ImageImageImageImageImage

Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET

Moderators: KF10, City of Trees, codydaze

SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#41 » by SacKingZZZ » Mon Apr 2, 2018 6:58 pm

kingjawn100 wrote:Yeah...last 4 games we should play starters first half and Cooley-Sampson-Bruno-Nigel-Frank for the 2nd half

I dont know how we could go into next year saying WCS/Skal is our starting frontcourt (its the glaring weakness of the team right now). Will be interesting to see who returns/how minutes shake out if we draft a big. Rookie/WCS/Koufos/Skal/Harry. There just arent enough minutes for 5 guys who are nearly 7 feet tall.



It depends on what you need out of your front court. The Kings clearly have their main talent on the wing so having players like Kosta Koufos, Jack Cooley, Hayes, Sampson, etc. makes more sense fit wise. I agree about too many guys not really being able to slide into the wing spot. They have a bunch of bigs that physically are more likely big PF's in a league where that isn't much of a benefit. I know it's the end of the year but I'm starting to not like what I'm seeing out of Willie defensively. He's not doing a whole lot on that end the last few games and he's doing way too much on the other.

Trading down and getting a pick in 2019 in the process might be the best option. I think the Kings are farther ahead than many of the other rebuilding squads due to age and experience but in case the team just doesn't work out next year for whatever reason it would be nice to have a shot next year.
User avatar
City of Trees
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 15,798
And1: 5,462
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#42 » by City of Trees » Mon Apr 2, 2018 7:00 pm

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:
Markannen, Booker, Jackson, Smith aren’t playing down the stretch.. Its a judgement call

And none of those teams can match what the Kings are brewing.

Now if it was Temple, ect winning then I'm right thete with you.. But its our core. We are developing who we have.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
Typically I agree but with 4 games left and seeding so tight, we should definitely be playing Cooley sampson Nigel and bruno.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


But that is what Joerger did last night. Jackson and Nigel Hayes had the 4th and 5th most minutes played last night. Nigel had 21 minutes Sampson and Cooley played 16-17 min each.

Only difference is VC had 12 min... Maybe give those min to Bruno but VC was scoreless last night, so....




Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#43 » by LightTheBeam » Mon Apr 2, 2018 7:04 pm

City of Trees wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:And none of those teams can match what the Kings are brewing.

Now if it was Temple, ect winning then I'm right thete with you.. But its our core. We are developing who we have.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
Typically I agree but with 4 games left and seeding so tight, we should definitely be playing Cooley sampson Nigel and bruno.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


But that is what Joerger did last night. Jackson and Nigel Hayes had the 4th and 5th most minutes played last night. Nigel had 21 minutes Sampson and Cooley played 16-17 min each.

Only difference is VC had 12 min... Maybe give those min to Bruno but VC was scoreless last night, so....




Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#44 » by SacKingZZZ » Mon Apr 2, 2018 7:15 pm

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:Typically I agree but with 4 games left and seeding so tight, we should definitely be playing Cooley sampson Nigel and bruno.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


But that is what Joerger did last night. Jackson and Nigel Hayes had the 4th and 5th most minutes played last night. Nigel had 21 minutes Sampson and Cooley played 16-17 min each.

Only difference is VC had 12 min... Maybe give those min to Bruno but VC was scoreless last night, so....




Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


The Kings already made their bed though. They didn't go the tank/asset build route for this year, they went with a longer term development route designed specifically for the players they have already so that means they'd do more damage than good by holding them out. They need that experience together because they are most likely the main core of talent they move forward with unless they get lucky in the lottery, free agency, or in a trade. I do agree Bruno should be getting minutes over someone like Carter but with Nigel Hayes getting signed that might be the end of the line for Bruno. Hayes is a much better fit for what Dave Joerger is looking for out of his bigs and according to Kayte in the post game after his debut he's been on the Kings radar all year.
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:3 

Post#45 » by LightTheBeam » Mon Apr 2, 2018 7:35 pm

SacKingZZZ wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
But that is what Joerger did last night. Jackson and Nigel Hayes had the 4th and 5th most minutes played last night. Nigel had 21 minutes Sampson and Cooley played 16-17 min each.

Only difference is VC had 12 min... Maybe give those min to Bruno but VC was scoreless last night, so....




Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


The Kings already made their bed though. They didn't go the tank/asset build route for this year, they went with a longer term development route designed specifically for the players they have already so that means they'd do more damage than good by holding them out. They need that experience together because they are most likely the main core of talent they move forward with unless they get lucky in the lottery, free agency, or in a trade. I do agree Bruno should be getting minutes over someone like Carter but with Nigel Hayes getting signed that might be the end of the line for Bruno. Hayes is a much better fit for what Dave Joerger is looking for out of his bigs and according to Kayte in the post game after his debut he's been on the Kings radar all year.
Like I said typically I'd agree.

And I was one who with 20 games left was rooting for a win with the young kids.

But with 5 games left, majority of teams resting players, I don't see the same benefit as I did 15 games ago. The negatives out weight the benefit in this case scenario. The difference between getting Michael porter or Miles Bridges will be a huge difference 3 years from now.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]
kingjawn100
Senior
Posts: 624
And1: 106
Joined: May 27, 2017

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#46 » by kingjawn100 » Mon Apr 2, 2018 7:37 pm

SacKingZZZ wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
But that is what Joerger did last night. Jackson and Nigel Hayes had the 4th and 5th most minutes played last night. Nigel had 21 minutes Sampson and Cooley played 16-17 min each.

Only difference is VC had 12 min... Maybe give those min to Bruno but VC was scoreless last night, so....




Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


The Kings already made their bed though. They didn't go the tank/asset build route for this year, they went with a longer term development route designed specifically for the players they have already so that means they'd do more damage than good by holding them out. They need that experience together because they are most likely the main core of talent they move forward with unless they get lucky in the lottery, free agency, or in a trade. I do agree Bruno should be getting minutes over someone like Carter but with Nigel Hayes getting signed that might be the end of the line for Bruno. Hayes is a much better fit for what Dave Joerger is looking for out of his bigs and according to Kayte in the post game after his debut he's been on the Kings radar all year.


See i just don't buy the argument of tank OR develop. The Kings are bad enough to pick high lottery just by giving their young talented players the majority of the minutes all season. If they literally tank 4-5 games meaning..sitting their best players in the second half of 4-5 games they could potentially have a draft slot that is 3-4 slots higher. If Buddy Hield literally didn't play 1 minute the next 4 games he would likely come into next season the exact same player as if he played 40 minutes a nite the next 4 games. If it's a cohesion thing the guys should get together for a week in July and play pick-up games.
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:3 

Post#47 » by LightTheBeam » Mon Apr 2, 2018 7:41 pm

kingjawn100 wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


The Kings already made their bed though. They didn't go the tank/asset build route for this year, they went with a longer term development route designed specifically for the players they have already so that means they'd do more damage than good by holding them out. They need that experience together because they are most likely the main core of talent they move forward with unless they get lucky in the lottery, free agency, or in a trade. I do agree Bruno should be getting minutes over someone like Carter but with Nigel Hayes getting signed that might be the end of the line for Bruno. Hayes is a much better fit for what Dave Joerger is looking for out of his bigs and according to Kayte in the post game after his debut he's been on the Kings radar all year.


See i just don't buy the argument of tank OR develop. The Kings are bad enough to pick high lottery just by giving their young talented players the majority of the minutes all season. If they literally tank 4-5 games meaning..sitting their best players in the second half of 4-5 games they could potentially have a draft slot that is 3-4 slots higher. If Buddy Hield literally didn't play 1 minute the next 4 games he would likely come into next season the exact same player as if he played 40 minutes a nite the next 4 games. If it's a cohesion thing the guys should get together for a week in July and play pick-up games.
Well said.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]
User avatar
RIPskaterdude
RealGM
Posts: 91,768
And1: 36,493
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
   

Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#48 » by RIPskaterdude » Mon Apr 2, 2018 8:04 pm

Lakers **** us again, 16 years later
Image
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#49 » by SacKingZZZ » Mon Apr 2, 2018 8:15 pm

kingjawn100 wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


The Kings already made their bed though. They didn't go the tank/asset build route for this year, they went with a longer term development route designed specifically for the players they have already so that means they'd do more damage than good by holding them out. They need that experience together because they are most likely the main core of talent they move forward with unless they get lucky in the lottery, free agency, or in a trade. I do agree Bruno should be getting minutes over someone like Carter but with Nigel Hayes getting signed that might be the end of the line for Bruno. Hayes is a much better fit for what Dave Joerger is looking for out of his bigs and according to Kayte in the post game after his debut he's been on the Kings radar all year.


See i just don't buy the argument of tank OR develop. The Kings are bad enough to pick high lottery just by giving their young talented players the majority of the minutes all season. If they literally tank 4-5 games meaning..sitting their best players in the second half of 4-5 games they could potentially have a draft slot that is 3-4 slots higher. If Buddy Hield literally didn't play 1 minute the next 4 games he would likely come into next season the exact same player as if he played 40 minutes a nite the next 4 games. If it's a cohesion thing the guys should get together for a week in July and play pick-up games.



Perhaps, but they are building on the positive vibes theory where they all head into the summer with something to build off of. That and they are hopefully gaining more insight to players that didn't get a full showing all year long in many ways. I'm personally the type who thinks asset management is probably more important than over focusing on player and team development at this stage considering you don't know what your team will even look like in a few years but it is what it is. On the other side is the potential that breakout games, yes even this late, could push up some sort of value with these players. It's not likely this late in the game but possible.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:3 

Post#50 » by SacKingZZZ » Mon Apr 2, 2018 8:24 pm

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I'm talking about closing out the game. No way I want any of fox buddy or Bogdan out there.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


The Kings already made their bed though. They didn't go the tank/asset build route for this year, they went with a longer term development route designed specifically for the players they have already so that means they'd do more damage than good by holding them out. They need that experience together because they are most likely the main core of talent they move forward with unless they get lucky in the lottery, free agency, or in a trade. I do agree Bruno should be getting minutes over someone like Carter but with Nigel Hayes getting signed that might be the end of the line for Bruno. Hayes is a much better fit for what Dave Joerger is looking for out of his bigs and according to Kayte in the post game after his debut he's been on the Kings radar all year.
Like I said typically I'd agree.

And I was one who with 20 games left was rooting for a win with the young kids.

But with 5 games left, majority of teams resting players, I don't see the same benefit as I did 15 games ago. The negatives out weight the benefit in this case scenario. The difference between getting Michael porter or Miles Bridges will be a huge difference 3 years from now.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]



Yeah the team that got Miles Bridges will be laughing at all those teams above them. 8-)

I think players like Buddy, Fox, and Bogdan showing what they can do with the team in their hands isn't at all negative regardless of the reasons surrounding it. If the Kings lose to the Suns and Grizz then they lose to them, but it's going to be hard to out tank them no matter what they do. You just just have to hope for really awful games from the Kings at that point or spiked gatorade or something. :lol:

Right now the hope should be that the Knicks win a few more and the Bulls win those tank games. The Kings will then be solidly in 7th if the Spurs and Rox don't rest.
SacSanity
Senior
Posts: 572
And1: 89
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
     

Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#51 » by SacSanity » Mon Apr 2, 2018 11:03 pm

benchmobbin02 wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I knew we were going to win. I **** hate joerger, what a joke of a coach

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


Such a weird statement when looked at realistically haha. I choked on my whiskey laughing


Why? We want to lose.
User avatar
City of Trees
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 15,798
And1: 5,462
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#52 » by City of Trees » Mon Apr 2, 2018 11:12 pm

SacSanity wrote:
benchmobbin02 wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I knew we were going to win. I **** hate joerger, what a joke of a coach

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


Such a weird statement when looked at realistically haha. I choked on my whiskey laughing


Why? We want to lose.


It's an odd statement because you called him a bad coach for winning the game.


"We want to lose" only applies to fans and maybe the front office. It doesn't mean anything to the coach or the players. So your statement, in general, is kind of ridiculous.
Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#53 » by LightTheBeam » Mon Apr 2, 2018 11:25 pm

City of Trees wrote:
SacSanity wrote:
benchmobbin02 wrote:
Such a weird statement when looked at realistically haha. I choked on my whiskey laughing


Why? We want to lose.


It's an odd statement because you called him a bad coach for winning the game.


"We want to lose" only applies to fans and maybe the front office. It doesn't mean anything to the coach or the players. So your statement, in general, is kind of ridiculous.
Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
Actually I called him a joke of a coach. And as most teams I would assume/hope our management tells him we want to lose the games. I think his pride throws that out the window when push comes to shove.

Like others said there's a reason the bulls and mavs aren't playing NBA players down the stretch.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]
User avatar
City of Trees
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 15,798
And1: 5,462
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#54 » by City of Trees » Mon Apr 2, 2018 11:30 pm

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
SacSanity wrote:
Why? We want to lose.


It's an odd statement because you called him a bad coach for winning the game.


"We want to lose" only applies to fans and maybe the front office. It doesn't mean anything to the coach or the players. So your statement, in general, is kind of ridiculous.
Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
Actually I called him a joke of a coach. And as most teams I would assume/hope our management tells him we want to lose the games. I think his pride throws that out the window when push comes to shove.

Like others said there's a reason the bulls and mavs aren't playing NBA players down the stretch.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]

So you'd rather healthy scratch Fox and Buddy for the month of March and April?

Ok. I'm done. Can't involve myself in this conversation. Im out.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#55 » by LightTheBeam » Tue Apr 3, 2018 12:18 am

City of Trees wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
It's an odd statement because you called him a bad coach for winning the game.


"We want to lose" only applies to fans and maybe the front office. It doesn't mean anything to the coach or the players. So your statement, in general, is kind of ridiculous.
Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
Actually I called him a joke of a coach. And as most teams I would assume/hope our management tells him we want to lose the games. I think his pride throws that out the window when push comes to shove.

Like others said there's a reason the bulls and mavs aren't playing NBA players down the stretch.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]

So you'd rather healthy scratch Fox and Buddy for the month of March and April?

Ok. I'm done. Can't involve myself in this conversation. Im out.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app


Come on dude... Don't be disingenuous. Last I check Markannen and DSJ are both playing, but in a close game they get benched at the end.
benchmobbin02
Veteran
Posts: 2,976
And1: 364
Joined: May 28, 2015
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#56 » by benchmobbin02 » Tue Apr 3, 2018 12:38 am

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:Actually I called him a joke of a coach. And as most teams I would assume/hope our management tells him we want to lose the games. I think his pride throws that out the window when push comes to shove.

Like others said there's a reason the bulls and mavs aren't playing NBA players down the stretch.

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]

So you'd rather healthy scratch Fox and Buddy for the month of March and April?

Ok. I'm done. Can't involve myself in this conversation. Im out.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app


Come on dude... Don't be disingenuous. Last I check Markannen and DSJ are both playing, but in a close game they get benched at the end.


Not completely true.

But as Trees said its not worth the convo.
MAKE IT MAKE SENSE!
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#57 » by LightTheBeam » Tue Apr 3, 2018 12:54 am

benchmobbin02 wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
City of Trees wrote:So you'd rather healthy scratch Fox and Buddy for the month of March and April?

Ok. I'm done. Can't involve myself in this conversation. Im out.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app


Come on dude... Don't be disingenuous. Last I check Markannen and DSJ are both playing, but in a close game they get benched at the end.


Not completely true.

But as Trees said its not worth the convo.
Na y'all right it's a forum not worth the convo. Praise the kings all is good. Joerger is the greatest coach and our team can do no wrong!

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]
User avatar
City of Trees
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 15,798
And1: 5,462
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#58 » by City of Trees » Tue Apr 3, 2018 12:58 am

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
benchmobbin02 wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
Come on dude... Don't be disingenuous. Last I check Markannen and DSJ are both playing, but in a close game they get benched at the end.


Not completely true.

But as Trees said its not worth the convo.
Na y'all right it's a forum not worth the convo. Praise the kings all is good. Joerger is the greatest coach and our team can do no wrong!

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]

Not true.

Just agree to disagree. Philosophical differences.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 16,904
And1: 10,573
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#59 » by LightTheBeam » Tue Apr 3, 2018 1:09 am

City of Trees wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
benchmobbin02 wrote:
Not completely true.

But as Trees said its not worth the convo.
Na y'all right it's a forum not worth the convo. Praise the kings all is good. Joerger is the greatest coach and our team can do no wrong!

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]

Not true.

Just agree to disagree. Philosophical differences.

Sent from my LG-H872 using RealGM mobile app


I mean dude, i'm probably one of the most optimistic Kings fans there is. I'm typically actually anti-tank because I hate to breed that type of culture. Go look at old threads, while everyone is jumping off a cliff, im happy we win behind big games from Fox, Bogie and the young guys.

The fact is, with this little games left in the season and a tight race between us the Bulls, Mavs, and Nets, I really see no incentive in winning.

We have no pick next year. This is literally time to grab a stud. I don't want to get Trey Young, Sexton and while I think both Bridges are quality players, neither projects to be a future superstar.

Fox might be that guy. I'm probably higher on Hield than most, I constantly praise him as our best defender and scorer. I love Bogdan and I repeatedly said theres no reason he cant be an absolute stud. Just go look at past threads. But the fact is we need an Ayton, Bagley, Doncic, or Porter JR. My only hope is the lottery balls bounce well for us, but judging off our last 10 years sans last year when we swapped with Philly, it never happens.
benchmobbin02
Veteran
Posts: 2,976
And1: 364
Joined: May 28, 2015
     

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Game 78: Sacramento Kings (24-53) @ Los Angeles Lakers (33-42) - 9:30 PM ET 

Post#60 » by benchmobbin02 » Tue Apr 3, 2018 1:30 am

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
benchmobbin02 wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
Come on dude... Don't be disingenuous. Last I check Markannen and DSJ are both playing, but in a close game they get benched at the end.


Not completely true.

But as Trees said its not worth the convo.
Na y'all right it's a forum not worth the convo. Praise the kings all is good. Joerger is the greatest coach and our team can do no wrong!

Sent from my [device_name] using [url]RealGM mobile app[/url]


Now who is being disingenuous...

The point is we disagree about the message to and the constant nick-picking over a game or 2 here or there when they are determining odd and not slots. We could lose all our games still end up 1 or 10. I think our coach should actually be teaching the team every chance he gets down the stretch as these are the future players that we will have to count on to play in the late game situations. I think it's important and was part of the plan going in. We have talked to death already about the player usage earlier during the year and how some didn't agree with it but none of that matters now. All the matters is the present.

But we aren't gonna convince each other which is why I said it wasn't worth the convo. Both sides have been stated.
MAKE IT MAKE SENSE!

Return to Sacramento Kings