Better franchise cornerstone: Fox, or Doncic? (Split from Doncic - performance thread)

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#91
The Kings are better because a) Joeger switched his scheme from what was arguably one of the worst schemes of the whole league last year. B) because Fox took a huge leap. Last year he was one of the worst RPM guys in the whole league, now he is a legitimate ball handling creator and we all know that the value provided by your primary ball handling creator has a pretty big correlation on your success as a team. C) Part of the scheme thing but we are playing more lineups that have four shooters, it almost automatically makes your offense better.

Dallas was 24-58 last year, thats .292 basketball. Now they are 22-27, thats .449 basketball. I would say that it looks like a pretty significant improvement. Its also extremely rare that rookie ball handling creators contribute to winning. Fox is a prime example on that. Your whole argument that Luka doesnt make his team better doesnt seem to have any basis whatsover. They were winning 29% percent of their games last year, now Luka as a rookie is their primary ball handling creator, without any one of their players taking any significant leaps they are winning 45% of their games. If you want some stats, Luka has 2.27 RPM, 3,7 BPM and 2,2 VORP aka per eye test, per traditional stats and per advanced metrics he contributes to winning and makes his team better (again, very rare for a rookie playing his role/position)

This is the thing that I personally dont like that much in this conversation. Feeling the need to trash a player or downplay his incredible performance as a rookie just because its more convinient than accepting that passing on him was most likely a mistake. Luka can be great now and Bagley can become great without those two things contradicting each other. Based on the things we've seen, the historical data we know, its most likely the case that Luka should've been our pick. It is what it is but that doesnt change just because it doesnt feel great as a fan.
I just want to know if OKC fans were having this same debate about Harden versus Reke in their rookie seasons when Harden was playing in a semi-limited role off the bench and Reke was looking like a once-in-a-generational talent.
 
#92
The Kings are better because a) Joeger switched his scheme from what was arguably one of the worst schemes of the whole league last year. B) because Fox took a huge leap. Last year he was one of the worst RPM guys in the whole league, now he is a legitimate ball handling creator and we all know that the value provided by your primary ball handling creator has a pretty big correlation on your success as a team. C) Part of the scheme thing but we are playing more lineups that have four shooters, it almost automatically makes your offense better.

Dallas was 24-58 last year, thats .292 basketball. Now they are 22-27, thats .449 basketball. I would say that it looks like a pretty significant improvement. Its also extremely rare that rookie ball handling creators contribute to winning. Fox is a prime example on that. Your whole argument that Luka doesnt make his team better doesnt seem to have any basis whatsover. They were winning 29% percent of their games last year, now Luka as a rookie is their primary ball handling creator, without any one of their players taking any significant leaps they are winning 45% of their games. If you want some stats, Luka has 2.27 RPM, 3,7 BPM and 2,2 VORP aka per eye test, per traditional stats and per advanced metrics he contributes to winning and makes his team better (again, very rare for a rookie playing his role/position)

This is the thing that I personally dont like that much in this conversation. Feeling the need to trash a player or downplay his incredible performance as a rookie just because its more convinient than accepting that passing on him was most likely a mistake. Luka can be great now and Bagley can become great without those two things contradicting each other. Based on the things we've seen, the historical data we know, its most likely the case that Luka should've been our pick. It is what it is but that doesnt change just because it doesnt feel great as a fan.
Sacramento was 27-55 last year, thats .329 basketball. Now they are 25-25, thats .500 basketball. I would say that it looks like a pretty significant improvement.

See what I did there? Both teams are quite a bit better... and teams SHOULD get quite a bit better after picking in the lotto.

I don't want to die on the hill - I'm challenging the assertion that Luka makes HIS teammates better, more than Fox makes HIS teammates better. I don't believe it. They both probably make their teammates better somewhat.

I take so much exception to the lack of respect shown to DeAaron and Marvin really - at this early stage of the season while the Mavs have become basically a bunch of side-men for Luka to show off with.

Anecdotally, the DSJ thing made it seem like Luka does not in fact make his teammates better. There is no such scandal with Fox creating an environment where he's got a teammate begging for a trade.

I'd frankly love a truce about Luka. But whenever people start up like Eyore with "hey look at this hi light or stat.. smh we should have got Luka".. I'll fight back. Because we got a terrific young player who fits with our other terrific young players and we are better than the Mavs.
 
#93
Sacramento was 27-55 last year, thats .329 basketball. Now they are 25-25, thats .500 basketball. I would say that it looks like a pretty significant improvement.

See what I did there? Both teams are quite a bit better... and teams SHOULD get quite a bit better after picking in the lotto.

I don't want to die on the hill - I'm challenging the assertion that Luka makes HIS teammates better, more than Fox makes HIS teammates better. I don't believe it. They both probably make their teammates better somewhat.

I take so much exception to the lack of respect shown to DeAaron and Marvin really - at this early stage of the season while the Mavs have become basically a bunch of side-men for Luka to show off with.

Anecdotally, the DSJ thing made it seem like Luka does not in fact make his teammates better. There is no such scandal with Fox creating an environment where he's got a teammate begging for a trade.

I'd frankly love a truce about Luka. But whenever people start up like Eyore with "hey look at this hi light or stat.. smh we should have got Luka".. I'll fight back. Because we got a terrific young player who fits with our other terrific young players and we are better than the Mavs.
I think a truce would come in the form of "let's stop bemoaning that we didn't draft Luka because there's nothing we can do about it anyway". That's fair. It's unreasonable to expect people not to talk about him at all though, especially after he has a 35 point triple double. It's crazy what he's doing as a 19 year old. We haven't seen this since LeBron, though that's partially because they changed the rules so that 19 year old American players aren't eligible for the draft right now unless they skip a grade in HS or something. Maybe it's a flash in the pan thing like Linsanity turned out to be and others in this class will eventually surpass him but it should be possible to enjoy the novelty of a 19 year old performing like an All-Star without always framing it in terms of the draft.
 
#97
I just want to know if OKC fans were having this same debate about Harden versus Reke in their rookie seasons when Harden was playing in a semi-limited role off the bench and Reke was looking like a once-in-a-generational talent.
I'm not sure why Tyreke seems to be constantly part of this discussion. If you cant see the difference of these players behind their box score stats, then I cant really help you on this one.

Sacramento was 27-55 last year, thats .329 basketball. Now they are 25-25, thats .500 basketball. I would say that it looks like a pretty significant improvement.

See what I did there? Both teams are quite a bit better... and teams SHOULD get quite a bit better after picking in the lotto.
What you did there was you completely ignored what I wrote. I gave my evaluation on why we are better this year and I have no idea wether you disagree with it or not since you decided to ignore it. But one thing is sure, picking in the lotto is certainly not the reason why we are better. Bagley has the worst RPM of all the PF's in this league.

I don't want to die on the hill - I'm challenging the assertion that Luka makes HIS teammates better, more than Fox makes HIS teammates better. I don't believe it. They both probably make their teammates better somewhat.

I take so much exception to the lack of respect shown to DeAaron and Marvin really - at this early stage of the season while the Mavs have become basically a bunch of side-men for Luka to show off with.
Well as I wrote above: eye test, box score stats and advanced metrics all sugest that Luka makes his team better. Its hard to ask more from a 19 year old rookie playing the most difficult position for a rookie. If you know more specifically what changed in Dallas since last year and why its more the reason on their improvement then please challenge the assertion with it.

Anecdotally, the DSJ thing made it seem like Luka does not in fact make his teammates better. There is no such scandal with Fox creating an environment where he's got a teammate begging for a trade.
DSJ is has chatacter concerns dated back to his high school and college days. I wouldnt fault Luka for DSJ acting up because someone better joined the team. Thats a low character move, not a winning player and there is no reason to assume it would happen with high character guys. One reason to keep adding high character guys like Kings do is that you can avoid this type of stupid drama. I also think its truly unfair to put that on Luka who did nothing but came in as a 19 and played lights out. Luka is liked by his teammates and doesnt "create enviroments" that make teammates to seek trade.

I'd frankly love a truce about Luka. But whenever people start up like Eyore with "hey look at this hi light or stat.. smh we should have got Luka".. I'll fight back. Because we got a terrific young player who fits with our other terrific young players and we are better than the Mavs.
The "truce" wont come with arguments like "Dallas are two games below us so why Luka isnt making his team better". It also doesnt come when his incredible rookie year gets constantly downplayed with shaky arguments just because its easier as a fan than just to accept the situation. We might have a terrific young player in Bagley some day. Atm its all based on potential with him since statistically he doesnt contribute to winning at all.
 
#98
Bagley has been improving lately, and I like the direction he’s heading but, Tyreke/fit seem to be coming up here...

Throughout my time as a user here I’ve said Reke as the most disappointing player in Sacramento history, while others sought to defend him. 20/5/5 and wither away to nothing? But when talking about Luka’s stellar year, is that literally the only example (Reke) folks can come up with of a phenomenal rookie season leading to a non phenomenal career?

Also, fit. Vlade talks about creating a passing team, yet Marvin isn’t known for his passing now. We can’t get Marvin into the game starting because Joerger likes space with Fox. Is Marvin as big of a fit question as Luka? I hope Fox/Marvin get on the floor together, soon, starting
 
Last edited:
#99
I have no conversation anymore for people who think Jordan/Barnes are positive players. Neither have been good for years now y’all probably thought Melo was a good player the last 3 seasons when Knicks fans were telling us he wasn’t. Or people bring up the stupid Tyrese Evans talk. Oh big deal Evans regressed who has nothing to do with Luka but let’s bring that up.
 
Kingsfans take on a civil war reenactment? Except even more pointless?

The closer he gets to being great, and the stronger the argument gets for 'we should have picked him', the less likely it becomes that he ever plays here. Maybe the odds of him playing for the Lakers increase though.

Them's the breaks.
 
What you did there was you completely ignored what I wrote.
I think the dominance of Luka talk on the Kings board, while the Kings are blowing away all expectations... is.... crazy.
I agree with Vlade's response on this, which is forbidden to be quoted here because we can't tell another person how to fan.
Lukamania is excessive even when it is NOT on a Kings chat board because his team is a bunch of side-men for a showboat. But for Lukamania to persist on the Kings fan board makes me want to hurl.
I think it is bizarre and disloyal to pine for a DIFFERENT franchise cornerstone when we finally, after a dozen years,have one. Sure put Luka on the list of desirable franchise cornerstones along with Giannis, AD, KD, Russ, etc... that's fine. I just don't want another face of the franchise except the one we've got.
It's the best Kings year in a dozen... I am not gonna spend a second of it in envy for Luka or finger pointing at Vlade or any of that crud.
 
I think the dominance of Luka talk on the Kings board, while the Kings are blowing away all expectations... is.... crazy.
I agree with Vlade's response on this, which is forbidden to be quoted here because we can't tell another person how to fan.
Lukamania is excessive even when it is NOT on a Kings chat board because his team is a bunch of side-men for a showboat. But for Lukamania to persist on the Kings fan board makes me want to hurl.
I think it is bizarre and disloyal to pine for a DIFFERENT franchise cornerstone when we finally, after a dozen years,have one. Sure put Luka on the list of desirable franchise cornerstones along with Giannis, AD, KD, Russ, etc... that's fine. I just don't want another face of the franchise except the one we've got.
It's the best Kings year in a dozen... I am not gonna spend a second of it in envy for Luka or finger pointing at Vlade or any of that crud.
Doncic was the unanimous #2 fan favorite. He's putting up HOF numbers in his rookie year. 35pt triple double. Of course fans are going to be upset about the Kings passing up on him.

And what's with the stuff about Luka not making his team better than Fox or anyone else? His team is not a bunch of side-men for a showboat. That's pretty damn insulting. If you've watched any Mavericks games you would know he consistently puts that team on his back and tries to drag them to wins.

While the Kings have blown expectations out of the water, the expectations were never set high in the first place. I'm very happy we're 25-25 past the mid-way point. It's a big accomplishment for this team to see Fox and Buddy grow. However, we're still 10th in the WC standings. We constantly get blown out by the current 8th seed Clippers. We have an atrocious 2-9 record against our division. And in the midst of all of this? Our assistant GM wants to fire our head coach. This is the Kings we're talking about... we can never be happy too long. We were around 8-6 when the rumors of Joerger being under the hot seat came out revolving around.......Marvin Bagley. Also doesn't help that his father has been crapting on the coach throughout the season. Or Bagley himself making a very cryptic Instagram post.

Not hard to see why fans don't want Doncic on this team. The Bagley drama just drums the drum even louder.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
I'm not sure why Tyreke seems to be constantly part of this discussion.
Then you're not thinking about it very hard. But I'll elaborate on that, in a minute.

... Throughout my time as a user here I’ve said Reke as the most disappointing player in Sacramento history...
:: laughs in Pervis Ellison, Jimmer Fredette and Thomas Robinson ::

20/5/5 and wither away to nothing?
Evans is having a career low season, in terms of efficiency. Other than that, he hasn't "withered" at all. Pretty much every aspect about his reduced statistical output, aside from the inexplicably poor shooting inside the three-point line, can be explained by the fact that he's playing the second-fewest minutes of his career. His per/36 and per/100 are right in line with his career numbers.

But when talking about Luka’s stellar year, is that literally the only example (Reke) folks can come up with of a phenomenal rookie season leading to a non phenomenal career?
  1. First of All™, so what if it is? How many times do you need it to have happened?
  2. Second of All, and tying it back in to @Gguod's query, it keeps coming up because this is a Kings message board, and it's the example that's most relevant to the Kings.
  3. In fairness, it probably mostly gets brought up as a form of pushback to the notion of the Kings "blowing" the pick. That's how that works: if some people weren't so adamant that the Kings "blew it" by passing on Doncic, then others wouldn't be so insistent on pointing out that an incredible rookie year does not guarantee an incredible career... Even though, if we're going to keep it a buck, while players earning ROY honors over more talented draft mates occurs often enough to barely be noteworthy, ROY winners who put up star/superstar-like numbers and end up not living up to superstar potential are virtually unprecedented. Before Evans, you probably have to go back to Damon Stoudamire for the last time that happened, or Derrick Coleman before him. Neither of whom (nor Evans, it should be acknowledged) actually had bad careers; not a scrub in the bunch, they just didn't live up to the expectations that they created because of phenomenal rookie play.
... Or people bring up the stupid Tyrese Evans talk. Oh big deal Evans regressed who has nothing to do with Luka but let’s bring that up.
Tyrese? Come on, man! What are we even doin' out here, man? The 's' and the 'k' aren't even on the same side of the keyboard!
 
I think the dominance of Luka talk on the Kings board, while the Kings are blowing away all expectations... is.... crazy.
I agree with Vlade's response on this, which is forbidden to be quoted here because we can't tell another person how to fan.
Lukamania is excessive even when it is NOT on a Kings chat board because his team is a bunch of side-men for a showboat. But for Lukamania to persist on the Kings fan board makes me want to hurl.
I think it is bizarre and disloyal to pine for a DIFFERENT franchise cornerstone when we finally, after a dozen years,have one. Sure put Luka on the list of desirable franchise cornerstones along with Giannis, AD, KD, Russ, etc... that's fine. I just don't want another face of the franchise except the one we've got.
It's the best Kings year in a dozen... I am not gonna spend a second of it in envy for Luka or finger pointing at Vlade or any of that crud.
If conversation about Lukas incredible season and wether we should've drafted him "makes you want to hurl" then maybe you shouldnt take part in the conversation. When you come to "fight back" as you said with arguments that doesnt hold no ground (like that Luka isnt making his team better because they are two games behind us) then you're just generating counter arguments from other people and therefore generating more conversation about the subject that makes you want to hurl.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
The "truce" wont come with arguments like "Dallas are two games below us so why Luka isnt making his team better". It also doesnt come when his incredible rookie year gets constantly downplayed with shaky arguments just because its easier as a fan than just to accept the situation...
I'd be curious to learn what would constitute not "downplaying" Doncic's performance, in your eyes? What would Kings fans have to say about Doncic, and how would they have to say it, for you to not consider it to be "downplaying"? If they don't talk about him at all, is that "downplaying," too?

Is there a point anywhere on the line between "Luka is the best!" and "This guy isn't even a King, why do I even have to listen to this?" that you'd be good with? Because, I'm telling you, there is (and will continue to be) a lot of pushback from the R.O.D. Kings fans over the notion that they should be made to even have to put up with hearing about "We coulda had..." when the Kings are doing well. If your agenda is "Name on the front," it's bad enough to have to listen to "We coulda had..." year after year after year, when the team stinks. But, when the team is actually doing well, for the first time in over a decade, you're pretty righteously going to feel like you shouldn't have to listen to "We coulda had..." any more, and that's going to lead to pushback that often takes the form of "He ain't that fine, anyway!"

You appear to be approaching this from the perspective of, "I'm not going to cease fire, until they stop shooting, first!" Which, I guess is a valid view to have, but I don't know why you think that is a reasonable thing to expect on a Kings message board?
 
  1. First of All™, so what if it is? How many times do you need it to have happened?
  2. Second of All, and tying it back in to @Gguod's query, it keeps coming up because this is a Kings message board, and it's the example that's most relevant to the Kings.
  3. In fairness, it probably mostly gets brought up as a form of pushback to the notion of the Kings "blowing" the pick. That's how that works: if some people weren't so adamant that the Kings "blew it" by passing on Doncic, then others wouldn't be so insistent on pointing out that an incredible rookie year does not guarantee an incredible career... Even though, if we're going to keep it a buck, while players earning ROY honors over more talented draft mates occurs often enough to barely be noteworthy, ROY winners who put up star/superstar-like numbers and end up not living up to superstar potential are virtually unprecedented. Before Evans, you probably have to go back to Damon Stoudamire for the last time that happened, or Derrick Coleman before him. Neither of whom (nor Evans, it should be acknowledged) actually had bad careers; not a scrub in the bunch, they just didn't live up to the expectations that they created because of phenomenal rookie play.
1. I would like to see a thing happened more often than once before I consider it as a legitimate argument and not an outlier.

2.The two players also dont have too much in common. Other was a great athlete and a non shooter, Doncic is the opposite of that. Other player didnt have a great basketball IQ, other player does. Luka has also been more efficent, winning more (with a better team but still relevant since he is the best player of that team).

I'd be curious to learn what would constitute not "downplaying" Doncic's performance, in your eyes? What would Kings fans have to say about Doncic, and how would they have to say it, for you to not consider it to be "downplaying"? If they don't talk about him at all, is that "downplaying," too?


For example, suggesting that he doesnt make his team better or that since they are couple games behind us, he isnt contributing nearly enough on winning. No one has to say anything if they dont want to I dont care about that. I care about downplaying his performance just because its easier as a fan to do it rather than accept the current situatuon.

Is there a point anywhere on the line between "Luka is the best!" and "This guy isn't even a King, why do I even have to listen to this?" that you'd be good with? Because, I'm telling you, there is (and will continue to be) a lot of pushback from the R.O.D. Kings fans over the notion that they should be made to even have to put up with hearing about "We coulda had..." when the Kings are doing well. If your agenda is "Name on the front," it's bad enough to have to listen to "We coulda had..." year after year after year, when the team stinks. But, when the team is actually doing well, for the first time in over a decade, you're pretty righteously going to feel like you shouldn't have to listen to "We coulda had..." any more, and that's going to lead to pushback that often takes the form of "He ain't that fine, anyway!"
I think we agree on a lot of things but this is where we disagree. If a fan doesnt want to hear "Luka is looking like he is most likely the best player of this class and would've most likely been the right pick for us", its absolutely fine with me. If a fan gets annoyed buy it and because of that makes arguments that hold no ground, to me it should not be justified just because he has a reason to do that (being annoyed). Or at least I wouldnt justify it. I'm also willing to counter those arguments over and over again so its not really a problem for me. Point is that when you argue something, whatever your reason is, you should expect counter arguments if that argument doesnt have much facts to support it.

You appear to be approaching this from the perspective of, "I'm not going to cease fire, until they stop shooting, first!" Which, I guess is a valid view to have, but I don't know why you think that is a reasonable thing to expect on a Kings message board?
I dont have a problem with countering false arguments so I dont care that much. Regarding Luka conversation I stay in his topic and only have that discussion outside of that topic if someone else has already started it (and usualy its with the usuall false arguments like "we have Fox so we couldn't have him too" or "he isnt even winning as many games as us so he is not so great" ect).
 
1. I would like to see a thing happened more often than once before I consider it as a legitimate argument and not an outlier.

2.The two players also dont have too much in common. Other was a great athlete and a non shooter, Doncic is the opposite of that. Other player didnt have a great basketball IQ, other player does. Luka has also been more efficent, winning more (with a better team but still relevant since he is the best player of that team).



For example, suggesting that he doesnt make his team better or that since they are couple games behind us, he isnt contributing nearly enough on winning. No one has to say anything if they dont want to I dont care about that. I care about downplaying his performance just because its easier as a fan to do it rather than accept the current situatuon.



I think we agree on a lot of things but this is where we disagree. If a fan doesnt want to hear "Luka is looking like he is most likely the best player of this class and would've most likely been the right pick for us", its absolutely fine with me. If a fan gets annoyed buy it and because of that makes arguments that hold no ground, to me it should not be justified just because he has a reason to do that (being annoyed). Or at least I wouldnt justify it. I'm also willing to counter those arguments over and over again so its not really a problem for me. Point is that when you argue something, whatever your reason is, you should expect counter arguments if that argument doesnt have much facts to support it.



I dont have a problem with countering false arguments so I dont care that much. Regarding Luka conversation I stay in his topic and only have that discussion outside of that topic if someone else has already started it (and usualy its with the usuall false arguments like "we have Fox so we couldn't have him too" or "he isnt even winning as many games as us so he is not so great" ect).
You accused John Galt of ignoring what you had to say. Are you ignoring what others say?

This thread is who makes the better cornerstone, Fox or Donic? Not if the Kings made a mistake or not. There's a whole other thread for that. Both have played a big part in this year's win totals for their respective teams. Personally i'm just glad my team isn't their normal suckitude of a team that they have been known for the great majority of the time in Sacramento.

So who makes the better cornerstone? Personally I don't know but I'm willing to wait and find out.
 
You accused John Galt of ignoring what you had to say. Are you ignoring what others say?

This thread is who makes the better cornerstone, Fox or Donic? Not if the Kings made a mistake or not. There's a whole other thread for that. Both have played a big part in this year's win totals for their respective teams. Personally i'm just glad my team isn't their normal suckitude of a team that they have been known for the great majority of the time in Sacramento.

So who makes the better cornerstone? Personally I don't know but I'm willing to wait and find out.
This thread has had multiple smaller different topics of conversation (as a lot of threads do). I quoted one post, pointed out a thing that I thought was flawed and then proceeded with that conversation without ignoring what was said to me.
 
I think the dominance of Luka talk on the Kings board, while the Kings are blowing away all expectations... is.... crazy.
I agree with Vlade's response on this, which is forbidden to be quoted here because we can't tell another person how to fan.
Lukamania is excessive even when it is NOT on a Kings chat board because his team is a bunch of side-men for a showboat. But for Lukamania to persist on the Kings fan board makes me want to hurl.
I think it is bizarre and disloyal to pine for a DIFFERENT franchise cornerstone when we finally, after a dozen years,have one. Sure put Luka on the list of desirable franchise cornerstones along with Giannis, AD, KD, Russ, etc... that's fine. I just don't want another face of the franchise except the one we've got.
It's the best Kings year in a dozen... I am not gonna spend a second of it in envy for Luka or finger pointing at Vlade or any of that crud.
Great post
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
I think we agree on a lot of things but this is where we disagree. If a fan doesnt want to hear "Luka is looking like he is most likely the best player of this class and would've most likely been the right pick for us", its absolutely fine with me. If a fan gets annoyed buy it and because of that makes arguments that hold no ground, to me it should not be justified just because he has a reason to do that (being annoyed). Or at least I wouldnt justify it. I'm also willing to counter those arguments over and over again so its not really a problem for me. Point is that when you argue something, whatever your reason is, you should expect counter arguments if that argument doesnt have much facts to support it.
That much is abundantly clear.

Have you ever considered (and yes, @John Galt and @kingsboi, I am acutely aware of the irony in me, of all people, bringing this up) that not every post on this message board is an invitation to have an "argument"?

For example, suggesting that he doesnt make his team better or that since they are couple games behind us, he isnt contributing nearly enough on winning. No one has to say anything if they dont want to I dont care about that. I care about downplaying his performance just because its easier as a fan to do it rather than accept the current situatuon.
I didn't ask you what you considered to be downplaying. I asked you what could Kings fans say about Luka Doncic that you wouldn't consider to be downplaying? What if they don't want to praise his performance? What if they just want to talk about the Kings, and not be bothered by talk about Doncic?

Because, at this point, as a barely-interested third-party observer, my motivation is almost entirely selfish; I am mostly concerned with making my job as a mod easier. My personal preference is for this **** to go away. What are you demanding from Kings fans to make this **** go away?

1. I would like to see a thing happened more often than once before I consider it as a legitimate argument and not an outlier.

2.The two players also dont have too much in common. Other was a great athlete and a non shooter, Doncic is the opposite of that. Other player didnt have a great basketball IQ, other player does. Luka has also been more efficent, winning more (with a better team but still relevant since he is the best player of that team).
  1. It has happened more than once. It just hasn't happened more than once when it was relevant to the Kings. This is a Kings-centric message board, so I am surprised that you are surprised that it is the example that keeps being brought up.
  2. I'd question the premise that Tyreke Evans has low basketball IQ, but that's neither here nor there. Has NBA Rookie Luka Doncic been more efficient than NBA Rookie Tyreke Evans was? Sure, but they're not as far apart as you make it sound; certainly not so far apart as for you to be offended by the comparison.
If you only look at what they've done in the NBA, you wouldn't think that someone who compared Evans' rookie numbers with Doncic's rookie numbers was guilty of a capital crime. The vitriol related to comparing Evans to Doncic seems entirely based on the fact that Evans didn't live up to his potential, and how dare anyone suggest that that might happen to Luka! To which, my general reaction is, whatever, man!
 
That much is abundantly clear.

Have you ever considered (and yes, @John Galt and @kingsboi, I am acutely aware of the irony in me, of all people, bringing this up) that not every post on this message board is an invitation to have an "argument"?


I didn't ask you what you considered to be downplaying. I asked you what could Kings fans say about Luka Doncic that you wouldn't consider to be downplaying? What if they don't want to praise his performance? What if they just want to talk about the Kings, and not be bothered by talk about Doncic?

Because, at this point, as a barely-interested third-party observer, my motivation is almost entirely selfish; I am mostly concerned with making my job as a mod easier. My personal preference is for this **** to go away. What are you demanding from Kings fans to make this **** go away?


  1. It has happened more than once. It just hasn't happened more than once when it was relevant to the Kings. This is a Kings-centric message board, so I am surprised that you are surprised that it is the example that keeps being brought up.
  2. I'd question the premise that Tyreke Evans has low basketball IQ, but that's neither here nor there. Has NBA Rookie Luka Doncic been more efficient than NBA Rookie Tyreke Evans was? Sure, but they're not as far apart as you make it sound; certainly not so far apart as for you to be offended by the comparison.
If you only look at what they've done in the NBA, you wouldn't think that someone who compared Evans' rookie numbers with Doncic's rookie numbers was guilty of a capital crime. The vitriol related to comparing Evans to Doncic seems entirely based on the fact that Evans didn't live up to his potential, and how dare anyone suggest that that might happen to Luka! To which, my general reaction is, whatever, man!
Wordsmith.
 
That much is abundantly clear.

Have you ever considered (and yes, @John Galt and @kingsboi, I am acutely aware of the irony in me, of all people, bringing this up) that not every post on this message board is an invitation to have an "argument"?
It might not be an invitation but since this is a message board, it might generate responses and replying to those responses is a choice of the user.

I didn't ask you what you considered to be downplaying. I asked you what could Kings fans say about Luka Doncic that you wouldn't consider to be downplaying? What if they don't want to praise his performance? What if they just want to talk about the Kings, and not be bothered by talk about Doncic?

Because, at this point, as a barely-interested third-party observer, my motivation is almost entirely selfish; I am mostly concerned with making my job as a mod easier. My personal preference is for this **** to go away. What are you demanding from Kings fans to make this **** go away?
If someone doesnt want to be bothered and talk about Doncic, then he shouldnt and to me thats a simple solution to that specific problem.

Imo I dont think any discussion should "go away" or that something should be done for it to go away. As long as there are people interested in talking about Luka, Bagley vs Luka ect it should have its place in here. Only thing a moderator can or should do is see that it doesnt spread into other topics and stop the comments from both sides, not just from the side that moderator disagrees with.

  1. It has happened more than once. It just hasn't happened more than once when it was relevant to the Kings. This is a Kings-centric message board, so I am surprised that you are surprised that it is the example that keeps being brought up.
  2. I'd question the premise that Tyreke Evans has low basketball IQ, but that's neither here nor there. Has NBA Rookie Luka Doncic been more efficient than NBA Rookie Tyreke Evans was? Sure, but they're not as far apart as you make it sound; certainly not so far apart as for you to be offended by the comparison.


1. And imo it still hasnt happened often enough for it to be more than an outlier rather than probable outcome. Someone having a rookie season like Tyreke or even sligthly better season like Luka will regress or stop developing so rarely that its very unlikely and to me that means that its really not an argument.

2. I would say that its a lot harder to predict regression for Luka than Tyreke. Luka doesnt depend on his athletisism and has a great IQ. That means he should be more able to survive aging and injuries for example.


If you only look at what they've done in the NBA, you wouldn't think that someone who compared Evans' rookie numbers with Doncic's rookie numbers was guilty of a capital crime. The vitriol related to comparing Evans to Doncic seems entirely based on the fact that Evans didn't live up to his potential, and how dare anyone suggest that that might happen to Luka! To which, my general reaction is, whatever, man!
Making a statement using a statistical outlier as an argument usually doesnt mean anything. It means basically that everything can happen but if we are talking about what is the most probable outcome or if we tried to make an educated guess, outliers doesnt hold much value in that conversation.
 
Then you're not thinking about it very hard. But I'll elaborate on that, in a minute.


:: laughs in Pervis Ellison, Jimmer Fredette and Thomas Robinson ::


Evans is having a career low season, in terms of efficiency. Other than that, he hasn't "withered" at all. Pretty much every aspect about his reduced statistical output, aside from the inexplicably poor shooting inside the three-point line, can be explained by the fact that he's playing the second-fewest minutes of his career. His per/36 and per/100 are right in line with his career numbers.


  1. First of All™, so what if it is? How many times do you need it to have happened?
  2. Second of All, and tying it back in to @Gguod's query, it keeps coming up because this is a Kings message board, and it's the example that's most relevant to the Kings.
  3. In fairness, it probably mostly gets brought up as a form of pushback to the notion of the Kings "blowing" the pick. That's how that works: if some people weren't so adamant that the Kings "blew it" by passing on Doncic, then others wouldn't be so insistent on pointing out that an incredible rookie year does not guarantee an incredible career... Even though, if we're going to keep it a buck, while players earning ROY honors over more talented draft mates occurs often enough to barely be noteworthy, ROY winners who put up star/superstar-like numbers and end up not living up to superstar potential are virtually unprecedented. Before Evans, you probably have to go back to Damon Stoudamire for the last time that happened, or Derrick Coleman before him. Neither of whom (nor Evans, it should be acknowledged) actually had bad careers; not a scrub in the bunch, they just didn't live up to the expectations that they created because of phenomenal rookie play.

Tyrese? Come on, man! What are we even doin' out here, man? The 's' and the 'k' aren't even on the same side of the keyboard!

Tyreke was the most disappointing of all time, and I remember being one of the only vocal critics at the time. That 20/5/5 followed by the menial career set the franchise back a decade. It was painful that I was like the only one calling it out when he regressed the following seasons while others were making up excuses about his injury status or what position he was playing.

What do you mean you want the Doncic stuff to end? What is your objective? Folks not discuss it at all?
 
Tyreke was the most disappointing of all time, and I remember being one of the only vocal critics at the time. That 20/5/5 followed by the menial career set the franchise back a decade. It was painful that I was like the only one calling it out when he regressed the following seasons while others were making up excuses about his injury status or what position he was playing.

What do you mean you want the Doncic stuff to end? What is your objective? Folks not discuss it at all?
In all fairness to Tyreke, the franchise was at the start of a downward spiral when he was drafted and it had nothing to do with him. The Maloofs featuring Tyreke in the way they did was a symptom of the problem and a sign of things to come. Drafting Jimmer and to a degree Thomas Robinson was part of the Kings drafting to sell tickets without regards to the teams on court future.

Dallas is in a situation where the face of their franchise, Dirk, is retiring and they have an opportunity to create buzz and have a new face. It is in the franchise's business interest to let Luka show out like he is this season. Luka is obviously a great talent, and I'm not saying he will regress or be terrible. But there is a similarity in how both Cuban and the Maloofs approach the business side.
 
In all fairness to Tyreke, the franchise was at the start of a downward spiral when he was drafted and it had nothing to do with him. The Maloofs featuring Tyreke in the way they did was a symptom of the problem and a sign of things to come. Drafting Jimmer and to a degree Thomas Robinson was part of the Kings drafting to sell tickets without regards to the teams on court future.

Dallas is in a situation where the face of their franchise, Dirk, is retiring and they have an opportunity to create buzz and have a new face. It is in the franchise's business interest to let Luka show out like he is this season. Luka is obviously a great talent, and I'm not saying he will regress or be terrible. But there is a similarity in how both Cuban and the Maloofs approach the business side.
This is the heart of the matter. Reke was a great prospect with some bad injury luck and terrible early career mismanagement hampering him from developing to his full potential. Luka may need less finishing, but he still needs finishing, and handing him everything on a platter does not provide the incentives to reach his full potential. It's not knocking Luka to acknowledge this. It's also not unrealistic to ask questions about whether or not Luka would be happy here or whether we'd have to ship out players (and possibly fire the coach) to accommodate him and if in doing so we'd be stuck with great player on sh** team which is pretty much the entirety of the 10's for us as fans. And those aren't questions you can easily answer honestly, especially until you get later in a players' career.

I wanted Luka because I thought the team was in worse shape than it apparently is. I see why we did what we did and I get tired of rehashing it over and over and over instead of enjoying the team. I type up replies and then nope the F out of them and say "nah, I'll stick to another sub-forum here" and yet this crap just follows me around even when I stay off the NBA board.