Looking to the year ahead.
- Thread starter sactowndog
- Start date
I’d be more inclined to look at his Bucks stats than the last two years. But we’re talking about a guy who was a part of a terrible kings team at the end of the season and using words like “most impactful” isn’t very inspiring, DDVs fault or not. Throughout DDV’s career we are talking about a guy who’s average under 10 points, below 35% from 3 and barely over 40% from the field with above average rebounding and defensive stats. Could he have helped the kings? Undoubtedly, is he a player good enough to be talked about and brought up at every opportunity? Absolutely not. It’s clear from the Kings moves this year they were going after one thing, improve the shooting around Fox and Sabo. It’s also not hard to jump to the conclusion that DDV doesn’t exactly fit that mold nor did he want to be here. So it is what it is.
I suppose it depends on how you define leadership. If it must be the Process/the Presti method of selling the farm for the unknowable future, then sure, the Kings' leadership has fallen short. When everything is viewed through that particular prism, however, it gets easy to find confirmation of bias in everything. I think many get weary of your schtick because you rarely argue in good faith. You're mostly interested in finding evidence to "prove" that the Kings should have traded Fox and started a Presti-like rebuild. Once you're dug in there, it becomes pretty obvious to everyone around you that you don't have much interest in the merits of any move under the umbrella of the team's current strategy, because you're entirely focused on what you wish had happened a year ago instead, and are actively seeking as much confirmation of that bias as possible (and often condescendingly so).
Well said, I don’t think anyone here is blindly following Kings leadership and stan-ing every decision they make. In fact quite the opposite, I think most are wary to place full faith at their feet. I myself probably would have taken the Pacers reported trade offer, and put Duarte at the 2 and taken Manthurin at 6 and put him at the 3 and drafted Lidell at 37. Gives us what I feel a lot more depth with young pieces to develop imagining that Monk and Huerter were still acquired. But I’m not going to continue to berate and belittle because it didn’t happen the way I would have done it.
None of this is a new discussion topic.
Most of this board would have preferred a full reset and rebuild (me included). It didn't happen and it's just reality that Vivek isn't going to let it happen. So we have to operate as fans in that manner and hope we can at least make positive moves with a bad owner that's always looking to "win-now"
Most of this board would have preferred a full reset and rebuild (me included). It didn't happen and it's just reality that Vivek isn't going to let it happen. So we have to operate as fans in that manner and hope we can at least make positive moves with a bad owner that's always looking to "win-now"
Last edited:
You keep salary free for big rookie extensions and signing players once the team is getting good and you can identify holes that need to be filled. Rookie max extensions are getting pricey and you can’t just pile them on top of each other without messing with the cap or ownerships pockets
Trying to sign impact vets can end up being death by a thousand cuts with contracts and also doesn’t serve much of a purpose when you’re tanking and can just as easily fill those roster spots with guys from the G-league and other prospects you want to kick the tires on (or slash your teams own tires in terms of winning during a tank year)
Trying to sign impact vets can end up being death by a thousand cuts with contracts and also doesn’t serve much of a purpose when you’re tanking and can just as easily fill those roster spots with guys from the G-league and other prospects you want to kick the tires on (or slash your teams own tires in terms of winning during a tank year)
Ownership also didn't believe that Haliburton was the player to build around, or else he'd still be on this roster. I enjoyed watching him play. He was a throwback player, and definitely a good Robin, but he's no Batman. If you're looking for someone to get you a basket when everyone knows you need to get it, it's not him.
Fox, however, IS that kind of talent, and that's what you need to move upward. I also trust Sabonis (and although he is a rookie, Murray) to do the right thing, even if it isn't what gets on the highlight reel. I'm excited for penetration from the guards and heady plays from the post and wings. This is a smart team - I don't see any boneheads.
Fox/Monk/Huerter/Murray/Sabonis is a promising offensive lineup, and miles ahead of where this team ended the season.
Fox/Mitchell/Barnes/Murray/Sabonis can be adequate defensively, especially with Brown instilling a competent plan and getting the buy-in that is possible.
Fox/Davis/Huerter/Barnes/Murray will score points in a hurry (can probably safely run a zone for a few minutes).
Mitchell/Monk/Murray/Lyles/Holmes? I think that's my only question/concern. What does the lineup with 6-10 look like? I wouldn't trust it for more than 2 minutes at a time, but I also have a lot more faith in Mike Brown and Co. figuring it out moreso than Walton.
Fox, however, IS that kind of talent, and that's what you need to move upward. I also trust Sabonis (and although he is a rookie, Murray) to do the right thing, even if it isn't what gets on the highlight reel. I'm excited for penetration from the guards and heady plays from the post and wings. This is a smart team - I don't see any boneheads.
Fox/Monk/Huerter/Murray/Sabonis is a promising offensive lineup, and miles ahead of where this team ended the season.
Fox/Mitchell/Barnes/Murray/Sabonis can be adequate defensively, especially with Brown instilling a competent plan and getting the buy-in that is possible.
Fox/Davis/Huerter/Barnes/Murray will score points in a hurry (can probably safely run a zone for a few minutes).
Mitchell/Monk/Murray/Lyles/Holmes? I think that's my only question/concern. What does the lineup with 6-10 look like? I wouldn't trust it for more than 2 minutes at a time, but I also have a lot more faith in Mike Brown and Co. figuring it out moreso than Walton.
I think DDV was only available to at that price because his market dried up in a hurry. He was one of the last servicable SG available. If we gave 9.5M to Monk, we could have found the money to keep him if we wanted. Clearly the separation was a mutually acceptable decision. I still think having him on the team would make it more balanced than monk and Huerter, but overall this team is better than last year.
With Brown's calling card being defense but never really putting a spectacular offense together, maybe the thought was to put a roster together which can spontaneously provide a crutch to the coach's weak areas (offense) while allowing the coach to develop the roster in its weakest areas (defense). Who knows... But if the offense lives up to its potential and the defense can be brought up to at least mid-level... Who is better and who is worse and who is in probably around the same level?
Definitely Better:
1. Phoenix (with or without Ayton, i think they are still a top 5 team).
2. Clippers with a healthy Kawhi and PG13 and having signed John Wall (despite having lost a step) they are probably top 3 in the West
3. GSW for sure unless 2 of Klay, Curry or Wiggins get injured then they are a play in team for sure.
4. Memphis: probably a little worse defensively and depth wise than last year.
5. Denver: if Murray and porter are healthy and give you even 80% of what they did before injury (Murray may need more time than porter), they should be top 5.
6. Pelicans with a full season with CJ Mccollum, Ingraham and Valanciunas alone they should be a top 6 team. But with Herb Jones' internal growth and returning Zion (for even 50 games), they should be a top 5-6 team.
Next Tier (Probably Better)
7. Portland: internal development of Simmons and returning Dame alone should put them in contention for a play in spot. But adding Grant (if he gets that he is a 3rd offensive option and is content being the defensive stopper he can be and still capable of giving 16-18ppg) should be better than the Kings.
8. Minnesota: Keeps KAT, ANT, DLo and adds Gobert. They lose some perimeter defense with the loss of Vanderbilt and Beverly, and some perimeter offense with Beasley, but overall with DLo and and Gobert they should still have a reasonable defense, and with Beasley gone DLo may be more featured in the offense as he will have to shoulder more of the burden. Plus if they bring back Prince they can move ANT to the 2 and Prince to the 3 to help shore up some perimeter defense. Should still be a play-in team but from the 8.
Fighting for play-in:
9. Dallas: i think losing brunsen will hurt a lot. I dont think Hardy will make up for it but crazier things have happened. Is it enough to drop them this far depends on Luka being superman (possible) Hardy and Hardaway. Dinwiddie is as good as he will get imho (14-16ppg). Im not sure this team has enough fire power.
10. Kings: SHOULD be squarely in the running for the 10th spot (play in). Could go as high as 8.if everything falls their way but i could easily see them being jumped by lakers and OKC if they KANGZ the bed. If they do...they should firesale the whole team and sell everyone off for FRPs (2-3 for Fox and Sabonis each. 1 for Barnes, maybe 1 for Holmes if the partner team really needs him) . Reset with Mitchell, Huerter, Murray and multiple 1sts (not a truly bad reset spot.
11. Lakers unless the move Westbrook for Kyrie and they all remember how to defend im not sure they have anything left. Then again, they have enough talent to be a top 5 team in their top 3 players. So who knows which team shows up...
Outside looking in:
12. OKC: They are my dark horse though. Until i see how Holmgren, Giddey and SGA are together, im not sure this team couldnt surprise a number of other teams and over perform. I really think if he stays healthy, Holmgen will be the best in this years draft. He is the rebirth of Dirk Nowitzki in the body of White Manute Bol. I think this team will be very good in 2 years if Holmgren stays healthy.
13. Rockets: they are going for all firepower but zero defense
14. Jazz: no defense on the perimeter or inside. They have a Bogi and a Spider and nothing else.
15. Spurs (the new OKC).
With Brown's calling card being defense but never really putting a spectacular offense together, maybe the thought was to put a roster together which can spontaneously provide a crutch to the coach's weak areas (offense) while allowing the coach to develop the roster in its weakest areas (defense). Who knows... But if the offense lives up to its potential and the defense can be brought up to at least mid-level... Who is better and who is worse and who is in probably around the same level?
Definitely Better:
1. Phoenix (with or without Ayton, i think they are still a top 5 team).
2. Clippers with a healthy Kawhi and PG13 and having signed John Wall (despite having lost a step) they are probably top 3 in the West
3. GSW for sure unless 2 of Klay, Curry or Wiggins get injured then they are a play in team for sure.
4. Memphis: probably a little worse defensively and depth wise than last year.
5. Denver: if Murray and porter are healthy and give you even 80% of what they did before injury (Murray may need more time than porter), they should be top 5.
6. Pelicans with a full season with CJ Mccollum, Ingraham and Valanciunas alone they should be a top 6 team. But with Herb Jones' internal growth and returning Zion (for even 50 games), they should be a top 5-6 team.
Next Tier (Probably Better)
7. Portland: internal development of Simmons and returning Dame alone should put them in contention for a play in spot. But adding Grant (if he gets that he is a 3rd offensive option and is content being the defensive stopper he can be and still capable of giving 16-18ppg) should be better than the Kings.
8. Minnesota: Keeps KAT, ANT, DLo and adds Gobert. They lose some perimeter defense with the loss of Vanderbilt and Beverly, and some perimeter offense with Beasley, but overall with DLo and and Gobert they should still have a reasonable defense, and with Beasley gone DLo may be more featured in the offense as he will have to shoulder more of the burden. Plus if they bring back Prince they can move ANT to the 2 and Prince to the 3 to help shore up some perimeter defense. Should still be a play-in team but from the 8.
Fighting for play-in:
9. Dallas: i think losing brunsen will hurt a lot. I dont think Hardy will make up for it but crazier things have happened. Is it enough to drop them this far depends on Luka being superman (possible) Hardy and Hardaway. Dinwiddie is as good as he will get imho (14-16ppg). Im not sure this team has enough fire power.
10. Kings: SHOULD be squarely in the running for the 10th spot (play in). Could go as high as 8.if everything falls their way but i could easily see them being jumped by lakers and OKC if they KANGZ the bed. If they do...they should firesale the whole team and sell everyone off for FRPs (2-3 for Fox and Sabonis each. 1 for Barnes, maybe 1 for Holmes if the partner team really needs him) . Reset with Mitchell, Huerter, Murray and multiple 1sts (not a truly bad reset spot.
11. Lakers unless the move Westbrook for Kyrie and they all remember how to defend im not sure they have anything left. Then again, they have enough talent to be a top 5 team in their top 3 players. So who knows which team shows up...
Outside looking in:
12. OKC: They are my dark horse though. Until i see how Holmgren, Giddey and SGA are together, im not sure this team couldnt surprise a number of other teams and over perform. I really think if he stays healthy, Holmgen will be the best in this years draft. He is the rebirth of Dirk Nowitzki in the body of White Manute Bol. I think this team will be very good in 2 years if Holmgren stays healthy.
13. Rockets: they are going for all firepower but zero defense
14. Jazz: no defense on the perimeter or inside. They have a Bogi and a Spider and nothing else.
15. Spurs (the new OKC).
I wouldn't get your hopes up. All the metrics I've looked at on Monk have been really bad defensively. The one good thing is his offensive metrics are on the up and up.
I think you'll wind up being severely disappointed if you go off of whatever that podcast was rattling off. I think they were looking at bad information. Like that tweet that stated he was holding his opponents to some of the lowest FG percentages in the league. Not buying it.
Personally I'd rather have DDV and Huerter over Monk and Huerter but we'll see what happens.
I think you'll wind up being severely disappointed if you go off of whatever that podcast was rattling off. I think they were looking at bad information. Like that tweet that stated he was holding his opponents to some of the lowest FG percentages in the league. Not buying it.
Personally I'd rather have DDV and Huerter over Monk and Huerter but we'll see what happens.
Yeah, I think Monk is legitimately good on offense now, but there's no need for us to say "He's actually a good defender, trust!" when basically nothing points that way.
In terms of Monk vs DDV, I think they're pretty closely on the same tier. DDV makes more sense bringing an actual defender on a team with like 2 good ones, but the Monk shooting and chemistry with Fox should work out very nicely. And if DDV was just done with the Kings, do you risk another Buddy/Bagley situation where he hates being here and is just waiting to leave?
Fox and Monk are like actual best friends. I think that matters in building overall chemistry in the locker room and actually building a sustainable culture in Sacto. If you have to sacrifice some fit on defense to get that? Maybe works out.
In terms of Monk vs DDV, I think they're pretty closely on the same tier. DDV makes more sense bringing an actual defender on a team with like 2 good ones, but the Monk shooting and chemistry with Fox should work out very nicely. And if DDV was just done with the Kings, do you risk another Buddy/Bagley situation where he hates being here and is just waiting to leave?
Fox and Monk are like actual best friends. I think that matters in building overall chemistry in the locker room and actually building a sustainable culture in Sacto. If you have to sacrifice some fit on defense to get that? Maybe works out.
Haliburton is entering year 3, if we hit the reset, we'd max him out before we turned any corners. Same as it's always been, new toy, everyone must go. Tired of it. That's also a treadmill, just a different variety. And you can damn well bet your butt that fans would turn on Haliburton the second he got paid and the team sucked. Which it would if you go full process.
We had a full reset and rebuild and the moron GM missed on 80% of his draft picks. I'm cheating a bit because I am counting blowing 10, 15 and 20 + Marv but there were opportunities to get all stars at every one of those picks.
There's just no way Vivek could chance another. The fanbase is in shambles and other teams were able to rebuild without going full process.
There's just no way Vivek could chance another. The fanbase is in shambles and other teams were able to rebuild without going full process.
Yea lost in the Presti "Process" is how many owners would give their GM the leash to basically punt 3+ years of their franchise? Maybe Miami, TOR, SAS? Hinkie started all of this and he didn't get to survive his asset collection stage.
Also:
Fox-24 years old
Sabonis-26 years old
Mitchell-23 years old
Murray-21 years old (22 by season start)
Monk-24 years old
Huerter- 23 years old (24 by season start)
T.Davis- 25 years old
Metu- 25 years old
Queta- 22 years old
Ellis- 22 years old
So 6 of our 8 best players are all 26 and younger and are going to be entering their prime or a few years out from it. He aged down this team significantly while improving the overall talent. Holmes and Barnes are the old guys at 28 and 30 years old. Monte didn't do a full reset, but he certainly retooled in a manner that leaves potential upside in the player core to still get better. Major difference from the Fox/Bogi/Buddy/Holmes/Bagley/Barnes core we had 2 years ago.
Also:
Fox-24 years old
Sabonis-26 years old
Mitchell-23 years old
Murray-21 years old (22 by season start)
Monk-24 years old
Huerter- 23 years old (24 by season start)
T.Davis- 25 years old
Metu- 25 years old
Queta- 22 years old
Ellis- 22 years old
So 6 of our 8 best players are all 26 and younger and are going to be entering their prime or a few years out from it. He aged down this team significantly while improving the overall talent. Holmes and Barnes are the old guys at 28 and 30 years old. Monte didn't do a full reset, but he certainly retooled in a manner that leaves potential upside in the player core to still get better. Major difference from the Fox/Bogi/Buddy/Holmes/Bagley/Barnes core we had 2 years ago.
I doubt it, I even posted something in a game thread shortly before the Hali trade and brought up the fact that this very much looked like them showcasing the young guys. I truly don't think Monte ever had inclinations of trading Fox. Now I really believe that since the moves made this summer are all about Fox's wishes. They even potentially overpaid to bring his pal in.
