rating of that "small" lineup did well against MIA when Barnes shot 50% from 3 that game.
Click to expand...
How dare you calmly present facts without hysterical hyperbole. You do realize you’re on the internet, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.