Can't believe the amount of overreaction here. Did everyone really expect a rookie in a weak draft to take the world by storm in his first season. Have a little patience people. Give him some time.
Having said that, I think he should move back to the bench for the time being. Right now, he's all nerves imo and i'm pretty sure his confidence isn't improving each night that he gets destroyed by the opposing starting sg. Thornton while not a long term solution is sufficient for the moment or even place Gay at sg and Williams at sf (or vice versa).
Having said that, I think he should move back to the bench for the time being. Right now, he's all nerves imo and i'm pretty sure his confidence isn't improving each night that he gets destroyed by the opposing starting sg. Thornton while not a long term solution is sufficient for the moment or even place Gay at sg and Williams at sf (or vice versa).
Last edited:
K
To me sending him to the D-League is not a option nor is to keep starting him, if we can get a quality player 25 years old or younger for him who helps us/fits well with Cousins I would not mind trading. Also if we play him off the bench with Williams/Gay as the wings I can live with Ben Mac developing off the bench but I can't watch him decimate us at both ends against the oppositons best starting 5.
I don't know if it just me but really everything he does is like Thomas Robinson he shows a couple flashes in a couple games but is just awful at best 95% of the time. The most basic skills off passing the ball into the post he literally struggles with (dribbling/finishing dunks also). That's what really concerns me is he can't even make basic passes at the age of 20 and is just lacking so badly in so many areas. The mental aspect as well is so much like T-Rob he's a ball of tense nervous energy.
I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt for now but I got to see something better from him.
I don't know if it just me but really everything he does is like Thomas Robinson he shows a couple flashes in a couple games but is just awful at best 95% of the time. The most basic skills off passing the ball into the post he literally struggles with (dribbling/finishing dunks also). That's what really concerns me is he can't even make basic passes at the age of 20 and is just lacking so badly in so many areas. The mental aspect as well is so much like T-Rob he's a ball of tense nervous energy.
I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt for now but I got to see something better from him.
At the end of my rope with the kid. Anymore 1-6, headless chicken defense performances and my head will literally eXplode. Problem is I don't know if you can put an underperforming Thornton into a lineup with 3 players that need significant touches. At this point I literally have as much hope in redeeming Marcus as I do in Ben's future, and that is a tough thing to say.
this was my original worry with starting McLemore. Beginning of the season, he had no team expectations and could just go out on the floor and be athletic. Guess what, he performed well in that role, which is why he got the starting gig in the first place. We need to bring him back to that. Let him D up Francisco Garcia's of the world instead of the James Harden's of the world. Run him in 5-6 minute stints instead of entire quarters. Get his shot confidence back by letting him go against players more on his level right now.
I don't think continuously beating his head against a wall against some of the toughest defenders and scorers in the league is helping his development.
I don't think continuously beating his head against a wall against some of the toughest defenders and scorers in the league is helping his development.
Raduljica is an idiot. He used to play for my team back in Serbia and he is just an idiot and in the NBA, his talent level is not big enough to put up with it. At least with Sanders you know that at his best he is one of the best defensive bigs and a very good fit next to Cousins so you are more likely to take the risk especially if those two have good relationship from the USA basketball camp over summer.
A majority opinion hardly makes something more true. And while being a "starter" is mostly a meaningless title, I'm sure we can assume "starting" means playing a bulk of the minutes. While I would love to have the kid come off the bench with the second unit, you need to have a viable solution that makes the team better to do that. Unfortunately, we do not have that on this roster. The SG spot on the first unit needs to be able to hit open jumpers and play defense. The SG spot on the second unit has the need to provide more of a scoring punch and all-around offensive repertoire. Plus, you need a backup PG. While putting Thorton into the the starting lineup might make people feel better about not starting a rookie, it would not improve our team, and would make us worse. If you don't remember, he was a 33% shooter as a starter (Ben is at 36%). So yes, it can get worse. Thorton is far better suited (on this team as constructed), to come off the bench as a scorer with the second unit. There would actually be more pressure on Ben if he was placed in that role. Using Jimmer is laughable as a solution (although it might set a record for the smallest starting backcourt ever).
So basically, Ben should be starting, until a better solution presents itself. Plus, Ben seems to have a bit of streakiness in him as well, he played very well on the last road trip. Making a change, just to make a change is dumb.
So basically, Ben should be starting, until a better solution presents itself. Plus, Ben seems to have a bit of streakiness in him as well, he played very well on the last road trip. Making a change, just to make a change is dumb.
Some of you folks... I don't know what to say. This is basketball we're talking about and you're acting like it's a war-time situation and Ben McLemore is getting people killed. What is he costing us? A few games here or there? You really think we're one decent SG away from being even a .500 team? Iman Shumpert is the difference or something? This is why Ben McLemore's play doesn't bother me -- he's doing his job. He's running to his spots on offense, he's trying to make the right pass, he's taking his shots when he gets them, he;s rebounding the ball and giving it up and he's getting in a defensive position and pressuring the ball. It drives me crazy when he sags into the key all the time on defense but we're 29 games into the season. He's done it in every game. Our whole damn team does it. If that's not the gameplan, surely someone would have told them not to by now. Everything else though...
Look, I know the guys who dominate the ball get all the fancy numbers but I'd take a team of 5 guys like Ben McLemore any day over 5 players who can't see far enough past their own ego to run an offensive system that doesn't place them at the center of attention. You're upset that Ben isn't doing anything out there? Look at the guys dominating the ball. They have this new player tracking feature on NBA.com that keeps track of all sorts of data like how far and how fast players are moving throughout the course of a game. If you look at the average distance traveled per 48 minutes, in other words how active a player is while they're on the floor, Ben McLemore comes in tied for 13th in the league. (link) I only looked that up because I suspected as much. He never stops moving. Look at average speed and he's even higher. In fact, of guys getting significant minutes he's tied with JJ Redick and Tony Parker for the highest speed on the list. He's working his ass off.
According to one account he's too dumb to run a play or something? Is that why Bill Self called him the most talented player he's ever coached? Rudy Gay is an 8 year NBA veteran and he's coming off a week where he had a 7 TO game, a 6 TO game and a 5 TO game. When this same topic was brought up regarding Rudy it was dismissed as ridiculous. Why? Because he has a track record. Well this is what I'm seeing: Over the last 4 games combined Rudy Gay has taken 71 shots. Thomas has taken 63 shots. Cousins has taken 73 shots. McLemore has taken 16 shots. Each of our "big 3" has also accounted for 13 TOs apiece over those 4 games. You can't have it both ways people. That's an average of 61.5 possessions per game which ended in one of those guys taking a shot or turning the ball over. (And that doesn't even account for all the free throws! 81 of them, but who's counting
) Doesn't leave much room for anyone else does it? This is exactly what I warned you about after the win in Orlando. The more our offense tilts toward featuring 3 guys almost to the exclusion of everyone else, the less successful we're going to be in the long run.
Look, I know the guys who dominate the ball get all the fancy numbers but I'd take a team of 5 guys like Ben McLemore any day over 5 players who can't see far enough past their own ego to run an offensive system that doesn't place them at the center of attention. You're upset that Ben isn't doing anything out there? Look at the guys dominating the ball. They have this new player tracking feature on NBA.com that keeps track of all sorts of data like how far and how fast players are moving throughout the course of a game. If you look at the average distance traveled per 48 minutes, in other words how active a player is while they're on the floor, Ben McLemore comes in tied for 13th in the league. (link) I only looked that up because I suspected as much. He never stops moving. Look at average speed and he's even higher. In fact, of guys getting significant minutes he's tied with JJ Redick and Tony Parker for the highest speed on the list. He's working his ass off.
According to one account he's too dumb to run a play or something? Is that why Bill Self called him the most talented player he's ever coached? Rudy Gay is an 8 year NBA veteran and he's coming off a week where he had a 7 TO game, a 6 TO game and a 5 TO game. When this same topic was brought up regarding Rudy it was dismissed as ridiculous. Why? Because he has a track record. Well this is what I'm seeing: Over the last 4 games combined Rudy Gay has taken 71 shots. Thomas has taken 63 shots. Cousins has taken 73 shots. McLemore has taken 16 shots. Each of our "big 3" has also accounted for 13 TOs apiece over those 4 games. You can't have it both ways people. That's an average of 61.5 possessions per game which ended in one of those guys taking a shot or turning the ball over. (And that doesn't even account for all the free throws! 81 of them, but who's counting
) Doesn't leave much room for anyone else does it? This is exactly what I warned you about after the win in Orlando. The more our offense tilts toward featuring 3 guys almost to the exclusion of everyone else, the less successful we're going to be in the long run.
Last edited:
Well, I don't really believe that last part is true at all; in fact, most of the better teams over the past four decades have had their offense tilt towards featuring 2-3 guys, to the near exclusion of everyone else, to great success. The trick is to have the right 2-3 guys, and to also have a cast of "everyone else" that's good at doing stuff besides scoring, like setting picks, boxing out, and playing defense.
Now, my personal bias would rather that one of those 2-3 guys be the off guard than the point guard, but that's neither here nor there.
Now, my personal bias would rather that one of those 2-3 guys be the off guard than the point guard, but that's neither here nor there.
Apologies if someone else posted this, but here is Peja first year vs Ben thus far. Let's not send him out to pasture just yet. For kings fans who have been losing for more than half a decade, I'm sometimes shocked at the lack of perspective. This is not surprising nor unprecedented and man, I'm just really surprised at some of you mods actually.
Now, we don't KNOW he'll turn it around like Peja or Wallace. And he shouldn't be starting ideally. But he is, and you take the lumps. That's how this works. At some point you give up on him. 30 games in isn't the time. Not even close. There's something there in Ben. It's ok if you disagree, but there certainly is precedence for a rookie struggling. He could definitely be put in better situations. He doesn't have big brother vlade setting him up like Peja, and as the first year numbers show, peja still shot a nice .320 from 3 his first season.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=stojape01&y1=1999&p2=mclembe01&y2=2014
The problem with the SG situation is Mr. Marcus Thornton. He's supposed to be starting. He was the day 1 starter. He's the veteran. If you want to spew venom, aim at the right guy. He was the guy throwing the ball off the backyard from 3 last night. And he's the guy who would fit with the current ball hoggy top 3 even worse than Ben.
The other part of all of this is the west is really good. We can play much much better and still lose a lot, like last night. We actually are several steps away, not one iman Shumpert or jimmy butler or George hill or Larry sanders or whatever mythical defender role player we all want. And part of this is they need to grow as a team and not overreact to losses that have little long term meaning, like last night. At least not the actual losing part. You learn from it, watch film, and try to be better the next time. That's part of the steps that need to be taken as well.
Now, we don't KNOW he'll turn it around like Peja or Wallace. And he shouldn't be starting ideally. But he is, and you take the lumps. That's how this works. At some point you give up on him. 30 games in isn't the time. Not even close. There's something there in Ben. It's ok if you disagree, but there certainly is precedence for a rookie struggling. He could definitely be put in better situations. He doesn't have big brother vlade setting him up like Peja, and as the first year numbers show, peja still shot a nice .320 from 3 his first season.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=stojape01&y1=1999&p2=mclembe01&y2=2014
The problem with the SG situation is Mr. Marcus Thornton. He's supposed to be starting. He was the day 1 starter. He's the veteran. If you want to spew venom, aim at the right guy. He was the guy throwing the ball off the backyard from 3 last night. And he's the guy who would fit with the current ball hoggy top 3 even worse than Ben.
The other part of all of this is the west is really good. We can play much much better and still lose a lot, like last night. We actually are several steps away, not one iman Shumpert or jimmy butler or George hill or Larry sanders or whatever mythical defender role player we all want. And part of this is they need to grow as a team and not overreact to losses that have little long term meaning, like last night. At least not the actual losing part. You learn from it, watch film, and try to be better the next time. That's part of the steps that need to be taken as well.
I'd like to keep starting Ben. We aren't going anywhere this year, it may help get a better draft pick and if he's going to become a quality player, now's the time to get that experience. He's only about a year out of high school, he's very coachable and I don't think this is the time to give up on him.
I would ride it out with Ben for the rest of the season and see what develops.
I would ride it out with Ben for the rest of the season and see what develops.
One of my earlier points about McLemore is that it no longer matters if he develops like it once did for us. That he largely can't, and even if he did here's Ben McLemore's big upside for us now: a 10-12pt/scorer. I again would urge people to watch our boxscores as they have developed. Last night Gay Cuz and Thomas combined for 60 shots. No one else had more than 8, with JT with 8, Ben with 7 and Thornton off the bench with 7. Even if Ben was shooting well he what? Shoots 4-7 for 10pts?
DeMarcus Cousins is developing into a huge star. Rudy Gay has been a lower tier star for half a decade. If people want to start up yet another this King vs. that King thing then your debate would have to be "let's get rid of IT so we can feature Ben". Which at this point in time would be completely batcrap insane. IT's a better SG than Ben is. That entire SG position for us has now become a roleplayer slot. Its about everything but numbers. And frankly aside from occasional good rebounding games Ben is terrible at everything that position is about for us now, and the key here: everything that the SG is likely to be about for us in the longer term.
When I was pointing out a couple of weeks ago how things were evolving so fast that not only old Kings holdovers no longer had a place on the team, but even early acquisitions by this same regime were quickly becoming outdated, Ben was one of those players. Carl Landry is one of those players. Derrick Williams is one of those players. Obviously Thornton etc. Cousins (17.0), Gay (15.0), and Thomas (15.7) combine for 47.7 shots a night as starters (the Heat's trio for comparison averages 42.2 shots a game, last year it was 45.9). There is absolutely no room for another scorer in the starting lineup. And really on the entire team there is basically room for 1 significant bench scorer, and that's it. And given our financial and seeming emotional commitment to Carl Landry, that is likely to be him. Giving us 4 scorers BTW, none of for whom defense is a focus. Even a good non-struggling Ben McLemore wouldn't fit what was needed at this point unless it be this completely mythological Ben who magically goes from league worst defender to All Defense teams. But that sort of thing is literally years away. In the meantime Ben is basically an agent for other teams undermining us during games.
People act like its completely abnormal to not start a rookie, even a terrible rookie, but that is silly. Victor Oladipo, who BTW would completely destroy Ben at this point in their respective careers, is coming off the bench. In fact only 3 of the 14 lottery picks are currently starting for their teams. It is FAR from a necessity for a young guy. Burke is nothing special, but he's clearly their guy at PG. MCW of course has been tremendous. And then there is Ben.
See this sounds accurate, but I don't think the data really bears it out. Here's a list of teams this season with less than 5 players averaging double digit scoring. It's a short list...
Clippers (21-11) #5 guy: DeAndre Jordan 9.3ppg
--------------------------------------------
TWolves (15-15) #5 guy: Rubio 8.9ppg
Nuggets (14-15) #5 guy: Faried 9.5ppg
Bobcats (14-17) #5 guy: MKG 9.1ppg
Raptors (13-15) #5 guy: Vasquez 9.5ppg
Grizzlies (13-16) #5 guy: Jon Leur 9.1ppg
Cavs (10-20) #5 guy: CJ Miles 8.4ppg
Knicks (9-21) #5 guy: Hardaway Jr. 9.1ppg
---------------------------------------------
Kings (9-20) #4 guy: McLemore 8.7ppg, #5 guy: Thornton 8.4ppg
There's a whopping 1 winning team on that list, and they didn't miss the cutoff by much. Also their third guy Jamal Crawford is coming off the bench. Minnesota is the closest comparison to our team with most of the shots going to a top 3 (Love, Martin, Pek) and they're having trouble winning games even with one of the best passing PGs in the game to distribute the shots. The Bobcats are one of the better defensive teams in the league right now so they can go a little further with a dysfunctional offense but they're not exactly lighting up the league over there either. Also, you may have noticed, we're the only team in the league with less than 4 guys averaging double digit scoring. And we're also the only team even remotely close to having three guys average 20ppg. (okay, Golden State is in the ballpark)
The teams you're thinking of -- Miami, OKC, San Antonio, Indiana, Portland -- the elite teams all have a group of players who could be considered their big 3 but Miami is more balanced offensively than you think they are, with Bosh providing them with role-player type numbers and both Beasley and Allen playing key roles off the bench. OKC has a big 2 with Ibaka as the defensive enforcer. San Antonio is one of the most balanced offenses in the league (technically they belong on the above list but with two guys at 9.8ppg, I rounded up -- plus they only have 1 player averaging more than 15ppg so they don't really count in this context). Indiana has only 1 guy over 15ppg as well. Portland is built around two scorers, Aldridge and Lillard, and a bunch of glue guys. Am I missing anyone? Houston's big three includes Dwight Howard guarding the paint. The Warriors start one of the most unique stars in the league in Igoudala next to their potent scoring guards and Thompson is a designated shooter, not a guy who dominates the ball.
Now the Miami team of the past two seasons which won back to back championships fits the criteria, but they've got Lebron James and Dywane Wade. That's 2 of the top 10 players in the league. And if you look back at their team, they've moved away from a big 3 concentrated offense more and more. The first year was the most lopsided and they didn't win that year. They've adapted. The winning Lakers teams had 1 20ppg scorer. Dallas had 1 20ppg scorer. Boston won with a big 3 but they also had a top 10 defense and one of the best passing PGs in the league. Going all the way back to 2007 you get the Spurs with their big 3 in their prime and dominating the offense. But I don't even need to tell you that the Spurs were not poor defensively. And that brings me back around to our problem...
A big three isn't by definition a losing scenario. But it is when none of your big 3 is a standout defender and all of them need the ball to create their shots. I question whether a team built around 3 20ppg scorers has ever consistently won anything in the post-season, but more to the point, you can't build a core around three players who are terrible as a unit defensively. You're just setting yourself up for failure. And I think you're saying the same thing -- it could work with the right 3 guys. I don't think these 3 guys are it. It scares me when people talk about trading guys like McLemore and Williams for role-players -- guys who can push this team to maybe a step above awful. Those kids are the future of the team. No they're not ready yet but you don't give up on guys that young and that talented who've barely started to adjust to the league.
Clippers (21-11) #5 guy: DeAndre Jordan 9.3ppg
--------------------------------------------
TWolves (15-15) #5 guy: Rubio 8.9ppg
Nuggets (14-15) #5 guy: Faried 9.5ppg
Bobcats (14-17) #5 guy: MKG 9.1ppg
Raptors (13-15) #5 guy: Vasquez 9.5ppg
Grizzlies (13-16) #5 guy: Jon Leur 9.1ppg
Cavs (10-20) #5 guy: CJ Miles 8.4ppg
Knicks (9-21) #5 guy: Hardaway Jr. 9.1ppg
---------------------------------------------
Kings (9-20) #4 guy: McLemore 8.7ppg, #5 guy: Thornton 8.4ppg
There's a whopping 1 winning team on that list, and they didn't miss the cutoff by much. Also their third guy Jamal Crawford is coming off the bench. Minnesota is the closest comparison to our team with most of the shots going to a top 3 (Love, Martin, Pek) and they're having trouble winning games even with one of the best passing PGs in the game to distribute the shots. The Bobcats are one of the better defensive teams in the league right now so they can go a little further with a dysfunctional offense but they're not exactly lighting up the league over there either. Also, you may have noticed, we're the only team in the league with less than 4 guys averaging double digit scoring. And we're also the only team even remotely close to having three guys average 20ppg. (okay, Golden State is in the ballpark)
The teams you're thinking of -- Miami, OKC, San Antonio, Indiana, Portland -- the elite teams all have a group of players who could be considered their big 3 but Miami is more balanced offensively than you think they are, with Bosh providing them with role-player type numbers and both Beasley and Allen playing key roles off the bench. OKC has a big 2 with Ibaka as the defensive enforcer. San Antonio is one of the most balanced offenses in the league (technically they belong on the above list but with two guys at 9.8ppg, I rounded up -- plus they only have 1 player averaging more than 15ppg so they don't really count in this context). Indiana has only 1 guy over 15ppg as well. Portland is built around two scorers, Aldridge and Lillard, and a bunch of glue guys. Am I missing anyone? Houston's big three includes Dwight Howard guarding the paint. The Warriors start one of the most unique stars in the league in Igoudala next to their potent scoring guards and Thompson is a designated shooter, not a guy who dominates the ball.
Now the Miami team of the past two seasons which won back to back championships fits the criteria, but they've got Lebron James and Dywane Wade. That's 2 of the top 10 players in the league. And if you look back at their team, they've moved away from a big 3 concentrated offense more and more. The first year was the most lopsided and they didn't win that year. They've adapted. The winning Lakers teams had 1 20ppg scorer. Dallas had 1 20ppg scorer. Boston won with a big 3 but they also had a top 10 defense and one of the best passing PGs in the league. Going all the way back to 2007 you get the Spurs with their big 3 in their prime and dominating the offense. But I don't even need to tell you that the Spurs were not poor defensively. And that brings me back around to our problem...
A big three isn't by definition a losing scenario. But it is when none of your big 3 is a standout defender and all of them need the ball to create their shots. I question whether a team built around 3 20ppg scorers has ever consistently won anything in the post-season, but more to the point, you can't build a core around three players who are terrible as a unit defensively. You're just setting yourself up for failure. And I think you're saying the same thing -- it could work with the right 3 guys. I don't think these 3 guys are it. It scares me when people talk about trading guys like McLemore and Williams for role-players -- guys who can push this team to maybe a step above awful. Those kids are the future of the team. No they're not ready yet but you don't give up on guys that young and that talented who've barely started to adjust to the league.
Well it all really depends on which direction you want to go. I've seen enough from McLemore to think he can be a better defensive version of Kevin Martin one day. The catch is that one day might just be 3 or 4 years from now. By then, Gay will be 31, Cousins will be 27, and Isaiah will be 28. McLemore is improving. His man-to-man defense has been leaps and bounds better than it was earlier this season. His shooting is slowly trending towards more consistency. His issues are largely a lack of concentration (pretty common for 20 year olds in general) leading to boneheaded mistakes at crucial times, like the last five minutes against the Spurs last game.
On one hand, you say, well hey, we had the Spurs on the ropes on the road and if it wasn't for McLemore's turnovers, offensive IQ woes, and defensive brainfarts, we probably win that game. The kid will get it eventually and then we're good to go. Season's lost anyways, why not give the rook trial by fire.
On the other hand, you think that a recent top 10 lottery selection with oodles of potential is certainly an attractive trade piece for rebuilding teams. If you want to be ready to win sooner rather than later, I'm thinking of calling up Orlando for Arron Afflalo.
McLemore + Jimmer (expiring) for Afflalo
Kings get better now, with Afflalo only being a year older than Gay on a cheap contract (for his production) for the next three years. Orlando takes a flier on a lottery pick who is more in-line age-wise with their core, and will probably add a top 10 pick this year.
IT/McCallam
Afflalo/Thornton
Gay/Williams
Thompson/Landry
Cousins/Acy (or Gray depending on situation)
Ideally you'd like to upgrade the starting 4 spot with a defensive-minded roleplayer, but at least JT is serviceable. Thats probably a team contending for the playoffs next year.
Salary-wise you're looking pretty good next year too. Isaiah probably gets locked in at a salary around $8 million per year in 2014, Gay's enormous contract expires and you can extend him at maybe $12-13 million per year in 2015, and Afflalo is locked in until 2015 when he probably exercises his player option. JT and Cousins are locked in long term, and you get nice salary breathing room in 2015 when Thornton and Outlaw expire and Gay gets a lesser salary to be able to extend Afflalo's contract.
On one hand, you say, well hey, we had the Spurs on the ropes on the road and if it wasn't for McLemore's turnovers, offensive IQ woes, and defensive brainfarts, we probably win that game. The kid will get it eventually and then we're good to go. Season's lost anyways, why not give the rook trial by fire.
On the other hand, you think that a recent top 10 lottery selection with oodles of potential is certainly an attractive trade piece for rebuilding teams. If you want to be ready to win sooner rather than later, I'm thinking of calling up Orlando for Arron Afflalo.
McLemore + Jimmer (expiring) for Afflalo
Kings get better now, with Afflalo only being a year older than Gay on a cheap contract (for his production) for the next three years. Orlando takes a flier on a lottery pick who is more in-line age-wise with their core, and will probably add a top 10 pick this year.
IT/McCallam
Afflalo/Thornton
Gay/Williams
Thompson/Landry
Cousins/Acy (or Gray depending on situation)
Ideally you'd like to upgrade the starting 4 spot with a defensive-minded roleplayer, but at least JT is serviceable. Thats probably a team contending for the playoffs next year.
Salary-wise you're looking pretty good next year too. Isaiah probably gets locked in at a salary around $8 million per year in 2014, Gay's enormous contract expires and you can extend him at maybe $12-13 million per year in 2015, and Afflalo is locked in until 2015 when he probably exercises his player option. JT and Cousins are locked in long term, and you get nice salary breathing room in 2015 when Thornton and Outlaw expire and Gay gets a lesser salary to be able to extend Afflalo's contract.
Last edited:
There's a reason not every team is known for developing young talent, and keep in mind this kid's brain is still developing. He's basically in late adolescence, a "pruning" period in the brain that translates roughly to use it or lose it. He's repeatedly demonstrated an attitude of coachability, which means he's taking it all in, and the cognitive connections that are not quick enough now will continue to get faster as he matures.
The end result is unwritten, but IMHO it's a mistake to write him off as "low bball IQ" this early. Set him in a nice sunny place on the bench, let him ripen, and let the hyperbolic pace of his NBA experience these last few weeks assimilate. My hope is that PDA will get us a player who can start at that position and allow Ben to get back to the bench where he belongs at this point.
The end result is unwritten, but IMHO it's a mistake to write him off as "low bball IQ" this early. Set him in a nice sunny place on the bench, let him ripen, and let the hyperbolic pace of his NBA experience these last few weeks assimilate. My hope is that PDA will get us a player who can start at that position and allow Ben to get back to the bench where he belongs at this point.
FWIW, MLM is a rookie with one year of college ball. His upside is a whole level above what TRob showed. He is a rookie. A 6-5 SG rookie who. has hops, speed and is slowly improving. The entire Kings team rebuild is a SLOW process that will take a year and a half to get to a point of breaking onto the playoffs. Starting a rookie in a slow rebuild process makes some sense especially one with MLM abilities. MT is likely not in Kings longer term plan. MLM is.