Game 56: Sacramento Kings (17-38) @ Dallas Mavericks (18-39) - 8:30 PM ET

[nolimit0820]

I've watched enough this season to have my take on the Buddy Hield dilemma. I know some here (SacKingZZZ) have advocated for a Buddy and Bogdan line up. Although I agree because I believe BB is capable of guarding many threes in the league (not all) I'm convinced that DJ (obviously) doesn't see BB as an ideal three. I think he likes size in the back court and on the perimeter. Unless there's a massive change in philosophy, I think BH is the backup shooting guard and that'll never change.

[SacKingZZZ]

I've watched enough this season to have my take on the Buddy Hield dilemma. I know some here (SacKingZZZ) have advocated for a Buddy and Bogdan line up. Although I agree because I believe BB is capable of guarding many threes in the league (not all) I'm convinced that DJ (obviously) doesn't see BB as an ideal three. I think he likes size in the back court and on the perimeter. Unless there's a massive change in philosophy, I think BH is the backup shooting guard and that'll never change.

Here's my thing. When you are this bad and starving for both production and talent, you don't have the luxury of cherry picking from some idea of what an "ideal" team is. The talent disparity and lack of offensive punch will get you every time. If they weren't as miserable on the defensive end as they are I could see a reason there, but fracturing your main core of talent into something incomplete is just wrong and the results speak for themselves. That said the minutes being what they are is ridiculous. The only thing I can see is maybe once Mason comes back that gives Buddy more chances because that means less maneuvering to make sure one of Bogdan or Temple are on the court for PG duties.

[benchmobbin02]

I've watched enough this season to have my take on the Buddy Hield dilemma. I know some here (SacKingZZZ) have advocated for a Buddy and Bogdan line up. Although I agree because I believe BB is capable of guarding many threes in the league (not all) I'm convinced that DJ (obviously) doesn't see BB as an ideal three. I think he likes size in the back court and on the perimeter. Unless there's a massive change in philosophy, I think BH is the backup shooting guard and that'll never change.

Here's my thing. When you are this bad and starving for both production and talent, you don't have the luxury of cherry picking from some idea of what an "ideal" team is. The talent disparity and lack of offensive punch will get you every time. If they weren't as miserable on the defensive end as they are I could see a reason there, but fracturing your main core of talent into something incomplete is just wrong and the results speak for themselves. That said the minutes being what they are is ridiculous. The only thing I can see is maybe once Mason comes back that gives Buddy more chances because that means less maneuvering to make sure one of Bogdan or Temple are on the court for PG duties.

Yeah, that and Buddy making consistent mental mistakes.

Plus, I think Jackson is part of our main core of talent so, as the team is made up and as availability is currently, we will have some guys from the core on the bench, both to start and in platooning minutes.

[SacKingZZZ]

I've watched enough this season to have my take on the Buddy Hield dilemma. I know some here (SacKingZZZ) have advocated for a Buddy and Bogdan line up. Although I agree because I believe BB is capable of guarding many threes in the league (not all) I'm convinced that DJ (obviously) doesn't see BB as an ideal three. I think he likes size in the back court and on the perimeter. Unless there's a massive change in philosophy, I think BH is the backup shooting guard and that'll never change.

Here's my thing. When you are this bad and starving for both production and talent, you don't have the luxury of cherry picking from some idea of what an "ideal" team is. The talent disparity and lack of offensive punch will get you every time. If they weren't as miserable on the defensive end as they are I could see a reason there, but fracturing your main core of talent into something incomplete is just wrong and the results speak for themselves. That said the minutes being what they are is ridiculous. The only thing I can see is maybe once Mason comes back that gives Buddy more chances because that means less maneuvering to make sure one of Bogdan or Temple are on the court for PG duties.

Yeah, that and Buddy making consistent mental mistakes.

Plus, I think Jackson is part of our main core of talent so, as the team is made up and as availability is currently, we will have some guys from the core on the bench, both to start and in platooning minutes.

I disagree as a main core of talent. I think he's an excellent role player who knows when to cut and how to play off of others. He has a nice floater but other than that I haven't seen the ability to consistently create so who knows what he looks like when a defense keys in on him. That might be another good thing to find out to some extent before the season is gone however.

[benchmobbin02]

Here's my thing. When you are this bad and starving for both production and talent, you don't have the luxury of cherry picking from some idea of what an "ideal" team is. The talent disparity and lack of offensive punch will get you every time. If they weren't as miserable on the defensive end as they are I could see a reason there, but fracturing your main core of talent into something incomplete is just wrong and the results speak for themselves. That said the minutes being what they are is ridiculous. The only thing I can see is maybe once Mason comes back that gives Buddy more chances because that means less maneuvering to make sure one of Bogdan or Temple are on the court for PG duties.

Yeah, that and Buddy making consistent mental mistakes.

Plus, I think Jackson is part of our main core of talent so, as the team is made up and as availability is currently, we will have some guys from the core on the bench, both to start and in platooning minutes.

I disagree as a main core of talent. I think he's an excellent role player who knows when to cut and how to play off of others. He has a nice floater but other than that I haven't seen the ability to consistently create so who knows what he looks like when a defense keys in on him. That might be another good thing to find out to some extent before the season is gone however.

Of course you don't think he is part of our main core of talent. It doesn't support your Buddy and BB lineup stance and that statement has a bunch of qualifiers to slip through.

He is part of our young core of talent along with Fox WCS BB Skal Hield Giles and Mason. Those are the building blocks. You may want to cut it off and site examples of other teams whose cores are 3-4 players but we are built different in that we added 10 young highly talented players in 2 yrs. Just how it happened for us.

[SacKingZZZ]

Yeah, that and Buddy making consistent mental mistakes.

Plus, I think Jackson is part of our main core of talent so, as the team is made up and as availability is currently, we will have some guys from the core on the bench, both to start and in platooning minutes.

I disagree as a main core of talent. I think he's an excellent role player who knows when to cut and how to play off of others. He has a nice floater but other than that I haven't seen the ability to consistently create so who knows what he looks like when a defense keys in on him. That might be another good thing to find out to some extent before the season is gone however.

Of course you don't think he is part of our main core of talent. It doesn't support your Buddy and BB lineup stance and that statement has a bunch of qualifiers to slip through.

He is part of our young core of talent along with Fox WCS BB Skal Hield Giles and Mason. Those are the building blocks. You may want to cut it off and site examples of other teams whose cores are 3-4 players but we are built different in that we added 10 young highly talented players in 2 yrs. Just how it happened for us.

Yes, I certainly feel Buddy and Bogdan are higher on the talent chain than Justin Jackson. And yes, relative to the usage of the word core you typically hear yours would be unusual that's why you almost exclusively hear it associated with a smaller group of individuals.

BTW, another game where Bogdan did just fine at SF. Joe Johnson who has made a career of posting didn't have much success on Bogdan when he tried. So there's another play or two for the tally.

And the stats backup Buddy and Bogdan playing together. The ONLY net positive lineup for the Kings on NBA.com this season (+8.8) is one that features Buddy and Bogdan playing together. They have an offensive rating around 105 and a defensive rating around 96. That will get it done.

[benchmobbin02]

I disagree as a main core of talent. I think he's an excellent role player who knows when to cut and how to play off of others. He has a nice floater but other than that I haven't seen the ability to consistently create so who knows what he looks like when a defense keys in on him. That might be another good thing to find out to some extent before the season is gone however.

Of course you don't think he is part of our main core of talent. It doesn't support your Buddy and BB lineup stance and that statement has a bunch of qualifiers to slip through.

He is part of our young core of talent along with Fox WCS BB Skal Hield Giles and Mason. Those are the building blocks. You may want to cut it off and site examples of other teams whose cores are 3-4 players but we are built different in that we added 10 young highly talented players in 2 yrs. Just how it happened for us.

Yes, I certainly feel Buddy and Bogdan are higher on the talent chain than Justin Jackson. And yes, relative to the usage of the word core you typically hear yours would be unusual that's why you almost exclusively hear it associated with a smaller group of individuals.

BTW, another game where Bogdan did just fine at SF. Joe Johnson who has made a career of posting didn't have much success on Bogdan when he tried. So there's another play or two for the tally.

And the stats backup Buddy and Bogdan playing together. The ONLY net positive lineup for the Kings on NBA.com this season (+8.8) is one that features Buddy and Bogdan playing together. They have an offensive rating around 105 and a defensive rating around 96. That will get it done.

They MAY be higher in some peoples view talent wise (which can be debated) but that doesn't mean Jackson isn't included . All the players I listed are part of our young and talented core.

Oh and I checked on your Net positive ratings. Either you're a liar or you're blind.

[SacKingZZZ]

Of course you don't think he is part of our main core of talent. It doesn't support your Buddy and BB lineup stance and that statement has a bunch of qualifiers to slip through.

He is part of our young core of talent along with Fox WCS BB Skal Hield Giles and Mason. Those are the building blocks. You may want to cut it off and site examples of other teams whose cores are 3-4 players but we are built different in that we added 10 young highly talented players in 2 yrs. Just how it happened for us.

Yes, I certainly feel Buddy and Bogdan are higher on the talent chain than Justin Jackson. And yes, relative to the usage of the word core you typically hear yours would be unusual that's why you almost exclusively hear it associated with a smaller group of individuals.

BTW, another game where Bogdan did just fine at SF. Joe Johnson who has made a career of posting didn't have much success on Bogdan when he tried. So there's another play or two for the tally.

And the stats backup Buddy and Bogdan playing together. The ONLY net positive lineup for the Kings on NBA.com this season (+8.8) is one that features Buddy and Bogdan playing together. They have an offensive rating around 105 and a defensive rating around 96. That will get it done.

They MAY be higher in some peoples view talent wise (which can be debated) but that doesn't mean Jackson isn't included . All the players I listed are part of our young and talented core.

Oh and I checked on your Net positive ratings. Either you're a liar or you're blind.

Or I could be going by the minutes threshold? The comp stats cut off at 47 with all teams listed. The lineup in question has 88 minutes played in 10 games which is nearly two full games of data to account for. It's hard to truly get a grip on the Kings advanced stats because of how random some of Joergers rotations have been, but some of the Kings advanced stats below that number would averages of something around 2-4 minute stretches which is nothing. Hence why most advanced stats are clamped with a qualifier. The Kings have more than a negative 8 net rating for the year so that makes it even more important to follow the NBA's compiled stats.

[benchmobbin02]

Yes, I certainly feel Buddy and Bogdan are higher on the talent chain than Justin Jackson. And yes, relative to the usage of the word core you typically hear yours would be unusual that's why you almost exclusively hear it associated with a smaller group of individuals.

BTW, another game where Bogdan did just fine at SF. Joe Johnson who has made a career of posting didn't have much success on Bogdan when he tried. So there's another play or two for the tally.

And the stats backup Buddy and Bogdan playing together. The ONLY net positive lineup for the Kings on NBA.com this season (+8.8) is one that features Buddy and Bogdan playing together. They have an offensive rating around 105 and a defensive rating around 96. That will get it done.

They MAY be higher in some peoples view talent wise (which can be debated) but that doesn't mean Jackson isn't included . All the players I listed are part of our young and talented core.

Oh and I checked on your Net positive ratings. Either you're a liar or you're blind.

Or I could be going by the minutes threshold? The comp stats cut off at 47 with all teams listed. The lineup in question has 88 minutes played in 10 games which is nearly two full games of data to account for. It's hard to truly get a grip on the Kings advanced stats because of how random some of Joergers rotations have been, but some of the Kings advanced stats below that number would averages of something around 2-4 minute stretches which is nothing. Hence why most advanced stats are clamped with a qualifier. The Kings have more than a negative 8 net rating for the year so that makes it even more important to follow the NBA's compiled stats.

If you really wanna look at what probably made the bigger difference defensively in that lineup you would point to KK and WCS front line and Mason at PG but that is a fair stat.

[SacKingZZZ]

They MAY be higher in some peoples view talent wise (which can be debated) but that doesn't mean Jackson isn't included . All the players I listed are part of our young and talented core.

Oh and I checked on your Net positive ratings. Either you're a liar or you're blind.

Or I could be going by the minutes threshold? The comp stats cut off at 47 with all teams listed. The lineup in question has 88 minutes played in 10 games which is nearly two full games of data to account for. It's hard to truly get a grip on the Kings advanced stats because of how random some of Joergers rotations have been, but some of the Kings advanced stats below that number would averages of something around 2-4 minute stretches which is nothing. Hence why most advanced stats are clamped with a qualifier. The Kings have more than a negative 8 net rating for the year so that makes it even more important to follow the NBA's compiled stats.

If you really wanna look at what probably made the bigger difference defensively in that lineup you would point to KK and WCS front line and Mason at PG but that is a fair stat.

It's possible, but it still shows that in a legitimate amount of minutes Buddy and Bogdan didn't have any truly negative effect on either end when paired together.

[benchmobbin02]

Or I could be going by the minutes threshold? The comp stats cut off at 47 with all teams listed. The lineup in question has 88 minutes played in 10 games which is nearly two full games of data to account for. It's hard to truly get a grip on the Kings advanced stats because of how random some of Joergers rotations have been, but some of the Kings advanced stats below that number would averages of something around 2-4 minute stretches which is nothing. Hence why most advanced stats are clamped with a qualifier. The Kings have more than a negative 8 net rating for the year so that makes it even more important to follow the NBA's compiled stats.

If you really wanna look at what probably made the bigger difference defensively in that lineup you would point to KK and WCS front line and Mason at PG but that is a fair stat.

It's possible, but it still shows that in a legitimate amount of minutes Buddy and Bogdan didn't have any truly negative effect on either end when paired together.

...with those other players on the floor as well.