# Kings Are Rolling



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

They recently discussed on NBA Fastbreak if the Kings had a chance against the Lakers. They said its a slim possibility. Not great but at least they're getting more respect. I think that saying the Kings are on the decline is going to blow up in peoples faces


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

The Kings are currently the best team in California. Going over their last couple of games, it amazes me how well the Kings control the passing lanes and shift the ball around. Every player hits the open shot and with guys like Brad Miller and Divac in the middle, the guards really aren't worried about creating or distributing. Think of the rotation with Webber back, how hard it will be for other teams to keep up with them. 

The Lakers have alot of options to go to, and can use isolation with Shaq, Kobe, Malone and Payton. They may be more individually talented than the Kings, but as a team these Lakers just haven't really been threated yet. They have 2 big games against the Mavs coming up, and a showdown with the Rockets on Christmas. We'll see if they can keep hitting their shots down the stretch, Jackson's motion offense still isn't as successfull I'm sure as he'd like it to be.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> The Kings are currently the best team in California. Going over their last couple of games, it amazes me how well the Kings control the passing lanes and shift the ball around.


:laugh: 

The only reason they are the best team in California is because the Lakers are currently in Texas getting ready for the Spurs game. Hilarious though.

Lakers last five games have been wins against Indiana, San Antonio, Washington, Memphis and Chicago. These teams have a combined record of 43-43 (W-L). Whereas, the Kings last five games (also all win) were against New Jersey, Houston, Memphis Chicago and Orlando who have a combined record of 30-53. 

If you only look at the last three games the Lakers beat teams with a 30-23 combined record where the Kings beat teams with a combined record of 24-25. And it gets even more in the lakers favor if you only consider the last two games. The lakers are obviously playing and beating the better teams, Sacramento has a relatively light schedule. So, hence, you are wrong...the Lakers are the better team right now. Sorry to dissapoint you. :nah:

:vbanana: :banana: :vbanana: :banana:


----------



## Peja Vu (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jstempi</b>!
> 
> 
> :laugh:
> ...


I agree. The Kings haven't played San Antonio, Dallas, or Los Angeles yet.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

The Kings are just playing comprehensive basketball. For the Lakers, the only strong teams they have played in their last 11 games are the Pacers, Spurs and Pistons. And the Spurs are notorious slow starters, this team has lost their last 2 games to the Clippers and Warriors, something pretty inexcusable for world champions.

Sacramento's schedule hasn't been much harder, but it's the ease with which they have dispatched of these teams since the loss to Portland that is impressive. Excluding the Golden State game, which they won by 2, they have been winning games by an average of 23.5 points after the Portland loss. Not an easy thing to do in the NBA. They are shooting 48% for the season, and 43% from the 3 point line. Still without Chris Webber... best part about the Kings offensive style is that it allows people like Songaila and Peeler to flourish on the offensive end and make ends meet on the defensive end. A reason why depth hasn't bothered them with Webber out. And you know they step up their play against the big name teams. Next two games against Minnesota and Indiana, even though both are home games it will show the Kings where they currently place against playoff teams.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> The Kings are just playing comprehensive basketball.


Comprehensive, LOL. What, did you get that phrase from Bill Walton?? 



> For the Lakers, the only strong teams they have played in their last 11 games are the Pacers, Spurs and Pistons.
> 
> 
> > LOL, you diss the laker's schedule and the Kings is even lighter...as I showed you in my last post. Hello??!!
> ...


----------



## beb0p (Jul 15, 2002)

Why do Laker fans like to incite argument in assinine topics? For the love of god, stop this stupidity. This debate is even more pointless than the Kobe vs T-Mac homerism. 

I don't blame The Franchise for expressing an opinion. But jstempi is turning this thread into a farce. As if which team is rolling at this point of the season is actually worth debating.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

It's the Sacramento style of basketball that can have the Lakers struggling against them. 3 great passing men in Webber, Miller and Divac and plenty of guards around them that can hit their shots. You can argue about Malone and Shaq being just as good in terms of passing, but if you watch the Laker games you'll know it isn't the essential point, the focal point, to them winning games. It's all about the individual play of their top players. And the triangle offense which can never go bad with Shaq.

We can analyze the stats all we want but it won't lead us to finding out who will win on Jan. 16 -- their first head to head meeting. Not sure if Webber will be back by then, but the Kings always put up in big games with or without key players. The point about Detroit is useless - Lakers lost to them by 10, and beat them by 5 in the other one. Still, tells me nothing about how they shape up against Sacramento. Pretty much, all I'm trying to say, is the Sacramento offensive game is what can tame the Lakers. Strong combination of in and out players, players who can score with their back to basket and then there is Peja, the best shooter in the league. Alot of elements for the Lakers to work with.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>beb0p</b>!
> Why do Laker fans like to incite argument in assinine topics?


Well, the Kings forum was getting a little slow so I thought I’d help you guys get some activity. Are you afraid of a little debate???? And isn’t that the point of having a forum, to debate/discuss topics??? And if you think the “Kings are rolling” topic is “asinine” then stay out of the kings forum. Anyone who takes a position better be prepared to defend it. And why do you single out laker fans?? A lot of non-laker fans like to debate on these boards too? Maybe you are a little jealous??? :laugh:



> I don't blame The Franchise for expressing an opinion. But jstempi is turning this thread into a farce.


Per dictionary.com Farce means : A seasoned stuffing, as for roasted turkey. 

I don’t think that I can turn this thread into something eatible. Anyhow, if you don’t like the debate, stay out of the thread. Thread bashing is childish, especially when it is the only active thread on the Kings forum right now.



> As if which team is rolling at this point of the season is actually worth debating.


Clearly you have no clue and are just trying to express laker-hate. You don’t even know what the discussion is about, we are not debating which team is rolling…both obviously are. If you took the time to read the posts you would have seen that we are debating who is playing (“rolling”) better right now. I find it interesting that instead of attempting to refute my points you decided to bash the thread and bash laker fans…I guess you cant refute them because my statements are correct. People would respect you more if you were just honest and didn’t lash out in frustration.



> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> It's the Sacramento style of basketball that can have the Lakers struggling against them. 3 great passing men in Webber, Miller and Divac and plenty of guards around them that can hit their shots. You can argue about Malone and Shaq being just as good in terms of passing, but if you watch the Laker games you'll know it isn't the essential point, the focal point, to them winning games. It's all about the individual play of their top players. And the triangle offense which can never go bad with Shaq.


Don’t get me wrong, the kings could beat the lakers this year, it’s all about execution offensively and defensively. The kings are the only team the lakers haven’t proven themselves against so far this year. I’m just saying that the kings haven’t proven themselves against not only the Lakers but also Dallas and the Spurs. Its too early to say the the Kings are playing better than the lakers.

Sure, the Kings’ passing game could make the lakers struggle if they execute their defense poorly, but the lakers also have a passing game in the triangle offense in addition to individual play as you mentioned. Have you seen the Lakers play this year??? They have passing, the break, and isolation plays…they have all three styles in their arsenal which makes it difficult to have an effective plan to defend them. The Kings are doing well with the break and their passing offense but it’s the same ol’ tired stuff the Lakers have seen for several years now. I guess we’ll see when they meet, but this was not the topic of our discussion…the discussion was who was playing better? And you were unable to refute my points.



> We can analyze the stats all we want but it won't lead us to finding out who will win on Jan. 16 -- their first head to head meeting.


As I said, we were debating who was playing better, not who will win against eachother…I guess you concede they the Lakers are indeed playing better since you refuse to address my points.



> Not sure if Webber will be back by then, but the Kings always put up in big games with or without key players.


I agree, Webber or no Webber the Kings will still give the Lakers a game.



> The point about Detroit is useless - Lakers lost to them by 10, and beat them by 5 in the other one. Still, tells me nothing about how they shape up against Sacramento. Pretty much, all I'm trying to say, is the Sacramento offensive game is what can tame the Lakers.


The point about Detroit, that you apparently did not understand, was that the Kings did not dominate. And yes the Lakers are 1-1 against Detroit, I wont rant about the disgusting display of officiating in the loss, but that was nine games ago and we are talking about how they are playing NOW. If you wanna talk about early season losses, at least the Lakers have only lost to above 500 teams. The Kings got beat by New York and Boston!!!!! “laugh: 



> Strong combination of in and out players, players who can score with their back to basket and then there is Peja, the best shooter in the league. Alot of elements for the Lakers to work with.


Yeah, Peja, Peja. We got three guys with better fg% than Peja. Sure one play has only one attempt but the point is that we have been able to shut down peja before and our defense is twice as good as last year…in addition, our best Peja stopper, and overall defender, is sitting on the IR. I think we’ll be fine. But like you said, we’ll have to wait for the game to see if both teams bring good offensive and defensive plans and are able to execute them. But clearly, you were wrong when you said the Kings were playing the best, the lakers are playing better than the Kings right now. This was the point of the debate and something which you haven’t been able to refute.


----------



## beb0p (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jstempi</b>!
> 
> Per dictionary.com Farce means : A seasoned stuffing, as for roasted turkey.
> 
> I don’t think that I can turn this thread into something eatible. Anyhow, if you don’t like the debate, stay out of the thread. Thread bashing is childish, especially when it is the only active thread on the Kings forum right now.



If you had read the entire definition of "farce" on dictionary.com, you'd have seen the following explanations pass the first two lines:

"Ridiculous or empty show"

"a dramatic composition marked by low humor, generally written with little regard to regularity or method, and abounding with ludicrous incidents and expressions"

The fact that you failed to find the correct definition from a dictionary basically sums up the quality of your posts - you focused on the wrong things, too quick to dismiss, and generally missed the points presented to you. 

Am I afraid of a little debate? First of all, my son jstempi, your posts are freakin essays! It may have started as a little debate but you've turned it into a big one. Second of all, it's a big debate about.... Nothing. I like to debate when it's worth debating. You remind me of fans who debate Britney vs Christina.

If you think "the Kings forum was getting a little slow" as you said, and you want to "help you guys get some activity", start something worthwhile. I don't mind debating Princeton vs. Triangle. Or which position should we play Gerald Wallace. Or what to do with Brad Miller when C-Web comes back. 

But please, no Kings rolling vs Lakers rolling. No Kobe vs. T-Mac. And for that matter, no apple vs. oranges nor Britney vs. Christina. 

If you don't already know, 99% of the VS thread is boring. With the two sides retort to saying "it's so" and "it's not."

Btw, I've lived in Sac, San Francisco, LA, NYC, Ann Arbor (close to Detroit), Seattle, Boca Raton (Florida), Toronto, Vancouver and visited many other cities. Laker fans are by far the worse in engaging in pointless debate. And I do mean By Far. They remind me of Manchester United fans. 




> Originally posted by <b>jstempi</b>!
> People would respect you more if you were just honest and didn’t lash out in frustration.


You know jstempi, you should practice what you preach.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>beb0p</b>!
> 
> If you had read the entire definition of "farce" on dictionary.com, you'd have seen the following explanations pass the first two lines:
> 
> ...


Ummm, it was a joke. I did see those other definitions but I figured you had a sense of humor. I mean, you did say I turned the thread into a farce (which as you said means a composition marked by low humor). Geez, what do you want, I tried to lighted it up and then you still complain. Dont hate me because I'm actually getting your forum a post count. 

And by the way, the quality of my posts far surpasses yours on any given day.



> Am I afraid of a little debate? First of all, my son jstempi, your posts are freakin essays!


First of all, my daughter beb0p, who cares if they are essays, if you dont like em, dont read em. I consider it a little debate, if you think its too big for you then I'll understand.



> I like to debate when it's worth debating.


You mean you only like to debate when you can win. Feel free to quit, I understand that you realize you cant win...thats why you turned the debate into a debate about debating...instead of staying on topic. Its pretty funny how that happens when someone cant hold up their arguement.



> If you think "the Kings forum was getting a little slow" as you said, and you want to "help you guys get some activity", start something worthwhile.



Hey, I didn;t even start this, dont complain to me...blame SacKings for starting it.



> I don't mind debating Princeton vs. Triangle. Or which position should we play Gerald Wallace. Or what to do with Brad Miller when C-Web comes back.


Well why dont you start a thread then? That wasn't the topic of this thread, and as you know, you're supposed to try to stay on the topic.



> But please, no Kings rolling vs Lakers rolling. No Kobe vs. T-Mac. And for that matter, no apple vs. oranges nor Britney vs. Christina.


If you dont like it, dont click the link to the thread and go start your own thread. Like I said, thread bashing is childish.



> Btw, I've lived in Sac, San Francisco, LA, NYC, Ann Arbor (close to Detroit), Seattle, Boca Raton (Florida), Toronto, Vancouver and visited many other cities. Laker fans are by far the worse in engaging in pointless debate. And I do mean By Far. They remind me of Manchester United fans.


Wow you are so cool for having lived in so many places, and I thoroughly trust your opinions.  I guess debating over whether something is worth debating is less pointless than this thread.

Generalized statements such as yours are pointless because all Lakers fans are not posting here, its just me.



> You know jstempi, you should practice what you preach.


Tell me where I haven't, I'm not frustrated and certainly am not lashing out, just debating the topic in this thread, unlike you. Clearly, you are the one off topic which shows you are the frustrated one.:nah: :nah: :nah:


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Wow lol.... i had no idea some people would take this so personally. I was just simply saying dont count out the Kings yet and that i personally think they are the only team that has any chance....


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Wow lol.... i had no idea some people would take this so personally. I was just simply saying dont count out the Kings yet and that i personally think they are the only team that has any chance....


I, for one, did not take it personnaly. I'm simply having a debate. And nobody is counting the Kings out.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>beb0p</b>!
> 
> They remind me of Manchester United fans.


Just like Fergy, always crying foul.


----------



## beb0p (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> 
> 
> Just like Fergy, always crying foul.



Isn't that the truth. :lol: He and Phil Jax should exchange notes, if they haven't already.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>beb0p</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that the truth. :lol: He and Phil Jax should exchange notes, if they haven't already.


This shows how much you know about the Lakers. Out of all the coaches in the league, PJ complains the least. And he's got two players on his team that dont get half the calls they should get.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> It's the Sacramento style of basketball that can have the Lakers struggling against them. 3 great passing men in Webber, Miller and Divac and plenty of guards around them that can hit their shots. You can argue about Malone and Shaq being just as good in terms of passing, but if you watch the Laker games you'll know it isn't the essential point, the focal point, to them winning games. It's all about the individual play of their top players. And the triangle offense which can never go bad with Shaq.


True, but the Kings have been running virtually the same motion offense for the last 2+ years (since Jwill left basically). The Lakers have been running the triangle for years, but have added starters in Malone and Payton that have been running virtually opposite offenses (and more importantly different defensive schemes) for their entire careers. That takes some getting used to. Right now the Lakers are getting by on talent, to put it simply. They have been meshing much better as a team ever since their first win in their current 9 game winning streak. 



> We can analyze the stats all we want but it won't lead us to finding out who will win on Jan. 16 -- their first head to head meeting. Not sure if Webber will be back by then, but the Kings always put up in big games with or without key players.


Historically, meaning the last two regular seasons and playoffs, the Lakers have won more games than they have lost against Sac, albeit by a slim 8-7 margin. That was with just Kobe and Shaq. If Sac is at best equal to the Lakers the past two years against Kobe, Shaq and the rest of the Lakers, it's without a doubt reasonable to assume the Lakers will continue to beat Sac now that they've added Gary Payton and Karl Malone. Sac has added no one of significance the last two years except for this season, Brad Miller. And Brad Miller is not > GP/Karl. 



> Still, tells me nothing about how they shape up against Sacramento. Pretty much, all I'm trying to say, is the Sacramento offensive game is what can tame the Lakers. Strong combination of in and out players, players who can score with their back to basket and then there is Peja, the best shooter in the league. A lot of elements for the Lakers to work with.


Nothing the Lakers haven’t successfully faced before.

This is not to say I disagree with you. You've made several good points. I, too, believe Sac is a huge threat to the Lakers, and if anything the *only* threat to the Lakers given that the Spurs are significantly weakened and the Mavs couldn't beat the Lakers to save their lives.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Still the best team in this league... losing to Dallas without Peja and Webber is nothing to worry too much about. Blowing that half time lead at Arco though; that's something that Adelman needs to ponder. I didn't watch the second half but I'm guessing that Sacramento had no defensive answer to Dallas and they couldn't keep up the pace on offense.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Still the best team in this league... losing to Dallas without Peja and Webber is nothing to worry too much about. Blowing that half time lead at Arco though; that's something that Adelman needs to ponder. I didn't watch the second half but I'm guessing that Sacramento had no defensive answer to Dallas and they couldn't keep up the pace on offense.


The second half was pretty bad. Kings had no defense. Dallas did whatever they wanted with the ball. They shot inside and outside and Kings were sleeping the whole time. But then The Franchise, you have to keep in mind that Dallas had all their players and Sacto didn't have Peja who is on fire shootin 50% and is 2nd on scoring in the NBA and Webber who always plays well against Dallas. We can only hope that Kings have everyone healthy and ready when we meet again January 25 at Dallas 1pm E.T. on ABC.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> 
> But then The Franchise, you have to keep in mind that Dallas had all their players and Sacto didn't have Peja who is on fire shootin 50% and is 2nd on scoring in the NBA and Webber who always plays well against Dallas.





> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Still the best team in this league... losing to Dallas without Peja and Webber is nothing to worry too much about.


As for the next game, these teams have so many stars and key players, having them all healthy for one game is not an easy thing to wish for.


----------

