Bagley.

I hear the argument that this fanbase is easier on players than others and players should and need to be able to handle criticism and hate, even when unwarranted, because everyone does it. The fanbase and how they treat their players has always been a source of pride with this franchise. That is literally the selling point for this team around the league.

We love when players like HG say how great the fans are. Beam with pride. So it really is disappointing when fans turn on a player who has not said a bad word about the fans and is suffering through some injuries. To say the player deserves it due to lack of improvement, when he hasn't played this season is not a good look, no matter how you slice it. Neither is "everyone does it" because I'm not sure it's true to that extent. But more importantly, it is incongruous to love when players and their families speak about how great the Kings fans are, like with HG and Holmes, and to also say players should be unaffected by negative fan talk.
Seems like it's being taken that I think Kings fans are bad. Not my intent. The fact that fans cheer Harry is a good thing and shows that they can get behind a player no matter the numbers or injury history. As far as Bagley goes, keep that same energy. ;)
It's easy to see why Harry Giles became a fan favorite.

He was a late-first round flier with a lengthy injury history that would've gone way high otherwise, the definition of an underdog story that a small market loves and he charmed the fanbase with his smile, passing ability, and interviews.

Bagley was a high-profile draft pick with a large camp that seems very interested in the idea in the idea of his brand. But if you think all it took was not talk bad about the fans and they'll take a shine to you, you'd be wrong.

There are other things that will make the fans sour on a player. Not hustling for one, airing dirty laundry to the media, etc.

But in Bagley's case, other than Luka and the injuries, there's one more thing the fans don't like that will never allow him to escape criticism and hate, and that's because simply put, he's a huge ballhog.
 
Every poster in this thread I've seen blaming Kings fans for talking smack about Bagley, I've seen talk smack about countless Kings players themselves over the years.

Of course, none of that matters as when you're a professional getting paid millions, you put up or shut up. You can either handle the spotlight and what comes with it or you can't.

The spotlight in Sac is much softer than what pros deal with elsewhere.

But if it really bothers you, the FO and ownership created this situation due to their incompetence. Don't like it, look at the cause, not the symptom.
 
Posters are not telling people they can't do or say something. Only that there are consequences or repercussions. It's a tough world out there, but that fact doesn't absolve people from their deeds. Punching someone in the eye, then telling the judge "it's a tough world" doesn't get your battery charges dropped. The FO of the Kings never made a fan do something on social media.

If Marvin closes his social media account or changes how he posts on IG, then that's how he chose to address the situation. Sounds pretty mature. More mature than those who have outbursts, create burner accounts or send cryptic messages.

There is no evidence that Marvin can't handle the criticism. However, as stated in my earlier post, the biggest selling point for being on the Kings is the fan experience. If he doesn't have that, then he for sure bounces. Some may not care, but it's still not a good look in the big scheme of things.
 
Last edited:

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
There seems to be a basic disconnect here. It's not about Bagley being criticized; it's about him being pilloried. It's not his fault he was drafted second, but for a few fans it's a capital offense which then allows them to attack him at every turn. The injuries he's suffered could have happened to anyone but because it's Bagley this is just further proof that he's no good.

It's like listening to bullies trying to justify why they're picking on someone. It's not about whether or not Bagley can take the comments. It's the fact that he shouldn't have to.

Sacramento fans have been known for decades for being supportive, enthusiastic, etc. It's one reason why so many players still speak so fondly of us, and why so many come back after their playing days are done.

It's not about talking smack. That's the ultimate straw man argument.
 
There seems to be a basic disconnect here. It's not about Bagley being criticized; it's about him being pilloried. It's not his fault he was drafted second, but for a few fans it's a capital offense which then allows them to attack him at every turn. The injuries he's suffered could have happened to anyone but because it's Bagley this is just further proof that he's no good.

It's like listening to bullies trying to justify why they're picking on someone. It's not about whether or not Bagley can take the comments. It's the fact that he shouldn't have to.

Sacramento fans have been known for decades for being supportive, enthusiastic, etc. It's one reason why so many players still speak so fondly of us, and why so many come back after their playing days are done.

It's not about talking smack. That's the ultimate straw man argument.
IMO, that ire should be directed at the members of the Kings front office that are leaving Bagley out to dry. The real, broad-based acrimony did not start until the foot injury subterfuge. Unfortunately, the only public figure that fans can easily reach is Bagley himself. It’s an organization of cowards, hiding behind a 20 year old. And then, they try to shame the rightful indignation the fans feel, by claiming it is aimed exclusively at the innocent 20 year old, through team apparatchiks like Ham and Napear. It’s a completely CS move. Vivek needs to start firing people soon—most are not doing their job anyway, so an empty desk until April/May won’t make a difference.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
IMO, that ire should be directed at the members of the Kings front office that are leaving Bagley out to dry. The real, broad-based acrimony did not start until the foot injury subterfuge.
Nope. I don't buy it. The way I see it, the broad-based acrimony against Bagley has zero to do with the Kings being less than forthcoming about his foot injury. Let me spell it out the way I see it:

1) Narrow-based acrimony begins among a minority of fans, from the moment of the draft, because Marvin Bagley is not Luka Doncic.
2) The folks behind #1 feel they have a grievance, so they are particularly vocal, and the mere fact of incessant repetition serves to legitimize their position.
3) Bagley's three unrelated injuries (one due to being hacked by a 'roid monster) cost him not only playing time but also crucial development time over the course of his first two seasons, providing justification/reinforcement for the attacks in #2.
4) Buddy Hield, who had earned the honorary title of Team Scapegoat due to his large extension, his sudden issues in shooting, and his being asked to step outside of his comfort zone and be more of a playmaker gets moved to the bench and starts protecting the rock and shooting the lights out again, forcing the negativity in the fan base to pass over him for somebody new.
5) Ready-made Scapegoat #2 Bagley, not contributing due to injuries and lack of development time and already opposed by a group loud enough to seem more representative than they are, steps up into the starring role in What's Wrong With The Kings?

It didn't have anything to do with the Kings' "subterfuge" on the foot injury thing, as bad as that was. Buddy started hitting shots and stopped turning the ball over and forced the ire to fall on the Next Man Up, who for the reasons articulated above, was Bagley.
 
Nope. I don't buy it. The way I see it, the broad-based acrimony against Bagley has zero to do with the Kings being less than forthcoming about his foot injury. Let me spell it out the way I see it:

1) Narrow-based acrimony begins among a minority of fans, from the moment of the draft, because Marvin Bagley is not Luka Doncic.
2) The folks behind #1 feel they have a grievance, so they are particularly vocal, and the mere fact of incessant repetition serves to legitimize their position.
3) Bagley's three unrelated injuries (one due to being hacked by a 'roid monster) cost him not only playing time but also crucial development time over the course of his first two seasons, providing justification/reinforcement for the attacks in #2.
4) Buddy Hield, who had earned the honorary title of Team Scapegoat due to his large extension, his sudden issues in shooting, and his being asked to step outside of his comfort zone and be more of a playmaker gets moved to the bench and starts protecting the rock and shooting the lights out again, forcing the negativity in the fan base to pass over him for somebody new.
5) Ready-made Scapegoat #2 Bagley, not contributing due to injuries and lack of development time and already opposed by a group loud enough to seem more representative than they are, steps up into the starring role in What's Wrong With The Kings?

It didn't have anything to do with the Kings' "subterfuge" on the foot injury thing, as bad as that was. Buddy started hitting shots and stopped turning the ball over and forced the ire to fall on the Next Man Up, who for the reasons articulated above, was Bagley.
Accurate and factorial........and this is probably the best way I’ve seen it described in the words “incessant repetition“.
 
Nope. I don't buy it. The way I see it, the broad-based acrimony against Bagley has zero to do with the Kings being less than forthcoming about his foot injury. Let me spell it out the way I see it:

1) Narrow-based acrimony begins among a minority of fans, from the moment of the draft, because Marvin Bagley is not Luka Doncic.
2) The folks behind #1 feel they have a grievance, so they are particularly vocal, and the mere fact of incessant repetition serves to legitimize their position.
3) Bagley's three unrelated injuries (one due to being hacked by a 'roid monster) cost him not only playing time but also crucial development time over the course of his first two seasons, providing justification/reinforcement for the attacks in #2.
4) Buddy Hield, who had earned the honorary title of Team Scapegoat due to his large extension, his sudden issues in shooting, and his being asked to step outside of his comfort zone and be more of a playmaker gets moved to the bench and starts protecting the rock and shooting the lights out again, forcing the negativity in the fan base to pass over him for somebody new.
5) Ready-made Scapegoat #2 Bagley, not contributing due to injuries and lack of development time and already opposed by a group loud enough to seem more representative than they are, steps up into the starring role in What's Wrong With The Kings?

It didn't have anything to do with the Kings' "subterfuge" on the foot injury thing, as bad as that was. Buddy started hitting shots and stopped turning the ball over and forced the ire to fall on the Next Man Up, who for the reasons articulated above, was Bagley.
Agreed, Capt described the situation in concise detail.
 
Nope. I don't buy it. The way I see it, the broad-based acrimony against Bagley has zero to do with the Kings being less than forthcoming about his foot injury. Let me spell it out the way I see it:

1) Narrow-based acrimony begins among a minority of fans, from the moment of the draft, because Marvin Bagley is not Luka Doncic.
2) The folks behind #1 feel they have a grievance, so they are particularly vocal, and the mere fact of incessant repetition serves to legitimize their position.
3) Bagley's three unrelated injuries (one due to being hacked by a 'roid monster) cost him not only playing time but also crucial development time over the course of his first two seasons, providing justification/reinforcement for the attacks in #2.
4) Buddy Hield, who had earned the honorary title of Team Scapegoat due to his large extension, his sudden issues in shooting, and his being asked to step outside of his comfort zone and be more of a playmaker gets moved to the bench and starts protecting the rock and shooting the lights out again, forcing the negativity in the fan base to pass over him for somebody new.
5) Ready-made Scapegoat #2 Bagley, not contributing due to injuries and lack of development time and already opposed by a group loud enough to seem more representative than they are, steps up into the starring role in What's Wrong With The Kings?

It didn't have anything to do with the Kings' "subterfuge" on the foot injury thing, as bad as that was. Buddy started hitting shots and stopped turning the ball over and forced the ire to fall on the Next Man Up, who for the reasons articulated above, was Bagley.
Two questions, and one quibble. What are the three unrelated injuries? He’s had two injuries this season, that I am aware of. Where in the sequence of events does Marvin developing zero aspects of his physique or skill-set over the summer fit? I think the above list still pre-supposes an acrimonious/malicious fanbase as opposed to what is clearly a horribly run organization careening from excuse to excuse.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
Two questions, and one quibble. What are the three unrelated injuries? He’s had two injuries this season, that I am aware of.
He had a knee injury last year that cost him about 20 games in addition to the hand and foot injuries this year.

Where in the sequence of events does Marvin developing zero aspects of his physique or skill-set over the summer fit?
I haven't heard any accusations that he didn't work hard over the summer. Kids with his physique usually take a bit longer (in terms of aging) to put on muscle. I for one didn't expect him to come back jacked up at 20. As far as skill-set, how do we know? He got hurt in his first game, lost development time with a new coach and new teammates, then seemed to be hitting a groove when he got hurt again.

I think the above list still pre-supposes an acrimonious/malicious fanbase as opposed to what is clearly a horribly run organization careening from excuse to excuse.
You seem to be arguing that the tide turned against Bagley because the Front Office was not fully forthcoming about the prognosis of his injury. Well, that would be some pretty misplaced anger. But I don't think that's what happened. I've already laid out what I think happened.