Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Moderators: codydaze, KF10, City of Trees
Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- codydaze
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 5,996
- And1: 4,666
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Kings return home after three ugly losses on the road and try to get right against an undermanned Pacers team who will be without Hali, Nembhard, Nesmith as well as newly acquired Pascal Siakam.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- codydaze
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 5,996
- And1: 4,666
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Keegan is hoopin.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- codydaze
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 5,996
- And1: 4,666
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Alex Len gets called for so many illegal screens.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,571
- And1: 2,869
- Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Fox.. kills me, so I’ll zip it
Huerter glad to see him coming back for multiple reasons - on the court and off
Barnes needs to go, for himself and the team
Keegan showing some things
Huerter glad to see him coming back for multiple reasons - on the court and off
Barnes needs to go, for himself and the team
Keegan showing some things
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- codydaze
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 5,996
- And1: 4,666
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Free throws have been brutal. Unreal how bad we are.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,429
- And1: 10,973
- Joined: Sep 17, 2010
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Time to rest fox for a few weeks. Guy hasn't been right in awhile and it clearly shows. I'll take some losses for him to get healthy
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,571
- And1: 2,869
- Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
LightTheBeam wrote:Time to rest fox for a few weeks. Guy hasn't been right in awhile and it clearly shows. I'll take some losses for him to get healthy
Healthy? I’m not sure it’s a physical ailment or we would have heard or saw something. And, maybe you want to hold him accountable to some degree and not fully excuse his play and excuse what could be the root cause of this stretch until we hear more (could, maybe something will come out. I hope so)
I hope your right though. I do know he has an innate motor issue where he randomly checks out quarters/games etc., but it could spell trouble if he starts to be prone to do this for long stretches of seasons (like his rookie year and the year Tyrese was moved)
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,571
- And1: 2,869
- Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Murray and Huerter looking good…
Maybe Malik will play himself back to the early bird..
But some changes are needed, but it starts with the PG as well
Maybe Malik will play himself back to the early bird..
But some changes are needed, but it starts with the PG as well
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- codydaze
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 5,996
- And1: 4,666
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
BoogieTime wrote:Maybe Malik will play himself back to the early bird..
I was going to post this with green font but I guess I don't have to...
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 25,327
- And1: 5,478
- Joined: Jul 28, 2006
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Whenever a team is dead last in FT%, it’s almost always mental.
This team has been unraveling all season long.
The team desperately needs a trade to give them a shot in the arm boost.
This team has been unraveling all season long.
The team desperately needs a trade to give them a shot in the arm boost.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,571
- And1: 2,869
- Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
codydaze wrote:BoogieTime wrote:Maybe Malik will play himself back to the early bird..
I was going to post this with green font but I guess I don't have to...
You have to have humor at this point
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- codydaze
- Forum Mod - Kings
- Posts: 5,996
- And1: 4,666
- Joined: Jul 06, 2013
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Keegan and Fox the only positive +/- tonight, it's not a great stat but it definitely goes to show how awful our bench was tonight. Bench outscored 34-16, Lyles and Len provided nothing. HB has just been getting cardio out there too.
This roster needs a trade asap. Have to wonder if the deadline looming is having an effect on these guys, I would hope not as they're all professionals and have gone through this before but the team has been off in every facet of the game the past couple weeks.
This roster needs a trade asap. Have to wonder if the deadline looming is having an effect on these guys, I would hope not as they're all professionals and have gone through this before but the team has been off in every facet of the game the past couple weeks.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,571
- And1: 2,869
- Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Now that I’m a bit recouped from the game, I guess it doesn’t do much good to go too overboard on Fox
His motor issue is innate and as such maybe you take the good with the bad and just build a better team to deal with these “spells”
Though he shouldn’t/won’t be supermaxed
His motor issue is innate and as such maybe you take the good with the bad and just build a better team to deal with these “spells”
Though he shouldn’t/won’t be supermaxed
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
- blind prophet
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,521
- And1: 3,268
- Joined: Dec 08, 2011
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
So 6th seed may be the goal at this point?
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,549
- And1: 2,435
- Joined: May 17, 2022
- Contact:
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
Again, not a great one. Defensively I have to question the coaching staff at this stage, not the players at this point.
Why in the world would you go zone and double team a player at the top like they did on it seemed like 3-4 possessions in a row. I mean, they're not even really a decent team FFS. To me it looks like a very basic offense that relies on the defense gambling and making a basic mistake. To Sacramento, it was P&R on the right side and the opposite defensive wing drops too far in and the Pacers PG either drives or it's a skip pass to the opposite corner. You see Hali doing this all the time too. It's a basic offensive set to stop.
Anyway, onto more important things.
If I was a person that flys off the handle and makes rash judgments on players on small sample sizes I think the pressure is on Monk.
Another horrible performance and I think the statisticians might be telling Porkys on that 1 TO. Were they generous with only 11 for the team? He's buying the next meal on the road if that's the case for throwing all those balls at people's feet.
He has been a turnover machine or just really poor plays more than usual lately, which is normally okay because hes contributing, but when you go 1/6...from the FT line. Yes, from the FT line. That's historic type bad.
Davion should have had his number called very, very early on in this one. No coach should sit there and watch McConnell driving to the hoop time after time after time with no pressure. Fox and Monk. There you go. That in itself was brutal to watch.
Why in the world would you go zone and double team a player at the top like they did on it seemed like 3-4 possessions in a row. I mean, they're not even really a decent team FFS. To me it looks like a very basic offense that relies on the defense gambling and making a basic mistake. To Sacramento, it was P&R on the right side and the opposite defensive wing drops too far in and the Pacers PG either drives or it's a skip pass to the opposite corner. You see Hali doing this all the time too. It's a basic offensive set to stop.
Anyway, onto more important things.
If I was a person that flys off the handle and makes rash judgments on players on small sample sizes I think the pressure is on Monk.
Another horrible performance and I think the statisticians might be telling Porkys on that 1 TO. Were they generous with only 11 for the team? He's buying the next meal on the road if that's the case for throwing all those balls at people's feet.
He has been a turnover machine or just really poor plays more than usual lately, which is normally okay because hes contributing, but when you go 1/6...from the FT line. Yes, from the FT line. That's historic type bad.
Davion should have had his number called very, very early on in this one. No coach should sit there and watch McConnell driving to the hoop time after time after time with no pressure. Fox and Monk. There you go. That in itself was brutal to watch.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,549
- And1: 2,435
- Joined: May 17, 2022
- Contact:
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
blind prophet wrote:So 6th seed may be the goal at this point?
Which again goes to a question of. Should the Kings waste assets trying to get an upgrade when realistically it won't make a huge difference?
If you can get a Bridges or someone, sure. But no Kuz, no Lavine at that money, no Grant. They just don't move the needle enough for whatever reason, salary or skill.
I would love an upgrade, but it's got to make sense in the overall grand scheme of team building. Don't pay 1st rounders for someone that isn't a real difference maker only to have a difference maker become available and you can't afford them.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 863
- And1: 188
- Joined: Jul 09, 2016
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
An excellent coaching job from Carlisle, a better deeper team won, even without Haliburton. The Kings are really faltering, and are unlikely to get a top 6 seed without some new blood. We have outcoached a few times recently also which maybe proves other teams have figured us out.
FT shooting was awful, which shows the state of mind of the players.
FT shooting was awful, which shows the state of mind of the players.
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,571
- And1: 2,869
- Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
OxAndFox wrote:blind prophet wrote:So 6th seed may be the goal at this point?
Which again goes to a question of. Should the Kings waste assets trying to get an upgrade when realistically it won't make a huge difference?
If you can get a Bridges or someone, sure. But no Kuz, no Lavine at that money, no Grant. They just don't move the needle enough for whatever reason, salary or skill.
I would love an upgrade, but it's got to make sense in the overall grand scheme of team building. Don't pay 1st rounders for someone that isn't a real difference maker only to have a difference maker become available and you can't afford them.
Team doesn’t need much IMO. They are 4-1 against the top three seeds. Clearing out deadwood and inserting a Grant and maybe a Kuz could vault the team IMO. I’d just prefer to wait a year til Monk is secured (because I think he’s ascending and emotionally invaluable), but maybe that won’t be needed if his play curtails
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,549
- And1: 2,435
- Joined: May 17, 2022
- Contact:
Re: Kings (23-17) vs Pacers (23-17)
BoogieTime wrote:OxAndFox wrote:blind prophet wrote:So 6th seed may be the goal at this point?
Which again goes to a question of. Should the Kings waste assets trying to get an upgrade when realistically it won't make a huge difference?
If you can get a Bridges or someone, sure. But no Kuz, no Lavine at that money, no Grant. They just don't move the needle enough for whatever reason, salary or skill.
I would love an upgrade, but it's got to make sense in the overall grand scheme of team building. Don't pay 1st rounders for someone that isn't a real difference maker only to have a difference maker become available and you can't afford them.
Team doesn’t need much IMO. They are 4-1 against the top three seeds. Clearing out deadwood and inserting a Grant and maybe a Kuz could vault the team IMO. I’d just prefer to wait a year til Monk is secured (because I think he’s ascending and emotionally invaluable), but maybe that won’t be needed if his play curtails
Reply posted in Trade thread.