24 rick barry
Bench
Marvin Bagley III = "Never Nervous Pervis" or as nicknamed by Danny Ainge "Out of Service Pervis."
he’s not. He just doesn’t play defense well enough to start or even get many minutes for a defensive oriented coach.
That being said I feel bad for him. He needs time on the court and to learn how to play defense. He was improving but he still has a ways to go.
it’s also pretty tough for the Kings. Do you pick up his option for $14M. It’s a huge overpay but if you don’t he becomes an unrestricted free agent and you lose him for nothing as we know he will leave.
It’s too bad. Marvin’s a good player, maybe would be great someday. One more setback for him and the Kings.
I think this really hurts the team (duh), but it looks like another lottery year.
Resigning Boogie would be interesting now. They’ve got to consider it, I would think.
i feel bad for the guy and our team. I dont think they aren't trying, it's just a crappy fit with an awful coach
Good point. When one door closes....
"Bright future even if McNair does nothing" at the trade deadline per this article
Here I'm looking for the glass half full, and you switch to door's on me. Getting to old to keep up..![]()
I thought it was a good article and I am definitely interested in seeing Fox and Haliburton (and Barnes) - if it's Buddy and Holmes in the other 2 spots, so be it. Those two might be the easiest to upgrade. Seeing Bagley's -20 glaring out there was just pretty friggin depressing though.This may be the best Kings related analysis I've ever read from a source that isn't directly in the Kings' orbit. Bravo Jonathan Tjarks for actually doing your homework and getting this right! He very neatly outlines the main points of our current situation:
(1) Fox and Haliburton in the same starting lineup needs to happen right away and should be a great foundation for us to build around.
(2) Barnes has been aces this season and he's the type of player we shouldn't throw away unless we have a very good reason.
(3) Bagley in the starting lineup is a huge problem for our defense and his biggest growth area on offense this season (shooting 35% from three on 2.6 attempts per game) is not very hard to replace when you also consider that he doesn't have the defensive impact a guy his size is expected to have. In fact, we already had a defensively challenged stretch 4 on the roster who we benched to give Bagley his spot in the starting lineup.
The other interesting wrinkle here that the article did not touch on is how moving Haliburton into the starting lineup (assuming Luke isn't bold enough to push his favorite Canadian into that spot instead) is likely to impact erstwhile 3pt champion Buddy Hield's shooting. After making 41% from deep in January, prompting sighs of relief that his touch had returned at last, Buddy proceeded to nosedive down to 32% on over 10 attempts per game in February. That's... not good. So far in March he's back up to 41% after 5 games and, as Tetsujin pointed out in the last game thread, the less Harrison Barnes and Buddy Hield are asked to create their own shot from the perimeter, the better life is for everyone. (You can bash in the post all day though HB). Tyrese and DeAaron driving and dishing to Buddy and Harrison spotted up on the 3pt line is what we want on offense. We should be running that particular glass horse until the revolving doors fall off. (for you @bajaden)
Not to beat said glass horse, but what the heck I'm just going to say it anyway: Getting a preview of a potential post-Bagley future might not be the worst thing for us right now. If we can get Metu and Whiteside back in uniform sometime soon and maybe even give Woodard half a look before the season is over, we might even show some improvement from the listless uninspiring team we've been for the past month or so.
I thought it was a good article and I am definitely interested in seeing Fox and Haliburton (and Barnes) - if it's Buddy and Holmes in the other 2 spots, so be it. Those two might be the easiest to upgrade. Seeing Bagley's -20 glaring out there was just pretty friggin depressing though.
It's such an obvious direction to go in the current NBA. I will cut Luke some slack here though. He knows he needs to work line-ups with Marvin for his growth. At the same time (and this is what Tjarks was getting at in his article and comments he's made in podcasts), no matter how good Marvin gets on offense, you'll likely always have issues in having to pair him up with the "right" front court mates (either as a C or PF). People have gotten on Luke for the fact that Marvin's not consistently getting "starter" minutes, but this is his issue. Will be interesting to see how things play out over the next couple weeks without Marvin and what they says about his future with the team.I don't know what it is right now but that Fox, Haliburton, Buddy, Barnes, Holmes lineup was a top 3, 5 man unit in all of the league at one point in net rating. The issue is now the players are kind of bought out from game to game and the momentum built during the win streak is gone.
It's such an obvious direction to go in the current NBA. I will cut Luke some slack here though. He knows he needs to work line-ups with Marvin for his growth. At the same time (and this is what Tjarks was getting at in his article and comments he's made in podcasts), no matter how good Marvin gets on offense, you'll likely always have issues in having to pair him up with the "right" front court mates (either as a C or PF). People have gotten on Luke for the fact that Marvin's not consistently getting "starter" minutes, but this is his issue. Will be interesting to see how things play out over the next couple weeks without Marvin and what they says about his future with the team.
The problem with Bagley remains the same. As a 5 he is not even close to being a good enough defender. As a 4 he still is a net negative defensively and playing with a non shooting 5 will take some away from his offense. The question is what happens when you replace Bagley with Barnes at 4 and a shooter/3d guy at the 3? The offense probably gets better because of the added shooting/spacing and the defense remains about the same. That will always be the issue with Marvin. Thats the reason why he has been a net negative per most of the metrics and the exact reason why he most likely wont be a high impact player in this league. He clearly has potential to be an off the bench instant energy type of guy if he continues to improve.
The problem with Bagley remains the same. As a 5 he is not even close to being a good enough defender. As a 4 he still is a net negative defensively and playing with a non shooting 5 will take some away from his offense. The question is what happens when you replace Bagley with Barnes at 4 and a shooter/3d guy at the 3? The offense probably gets better because of the added shooting/spacing and the defense remains about the same. That will always be the issue with Marvin. Thats the reason why he has been a net negative per most of the metrics and the exact reason why he most likely wont be a high impact player in this league. He clearly has potential to be an off the bench instant energy type of guy if he continues to improve.
As mentioned by Doug part of Bagley’s problem is his poor defensive fundamentals. He really doesn’t know how to get down in and stay in a defensive stance. Doug felt Marvin should spend the next four weeks just working in his movement.
It's such an obvious direction to go in the current NBA. I will cut Luke some slack here though. He knows he needs to work line-ups with Marvin for his growth. At the same time (and this is what Tjarks was getting at in his article and comments he's made in podcasts), no matter how good Marvin gets on offense, you'll likely always have issues in having to pair him up with the "right" front court mates (either as a C or PF). People have gotten on Luke for the fact that Marvin's not consistently getting "starter" minutes, but this is his issue. Will be interesting to see how things play out over the next couple weeks without Marvin and what they says about his future with the team.
Its easy to see the mindset of a lot of nba players being to score 17+ and get paid throughout their careers. Not everybody wants to be great. Not everybody wants to put in the work that it takes to reach that level. Marvin might be one of those. He could easily put up 20 with 10 rebounds on a losing team that feeds him, he and especially his father know that. Ofc I could be wrong but those are the vibes I get.We all know that won’t happen. Nothing about Bagley has shown he works on his game. He’s the same player now that he was on Duke.
I don't care what he does, really. He won't be here much longer if you ask meDo we really think he'll never get injured if we get rid of Luke?
It's such an obvious direction to go in the current NBA. I will cut Luke some slack here though. He knows he needs to work line-ups with Marvin for his growth. At the same time (and this is what Tjarks was getting at in his article and comments he's made in podcasts), no matter how good Marvin gets on offense, you'll likely always have issues in having to pair him up with the "right" front court mates (either as a C or PF). People have gotten on Luke for the fact that Marvin's not consistently getting "starter" minutes, but this is his issue. Will be interesting to see how things play out over the next couple weeks without Marvin and what they says about his future with the team.