Sac, Phi, OKC

[SacTownKid]

I like Harkless, but would support experimenting w/Buddy starting in his place. Buddy is a better rebounder and does his best defensive work in the post where he can use his strength. Would also be happy to see a bigger player have to chase Buddy around on the other end.

They do need a shot in the arm offensively. Part of that is simply Fox playing better, and part of them running more sets, if only to settle themselves down. They've been super-frenetic and perimeter-happy. 46 3PA out of 86 FGA against the Warriors. A little excessive.

Harkless is a liability offensively if he can't hit open 3's with consistency but even then teams are going to let him shoot all night long if need be at some point and that raises the question, what is your gameplan here? If that's the role of your SF this year then they are REALLY going to regret not upgrading that spot. The Warriors were leaving him WIDE open as the game went on and it allowed them to hound the ball on pick and roll and pack the driving lanes. So far the best lineup according to the 5 man stats (with a 5 minutes of game time qualifier since it's so early in the season obviously) is Fox/Haliburton/Buddy/Barnes/Holmes. The SAME lineup that was top 3 in the league at one point last year. The question now is why are they getting so little time???

https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced/?Season=2021-22&SeasonType=Regular Season&TeamID=1610612758&sort=NET_RATING&dir=1&CF=MIN*GE*5

 

[kb02]

I feel like your definition of lead is that of the John Stocktons of the world.

Look at the top guards around the league at this point. With the exception of Chris Paul, most of them are score-first attackers whose passes are secondary to their ability to score and put pressure on defenses. The only guards who've shown any consistent ability to do that on this roster are being traded for a guy who can't score and a guy who's afraid to score when things matter.

My definition of a lead guard is a player, who can control the pace of the game. Right now, he’s one speed. Isn’t efficient enough from three and doesn’t get to the line enough to put the defense in the penalty. And when he’s at the line, he’s shooting like 60 to 70%.

 

[regularkingsfan]

Right now, he’s one speed. Isn’t efficient enough from three and doesn’t get to the line enough to put the defense in the penalty. And when he’s at the line, he’s shooting like 60 to 70%.

Lol this sounds almost like Ben Simmons. Actually this is Ben Simmons. Fox is better than 70% free throw shooters.

 

[Tetsujin]

Lol this sounds almost like Ben Simmons. Actually this is Ben Simmons. Fox is better than 70% free throw shooters.

Yes but Ben Simmons is a great defender (and currently at war with his team because he had a meltdown in the playoffs and his entire team threw him under the bus).

 

[kingsboi]

if you are trading Fox for a Simmons while giving up your best shooter, you better hope you are holding the opposition to 90 PPG because that team will only be scoring about 85-90 PPG

 

[kb02]

Lol this sounds almost like Ben Simmons. Actually this is Ben Simmons. Fox is better than 70% free throw shooters.

Fox’s FT% for the year: 60%. Career FT%: 71.7%

 

[kb02]

Fox’s FT% for the year: 60%. Career FT%: 71.7%

Simmons career FT %: 59.7. Career FT% difference between Fox and Simmons is 1/10 shots. Fox is better, but in the same essential category as Simmons. So…

 

[kb02]

if you are trading Fox for a Simmons while giving up your best shooter, you better hope you are holding the opposition to 90 PPG because that team will only be scoring about 85-90 PPG

That team will win more than this team. That is what matters.

 

[Tetsujin]

That team will win more than this team. That is what matters.

There is literally no way to confirm this statement.

How do we know that an absolutely horrid offensive team with a solid defensive base will be better than the competent offensive team with sightly improved defense from last year is?

 

[kingsboi]

That team will win more than this team. That is what matters.

are you able to look into the future in the present and hypothetical realm?

 

[kb02]

are you able to look into the future in the present and hypothetical realm?

Funny. The dude who predicts a team that will score between 85 to 90 per game is now asking whether I can look into the future.

Btw, easier to hit on a that team will win more than this team (who has a 1-2 record (.333%)) prediction than to hit on an 85 to 90 scoring average prediction for the season. Like, you’ll notice that my margin for error (66.7%) is significantly greater than yours (5.5% based on a 109 league scoring average). You should’ve said less than 90. Lolzzzz

 

[kb02]

There is literally no way to confirm this statement.

How do we know that an absolutely horrid offensive team with a solid defensive base will be better than the competent offensive team with sightly improved defense from last year is?

See above.

 

[kingsboi]

Funny. The dude who predicts a team that will score between 85 to 90 per game is now asking whether I can look into the future.

Btw, easier to hit on a that team will win more than this team (who has a 1-2 record (.333%)) prediction than to hit on an 85 to 90 scoring average prediction for the season. Like, you’ll notice that my margin for error (66.7%) is significantly greater than yours (5.5% based on a 109 league scoring average). You should’ve said less than 90. Lolzzzz

your prediction is just that, a prediction same as mine. Your prediction however is unlikely to come to fruition.

 

[kb02]

your prediction is just that, a prediction same as mine. Your prediction however is unlikely to come to fruition.

Well, my odds are 1212% better than yours, so they’re not quite the same kind of predictions. It’s like comparing Steph Curry’s three point shooting to Simmons’.

 

[kingsboi]

Well, my odds are 1212% better than yours, so they’re not quite the same kind of predictions. It’s like comparing Steph Curry’s three point shooting to Simmons’.

odds don't equate to results

 

[EIM86]

 

[NewArena]

What an awful trade for the Kings. Even if our defense was good enough to just flat out make the games “ugly” (they would definitely be ugly) we wouldn’t have enough offense to win any of those close games. These days, it’s offense that leads to good defense, not the other way around. It’s not 1995 or even 2004 with that Ben Wallace led Pistons team. We’d get ran outta the gym every night, going on 9 minute scoring droughts. No thanks!

 

[NewArena]

Lol this sounds almost like Ben Simmons. Actually this is Ben Simmons. Fox is better than 70% free throw shooters.

LOL

 

[kb02]

What an awful trade for the Kings. Even if our defense was good enough to just flat out make the games “ugly” (they would definitely be ugly) we wouldn’t have enough offense to win any of those close games. These days, it’s offense that leads to good defense, not the other way around. It’s not 1995 or even 2004 with that Ben Wallace led Pistons team. We’d get ran outta the gym every night, going on 9 minute scoring droughts. No thanks!

Last year, the Kings had the 12th ranked offense and the 30th (dead last) ranked defense. Yet defense doesn’t matter. Lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz