Lets talk Isaiah Thomas..

[ESP47]

Lately it's been getting on my nerves reading all the IT bashing that's going on here. It seems like a few members came out with this anti IT agenda and it's spread throughout the board like wildfire. People are saying that he's a ball hog, that he doesn't pass, he takes too many shots, he's greedy and ignoring defense while looking to put up huge offensive numbers so he can get a big contract.

The guy has been averaging 7 assists a game this month. He's passing the ball at an above average pace for a PG. He's also basically tied for the 2nd best offensive player on this team. He SHOULD be taking a lot of shots. You don't want one of your best offensive weapons dumping the ball off to lesser skilled teammates all game when he can score efficiently himself. It doesn't matter if he scores 25 points with 5 assists or 15 points with 10 assists. The same amount of points were scored. We could lose both games and we'd be saying he did a great job in the 10 assist game and then we'd blame the loss on him in the 5 assist game for not passing the ball enough. It's ridiculous. Points are points and it doesn't matter how they get put on the board as long as they get put on the board.

If you want to talk about his defense then talk about his defense but it's just pure speculation that he completely forgoes the defensive side of the court because he's worried about a big contract with good offensive numbers. If he was really that greedy, why wouldn't he do better on defense so he could make even more money? It's not like being a good defensive player takes away from your offense.

You guys are trying to make one of our best players the scapegoat here. Why don't we talk about Cousins' defense? It's just as bad as IT's but for some reason he gets a pass. They're both excellent offensive players and they're both worthless on D. Yet one guy is our savior and the other is the main reason why were losing. It makes absolutely no sense. Demarcus is obviously the better player but IT is not so far off that he's the reason why were losing.

People just need to stop with the anti IT agenda. If you're talking about his offense, you're blaming him for all the wrong reasons. He's turned around his offense this year and has gotten better at everything. If you want to blame him for his defense, then that's perfectly fine but let's also blame Cousins just as much because they are equally as bad and even worse when they're both on the floor together. This post isn't meant to be anti Cousins, it's just showing you that it makes no sense to blast on one great offensive/no D player while praising the other great offensive/no D player every night.

 

[TyFreak Evans]

Lately it's been getting on my nerves reading all the IT bashing that's going on here. It seems like a few members came out with this anti IT agenda and it's spread throughout the board like wildfire. People are saying that he's a ball hog, that he doesn't pass, he takes too many shots, he's greedy and ignoring defense while looking to put up huge offensive numbers so he can get a big contract.

The guy has been averaging 7 assists a game this month. He's passing the ball at an above average pace for a PG. He's also basically tied for the 2nd best offensive player on this team. He SHOULD be taking a lot of shots. You don't want one of your best offensive weapons dumping the ball off to lesser skilled teammates all game when he can score efficiently himself. It doesn't matter if he scores 25 points with 5 assists or 15 points with 10 assists. The same amount of points were scored. We could lose both games and we'd be saying he did a great job in the 10 assist game and then we'd blame the loss on him in the 5 assist game for not passing the ball enough. It's ridiculous. Points are points and it doesn't matter how they get put on the board as long as they get put on the board.

If you want to talk about his defense then talk about his defense but it's just pure speculation that he completely forgoes the defensive side of the court because he's worried about a big contract with good offensive numbers. If he was really that greedy, why wouldn't he do better on defense so he could make even more money? It's not like being a good defensive player takes away from your offense.

You guys are trying to make one of our best players the scapegoat here. Why don't we talk about Cousins' defense? It's just as bad as IT's but for some reason he gets a pass. They're both excellent offensive players and they're both worthless on D. Yet one guy is our savior and the other is the main reason why were losing. It makes absolutely no sense. Demarcus is obviously the better player but IT is not so far off that he's the reason why were losing.

People just need to stop with the anti IT agenda. If you're talking about his offense, you're blaming him for all the wrong reasons. He's turned around his offense this year and has gotten better at everything. If you want to blame him for his defense, then that's perfectly fine but let's also blame Cousins just as much because they are equally as bad and even worse when they're both on the floor together. This post isn't meant to be anti Cousins, it's just showing you that it makes no sense to blast on one great offensive/no D player while praising the other great offensive/no D player every night.

Not that I was thinking about this or anything like that.......BUT, if I were to ever go on a minor rant about all the IT bashing, I would have said a lot of stuff. Now, I do not have to say a lot of stuff, because you have done it for me.

 

[Glenn]

We have had multiple threads about IT. Not sure why we need another. This is a team game and not an IT game. Certainly there must be another player to discuss. I can't imagine for one second anyone adding anything new and your note did not do it. It is also filled with the distortions I have come to expect from the "IT is great" crowd. If this thread is restricted to the IT cult, I am all for it but if anyone thinks rational discussion of IT is the purpose of this thread, think again.

 

[Glenn]

Not that I was thinking about this or anything like that.......BUT, if I were to ever go on a minor rant about all the IT bashing, I would have said a lot of stuff. Now, I do not have to say a lot of stuff, because you have done it for me.

So legitimate concerns about the holes in IT's game are "bashing?" Give me a break.

 

[Padrino]

sure, let's talk isaiah thomas: he's a 6th man, and nothing more, for myriad reasons previously discussed in myriad threads at kf.com. as far as i can gather, just about nobody here takes issue with isaiah thomas, the player. however, many posters take issue with isaiah thomas, the starter, and for very good reason...

 

[dude12]

Good offensive player, terrible defensive player because of size or other reasons. For me, defense starts with the guards and its a fail from the PG spot. Others are not playing well on defense either if it makes people happier.

 

[TyFreak Evans]

So legitimate concerns about the holes in IT's game are "bashing?" Give me a break.

He was the one who originally called it "bashing" so don't blame me...

I understand IT has holes in his game, and there should be legitimate concerns. BUT, guess what? The IT you see is probably the IT you're gonna keep on getting. I don't think he is ever going to become a stud defensive juggernaut, and I am sorry if anyone else feels the same way. I think IT will forever be used for his offensive firepower.

Now, to the discussion about whether he should be starting Vs. whether he should be coming off the bench? Right now, start the guy. Because we really do not have a guy that we can legitimately bring off the bench to start over IT. BUT, over time, we should acquire a stud point guard, and then bring IT off the bench. IT, I think, can become a modern day version of Bobby Jackson.

 

[hrdboild]

Most of the people who complain about IT's play lately aren't bashing him or calling him a poor teammate or ignoring his talent for scoring the ball. Some of the criticism is a direct reaction to our play-by-play crew insistently and relentlessly hyping him up as a superstar who is without fault. If you watch the Kings broadcasts a lot it starts to get under your skin and that's when you see a wave of sarcastic remarks directed at Grant and Jerry, not really at IT himself. But announcer bias aside, we've had plenty of discussions about IT already -- when he took over the starting job under Smart, all off-season while discussing potential trades, early this season with Vasquez struggling, and after the Rudy Gay trade when IT was forced into the starting role. It always circles around the same basic issues: does he pass enough to be a starting PG and does he defend well enough to play 30+ minutes a game.

Now you could just look at the numbers and say that Thomas is a top 10 PG this season and one of the top performers on the team. It's a fair point to make, but there seems to be a consensus around here among the people who watch every game and have watched every game for years that IT has the right skillset and attitude to be a dangerous weapon off the bench but he doesn't fit in the starting lineup very well for many of the same reasons. Usage rate, shot selection, and defensive consistency are all factors. But basically it comes down to just watching the games. Clever people in basketball often want to play up statistical data as something more than it is because the illusion of objectivity makes for a stronger argument. But there's no substitute for watching the games. And my subjective opinion is that IT, as good as he as at scoring the ball, creates problems for himself by not allowing his teammates to make plays. If he makes a couple of tough baskets his goal is usually to stay aggressive and make another one but defenses adjust. In the fourth quarter especially he needs to learn how to defer and spread the defense out by keeping everyone involved.

There may come a time when IT learns to do that. But right now he's still figuring it out and it's costing us games. The only "agenda" I have is that I want this team to win games. Every game if possible. At times I see IT as standing in the way of that goal and it gets a little frustrating. But that doesn't mean I'm ignoring all of the things that he does well. Actually, to the contrary, until recently I had hoped we'd be able to retain him as a scoring guard off the bench for the next 4 or 5 seasons. And I still think he'd be a great weapon to have on our side in the playoffs. The tricky part is that his contract is up at the end of the season and the numbers he's putting up are going to get him a big contract from somebody. The ironic part about his situation is that the better he plays individually, the less likely he is to be a member of this team in the future. I always try to look at the big picture and that means a player's contract situation plays into how I evaluate their value to the team. It's not Isaiah's fault that we have no depth at PG this season. But the longer he starts and puts up good scoring numbers in the boxscore, the more likely it is that he earns himself a contract which exceeds the value of a bench spark plug (see also: Marcus Thornton). And since I'm about the team more than I am about one player, it's tough for me to fully embrace IT as a future part of this team when I feel like he won't be for much longer.

 

[rainmaker]

I wasn't a member early last decade during our golden era, but were there BJax fans who would campaign for his to start over Bibby? Was there a BJax crowd vs Bibby crowd, or did picking a favorite player and backing him no matter what start later? Curious.

And no, we don't have a Bibby. The point is more IT's best role is as 6th man and some of his backers take that as an insult and I'm wondering if BJax had backers who took it as an insult when 6th man was considered his best role.

 

[rainmaker]

The tricky part is that his contract is up at the end of the season and the numbers he's putting up are going to get him a big contract from somebody. The ironic part about his situation is that the better he plays individually, the less likely he is to be a member of this team in the future.

Agree with your post in general but what do you define as a big contract? Other 6th men types, despite large numbers haven't been getting what I'd call "big contracts".

Nate Robinson is on a 2M contract.

Barea is on roughly 4.5M per, despite what he did on a Championship team.

Jamal Crawford is on roughly a 5.2-5.6M contract and has been a top 6th man for years.

JR Smith is on a two year, 5.6-6M per contract after winning 6th man of the year.

Nick Young is on 1.1M.

Isaiah doesn't have the resume or reputation Jamal/JR have as 6th men. I think we're looking at somewhere between Robinson and Barea territory. I don't think anyone will offer 5-6M+ per year due to his stats. I don't see him getting paid like most 17/5 guards as his stats are misleading in comparison to impact.

Maybe someone offers a Jack type deal at 6.3M per, but that's a bad contract imo and I wouldn't say it's likely in the first place.

 

[New Era]

I wasn't a member early last decade during our golden era, but were there BJax fans who would campaign for his to start over Bibby? Was there a BJax crowd vs Bibby crowd, or did picking a favorite player and backing him no matter what start later? Curious.

And no, we don't have a Bibby. The point is more IT's best role is as 6th man and some of his backers take that as an insult and I'm wondering if BJax had backers who took it as an insult when 6th man was considered his best role.

I didn't read this board then either but I followed the Kings very closely and I think I have a pretty good idea of what the fans thought. Here's the thing. The Kings were winners. They had multiple 50+ win seasons in a row. When you win, it fixes a lot of problems. When you win, you don't question whether Bax or Bibby should start. You just assume it's the right move because you're winning and you don't fix "what's not broken."
But as far as BJax or Bibby goes, I think it was pretty obvious to most people that Bibby was a better playmaker (and also a very good shooter) and that BJax was the perfect 6th man because he was instant offense off the bench. The one argument that could have been made though is that BJax was a very good defender -- much better than Bibby, but he simply wasn't anywhere as good as Bibby in running the offense for the majority of the game.

 

[ESP47]

We have had multiple threads about IT. Not sure why we need another. This is a team game and not an IT game. Certainly there must be another player to discuss. I can't imagine for one second anyone adding anything new and your note did not do it. It is also filled with the distortions I have come to expect from the "IT is great" crowd. If this thread is restricted to the IT cult, I am all for it but if anyone thinks rational discussion of IT is the purpose of this thread, think again.

I don't see any IT threads on the front page and I haven't seen a thread on him in a while. But many of the threads here seem to revert back to him as the cause of all the teams problems.

If you want to talk about distortions we can certainly talk about distortions. Check out your post in the Jimmer thread.

http://kingsfans.com/threads/jimmer-and-the-bench.54797/#post-1035128

You take a quote from IT about how everyone needs to step their D up and you spun it into him being embarrassed by his teammates, him talking as if he isn't part of the problem, him being oblivious to his own faults and him having an agenda to get a big contract. Now that is what you call distorting the truth.

It's that kind of garbage that annoys me when it comes to this guy. I'm not even a huge IT fan, I'm just sick of everyone twisting the truth around so they can blame the guy for all the teams problems. IT can do everything at an average or above average level other than play defense. We have a team full of guys who can't shoot, can't play D, can't handle the ball, can't finish, can't make plays and can't play consistently. We have no complete players. Find someone else to blame or blame the team as a whole, but stop twisting the truth around to blame one guy for all the teams problems.

 

[hrdboild]

Agree with your post in general but what do you define as a big contract? Other 6th men types, despite large numbers haven't been getting what I'd call "big contracts".

Nate Robinson is on a 2M contract.

Barea is on roughly 4.5M per, despite what he did on a Championship team.

Jamal Crawford is on roughly a 5.2-5.6M contract and has been a top 6th man for years.

JR Smith is on a two year, 5.6-6M per contract after winning 6th man of the year.

Nick Young is on 1.1M.

Isaiah doesn't have the resume or reputation Jamal/JR have as 6th men. I think we're looking at somewhere between Robinson and Barea territory. I don't think anyone will offer 5-6M+ per year due to his stats. I don't see him getting paid like most 17/5 guards as his stats are misleading in comparison to impact.

Maybe someone offers a Jack type deal at 6.3M per, but that's a bad contract imo and I wouldn't say it's likely in the first place.

Anything up to 5M per season is acceptable to me for a top sixth man. I have no way of knowing how other teams view IT, but I just get a feeling some GM is going to see a 25 year old stud averaging 21 and 7 in per/36 numbers and think they've found themselves a bit of a bargain in a starting PG. To the tune of 7-8 million per year for 4 years. That's the type of contract which has kept this team in the basement for the better part of a decade. Beno Udrih was 25 and coming off one season of 14 and 5 when Geoff signed him to a 5 yr / 32 million dollar deal. That's too much to spend on a 15-20 minute per night bench scorer I think. Especially with the new CBA restrictions.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I wasn't a member early last decade during our golden era, but were there BJax fans who would campaign for his to start over Bibby? Was there a BJax crowd vs Bibby crowd, or did picking a favorite player and backing him no matter what start later? Curious.

Well, part of the problem is, when you have a "Bibby," such discussions never occur in the first place.

As has been pointed out, we all know what Thomas is, and what he isn't. It's been my observation that those who accuse the rest of us as "bashing" Thomas seem to believe that what he can do is so impressive and important, that it outweighs what he can't do. There are many people on the "other side of the aisle" who believe the opposite of that.

And then, there is an often unacknowledged middle, of people who think that whether or not what he can do outweighs what he can't do depends on what role he has on the team. As a sixth man, a point guard who scores at a super-efficient rate, who can run the break, who is good at getting assists off penetration... that's great! As a starter, a point guard who can actually control the tempo, play fast or slow, who can work the ball inside to our star big, as opposed to mainly getting the ball to him on the drive-and-kick, and making him have to make a play from twenty feet out, who can defend the other team's point guard... well, that stuff is way more important to me from my starter than how efficient his scoring is.

Speaking for myself, I was happy with Thomas when he was coming off the bench; as a starter, though, it's not good enough. Not because he stopped being any good, but because what he does is no longer a fit for what he's being asked to do. Different roles demand different standards.

 

[bajaden]

Agree with your post in general but what do you define as a big contract? Other 6th men types, despite large numbers haven't been getting what I'd call "big contracts".

Nate Robinson is on a 2M contract.

Barea is on roughly 4.5M per, despite what he did on a Championship team.

Jamal Crawford is on roughly a 5.2-5.6M contract and has been a top 6th man for years.

JR Smith is on a two year, 5.6-6M per contract after winning 6th man of the year.

Nick Young is on 1.1M.

Isaiah doesn't have the resume or reputation Jamal/JR have as 6th men. I think we're looking at somewhere between Robinson and Barea territory. I don't think anyone will offer 5-6M+ per year due to his stats. I don't see him getting paid like most 17/5 guards as his stats are misleading in comparison to impact.

Maybe someone offers a Jack type deal at 6.3M per, but that's a bad contract imo and I wouldn't say it's likely in the first place.

I hope your right, because for the right price, I'd love to keep IT. And, as pointed out, as a 6th man off the bench. What scares me is that there are some teams out there right now that could really use IT. The Lakers spring to mind, perhaps even the Bulls with Rose out again. It seems that there's always some idiot team that overpays. I'm assuming that the Kings and IT's agent have had some conversations, and that the Kings have some idea of what he wants. If so, that might determine whether he gets traded before the deadline or not.

If the Kings think there's a chance they might lose him in freeagency, they might opt to trade him before hand.

 

[Lennox]

So legitimate concerns about the holes in IT's game are "bashing?" Give me a break.

Maybe you don't bash him but a lot of poster's do for sure. He is short as hell and will never be a stopper on d, but Cuz is not helping as much as he should. IT is pretty good getting steals when 1 on 1 because of his quickness but he gets knocked off screens pretty easily because of his size. He and the other guards need more help than they have been getting. He and Jimmer do get bashed a lot on here and not saying you included. I never hear anything about big Cuz on D or on his turnovers, maybe because he is the best offensive player here.

 

[Padrino]

Maybe you don't bash him but a lot of poster's do for sure. He is short as hell and will not ever be a stopper on d, but Cuz is not helping as much as he should. IT is pretty good getting steals when 1 on 1 because of his quickness but yes gets knocked off screens pretty easily because of his size. He and the other guards need more help than they have been getting. He and Jimmer do get bashed a lot on here and not saying you included. I never hear anything about big Cuz on D or on his turnovers, maybe because he is the best offensive player here.

or maybe it's because he's rapidly developing into the single most talented center in the entire nba?



it has long been a known quantity that demarcus cousins will never become the kings' defensive anchor. these are not new revelations. big cuz is largely ground-bound and relatively slow-footed. he's got a few solid instincts on defense, particularly when it comes to taking charges, and he's becoming a sturdy man-defender. but he is being asked to give a lot on offense while taking tremendous punishment down low from opposing defenses, and he's being asked to shoulder the bulk of the team's rebounding responsibilities, as well. it's simply not feasible for cousins to also chase down the guards who blow by isaiah thomas and/or ben mclemore on every. single. play. demarcus definitely needs to improve his reaction time on the pick and roll, but it certainly would help if IT or the rook could, ya know, deny dribble penetration or successfully contest a 3-pt. shot even occasionally...

 

[Kingster]

Every player on this team has limitations. The best player, Cousins, has obvious limitations in his ability to jump, and to a certain extent, his endurance. Rudy Gay isn't exactly a stopper on D. Thompson is limited by bad feet and mediocre hands. McLemore is limited by his ball handling. Etc., etc., etc. IT is obviously limited by his size. He's also the quarterback of the team. Because he's the quarterback, his errors are going to be magnified. That's the way it is. The attention is typically on the ball handler. So he gets a lot of the blame for the losses. The fact that he's the smallest guy on the floor seems to magnify the focus and the negativity. I guess if you have bad D on your team, it just has to be mainly because of the smallest guy on the floor. It's not because your center, power forward, and three aren't quick enough or willing enough to stop a guy dribbling from the 3 point line all the way to the basket for a layup, something that happens repeatedly with this team. My own belief is that IT is not going to be appreciated fully until this team wins. I'm hopeful he can be resigned so that when this team does start winning he can be more fully appreciated for his positive impact on the game. He is a good player. One of the few we have on this team.

 

[KingMilz]

Isaiah Thomas is the last person we should be worried/complaining about this season

 

[Padrino]

Every player on this team has limitations. The best player, Cousins, has obvious limitations in his ability to jump, and to a certain extent, his endurance. Rudy Gay isn't exactly a stopper on D. Thompson is limited by bad feet and mediocre hands. McLemore is limited by his ball handling. Etc., etc., etc. IT is obviously limited by his size. He's also the quarterback of the team. Because he's the quarterback, his errors are going to be magnified. That's the way it is. The attention is typically on the ball handler. So he gets a lot of the blame for the losses. The fact that he's the smallest guy on the floor seems to magnify the focus and the negativity. I guess if you have bad D on your team, it just has to be mainly because of the smallest guy on the floor. It's not because your center, power forward, and three aren't quick enough or willing enough to stop a guy dribbling from the 3 point line all the way to the basket for a layup, something that happens repeatedly with this team. My own belief is that IT is not going to be appreciated fully until this team wins. I'm hopeful he can be resigned so that when this team does start winning he can be more fully appreciated for his positive impact on the game. He is a good player. One of the few we have on this team.

geezus, i sure as s*** wish more people were talking like this when tyreke evans was still a king...



isaiah thomas is a nice asset, an incredibly useful sixth man type. if this team ever does start winning again, IT will indeed be "fully appreciated," but likely in the same way that bobby jackson was "fully appreciated" during the kings' golden era. that said, bobby jackson was not at the heart of that team. he was its sparkplug, a role that thomas should eventually return to...

 

[rainmaker]

Every player on this team has limitations. The best player, Cousins, has obvious limitations in his ability to jump, and to a certain extent, his endurance. Rudy Gay isn't exactly a stopper on D. Thompson is limited by bad feet and mediocre hands. McLemore is limited by his ball handling. Etc., etc., etc. IT is obviously limited by his size. He's also the quarterback of the team. Because he's the quarterback, his errors are going to be magnified. That's the way it is. The attention is typically on the ball handler. So he gets a lot of the blame for the losses. The fact that he's the smallest guy on the floor seems to magnify the focus and the negativity. I guess if you have bad D on your team, it just has to be mainly because of the smallest guy on the floor. It's not because your center, power forward, and three aren't quick enough or willing enough to stop a guy dribbling from the 3 point line all the way to the basket for a layup, something that happens repeatedly with this team. My own belief is that IT is not going to be appreciated fully until this team wins. I'm hopeful he can be resigned so that when this team does start winning he can be more fully appreciated for his positive impact on the game. He is a good player. One of the few we have on this team.

You said the exact opposite when it was Reke running the team for 2-3 years. The same excuses you throw around now were the ones you attacked repeatedly.

Interesting.

 

[Kingster]

You said the exact opposite when it was Reke running the team for 2-3 years. The same excuses you throw around now were the ones you attacked repeatedly.

Interesting.

Oh, God. Now we're back to Tyreke Evans? Maybe we can talk about the Webber trade for old times sake?

It's probably telling that a positive post on IT brings up the re-hash of Tyreke Evans. I hadn't considered that some of the IT negativity is just the bitter resentment of those disappointed by the IT experience, but your post and the one of above certainly lend some credence to that point.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

[devil's Advocate]

That wasn't a denial...

[/devil's Advocate]

 

[ESP47]

or maybe it's because he's rapidly developing into the single most talented center in the entire nba?



it has long been a known quantity that demarcus cousins will never become the kings' defensive anchor. these are not new revelations. big cuz is largely ground-bound and relatively slow-footed. he's got a few solid instincts on defense, particularly when it comes to taking charges, and he's becoming a sturdy man-defender. but he is being asked to give a lot on offense while taking tremendous punishment down low from opposing defenses, and he's being asked to shoulder the bulk of the team's rebounding responsibilities, as well. it's simply not feasible for cousins to also chase down the guards who blow by isaiah thomas and/or ben mclemore on every. single. play. demarcus definitely needs to improve his reaction time on the pick and roll, but it certainly would help if IT or the rook could, ya know, deny dribble penetration or successfully contest a 3-pt. shot even occasionally...

This is exactly what I mean. Cousins gets a pass while IT doesn't. IT puts up almost as many points as Cousins. They're both working hard on the offensive side and they're both not holding up their weight on defense. Yet Cousins always gets the pass.

 

[VF21]

This is exactly what I mean. Cousins gets a pass while IT doesn't. IT puts up almost as many points as Cousins. They're both working hard on the offensive side and they're both not holding up their weight on defense. Yet Cousins always gets the pass.

WHY do people always seem to find a way to make it about King vs. King? It's been this way for far too long, going back to the arguments about Webber vs. Peja. Those were stupid then and this is stupid now.

Isaiah Thomas is a Sacramento King. Demarcus Cousins is a Sacramento King. Both are part of the reason this team is even worth watching. Instead of finding ways to make constructive comments, it seems as though these arguments ALWAYS end up with one side feeling they have to point out either favoritism or discrimination on one side to strengthen or destroy the opposing view.

Isaiah is a very good player who many believe would be even better if he returned to his role off the bench. He's not perfect but he's not as bad as some seem to believe. On the other hand, he's not the starting point guard for the future of this franchise. He just isn't. It doesn't make him a bad person or a poor player. It makes him someone who needs to be able to play in the right spot and unfortunately he cannot do that at this point because we don't have an adequate player to replace him in the starting five.

Demarcus is a very good player who many believe will become even better. Comments like "Cousins always gets the pass" are just wrong. DMC received more criticism last year than any other player in recent memory (with the possible exception of the poopoo storm Webb was embroiled in because of his various problems off the court). He's not perfect either but he has shown incredible growth and maturity. If you don't see that, you must be watching a different team than I watch every single game. Could he do better on defense? Oh, hell yes. But that's not the point. Saying that he gets a pass from criticism is pure deflection, an attempt to turn the discussion away from IT.

Grant and Jerry have done more to irritate Kings fans than anyone else could possibly have done. If they didn't feel the need to preach about Isaiah every single freaking time they open their mouths, I know a least one Kings fan who wouldn't get so irritated she's tempted to throw things at the TV. Give him props sure, but quit acting like he's the next future HoF player in the making.

I, being a person on the short side myself, empathize with IT and have a ton of respect for what he has accomplished thus far. I think he has an incredible NBA career in front of him. I just wish Kings fans could look at him a little more objectively and quit buying into the G&J hyperbole.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

geezus, i sure as s*** wish more people were talking like this when tyreke evans was still a king...



isaiah thomas is a nice asset, an incredibly useful sixth man type. if this team ever does start winning again, IT will indeed be "fully appreciated," but likely in the same way that bobby jackson was "fully appreciated" during the kings' golden era. that said, bobby jackson was not at the heart of that team. he was its sparkplug, a role that thomas should eventually return to...

Disagree that a 6th man who competes effectively on both ends of the floor, is not 'at the heart of the team'. Bobby Jackson was a huge part of the heart of that team

 

[spudfan]

WHY do people always seem to find a way to make it about King vs. King? It's been this way for far too long, going back to the arguments about Webber vs. Peja. Those were stupid then and this is stupid now.

Isaiah Thomas is a Sacramento King. Demarcus Cousins is a Sacramento King. Both are part of the reason this team is even worth watching. Instead of finding ways to make constructive comments, it seems as though these arguments ALWAYS end up with one side feeling they have to point out either favoritism or discrimination on one side to strengthen or destroy the opposing view.

Isaiah is a very good player who many believe would be even better if he returned to his role off the bench. He's not perfect but he's not as bad as some seem to believe. On the other hand, he's not the starting point guard for the future of this franchise. He just isn't. It doesn't make him a bad person or a poor player. It makes him someone who needs to be able to play in the right spot and unfortunately he cannot do that at this point because we don't have an adequate player to replace him in the starting five.

Demarcus is a very good player who many believe will become even better. Comments like "Cousins always gets the pass" are just wrong. DMC received more criticism last year than any other player in recent memory (with the possible exception of the poopoo storm Webb was embroiled in because of his various problems off the court). He's not perfect either but he has shown incredible growth and maturity. If you don't see that, you must be watching a different team than I watch every single game. Could he do better on defense? Oh, hell yes. But that's not the point. Saying that he gets a pass from criticism is pure deflection, an attempt to turn the discussion away from IT.

Grant and Jerry have done more to irritate Kings fans than anyone else could possibly have done. If they didn't feel the need to preach about Isaiah every single freaking time they open their mouths, I know a least one Kings fan who wouldn't get so irritated she's tempted to throw things at the TV. Give him props sure, but quit acting like he's the next future HoF player in the making.

I, being a person on the short side myself, empathize with IT and have a ton of respect for what he has accomplished thus far. I think he has an incredible NBA career in front of him. I just wish Kings fans could look at him a little more objectively and quit buying into the G&J hyperbole.

Yeppppp! That has to be one of the most irritating "strategies" people use. If someone doesn't want to talk about one players performance then they don't need to. People see different problems from different places and prioritize which they feel like talking about accordingly. That doesn't mean the view of another person isn't important, it just isn't the current topic.

 

[dude12]

This is exactly what I mean. Cousins gets a pass while IT doesn't. IT puts up almost as many points as Cousins. They're both working hard on the offensive side and they're both not holding up their weight on defense. Yet Cousins always gets the pass.

I can only speak my opinion but PGs or guards that are terrible on defense is not a recipe for championship success. You can hide a PGs defense by playing your off-guard on the better offensive player(Doug Christie) and you can help em with a defensive big when the opposing guards low past your 1st line of defense. You can get by with an adequate defensive big like Cousins. Hard to get by with a defensive liability at PG.....it breaks the team defense down. It's why if w get a chance to draft Marcus Smart, he should be our 1st choice

 

[gunks]

Smart with IT off the bench. We'd be set at PG for a decade.

 

[randymoss1881]

Smart with IT off the bench. We'd be set at PG for a decade.

I like your thinking but if we got Embiid not only would we be set for a decade but we could be talking about a dynasty in 5 years if Embiid reached 80% of his potential. Twin towers reminiscing Timmy/robinson.