What is up with De'Aaron Fox?

TaxMan

TaxMan

Starter
#31
#31
kb02 said:
The NBA facts that you cite or that I cite or that others cite, they're real facts. Your facts are not more factual than mine and others facts are not more factual than yours. Someone saying their facts are real facts (and thereby implying that other's facts are not) is just kinda head scratching funny.

If you want to expand the conversation to things outside of the NBA, I don't play in those arenas. Have fun and carry on.
Click to expand...
Oh, why not....

yes, some "facts" in a debate are more factual than others. To say Marvin is "almost an 18/10 guy" on last year's team as a way to dispute Fox's actual stats that were quoted, is not equivalent. Fox's real stats are actually more factual than Marvin's almost stats. Otherwise, why don't I counter and say well, Fox almost was a 30/10 guy. It holds no meaning. If you want to claim you are arguing with facts, then you actually argue with the facts, not the almost facts. However, I'm sure you know what you're doing here, so have fun and carry on.
 
steelevt

steelevt

All-Star
#32
#32
TaxMan said:
Sorry, I missed your obviously hilarious joke. If you really think all opinions are based on facts, you haven’t been living in 2021.
Click to expand...
I think anyone following the convo can comprehend the difference between stating their opinions aren’t facts but based on facts and that their opinions ARE facts…except one person. Now what I think is kinda funny is how someone can quote someone else saying “my opinions AREN’T facts” and replying “Thanks for confirming that you assume your opinions ARE facts.” o_O
 
kb02

kb02

All-Star
#33
#33
TaxMan said:
Oh, why not....

yes, some "facts" in a debate are more factual than others. To say Marvin is "almost an 18/10 guy" on last year's team as a way to dispute Fox's actual stats that were quoted, is not equivalent. Fox's real stats are actually more factual than Marvin's almost stats. Otherwise, why don't I counter and say well, Fox almost was a 30/10 guy. It holds no meaning. If you want to claim you are arguing with facts, then you actually argue with the facts, not the almost facts. However, I'm sure you know what you're doing here, so have fun and carry on.
Click to expand...
They're all factual data, are they not? We can project and normalize them and go on and on and on. And even if we did go on and on and on and on and on, it wouldn't make your facts more factual than mine. Nor would my facts be more factual that yours.

It makes sense to say you don't agree with someone's interpretation or that someone's generalization may be a bit too general, but to say someone's facts are more factual than someone else facts, well, that's funny. They're facts. Have fun and carry on.
 
kb02

kb02

All-Star
#34
#34
steelevt said:
I think anyone following the convo can comprehend the difference between stating their opinions aren’t facts but based on facts and that their opinions ARE facts…except one person. Now what I think is kinda funny is how someone can quote someone else saying “my opinions AREN’T facts” and replying “Thanks for confirming that you assume your opinions ARE facts.” o_O
Click to expand...
Re-read that and try to explain what you just wrote. It's like Fox dancing on the perimeter before he does a step back, off balanced three. 30% hit rate. I'll take the 70% miss rate.
 
TaxMan

TaxMan

Starter
#36
#36
kb02 said:
They're all factual data, are they not? We can project and normalize them and go on and on and on. And even if we did go on and on and on and on and on, it wouldn't make your facts more factual than mine. Nor would my facts be more factual that yours.

It makes sense to say you don't agree with someone's interpretation or that someone's generalization may be a bit too general, but to say someone's facts are more factual than someone else facts, well, that's funny. They're facts. Have fun and carry on.
Click to expand...
As I said, I'm sure you know what you're doing here... otherwise, anything could ALMOST be anything else. What I can't figure out is why you chose to make Marvin an almost 18/10 guy? Why not almost 20/10? Almost 25/10/5? Why not really ramp up that pace argument and talk about how Kyle Guy was almost a 10/8 guy and now look at him bouncing around the g league? Totally proves your point that the team's pace distorted Fox's numbers.

Look, I really don't care about this argument. And, frankly I'm starting to go sour on Fox given his play and what I perceive is an uninterested demeanor on the court. I wouldn't mind a trade -- if it was the right trade. I just found your line of argument dishonest, and I can tell you love to debate, so why not.
 
kb02

kb02

All-Star
#37
#37
TaxMan said:
As I said, I'm sure you know what you're doing here... otherwise, anything could ALMOST be anything else. What I can't figure out is why you chose to make Marvin an almost 18/10 guy? Why not almost 20/10? Almost 25/10/5? Why not really ramp up that pace argument and talk about how Kyle Guy was almost a 10/8 guy and now look at him bouncing around the g league? Totally proves your point that the team's pace distorted Fox's numbers.

Look, I really don't care about this argument. And, frankly I'm starting to go sour on Fox given his play and what I perceive is an uninterested demeanor on the court. I wouldn't mind a trade -- if it was the right trade. I just found your line of argument dishonest, and I can tell you love to debate, so why not.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is I really don’t care about this argument either. I decided to respond like that to KFsince85 because I didn’t want to go into a super long debate. He took a general benign statement and made a big issue out of it, because he doesn’t fall into the “most” category. With KFsince85, it’s the second time we’ve gotten into a convo revolving around issues like this where he took an issue with a generalization. Even though, in this case, most = not all. Sigh. Moving on.
 
TaxMan

TaxMan

Starter
#38
#38
kb02 said:
The funny thing is I really don’t care about this argument either. I decided to respond like that to KFsince85 because I didn’t want to go into a super long debate. He took a general benign statement and made a big issue out of it, because he doesn’t fall into the “most” category. With KFsince85, it’s the second time we’ve gotten into a convo revolving around issues like this where he took an issue with a generalization. Even though, in this case, most = not all. Sigh. Moving on.
Click to expand...
All good man. Sometimes I can’t pass up an opportunity to argue (just ask my wife).
 
G

Groovygreg

Starter
#40
#40
Fox has regressed - no question. Moreover, he is not having a positive impact on the outcome of games. From what I’ve seen, he is a non-factor or a net negative in key moments. I think the Kings need to re-assess the calculus. Every team contending for some type of post-season appearance needs at least one bona fide star and Fox ain’t it. He is the epitome of fools gold, folks.
 
R

reptilexcq2

Bench
#48
#48
Woot! said:
I think his "regression" is greatly overstated. Physically, I don't think there's anything wrong. He looks explosive to me - fast and quick. He still gets anywhere he wants to go. He's just missing more - more layups, more 10-footers, more 3-pointers. His effective FG% is down to 44% from 52% last year and he's shooting a bit less from the field and from the free throw line. So of course his scoring is a bit down.

I call that an extended shooting slump and I think he'll get over that.

My bigger concerns w/DFox are the ones that have carried over from last year: 1) his on-ball and off-ball defense are WAY too casual WAY too much of the time, often within the same game. His offseason promises about locking in defensively - and our hope that Davion's example would rub off - they haven't translated w/anything remotely approaching consistency. That's concerning.

2) As many others have noted, D'Aaron's way of "going supernova" is to dominate the ball and freelance. At his best, it's remarkable what he can do, often, playing that way. But it leaves everyone else watching for extended amounts of time and, at very least, is a waste of very good shooting talents like HB, Buddy, Tyrese, and even Richaun (in his way). IMO, this is the toughest nut to crack.
Click to expand...
I think that's a coaching problem. You have Fox dribbling doing his thing, you have Haliburton working with Holmes on pick and roll and you have Barnes doing his own thing attacking the basket. But as a team....do they play as a TEAM within the team style? No. It's more like individual niches of game style that each have within themselves. So it doesn't seem like their talents are being mesh into the team style of play but more like who is going to do their thing and then the others just standing and watch and they keep rotating to their own skills. Maybe it's the reason why it isn't working because they're not running a team style of game play. It is similar to the Lakers with all their stars just watching who is going to do their own individual thing and then everybody else just watching. There is no team concept game plan (that's why it failed). If you watch the Warriors, they play within the team concept and each one of them don't just stand and watch a specific player doing their own thing.
 
fansinceday1

fansinceday1

Starter
#53
#53
Just saw fox and his post game press conference. Wow. Either that dude just doesn’t give a damn or he’s trying to get himself traded. Seriously! Considering how bad the kings are, THAT was not a good look at all. If I was paying $40 to get COVID tested and then paying for tickets to watch that trash, I’d be pretty torqued off. I checked out years ago so it doesn’t personally bother me anymore. I have league pass and I’ve been watching some outstanding basketball all season. But for people who live and die with this team, wow. Your “best player” has completely checked out and you guys schedule is getting so much harder. This has the potential to get so much worse. Wow.
That’s just my opinion of course.
 
Last edited:
Warhawk

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#54
#54
Joshoua said:
Is this the new Bagley “he hasn’t played enough games he’s still a rookie excuse”
Click to expand...
Only if you don't understand some of the possible long-term COVID effects. And we aren't going to go there in this thread (fair warning). But Long COVID is a reality for some. Not saying it is for Fox, but it isn't out of the question, either.

But that's the problem for us here - we don't have enough info to go off of with Fox this season so we are always just guessing....
 
M

mrlaze

Bench
#57
#57
It kinda sounds like he was taking shots at everyone. But I still don't get the change. Seems more frustrated than checked out to me. But it happened on an upswing... it's really wierd.
 
MizzouKing

MizzouKing

Starter
#58
#58
I've wondered if there are some mental health challenges going on, problems in his personal life, or some combination of both. That charismatic kid is in there somewhere, but he seems overwhelmed and (at least partly) checked out. I do think he feels he's in a situation he doesn't like and can't do much about, and its logical to assume that part of that points to Kings coaching and leadership. I wish Doug could share what he knows.
 
itzcoatl

itzcoatl

Bench
#59
#59
MizzouKing said:
I've wondered if there are some mental health challenges going on, problems in his personal life, or some combination of both. That charismatic kid is in there somewhere, but he seems overwhelmed and (at least partly) checked out. I do think he feels he's in a situation he doesn't like and can't do much about, and its logical to assume that part of that points to Kings coaching and leadership. I wish Doug could share what he knows.
Click to expand...
Man. The guy has a a couple frustrated interviews and now we are speculating that he has mental health problems. Geeez. Guys. Let’s get a grip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.