Western Conference preview

Sactowndog · Post #1 » by **Sactowndog** » Thu Sep 5, 2019 4:55 am

Danny Leroux and his analytics idiots are apparently very down on the Kings. if you bother to listen they have no intelligent analysis of the Kings organization. It's a good one to bookmark and comment on at the end of the year.

No comment on the spacing Dedmon will provide and how it frees up Bagley down low
No comment on the effect of Joseph allowing Bogi to play off the ball

Their only comment was wondering if WCS moved to the Warriors would he develop more.

The group reminds me of a bunch of ugly guys commenting on female appearances. I have rarely heard such an unbalanced crappy analysis then Danny Leroux's analysis last year which picked the Kings to be under their win number last year. One of the dumbest commentators in all of basketball.

blind prophet · Post #2 » by **blind prophet** » Thu Sep 5, 2019 4:45 pm

If that is the case, just another person that pretends to know all 30 teams.

We should be used to this sort of thing by now.

Amick is the only person that covers league wide stuff I take seriously.

LightTheBeam · Post #3 » by **LightTheBeam** » Sat Sep 7, 2019 5:42 pm

Never liked him. Not even for kings stuff, just in general never thought he was some special basketball mind or anything.

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using RealGM mobile app

Lost in LA · Post #4 » by **Lost in LA** » Sun Sep 8, 2019 12:49 am

I still stick with 42-45 wins, and the depth will protect us from people playing hurt which happened quite a bit last year with Fox especially. Not having WCS is worth 5 wins alone..

Post #5 » by **KF10** » Sun Sep 8, 2019 7:28 pm

One thing we tend to forget that WCS was pretty damn good for the first month or so of last season. He gave us that boost that the Kings needed in a lot of the early games. I wonder if the Kings can replicate or surpass his production in other areas of the game. We also caught a lot of teams off guard with our pace and our general scoring velocity. After a year worth of data, teams will be better prepared against the Kings. How well the Kings adapt to better prepared teams? That is why I said earlier that I wouldn't be surprised if the Kings underperformed. We gotta bank on several players continued improvement i.e. Bagley, Fox, Bogdan, Buddy, etc. Also, we really need to have most, if not, all of our FA players to play well for us too. I haven't talked about Walton but we really need him to work for us too.

Tiny ball · Post #6 » by **Tiny ball** » Sun Sep 22, 2019 10:09 am

Lost in LA wrote:I still stick with 42-45 wins, and the depth will protect us from people playing hurt which happened quite a bit last year with Fox especially. Not having WCS is worth 5 wins alone..

I thought WCS had a good year.

Tiny ball · Post #7 » by **Tiny ball** » Sun Sep 22, 2019 10:12 am

KF10 wrote:One thing we tend to forget that WCS was pretty damn good for the first month or so of last season. He gave us that boost that the Kings needed in a lot of the early games. I wonder if the Kings can replicate or surpass his production in other areas of the game. We also caught a lot of teams off guard with our pace and our general scoring velocity. After a year worth of data, teams will be better prepared against the Kings. How well the Kings adapt to better prepared teams? That is why I said earlier that I wouldn't be surprised if the Kings underperformed. We gotta bank on several players continued improvement i.e. Bagley, Fox, Bogdan, Buddy, etc. Also, we really need to have most, if not, all of our FA players to play well for us too. I haven't talked about Walton but we really need him to work for us too.

I think WCS will be missed. Is Walton going to have Kings playing fast?

Post #8 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:30 pm

Tiny ball wrote:
Lost in LA wrote:I still stick with 42-45 wins, and the depth will protect us from people playing hurt which happened quite a bit last year with Fox especially. Not having WCS is worth 5 wins alone..

I thought WCS had a good year.

As did many people who didn't closely watch the Kings. Pretty much everyone who watched them closely disagrees. There's a reason he was signed for the vet min.

blind prophet · Post #9 » by **blind prophet** » Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:23 pm

Tiny ball wrote:
Lost in LA wrote:I still stick with 42-45 wins, and the depth will protect us from people playing hurt which happened quite a bit last year with Fox especially. Not having WCS is worth 5 wins alone..

I thought WCS had a good year.

Fit was not great here with Bagley even if you think WCS did a decent job.

Sactowndog · Post #10 » by **Sactowndog** » Mon Sep 23, 2019 4:44 am

blind prophet wrote:
Tiny ball wrote:
Lost in LA wrote:I still stick with 42-45 wins, and the depth will protect us from people playing hurt which happened quite a bit last year with Fox especially. Not having WCS is worth 5 wins alone..

I thought WCS had a good year.

Fit was not great here with Bagley even if you think WCS did a decent job.

WCS has some great skills but he is quite possibly the worst possible fit with Bagley and Fox. Both need a floor spacer who opens up the lane for both. The could also use a rim protector which WCS isn’t either. WCS with a stretch 4 like Beli is a good fit. I wish him well. But he was a bad fit for our other starters.

blind prophet · Post #11 » by **blind prophet** » Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:09 am

Sactowndog wrote:
blind prophet wrote:
Tiny ball wrote:I thought WCS had a good year.

Fit was not great here with Bagley even if you think WCS did a decent job.

WCS has some great skills but he is quite possibly the worst possible fit with Bagley and Fox. Both need a floor spacer who opens up the lane for both. The could also use a rim protector which WCS isn’t either. WCS with a stretch 4 like Beli is a good fit. I wish him well. But he was a bad fit for our other starters.

I think he will fit in with the Warriors nicely. We will miss the lobs some, Dedmon won't be doing much of that, but then again Bagley may be able to get a lot of EZ baskets himself.