Crappy overview of the Kings

[Entity]

this is DX overview of the Kings. It really sucks and isn't very informative but, its something to read. In fact they don't have write ups on JT, Spencer, and few more and still have Artest on the team.

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/NBA-Scouting-Reports,-Pacific-Division--Part-Three--2981/

 

[SacKings7]

Yeah, I didn't find that interesting at all. They didn't review any of our younger players, and they reviewed Anthony Johnson who actually isn't on the team anymore. And a SAR trade to the Nets was never ever nixed, it was a pending free agent contract that was nixed. Usually I find DX really good for reading, but they should stick to draft talk after reading that article

 

[Bricklayer]

Actually, have only gotten through the first couple payers, but that has to be about the best attempt at an in depth scouting report type player by player analysis I've seen on the web. They miss badly here and there (Cisco?) though. Too bad they aren't doing the younger players, although I understand the rationale -- they already have their scouting reports of them from when they were still in school.

Wasn't aware they were tackling this -- checking out other team's guys could be very educational.

P.S. For a good laugh check out the profile for our 2nd round pick off to the right of the main analysis.

 

[kingsnation]

Jason Kidd?!?!

 

[bajaden]

Read the article, and I've always thought that DX does as good a job as anyone in player analysis. The only problem I have with it is the timing. I think it work better if it were done in another month when the rosters of most teams are really set for the most part.

For example, to look at Houston without adding Artest into the equation just doesn't make sense, when the overall analysis is of the team. I know that they already have player profiles on the rookies, but I don't think it would have damaged they're long term dexterity, to add a short line about them, ending with a yea or a nea.

 

[tyrant]

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/NBA-Scouting-Reports,-Pacific-Division--Part-Three--2981/

thank god for this, we wouldve inadvertently mistaken them for the 96 bulls

 

[CruzDude]

......... Too bad they aren't doing the younger players, although I understand the rationale -- they already have their scouting reports of them from when they were still in school.

P.S. For a good laugh check out the profile for our 2nd round pick off to the right of the main analysis.

Ahh yes. I forgot about our 2nd rounder, Ewing. He is a bit older than I remember in summer league tho'.

Overall very good analysis of the other players. Hit the nail on Beno who should serve the Kings well for a number of years.

 

[NewMonkey]

Actually, have only gotten through the first couple payers, but that has to be about the best attempt at an in depth scouting report type player by player analysis I've seen on the web. They miss badly here and there (Cisco?) though. Too bad they aren't doing the younger players, although I understand the rationale -- they already have their scouting reports of them from when they were still in school.

Yeah, I thought it was pretty accurate too.

 

[NME]

It looks like they took individual player reports they had laying around and plugged them all into one page. Nothing wrong with the player capsules themselves, but too bad they aren't bothering to give a summary of the team as a whole or make sure the rosters are up to date.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

They have Patrick Ewing SENIOR(46 yrs)on our roster!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

It wasn't too bad. I mean, keep in mind they're reviewing all thirty teams in the league, and if that's what they can come up with it's pretty good. They had Mikki Moore down to a T, and although I think they underrate Garcia's D, for the most part they got him figured out. I mean, it's hard for them to notice the little nuances--such as Salmons's inability to play well off the bench.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Read the article, and I've always thought that DX does as good a job as anyone in player analysis. The only problem I have with it is the timing. I think it work better if it were done in another month when the rosters of most teams are really set for the most part.

For example, to look at Houston without adding Artest into the equation just doesn't make sense, when the overall analysis is of the team. I know that they already have player profiles on the rookies, but I don't think it would have damaged they're long term dexterity, to add a short line about them, ending with a yea or a nea.

I think it is a good job if you understand their objective. They were not trying to do comprehensive "team" scouting reports. They were trying to add profiles and scouting reports for every player in the league who was not already in their database. Now they sold it as a series of articles by doing it team by team. However, it really does not matter if they have Artest on Houston or Sacramento because his scouting report would remain the same. They were not trying to put every player in the context of the team they are on, just scouting them individually.