What about Burks ?
- Thread starter Sac.1989
- Start date
Section 101
All-Star
He wasn't around the last 2 weeks or so. I mentioned in a game thread he wasnt on the bench. Nobody seemed to notice.
ockingsfan
Starter
It will depend on coach Luke and Vlade seeing how he fits into Luke's schemes. He didn't show much at all, the time he was here.
If he comes back on a cheap deal, I can see them bringing him back, otherwise, I think they will go after other players.
Last edited:
Sac.1989
Starter
Theres value there in that we traded fan and locker room favorite, Shump for him envisoning a playoff run that he would have been a key piece for.
The kicker is he didnt play much so am intrigued as to if we bring him back if there isnt much of a market or if we still value his services.
I did not know he wasnt here towards the end of the season. That may have buried any plans of being resigned
His value is not defined by who we traded to acquire him.
King-Da-Yah
Starter
I still like Burcs, think he could be good bench depth next season.
beb0p
Starter
The Kings wanted a big guard who can handle and slash. I believe Burks was the consolation price for not being able to get Jeremy Lin.
The grand plan at that time was to move Bogi to the starting lineup and let this big guard take over for Bogi in the 2nd unit. It was a failure on both front - Bogi didn't look good as a starter and Burks was terrible in the Bogi role. Watching Burks run the pick n roll is like watching Jimmer run the pick n roll. To be fair, there is nothing in Burks' past that would suggest he can play like Bogi; and it was an experiment doom to fail. Nonetheless, after Bogi goes back to the second unit, Burks essentially disappeared.
I can't imagine the Kings would bring him back and I highly doubt a player with Burks' resume would settle for being mostly probably the 4th SG in the dept chart.
.
The grand plan at that time was to move Bogi to the starting lineup and let this big guard take over for Bogi in the 2nd unit. It was a failure on both front - Bogi didn't look good as a starter and Burks was terrible in the Bogi role. Watching Burks run the pick n roll is like watching Jimmer run the pick n roll. To be fair, there is nothing in Burks' past that would suggest he can play like Bogi; and it was an experiment doom to fail. Nonetheless, after Bogi goes back to the second unit, Burks essentially disappeared.
I can't imagine the Kings would bring him back and I highly doubt a player with Burks' resume would settle for being mostly probably the 4th SG in the dept chart.
.
jcassio
Starter
He disappeared because Joerger made him disappear. I’m not saying he would have blown anyone’s socks off. I’m saying he never got the chance, and that’s different than him not performing.
Was this the grand plan, or is this why we have a new coach incoming?
beb0p
Starter
Burks got his chance. A couple games and a few possessions was all it takes for one to see he wasn't going to bring what the Kings needed. Now, that doesn't mean he's a bad player, I personally think he'd thrive in a different system, but he was a bad fit.
It's possible the new Kings coach sees a use for him in the new scheme, whatever that is. But until then, the Kings are better off looking for someone who actually fit what they want from that position - playmaking and shooting; assuming the new coach will keep the same game plan.
beb0p
Starter
I don't know what your point is.
I think the grand plan was clearing the 3 spot for Barnes, not to start Bogs.
beb0p
Starter
The Kings put Barnes at the 4 and Bogi at the 3.
Then they tried to have Burks played the Bogi role in the 2nd unit.
Neither plan worked out.
Telemachus
Starter
I think that was the point. Vlade's plan differed from Joeger's. Joeger had complained for 2 years that they were undersized every night. Vlade brings in a full sized SF. Joeger puts Barnes at the 4 & Bogie at the 3 making them undersized at both positions.
Yes. That's what happened. You had said that was the grand plan by the trades made. My suggestion is that wasn't Vlade's vision at all and is part of the reason why Joerger is out of a job.
Sac.1989
Starter
I know. In any case his value has diminished if that is the measure we are evaluating him against given he hasnt been playing.
My point is more so that he was of value to us/vlade held him in a positive regard given he shipped out shump for him.
I think that was more of doing a solid for a guy who really helped with this young core and wouldn't have much of a role going forward. Move him to a contending team where he could hopefully contribute at the end of a contract year.
In hindsight, with our coach deciding to use his replacement at a completely different position, the move looks really poor. But I really think Burks was brought here more as a deep bench/utility guy, not a guy who was supposed to contribute significantly in the second unit.
I'm ambivalent on bringing him back, but I think he got misplayed while here.
Sac.1989
Starter
That could have absolutely been the case. I see it as we brought him here with a purpose, that being to help us push for the playoffs. It didnt work out. I agree he got misplayed while here. More than likely sails off into the sunset but i guess it will come down to how much value Vlade initially saw in him and if that is still the case given his trial so to speak didnt really go as planned
If the idea was for Barnes to play 30+ at the 3; Buddy play 30+ at the 2; and Bogs to be the primary relief for both there was never going to be more than situational lineups and spot minutes for Burks.
Ozymandias
All-Star
would LOVE to see Burks back. He is a legit rotation player, just needs some leeway, and minutes...
It doesnt seem he and Bogdan mesh well though... who knows...
The price could be right. He is an uptempo player for sure. What glimpses we got to see last season really wasn't much of a proper showcase.
It doesnt seem he and Bogdan mesh well though... who knows...
The price could be right. He is an uptempo player for sure. What glimpses we got to see last season really wasn't much of a proper showcase.
Telemachus
Starter
Other than a couple of games, they used him in the role of stand at the 3pt line to spread the floor. That doesn't play to any of his strengths.
beb0p
Starter
I think the facts would disagree with your point. The Kings tried to sign Zach Lavine in the off season to form a Fox/Lavine/Bogi lineup. The FO have been chasing that big guard for a while. After they got Burks, they promptly moved Bogi to the 3. They even bypassed Doncic in the draft (not saying it was the right/wrong call. Just stating a fact). Playing Bogi at the 3 was the plan all along, but they just didn't have anyone to fill his shoes in the 2nd unit.
You can blame it all on Joeger, but I just don't think that Lavine contract and drafting of Bagley over Doncic would get done without blessing from Divac. Same with the Burks trade. I don't think Burks would be here if Divac didn't want him and the only reasonable reason for him to be here was to take over for Bogi in the 2nd unit.
I highly doubt the FO just woke up one day and went, "I just thought of a an idea, let's make Bogi a starting 3!" The Lavine signing cofirms that they've been thinking about that move since the summer of 2018.
Last edited:
Based on this theory, what the hell happens to Buddy? And why did Bogi not get major minutes at the 3 when two tradeable players were there? Also as ludicrous as Vlade's assertion that Bags can play at the 3 is, I think it showed they clearly wanted to go big and not small with the players they drafted.
Regardless of the Lavine attempt, a fair amount of time passed since then. It seemed incredibly clear to everyone at the time the Barnes trade went down that we had a big weakness at the 3 spot and Barnes was brought in to fill that gap.
What followed sure was different than what everyone was expecting. The logical answer being that the coach who did not execute the FO's vision is no longer the coach.
If what you're suggesting is true the entire FO is incompetent and needs to be fired. I don't think that's the case though.
Agree with all you said. My 1 cent, Barnes did an good job assigning him to guard other teams best scorers but going forward I question if paying him [as some project] 25 million when the team might be ahead looking to sign a much better scorer for the 3 for that kind of money, just saying.
beb0p
Starter
Barnes was brought in to matchup with the big wing players that other teams threw at us, for which we had few answers aside from Justin Jackson's occasional shine. It's not necessary that he plays the 3, Barnes can play the 4 and still matchup with a long athletic wing in this era of positionless basketball. In fact, nowadays you'll find many long athletic wings playing the 4. The point being that someone highup in the Kings' rank thought it was a good idea to play Bogi as a starter in a three guards lineup.
I don't understand why you said the logical answer is that Joeger was fired because he didn't execute the FO's vision. The reportings that I read said he was fired for personality clash with the FO - power dynamic stuff and not related to the what happened on the court. In fact, during the first half of the season Divac said Joeger was doing a great job with the execution and the style of basketball. If there is a report that said he was fired for "not executing the FO's vision", I'd like to read about it.
At any rate, if Zavine had gone to the Kings, Hield would obviously come off the bench like he did the season prior. The thing is, he could be subbed for anyone one of Fox/Lavine/Bogi and the Kings can still keep the 3 guard offense with at least two ball handlers. Not that I am in favor of this idea.
Why would the FO be incompetent for thinking a three guard lineup would be potent? That is essentially what the Rockets have been doing. Their starting SF is 6'3" Eric Gordon. Again, not that I'm in favor of it, but it is not a dumb idea at all if executed right.
.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
