You articulated what needed to be said and in the process murdered GWD…….take a photo of the chalk outline of the body.
[Game] Kings @ Minnesota Timberwolves, 3/1/2024, 5:00p PT/8:00p ET
- Thread starter QWERTYLICIOUS
- Start date
- Status
sactowndog
All-Star
is your goal to make the play in or win a Championship? I think based on Fox and Sabonis alone this team will certainly at least be in the play in. But they have too few longer wings to have an effective defense. That will hurt them in playoff time.
sactowndog
All-Star
We shall see. Good luck trading one of our smaller guards for a longer big. I think Monte’s inability to complete a trade this trade deadline that didn’t include Keegan showed the value of the Kings assets around the league.
Monk is going to command decent dollars in free agency but can we really commit more cap space to a smaller wing? I don’t think this team makes the second round of the play-offs as constructed.
Monte in my opinion may three critical errors.
1) Drafting Davion over a desperately needed wing
2) not using his cap space to acquire incremental assets like was done by OKC
3) not selling Barnes and bottoming out when we were bad. Far too many years finishing 7, 8, 9 in the lottery standings.
sactowndog
All-Star
we just flatly disagree.
And yes I agree Murray moves well but the Bookers and Vassell’s go for 30 against us for a reason. And yes Book goes off against everyone but Vassell doesn’t. We just don’t have anyone we play who can defend him.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Yet I do recall a game earlier in the season when Booker repeatedly drove at will to the basket while Keegan was guarding him. Murray couldn't stay with him. I kept wondering why Murray was so closely guarding him far beyond the three point line. (This was when Booker was bringing the ball up the floor). Was it the coaches' defensive scheme? Murray's choice? I'm not sure, but if it was Murray's "choice" then I was hoping he would alternate somewhat between pressure and semi-pressure to at least make Booker think a little about it. If the Kings had some help at the rim for Murray his pressure defense would have made more sense. In the end, my best guess was the Kings figured they would wear Booker out by the 4th quarter so they would rather deal with his drives earlier in the game rather than later.
sactowndog
All-Star
opportunities were there. Monte just missed them.
Barnes was tradeable. Forwards were available with the Davion Pick. The team had cap space that could be rented for assets instead of selling assets for journeyman. The team could have committed to a rebuild and improved their lottery odds instead of sitting 9 or so.
sactowndog
All-Star
I want to make clear, I love Keegan’s game. I think he could end up as the best stretch 4 in the league. He can score at 3 levels. He can stay in front of most 3-4’s on defense. He, to me, is the 2nd least tradable player on the team.
twslam07
All-Star
We disagree in that you think a wing is defined as a SG (Booker, Edwards) or a PG (SGA)?
Regarding Vassell, there were many possessions where Murray did a really good job defending him, and he just ended up making a difficult shot. This is exactly why you don’t look at 1 game sample sizes as that will normalize across a larger sample. Sometimes the offensive player just can’t miss. It’s why the quote “great offense beats great defense” exists. Sometimes you just have to tip your cap to the opposing player.
You're asking for perfection. That's just too high of a bar. Yes, the Davion pick seems to have been a poor one, but that draft wasn't exactly peppered with talent at the #9 spot. Hindsight can identify some players, but it is 20/20.
The Kings had already been bottoming out for a full decade+ at the time Monte took over. The Kings' previous 10 first round picks before Monte were at an average of 5.7 - and none higher than 8. They managed to hit the lottery only once in those entire ten years (including MISSING the top three spots when they had the #1 overall odds) and for ten top-8 picks, there were only two players that really amounted to anything (Fox, Cousins). Bottoming out hadn't worked for a whole decade...but now that they're in a new arena (when Monte took over 4 yrs old) and ownership wants to compete...keep bottoming out? "Compete Now" was very clearly a Vivek mandate. And so, in the next three drafts, Monte hit at #12, missed at #9, and hit at #4 (with some lottery luck). That's two hits in three drafts (on an average 8.33 pick) rather than two hits in ten drafts (on an average 5.7 pick). That's a huge step up.
And now, we're a playoff team for the first time in a decade and a half. Focus on perfection, miss the forest for the trees.
You have a bad habit of validating your point of view by proclaiming because we're not the best in the NBA, that it's bad or wrong.
-Monte isn't Presti,so he's not a good GM
-We aren't a title contender so our team build is bad.
Frankly, I don't think we can evaluate whether or not this core is a title contender or not. We're in the middle of year 2 under the Monte/Brown/Domas/Fox era. We're 82-59 with them running the show after FIFTEEN years of pure incompetence. I'm just never going to agree with you that he's doing a bad job. Perfect? No. Best the Kings have had in 20 years? Absolutely.
Remember, Petrie really started to fall off the last few years of his tenure with us too, after he built the core up.
macadocious
Starter
So much context lost in so many of these overly repetitive conversations.
This is a little off topic, but off the record Petrie said his hands were really tied those last few years. Ownership just wouldn’t allow him to spend money, and then after the sale and the following draft the whole Giannis disaster smh
Section 101
All-Star
Be specific name the player they should have drafted not some mythical 3 and d player.
sactowndog
All-Star
Just for my clarity are you averaging picks or lottery finish?
btw I am not arguing against Monte’s draft acumen as much as strategy and asset management. And yes he is much better than Vlade but do we really want to make that our bar?
sactowndog
All-Star
well one they shouldn’t have been in that spot.
But at that point I liked Jalen Johnson but acknowledge he was a reach. Franz was the player I wanted to fall. But Johnson, Murphy and Moody were the players on the board with the length (defined as wingspan and standing reach) the Kings needed.
I would not have argued with any of the 3. I hated the Davion pick at the time. Not because Davion is not an NBA rotation player. He clearly is. Davion was an obvious poor strategic fit.
Last edited:
sactowndog
All-Star
maybe best in 15 years but I agree that Jeff’s hands were tied. To some extent Monte’s hands have been also. It’s hard to tell if Monte’s keep all options open comments from day one were fully his or Vivek inspired.
we will see. I think first round exit is this teams ceiling as currently constructed. But hey I’m spending money on tickets.
sactowndog
All-Star
by the way the fact Vlade was completely incapable of executing in the draft was not a rejection of the strategy to bottom out. Very few GM’s were as bad at drafting as Vlade. Vlade was probably in the bottom 10% of all GM’s.
consider what was on the board when Vlade had the 10 pick:
10) Zach Collins
11) Malik Monk
12) Luke Kennard
13) Donovan Mitchell all-star
14) Bam Adabeyo all-star
15) Justin Jackson
16) Justin Patton
17) DJ Wilson
18) TJ Leaf
19) John Collins
20) Harry Giles
21) Terrance Ferguson
22) Jarret Allen all-star
23) OG Anunoby
24) Tyler Lydon
25) Anzej P
26) Cale Swanigan
27) Kyle Kuzma
28) Tony Bradley
29) Derrick White
30) Josh Hart.
20 players with half still on full contracts 9 rotation players and a number of all-stars. To draft two players in that group not on full time league contracts was all time bad. It was probably worse than the Bagley pick…..
Vlade had good strategic sense / asset management and next world bad talent evaluation. ( Imagine a team of Fox, Bogdan, OG Anunoby, Jaren Jackson, Jarret Allen).
Monte meanwhile has good talent evaluation (even Davion in the right spot is a full rotation player) but poor strategic sense asset management.
Last edited:
But it doesn't work that way. As just one example, the Kings would have most certainly not been in a position to draft Jaren Jackson had they previously drafted OG and Allen. We would have been better than picking #2 in that draft.
That is the problem with these "could have, would have, should have" type posts. Its the butterfly effect. If you change any one personnel decision you change the entire course of the league. Drafting OG at 15 would have completely and directly altered the Kings and Raptors histories, as well as every team drafting after the Kings that would have made different picks. Pretty much every game that season would have had different outcomes, different players would have had different minutes, different guys would have been injured, and whole different teams could have risen and fallen in the standings, thus changing future moves they made...
twslam07
All-Star
I think this is also a good example how length can help disrupt a play even if you get beat. Someone like Mitchell doesn’t have this margin of error.
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
In addition, the offense functions well with him as he almost always makes a good decision and the right play, while keeping all of the capable players involved and in rhythm
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
Except the example of drafting Haliburton and having Fox, didn't seem to then change the decision to draft Mitchell. They were in an ideal position to draft a different type of player. I would have taken Moody at the time
The value I gave was lottery finish post-draw (but before any draft-day trades - we traded down twice in that span if I recall correctly). It doesn't change much if you look in terms of pre-lottery - I think the number was 5.8 or 5.9 - because we moved up once to #2 and won a couple of tiebreakers, but we also slipped down multiple times so it basically evened out. I just skipped over Vlade's final year, when we didn't have our pick at all, as if it didn't happen for the purposes of that calculation.
That's not my point. I am not saying "we wouldn't have taken player x if we had player y." Your example is a good reason of why that argument doesn't work. Just because you have two young point guards doesn't mean your franchise won't draft a third.
My point is more fundamental. The poster said to imagine a lineup of Fox, Bogi, OG, Allen, and JJJ, as though we could have had THAT lineup. My point is that likely could have never happened. We likely would have never been in position to draft JJJ if we had taken Allen and OG the year prior. Not because we would have been so much better, but because the entire NBA would have been different if we drafted OG instead of Justin Jackson. Other teams would have made different decisions, most games would have had different outcomes, players and teams would have had totally different arcs. You can't just say "if we had done this in 2021, and then used our 2022 draft pick to do this, we would be amazing," because you doing something different with your 2021 draft pick would have fundamentally changed everything about 2022.
sactowndog
All-Star
Maybe though remember we got lucky in the lottery and playing 2 Rookies one of whom was out for the year if I recall in Jackson was unlike to result in a bunch more wins. But yes it would have had an impact of some sort.
sactowndog
All-Star
curious what the two numbers looked like.
but regardless the strategy was actually pretty good. The execution was horrible because darts would have been better than Vlade’s talent evaluation. But people mix up the strategy and asset accumulation with talent evaluation. They are two different skills.
sactowndog
All-Star
Rookies just don’t impact a teams finish that highly ….. especially rookies on the second half of the draft. You point is somewhat valid but you are way overstating the impact rookies have on a team. ..
for example
OG played 20 min per game and averaged 5.5 points.
Allen played 20 min per game and averaged 8 points.
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
When you need a young shooting guard or wing with length, you really shouldn't draft a third point guard....unless he's a potential all star type talent or there is nobody that fits your need that is anywhere close to your draft slot. This wasn't the case and was a perfect example of when reaching down the draft projections would have been a great move. Heck, even Kispert would have been a much better fit, but Moody or Trey Murphy would have been ideal
Srzly
G-League
Keegan doesn't shut down everyone, but I think he has been playing defense at an all-NBA level most nights this season. I just am not aware of any defenders that guard 1-5 and shutdown the best offensive player every single night. I recall Keegan getting the better of Booker in one of the matchups, but when you're guarding the best offensive players in the NBA, they are bound to get the better of you some nights for sure. Murray has been able to stay in front of quick players many games this season.
Side note: I also think Keon is an excellent defender and love seeing him and Keegan out there together. Add in Fox and that is a nasty perimeter defense that can virtually switch anything.
Also, SGA was brought up earlier as an example and no one is allowed to play defense on SGA. Every night the best defender from every team is on him and its impossible with the way he is officiated this year.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
