Expectations of Kings' defense, 2021-22

sactowndog said:
King is 6’ 7” with an 7’ wingspan definately wing size… but
  • Metu was a vet Min signing
  • King was a 2 way player
  • Harkless was glued to Miami’s bench
  • Barnes was dumped to the Kings for a guy fighting to stay in the league.

while they are all NBA wing size it’s not a stretch to say the position is currently held together by chewing gum and chicken wire.

Perhaps the guys will all take a leap forward. We all hope they do and have some reason for hope. But it’s hope at the moment.
Click to expand...
I'm don't care how the Kings acquired a player because it is irrelevant. You like to disparage Harkless because he wasn't playing for Miami, but never mention that they were a team filled with wings. They were also a terrific defensive team (Harless' main attribute) that needed more offense.

As to your last point, I never claimed they don't need more help on the wing, I was refuting the statement that they had zero players who can defend the wing. Both Barnes & Harkless have shown theycan defend wings. Both King a & Metu shown signs that they can defend wings (need to see more). Could theyuse more help? Of course. But we do have some whocan fill that role.
 
datamanwes said:
Saying Barnes was dumped to the Kings is a statement that rings totally biased . I think Monte has made some good moves this off season. Not enough to make the playoffs but its a start. I think Meu, and Harkless were good additions at the end of last season. I think King has potential but we shall see
Click to expand...

the trade was:

Dallas: Harrison Barnes

Sacramento:
Anthony Randolph (bought out)
Justin Jackson

please explain how my statement was biased? I am not implying Barnes’s value at the moment. Point to any part of my statement that is factually inaccurate.
 
Telemachus said:
I'm don't care how the Kings acquired a player because it is irrelevant. You like to disparage Harkless because he wasn't playing for Miami, but never mention that they were a team filled with wings. They were also a terrific defensive team (Harless' main attribute) that needed more offense.

As to your last point, I never claimed they don't need more help on the wing, I was refuting the statement that they had zero players who can defend the wing. Both Barnes & Harkless have shown theycan defend wings. Both King a & Metu shown signs that they can defend wings (need to see more). Could theyuse more help? Of course. But we do have some whocan fill that role.
Click to expand...

how they were acquired is a relevant measure of their implied value around the league. The same as the price you pay for a stock is the implied value of the stock. Can that value change? Sure, and in the case of Barnes it has but let’s not pretend we have some current all-star talent out there to counter the all star talent we face.

it’s ridiculous to say we have no wings and it’s equally ridiculous to say we have proven quality starters (with the exception perhaps of Barnes).
 
sactowndog said:
the trade was:

Dallas: Harrison Barnes

Sacramento:
Anthony Randolph (bought out)
Justin Jackson

please explain how my statement was biased? I am not implying Barnes’s value at the moment. Point to any part of my statement that is factually inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Typo correction: Zach Randolph.

But I don't see how you can square "I'm not implying Barnes' value at the moment" with your original post which very clearly stated that the position was being "held together by chewing gum and chicken wire", listed our clear #1 wing option fourth, and disparaged him based on the value that was required to obtain him in trade.

Instead of saying "Barnes" is the best we have right now, you list him fourth and clearly imply that he's not any good by talking about what was traded for him rather than his actual value.

Of course you're going to get called out on that. Of course.

"The Continental Army is led by one G. Washington, who continually cried as a baby. Point to any part of my statement that is factually inaccurate."
 
sactowndog said:
how they were acquired is a relevant measure of their implied value around the league. The same as the price you pay for a stock is the implied value of the stock. Can that value change? Sure, and in the case of Barnes it has but let’s not pretend we have some current all-star talent out there to counter the all star talent we face.

it’s ridiculous to say we have no wings and it’s equally ridiculous to say we have proven quality starters (with the exception perhaps of Barnes).
Click to expand...

Since Barnes CLEARLY is seen as much more valuable now than when he was acquired by the Kings, enhanced value he earned thru very good play, your point about how cheaply he was acquired is irrelevant and you should just acknowledge that and move on.

And yes, it would be silly to pretend that HB/Harkless/Metu/maybe-King constitute "all-Star" wing talent, which probably explains why not a single person (that I've seen) has come close to making that claim. In fact, feels like half the chatter since before the draft has been about whether/how the Kings might get Siakam, Harris, or Simmons with giving up Fox/Ty/Davion (or, barring that, pull in a lesser light like Vanderbilt, Hart, etc.).

What several people have said is that the "wing" cupboard isn't bare in Sacramento, which is obviously true. I actually think the Kings can be solid there against most teams, which coupled with solid play from the bigs, superior play from the backcourt, and solid depth and improved defense throughout, means this team can be a playoff team as currently constituted.
 
Last edited:
sactowndog said:
how they were acquired is a relevant measure of their implied value around the league. The same as the price you pay for a stock is the implied value of the stock. Can that value change? Sure, and in the case of Barnes it has but let’s not pretend we have some current all-star talent out there to counter the all star talent we face.

it’s ridiculous to say we have no wings and it’s equally ridiculous to say we have proven quality starters (with the exception perhaps of Barnes).
Click to expand...
Sorry, it isn't relevant. Teams move on from players for all kinds of reasons & their worth can vary from year to year or often within the same year. Is Barnes worth what the Kings gave up for him or what you often claim the Kings turned down from the Celtics? It can't be both.

I never made any claim that anyone other than Barnes was a quality starting wing (have no idea where you would get that), I claimed we had 2 proven wing defenders & 2 others who show potential in that area (just unproven).
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Typo correction: Zach Randolph.

But I don't see how you can square "I'm not implying Barnes' value at the moment" with your original post which very clearly stated that the position was being "held together by chewing gum and chicken wire", listed our clear #1 wing option fourth, and disparaged him based on the value that was required to obtain him in trade.

Instead of saying "Barnes" is the best we have right now, you list him fourth and clearly imply that he's not any good by talking about what was traded for him rather than his actual value.

Of course you're going to get called out on that. Of course.

"The Continental Army is led by one G. Washington, who continually cried as a baby. Point to any part of my statement that is factually inaccurate."
Click to expand...

thanks for the correction on the name. I looked up the trade and it said Anthony and I thought perhaps that was Zach’s real first name.

as for the list it was listed in no particular order. Most consider Barnes a 4th or 5th option and we have two spots with Barnes as our #1. To say it’s currently chewing gum and chicken wire is seems pretty fair as most teams have 2-3 guys in that 3-4 spot.
 
Telemachus said:
Sorry, it isn't relevant. Teams move on from players for all kinds of reasons & their worth can vary from year to year or often within the same year. Is Barnes worth what the Kings gave up for him or what you often claim the Kings turned down from the Celtics? It can't be both.

I never made any claim that anyone other than Barnes was a quality starting wing (have no idea where you would get that), I claimed we had 2 proven wing defenders & 2 others who show potential in that area (just unproven).
Click to expand...

Barnes generally is considered average to slightly below average around the league. He is also our best wing defender. So not sure how you define “proven” but I would argue it’s hard to be the worst defense in history with “proven” wing defenders.

Will we be better this year? Perhaps and certainly we all hope so but I am by no means highly confident absent seeing improvement in the preseason.
 
Telemachus said:
Harkless has been a SF most of his career and played primarily the 3/4 for the Kings last season. King can call himself a guard all he wants, but he is 6' 8 and plays like a prototypical wing in today's game. Barnes is a 3/4, which is what a wing is in today's game. As for Metu, his play in the Olympics and summer league looked like a tryout to prove he can be a wing (time will tell). The point being, that is a far cry from having no wings.
Click to expand...

He's mostly been recognized as an on ball defender and in watching him in his career he's always been more comfortable guarding 2's and has played plenty of SG since he's always been a little slight of frame. I think this is the reason along with his sketchy shot that he had fallen so out of favor the last few seasons. And you can call whoever, whatever, they will show you what they are and sometimes not just with ability but with words. King is still probably around the 200 pound mark so that will decide where he plays and where he wants to will do the rest. All in all I think he's the only long term shot on the Kings right now with Woodard looking like a PF. Barnes is clearly better at PF as well. Metu is a PF/C and him turning into a SF at 25-26 is beyond wishful thinking and treads into plain bad idea territory. In the end, the Kings are steady at mostly "what if's" on the wing in regards to "TRUE" wings right now so any potential doubts are well warranted.
 
When Harkless was acquired, one of the talking points was how highly rated he was defending the pick and roll during the Portland and with NY. Of course that has been a few years. But it’s possible he comes back if he knows he has minutes, there is motivation. We shall see if he can defend….if he comes anywhere close to what he used to be that is a win for Sac
 
SacTownKid said:
While him coming to the Kings probably had a lot to do with his non-true, more PF status as a wing, he proved his worth last season. And with these contracts much lesser players are signing these days he's also become practically a STEAL at his contract value.
Click to expand...
He doesn’t suck. Also, I don’t think anyone is looking at him as one of our top scoring options……at least I don’t think so.
 
dude12 said:
He doesn’t suck. Also, I don’t think anyone is looking at him as one of our top scoring options……at least I don’t think so.
Click to expand...

And the great thing about him is he's proven his entire career he can carry a team for stretches. Being a 3rd option on this team is perfect for him and the Kings.
 
dude12 said:
When Harkless was acquired, one of the talking points was how highly rated he was defending the pick and roll during the Portland and with NY. Of course that has been a few years. But it’s possible he comes back if he knows he has minutes, there is motivation. We shall see if he can defend….if he comes anywhere close to what he used to be that is a win for Sac
Click to expand...

And the league has somewhat changed around him to the point that it put him out of the rotation on a team that just made it to the finals the year before. The Kings have been scraping the bottom of the barrel or looking for a winning ticket on youth or reclamation projects at SF the last few seasons. From multiple looks at Corey Brewer, to GR3, to Harkless. That isn't what winning teams are doing these days. In the end, hopefully none of these players are stealing minutes from the Kings guards. If they are, that means the guard experiment failed miserably, or Walton is tinkering again.
 
SacTownKid said:
And the league has somewhat changed around him to the point that it put him out of the rotation on a team that just made it to the finals the year before. The Kings have been scraping the bottom of the barrel or looking for a winning ticket on youth or reclamation projects at SF the last few seasons. From multiple looks at Corey Brewer, to GR3, to Harkless. That isn't what winning teams are doing these days. In the end, hopefully none of these players are stealing minutes from the Kings guards. If they are, that means the guard experiment failed miserably, or Walton is tinkering again.
Click to expand...
Harkless has been a 3/4 his whole career. The weird thing is he’s only 27. It’s possible he’s on his last contract. It’s possible he’s a solid contributor this year. Won’t really know until Walton’s rotations but I’m going to guess Harkless gets 20 minutes or so a game but not every game……pending matchups.
 
Woot! said:
Since Barnes CLEARLY is seen as much more valuable now than when he was acquired by the Kings, enhanced value he earned thru very good play, your point about how cheaply he was acquired is irrelevant and you should just acknowledge that and move on.

And yes, it would be silly to pretend that HB/Harkless/Metu/maybe-King constitute "all-Star" wing talent, which probably explains why not a single person (that I've seen) has come close to making that claim. In fact, feels like half the chatter since before the draft has been about whether/how the Kings might get Siakam, Harris, or Simmons with giving up Fox/Ty/Davion (or, barring that, pull in a lesser light like Vanderbilt, Hart, etc.).

What several people have said is that the "wing" cupboard isn't bare in Sacramento, which is obviously true. I actually think the Kings can be solid there against most teams, which coupled with solid play from the bigs, superior play from the backcourt, and solid depth and improved defense throughout, means this team can be a playoff team as currently constituted.
Click to expand...

that is fine you believe that point and we shall see if it is true. Whether we are solid or proven remains to be seen. A year with historically bad defense and no change in personnel would indicate otherwise. Perhaps it is all on the coaches as some have postulated. We shall all no for sure I’m 3-4 months.
 
Having viable wings at the 4 matters as much as having wings at the 3. Giannis (also splits a ton of time at the 5), Sabonis (should be a full-time 5), Kristaps (should be a full-time 5), Kevin Love ( hardly a rotation player at this point), Anthony Davis (should a full-time 5, but is weak-sauce to move over), Randle, Zion. Everyone else is just a bigger wing in the vein of a Harrison Barnes at the 4 slot now. That's why someone like Metu is intriguing as a "big 4" because he shows some really intriguing wing skills with the size of the more traditional PF player.

So yeah while Zion and Randle look to really be ascending as more "classic" bully ball PF's, the rest of the league has adjusted to getting smaller.
 
dude12 said:
He doesn’t suck. Also, I don’t think anyone is looking at him as one of our top scoring options……at least I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
I don’t think I ever said he sucked. I said most people consider Barnes a 4th starter on a good team and an average defender. If you go to a non fan specific board you will find that to be the middle ground.
 
sactowndog said:
that is fine you believe that point and we shall see if it is true. Whether we are solid or proven remains to be seen. A year with historically bad defense and no change in personnel would indicate otherwise. Perhaps it is all on the coaches as some have postulated. We shall all no for sure I’m 3-4 months.
Click to expand...

I don’t understand some expect large improvements from players that were never good at defending the modern wing in the first place. Especially veterans. If they were like 23 sure that makes sense but Barnes and Mo are older and King has already said he’s a big guard. This miracle change isn’t gonna happen. If they can be average that’s a win for us
 
sactowndog said:
that is fine you believe that point and we shall see if it is true. Whether we are solid or proven remains to be seen. A year with historically bad defense and no change in personnel would indicate otherwise. Perhaps it is all on the coaches as some have postulated. We shall all no for sure I’m 3-4 months.
Click to expand...

huh?

Rookie Hali
CoJo
Grob III
Bjelica
Whiteside

to

Mitchell
Hali year 2
TD
Harkless
Len || TT

That's a significant bench defensive upgrade from our opening rotation last year.
 
Is it really a miraculous turnaround if they improve from historically bad to say closer to the top of the bottom half.

I don’t think the wings are where we should be looking at but more the guards. Defense at the point of attack. Fox and Hali do have room for improvement and we have seen Fox play good defense but he needs to do it on a consistent basis. And although a few have banged the drum for Delon Wright, it appears that Mitchell is better right now as a disruptor where as Wright was solid and more of a play the passing lanes guys. Having TD for a full year is also quite a bit better than what we put out.

Now where does that leave Buddy and what are we doing with Bagley. Buddy works hard at D but generally we know what the deal is there and Bagley generally struggles. If Walton plays these guys together, then that is a problem.

But Mitchell has the ability, I believe, to help the culture of us becoming better on D. Our guards are key. We can’t give up straight line drives routinely. And I do believe we are going to see TD play some 3
 
Also - with the addition of Off Night - we should at least be good at defending the 3. That would be a start at least - the defense was bad at every level last year.

And with actual depth on the roster, Walton can bench players that aren’t effective.
 
The_Jamal said:
huh?

Rookie Hali
CoJo
Grob III
Bjelica
Whiteside

to

Mitchell
Hali year 2
TD
Harkless
Len || TT

That's a significant bench defensive upgrade from our opening rotation last year.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm not sure why this point isn't sticking w/some, but I'll say it again: the Kings' "historically bad" defensive team is NOT the team that played the second half of last year. The post-ASGame team was ranked 23rd in DETRTG - hardly worth shouting from the rooftops, but *much* better than the pre-ASGame team.

And *that* team has added Mitchell, Len, Thompson, Christie, Longabardi, and greater commitments from Fox and Hali. No one's yet made a plausible case for why we shouldn't expect at least modest additional improvement on that 23rd-ranked defensive team. Even quite modest improvement would put them right in the middle of the pack defensively and MILES better than the "historically bad" Opening Day 2020 version.
 
sactowndog said:
A year with historically bad defense and no change in personnel would indicate otherwise.
Click to expand...

Didn't happen. Had half a season w/historically had defense, brought in Wright/Davis/Harkless and actually played them, and were no longer that hideous defense. That 2nd-half defense is the baseline.
 
Woot! said:
Exactly. I'm not sure why this point isn't sticking w/some, but I'll say it again: the Kings' "historically bad" defensive team is NOT the team that played the second half of last year. The post-ASGame team was ranked 23rd in DETRTG - hardly worth shouting from the rooftops, but *much* better than the pre-ASGame team.

And *that* team has added Mitchell, Len, Thompson, Christie, Longabardi, and greater commitments from Fox and Hali. No one's yet made a plausible case for why we shouldn't expect at least modest additional improvement on that 23rd-ranked defensive team. Even quite modest improvement would put them right in the middle of the pack defensively and MILES better than the "historically bad" Opening Day 2020 version.
Click to expand...

What was their ranking if you take those last 10 games out of play? They played OKC 3 times and against injured teams as well as teams resting their starters.
 
ESP47 said:
What was their ranking if you take those last 10 games out of play? They played OKC 3 times and against injured teams as well as teams resting their starters.
Click to expand...

Their ranking would certainly be worse absent those last 10 games, but they can only play what was in front of them, right? The basic point stands: they were a substantially better defensive team post all-Star break than pre, caveats notwithstanding. They traded away guys that hurt defensively and got some guys that helped AND they placed greater emphasis on that end. Now they've added more help. We'll see what it all amounts to.
 
Last edited:
Woot! said:
Their ranking would certainly be worse absent those last 10 games, but they can only play what was in front off them, right? The basic point stands: they were a substantially better defensive team post all-Star break than pre, caveats notwithstanding. They traded away guys that hurt defensively and got some guys that helped AND they played greater emphasis on that end. Now they've added more help. We'll see what it all amounts to.
Click to expand...

Correct but they also traded Wright and weren’t playing Fox who while he has potential has been poor. Regardless it’s pointless to argue about what will be. Perhaps King or Metu will shock us all. King certainly has the length to defend the 3.
 
Woot! said:
Their ranking would certainly be worse absent those last 10 games, but they can only play what was in front of them, right? The basic point stands: they were a substantially better defensive team post all-Star break than pre, caveats notwithstanding. They traded away guys that hurt defensively and got some guys that helped AND they placed greater emphasis on that end. Now they've added more help. We'll see what it all amounts to.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from and I don't even necessarily disagree with you. It's just I take everything with a grain of salt after years of watching the Kings look like they have potential at the end of the season, only to look the same or worse the next year. Remember end of season Ike Diogu and McLemore? A lot of times it just turned out that our crappy players were better than their crappy players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Caccia
  • Locked
[Game] 72/82: Kings vs. Thunder 25 MAR 2025, 7pm PT/10pm ET
8 9 10
Replies
286
Views
8K
Section 101
Section 101
Spike
  • Poll Poll
Power Rankings, Week of 12/12
Replies
0
Views
213
Spike
Spike
Caccia
  • Locked
[Game] 51/82: Kings @ Portland Trail Blazers 06 FEB 2025, 7pm PT/10pm ET
19 20 21
Replies
628
Views
14K
serbiangoat
S
Spike
  • Poll Poll
NBA Power Rankings Week of 11/21
Replies
2
Views
360
Capt. Factorial
Capt. Factorial
Spike
  • Poll Poll
Power Rankings, Week of 12/5
Replies
0
Views
162
Spike
Spike
Back
Top