There are plenty of people willing and able to have a reasonable conversation with you but when you come flying in with all your anger as if we are the cause of Jimmer's problem as you see it, you will get nothing from us. Saying that our thinking is a "line of bull" will get you nowhere. Have your hissy fit and go away or tone it down and have a reasonable conversation. You just might find a few reasonable people willing and capable of discussing Jimmer in a rational manner - like me. I will not engage you if you are going to put me down without hearing me out. You so far have shown little capability of being reasonable or better put, being the type of person I would want to engage in a conversation.
- Status
Yes, Marcus Thornton's play has been frustrating. Why? Because he's shown himself to be a consistent 20 ppg scorer in the NBA, particularly after his trade from New Orleans to Sacramento. His lack of production has been frustrating in the same way that Fredette's play has been encouraging.
I'm not sure you're actually reading what other people have said. My entire point with my first post in this thread was that Jimmer has performed at least as well as Thomas and Thornton in preseason games. The fact is both due to his offensive efficiency AND less than stellar play by Thornton and Thomas. I'd honestly be surprised if any of the three of them were in the plans long term for the new Kings front office.
I'm not sure you're actually reading what other people have said. My entire point with my first post in this thread was that Jimmer has performed at least as well as Thomas and Thornton in preseason games. The fact is both due to his offensive efficiency AND less than stellar play by Thornton and Thomas. I'd honestly be surprised if any of the three of them were in the plans long term for the new Kings front office.
G
Still waiting for you to show me how all that awesome "athleticism" translating to amazing stats.
Cousins? The guy who couldn't avoid getting into a fist-fight with Smart and Westphal and missed all those games last year for being a spoiled little child? The guy is overrated.
Quit preaching IT as the next Chris Paul.
And you'll go through a lot more hell if you keep pushing these crap players that you have for years. You and the rest of the hardcore Kings fans are the last people to lecture anyone on how to build a good team in the NBA, so take your ego and shove it.
And you truly want your Kings to succeed, but you're the laughing stock of the NBA. You're team is the butt of jokes in this league. Maybe you should take more advice from these fans you brag about running off this site, could do you some good.
Cousins? The guy who couldn't avoid getting into a fist-fight with Smart and Westphal and missed all those games last year for being a spoiled little child? The guy is overrated.
Quit preaching IT as the next Chris Paul.
And you'll go through a lot more hell if you keep pushing these crap players that you have for years. You and the rest of the hardcore Kings fans are the last people to lecture anyone on how to build a good team in the NBA, so take your ego and shove it.
And you truly want your Kings to succeed, but you're the laughing stock of the NBA. You're team is the butt of jokes in this league. Maybe you should take more advice from these fans you brag about running off this site, could do you some good.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that is the most important point, but I would add a caveat. Thomas and Thornton have both clearly been struggling with the change of coach and new team concept on both ends of the floor. Jimmer has been thriving. I don't think he was part of the plan when training camp started, but he may play himself into the plan.
"Useless jargon"? Do I have to define what "handle" means now? Do you watch basketball at all? Jimmer has scored well, but he doesn't have PG-level dribbling ability. As in, get the ball up the court and set up the offense. I don't need stats to tell me how much he's struggled to bring the ball up the court, in both actual gametime and in Summer League last year. Here's a stat: his career assist to turnover ratio is 1.5:1, which is terrible for a PG.
Jimmer has a SG handle. Once he has the ball in triple threat position in the half court, he's adequate at creating his own looks or for others. He's efficient at getting the ball in motion and making plays off the dribble. Neither of those skills necessarily equate to being a good PG full time. We have watched Jimmer for over two years struggle to bring the ball up the court as a PG. The onus is on you to provide countering evidence.
Your reading comprehension needs work. Feel free to talk about Jimmer, but in the context of how using him benefits the Sacramento Kings. If you want to discuss how the Kings can benefit Jimmer's career, go somewhere else. Playing Jimmer at PG does not benefit the Sacramento Kings. He's been terrible at the position and his weaknesses (such as weak ballhandling ability) aren't exactly correctable.
I haven't accused Jimmer of anything. Jimmer's had a fine attitude ever since he's gotten here. I've accused Jimmer fans, particularly you, of proposing untenable suggestions that put his career over the good of the team, such as playing him more at PG. I actually would like to see Thornton moved so Jimmer get some time at backup SG. He's outplayed Thornton so far and is much cheaper.
Jimmer cannot play PG. A successful preseason while playing SG does not prove that Jimmer can play PG. We've seen him try it and he's failed. The only success he's had so far is at SG.
I reiterate. Jimmer cannot play PG. A successful preseason while playing SG does not prove that Jimmer can play PG. We've seen him try it and he's failed. The only success he's had so far is at SG.
Jimmer has a SG handle. Once he has the ball in triple threat position in the half court, he's adequate at creating his own looks or for others. He's efficient at getting the ball in motion and making plays off the dribble. Neither of those skills necessarily equate to being a good PG full time. We have watched Jimmer for over two years struggle to bring the ball up the court as a PG. The onus is on you to provide countering evidence.
Your reading comprehension needs work. Feel free to talk about Jimmer, but in the context of how using him benefits the Sacramento Kings. If you want to discuss how the Kings can benefit Jimmer's career, go somewhere else. Playing Jimmer at PG does not benefit the Sacramento Kings. He's been terrible at the position and his weaknesses (such as weak ballhandling ability) aren't exactly correctable.
I haven't accused Jimmer of anything. Jimmer's had a fine attitude ever since he's gotten here. I've accused Jimmer fans, particularly you, of proposing untenable suggestions that put his career over the good of the team, such as playing him more at PG. I actually would like to see Thornton moved so Jimmer get some time at backup SG. He's outplayed Thornton so far and is much cheaper.
Jimmer cannot play PG. A successful preseason while playing SG does not prove that Jimmer can play PG. We've seen him try it and he's failed. The only success he's had so far is at SG.
I reiterate. Jimmer cannot play PG. A successful preseason while playing SG does not prove that Jimmer can play PG. We've seen him try it and he's failed. The only success he's had so far is at SG.
Cousins? The guy who couldn't avoid getting into a fist-fight with Smart and Westphal and missed all those games last year for being a spoiled little child? The guy is overrated.
Quit preaching IT as the next Chris Paul.
And you'll go through a lot more hell if you keep pushing these crap players that you have for years. You and the rest of the hardcore Kings fans are the last people to lecture anyone on how to build a good team in the NBA, so take your ego and shove it.
And you truly want your Kings to succeed, but you're the laughing stock of the NBA. You're team is the butt of jokes in this league. Maybe you should take more advice from these fans you brag about running off this site, could do you some good.[/quote]
Well, its been fun getting to know you.
Quit preaching IT as the next Chris Paul.
And you'll go through a lot more hell if you keep pushing these crap players that you have for years. You and the rest of the hardcore Kings fans are the last people to lecture anyone on how to build a good team in the NBA, so take your ego and shove it.
And you truly want your Kings to succeed, but you're the laughing stock of the NBA. You're team is the butt of jokes in this league. Maybe you should take more advice from these fans you brag about running off this site, could do you some good.[/quote]
Well, its been fun getting to know you.
Please read this note as it mimics my thoughts and hopes and disappointments. Let's see how this all plays out as it appears that Malone IS giving Jimmer a chance and Jimmer, in my view, looks far more comfortable on the court than in the first few years. He has a role and is playing it probably as well as he can.
My view of Jimmer is that stepping into the hell that is the Maloofian Kings really threw him for a loop. Suddenly he had to become something that he can't be. Now it appears he is being asked to do what he CAN do.
Malone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smart. This will make a difference for Jimmer and he will either make it or won't. I don't want to start a side argument with a few others but it seemed clear to me that Smart saw something in IT that he liked and spent far too much time forwarding IT's game.
My view of Jimmer is that stepping into the hell that is the Maloofian Kings really threw him for a loop. Suddenly he had to become something that he can't be. Now it appears he is being asked to do what he CAN do.
Malone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smart. This will make a difference for Jimmer and he will either make it or won't. I don't want to start a side argument with a few others but it seemed clear to me that Smart saw something in IT that he liked and spent far too much time forwarding IT's game.
G
IT committed 1.8 TOV per game last year to Jimmer's 1 per game. Bottom line is Thomas is more careless with the ball than Fredette is. Douglas averaged 1.1 and Brooks averaged 1.4. Look it up at NBA.com for last season. Jimmer had the lowest TOV average all year long.
The stats do back me up. Just because it's cool or popular to parrot everyone else, that Jimmer can't play PG or he's too slow doesn't mean it's true.
Stats please? Still waiting...tick tock.
Good, now at least you're getting somewhere. Unlike some here who seem to unreasonably want to see MT playing the 2 no matter what.
Again, the stats prove you're dead wrong. Please stop with the BS arguments. Every time he's on the court he gets everyone on the court involved in a play. It's so easy to see, I can't believe you're arguing this. IT runs up the court and dribbles into a circus shot every time, he's extremely selfish.
The stats do back me up. Just because it's cool or popular to parrot everyone else, that Jimmer can't play PG or he's too slow doesn't mean it's true.
Stats please? Still waiting...tick tock.
Good, now at least you're getting somewhere. Unlike some here who seem to unreasonably want to see MT playing the 2 no matter what.
Again, the stats prove you're dead wrong. Please stop with the BS arguments. Every time he's on the court he gets everyone on the court involved in a play. It's so easy to see, I can't believe you're arguing this. IT runs up the court and dribbles into a circus shot every time, he's extremely selfish.
That post was edited before I even responded to it. Then edited a second time after I responded to it. Is there a way I can see who changed what? If he went back and fixed his post to show he was willing to be reasonable it would be quite difference than needing a moderator to make the changes for him.
And you are doing a disservice to the other posters here (if it was you) when you edit a ridiculous part of a persons post that could greatly effect whether someone finds the person deserves a response. At the very least leave a footnote to tell people that certain lines of discussion are not permitted to give some kind of context to an edit.
And you are doing a disservice to the other posters here (if it was you) when you edit a ridiculous part of a persons post that could greatly effect whether someone finds the person deserves a response. At the very least leave a footnote to tell people that certain lines of discussion are not permitted to give some kind of context to an edit.
G
Ban me if you want. I've had my say, I don't care either way either.
I think it's just hilarious when I'm not allowed to use stats that make him look good because he didn't play many minutes, but then stats are allowed to be used in those limited minutes to discredit him. "He only averaged 7ppg last season! That's terrible! But don't tell me he had low TOV because he was playing limited time".
The bottom line is that we will NEVER know the kind of player Jimmer can be when he's getting so few minutes and getting so many DNPs. No player can develop a rhythm being treated like that.
I think it's just hilarious when I'm not allowed to use stats that make him look good because he didn't play many minutes, but then stats are allowed to be used in those limited minutes to discredit him. "He only averaged 7ppg last season! That's terrible! But don't tell me he had low TOV because he was playing limited time".
The bottom line is that we will NEVER know the kind of player Jimmer can be when he's getting so few minutes and getting so many DNPs. No player can develop a rhythm being treated like that.
Look, maybe you're just new to watching basketball. Thats fine. We were all newbies at one point. It would help for you to be a bit more humble about your lack of knowledge though. But I digress and proceed.
Average turnovers per game are not a good indication of ballhandling ability. There are several reasons for this.
a) Some players have the ball in their hands more than others
b) Some players play more minutes than others, and thus have more chances for turnovers
c) Some players do much less with the ball in their hands than others depending on position.
Therefore, to counteract these three problems in the pure TO per game statistic, to judge a player's ability to play PG we normally use Assist to Turnover ratio. Using this statistic mitigates the problems described above in the following ways:
a) A player gets more assists generally when the ball is in their hands as well as turnovers, so using A:TO helps get an idea of whether a PG is using that time with the ball more often positively or negatively. So the higher the number, the more a PG commits a positive play as opposed to a negative play.
b) A:TO is a ratio which is normalized for minutes, so even a player playing less minutes is not disadvantaged in any way.
c) A:TO is a basic measurement of positive plays to negative plays that is most effective when comparing players of the same position or role in the offense. So its good for PG vs PG comparisons.
Last year, these are the A:TO ratios of the players in question:
Vasquez- 2.8:1 (Very good)
IT- 1.9:1 (Mediocre)
Jimmer- 1.3:1 (Putrid)
Yeah, the stats really don't back you up to well, sorry to say. You are welcome to propose evidence otherwise. "Its so easy to see" doesn't qualify as evidence, I'm afraid.
Average turnovers per game are not a good indication of ballhandling ability. There are several reasons for this.
a) Some players have the ball in their hands more than others
b) Some players play more minutes than others, and thus have more chances for turnovers
c) Some players do much less with the ball in their hands than others depending on position.
Therefore, to counteract these three problems in the pure TO per game statistic, to judge a player's ability to play PG we normally use Assist to Turnover ratio. Using this statistic mitigates the problems described above in the following ways:
a) A player gets more assists generally when the ball is in their hands as well as turnovers, so using A:TO helps get an idea of whether a PG is using that time with the ball more often positively or negatively. So the higher the number, the more a PG commits a positive play as opposed to a negative play.
b) A:TO is a ratio which is normalized for minutes, so even a player playing less minutes is not disadvantaged in any way.
c) A:TO is a basic measurement of positive plays to negative plays that is most effective when comparing players of the same position or role in the offense. So its good for PG vs PG comparisons.
Last year, these are the A:TO ratios of the players in question:
Vasquez- 2.8:1 (Very good)
IT- 1.9:1 (Mediocre)
Jimmer- 1.3:1 (Putrid)
Yeah, the stats really don't back you up to well, sorry to say. You are welcome to propose evidence otherwise. "Its so easy to see" doesn't qualify as evidence, I'm afraid.
I'm asking you to take a deep breath and take the chip off your shoulder. If you continue to act like a troll, tossing insults and demeaning comments around, you're only going to accomplish what trolls set out to do. Is that really why you chose to finally register?
You're allowed to use any stats you like. Just don't expect people to blindly accept them without question. This ain't our first rodeo.
On that point, I actually agree. I want to see EACH player get a fair shot, a new beginning, a chance to prove he's worth keeping around. I just personally don't see the need to build up one player at the expense of another. You weren't around during the infamous Peja v. Webber years. Those of us who were learned, for the most part, that there's no way to win in an argument like that and it just creates hostility amongst the fan base.
You're allowed to use any stats you like. Just don't expect people to blindly accept them without question. This ain't our first rodeo.
On that point, I actually agree. I want to see EACH player get a fair shot, a new beginning, a chance to prove he's worth keeping around. I just personally don't see the need to build up one player at the expense of another. You weren't around during the infamous Peja v. Webber years. Those of us who were learned, for the most part, that there's no way to win in an argument like that and it just creates hostility amongst the fan base.
This thread is a good laugh. I'm not sure I've ever seen such delusion. What is it about Jimmer? I mean, I like the dude, he seems like a really cool guy and he's a great teammate. But what makes him so attractive to casual (at best) basketball fans who really have no idea what they're watching?
Anyway, obviously if we'd just started Jimmer from day 1 we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now, and LeBron wouldn't have any rings.
Anyway, obviously if we'd just started Jimmer from day 1 we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now, and LeBron wouldn't have any rings.
Just for the hell of it, I'd like to point out that Larry Bird wasn't very athletic either. Of course, he was 6'9", but I clearly remember all the criticisms connected to him coming out of college. Magic Johnson wasn't a great athlete as well. Here's the thing, if your just an average athlete, and that's where I put Jimmer, then you have to have skills and BBIQ that more than make up for the lack of athleticism. I like Jimmer! As I said in another post, I think I saw every game he played at BYU in his last two years. He, at the moment has one great skill. He can shoot the rock. And until McLemore arrived, he was hands down the best 3 pt shooter on the team, and he managed to do so without ever being able to get into a consistent flow, due to not getting regular playing time.
That said, he was lacking in areas of need. Especially his handle, which to be honest with you, I thought would be adequate enough for the NBA based on what I saw at BYU. He had trouble with backcourt pressure. However, the Kings did little to help him bring the ball up. Does anyone remember Webber, and later Miller screening Bibby while he brought the ball up the court. So Ok, its apparent to me at least, that Jimmer has improved his handle. He's also shown better BBIQ in knowing when to drive and when not to. He's done a little creating off the dribble for himself, and others. Nothing fancy, but its an improvement. However, I would be very reluctant to put him in the backcourt with IT. Thats going just a little too small for me. I can see Jimmer in the backcourt with Vasquez. Obviously Malone pictured that idea as well since he started them together in one of the games. If I remember correctly, that worked fairly well.
Where I agree with our emotional new poster is that there seems to be a little bit of a double standard when it comes to Jimmer. Few mention his good games once their logged into history, and few remember the bad games that either Thornton or IT have had. Both Thornton and IT get some slack, because their both so called "Proven Players", and Jimmers accomplishments are discarded as nothing more than a small sampling, and therefore not credible enough to make a judgement on. Now I'm generalizing here, so please don't take offense. I think its fair to say that Jimmer was drafted into a big giant mess of an organization that had little in the way of resources for player development. I never felt that Jimmer would be the same player in the NBA that he was at BYU. I doubt he did. But I did feel that he could become a valuable piece on a good team. I suspect that if he had been drafted by the Spurs, that by this time there would be those on the forum trying to figure out how we could trade for him.
VF21 stated that if he's good enough, then he'll earn his way into the rotation. Not in those exact words, but that's the gist of it. And for the most part, I agree with that statement. I hope that the coaching staff is giving him equal consideration, and the fact that they gave him serious minutes in that one game, seems to validate that they are. So I suggest we wait and see what transpires, and if your a big Jimmer fan, just don't read posts that infuriate you. A post is just someone's opinion, its not a congressional law. Cream usually rises to the top, so lets give it a chance. Couldn't end without at least one metaphor.
That said, he was lacking in areas of need. Especially his handle, which to be honest with you, I thought would be adequate enough for the NBA based on what I saw at BYU. He had trouble with backcourt pressure. However, the Kings did little to help him bring the ball up. Does anyone remember Webber, and later Miller screening Bibby while he brought the ball up the court. So Ok, its apparent to me at least, that Jimmer has improved his handle. He's also shown better BBIQ in knowing when to drive and when not to. He's done a little creating off the dribble for himself, and others. Nothing fancy, but its an improvement. However, I would be very reluctant to put him in the backcourt with IT. Thats going just a little too small for me. I can see Jimmer in the backcourt with Vasquez. Obviously Malone pictured that idea as well since he started them together in one of the games. If I remember correctly, that worked fairly well.
Where I agree with our emotional new poster is that there seems to be a little bit of a double standard when it comes to Jimmer. Few mention his good games once their logged into history, and few remember the bad games that either Thornton or IT have had. Both Thornton and IT get some slack, because their both so called "Proven Players", and Jimmers accomplishments are discarded as nothing more than a small sampling, and therefore not credible enough to make a judgement on. Now I'm generalizing here, so please don't take offense. I think its fair to say that Jimmer was drafted into a big giant mess of an organization that had little in the way of resources for player development. I never felt that Jimmer would be the same player in the NBA that he was at BYU. I doubt he did. But I did feel that he could become a valuable piece on a good team. I suspect that if he had been drafted by the Spurs, that by this time there would be those on the forum trying to figure out how we could trade for him.
VF21 stated that if he's good enough, then he'll earn his way into the rotation. Not in those exact words, but that's the gist of it. And for the most part, I agree with that statement. I hope that the coaching staff is giving him equal consideration, and the fact that they gave him serious minutes in that one game, seems to validate that they are. So I suggest we wait and see what transpires, and if your a big Jimmer fan, just don't read posts that infuriate you. A post is just someone's opinion, its not a congressional law. Cream usually rises to the top, so lets give it a chance. Couldn't end without at least one metaphor.
- Status