Rebuild Strategy (or WE WANT LINS!)

kingjatt · Dec 13, 2017

In rebuild mode I feel like the young guys should get the bulk of the shots minutes and usage, some may feel guys are too young for that but we only have one real (teen) young guy on this team (fox) the rest Frank, Bogie,JJ are older and should be able to handle more than the minutes and shots they are getting. Guys like WCS,Buddy should be especially featured as they are 24+ years old now......they should be looked at as the "Vets" in crunch time, do not be afraid to lose this year, absolutely go for the win, but do so with your potential future, not guys who won't be here in a year or 2.

I do not agree that ZBO, Hill and Temple are here to mentor, they are NBA players, they want shots, playing time and money just like anyone else, they do not have a vested interest or history in this franchise like Tim Duncan as illustrated by these three events.
-ZBO the mentor gets arrested for selling weed.
-G. Hill tells the salt lake media guy hes pissed about playing time, Doris Burke on the national broadcast brings up the fact that Joerger approached ZBO about cutting minutes for the young guys and the ZBO flat out refused.
-All three are here because we overpaid for them to be here. No one else was matching that money for any of them.

I like your point on the young guys not getting the offense and I agree, but why the bottom of league in pace with the shooters and athletes we have? Why not push the ball more and emphasize threes? Wouldn't that be even simpler? All I see is mostly ZBO setting a pick only to get the ball back for himself? Why not clear some space by going small and playing spread out? Let Fox have some more chances to try to attack? Simple things that we do not do because they don't work for ZBO.

The Spurs send down there top (late 1st round) draft picks to play in the D-league because the big club is in constant contention, simply put there is no time at the big club for the young guys to play. The Kings currently should have no problem finding time for at least their first rounders at the big club. Like its not like last night we were playing against a team that should overwhelm the youngsters, yet ZBO (tied) leads the team in shots. Go for the WIN but results be damned this year. I do not think anyone is specifically clamoring for losing on purpose, most people just want more run from the youngsters, sure throw a vet in there once in a while, but focal points and most of the shots should only be for the young guys. G. Hill and ZBO should have a healthy serving of DNP-CDs and be okay with it since they are "mentors".

macadocious · Dec 13, 2017

Also, FWIW. I am in the play well but not win category. That being said, if our young team has an opportunity to win a game its really good for them to get that feeling. To understand what plays and defense it took to make that happen. I 100% don't want to be up 6 going into the last 4 minutes and have Joerger decided to roll out Fox, Buddy, BB8, J.J. and Skal and lose by 5. That's not helping anyone.

SacTownKid · Dec 13, 2017

King Baller said:

It might be, and there have been positives for sure, but if they can someone like Vlade along with whatever coach a new GM will have his own vision most likely and that means changes. Any change with the Kings not having really established any of their players yet probably means a clean slate. Not good. And 25 minutes is not big for where the Kings are at. Most rookies or young players on other rebuilding teams are starting to solidify into real starters minutes, the Kings need to start eyeballing that shift because what better time than now, when the pressure is off. I've already discussed this multiple times but I'll give it a go again, the window right now isn't huge by any means and very much in the balance. No pick in '19 and many of the Kings younin's aren't that young. Willie is nearing the end of his deal which means a hit to potential cap space should they retain him. Bogdan is 25-26 and already making close to 10% of your projected cap. Vlade better realize that this 2-3 plan doesn't mean waiting that 2-3 years out on the slow track and seeing what happened.

Look at a team like Wolves, you have to be on point with your assets and strike when the opportunity is there. Developing young players is only part of the process because sometimes you aren't really developing them for yourself, but in order to establish value to build a team.

SacTownKid · Dec 13, 2017

macadocious said:

Big picture though, losing will tell you a lot about who those players are depending on how they respond. The facts are wins or losses now won't hurt or help anyone, just like they haven't in previous seasons. How many "big wins" have the Kings had in the last 2-3 seasons? How much did it help in the long run? The more minutes of in game opportunity against the best in the league for a young player the better. If they crack from it they weren't going to stick in the cut throat NBA anyhow.

The first few years of a players career should be focused on their own game and individual improvement. Sure it'd be nice to win, but lets get real, the NBA's pecking order is what it is to the point that's it's almost entirely natural. Young players and young teams don't win. You have to learn how to walk before you run, but the more practice you get walking I'd bet the quicker you're going to run.

macadocious · Dec 13, 2017

kingjatt said:

See, this is a well thought out post. I agree with some, but not all. Last night we had Mason, Buddy Hill, BB8 and Zbo in to close the game. 2 rookies, a 2nd year player and two vets. I think that is a great mix.

I don't know how you watch games, but I tend to watch off ball stuff and coaches quite a bit. It's not intentional, I just happened to have played and coached a ton of basketball in my life so my brain watches games in a certain way. There were multiple times last night the Joerger is shuffling up the side lines, with his arm in swiping motion yelling go go go to Fox and Fox is just walking it up. I've seen enough basketball in my life to know that this team is not last in pace because of how the coach is trying to play, it's last because of how the players are actually playing. Zbo slows it down some, but not to the extent it is. I would guess we should be somewhere in the 16-18 pace range, but were not even close.

The reason the team is playing better with Mason running PG vs. Fox, is because Mason is being aggressive. I waited a few games before I thought that it was the coach slowing Fox down. I really dont think it is, I think Fox is tentative and struggling with the offense and trying to find his way. Young players coming from Kentucky struggle with offensive sets and different defenses because they dont do that there. They run a more sophisticated pick up playground style of basketball.

kingsboi · Dec 13, 2017

macadocious said:

See, this is a well thought out post. I agree with some, but not all. Last night we had Mason, Buddy Hill, BB8 and Zbo in to close the game. 2 rookies, a 2nd year player and two vets. I think that is a great mix.

I don't know how you watch games, but I tend to watch off ball stuff and coaches quite a bit. It's not intentional, I just happened to have played and coached a ton of basketball in my life so my brain watches games in a certain way. There were multiple times last night the Joerger is shuffling up the side lines, with his arm in swiping motion yelling go go go to Fox and Fox is just walking it up. I've seen enough basketball in my life to know that this team is not last in pace because of how the coach is trying to play, it's last because of how the players are actually playing. Zbo slows it down some, but not to the extent it is. I would guess we should be somewhere in the 16-18 pace range, but were not even close.

The reason the team is playing better with Mason running PG vs. Fox, is because Mason is being aggressive. I waited a few games before I thought that it was the coach slowing Fox down. I really dont think it is, I think Fox is tentative and struggling with the offense and trying to find his way. Young players coming from Kentucky struggle with offensive sets and different defenses because they dont do that there. They run a more sophisticated pick up playground style of basketball.

I too noticed this on multiple occasions, not just last night but in most of the games played this season. He needs to continue to tell his PG or guards to push the pace and it's annoying quite frankly.

bajaden · Dec 13, 2017

Whereas we're taking a hard look at our rookies progress, or in some peoples minds. lack of progress, I thought I would take a look at the other top rookies in that draft and see how Fox stacks up. Going strictly on stats, which I have to because I don't have the time to watch every game of every top rookie, I would say that Mitchell is one of two at the top of the pecking order. He's averaging 29:40 mpg, 17.3 ppg on 15.3 attempts per game, while shooting 41.0% overall and 37.4% from the three. He's also averaging 3.2 assists and 2.4 turnovers per game.

His competitor for the top spot, and who was one of my favorite players in the draft is Tatum. Who is averaging 30:36 mpg, 13.8 ppg on 9.1 attempts per game, while shooting a great 50.2% overall, and a blistering 50.0% from the three. He's also averaging 5.7 rebounds and 1.0 steals.

Next in line is probably Markkanen who is averaging 30:40 mpg, 14.7 ppg on 13 attempts per game, while shooting 40.1% overall and 33.5% from the three. He's also pulling down an impressive 8.1 rebounds a game. After Markkanen, there's no clear winner. Some have raved about Smith, but his stats aren't mind blowing. He's averaging 28:08 mpg, 14.4 ppg on 14.6 attempts per game, while shooting 39.4% overall and 30.6% from the three. He's also averaging 4.0 assists per game against 3.0 turnovers and 0.8 steals per game.

I don't see where he's remarkably better than Fox who is averaging 26:18 mpg, 10.0 ppg on 10.0 attempts per game, while shooting 40.6% overall and 29.7% from the three. He's also averaging 3.9 assists against 2.3 turnovers and 0.9 steals per game. Smith is scoring more points than Fox, but he's also playing more minutes, and taking more shots. So it's fairly even at this point.

How about Josh Jackson? Well, he's averaging 22:12 mpg, 9.2 ppg on 9.0 attempts per game, while shooting 38.5% overall and a pitiful 23.9% from the three. General rule of thumb is, if you were a poor shooter in college, it's going to get worse in the NBA before it gets better. He is averaging 1.1 steals per game.

Then there's Lonzo Ball, who is really good at one thing, and really bad as several things. He's averaging 33:08 mpg, 8.9 ppg on 10.7 attempts per game (never good when your attempts exceed your points), while shooting 32.7% overall and 25.8% from the three. He is averaging a great 7.0 assists per game against only 2.5 turnovers. While he averages 1.4 steals per game, his defense is terrible.

Then there's the forgotten man, Ntilikina. He's averaging 20:05 mpg, 5.8 ppg on 6.1 attempts per game, while shooting 35.6% overall and a decent 32.6% from the three. He's also averaging 3.3 assist against 2.0 turnovers. He is by the way a good defender whose averaging 1.4 steals. I like this kid.

The final two that I'll throw in are first, Isaac who is averaging 19:53 mpg, 6.1 ppg on 5.1 attemps per game, while shooting 45.9% overall and 29.4% from the three. Throw in 4.4 rebounds and 0.7 steals per game

Lastly there's Monk who is averaging 16:22 mpg, 6.5 ppg on 7.2 attempts per game, while shooting 32.7% overall and 31.9% from the three. He's also averaging 1.7 assists against 0.8 turnovers and 0.3 steals per game.

Taken at face value right now, one might think that this was a bad draft, but I can assure that almost everyone of these players at worse will be good NBA players, and that several will be stars in the league. What you see is normal, and if you were to take the time to go back and look at the past history of many NBA stars, you'd see a similar story. I thought the most NBA ready player in the draft was Tatum, and so far that's proven to be true. I thought Mitchell would be a player similar in time to McCollum, but he has surprised me by being better sooner than I thought. PG is the hardest position in the NBA to play, so it's not a surprise that most of the rookie PG's are struggling with parts of their game. Whatever your weakness was in college, it's going to be magnified in the NBA. It then becomes a question of how soon you can adjust.

If I had to pick out the most surprising player, it would be Markkanen. He's already exceeded my expectations. But one has to remember that part of who a player appears to be in college has to do with that players environment. The Kevin Johnson you saw at Cal, wasn't the Kevin Johnson you saw in the NBA. Some players are victims of the system, and Markkanen may have been one of them. The other side of the coin is, that some systems make a player look better than he is. It's not an exact science.

bajaden · Dec 13, 2017

macadocious said:

I'm very much like you in how I watch a game. I love the off ball stuff. For instance in the last 3 or 4 minutes of the game where Zach got wide open on the right wing from about 16 feet and he hit an uncontested shot. But the reason he was so open was that Willie set a terrific back screen for him taking his man out of the play completely. That stuff goes unnoticed by most folks, but its just as important as everything else. Anyway, I think it's important to point out that some things that are important don't show up in the stat sheet.

By the way, Calipari likes to run a dribble drive offense, but at the end of the day, it's up to the talent he has on the roster. When you have such a big turnover every year like he does at Kentucky, you have to keep it fairly simple. The other side of the coin is probably Villanova, who usually starts juniors and seniors, and as a result runs a more sophisticated offense. I really like Mikal Bridges by the way. Great defender.

dude12 · Dec 13, 2017

macadocious said:

I've been a member of this forum for almost 13 years. I may have even been around before the crashed forum happened, but I cant remember. As of right now, I am pretty close to being done here. I get nothing from it because of the misanthropes who have insane expectations and have no idea what this season was supposed to be.

We are in re-build mode. We are not in tank for the #1 pick under any circumstance mode.
We will probably end up somewhere between 24-28 wins on there year. See 538: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-nba-predictions/
Joerger consistently has 3-4 rookies, 2nd year players and our 3rd year player WCS with 1-2 veterans IN CRUNCH TIME!
The coaches are coaching individual games TO WIN. They always have and always will. With that being said, we still are going to lose a ton of games because we have 10 players on rookie contracts 7 of which are playing major minutes.
Z-B0, Hill, Carter and to a certain extent Temple are here to teach younger players how to men in this league, how to play, how to win and how to handle failures and successes. So far, it seems like they are doing an amazing job at it.
For those complaining about the offense, try listening to and reading what reporters are saying instead of your own interpretations. James Ham said 3 days ago that Joerger is running the simplest offense he can and the young guys are still confused. Vets want a more robust offense but he just can't implement it right now. That is BECAUSE we have 10 players on rookie contracts. Most teams, even in a major rebuild, have 2-4 players like that. So even if the veterans they have suck, they are veterans who know how to run and offense and play team D. They just might not be good players.
Joerger said this is at minimum an 18 month process. He doesn't expect to see results until the middle of the 2018/19 season.
Joerger also said he was going to play 10 players all 20-25 minutes a game. (guess what, he's pretty much done that)
The Kings are using the G-League as well or better than any team in the league right now. The NBA has never had a true minor league system until this past decade and even now it's really just coming to fruition. There is no blue print for what they are doing. It's not like MLB where guys are moved up slowly and may not see the league for 3-4 years after being drafted. I think what they are doing is genius btw. The other team that does what they are doing, the Spurs. I think they've done a decent job developing draft picks the past 5 years.
We still have Harry Giles! He could be a Unicorn, he could be a bust.
We will have a top 6 pick in the upcoming draft. Hopefully a top 3. With correct scouting it should get us a starting caliber front court player OR Donic.

Right now we have a few people clamoring for not playing any veterans and losing on purpose. We also have a few people on the other side upset that the veterans aren't playing more and battling for the 8 seed. I really don't care what the speculation about what Hill may or may not have been told was.

Watch this interview. This was taped right before training camp. Guess what, almost every single part of what he said has and is happening. It's almost prophetic in nature.

http://www.nba.com/video/2017/10/05/20171005-kings-nbatv-preview-joerger-interview#/

That was the one I was able to find, but he and the FO had been saying this since summer league. I'm not advocating banning anyone from the board or anything like that, but I already find myself on here less and less and unless something changes to where the discussion goes back to a combination of X's and O's and things we would like to see or speculation of things to come, in a positive manner; I'm probably just going not going to bother logging on.

You crushed it.

dude12 · Dec 13, 2017

fansinceday1 said:

Are you kidding me?
You'd like this place to just be x's and o's, and only posted in a positive manner? What kind of fan forum is that? Have you been to any other site for any other sports team? This place is as tame as my daughters kitty cat!!! CMON!!!!!!
I really think that the majority of this place wants there to be strict rules on who posts and where. You? Your a miserable complaining POS so your not allowed in this thread because well, we like to discuss the team only in a happy happy joy joy demeanor. You can stay in your miserable you hate the team thread and discuss things with all the other trolls and haters. JHC...........

Some of the greatest fan forums in the sporting world are free flowing and they are not positive. The Kansas City Cheifs fan forum has got to be the greatest and most entertaining one I've ever come across. And they certainly aren't banning ANYONE for not posting in a positive manner. Unbelievable.

You are blowing things out of proportion....have fun with that

macadocious · Dec 13, 2017

bajaden said:

Yes I know Calipari runs the dribble drive, it's why Willie was able to be effective when Karl let him play. It's also a free flowing simple offense, which you just espoused. Fox has probably run a handful of sets in his life prior to this year. He looks fairly lost out there at times, especially early in the game. I think that is also why he was more effective earlier this year coming off the bench. He was able to be more aggressive without the early game offense being initiated. But, as I've said before, that is picking nits. There is benefit to both Fox coming off the bench and being more successful and earning his chops as a starter. Bottom line, for hims specifically (Skal to a certain extent too) they need more controlled aggression.

The big thing I've seen Fox improve upon is not getting the ball stripped away as much going into the lane. He's learning.

sactowndog · Dec 13, 2017

kingjatt said:

In rebuild mode I feel like the young guys should get the bulk of the shots minutes and usage, some may feel guys are too young for that but we only have one real (teen) young guy on this team (fox) the rest Frank, Bogie,JJ are older and should be able to handle more than the minutes and shots they are getting. Guys like WCS,Buddy should be especially featured as they are 24+ years old now......they should be looked at as the "Vets" in crunch time, do not be afraid to lose this year, absolutely go for the win, but do so with your potential future, not guys who won't be here in a year or 2.

I do not agree that ZBO, Hill and Temple are here to mentor, they are NBA players, they want shots, playing time and money just like anyone else, they do not have a vested interest or history in this franchise like Tim Duncan as illustrated by these three events.
-ZBO the mentor gets arrested for selling weed.
-G. Hill tells the salt lake media guy hes pissed about playing time, Doris Burke on the national broadcast brings up the fact that Joerger approached ZBO about cutting minutes for the young guys and the ZBO flat out refused.
-All three are here because we overpaid for them to be here. No one else was matching that money for any of them.

I like your point on the young guys not getting the offense and I agree, but why the bottom of league in pace with the shooters and athletes we have? Why not push the ball more and emphasize threes? Wouldn't that be even simpler? All I see is mostly ZBO setting a pick only to get the ball back for himself? Why not clear some space by going small and playing spread out? Let Fox have some more chances to try to attack? Simple things that we do not do because they don't work for ZBO.

The Spurs send down there top (late 1st round) draft picks to play in the D-league because the big club is in constant contention, simply put there is no time at the big club for the young guys to play. The Kings currently should have no problem finding time for at least their first rounders at the big club. Like its not like last night we were playing against a team that should overwhelm the youngsters, yet ZBO (tied) leads the team in shots. Go for the WIN but results be damned this year. I do not think anyone is specifically clamoring for losing on purpose, most people just want more run from the youngsters, sure throw a vet in there once in a while, but focal points and most of the shots should only be for the young guys. G. Hill and ZBO should have a healthy serving of DNP-CDs and be okay with it since they are "mentors".

I agree with this 1000%....

if we get a win because Bogie and Willie continue to get further in synch and execute the pick and roll in crunch time... so be it. That means the young guys are progressing. This approach is what the warriors did.

If we lose because Bogie and Willie are on the floor and can’t execute that means they aren’t progressing and we need a high pick badly. I can live with that as Vlade said we would have a rebuilding year.

What’s not a rebuilding year is watching Frank dump it into ZBo in isolation. Or ZBo and Hill contribute most of the baskets down the stretch.

sactowndog · Dec 13, 2017

bajaden said:

Whereas we're taking a hard look at our rookies progress, or in some peoples minds. lack of progress, I thought I would take a look at the other top rookies in that draft and see how Fox stacks up. Going strictly on stats, which I have to because I don't have the time to watch every game of every top rookie, I would say that Mitchell is one of two at the top of the pecking order. He's averaging 29:40 mpg, 17.3 ppg on 15.3 attempts per game, while shooting 41.0% overall and 37.4% from the three. He's also averaging 3.2 assists and 2.4 turnovers per game.

His competitor for the top spot, and who was one of my favorite players in the draft is Tatum. Who is averaging 30:36 mpg, 13.8 ppg on 9.1 attempts per game, while shooting a great 50.2% overall, and a blistering 50.0% from the three. He's also averaging 5.7 rebounds and 1.0 steals.

Next in line is probably Markkanen who is averaging 30:40 mpg, 14.7 ppg on 13 attempts per game, while shooting 40.1% overall and 33.5% from the three. He's also pulling down an impressive 8.1 rebounds a game. After Markkanen, there's no clear winner. Some have raved about Smith, but his stats aren't mind blowing. He's averaging 28:08 mpg, 14.4 ppg on 14.6 attempts per game, while shooting 39.4% overall and 30.6% from the three. He's also averaging 4.0 assists per game against 3.0 turnovers and 0.8 steals per game.

I don't see where he's remarkably better than Fox who is averaging 26:18 mpg, 10.0 ppg on 10.0 attempts per game, while shooting 40.6% overall and 29.7% from the three. He's also averaging 3.9 assists against 2.3 turnovers and 0.9 steals per game. Smith is scoring more points than Fox, but he's also playing more minutes, and taking more shots. So it's fairly even at this point.

How about Josh Jackson? Well, he's averaging 22:12 mpg, 9.2 ppg on 9.0 attempts per game, while shooting 38.5% overall and a pitiful 23.9% from the three. General rule of thumb is, if you were a poor shooter in college, it's going to get worse in the NBA before it gets better. He is averaging 1.1 steals per game.

Then there's Lonzo Ball, who is really good at one thing, and really bad as several things. He's averaging 33:08 mpg, 8.9 ppg on 10.7 attempts per game (never good when your attempts exceed your points), while shooting 32.7% overall and 25.8% from the three. He is averaging a great 7.0 assists per game against only 2.5 turnovers. While he averages 1.4 steals per game, his defense is terrible.

Then there's the forgotten man, Ntilikina. He's averaging 20:05 mpg, 5.8 ppg on 6.1 attempts per game, while shooting 35.6% overall and a decent 32.6% from the three. He's also averaging 3.3 assist against 2.0 turnovers. He is by the way a good defender whose averaging 1.4 steals. I like this kid.

The final two that I'll throw in are first, Isaac who is averaging 19:53 mpg, 6.1 ppg on 5.1 attemps per game, while shooting 45.9% overall and 29.4% from the three. Throw in 4.4 rebounds and 0.7 steals per game

Lastly there's Monk who is averaging 16:22 mpg, 6.5 ppg on 7.2 attempts per game, while shooting 32.7% overall and 31.9% from the three. He's also averaging 1.7 assists against 0.8 turnovers and 0.3 steals per game.

Taken at face value right now, one might think that this was a bad draft, but I can assure that almost everyone of these players at worse will be good NBA players, and that several will be stars in the league. What you see is normal, and if you were to take the time to go back and look at the past history of many NBA stars, you'd see a similar story. I thought the most NBA ready player in the draft was Tatum, and so far that's proven to be true. I thought Mitchell would be a player similar in time to McCollum, but he has surprised me by being better sooner than I thought. PG is the hardest position in the NBA to play, so it's not a surprise that most of the rookie PG's are struggling with parts of their game. Whatever your weakness was in college, it's going to be magnified in the NBA. It then becomes a question of how soon you can adjust.

If I had to pick out the most surprising player, it would be Markkanen. He's already exceeded my expectations. But one has to remember that part of who a player appears to be in college has to do with that players environment. The Kevin Johnson you saw at Cal, wasn't the Kevin Johnson you saw in the NBA. Some players are victims of the system, and Markkanen may have been one of them. The other side of the coin is, that some systems make a player look better than he is. It's not an exact science.

Interesting. In fairness to Ball you left out his rebounds which are also impressive.

I think Kuzma, OG and Collins should also be included do you agree? I would put Kuzma as most surprising.

sactowndog · Dec 13, 2017

macadocious said:

See, this is a well thought out post. I agree with some, but not all. Last night we had Mason, Buddy Hill, BB8 and Zbo in to close the game. 2 rookies, a 2nd year player and two vets. I think that is a great mix.

I don't know how you watch games, but I tend to watch off ball stuff and coaches quite a bit. It's not intentional, I just happened to have played and coached a ton of basketball in my life so my brain watches games in a certain way. There were multiple times last night the Joerger is shuffling up the side lines, with his arm in swiping motion yelling go go go to Fox and Fox is just walking it up. I've seen enough basketball in my life to know that this team is not last in pace because of how the coach is trying to play, it's last because of how the players are actually playing. Zbo slows it down some, but not to the extent it is. I would guess we should be somewhere in the 16-18 pace range, but were not even close.

The reason the team is playing better with Mason running PG vs. Fox, is because Mason is being aggressive. I waited a few games before I thought that it was the coach slowing Fox down. I really dont think it is, I think Fox is tentative and struggling with the offense and trying to find his way. Young players coming from Kentucky struggle with offensive sets and different defenses because they dont do that there. They run a more sophisticated pick up playground style of basketball.

The problem is if you look at the game log, from the point ZBo came into the game in the 4th, he and Hill took every shot save one attempt by Buddy and late free throws by Bogdan when the game was over. If he and Hill were facilitating plays for the young guys it would be something. But instead it tends to be dump the ball to ZBo and watch him operate while the young guys stand on the perimeter.

KingsSelecao · Dec 13, 2017

Completely agree. Late in the 4th Randolph and Hill(Played a great game) led the offense. If Zbo and/or Hill were not in there crunch, it may have been a loss.
I don't have an issue with wins, If the youngsters are facilitating it. But, I would say 8 of the 9 wins Sac have are due to Randolph's offense.

Team would have 1-2 wins on the season, if not for Randolph.

kingjatt · Dec 13, 2017

sactowndog said:

Or Zbo sets a lazy screen basically forcing the guard to pass it back to him so he can do his 1 on 1 thing. I dont think its going to be easy to bench or DNP these guys, it WILL create a rift in the locker room.

sactowndog · Dec 13, 2017

KingsSelecao said:

If you agree this fact is true (and most would agree), it indicates the Kings don’t have a cornerstone player among their young players (non-rookies). Using the warriors as a model, Steph was averaging 20 points a game and 30 min. For the Kings to be a playoff contender, they need ideally a top 3 pick. Right now they project at 7.

206Fan · Dec 13, 2017

KingsSelecao said:

Kuzma has surprised me too. He wasn't this good in college....

macadocious · Dec 13, 2017

sactowndog said:

You keep saying this, and I keep giving you evidence to the contrary. They are in the 6th spot currently.

Why are you using the Warriors model. There is no model for what the Kings are doing. None. Doesn't exist, it's never been done before.

King Baller · Dec 13, 2017

sactowndog said:

GSW picked Curry at #7, Klay at #11 and Draymond at pick #35. Quick, who was the GM that picked Curry? Anyhow my point is you don't necessarily need a top 3 pick.

sactowndog · Dec 13, 2017

206Fan said:

Things

King Baller said:

Sure and which player under 25 do we have averaging 20+ points a gain.

Joshoua · Dec 13, 2017

macadocious said:

Also, we are currently 6th and projected to be 3rd. We only have one more win than Dallas and Memphis and Phx has two more losses than us.

Of those above us right now

Lakers - no reason to tank
Brooklyn - no reason to tank
Charlotte - Cannot see a Jordan ran team tanking
Clippers - No chance they tank with Doc as a coach
Magic - Maybe, put Vogel is trying to win

Those at or below us.

Memphis - Not tanking, Coach was fired because they are not playing to expectations
Dallas - Front Office is tanking, coach is not. They are better than the Kings and unless FO shuts everyone down in February they will have a better record than us.
Suns - With Booker out, we are a better team. Sorta tanking?
Bulls - Tanking - They will have a worse record than us. They are terrible and we barely beat them.
Atlanta - Coach Bud is not tanking, they just dont have talent. We are probably a hair better than them.

Post All Star break I expect Zbo and Hill to get some days off (if they are still on the team) and also play less minutes. Again, our winning percentage right now puts us at 27 wins. 538 projects 26.

I will be extremely pissed if we are better than Dallas we should only finish ahead of Atlanta and Chicago. That would position us to get a top 5 pick guaranteed

Joshoua · Dec 13, 2017

King Baller said:

And they got lucky MN took Flynn Curry and Rubio actually made sense and GSW doesn’t exist as we know it if Kahn isn’t a moran

206Fan · Dec 14, 2017

King Baller said:

The Kings have been extremely unsuccessful drafters. We picked Jimmer at #11, T-Rob at #5, McLemore at #7, Stauskas at #8, and Tyler Honeycutt at #36.

The Kings have been extremely poor talent evaluators. Yes they can still screw up a pick inside the top 3, but statistically, there's a higher chance that the higher a draft pick, the more better he'll turn out. I don't have that graphic on hand, but it's been posted a lot on here.

If you're a horrible organization like the Kings, then you do need a top 3 pick.

bajaden · Dec 14, 2017

macadocious said:

In Skal's case, he needs to be more aggressive period. I get a little tired of seeing him pass up open shots. Agree on Fox. I think his lack of strength limits the effectiveness of his driving ability. Not much he can do about that right now, but I think with his speed and quickness, that mid-range pullup is there anytime he wants it. Westbrook lived off that shot his first couple of years in the league.

bajaden · Dec 14, 2017

sactowndog said:

Yeah, but I left out some stats on almost every player. I was just trying to give an overall picture. As for the rest of those players you mentioned, I was trying to stick with those players that were considered the top picks in the draft. I really liked Kuzma, and had him as one of four players I wanted for the Kings in the 2nd round. That said, I had no idea he would be this good. When the Kings traded down, I figured they take either Jackson or OG. Loved his defensive abilities.

bajaden · Dec 14, 2017

206Fan said:

Come on, your just cherry picking. What about Cousins, Evans, Peja, Martin, J. Will, Gerald Wallace, Brian Grant, Funderburke, Ricky Berry, etc. Yeah, they had a bad run with the players you mentioned, but part of that was due to the Maloof's meddling.

King Baller · Dec 14, 2017

sactowndog said:

You are the one that chose GSW as your model. Curry did not average 20+ per game until his 4th season. So to answer your question, we don't know yet

To quote Lebron, "This ain't instant oatmeal."

King Baller · Dec 14, 2017

206Fan said:

The Kings don't get top 3 picks. there have only been 3 times in the last 35 years when the Kings picked in the top 3. So apparently "horrible" has got nothing to do with it? What are you going to do about that?

Thanks for bringing this up, pretty damn depressing.

For a full run down of the misery---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramento_Kings_draft_history

King Baller · Dec 14, 2017

Joshoua said:

Quite true

The dynasty that is the current GSW team owes it all to a moron LOL!

Rebuild Strategy (or WE WANT LINS!)

How would you like the rebuild handled?

Wouldn't change a thing. Joeger and Vlade doing it right.

Only youth plays no vets

Somewhere in the middle

Starter

Starter

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Starter

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Starter

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

Bench

Starter

All-Star

All-Star

Starter

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

All-Star

All-Star

All-Star