Here's something I posted in the "Comments that Don't Warrant Their Own Thread," but it probably fits here the best. I do it while feeling the pessimism, and I then had some thoughts from a different perspective. So, here is some musing for the long hot off season in Texas. I was thinking the other day, probably with too much time on my hands, about the optimism of the last season. Many thought that the Kings had improved over the lineups of the previous two seasons that had resulted in 48 and 46 wins, respectively, maybe being able to knock on the door of 50 wins. DeRozan was a dramatic improvement over Harrison Barnes in scoring, also a top clutch scorer with Fox. That team looked impressive on paper. Alas, we all know that the dream turned into a nightmare. Still, what if one puts the last season totally aside and compares this team, since they seem to be running it back, with that team, with all of its optimism. The huge change is Fox to LaVine. Quite apart from the issue of Fox’s debacle of leaving, LaVine’s contract, and wishing that the Kings had gotten much more than LaVine, LaVine is a top level shooter, better than Fox (a good scorer). They’re not the same player, but one could compare them, all of the other mess aside. In fact, on a recent episode of Eddie Johnson and Justin Termine, discussing Fox’s new contract, which pays him more than LaVine, Fox did not come across well. I was thinking after their assessment that LaVine could look like the better player, at least equal, overall. (I know, but for the Kings handicap, Fox would probably have made more All NBA selections, which Eddie and Justin were looking at—and Fox is probably going to explode on the national scene in San Antonio). LaVine’s incredibly efficient 23.3 points per game (even with the 22.5 for the Kings and that mess), was top 14 in the league, better than Steph Curry. If the Kings double down on LaVine as a scorer for him to get just a few points more up to 27 per game, which he has done (like Fox), he would be in the top 8, ahead of Jokic. For the team at the end of last year, which played above .500 under Christie, Schroeder is a much better point guard than they had. If one compares the team starting this year with the team starting last year, LaVine is a better shooter than Fox, and Schroeder is a better pure point guard than Fox, and also speedy. Since Fox was inconsistent on defense, it could even be that LaVine and Schroeder are better on defense than Fox and Huerter. Together, LaVine and Schroeder are arguably better than Fox and Huerter. The other three are the same. So is it possible, imagining that in the offseason and preseason that they figure out a way to play together well, with a new offense, is it possible that this team looks better than the team that started last year?! About which people were quite optimistic?!
