Agreed.Necessary but not sufficient
Agreed.Necessary but not sufficient
That still gets us back to the question: if you, as a Kings Fan, are rooting for the Kings to lose, anyway, why don't you want them to at least put the guys out on the floor that will bust their asses and try every night? You want the team to lose and be lazy and boring?
But, How is it worth yours, telling me its not worth it for me to tell it wasn't worth yours? It was a response to someone else's comment like most of the other posts in that string.......You have 8 comments on that page alone, 7 in a row. Was it worth your time telling us it's not worth ours?
Don't worry there won't be any faking.....same goes for the 49ers - although they're at least mediocre. This team is reminding me of the 2013-2014 bad Kings. They'll probably win just enough games to not get a top 3 pick, and/or get screwed by ping-pong balls.Dont mind him. Hes clearly vested in the team. He can fake not watch all he wants
I wasn't objecting to the "don't play the veterans" part, just the "eking out wins" part. I think that they should try to eke out wins, anyway. My philosophy is, tear it down to the screws, and only play the kids, but still try to win every game... Just be okay with that not happening.Best way I can explain it is the Kings should be investing in their future right now. Any attempt at eeking out wins on the backs of veterans is working against their own long term investment. They need to go heavy on youth with just enough veteran leadership sprinkled in to keep the games from turning into amateur hour.
We go into next year with a better idea of which young guys have a shot and we more than likely wind up with a great pick in one of the strongest drafts in recent memory.
Insanity is doing what they're currently attempting which is nearly the same thing they've done for most of the last two decades. It's like Vivek never learns despite touching the hot iron dozens of times. Every year isn't a run at the playoffs. Each time he attempts that too early, he costs himself draft positioning, salary cap room and trade flexibility.
Your misunderstanding seems to be that you think that we think that playing Ellis would "save" the team. "Saving the team" is not the point. The point is to play him enough to properly assess whether or not Ellis can be a part of a Kings team that would hopefully be good enough to compete three years from now. Not to see if he can be a franchise cornerstone player, just a rotational player, possibly a starter, on a playoff team. As of now, that information is not known, because he doesn't get to play.Ellis is not who you guys imagine him to be. Kings fans always fall in love with a guy undeservingly. Before it was Davon, I remember when Kenny Smith was a fan fav. Then Holmes. Soon as these guys got real minutes they got exposed.
Ellis is a good role player but he takes Hella chances on defense and gets overpowered against stronger guys. He should def grt more than 4th quarter burn, so should Carter. But hes not saving anyone.
This is reductive and disingenuous. Reducing the argument to "Ellis should start over LaVine" misses the point, which is that LaVine shouldn't be on the team in the first place, and that his (and DeRozan's and Monk's and Schröder's) presence is impeding the Kings' ability to develop the assets that might still be here in three years.Only a kings fan would start Ellis over Freakin Lavine lol. Come on
Also, these guys are humans. Lavine is expected to carry the offense of this team. He really needs to be more selfish.
Dennis needs to be benched.
Rookie
Lavine
Murray
Precious
Sabonis
Westbrook
Ellis
monk
Ddr
Eubank
Carter spot min
Problem solved
Bye Dennis
Actually this team is Hella deep. Its crazy
What happend to 2) ?The game was blacked out for me, and now that it's over, I see no point in watching the replay. But it's clear that 1) the Kings played poorly and 3) they lost. I have no idea how hard they played, or who was putting out the effort.
For one, Ellis is not a rookie, some would say hes not even young by nba standards. We have had Ellis long enough to know what he is. I dont think anyone doubts hes good enough to be a role player in this league or ok this team.Your misunderstanding seems to be that you think that we think that playing Ellis would "save" the team. "Saving the team" is not the point. The point is to play him enough to properly assess whether or not Ellis can be a part of a Kings team that would hopefully be good enough to compete three years from now. Not to see if he can be a franchise cornerstone player, just a rotational player, possibly a starter, on a playoff team. As of now, that information is not known, because he doesn't get to play.
LaVine is a known quantity. And what is known is that he's not good enough to contribute to a winning team, unless you a) have Prime!Jokić or Prime!Antetokounmpo, b) construct the entire rest of your roster to compensate for his weaknesses, and/or c) build your offensive gameplan around him. The Kings don't have option (a) and, frankly, trying to implement options (b) or (c) would be dumb.
This is reductive and disingenuous. Reducing the argument to "Ellis should start over LaVine" misses the point, which is that LaVine shouldn't be on the team in the first place, and that his (and DeRozan's and Monk's and Schröder's) presence is impeding the Kings' ability to develop the assets that might still be here in three years.