Post-Mortem: 2021-22 Sacramento Kings

[falcolombardi]

i dont follow kings, how good/how much potential do fox and haliburton have?

reading you guys it seems like haliburton has much higher ceiling than fox?

Fox is in his 5th year now, on a max deal, and has continually been a volume scorer on below league-average efficiency who isn't a great passer and generally has a negative On/Off. I don't think it was so much that Haliburton was perceived to have a higher ceiling than Fox was once perceived, but it seems likely that it was a mistake to treat Fox as a franchise player, and it isn't so clear cut how to use him in another way.

By contrast, Haliburton is a guy who works just fine around greater talent due to his intelligence and general lack of entitlement to his game, and also happens to still be on a rookie deal.

All of this made Halliburton the much more valuable trade asset, which was why Indiana wanted him instead of Fox.

ftr, while I'm not optimistic about Fox's future, I will say that I completely get seeing him as having more potential than Halliburton even now, it's just that if I'm trying to build my franchise for the long-term, I'd much rather have a commitment to Halliburton at his place in his career than to Fox in his.

what is it about fox that makes you think he has more potential than haliburton still ? athletism?

[youOK]

i dont follow kings, how good/how much potential do fox and haliburton have?

reading you guys it seems like haliburton has much higher ceiling than fox?

Fox is in his 5th year now, on a max deal, and has continually been a volume scorer on below league-average efficiency who isn't a great passer and generally has a negative On/Off. I don't think it was so much that Haliburton was perceived to have a higher ceiling than Fox was once perceived, but it seems likely that it was a mistake to treat Fox as a franchise player, and it isn't so clear cut how to use him in another way.

By contrast, Haliburton is a guy who works just fine around greater talent due to his intelligence and general lack of entitlement to his game, and also happens to still be on a rookie deal.

All of this made Halliburton the much more valuable trade asset, which was why Indiana wanted him instead of Fox.

ftr, while I'm not optimistic about Fox's future, I will say that I completely get seeing him as having more potential than Halliburton even now, it's just that if I'm trying to build my franchise for the long-term, I'd much rather have a commitment to Halliburton at his place in his career than to Fox in his.

what is it about fox that makes you think he has more potential than haliburton still ? athletism?

I think it's very tough to compare the two as they are completely different styles of point guards. Fox is your Westbrook / Rose / Wall type point guards with his quickness/athleticism but just average to below-average shooting efficiency. Haliburton is much less athletic but more like a Chris Paul type. Haliburton will never take over a game scoring-wise as Fox can but he is more efficient and a better playmaker. As they are today, I think Hali is easier to fit into any team but if everything else was equal Fox is more of a #1 option offensively. The real difference in there value right now is the fact that Fox is on a max deal and Hali is on a #12 overall rookie contract.

[Jadoogar]

How are people saying the team performed as expected? on paper, this team is just as talented as the Spurs or zion-less Pelicans. Especially after the Sabonis trade.
This season was absolutely a disaster for them, especially since they are trying so hard to make the play-in.

[Doctor MJ]

i dont follow kings, how good/how much potential do fox and haliburton have?

reading you guys it seems like haliburton has much higher ceiling than fox?

Fox is in his 5th year now, on a max deal, and has continually been a volume scorer on below league-average efficiency who isn't a great passer and generally has a negative On/Off. I don't think it was so much that Haliburton was perceived to have a higher ceiling than Fox was once perceived, but it seems likely that it was a mistake to treat Fox as a franchise player, and it isn't so clear cut how to use him in another way.

By contrast, Haliburton is a guy who works just fine around greater talent due to his intelligence and general lack of entitlement to his game, and also happens to still be on a rookie deal.

All of this made Halliburton the much more valuable trade asset, which was why Indiana wanted him instead of Fox.

ftr, while I'm not optimistic about Fox's future, I will say that I completely get seeing him as having more potential than Halliburton even now, it's just that if I'm trying to build my franchise for the long-term, I'd much rather have a commitment to Halliburton at his place in his career than to Fox in his.

what is it about fox that makes you think he has more potential than haliburton still ? athletism?

Well first, I didn't say I thought Fox had more potential than Halliburton, only that I get why others would believe so. And yes, it'd be about athleticism because I'm not sure there's anything else about Fox that is better than Halliburton...but athleticism is no small thing.

[CraftylikeaFox]

First year I've ever truly given up on the Kings. Didn't go to one live game and caught around 5 games, most following the Sabonis trade, on TV.

This team is dead to a majority of this city and that won't change as long as Vivek runs the team.