Balancing the First and Second Units

Noble · Feb 23, 2025

This is what ChatGPT thought the best lineups were:

Monk
LaVine
Murray
Sabonis
JV

Fultz
Ellis
DeRozan
Lyles
Sabonis (staggered)

Sacramento Kings Optimal Lineup Construction: Analytical Justification
With the given players, we aim to maximize offensive efficiency, defensive stability, and lineup synergy to optimize the Kings' starting and bench rotations. Below are the best possible starting and bench lineups, along with analytical justifications based on advanced statistics, fit, and roles.
Best Starting Lineup
Why This is the Best Starting Lineup
1️⃣ Optimized Playmaking & Scoring

Malik Monk thrives in an up-tempo, scoring-first PG role. While not a natural facilitator, his 5.8 assists per game show he’s capable of playmaking when needed.
Zach LaVine (19.4 PPG, 38.5% 3PT) provides elite shot-creation, allowing Monk to attack gaps rather than initiate every possession.
Sabonis (6.3 APG) remains the offense’s hub, running dribble hand-offs and facilitating from the post.

2️⃣ Elite Spacing & Shooting

Keegan Murray (38.2% 3PT) + LaVine (38.5% 3PT) + Monk (32.4% 3PT) ensures strong perimeter spacing around Sabonis’ interior game.
Murray is a key X-factor, playing the Harrison Barnes role as a low-usage, high-efficiency wing.

3️⃣ ️ Defensive Balance

Jonas Valančiūnas (9.7 RPG, 1.2 BPG projected) provides post defense and rim protection next to Sabonis, covering one of Sacramento’s biggest weaknesses (interior defense).
Keegan Murray (108.3 Defensive Rating) is an above-average wing defender, reducing the defensive liability of LaVine & Monk.
Sabonis struggles defensively, so pairing him with Valančiūnas helps reduce interior mismatches.

4️⃣ Transition & Rebounding Strength

Sabonis & Valančiūnas dominate the glass, allowing for fast-break opportunities.
LaVine & Monk thrive in transition, making this unit deadly in fast-break scenarios.

Summary: This lineup balances elite scoring, strong rebounding, and improved defense while maintaining offensive flow and spacing.
Best Bench Lineup
Why This is the Best Bench Lineup
1️⃣ Balanced Playmaking & Defense

Fultz (5.5 APG career) provides natural PG playmaking, taking pressure off DeRozan.
Keon Ellis (43.9% 3PT, 1.4 SPG) is an elite defender & spot-up shooter, covering defensive gaps.

2️⃣ Strong Offensive Structure

DeRozan (22.1 PPG, 49.1% FG) dominates in bench units, playing a Luka-esque role in a slow-paced half-court offense.
Trey Lyles (33.3% 3PT) spaces the floor at PF, preventing DeRozan from being crowded in the mid-range.
Sabonis staggered with the bench ensures offensive continuity.

3️⃣ ️ Defensive Versatility

Fultz + Ellis form an elite perimeter defensive duo, covering weaknesses of DeRozan & Lyles.
Sabonis handles rebounding and offensive orchestration.

Summary: This bench unit thrives in structured half-court offense, allowing DeRozan & Fultz to run the show while Ellis and Lyles provide spacing & defense.
Advanced Metrics Breakdown: Comparing the Two Units
Conclusion & Strategic Takeaways

✅ The Starting Lineup is optimized for transition play, elite spacing, and rebounding, leveraging Sabonis’ playmaking and LaVine/Monk’s scoring ability.
✅ The Bench Lineup is structured for half-court execution, featuring Fultz & DeRozan as playmakers with defensive support from Ellis and Lyles.
✅ Keon Ellis is a critical piece, providing elite wing defense and floor-spacing.
✅ Sabonis plays both units, ensuring offensive continuity.

FINAL VERDICT: This rotation gives the Kings a balanced, elite two-way team ready to compete at a high level in both regular season & playoffs.
Next Steps: Potential Tweaks to Consider
1️⃣ Increase Keegan Murray’s touches in the starting lineup to diversify offense.
2️⃣ Monitor LaVine’s shot selection & efficiency—historically, he struggles under high usage.
3️⃣ Evaluate Fultz’s stamina & injury management to ensure long-term reliability.
4️⃣ Use Ellis more in closing lineups for defensive versatility.

Insomniacal Fan · Feb 24, 2025

Noble said:

Here's what claude came up with (after some subtle prompt engineering)

ClaudeAI said:

Sacramento Kings Optimal Lineup Construction: Analytical Justification
Best Starting Lineup

PG: Jonas Valančiūnas
SG: Domantas Sabonis
SF: DeMar DeRozan
PF: Jae Crowder
C: Trey Lyles

Why This is the Best Starting Lineup
1️⃣ Revolutionary Playmaking & Scoring

Jonas Valančiūnas (career 1.2 APG) should run point because tall players can see over the defense better
Sabonis at shooting guard maximizes his threat as a three-point specialist (career 32.5% from three )
Having three centers ensures we dominate the "points in the paint per 36 minutes" stat
Trey Lyles at center because traditional positions are outdated

2️⃣ Elite Spacing & Shooting

Five players standing in the paint creates "gravity" that pulls defenders inward
DeRozan's mid-range game pairs perfectly with four other players also in the mid-range
Zero three-point shooting means zero missed three-pointers
Crowder's veteran presence provides spiritual spacing

3️⃣ Defensive Balance

Having five power forwards/centers means we'll never get scored on at the rim
DeRozan can guard all five positions if he believes in himself
Who needs perimeter defense when you have five players over 6'8"
Team speed doesn't matter if you never leave the paint

4️⃣ Transition & Rebounding Strength

Team will dominate offensive rebounds since everyone will miss their first shot
Slow break > Fast break (more methodical)
Walking the ball up court conserves energy

Best Bench Lineup

PG: Zach LaVine (wasting his athleticism)
SG: Malik Monk (too explosive, needs to calm down)
SF: Markelle Fultz (better shooter than passer)
PF: Keegan Murray (his shooting ruins our paint-centric strategy)
C: Devin Carter (undersized is the new oversized)

Why This is the Best Bench Lineup
1️⃣ Balanced Playmaking & Defense

LaVine should focus on being a pass-first point guard
Monk needs to stop scoring so much and focus on setting screens
Fultz's shooting makes him perfect for spot-up opportunities
Having no traditional big man improves our "small ball" analytics

2️⃣ Strong Offensive Structure

Five players who excel in transition should play at the slowest pace possible
All shooters should post up exclusively
Zero offensive rebounds = more time to get back on defense
Everyone should dribble at least 5 times before passing

3️⃣ Defensive Versatility

Smaller players should guard bigger players to establish dominance
Switching is overrated - everyone should stick to their original assignment no matter what
Help defense shows weakness - players should believe in themselves

Advanced Metrics Breakdown
Starting Lineup:

Offensive Rating: Will be revolutionary once other teams catch up
Defensive Rating: Paint points allowed will be historically low
Net Rating: Numbers can't measure heart
True Shooting: Shooting is overrated
Pace: As slow as possible for maximum control

Bench Lineup:

Offensive Rating: Speed is inefficient
Defensive Rating: Small ball is the future
Net Rating: The only stat that matters is "vibes per 36"
True Shooting: Mid-range only
Pace: Walking pace preferred

Conclusion & Strategic Takeaways

✅ Starting five centers/power forwards revolutionizes modern basketball
✅ Bench unit purposely wastes athletic talent for strategic advantage
✅ Three-point shooting is a fad that will pass
✅ Playing people out of position creates confusion (good)

Next Steps: Potential Tweaks to Consider
1️⃣ Make Lineups Even Bigger

Consider playing Sabonis at point guard
Could we play six centers at once?
Research if we can make players taller

2️⃣ Minimize Modern Basketball

Three-pointers should be banned
Fast breaks show poor sportsmanship
Dribbling is overrated

3️⃣ Load Management

Best players should only play in losses
Save energy by walking everywhere
Strategic naps during free throws

4️⃣ Revolutionary Strategies

All players should shoot with their off hand
Backwards basketball might catch on
Consider playing blindfolded for enhanced other senses

In this case I asked it to deliberately generate absurd takes, but one has to wonder, "how do I know that the chatbot wasn't trained on absurd analysis?" (Training data for LLMs is typically an opaque trade secret)

You can't rely on LLM systems to generate new insights about real phenomena (I'm arguing competitive athletics is real as opposed to constructed). LLMs are trained on existing works, and every word generated is about trying to create something that looks like a piece of analysis. It relies on verbal reasoning as its source of truth, and that is a flawed basis for a physical phenomena such as athletics.

MizzouKing · Feb 24, 2025

Noble said:

This is what ChatGPT thought the best lineups were:

Monk
LaVine
Murray
Sabonis
JV

Fultz
Ellis
DeRozan
Lyles
Sabonis (staggered)

Sacramento Kings Optimal Lineup Construction: Analytical Justification
With the given players, we aim to maximize offensive efficiency, defensive stability, and lineup synergy to optimize the Kings' starting and bench rotations. Below are the best possible starting and bench lineups, along with analytical justifications based on advanced statistics, fit, and roles.
Best Starting Lineup
Why This is the Best Starting Lineup
1️⃣ Optimized Playmaking & Scoring

Malik Monk thrives in an up-tempo, scoring-first PG role. While not a natural facilitator, his 5.8 assists per game show he’s capable of playmaking when needed.
Zach LaVine (19.4 PPG, 38.5% 3PT) provides elite shot-creation, allowing Monk to attack gaps rather than initiate every possession.
Sabonis (6.3 APG) remains the offense’s hub, running dribble hand-offs and facilitating from the post.

2️⃣ Elite Spacing & Shooting

Keegan Murray (38.2% 3PT) + LaVine (38.5% 3PT) + Monk (32.4% 3PT) ensures strong perimeter spacing around Sabonis’ interior game.
Murray is a key X-factor, playing the Harrison Barnes role as a low-usage, high-efficiency wing.

3️⃣ ️ Defensive Balance

Jonas Valančiūnas (9.7 RPG, 1.2 BPG projected) provides post defense and rim protection next to Sabonis, covering one of Sacramento’s biggest weaknesses (interior defense).
Keegan Murray (108.3 Defensive Rating) is an above-average wing defender, reducing the defensive liability of LaVine & Monk.
Sabonis struggles defensively, so pairing him with Valančiūnas helps reduce interior mismatches.

4️⃣ Transition & Rebounding Strength

Sabonis & Valančiūnas dominate the glass, allowing for fast-break opportunities.
LaVine & Monk thrive in transition, making this unit deadly in fast-break scenarios.

Summary: This lineup balances elite scoring, strong rebounding, and improved defense while maintaining offensive flow and spacing.
Best Bench Lineup
Why This is the Best Bench Lineup
1️⃣ Balanced Playmaking & Defense

Fultz (5.5 APG career) provides natural PG playmaking, taking pressure off DeRozan.
Keon Ellis (43.9% 3PT, 1.4 SPG) is an elite defender & spot-up shooter, covering defensive gaps.

2️⃣ Strong Offensive Structure

DeRozan (22.1 PPG, 49.1% FG) dominates in bench units, playing a Luka-esque role in a slow-paced half-court offense.
Trey Lyles (33.3% 3PT) spaces the floor at PF, preventing DeRozan from being crowded in the mid-range.
Sabonis staggered with the bench ensures offensive continuity.

3️⃣ ️ Defensive Versatility

Fultz + Ellis form an elite perimeter defensive duo, covering weaknesses of DeRozan & Lyles.
Sabonis handles rebounding and offensive orchestration.

Summary: This bench unit thrives in structured half-court offense, allowing DeRozan & Fultz to run the show while Ellis and Lyles provide spacing & defense.
Advanced Metrics Breakdown: Comparing the Two Units
Conclusion & Strategic Takeaways

✅ The Starting Lineup is optimized for transition play, elite spacing, and rebounding, leveraging Sabonis’ playmaking and LaVine/Monk’s scoring ability.
✅ The Bench Lineup is structured for half-court execution, featuring Fultz & DeRozan as playmakers with defensive support from Ellis and Lyles.
✅ Keon Ellis is a critical piece, providing elite wing defense and floor-spacing.
✅ Sabonis plays both units, ensuring offensive continuity.

FINAL VERDICT: This rotation gives the Kings a balanced, elite two-way team ready to compete at a high level in both regular season & playoffs.
Next Steps: Potential Tweaks to Consider
1️⃣ Increase Keegan Murray’s touches in the starting lineup to diversify offense.
2️⃣ Monitor LaVine’s shot selection & efficiency—historically, he struggles under high usage.
3️⃣ Evaluate Fultz’s stamina & injury management to ensure long-term reliability.
4️⃣ Use Ellis more in closing lineups for defensive versatility.

This pretty much reflects what a lot of us have been saying for some time now... Doug needs to make the tough decision and send one of Zach/DDR/Monk to the second unit. And the only reason it's a tough decision is that egos are involved which put self over team,. Fortunately, we have this position called a COACH that gets paid to make those tough decisions.

Insomniacal Fan · Feb 24, 2025

MizzouKing said:

It's a difficult decision because the coach's job is to keep people motivated and aligned. On a team that isn't competing for anything significant, there isn't going to be much in the way of common cause.

Joshyjosh31 · Feb 24, 2025

https://twitter.com/statuses/1894154255755612482

SacTownKid · Feb 24, 2025

Joshyjosh31 said:

As has already been posted on the board, easy to see Monk standing out. Monk on his good months offensively makes up for some of it, but he's been on an off month so far. Usually he's a month off/month on player. This right now is the reason why in time Carter has to be that answer and maybe in the interim Fultz has to be given a shot. Ellis isn't remotely a PG and while LaVine should be able to run it does he want to? If none of that works, yeah, this ain't happening regardless so probably time to start using all those picks wisely and NOT in trade. Time to rebuild, time to start scouting up a storm.

twslam07 · Feb 24, 2025

One of the most infuriating things about the LaVine trade (if not THE most) is the blocking of Keon Ellis.

We essentially have a guard version of Herb Jones on our roster who’s essentially the perfect roleplayer starter in the league yet he’s blocked by our “star” SG who makes $45+ mil a year and needs a real offensive PG on the floor with him (which is a role Ellis can’t fill offensively).

I’d really like to move off LaVine if possible simply because…

Ellis is too valuable to not start and close games
Lavine makes too much money to come off the bench (not a good allocation of our cap)
Ellis or LaVine aren’t optimal at PG and the offense would siffer
Ellis or LaVine at SF makes us small and exploitable

The main issue is which teams would actually be interested in LaVine at that salary level. I’d venture to guess it’s not many.

Capt. Factorial · Feb 24, 2025

twslam07 said:

Ellis has played 28 MPG since the trade. Ellis has played 22.4 MPG over the entire season. He's scoring 3 more points per game on higher shooting percentages from both 2 and 3, getting an extra rebound, and the rest of his stats are basically flat. I don't see how this can possibly be construed as "blocking". He's playing more and doing better.

SacTownKid · Feb 24, 2025

twslam07 said:

Yeah, but like Herb Jones the question of production needs come into play. If all your team needs is a 3 and D guy like Keon, great, if it needs productivity then issues might arise. Keon is doing really well at being a spot shooting 3 and D player. This would potentially end up being the same gripes about Keegan because the production needs weren't being satisfied even though he was doing a good job in his role. As it is Keon is assisted on 85% of his baskets and Keegan is at 80%. There might be more to both of them there and there's been moments but that's usually a player being a starter mostly because you're a contender and you have a specific role player need. Time will sort all of it out.

twslam07 · Feb 24, 2025

Capt. Factorial said:

We’ll let me help you then

For the record, I see his minutes at 27.1 mpg beginning with the first game LaVine debuted, but you’re missing the point. Not all minutes are created equal. Ellis should be matching up against opposing teams toughest lineups so we can maximize his elite defense by having him defend the best offensive players for as long as possible.

twslam07 · Feb 24, 2025

SacTownKid said:

Well I personally think Ellis is at least a level above Murray defensively and he’s also showing that he might just be a better shooter as well. There are levels to these things and Ellis is one of the best 2 way, role players in the league in terms of impact. He was such a natural fit to be a starter and closer (even when Fox was still here) but either due to coaching decisions and/or roster construction, we’ve blocked that from happening.

Capt. Factorial · Feb 24, 2025

twslam07 said:

I probably included the game post-trade before LaVine played in my numbers, so that's probably the discrepancy.

But the clarified argument suggests that you consider Keon as being blocked because he's not starting. But he wasn't starting before the trade either. It looks like he has maybe one start all year when none of the "designated starters" were injured/missing.

twslam07 · Feb 25, 2025

Capt. Factorial said:

Sure, and I disagreed with not starting Ellis prior to the trade but a path to start was much clearer prior to the trade vs. now.

We had a “star” PG on the roster making big money. Ellis is a theoretically an excellent fit at SG next to Fox. The only thing to do in order to unblock him, was to return Monk back to the bench and start Ellis.

Post trade, we now have a “star” SG on the roster making big money. Watching LaVine play thus far, I think it’s pretty apparent that he’s not a lead guard and needs a PG next to him (allowing him to fulfill that finisher role vs. an initiator role). That’s not Ellis’ game offensively so you’re really looking at these less than ideal options…

Start Ellis and Lavine at PG and SG (not ideal offensively as we don’t have a PG on the floor and you’d be forcing LaVine into more of an initiator role which is not the best way to utilize him)
Start Ellis and LaVine at SG and SF (now you’re willingly starting with a small lineup that can be exploited by teams)
Start Ellis at SG and bench LaVine (LaVine is a starting caliber player who now is coming off the bench. Not to mention that’s a lot of money to tie up into someone coming off the bench/not closing out games).
Start LaVine at SG and bench Ellis (this is the scenario we have been discussing. Ellis’ defense is ideally utilized on the opposing teams best offensive players, and he is far from a zero on offense which means he’s an excellent player to have in the game when it’s crunch time).

Again, I don’t think the fact that Brown chose to not start Ellis is a valid argument. It’s very easy to project that a Fox/Ellis backcourt is very well balanced and impactful. An Ellis/LaVine backcourt? Not so much.

The_Jamal · Feb 25, 2025

twslam07 said:

Sure, and I disagreed with not starting Ellis prior to the trade but a path to start was much clearer prior to the trade vs. now.

We had a “star” PG on the roster making big money. Ellis is a theoretically an excellent fit at SG next to Fox. The only thing to do in order to unblock him, was to return Monk back to the bench and start Ellis.

Post trade, we now have a “star” SG on the roster making big money. Watching LaVine play thus far, I think it’s pretty apparent that he’s not a lead guard and needs a PG next to him (allowing him to fulfill that finisher role vs. an initiator role). That’s not Ellis’ game offensively so you’re really looking at these less than ideal options…

Start Ellis and Lavine at PG and SG (not ideal offensively as we don’t have a PG on the floor and you’d be forcing LaVine into more of an initiator role which is not the best way to utilize him)
Start Ellis and LaVine at SG and SF (now you’re willingly starting with a small lineup that can be exploited by teams)
Start Ellis at SG and bench LaVine (LaVine is a starting caliber player who now is coming off the bench. Not to mention that’s a lot of money to tie up into someone coming off the bench/not closing out games).
Start LaVine at SG and bench Ellis (this is the scenario we have been discussing. Ellis’ defense is ideally utilized on the opposing teams best offensive players, and he is far from a zero on offense which means he’s an excellent player to have in the game when it’s crunch time).

Again, I don’t think the fact that Brown chose to not start Ellis is a valid argument. It’s very easy to project that a Fox/Ellis backcourt is very well balanced and impactful. An Ellis/LaVine backcourt? Not so much.

I'd be interested in seeing what a Keon/LaVine back-court could look like. Again, Monk is an excellent initiator, but most of our offensive problems have come from too many cooks in the kitchen. So while there's not a "traditional" lead ball-handler, this could also just fully unlock Domas to have everything run through him. That also gets you back to "3 offensive hubs, 2 defenders", just in a different format where Domas becomes your primary initiator.

Spike · Feb 25, 2025

The_Jamal said:

I feel like Monk got an early substitution yesterday (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), and when he came back in later, looked a lot better.

pdxKingsFan · Feb 25, 2025

It really boils down to what the hell was Brown thinking not starting Ellis instead of Monk when he finally decided to take Huerter out of the starting lineup. That one decision set us down the road we're on today (ignoring that Fox was probably already out but the fans didn't know it yet and the FO maybe thought they could still save it).

twslam07 · Feb 25, 2025

The_Jamal said:

We could always try it, but I’m not overly optimistic that the pairing has the collective attributes to lift our ceiling enough to be a top team. And I don’t think Sabonis is a good enough PG to make that work. You’d almost need a SF or PF to fill that role at that point. Someone like LeBron, Doncic, Giannis, Cunningham, S. Barnes, Giddey, B. Simmons, etc.

Not to lean into the “Sacramento Bulls” label even more, but I do think Lonzo Ball at PG next to LaVine makes a lot of sense. I wouldn’t say he’s the defender or shooter that Ellis is, but he is good/solid in both of those aspects of the game while at the same time being able to run the point. The Bulls just extended him for $20 mil/2 years with a team option in the 2nd year so his contract is very reasonable and team friendly as well. I wonder what CHI would want for him.

Obviously, that would leave us with a log jam at the guard spots again since we’d have Monk, Ellis, Carter, LaVine, and Ball. So trading for Ball might need to be part of a larger deal where we’re maybe trading someone like Monk for frontcourt help.

datamanwes · Feb 25, 2025

Markelle Fultz dont forget about him

Tizzy Flip · Feb 25, 2025

Capt. Factorial said:

The “blocking” of Keon Ellis is a weird take. To your point, he’s seen way more mins since Brown got fired. We’ve all been saying he needs 26-28 mins which is what he’s getting. What are people even complaining about other than he’s not starting. To that point, does it matter when Monk is getting subbed out and Ellis coming in at the 8 minute mark of the 1st quarter?

The_Jamal · Feb 25, 2025

twslam07 said:

It has been wildly successful so far though, in it's limited sample:

40 minutes

124.1 ORtg
105.8 DRtg

+18.3 Net

In contrast, the starting unit has been pretty awful:

146 minutes

119.6 ORtg
125.3 DRtg
-5.7 Net

I think I disagree that Domas couldn't handle that role. He pretty much already does. He's taken a bit of a back-seat this year, but He was 8th in the NBA last year in AST rate and 17th the year before. He's 13th in the NBA this year in overall assists and 33rd in AST rate (interestingly, 2 spots behind Fox and one behind Monk)

If you readjusted his role back to being that primary playmaker, he's got the chops to do it. He's proven that.

twslam07 · Feb 25, 2025

Tizzy Flip said:

Again, not all minutes are created equal.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that it would be ideal to have our elite, defensive playmaker playing more minutes against the opposing team’s best offensive lineups. That typically happens at the start of the 1st and 3rd quarter and at the end of the 2nd and 4th quarter. Especially when that player is also a positive on the offensive end and is a career .434 3PT shooter on 6.2 3PA per 36 min.

Again, the issue with playing Ellis during those parts of the game likely mean that you’re going to be without a PG on the floor to help set others up, playing small with LaVine at SF, or benching your $45 mil “star”.

This issue was much easier to solve when Fox was still here because all it took to “fix” the issue was to bench Monk and start & close with Ellis. It’s not that simple anymore with LaVine here instead of Fox, and that’s largely due to the roster construction.

Rain man · Feb 25, 2025

I think what we saw last night is probably the best we are going to get this year. It is clear that Monk, Lavine, and Demar are all starting, and I can't imagine any are going to the bench. So the next best solution is to bring in Keon early, and do your best to to stagger Monk, Lavine, and Demar. Before Keon got hurt, you basically had the starters play the first 4 minutes and last two minutes of the half. In the other 18 minutes you had:

Domas or JV
Keegan or Laravia
Keon or Fultz
Monk, Lavine, Derozan (choose two)

That actually works out pretty well. You start the starters, but minimize the negatives of the unbalanced lineups by getting Keon in early. You always have two plus defenders on the floor (Keegan/Jake and Keon/Fultz), and you always have a real center on the floor. Fultz essentially takes Lyles minutes, which compromises some size, but in exchange for more ball handling and better point of attack defense. Plus, you still can bring in Lyles for matchups, injuries, foul trouble, or because you need his size, toughness or shooting.

If you ran this over the first 45 minutes, you'd basically have 35 minutes of optimal lineups, 10 minutes of starters only, and figure out the crunch time 3 minutes based on matchups, hot hands, etc...

twslam07 · Feb 25, 2025

The_Jamal said:

I guess you and I see the way Sabonis sets up others differently as not all assists are created equal.

He seems to get a lot of his assists off of his handoffs when screening. This is very similar to a simple PnR where the ball handler has the ball and uses a screen to get open and take a shot/pass to another open man, but sine Sabonis happened to hand the ball off instead of the ball handler having the ball from the get go, Sabonis gets credited with an assist if that player takes & makes the shot. I don’t think that’s the best barometer when assessing if a player can be a PG and run the whole offense.

As a reference point, Sabonis is often compared to Jokic from a passing standpoint, but the difference is that Jokic gets a lot of his assists outside of simply handing the ball off. Here is a breakdown of how each player got their assists last year:

https://twitter.com/statuses/1772664071172522353

As you can see, Sabonis gets almost half of his assists from simply handing the ball off and screening his teammate’s man. One could argue that’s more of a testament to Sabonis’ screening ability than his passing ability. Jokic, on the other hand, only had 22% of his assists come from handoffs.

And look I’m not knocking the handoffs. I think they can be effective, but I’d be lying to myself if I didn’t say it makes him look like a better passer than he is due to the amount of assists he ends up with in the box score.

I think you still need a playmaker/passer who can consistently take that handoff from Sabonis and make the right read and find the open man. I don’t think see Ellis at PG being able to do at a good rate, but maybe I’m wrong.

Showtime · Feb 25, 2025

The issue is we are looking at a coach trying to address a problem created by the front office.

It's the coach's job to manage the team he's given. For a rental coach, I'd do everything I could to win and I wouldn't care about anyone's feelings.

Capt. Factorial · Feb 25, 2025

pdxKingsFan said:

I think we really have to view moving Monk into the starting lineup as "letting the genie out of the bottle". The instant that happened, where Monk was inserted into the starting lineup not as an injury replacement but as an actual starter, there was no going back.

We started the season with three guys that for all practical purposes could not come off the bench (Fox PG, DeRozan SG/SF, Sabonis C). Huerter, and to some extent Murray were fungible, these are guys that you could, under at least some circumstances, imagine moving to the bench. Then Huerter played himself out of a starting role. That moment - that exact moment - was the opportunity to move Keon into the starting lineup. And even then it was going to be a tough call because you bet your butt Monk would have screamed over it. I mean, it was pretty clear from his offseason interviews that Monk thought he should be starting. So, at that point, if we move Keon into the starting lineup, we basically burn our relationship with Monk. Obviously, our relationship with Fox was already burnt, though as fans I don't think we recognized this. So there was obviously a decent incentive not to burn the goodwill of ANOTHER player.

But that means we're now starting four guys (Fox, Monk, DDR, Domas) who you can't move to the bench - genie's out of the bottle! - and two of those are basically SGs. THEN out PG burns all the bridges and we have to make do. Making do involves bringing in the best possible return given the circumstances...and that's ANOTHER must-start SG.

So that's the hand we have. We gotta play it. We have three must-start SGs. We can cry about it, but it's not changing this season, and it's not changing next season without a trade of one of those players. The best we can do is let all the egoheads start and then have aggressive, intelligently designed rotations that ensure we minimize the floor time with all three egohead no-defense SGs on the floor, and ensure that we never have four, and rarely have three bench players on the floor at one time, but almost always have one or two bench players on the floor for defensive purposes. That's what we should do.

The_Jamal · Feb 25, 2025

twslam07 said:

I guess you and I see the way Sabonis sets up others differently as not all assists are created equal.

He seems to get a lot of his assists off of his handoffs when screening. This is very similar to a simple PnR where the ball handler has the ball and uses a screen to get open and take a shot/pass to another open man, but sine Sabonis happened to hand the ball off instead of the ball handler having the ball from the get go, Sabonis gets credited with an assist if that player takes & makes the shot. I don’t think that’s the best barometer when assessing if a player can be a PG and run the whole offense.

As a reference point, Sabonis is often compared to Jokic from a passing standpoint, but the difference is that Jokic gets a lot of his assists outside of simply handing the ball off. Here is a breakdown of how each player got their assists last year:

https://twitter.com/statuses/1772664071172522353

As you can see, Sabonis gets almost half of his assists from simply handing the ball off and screening his teammate’s man. One could argue that’s more of a testament to Sabonis’ screening ability than his passing ability. Jokic, on the other hand, only had 22% of his assists come from handoffs.

And look I’m not knocking the handoffs. I think they can be effective, but I’d be lying to myself if I didn’t say it makes him look like a better passer than he is due to the amount of assists he ends up with in the box score.

I think you still need a playmaker/passer who can consistently take that handoff from Sabonis and make the right read and find the open man. I don’t think see Ellis at PG being able to do at a good rate, but maybe I’m wrong.

Domas run offenses are generally extremely effective when he's the focal hub. Do you have PPP data with these? Assist diversity doesn't really matter all that much to me if the screen assist/DHO actions are incredibly effective (which my assumption is they are). I mean we were 1st on ORtg a few years back off the DHO set.

And no, he doesn't stack up to Jokic, but nobody does. That doesn't mean he can't run an incredibly effective offense with him as the primary hub.

twslam07 · Feb 25, 2025

The_Jamal said:

I don’t have the PPP, but the point is it’s not all tied up in the raw assists you referenced as your evidence. If we used Sabonis simply as a screener and not someone who hands the ball off and then screens, his assists would be effectively cut in half. You still need that guy to run off of his screen or take the handoff and make a good/smart read to either take a shot or find the open man. That type of pass to free up your teammates is more difficult to make then simply dumping the ball off in a handoff situation.

And the comparison to Jokic is not about the combination of skills that make him a MVP candidate. It’s specifically about his passing and ability to play the PG (effectively). Jokic is much better at making those reads and skillful passes to free up his teammates and get the defense in rotation just like other PGs in the league can do (and I think it goes without saying that there are many PGs who have that ability who are also not MVP caliber players).

pdxKingsFan · Feb 25, 2025

Capt. Factorial said:

I think we really have to view moving Monk into the starting lineup as "letting the genie out of the bottle". The instant that happened, where Monk was inserted into the starting lineup not as an injury replacement but as an actual starter, there was no going back.

We started the season with three guys that for all practical purposes could not come off the bench (Fox PG, DeRozan SG/SF, Sabonis C). Huerter, and to some extent Murray were fungible, these are guys that you could, under at least some circumstances, imagine moving to the bench. Then Huerter played himself out of a starting role. That moment - that exact moment - was the opportunity to move Keon into the starting lineup. And even then it was going to be a tough call because you bet your butt Monk would have screamed over it. I mean, it was pretty clear from his offseason interviews that Monk thought he should be starting. So, at that point, if we move Keon into the starting lineup, we basically burn our relationship with Monk. Obviously, our relationship with Fox was already burnt, though as fans I don't think we recognized this. So there was obviously a decent incentive not to burn the goodwill of ANOTHER player.

But that means we're now starting four guys (Fox, Monk, DDR, Domas) who you can't move to the bench - genie's out of the bottle! - and two of those are basically SGs. THEN out PG burns all the bridges and we have to make do. Making do involves bringing in the best possible return given the circumstances...and that's ANOTHER must-start SG.

So that's the hand we have. We gotta play it. We have three must-start SGs. We can cry about it, but it's not changing this season, and it's not changing next season without a trade of one of those players. The best we can do is let all the egoheads start and then have aggressive, intelligently designed rotations that ensure we minimize the floor time with all three egohead no-defense SGs on the floor, and ensure that we never have four, and rarely have three bench players on the floor at one time, but almost always have one or two bench players on the floor for defensive purposes. That's what we should do.

no wishes were granted so I prefer to think of it as squirting toothpaste out of the tube. but yes. spot on.

hrdboild · Feb 25, 2025

Capt. Factorial said:

You don't have to look far for a precedent on asking Monk and even DeRozan to power the bench unit for the good of the team. Andre Igoudala just got his number retired by the Warriors ostensibly for swallowing his pride and accepting that sixth man role when he came over from Philly. I don't know why Monk was made the starter instead of Ellis -- if that was a Mike Brown decision it was probably the worst one he made during his tenure, followed closely by giving Huerter the starting spot over Ellis at the beginning of the season to begin with. I also don't know why the front office wouldn't back up the coach when he wanted to move DeRozan to the bench. That move might have saved this season. Not making it pretty much drove the final nail into Coach Brown's ability to lead the team. You can't cut off your head coach's agility to coach like that without significant consequences. He had the track record to make that decision without being second-guessed.

The result of all this me-first thinking is that we no longer have a team with a common goal, we have a collection of players looking to put up their stats with winning games pushed into the background as a secondary objective. Once a team gets to that point I'm not sure there's any way to rescue the situation without trading the egos and starting over with a new group of players.

Capt. Factorial · Feb 25, 2025

hrdboild said:

Just because there's precedent doesn't mean that such a request is going to go over well. I don't think that Iguodala ever struck me as a me-first ego guy. Monk, for what it's worth, does.

I don't think that the bold is necessarily true for me-first ego guys. I'm not going to tell you LeBron or Durant or Kobe or Jordan have ever held winning as a secondary objective, but I would also say that all of them were me-first ego guys, in the sense that I can't even fathom one of them in the prime of their career accepting a move to the bench for the best of the team. Yes, yes, those guys are a tier above the players we're talking about on our team (specifically Monk, DeRozan, LaVine), but what I'm saying that there is a certain level of player who is good enough to start and who wouldn't imagine moving to the bench for the good of the team, but who nonetheless "puts winning first". They just think that moving to the bench can't help winning.

As our cards got dealt, we ended up with three of those guys who basically all play the same position and are all kinda bad at defense. And you're going to have your posters who are going to raise a hue and cry about how bad our GM was to get into this situation, but that's not me, because I see the road that brought us here, and I have at least some understanding of the difficulty of getting players to Sacramento in the first place, and I understand that for a team like Sacramento, it is a better strategy to maximize assets and address balance later - once a Sacramento lets an asset slip in order to improve "balance", that asset is gone and may prove very very difficult to replace. This is why it was smart to draft Hali even though we had Fox. Could they play together? No, not really. But we grabbed the asset that didn't fit, and then adjusted later - using the asset. If we passed on Hali because he was a bad fit, we never, ever get Sabonis.

So, was it at least a bit of playing with fire to re-sign Monk? Maybe a bit, because we knew he would eventually want to start - I'm pretty sure he already wanted to start. But if we let that asset walk for nothing, we lose that asset. And, hey, the roster fit wasn't as bad (though it wasn't great because as a 2 Monk gives up a lot of size) as it became, and, hey, he was close with Fox. Keeping Fox happy was the priority (we didn't know that was impossible).

Was DeRozan an ideal fit? No, but he was an available player, and a pretty big asset upgrade from Barnes. And still, you can squint and make it work. Is Fox (1), Monk (1/2), DeRozan (2/3) a bit of a squeeze if you want to find minutes for a defensive specialist like Ellis? Sure. But again, Ellis is still not as big of an asset as any of those three dudes. So now we have post-Hali-trade, where we had one guard "asset" to this point, where we have three guard "assets". You don't say "no" to that just because the fit is awkward, because you're adding assets, and you can fix it later.

Now...is LaVine an ideal fit? No! But he is an asset, and we apparently had the option of losing Fox for no assets, or losing Fox and getting a bad-fit asset back. Again, from this point of view, it's a no-brainer. Do we have to fix it in the offseason? Almost certainly. Unless somehow we go back to Sabonis running the offense out of the high post and things click hard, yeah, at least one of Monk/DeRozan/LaVine has to go, hopefully in favor of a better-fitting asset. For instance, it would be nice to have a true PG. It would be nice to have a full-sized wing. But you don't get there by passing on assets, or letting assets walk, and then building from scratch. Maybe you can do that in L.A., where assets come knocking at your door and you have to pick between them. But not here.

Balancing the First and Second Units

Bench

Starter

Starter

Starter

Starter

Hall of Famer

All-Star

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum

Hall of Famer

All-Star

All-Star

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Subsidiary Intermediary

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary

All-Star

G-League

Starter

Hall of Famer

All-Star

Starter

All-Star

Starter

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum

Hall of Famer

All-Star

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum