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

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

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.

This statement is completely specious. It might sound reasonable, on the surface, but the obvious flaw is that the person being bothered by the Doncic discussion has no control over whether or not the people who are bothering them with the discussion continue to bother them. It presupposes that all of the people who are bothered by the Doncic discussion are only bothered when people are replying to them, directly. Which isn't actually true: I didn't say bothered to talk about Doncic, I said bothered by talk about Doncic. Opting not to talk about him doesn't solve the problem, if the problem is other people talking about him. And putting the whole damned board on Ignore is not a practical solution.

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.

[mod mode on]

1. Your opinion is recognized as valid, but it will not be used to determine our policy. This is not Reddit, or 4chan, or Twitter, or even RealGM, or whatever other corner of the interwebs whose moderation policy is more suited to your temperament. I'm not "Go somewhere else, if you don't like it here!" guy, but I am "If you're going to be here, you need to figure out how to make peace with the fact that this is how we do it here" guy. So, you can have your own opinion about what a mod "can or should" do, but that ain't your call.
2. We don't engage in "zero-sum" moderation here: we have no responsibility to ensure that "both sides" receive the same number of public warnings. The harshest penalties are handed out to the harshest posts. But that's not a function of whether or not the mods agree with what you said, it's a function of how you said what you said. A post which criticizes a player isn't going to be censured as harshly as a post which criticizes a poster who criticizes a player; that's not because a moderator agrees or disagrees, it's because (for lack of a better choice of words) "attacking" posters is off-limits, and "attacking" players is not.

[mod mode off]

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.

Well good, because I wasn't trying to have an argument with you. And "What is the probable outcome?" was not the question being asked, in the first place.

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.

1. I would ask again why you keep bringing "IQ" into this, but I'm afraid you might tell me.
2. "He should be more able to survive aging and injuries" strikes me as an impossible thing to know about a nineteen year-old.

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.

"We" weren't talking about that. Just you.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Tyreke was the most disappointing of all time...

This is not only wrong, but offensively ahistorical.

What do you mean you want the Doncic stuff to end? What is your objective? Folks not discuss it at all?

As a poster, my "objective" would be for discussion of Luka Doncic to be limited to the #NBA subfolder. As a mod, I'd settle for Luka Doncic to not be shoehorned into threads which are discussing the Kings in general, and Bagley, in particular. The Kings are finally having a season which many fans claim that they've wanted for over a decade... So, let the ones who actually meant it enjoy themselves.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Actually, let me rewind this, right quick:

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.

You don't want to answer the second part of my question, fine. Please answer the first part: 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" him? Because that's actually why I asked you what it would take to make this "stop." Your position appears to be that you're going to reply to any and every post that you consider to be "downplaying" Doncic, regardless of whether the post was directed at you or not. So, what are Kings fans allowed to say about Doncic that will not trigger your need to reply?

Help us help you.

 

[Livinthedream]

Answering the thread question, I choose Fox. I don't see it as who will have the best stats, but who gives me a chance to build the best team. Now granted, this depends on the style of play that you prefer. I'd prefer that my point guard be able to score, but not score all the points. Only take over when it's needed. Not just pass when he's been stopped, but pass to get his teammates going. I also want a 2 way player and one that is not going to end up on the wrong end of a mismatch on either side of the ball. Those who are ok with the Harden style of game, more power to you. That's what Luka is at this moment in time, until it changes. Not my style.

For those lamenting that we missed out on a generational player, it's your right to feel that way. I disagree with generational or transcendent label. But, there is never just one opportunity for success at anytime. As many love to point out, the NBA has changed. It hasn't just changed because of analytics. It's also changed because the guy you draft probably isn't going to stay with you throughout his career. The better the player, the more likely he is to leave and go play with his friends to win a title. Pelicans are dealing with it today. OKC lost Durant. Cleveland lost Lebron twice. Kyrie bolted. Leonard left the Spurs. Your best bet to get into title contention is to build a solid team first, then attract that superstar through a trade with your assets.

 

[Joshoua]

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.

Rick Carlisle runs a system he’s not letting Luka just go out there and get stats.

 

[Kingsfan23]

This is not only wrong, but offensively ahistorical.

As a poster, my "objective" would be for discussion of Luka Doncic to be limited to the #NBA subfolder. As a mod, I'd settle for Luka Doncic to not be shoehorned into threads which are discussing the Kings in general, and Bagley, in particular. The Kings are finally having a season which many fans claim that they've wanted for over a decade... So, let the ones who actually meant it enjoy themselves.

It’s a subjective notion, so how can it be wrong? Tyreke teased the fanbase with actually being a franchise player, the others didn’t

I think most would agree that the Doncic talk can be limited to there, I was surprised to see this topic in this forum

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Answering the thread question, I choose Fox. I don't see it as who will have the best stats, but who gives me a chance to build the best team.

I can agree with this, with a caveat. If you are committed to a running, uptempo offensive style, De'Aaron Fox is probably a better player to build your franchise around than Luka Doncic. The obvious rebuttal to that, from my point of view is... if you're in charge of a team that has had a losing record twelve years in a row, and hasn't won thirty games in a decade, why have you made a commitment to style/system/fit which supersedes talent/BPA? Have Divac and/or Joerger won anything, anywhere, that justifies that decision?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

It’s a subjective notion, so how can it be wrong?

"I think Tyreke Evans was the most disappointing player in Sacramento history" is a subjective notion. "Tyreke Evans was the most disappointing player in Sacramento history" is a statement which can be objectively evaluated. And, objectively, the most disappointing player in Sacramento history is the player who was taken with the Number One overall pick. It's ahistorical to suggest otherwise.

 

[VF21]

I can agree with this, with a caveat. If you are committed to a running, uptempo offensive style, De'Aaron Fox is probably a better player to build your franchise around than Luka Doncic. The obvious rebuttal to that, from my point of view is... if you're in charge of a team that has had a losing record twelve years in a row, and hasn't won thirty games in a decade, why have you made a commitment to style/system/fit which supersedes talent/BPA? Have Divac and/or Joerger won anything, anywhere, that justifies that decision?

I don't necessarily agree with the presupposed "correct" answer here, based on the rebuttal, but I definitely appreciate the attempt to return the thread to its original premise.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

"I think Tyreke Evans was the most disappointing player in Sacramento history" is a subjective notion. "Tyreke Evans was the most disappointing player in Sacramento history" is a statement which can be objectively evaluated. And, objectively, the most disappointing player in Sacramento history is the player who was taken with the Number One overall pick. It's ahistorical to suggest otherwise.

I mostly agree, although I also think objectively speaking we got the top pick in the worst draft in probably 10 years on either side. So from having the number one pick standpoint it sucks it was a guy who couldn't stick more than one season in Sac and who's career was a dud, but had we picked Sean Elliot who was probably the standout of anyone considered, while he enjoyed a nice long career, objectively speaking he'd have been a disappointment for a #1 overall as well. So solely judging draft picks I think you could make an objective case for Joe Klein, Thomas Robertson, Jimmer Fredette, Nick Stauskas, Spencer Hawes, and a few others especially when you consider who was passed up to draft them.

Then throw in Ralph Sampson, JJ Hickson - two trades that absolutely crippled this franchise. Kenny Thomas, the most unmoveable moveable piece ever. Bobby Hurley's car wreck. Ricky Berry. I feel like I could go on and on for the list of people that might earn this award.

Bottom line is that there is no room for Tyreke in this discussion and I think that Bagley would pretty much have to give up basketball tomorrow to crack the list.

 

[Livinthedream]

I can agree with this, with a caveat. If you are committed to a running, uptempo offensive style, De'Aaron Fox is probably a better player to build your franchise around than Luka Doncic. The obvious rebuttal to that, from my point of view is... if you're in charge of a team that has had a losing record twelve years in a row, and hasn't won thirty games in a decade, why have you made a commitment to style/system/fit which supersedes talent/BPA? Have Divac and/or Joerger won anything, anywhere, that justifies that decision?

No, they haven't won anything. But if you have a plan, and you think you're close, complete it. It appears Phoenix and Sacramento both think/thought they were on a certain track and Luka would change their direction.

If the goal is to make the playoffs ASAP, the argument then becomes what gets you there faster. Finishing the current plan, or turning the team over to Luka.

 

[Gguod]

This statement is completely specious. It might sound reasonable, on the surface, but the obvious flaw is that the person being bothered by the Doncic discussion has no control over whether or not the people who are bothering them with the discussion continue to bother them. It presupposes that all of the people who are bothered by the Doncic discussion are only bothered when people are replying to them, directly. Which isn't actually true: I didn't say bothered to talk about Doncic, I said bothered by talk about Doncic. Opting not to talk about him doesn't solve the problem, if the problem is other people talking about him. And putting the whole damned board on Ignore is not a practical solution.

Thats why my opinion to this question:

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?

"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."

So basically keep this conversation in a certain topic and anyone that doesnt want to have that conversation doesnt have to open that specific topic.

Well good, because I wasn't trying to have an argument with you. And "What is the probable outcome?" was not the question being asked, in the first place.

Well if the point of Tyreke argument is that there is a small, very unlikely chance that he could regress because there have been few instances in the history, then obviously yes thats okay. I would say that its an outlier and doesnt affect the conversation, in fact I would say that statistically after a rookie season like Doncic its far less likely to regress or cap out at fringe starter than with seasons like the other guys like Bagley, Ayton ect are having. So the point is that this Tyreke argument doesnt really change anything or basically mean anything.

1. I would ask again why you keep bringing "IQ" into this, but I'm afraid you might tell me.
2. "He should be more able to survive aging and injuries" strikes me as an impossible thing to know about a nineteen year-old.

1.Because imo Doncic has demonstrated that he has a lot better basketball IQ than Evans did and basketball IQ is very important if we are considering wether a player will regress or not.

2. If we are talking about a hypothetical situation where two players suffer the same amount of injuries, then the player who relies less on his athletisism is more likely to sustain his level of play as a basketball player. Or at lest I would think so

Actually, let me rewind this, right quick:

You don't want to answer the second part of my question, fine. Please answer the first part: 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" him? Because that's actually why I asked you what it would take to make this "stop." Your position appears to be that you're going to reply to any and every post that you consider to be "downplaying" Doncic, regardless of whether the post was directed at you or not. So, what are Kings fans allowed to say about Doncic that will not trigger your need to reply?

Help us help you.

Hard to tell you specific examples, if that is something you are interested in, you can read my post history and see what are the things I've replied to regarding Luka and considered as downplaying. I already gave one specific example and that was the "Luka doesnt even make his team better" argument. Also its a strange question since if something is posted in a thread about Luka Doncic, I dont see why anyone couldnt reply to it wether they agree or disagree. To me its a big part of how the message board functions