Kings beat Mavericks!

#31
Willie is starting to figure out rebounding. He got 16 last night. I mentioned about a week a go he should be able to snag 10-12 a game and get 20 sometimes. The best rebounder on the team almost always starts.
The Kings are very competitive against average teams missing a few veterans. That is not a slight. It is stating the facts. It is a starting place with a lot of room to get better. Coach J is worth keeping around. I wish I had a coach that actually said something constructive every day. He is a good fit for young players struggling to gain confidence. He has already made a difference in the careers of several players like Ben and Willie.
 
#33
Willie is starting to figure out rebounding. He got 16 last night. I mentioned about a week a go he should be able to snag 10-12 a game and get 20 sometimes. The best rebounder on the team almost always starts.
The Kings are very competitive against average teams missing a few veterans. That is not a slight. It is stating the facts. It is a starting place with a lot of room to get better. Coach J is worth keeping around. I wish I had a coach that actually said something constructive every day. He is a good fit for young players struggling to gain confidence. He has already made a difference in the careers of several players like Ben and Willie.
It's really nice to see Willie getting aggressive on the boards.
We are competitive against teams more concerned about the draft pick than to win games when we play our young guys. Nothing wrong with that. Obviously our rookies and young players need every opportunity to learn.
The amount of easy mistakes by our players is a point of concern nontheless. Wether it's Papa bringing the ball down and taking forever to gather, making unnecessary dribble moves or getting into the way of our penetrating guards, Hield getting trapped due to lack of court vision or Skal fumbling balls, trying too much and throwing bad passes - it's all part of the learning process.
In 2-3 years we will have a pretty good idea, what we have in those players.
So far I'm hoping for a few solid rotation players. But maybe that's just my pessimism working at his best.

I really wonder, how Papa develops going forward. He just looks so slow out there. Every move seems to be in slow motion. He has a nice soft touch and plays big, but will he ever be able to develop something like a quick spin over the right shoulder?
 
#34
It's really nice to see Willie getting aggressive on the boards.
We are competitive against teams more concerned about the draft pick than to win games when we play our young guys. Nothing wrong with that. Obviously our rookies and young players need every opportunity to learn.
The amount of easy mistakes by our players is a point of concern nontheless. Wether it's Papa bringing the ball down and taking forever to gather, making unnecessary dribble moves or getting into the way of our penetrating guards, Hield getting trapped due to lack of court vision or Skal fumbling balls, trying too much and throwing bad passes - it's all part of the learning process.
In 2-3 years we will have a pretty good idea, what we have in those players.
So far I'm hoping for a few solid rotation players. But maybe that's just my pessimism working at his best.

I really wonder, how Papa develops going forward. He just looks so slow out there. Every move seems to be in slow motion. He has a nice soft touch and plays big, but will he ever be able to develop something like a quick spin over the right shoulder?
He's 19. Rookies will have time to develop, there's no pressure to "win" anymore. This is a true rebuild, I'm pretty sure these dudes are going to develop. Everything about Sacramento Kings basketball from 2000-2017 was about trying to "win," or "re-tool." This is a true rebuild. This is exciting, not Cuz who whined and put up empty stats, destroying team court and game-time morale.
 
#35
How about building a roster with a goal in mind? You want playoffs? You build a roster for it. You want to tank? You build a roster for it. You do this before the season in a controlled and thoughtful manner and not with blind actionism right at the deadline, by trading your star player but refusing to trade any of the left over vets even those with expiring contracts.
This is one of the most difficult to swallow seasons for me as a Kings fan and I'm used to drama and disappointment. But the likely fact, that we come out of this mess only with two picks around #7-10 and once again have to go BPA with almost no chance for any of the consensus potential star players in the draft, is just frustrating beyond believe.
Once again it's most likely the C or D solution for the Kings in the draft.
I am understanding of your frustration though I don't share it. Remember the ntent, the best player choices in the draft go to the worst teams. We are not one of the six worst teams. We will get shots at the best players we deserve.
 

gunks

Hall of Famer
#36
But it wasn't just Ben though. Our three young bigs had really really nice games and Buddy gave us his usual 15 points. You can try tanking but when the "sucky" guys you put out there to lose end up playing well, there's only so much you can do.
I agree, and I think I said something similar after the Wolves win.

It's just that I cant really get excited about beating a d-league team. At least the Wolves played Towns, Wiggins, and Rubio.
 
#37
I've always disliked the calls for tanking, prefering that we make trades for future assets, rest our veterans, and develop the youngsters - without just throwing them in the fire. Granted, this isn't good enough if your goal is to deeply tank and choose a top 3 draft pick who will take you to the promised land. So I wanted to share something...
Look at the top 3 draft picks for the last 7 years (below). In hindsight, only one of the three (on average) looks to be a justified top 3 pick. If you expand from the top 3 to the top 5, or to the top 10, the lesson is the same. Only about 1 in 3 high draft picks look justified with the benefit of hindsight. If you expand back beyond 2010, the same lesson is there, too. So the teams follow these prospects and (hopefully) make informed choices (draft picks). But the odds of a high pick being justified are not good! Doesn't mean it's a total crap shoot, but it does mean that there's a significant element of chance. In other words, I see no reason to assume that having a top 3 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 6 draft pick. And I see no reason to assume that having a top 6 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 9 draft pick. Yes, the chances are better, but not significantly better. I think you can significantly affect your odds if you allow uninformed people to influence the decision. Remember Jimmer? T-Rob? Unfortunately, the Kings have made their share of bad draft decisions. But that was then and this is now.

2016:
Ben Simmons, 76ers
Brandon Ingram, Lakers
Jaylen Brown, Celtics
Too early to tell if any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2015:
Karl-Anthony Towns, Wolves
D'Angelo Russell, Lakers
Jahlil Okafor, 76ers
May be too early to tell, but right now it looks like only KAT should have been in the top 3.

2014:
Andrew Wiggins, Cavs (then to Wolves in the Kevin Love deal)
Jabari Parker, Bucks
Joel Embiid, 76ers
At this point, only 1 or 2 of the 3 should have been in the top 3 (depending on your optimism for Embiid's health).

2013:
Anthony Bennett, Cavs
Victor Oladipo, Magic (then to Thunder in the Serge Ibaka deal)
Otto Porter, Wizards
Oladipo and Porter are good players with fine upsides, but I'm not sure that any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2012:
Anthony Davis, New Orleans
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Bobcats/Hornets (then to ...)
Bradley Beal, Wizards
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3, although Beal's star is rising.

2011:
Kyrie Irving, Cavs
Derrick Williams, Wolves (who cares the journey from there)
Enes Kanter, Jazz (then to Thunder)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3.

2010:
John Wall, Wizards
Evan Turner, 76ers (then to Pacers, Celtics, Blazers)
Derrick Favors, Nets (then to Jazz)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3. Favors is not a bad player, but a top 3?
 
#41
I've always disliked the calls for tanking, prefering that we make trades for future assets, rest our veterans, and develop the youngsters - without just throwing them in the fire. Granted, this isn't good enough if your goal is to deeply tank and choose a top 3 draft pick who will take you to the promised land. So I wanted to share something...
Look at the top 3 draft picks for the last 7 years (below). In hindsight, only one of the three (on average) looks to be a justified top 3 pick. If you expand from the top 3 to the top 5, or to the top 10, the lesson is the same. Only about 1 in 3 high draft picks look justified with the benefit of hindsight. If you expand back beyond 2010, the same lesson is there, too. So the teams follow these prospects and (hopefully) make informed choices (draft picks). But the odds of a high pick being justified are not good! Doesn't mean it's a total crap shoot, but it does mean that there's a significant element of chance. In other words, I see no reason to assume that having a top 3 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 6 draft pick. And I see no reason to assume that having a top 6 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 9 draft pick. Yes, the chances are better, but not significantly better. I think you can significantly affect your odds if you allow uninformed people to influence the decision. Remember Jimmer? T-Rob? Unfortunately, the Kings have made their share of bad draft decisions. But that was then and this is now.

2016:
Ben Simmons, 76ers
Brandon Ingram, Lakers
Jaylen Brown, Celtics
Too early to tell if any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2015:
Karl-Anthony Towns, Wolves
D'Angelo Russell, Lakers
Jahlil Okafor, 76ers
May be too early to tell, but right now it looks like only KAT should have been in the top 3.

2014:
Andrew Wiggins, Cavs (then to Wolves in the Kevin Love deal)
Jabari Parker, Bucks
Joel Embiid, 76ers
At this point, only 1 or 2 of the 3 should have been in the top 3 (depending on your optimism for Embiid's health).

2013:
Anthony Bennett, Cavs
Victor Oladipo, Magic (then to Thunder in the Serge Ibaka deal)
Otto Porter, Wizards
Oladipo and Porter are good players with fine upsides, but I'm not sure that any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2012:
Anthony Davis, New Orleans
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Bobcats/Hornets (then to ...)
Bradley Beal, Wizards
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3, although Beal's star is rising.

2011:
Kyrie Irving, Cavs
Derrick Williams, Wolves (who cares the journey from there)
Enes Kanter, Jazz (then to Thunder)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3.

2010:
John Wall, Wizards
Evan Turner, 76ers (then to Pacers, Celtics, Blazers)
Derrick Favors, Nets (then to Jazz)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3. Favors is not a bad player, but a top 3?
In a vacuum, it's tough to say, but maybe you should look at picks 4-6 in each draft and see how they compare, THEN decide whether or not they deserve to be top 3 picks.

Like (random choice) 2013:

Bennett
Oladipo
Porter
Zeller
Len
Noel
McLemore
Caldwell-Pope
Burke
McCollum

Have any of these guys played like top 3 picks? Pick #15, Antetokounmpo, is probably the only one who I think has. When you pick top 3, you're hoping to find a game-changer. He's probably closest to it.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#42
Wasn't he singing a different tune last week?
No, not at all. He still thinks we should be tanking, but he blames the front office for the snafu and not the players or the coaches. It's consistent although worded differently than usual.
 
#44
Willie is starting to figure out rebounding. He got 16 last night. I mentioned about a week a go he should be able to snag 10-12 a game and get 20 sometimes. The best rebounder on the team almost always starts.
The Kings are very competitive against average teams missing a few veterans. That is not a slight. It is stating the facts. It is a starting place with a lot of room to get better. Coach J is worth keeping around. I wish I had a coach that actually said something constructive every day. He is a good fit for young players struggling to gain confidence. He has already made a difference in the careers of several players like Ben and Willie.
Please support your claim that coach has made a positive impact on ben's career.
 
#46
If I'd watched this at home I could have laughed at the ineptness and been encouraged by the development of the kids. However, I had tickets to this game and, because my wife couldn't go at the last minute, I had 2 full-price tickets for this train wreck. I was disgusted at half time and slightly less cranky at the end.
 
#47
Honestly I think you are missing the point of my post. ;)
What bothers me is the lack of foresight and the lack of a cohesive long term strategy (and the negotiating of trades, but that's a moot point now). And that even when we make a strategy change mid season, we don't go all in on our new strategy.
We went into the season without really commiting to one strategy. We didn't trade Cousins to catalyze a full scale rebuild, despite the fact, that there were some really good arguments for starting over, like you and a few other posters pointed out at that time. We didn't get Cousins enough help and didn't fix the obvious weaknesses of our roster to really make a serious playoff push.
It was a little bit of both. That's why we are once again looking at a draft without the hope for top picks and are now no longer able to hope for a good complimetary player for DMC to bring us to the Playoffs next year.

Of course we have to keep the 76ers trade in mind. But the GM, who negotiated that trade, is still in charge, so I don't feel like giving him a pass for the strategy of the current season just because he pretty much handcuffed himself earlier.
To turn it around, we finally need to go all in on something and be patient and smart. We can't keep changing our approach twice every season and expect good results.
This all goes without saying though. We've hashed Vlade's incompetence into the ground with dealing with Cousins and not having anything resembling a clear goal in mind. Even despite all his mistakes though, we have a really great coach and already a promising young core that's playing well.

As Tetsu said, there's nothing else we can really do to "tank" harder than we did in this Mavericks game. Suited up only 2 vets to fill a roster and played the young guys most of the game. And the answer is certainly not sitting the young guys so we suck even harder.
 
#48
If I'd watched this at home I could have laughed at the ineptness and been encouraged by the development of the kids. However, I had tickets to this game and, because my wife couldn't go at the last minute, I had 2 full-price tickets for this train wreck. I was disgusted at half time and slightly less cranky at the end.
Well I bet you're really disappointed that we didn't suck even more as some others wish right? :p
 
#49
I've always disliked the calls for tanking, prefering that we make trades for future assets, rest our veterans, and develop the youngsters - without just throwing them in the fire. Granted, this isn't good enough if your goal is to deeply tank and choose a top 3 draft pick who will take you to the promised land. So I wanted to share something...
Look at the top 3 draft picks for the last 7 years (below). In hindsight, only one of the three (on average) looks to be a justified top 3 pick. If you expand from the top 3 to the top 5, or to the top 10, the lesson is the same. Only about 1 in 3 high draft picks look justified with the benefit of hindsight. If you expand back beyond 2010, the same lesson is there, too. So the teams follow these prospects and (hopefully) make informed choices (draft picks). But the odds of a high pick being justified are not good! Doesn't mean it's a total crap shoot, but it does mean that there's a significant element of chance. In other words, I see no reason to assume that having a top 3 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 6 draft pick. And I see no reason to assume that having a top 6 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 9 draft pick. Yes, the chances are better, but not significantly better. I think you can significantly affect your odds if you allow uninformed people to influence the decision. Remember Jimmer? T-Rob? Unfortunately, the Kings have made their share of bad draft decisions. But that was then and this is now.

2016:
Ben Simmons, 76ers
Brandon Ingram, Lakers
Jaylen Brown, Celtics
Too early to tell if any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2015:
Karl-Anthony Towns, Wolves
D'Angelo Russell, Lakers
Jahlil Okafor, 76ers
May be too early to tell, but right now it looks like only KAT should have been in the top 3.

2014:
Andrew Wiggins, Cavs (then to Wolves in the Kevin Love deal)
Jabari Parker, Bucks
Joel Embiid, 76ers
At this point, only 1 or 2 of the 3 should have been in the top 3 (depending on your optimism for Embiid's health).

2013:
Anthony Bennett, Cavs
Victor Oladipo, Magic (then to Thunder in the Serge Ibaka deal)
Otto Porter, Wizards
Oladipo and Porter are good players with fine upsides, but I'm not sure that any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2012:
Anthony Davis, New Orleans
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Bobcats/Hornets (then to ...)
Bradley Beal, Wizards
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3, although Beal's star is rising.

2011:
Kyrie Irving, Cavs
Derrick Williams, Wolves (who cares the journey from there)
Enes Kanter, Jazz (then to Thunder)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3.

2010:
John Wall, Wizards
Evan Turner, 76ers (then to Pacers, Celtics, Blazers)
Derrick Favors, Nets (then to Jazz)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3. Favors is not a bad player, but a top 3?
Wow! Thanks for that. Seeing it written on the screen really puts things in perspective.
 
#50
I've always disliked the calls for tanking, prefering that we make trades for future assets, rest our veterans, and develop the youngsters - without just throwing them in the fire. Granted, this isn't good enough if your goal is to deeply tank and choose a top 3 draft pick who will take you to the promised land. So I wanted to share something...
Look at the top 3 draft picks for the last 7 years (below). In hindsight, only one of the three (on average) looks to be a justified top 3 pick. If you expand from the top 3 to the top 5, or to the top 10, the lesson is the same. Only about 1 in 3 high draft picks look justified with the benefit of hindsight. If you expand back beyond 2010, the same lesson is there, too. So the teams follow these prospects and (hopefully) make informed choices (draft picks). But the odds of a high pick being justified are not good! Doesn't mean it's a total crap shoot, but it does mean that there's a significant element of chance. In other words, I see no reason to assume that having a top 3 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 6 draft pick. And I see no reason to assume that having a top 6 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 9 draft pick. Yes, the chances are better, but not significantly better. I think you can significantly affect your odds if you allow uninformed people to influence the decision. Remember Jimmer? T-Rob? Unfortunately, the Kings have made their share of bad draft decisions. But that was then and this is now.

2016:
Ben Simmons, 76ers
Brandon Ingram, Lakers
Jaylen Brown, Celtics
Too early to tell if any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2015:
Karl-Anthony Towns, Wolves
D'Angelo Russell, Lakers
Jahlil Okafor, 76ers
May be too early to tell, but right now it looks like only KAT should have been in the top 3.

2014:
Andrew Wiggins, Cavs (then to Wolves in the Kevin Love deal)
Jabari Parker, Bucks
Joel Embiid, 76ers
At this point, only 1 or 2 of the 3 should have been in the top 3 (depending on your optimism for Embiid's health).

2013:
Anthony Bennett, Cavs
Victor Oladipo, Magic (then to Thunder in the Serge Ibaka deal)
Otto Porter, Wizards
Oladipo and Porter are good players with fine upsides, but I'm not sure that any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2012:
Anthony Davis, New Orleans
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Bobcats/Hornets (then to ...)
Bradley Beal, Wizards
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3, although Beal's star is rising.

2011:
Kyrie Irving, Cavs
Derrick Williams, Wolves (who cares the journey from there)
Enes Kanter, Jazz (then to Thunder)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3.

2010:
John Wall, Wizards
Evan Turner, 76ers (then to Pacers, Celtics, Blazers)
Derrick Favors, Nets (then to Jazz)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3. Favors is not a bad player, but a top 3?
The thing about picking top 3 is that the GMs have the pressure to try and hit the "home run" with those picks.

A lot of times GMs takes a big swing on a player with "higher upside" that may not be polished, but projects to be a future star and a lot of the times they just don't pan out.

Sometimes when you are picking lower, there is less pressure to pick that "home run" player, so you can take the player that you like more and is more polished. When they come in better prepared, they wind up being better than the "upside" player taken top 3. There is also less pressure on the player when they are picked lower.
 
Last edited:
#51
I've always disliked the calls for tanking, prefering that we make trades for future assets, rest our veterans, and develop the youngsters - without just throwing them in the fire. Granted, this isn't good enough if your goal is to deeply tank and choose a top 3 draft pick who will take you to the promised land. So I wanted to share something...
Look at the top 3 draft picks for the last 7 years (below). In hindsight, only one of the three (on average) looks to be a justified top 3 pick. If you expand from the top 3 to the top 5, or to the top 10, the lesson is the same. Only about 1 in 3 high draft picks look justified with the benefit of hindsight. If you expand back beyond 2010, the same lesson is there, too. So the teams follow these prospects and (hopefully) make informed choices (draft picks). But the odds of a high pick being justified are not good! Doesn't mean it's a total crap shoot, but it does mean that there's a significant element of chance. In other words, I see no reason to assume that having a top 3 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 6 draft pick. And I see no reason to assume that having a top 6 draft pick is significantly better than having a top 9 draft pick. Yes, the chances are better, but not significantly better. I think you can significantly affect your odds if you allow uninformed people to influence the decision. Remember Jimmer? T-Rob? Unfortunately, the Kings have made their share of bad draft decisions. But that was then and this is now.

2016:
Ben Simmons, 76ers
Brandon Ingram, Lakers
Jaylen Brown, Celtics
Too early to tell if any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2015:
Karl-Anthony Towns, Wolves
D'Angelo Russell, Lakers
Jahlil Okafor, 76ers
May be too early to tell, but right now it looks like only KAT should have been in the top 3.

2014:
Andrew Wiggins, Cavs (then to Wolves in the Kevin Love deal)
Jabari Parker, Bucks
Joel Embiid, 76ers
At this point, only 1 or 2 of the 3 should have been in the top 3 (depending on your optimism for Embiid's health).

2013:
Anthony Bennett, Cavs
Victor Oladipo, Magic (then to Thunder in the Serge Ibaka deal)
Otto Porter, Wizards
Oladipo and Porter are good players with fine upsides, but I'm not sure that any of these guys should have been in the top 3.

2012:
Anthony Davis, New Orleans
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Bobcats/Hornets (then to ...)
Bradley Beal, Wizards
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3, although Beal's star is rising.

2011:
Kyrie Irving, Cavs
Derrick Williams, Wolves (who cares the journey from there)
Enes Kanter, Jazz (then to Thunder)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3.

2010:
John Wall, Wizards
Evan Turner, 76ers (then to Pacers, Celtics, Blazers)
Derrick Favors, Nets (then to Jazz)
Only 1 of the 3 should have been in the top 3. Favors is not a bad player, but a top 3?
Really a lot of that depends on the depth and quality of the draft. For example 2013 draft cannot be compared to LeBron's draft year where you are getting multiple HoF in the top 10. First pick in some drafts get you nothing more than a solid role player at best. Remember the Mike Miller draft?

In other years you get a franchise player like LeBron, Davis and even KAT. This year by all reports is very good and even draft in the top 10 or so with one clear stand out. In drafts like this, you could end up being a bigger winner with two picks in the top 10 than #1 pick. In draft like the year that KAT and Davis were drafted you want that top pick because it guarantees you a franchise level player.

Kings need to get lucky one way or another. Either draft really well and land one mid lottery, or get lucky and get the first pick in the year where franchise level player is available at #1 as a clearly the best player in the draft (e.g. KAT or Davis or LeBron drafts)
 
#52
Please support your claim that coach has made a positive impact on ben's career.
Coach J has pointed out that Ben has had 4 coaches in 4 years and struggled with confidence. That is big right there. Ben is not my favorite player, but he has had some 20+ point games recently and shown some of the potential that caused him to be drafted so high.
 
#53
Coach J has pointed out that Ben has had 4 coaches in 4 years and struggled with confidence. That is big right there. Ben is not my favorite player, but he has had some 20+ point games recently and shown some of the potential that caused him to be drafted so high.
I've liked McClemore despite his awful mitts and dribbling - his propensity for turnovers is maddening. He shows flashes but his consistency in performance just isn't there enough. If he can be resigned on the cheap, I'd say keep him as a bench player and remain hopeful that he gains confidence somehow.