[KINGS] Comments about the Kings that don't warrant their own thread

Biggest red flag I've seen w/Walton was when he said he'd play 8, 9, or 10 a game. He said 12 is too many for a game.
o_O
For the tempo he wants to play, rotations of 8 or 9 is a horrible idea. Look how we ran out of gas at the end of last season.

Psst Walton wants 35 3s taken each game
o_O
 
Biggest red flag I've seen w/Walton was when he said he'd play 8, 9, or 10 a game. He said 12 is too many for a game.
o_O
For the tempo he wants to play, rotations of 8 or 9 is a horrible idea. Look how we ran out of gas at the end of last season.

Psst Walton wants 35 3s taken each game
o_O
I figured out how to make the math work.
New offense will involve a lot of 3/4 court shot attempts. This will also lets us focus on defense by never leaving defensive positioning.
 
Biggest red flag I've seen w/Walton was when he said he'd play 8, 9, or 10 a game. He said 12 is too many for a game.
o_O
For the tempo he wants to play, rotations of 8 or 9 is a horrible idea. Look how we ran out of gas at the end of last season.

Psst Walton wants 35 3s taken each game
o_O
That's not a red flag, it's a positive. 12 man rotations don't work. And you better get used to an 8 man rotation if you wanna win, because nothing matters less than how deep you are at the 11th and 12th man once the playoffs start.
 
Only thing that is negative is your quote.
Hahahaha. Ok boss.

I'm focused on seeing the Kings win some games and get back to relevancy. HOW they accomplish that is of a much smaller concern to me than them actually doing it. Apparently you are more concerned about the stupid things that dont amount to winning basketball, like how many players are in Waltons rotation. Newsflash. Not a single winning team last year went 12 deep AT ANY POINT. MAYBE 10 deep, until garbage time of course.

Would you rather see the Kings win or see them play the way YOU want them to? It's an honest question man.


Edit: Funny enough, my "quote" was what you had said. Funny how that works out
 
Last edited:
Hahahaha. Ok boss.

I'm focused on seeing the Kings win some games and get back to relevancy. HOW they accomplish that is of a much smaller concern to me than them actually doing it. Apparently you are more concerned about the stupid things that dont amount to winning basketball, like how many players are in Waltons rotation. Newsflash. Not a single winning team last year went 12 deep AT ANY POINT. MAYBE 10 deep, until garbage time of course.

Would you rather see the Kings win or see them play the way YOU want them to? It's an honest question man.
Denver: PG: Marey, Morris, Tomas (for a few games), SG: Harris, Beasly, SF: Craig, Barton, PF: Milsap, Hernangomez/Lyles, C: Jokic, Plumlee
However, because of the injuries, they played 9 man rotation most games.
 
Denver: PG: Marey, Morris, Tomas (for a few games), SG: Harris, Beasly, SF: Craig, Barton, PF: Milsap, Hernangomez/Lyles, C: Jokic, Plumlee
However, because of the injuries, they played 9 man rotation most games.
So what you are saying is because of injuries they were FORCED to go that deep? And then they still went 9 deep MOST games?
 
Biggest red flag I've seen w/Walton was when he said he'd play 8, 9, or 10 a game. He said 12 is too many for a game.
o_O
For the tempo he wants to play, rotations of 8 or 9 is a horrible idea. Look how we ran out of gas at the end of last season.

Psst Walton wants 35 3s taken each game
o_O
I saw that and he was responding to if he would play 12 guys. He said 12 is too many and I agree.

He did not say he wouldn’t play 10 which is the number I hope he plays.
 
Doesnt mean he is only going to play the same 8,9,10 EVERY game
I think this statement is true as Dedmon, Giles and Holmes will have games where they sit out. But he has a valid point we wore down last year playing at our pace and going 9 deep. To me it is winning basketball to go 10 deep because we can and teams like Houston, Golden State, Lakers all can’t go 10 deep.

I hope Fox and Joseph pick up Westbrook, Curry, Rondo full court and get into their legs. I hope Buddy and Bogi make opposing two guards chase them around multiple picks in the half court. Our advantage is we can wear other teams out without wearing out ourselves.
 
I think this statement is true as Dedmon, Giles and Holmes will have games where they sit out. But he has a valid point we wore down last year playing at our pace and going 9 deep. To me it is winning basketball to go 10 deep because we can and teams like Houston, Golden State, Lakers all can’t go 10 deep.

I hope Fox and Joseph pick up Westbrook, Curry, Rondo full court and get into their legs. I hope Buddy and Bogi make opposing two guards chase them around multiple picks in the half court. Our advantage is we can wear other teams out without wearing out ourselves.
Well yeah, if going up to 10 deep means running the other team out then you do it. I'm more concerned with the OP wanting a full on 11 or 12 deep rotation when most situations only dictate you go that deep in garbage time.

Look. I want wins. I want to make the playoffs. We have a very real chance to make the playoffs. I dont wanna see that squandered for some fool on KF.com who has a personal agenda because he thinks he is right.
 
Well yeah, if going up to 10 deep means running the other team out then you do it. I'm more concerned with the OP wanting a full on 11 or 12 deep rotation when most situations only dictate you go that deep in garbage time.

Look. I want wins. I want to make the playoffs. We have a very real chance to make the playoffs. I dont wanna see that squandered for some fool on KF.com who has a personal agenda because he thinks he is right.
I think his point was to not wear ourselves out and fade down the stretch where we can’t win. Not that we should play 12 players. Given what happened at the end of last year after Dave benched Beli it seems like a damn good point to me.
 
I think his point was to not wear ourselves out and fade down the stretch where we can’t win. Not that we should play 12 players. Given what happened at the end of last year after Dave benched Beli it seems like a damn good point to me.
No it's not a damn good point. Dave lost his team by being an butthead. They all still had a LOT left in the tank. Unless you somehow think 10 year veterans had more than 2-3yr players lol.



Hey, what was your preseason prediction on Fox again from last year champ? I remember us fighting about how you said Fox would never be a player to see the court well....and I pointed out he was on the right track.

And to edit, my point is to not pull a Dave. Dave Joeger gave people a chance in 10 game increments. That is absolutely wrong. You play a hot hand. Dave played Mason for 10 games, then Yogi for 10 games. That was to his own detriment. He should have switched it up.
 
So what you are saying is because of injuries they were FORCED to go that deep? And then they still went 9 deep MOST games?
No, they were deep. When healthy they played 10 man rotation. They shorten it 9 in PO. They simply had 10 players deserving to play regularly and Malone played them all when they were healthy. This year they are even deeper. We will see how MM handles the rotation this year.
 
jason anderson posted this on reddit, rhe photocopy of the sheet, but for the life of me I cannot put that link properly here


Looking at some of the responses to this on Twitter, I’m not sure these are accurate. Embiid measured 6’11.75” without shoes. Your telling me Bagley is 6’11” without shoes? Something seems off especially since we have seen other teams add the .25/.50/.75 to the heights and those listed above are all perfectly rounded.

My guess is that those are still not right or they are with shoes on.
 
Looking at some of the responses to this on Twitter, I’m not sure these are accurate. Embiid measured 6’11.75” without shoes. Your telling me Bagley is 6’11” without shoes? Something seems off especially since we have seen other teams add the .25/.50/.75 to the heights and those listed above are all perfectly rounded.

My guess is that those are still not right or they are with shoes on.
I was wondering also why all the heights are round numbers, but I was not aware that other teams added fractions of an inch. so someone is misinforming Jason Anderson because he is "being told" these are new.
 
Looking at some of the responses to this on Twitter, I’m not sure these are accurate. Embiid measured 6’11.75” without shoes. Your telling me Bagley is 6’11” without shoes? Something seems off especially since we have seen other teams add the .25/.50/.75 to the heights and those listed above are all perfectly rounded.

My guess is that those are still not right or they are with shoes on.
62C22E13-546E-4A84-AF49-21C024CE52D4.jpeg I’d say Marvin is probably 1-2 inch shorter at most compare to Embiid. I don’t think he’s 6’8 though
 
I was wondering also why all the heights are round numbers, but I was not aware that other teams added fractions of an inch. so someone is misinforming Jason Anderson because he is "being told" these are new.
They may end up being rounded when listed for the viewer. I think I read that somewhere. For example, Embiid measured in 6'11.75" without shoes, so when they list his height on TV or in a player profile, they will round to 7'0".

But I guess the points I'm trying to make are:
  1. I have a hard time believing Bagley is 6'11" without shoes if Embiid is 6'11.75" without shoes
  2. All of these other teams have been reporting heights with the .25/.50/.75 added on to some of their measurements and the Kings have 20 players in that tweet that are all rounded. What are the odds that everyone they measured landed cleanly on an inch? The probability of landing on a clean inch is 25% (your options are .25, .50, .75, or 1), and you measured 20 players. The probability that they all land on a clean inch is 25%^20 = 0.00000000091%.
Something tells me we're still waiting on the "correct" official heights.
 
View attachment 9286 I’d say Marvin is probably 1-2 inch shorter at most compare to Embiid. I don’t think he’s 6’8 though
Bagley was unofficially measured in 2014 and these were the results:

Age = 15 years
Height w/o shoes = 6'9.5"
Height w/ shoes = ???
Wingspan = 7'0"
Standing Reach = ???
Weight = 208lbs

Now he's being listed (unofficially) as follows:

Age = 20 years
Height w/o shoes = ???
Height w/ shoes = 6'11"
Wingspan = 7'1"
Standing Reach = ???
Weight = 234lbs

We don't really know how valid his unofficial height w/ shoes & wingspan measurements are, but you'd have to think (or hope) that he won't be smaller than 6'9.5" w/o shoes (making him ~6'10.5" w/ shoes).
 
Bagley was unofficially measured in 2014 and these were the results:

Age = 15 years
Height w/o shoes = 6'9.5"
Height w/ shoes = ???
Wingspan = 7'0"
Standing Reach = ???
Weight = 208lbs

Now he's being listed (unofficially) as follows:

Age = 20 years
Height w/o shoes = ???
Height w/ shoes = 6'11"
Wingspan = 7'1"
Standing Reach = ???
Weight = 234lbs

We don't really know how valid his unofficial height w/ shoes & wingspan measurements are, but you'd have to think (or hope) that he won't be smaller than 6'9.5" w/o shoes (making him ~6'10.5" w/ shoes).
I thought he was measured at 6’ 8”