[Game] Kings @ Mavs, Sunday May 2nd, 5pm Pacific, 8pm Eastern

Geez, it’s pretty standard practice around the league to discount performances in run it out games this time of year. I mention Skal specifically because I remember being encouraged about Skal’s play around this time and being told by knowledgeable people to wait and see what he could do when games mattered. They were correct.

My only point, which I assumed would not be too controversial, was you have to be careful about judging any performance positive or negative based on performance this time of year.
Not saying you but when the Kings played Dallas a week ago it was all about how Fox destroyed Luka (implying Fox is better if he had coaching/refs/role players) now they win twice without him and it's ohh these games don't count and it doesn't mean anything.
 
Not saying you but when the Kings played Dallas a week ago it was all about how Fox destroyed Luka (implying Fox is better if he had coaching/refs/role players) now they win twice without him and it's ohh these games don't count and it doesn't mean anything.
Let’s get this straight. Are you saying the kings are better without fox? Cuz a lot of your post are implying it. Saying you don’t think he’s an all star is one thing. But continuing to post about win loss records with and without him is implying another.
 
Let’s get this straight. Are you saying the kings are better without fox? Cuz a lot of your post are implying it. Saying you don’t think he’s an all star is one thing. But continuing to post about win loss records with and without him is implying another.
I would say sadly for the Kings that when the likes of Fox/Barnes don't play there's really no overall difference from a winning point of view and from the 26 or so game sample size past two seasons they have played well above record wise than what they have with Fox and being able to replace him with the like of CoJo (last year), Haliburtion (talented) and Wright does not really bode well when he's on or close to a max deal.

I 100% think they should replace Barnes at all costs, Fox maybe a coaching change might fix but if a star player like Simmons becomes available for a trade I would explore it. But I think it's a interesting discussion to have.
 
I would say sadly for the Kings that when the likes of Fox/Barnes don't play there's really no overall difference from a winning point of view and from the 26 or so game sample size past two seasons they have played well above record wise than what they have with Fox and being able to replace him with the like of CoJo (last year), Haliburtion (talented) and Wright does not really bode well when he's on or close to a max deal.

I 100% think they should replace Barnes at all costs, Fox maybe a coaching change might fix but if a star player like Simmons becomes available for a trade I would explore it. But I think it's a interesting discussion to have.
So you think the kings are better without fox?
 
Ujiri isn't jockeying for a better ping pong ball position. They just beat the Lakers and are in the mix for the play in. As you mentioned, one of the best GMs in the league didn't trade his second best trade chip for assets at the deadline nor did he instruct his coach to sit his best players.
so remind me of the bet terms again. 100 to charity of choice and I think I have the Kings winning all 3. Is that correct?
 
So you think the kings are better without fox?
No one wants to be on record saying that.

A better related question is how does a team build around a score first PG? Fox is hands down the Kings best player, and this franchise pushed him to be a score first PG. The team needs another natural scorer/shot creator. It would be better if they found that in a 3 or 4 and not push Hali to be that guy.
 
No one wants to be on record saying that.

A better related question is how does a team build around a score first PG? Fox is hands down the Kings best player, and this franchise pushed him to be a score first PG. The team needs another natural scorer/shot creator. It would be better if they found that in a 3 or 4 and not push Hali to be that guy.
I think one could reasonably ask how successful are ball dominant score first point guards? Taking it away from Fox and putting it on other options like Trae and even Luka it seems that a ceiling of sorts exists.
 
Westbrook, Kemba, Wall...
Portland might be a better example. Two score first guards. Hard to find two better guards than Dame and CJ and yet they are 7th in the East.

Interesting enough is the Wiz’s surge in the east. Russ seems less interested in low efficiency scoring and dished out 24 assists last night. Russ truely focused on setting up others versus taking low efficiency shots could be a force.
 
Looking better for you with Fox, Hali and Barnes out. But I guess if we still win it just further reinforces my point of the foolishness of the Harkless, Davis and Wright acquisitions.

ESPN has me at a 67% favorite. In Buddy I trust.
yeh I made the bet solely on the idea that it’s tough to beat any team 3 times in the matter of a week plus. We shall see
 
Portland might be a better example. Two score first guards. Hard to find two better guards than Dame and CJ and yet they are 7th in the East.

Interesting enough is the Wiz’s surge in the east. Russ seems less interested in low efficiency scoring and dished out 24 assists last night. Russ truely focused on setting up others versus taking low efficiency shots could be a force.
Portland has been better in the past, though, while still being built around two high usage guards. Wouldn’t that suggest that the cause of their success and failure is something else?
 
Portland has been better in the past, though, while still being built around two high usage guards. Wouldn’t that suggest that the cause of their success and failure is something else?
Is there a ceiling though. Was there a formula with Steph Curry and the Warriors, or was that an anomaly like when the Pistons won without a star?

Portland has continuously had injury problems, but is there more to it when teams like Phoenix and Utah pass them up so easily with addition of traditional point guards.
 
The reality is almost all NBA championships have been won by the team with a top 3 player regardless of position. We are unlikely to ever win a championship if we are being honest with ourselves. I would be satisfied with a return to entertaining competitive basketball.
 
The reality is almost all NBA championships have been won by the team with a top 3 player regardless of position. We are unlikely to ever win a championship if we are being honest with ourselves. I would be satisfied with a return to entertaining competitive basketball.
I've argued the same point about having to have the best player to win a championship. But how come that best player isn't usually a scoring PG? How do the Kings build this roster to compliment Fox so the team can be competitive, even when he's not playing out of his mind?

I'm not questioning or doubting Fox at all. I wonder what else is needed to push this team over the top, because there is already a lot of talent there.
 
The reality is almost all NBA championships have been won by the team with a top 3 player regardless of position. We are unlikely to ever win a championship if we are being honest with ourselves. I would be satisfied with a return to entertaining competitive basketball.
This, and title-winning teams is such a small sample that I’m not sure you can glean any significant, sweeping generalizations from such teams regarding shoot or pass first point guards.
 
I can't be the only person who's wondered why no matter how much better Fox gets, the team win total doesn't change. I don't think it's Fox's fault. He's doing all he can and what the team is asking of him. But it's not working, so maybe there's a problem with the approach or philosophy of the team.
 
The Kings are a terrible defensive team. They have been for a long time. If Fox were doing his thing on an average defensive team, the wins total would be over .500.
 
I can't be the only person who's wondered why no matter how much better Fox gets, the team win total doesn't change. I don't think it's Fox's fault. He's doing all he can and what the team is asking of him. But it's not working, so maybe there's a problem with the approach or philosophy of the team.
I think these are fair questions! I also think it’s fair to ask more of Fox, since he’s now going to be paid like a superstar, and while he had some all-league-level stretches he hasn’t been completely consistent there yet, especially earlier in this season.

But I agree there are bigger issues. For me, it’s hard to look past the league-worst defense. You can’t be the worst in the league in defense and expect to be any good. I wonder what the record would look like if they were even average?
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
I can't be the only person who's wondered why no matter how much better Fox gets, the team win total doesn't change. I don't think it's Fox's fault. He's doing all he can and what the team is asking of him. But it's not working, so maybe there's a problem with the approach or philosophy of the team.
Right. Fox is averaging 25/7 and the Kings have had like three different mind numbingly bad stretches of basketball regardless of him putting up superstar numbers.
 
The Kings are a terrible defensive team. They have been for a long time. If Fox were doing his thing on an average defensive team, the wins total would be over .500.
bingo, it's pretty simple, they suck balls at defense. Remember when Mike Malone was here and the Kings played defense ? Their rotations were crisp, they communicated, they put in effort. I remember everyone making great rotations and playing sound defense, even the "low iq" players.

That's been non-existent since (though I'll be fair I've missed most of this season). I think they need a coach that can whip them into shape on the defensive end and that actually has great success getting teams to work hard and play good fundamental defense.
 
I've argued the same point about having to have the best player to win a championship. But how come that best player isn't usually a scoring PG? How do the Kings build this roster to compliment Fox so the team can be competitive, even when he's not playing out of his mind?

I'm not questioning or doubting Fox at all. I wonder what else is needed to push this team over the top, because there is already a lot of talent there.
one thing to consider is the list of elite score first point guards is short. We don’t have a ton of those guys to draw a definitive conclusion from.
 
one thing to consider is the list of elite score first point guards is short. We don’t have a ton of those guys to draw a definitive conclusion from.
I'd argue it's because that situation is not tenable. In crunch time, Fox gets moved off ball quite often. Even in favor of Buddy Hield handling the ball. If your best scorer already has the ball, it's going to be iso time and the defense knows it. In order to run an actual play to free up the scorer, it's better that he starts without the ball.

Eventually Haliburton is going to takeover the traditional PG duties and Fox will be the scoring guard.
 
one thing to consider is the list of elite score first point guards is short. We don’t have a ton of those guys to draw a definitive conclusion from.
Agree. And if you look at Kyrie Irving - he contributes substantially to wins on a good team. Not so good at making a bad team good.

But I think Haliburton negates some of the “score first pg” label for Fox. When they start together next year - the 1 and 2 positions are very fluid. So I don’t think the Kings will fit squarely into the box of teams run by a score first point guard because Tyrese is such a stellar playmaker.
 
Fox seems like a good locker room guy (like Dame) so I think that should factor into this too. I think he does a lot because he is asked a lot. But hey, I don't want to harp on coaching.