Let's Talk Fox...

Spike

Spike

Subsidiary Intermediary
Staff member
#61
#61
I'm not quite sure on what our expectations were anyways, given who Fox has had around him. For craps and giggles, here's the roster that surrounded the following players during their rookie seasons:

Chris Paul:

Kirk Snyder
Desmond Mason
David West
PJ Brown

Record:
2 seasons before CP: .500
1 season before: .220
end of rookie season: .463

Tony Parker (LOL):

Starters:
Do I have to?

Record:
Do I have to?

Jeff Teague:

Starters during his rookie season:
Josh Smith
Al Horford
Mike Bibby
Marvin Williams
Joe Johnson

Is Conley the best comp? Let's see:

Mike Conley

Record:
2 seasons before: .600
1 season before: .268
end of rookie season: .268
and the futility continued for a while.

Starters during rookie season:
Kyle Lowry
Mike Miller
Rudy Gay
Hakim Warrick
Pau Gasol

De'Aaron Fox:

Team Record:
2 seasons before: .400
1 season before: .390
end of rookie season: maybe .330?

Starters (a different kind of LOL):
I guess by minutes played, we get:

Bogdanovich (although more Temple earlier)
Justin Jackson (ditto the ghost of Vince Carter)
Zach Randolph (with strong minutes from Skal)
Willie Cauley-Stein (not sure if Kosta played much with Fox, too lazy to look up minutes)

I don't think you can say that advanced stats tell the story this time around. Each team was noticeably better than the Kings roster. Each team had different noticeable measures of success prior to the arrival of their rookie PG, with other players (in their prime, at times) on the roster to help cultivate positive growth. The closest example the Kings probably had was the roster that Ben McLemore inherited, for example. I know, but that's the point. I didn't go through all of the players listed above, but I bet you'll find a similar story.

I don't think you can objectively look at Fox and say "he isn't performing like x or y did during their rookie season!!" without thinking about what their rookie seasons looked like. Chris Paul is the outlier here thus far, but he's also the outlier for a reason. Baseball works better for advanced stats, because players at times operate in a vacuum. Not so here in basketball. Context matters.

I guess this goes to the point Padrino (long time no see!) was making. Do we trust the front office to:
1. Weed out the players we need to keep?
2. Put in a strong supporting cast (players, coaches, etc.) to help them reach their potential?

Personally, I don't know how I feel about #1, but I think cutting ties with failed prospects sooner rather than later makes me feel good. Sorry Papa. I feel a bit more confident about #2, given that Joerger seems fine with bringing along players at a slower pace, given that they're not ready for prime time.

TL;DR = advanced stats aren't as great in basketball. It's too soon on Fox; I didn't even discuss physical attributes that can lead to success.
 
Last edited:
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#62
#62
Padrino said:
I rarely poke my head into the Kings Rap forums these days. I just don’t watch enough Kings games to justify it. But I do wonder from time to time about the team’s scouting and player development programs.

...

Maybe my concerns are much ado about nothing. That said, I do have to scratch my head and wonder why this franchise just can’t settle into a reasonably successful formula for the drafting and development of young talent. I don’t expect Spurs-level efficiency, of course. But from one ownership group to the next, from one GM to the next, from one coach to the next, nothing breeds success. And I honestly don’t have much confidence in a Vivek/Vlade/Joerger partnership, either. I hate to waltz in here and be a downer, but it just isn’t easy being a Kings fan, I suppose.
Click to expand...
You're not saying anything that hasn't been said multiple times in multiple threads by multiple posters. My main complaint is that people act as though there are no extenuating circumstances for what went on the past decade. You know, little things like the Maloofs intentionally trying to scuttle the franchise so it would be easier to move? Things like D'Allesandro being the worst GM to ever occupy the office? Things like constant flux of players and personnel and a learning period for Vivek that seems only this year to have settled down.

It isn't easy being a Kings fan. It hasn't been for a long time. But you know what? Things are getting better. You might not see it, but there's hope on the horizon.
 
Last edited:
LPKingsFan

LPKingsFan

All-Star
#64
#64
Kingster said:
It's interesting that you compare him to Parker. I've been wondering lately who the one player Fox should talk to in the off-season to get some tips on his game and where and how to improve. The guy I came up with was Tony Parker.

I also agree with you on your comments on Schroder and how Fox could in fact be better than him.
Click to expand...
Parker came to mind with me as well. Fox needs to learn to keep the dribble alive on his drives if there's not an open man or good look at the rim - as Parker and others (Nash, especially) have mastered.

I am optimistic about Fox because clearly the tools (which you cannot teach) have translated to the next level. Hopefully the skills will follow suit. His shot is already further along than I expected.
 
Sac.1989

Sac.1989

Starter
#65
#65
VF21 said:
You're not saying anything that hasn't been said multiple times in multiple threads by multiple posters. My main complaint is that people act as though there are no extenuating circumstances for what went on the past decade. You know, little things like the Maloofs intentionally trying to scuttle the franchise so it would be easier to move? Things like D'Allesandro being the worst GM to ever occupy the office? Things like constant flux of players and personnel and a learning period for Vivek that seems only this year to have settled down.

It isn't easy being a Kings fan. It hasn't been for a long time. But you know what? Things are getting better. You might not see it, but there's hope on the horizon.
Click to expand...
Dont forget the George Karl era ! Heaven hope we never have to speak of it again
 
E

ESP47

All-Star
#66
#66
The_Jamal said:
I mean, you can cherry-pick VORP all you want, but it still doesn't change the fact basically all of the rookie PGs have been trash. I guess if you want to say Fox has been the "worst" of them, you can, but not a single one of them outside of Mitchell is "living up to the hype". They're ALL bad NBA players right now. They all have a LONG way to develop if this PG class wants to live up to the hype of being the next great generation in the NBA.

I was never looking for Fox to be a productive player this year, on a bad team with 10+ new players added. I wanted to see glimpses of how he can eventually turn into a franchise player. And his quickness+Ability to break-down a defense is incredibly rare and we've seen the moments of how this guy can develop into an all-star. There's nothing suggested in his play that he's a Jimmer/Stauskas/McLemore/Robinson type of pick where he clearly doesn't belong at the NBA level. He's just incredibly young and doesn't know how to use his talent in the right ways yet. That'll hopefully change starting next season.
Click to expand...
I'm not cherry picking anything. That would mean that I have some sort of agenda against Fox, which is ridiculous considering that I root for him harder than any other King.

Your broad brush stroke about almost all of the rookies being bad is true, but it's not true in the context that I'm talking about. If I was a rookie this year, you could say that me and Fox were both bad rookies but lets be honest here because there are differing levels of bad. I'm talking about these differing levels.

Take a look at ESPN's RPM stat (RPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team performance, measured in net point differential per 100 offensive and defensive possessions. RPM takes into account teammates, opponents and additional factors)

Fox is 505th out of 521 players. His RPM is -4.37. Lets look back through each year at what good to decent players are ranked that low. Usually there are about 30-70 players in that area. I'll name the good and/or up and coming players that are in that vicinity.

2017 - Jerami Grant and Brandon Ingram are ranked around that low. The other 30 players or so in that vicinity are either young, old or bad.

2016 - Terry Rozier, Devin Booker and Juluis Randle. There are about 30 other players in that area.

2015 - Gary Harris, Zach LaVine, Jabari Parker and Austin Rivers. There are about 65 other players in that area.

2014 - Dennis Schroder, Tim Hardaway Jr, Kent Bazemore, Will Barton, Enes Kanter. With 65 other players in that area.

That's as far back as the stat goes. It's not black and white because there is my subjective opinion at play here but I listed the players that I thought were either good or going to be pretty good like Rozier and Ingram. It shows that players obviously develop, which is why more players get added to the list as the years go on. In 2014, there are 5 of what I think are at least decent players out of a possible 70 that developed solidly. Those are not good odds. It doesn't mean that Fox has 1 in 10 odds of becoming any good but it certainly doesn't bode well for him becoming a franchise player. How many franchise players are on that list? Booker and then maybe Parker and/or Ingram? The stat doesn't predict a really bright future for our guy.

Side note, McLemore and Stauskas are perennial members at the back end of this stat.
 
King Baller

King Baller

All-Star
#68
#68
ESP47 said:
I'm not cherry picking anything. That would mean that I have some sort of agenda against Fox, which is ridiculous considering that I root for him harder than any other King.

Your broad brush stroke about almost all of the rookies being bad is true, but it's not true in the context that I'm talking about. If I was a rookie this year, you could say that me and Fox were both bad rookies but lets be honest here because there are differing levels of bad. I'm talking about these differing levels.

Take a look at ESPN's RPM stat (RPM: Player's estimated on-court impact on team performance, measured in net point differential per 100 offensive and defensive possessions. RPM takes into account teammates, opponents and additional factors)

Fox is 505th out of 521 players. His RPM is -4.37. Lets look back through each year at what good to decent players are ranked that low. Usually there are about 30-70 players in that area. I'll name the good and/or up and coming players that are in that vicinity.

2017 - Jerami Grant and Brandon Ingram are ranked around that low. The other 30 players or so in that vicinity are either young, old or bad.

2016 - Terry Rozier, Devin Booker and Juluis Randle. There are about 30 other players in that area.

2015 - Gary Harris, Zach LaVine, Jabari Parker and Austin Rivers. There are about 65 other players in that area.

2014 - Dennis Schroder, Tim Hardaway Jr, Kent Bazemore, Will Barton, Enes Kanter. With 65 other players in that area.

That's as far back as the stat goes. It's not black and white because there is my subjective opinion at play here but I listed the players that I thought were either good or going to be pretty good like Rozier and Ingram. It shows that players obviously develop, which is why more players get added to the list as the years go on. In 2014, there are 5 of what I think are at least decent players out of a possible 70 that developed solidly. Those are not good odds. It doesn't mean that Fox has 1 in 10 odds of becoming any good but it certainly doesn't bode well for him becoming a franchise player. How many franchise players are on that list? Booker and then maybe Parker and/or Ingram? The stat doesn't predict a really bright future for our guy.

Side note, McLemore and Stauskas are perennial members at the back end of this stat.
Click to expand...
I have a question about all the stats you speak of. Are they categorized by month? I'm wondering if DeAaron Fox improved in these stats as the year progressed? The young player I have watched the last couple of months is much better than "bad" IMO. Is my eyball test that far off or has he in fact improved as the season progressed?
 
2

206Fan

All-Star
#71
#71
Joshoua said:
There’s gonna be a lot of excitement next year with Fox when we’re running pick and rolls. He’ll look totally different like he did in December I think it was
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if Sampson will be on the team next year, but he would be the perfect PnR player with Fox. Somebody nudge Willie
 
E

ESP47

All-Star
#72
#72
King Baller said:
I have a question about all the stats you speak of. Are they categorized by month? I'm wondering if DeAaron Fox improved in these stats as the year progressed? The young player I have watched the last couple of months is much better than "bad" IMO. Is my eyball test that far off or has he in fact improved as the season progressed?
Click to expand...
I looked but I can't seem to find anything other than the regular box score stats that are categorized by month.

My personal eye test saw him looking really good for a rookie right out of the gate. Then he struggled for a bit and got hurt. After he came back from the injury, he seemed like he had a resurgence for a month or so and then after that I saw him regress again. I thought his play in late March and April was just as bad as his play before he got injured earlier in the year if you take into account the competition he was playing with all the teams tanking.
 
D

dude12

Hall of Famer
#73
#73
Any talk about Fox or most rookies who play a decent amount of minutes have to take into account the length of the season and the first time grind and the wear and tear for those rookies who are physically not ready for that. I'd put Fox into that category as far as physically not ready. Talent level is there, body needs work.
 
E

ESP47

All-Star
#75
#75
King Baller

King Baller

All-Star
#76
#76
Well his shooting does need to improve. Especially from the 3 point line. That said since he has a nice floater and mid-range game I for one do not want him to abandon them. Those are just another tool to keep in the arsenal to use when needed. Perhaps he can look for more open 3's for himself and his teammates but in the clutch if the mid range is wide open and the team needs 2 points Swipa shoot the shot:cool:
 
G

Gguod

Bench
#77
#77
Its not easy to evaluate Fox since Joegers system is so horrible for a pg, no spacing since there is always two non shooting bigs clogging the paint and not really a pick n roll dominated offence.

That being said, Fox becoming an all star level player doesnt seem that likely to me. His vision most likely will never be elite and in order to be dominant in pick n roll situations, he would have to develope at least an average pull up 3point shot. Good enough to be a starter for a good team but probably not a player you build your franchise around.
 
F

Folsomkingsfan

Starter
#78
#78
Gguod said:
Its not easy to evaluate Fox since Joegers system is so horrible for a pg, no spacing since there is always two non shooting bigs clogging the paint and not really a pick n roll dominated offence.

That being said, Fox becoming an all star level player doesnt seem that likely to me. His vision most likely will never be elite and in order to be dominant in pick n roll situations, he would have to develope at least an average pull up 3point shot. Good enough to be a starter for a good team but probably not a player you build your franchise around.
Click to expand...
This is the thing that I hope changes the most significantly next season. Joerger is a great coach using an outdated system. Fox could be a great player possibly but never will in this current system because he can't move anywhere without running into one of our bigs. If we really think he is the guy to initiate our offense long term we need to give him a Houston rockets type of environment where everyone but the center is along the perimeter and he has plenty of room to operate.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#79
#79
Larry David said:
I’ll conceed it’s better. Objectively, it’s still not well owned, staffed, run, stocked or holding assets by league standards.

It’s just not
Click to expand...
Whether it's up to league standards, whatever that is, or not, there have been improvements. They now have scouts in Europe, and they've totally rebuilt their scouting staff. They have an assistant coach for every position on the floor. They have two very league knowledgeable people under Vlade. They have a cap guru. More than anything else, they finally appear stable. Same coach and GM for more than one lousy year. I think you have to give credit where it's due.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#80
#80
Folsomkingsfan said:
This is the thing that I hope changes the most significantly next season. Joerger is a great coach using an outdated system. Fox could be a great player possibly but never will in this current system because he can't move anywhere without running into one of our bigs. If we really think he is the guy to initiate our offense long term we need to give him a Houston rockets type of environment where everyone but the center is along the perimeter and he has plenty of room to operate.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you've been watching, but the system Joerger has been running has the center (Willie) out at the top of the circle with the ball running through him a lot. They've done a better job of spreading the floor for open shots this year than in the last five years. They're running a drive and dish motion offense. Obviously it's not going to work as well when Randolph is on the floor, although Randolph does set up away from the basket at times. Take Randolph out of the equation and it flows much better.

My point is, there's nothing wrong with the system their running, just with the personnel on the floor at times. Take Randolph out, and put Giles in, and maybe you have an entirely different looking scenario. In short, it's a work in progress.
 
bajaden

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#81
#81
Joshoua said:
https://www.sactownroyalty.com/2018/4/20/17253798/sacramento-kings-deaaron-fox-player-grades

Good article on Fox he really needs to shy away from mid range shots so much. He doesn’t need to be 3 or lay up but he can’t be taking more mid range shots than layups and 3s
Click to expand...
I agree and disagree with the article when it comes to shooting the three. It's sort of a catch 22. I mean if your a terrible 3 pt shooter, then I don't want you chucking up 5 or 6 three's a game. I think a player should play to his strengths. Westbrook's strength coming into the league was his mid-range shot, and he took a lot of them. As his confidence increased he started to take more three's. He was always an attack the basket player. I think Fox will attack more as he gets stronger. He didn't come into the league with Westbrooks, or Wall's body. So he has some body building to do, as well as work on his three point shot in the offseason.

One of the reasons I hated Marcus Smart, and there are others as well that I won't go into right now, is that he didn't seem to know that he was a terrible 3 pt shooter. He's chuck up 7 or 8 a game while shooting 27%. Sorry, but that's not helping the team win. So I agree that there's a line there that Fox has to cross, but it's up to him to know when. It's all about confidence, and he seemed to be growing in that area later in the season. I didn't expect him to shoot a lot of three's this season, so I'm not disappointed in that area. Next season is different.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#82
#82
Gguod said:
Its not easy to evaluate Fox since Joegers system is so horrible for a pg, no spacing since there is always two non shooting bigs clogging the paint and not really a pick n roll dominated offence.

That being said, Fox becoming an all star level player doesnt seem that likely to me. His vision most likely will never be elite and in order to be dominant in pick n roll situations, he would have to develope at least an average pull up 3point shot. Good enough to be a starter for a good team but probably not a player you build your franchise around.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s his vision as we saw instances of him making the right pass. I think it’s his mentality of wanting to be the dude with his name in the lights as a scorer. He and Frank both tend to force shots that aren’t there instead of finding the open shooters.

Hopefully watching Lillard get swept in the first round convinces him sharing the ball is important. Portland and OKC annually rank near the bottom in passes made because neither back court shares the ball.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#84
#84
King Baller said:
I have a question about all the stats you speak of. Are they categorized by month? I'm wondering if DeAaron Fox improved in these stats as the year progressed? The young player I have watched the last couple of months is much better than "bad" IMO. Is my eyball test that far off or has he in fact improved as the season progressed?
Click to expand...
Go to NBA.com, click on stats, click on advanced filters and you can choose the date ranges you want.
 
sactowndog

sactowndog

All-Star
#85
#85
beb0p said:
I don't understand the downers. Imo, Fox has lived up to the hype. The future is bright for him.

The player I compared him to coming into the draft was Tony Parker, and lo and behold, their rookie year stats are very very similar. Both players possess elite speed, shiftiness, able to get anywhere on the floor and create good looks for themselves. Am I saying Fox is going to be as good as Parker? No. But Parker is Fox's ceiling, and based on his rookie year, Fox is on the same trajectory as a young Parker. There is no guarantee he reaches that level but don't give up on him now.

Is Fox without flaws? Of course not. He needs to be a better shooter, better playmaker, and better finisher. All the things that a young Parker also dealt with, but those are flaws that can be fixed. What Fox already has - size, length, shiftiness, and top notch speed; should make any fans drool. The NBA has always been kind to point guards with size and speed - the John Wall, Derek Rose, Tony Parker, pre-injury Devin Harris, Gary Payton, Steve Francis, etc. And this Fox kid is bigger, longer, and faster than most. Besides John Wall, which PG in the NBA can match his size and speed? I haven't seen any team able to stop his penetration. None. Yes, too often he makes dumb decisions and stupid plays after he gets into the lane, but the key is he gets there essentially whenever he wants to. Once he figured out the rest of his game, he is going to be scary.

And we haven't even gotten to the other side of the ball yet. This kids plays D and more importantly, he takes pride in D. Is he a good defender? No. But man, the tools and the will are there. After so many no-D Kings PGs, I like a PG who can defend.

So what we have here is a two-way freak whose flaws are all fixable. Coming into the 2013 draft, I was high on a PG named Dennis Schroder. That kid is long, speedy, can D up, and is left handed. I thought if he could improve his shot and cut down on turnovers, he'd be a pretty good starting PG. And now Schroder is one of the better PG starter int he NBA. Fox, can be even better than Schroder - he is taller, faster, and all around higher skill level than a rookie Schroder. I think, when it all comes and said, Fox will be better than Schroder and maybe as good as Parker.

.
Click to expand...
They may be fixable....

I read an interesting study once on core motivators for athletes. It is generally one of 3 things:
1) Fear of failure
2) Desire for Glory
3) A desire to win

They are 3 different things, all very powerful motivators that each have their place, and very intrinsic to whom the person is. I have found these motivators to be universal across many sports.

While each motivator can be a huge contributor certain motivations are better aligned to certain positions in each sport. A safety or O Lineman motivated by fear of failure can be a outstanding because they are never out of position and don’t gamble. But a shooting guard motivated by fear of failure never takes the critical shots he should.

Fox seems to be motivated by a desire for Glory. It’s a great motivator for a 2 guard and a horrible motivator for ball handler/play maker. He’s willing to take and often makes shots with the game on the line. But that same motivation leads him to take shots when he should look to get his teammates involved. Westbrook is an extreme example of a player with this motivation.

A better motivator for the lead guard is desire to compete. Rajon Rondo is a perfect example of this kind of player for better or worse. Often barely shows up in games that matters (worse) but does what is needed to win in playoffs (better). Magic Johnson was the extreme example of this type of motivation with his phrase “it’s winning time”.

If I’m correct it’s hard for Fox to change what motivates him. Better to put the ball in Bogdan’s hands and let Fox play off the ball in a 2 guard role that matches his personality.
 
Gary

Gary

All-Star
#89
#89
kingsboi said:
Fox has the tools and skillset to become a two way PG, why give up on that for a one dimensional player in Young?
Click to expand...
Because I think Young is going to be better than Fox. I think Young will be awesome straight out of the box in his rookie season. He's one of those players that give me that vibe that they are going to be great in the NBA. Like Cousins, and Love did before Trae.
 
jcassio

jcassio

Starter
#90
#90
Gary said:
Because I think Young is going to be better than Fox. I think Young will be awesome straight out of the box in his rookie season. He's one of those players that give me that vibe that they are going to be great in the NBA. Like Cousins, and Love did before Trae.
Click to expand...
Do you always think your neighbor’s grass is greener than your grass?
I think Young has terrific Curry-esque potential. But he hasn’t shown he can handle tall defenders at the basket and he hasn’t shown that he’s interested in playing defense. I certainly wouldn’t take him before taking one of the Bridges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.