Actual conversation tonight after the Washington Wizards beat the Sacramento Kings 73-69 in scintillating summer league action:

Me: Alex Sarr made a shot tonight.

Son (giving a classic “hey how ‘bout that” nod, turning back to his phone, then abruptly looking up): Wait, you mean one?

Me: Yeah, 1-6.

Son (after a moment’s contemplation): So that’s one for his last 21. Maybe he should work on his shooting?

If you recorded this one with plans of watching it back later, I offer this advice: don’t. It was ugly. The Wizards shot 34.7% on twos and 31.6% on threes, and somehow won. They somehow did it with the same number of offensive rebounds, and more turnovers than the Kings.

For those of you keeping score at home, that leaves only the free throws part of the four factors, and that’s where it could be said the Wizards won the game. Washington hit 21 of 21. The Kings just 13-20.

Yay free throws.

Nobody the Wizards really wanted to play well did. Taylor Funk and Erik Stevenson were their most productive players on a per possession basis. Both hit some threes. Funk got some rebounds too.

Jules Bernard shot decently and got to the free throw line, but also committed six turnovers.

The forgoing on the page, I have come not spew negativity but to notice some positives. And there were some.

Sarr did something Matt Modderno, Osman Baig, and I discussed during the postgame live we did after the previous game: he posted a reasonably positive overall game despite the atrocious shooting. In this case, he grabbed 11 rebounds, including a game-high 6 on the offensive glass, had 4 assists, a steal, and a block. He also had two turnovers and five fouls.

All that graded out to a below average but above replacement level score in my PPA metric, which is kinda impressive given the shooting. His contributions showed up on the game sealer — he corralled the offensive board after Carrington got his shot blocked, then kicked the ball out to a wide open Patrick Baldwin Jr., who drained the three to give Washington the lead.

Last night, his poor shooting night couldn’t be blamed on his abiding love for launching threes. All six of his shots came from in the paint. Two or three could probably still be dropped into the “bad shot selection” bucket (for example, his final shot was a heavily contested 12-footer with 10 seconds still on the shot clock), but…well…he just missed. A lot. Which is cause for concern, even if it’s just summer league.

I still overall felt pretty good about his game — good rebounding, good passing, some solid defense. His athletic tools are NBA level already. He’ll need to get stronger, of course — something true of every 19-year old entering the NBA. Except maybe LeBron James. Who did get a lot stronger.

Bub Carrington’s stat line was bad because he shot poorly (2-11 from the floor) and had three turnovers to three assists, and yet I liked how he played. As he did in the first three games, he competed on both ends, and found ways to contribute without making shots — 5 rebounds, a steal and two blocks.

I did not have a similar reaction to Kyshawn George’s game. He shoot poorly (as did virtually everyone who played in this game), and he blocked a couple shots, but his overall performance felt sloppy and disjointed — four turnovers, four fouls, just two rebounds in 26 minutes. I haven’t seen anything from him in summer league to make me think YODA’s (low) assessment of him was off the mark.

Baldwin somehow ended up with five assists.

I wanted Colby Jones to play well for the Kings. Say it with me now: He shot poorly, but he was active on both ends — 7 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 steals. I had him with a first round grade in the 2023 draft, and still think he’s a worthwhile prospect. He’s the kind of guy the Wizards should get just thrown in when they trade Kyle Kuzma.

Wizards summer league head coach Cody Toppert designed a clever play that got Carrington a runway to the rim on that go-ahead three from Baldwin I mentioned previously. It started with a fake action out top that set up the defender for a sweet crossover from Carrington. The 18-year-old got blocked at the rim (gotta work on finishing against size), but the play design had Sarr crashing the glass. Sarr got the board and made the pass.

My point isn’t that the play worked exactly as Toppert drew it up (it didn’t) but that it worked because he’d thought through contingencies and incorporated them into the design.

1. The fake action out top helped Carrington get into the lane.
2. The team’s best offensive rebounder (Sarr) crashed from a trail position in case Carrington missed.
3. Toppert had shooters spaced to key spots on the floor to facilitate kickout passes for Carrington or Sarr.

That’s good design, and the execution showed it was something they worked on. It didn’t work exactly as hoped (sometimes the other guy makes a play), but it put players in position to make a play. That’s solid coaching.