Kings scrimmages televised 7/22 & 7/25
- Thread starter PurpleHaze
- Start date
He's still the 2nd best player on the team so we have to take the good with the bad. He's the only guy who can erase a 10pt deficit in a heart beat. Luckily for us, he has more good games than he has bad. There aren't many players on the team that you can say that about. He also never disappears in games. You always notice him, the good and the bad.
I guess I can rephrase my question. Do we think that the change in the starting lineup had any effect on that record, or do we think that it was due purely to these other factors you guys list. We lost 6 straight, then we made a lineup change, then we went 13-7. Now, its possible that the lineup change had nothing to do with this turnaround, but its also possible that this change changes something about how the team functions which is borne out in the ultimate net rating, the score.
It's not just the starting lineup though, it's the insistence on playing big even though the starting units inability to get scoring early as a big unit was a problem prior to the restart and so far in this preseason has remained an issue. Maybe that still happens when small but one thing is for sure, the potential to pour it on in a hurry is much more likely with the smalls and in particular when Buddy Hield is on the floor. Look at this highlight package in particular. This game I thought was going to be the breaking point when it occurred. Early in the game, the big unit digs a hole. After awhile the smalls get some positivity going but it takes time to dig out and then Buddy as a part of that the Fox, Buddy, Bogdan, Barnes foursome with Bjelica at C do this. How do you not look at those 4 together more after this kind of output? SMH. I mean look at the spacing Buddy has. That's because of who is around him.
And I think it was clearly mostly those factors previously stated. I'm sure there are a few game threads noting when the team went small and the result as it was happening. And that's the thing, the net rating relative to small vs. big stayed in the same basic area win or lose if I recall. Small was still better than big. I think Giles for much of that run was at a persistent negative rating, or had just barely eclipsed into positive territory at one point but even that was likely do to him seeing minutes at center in a small unit. The thing I'm somewhat angry over is that the coaching staff not buying into it before makes it that much harder for any lineup change to get going now with any sort of rhythm. For all intents and purposes the playoffs begin on Friday. The crap thing is if the Kings don't get going in a hurry that will likely mean their drought continues so they don't get credit for it.
And I think it was clearly mostly those factors previously stated. I'm sure there are a few game threads noting when the team went small and the result as it was happening. And that's the thing, the net rating relative to small vs. big stayed in the same basic area win or lose if I recall. Small was still better than big. I think Giles for much of that run was at a persistent negative rating, or had just barely eclipsed into positive territory at one point but even that was likely do to him seeing minutes at center in a small unit. The thing I'm somewhat angry over is that the coaching staff not buying into it before makes it that much harder for any lineup change to get going now with any sort of rhythm. For all intents and purposes the playoffs begin on Friday. The crap thing is if the Kings don't get going in a hurry that will likely mean their drought continues so they don't get credit for it.
I don't disagree that going small has been beneficial for the Kings, but that is sort of orthogonal to this discussion. If the change in record was due to other factors, the change in those factors had to coincide with the lineup change to manifest itself in such a clean break in record. That seems like too much of a coincidence for me.
I think something fundamentally changes about team dynamics with this change. For example, and this is just me theorizing, Buddy is our second best player and our best scorer. Given that status, he takes the most shots. When you put Bogdan in the starting lienup, he does not carry the same weight, so more shots go to other starters. Then when Buddy gets in off the bench the shots he is taking are replacing the shots our bench players would be taking as opposed to those of the starters. Since he is a more efficient scorer than Bogdan, this results, on average, of more of the team's shots taken by better players than when Buddy starts. And that would be an example of one of the changes in dynamics that I'm referring to. Again, this is pure speculation on my part....
I think something fundamentally changes about team dynamics with this change. For example, and this is just me theorizing, Buddy is our second best player and our best scorer. Given that status, he takes the most shots. When you put Bogdan in the starting lienup, he does not carry the same weight, so more shots go to other starters. Then when Buddy gets in off the bench the shots he is taking are replacing the shots our bench players would be taking as opposed to those of the starters. Since he is a more efficient scorer than Bogdan, this results, on average, of more of the team's shots taken by better players than when Buddy starts. And that would be an example of one of the changes in dynamics that I'm referring to. Again, this is pure speculation on my part....
Spurs are starting Demar DeRozan at the 4. The Kings better start with Barnes at the 4 or they will get murdered.
Also - sometimes it comes down to player dynamics. Our starting lineup is only good when Fox is aggressive. I don’t think he and Buddy have learned to compliment each other yet. Buddy would be great in the starting lineup if he ran off screens like Kyle Korver. He does not. When he started next to Fox - Fox was too passive. They may get there over time , but we don’t have time right now.
Fox, Bogi, Bazemore, Barnes and Holmes should start. Joseph, Buddy, Jeffries, and Beli should get most of the bench minutes. Harry should get minutes when it makes sense to run the offense through him.
Also - sometimes it comes down to player dynamics. Our starting lineup is only good when Fox is aggressive. I don’t think he and Buddy have learned to compliment each other yet. Buddy would be great in the starting lineup if he ran off screens like Kyle Korver. He does not. When he started next to Fox - Fox was too passive. They may get there over time , but we don’t have time right now.
Fox, Bogi, Bazemore, Barnes and Holmes should start. Joseph, Buddy, Jeffries, and Beli should get most of the bench minutes. Harry should get minutes when it makes sense to run the offense through him.
It's not when you essentially live a duality within the rotation scheme. Again, this is what the stats back up and why I supplied that clip. That was a prime example of the dual existence Walton created by utilizing two different identities. One traditional one small ball. Buddy starting or not has nothing to do with it although the stats still back up that this team is simply more competitive when Fox and Buddy share the court and why Buddy seeing a decline in minutes might not be very smart if the idea is to be competitive.
Bjelica has shown an ability to get going but yeah, his usage makes it more unlikely than likely so where's the advantage long term. Here's my thing, if Walton wants to stay big then he needs to go at the mismatch game after game, otherwise you're just putting a monster truck out there when you're trying to win the Indy 500.
Fox's aggression is almost always tied to spacing. Teams aren't stupid. They're going to lock down the lane if they're playing big. They'll give the center the shot every time.
Fox's aggression is almost always tied to spacing. Teams aren't stupid. They're going to lock down the lane if they're playing big. They'll give the center the shot every time.
