Yup, definitely more than a notch below Iverson. I do feel Isaiah played well last year and was at times the King's best player on the court. The problem was he caused it with his playing style more than his flat out skill. Anyhow it is ironic that for all of his efforts, he may just well wind up being under paid.
IT = Rumor of 3/24 offer from Pistons
- Thread starter John Galt
- Start date
- Status
IT had one break out season, last year as the only viable option at Point Guard on the Kings.
Just like Aaron Brooks and Nate Robinson, at their size, it's hard to maintain those kind of numbers year in and year out. I think a lot of GM's likes IT's game as a 6th man type, but realize he is not a long term starter at his size and won't be able to produce those numbers on a good team.
I think he is getting 6th man type offers at/ or around the MLE from most of the interested teams. If he signs, the Kings should match.
IT would be the ideal 6th man on a playoff team, just don't think you can start him on a playoff team because of the size he gives up on defense.
IF IT could accept his role as 6th man extraordinaire and embrace that role with the Kings, he could go down as one of the BEST 6th men EVER in the NBA.
Just like Aaron Brooks and Nate Robinson, at their size, it's hard to maintain those kind of numbers year in and year out. I think a lot of GM's likes IT's game as a 6th man type, but realize he is not a long term starter at his size and won't be able to produce those numbers on a good team.
I think he is getting 6th man type offers at/ or around the MLE from most of the interested teams. If he signs, the Kings should match.
IT would be the ideal 6th man on a playoff team, just don't think you can start him on a playoff team because of the size he gives up on defense.
IF IT could accept his role as 6th man extraordinaire and embrace that role with the Kings, he could go down as one of the BEST 6th men EVER in the NBA.
I don't want a player that would say "yeah im a bench player". Accepting a role as a bench player/6th man while knowing your good enough to start is a different thing. Do you think Jason Terry, Jamal Crawford, Manu will every say "im a bench player"? No they are/were good enough to start but accept roles as 6th men for the good of the team. Its hard to accept a 6th man role when the guys in front of you are Grievis Vasquez or Aaron Brooks on abysmal teams. Get a good player in front of IT(Collison looks like a good fit), start winning some games and IT will accept his role.
Well that Pistons rumor always seemed to be a pretty obvious candidate for a plant by his agent spread via a patsy like Bruski. Trying to establish a market on Day 1 that may as it turns out, not exactly be there.
My lone interest in all this is that its the RIGHT team which takes an interest in him. In other words one that will sign and trade with us. The problem is that there's a healthy chance instead he's going to end up being a backup plan for one of the teams with lots of cap room who gets shut out. Their own Carl Landry situation. And one that has us losing an asset for nothing.
My lone interest in all this is that its the RIGHT team which takes an interest in him. In other words one that will sign and trade with us. The problem is that there's a healthy chance instead he's going to end up being a backup plan for one of the teams with lots of cap room who gets shut out. Their own Carl Landry situation. And one that has us losing an asset for nothing.
Manu also happens to play for the best organization of the past 20 years, and a perennial playoff/championship contender. IT plays on one of the biggest jokes/mediocre franchises of the past decade.
Wasn't IT the one organizing player mini camps before last season, and in general tries to be a leader for this "team"? Thats the thing we have no TEAM, over the past 5 years we've been the posterchild of mediocrity. We need an identity, we need stability, we need wins. This "team" has been nothing but a bunch of individuals putting on the same uniform and playing pick up ball out there for the last 5 years(last year was a bit of an improvement). If you want to hear IT say that, than I want to hear Cousins say and play like that(not complaining to the refs every other play, or trotting back on defense because he's complaining, pass the ball when you get tripled in the paint instead of throwing up some junk). How about Rudy Gay, prove your a team player too, earn your 19 million.
Wasn't IT the one organizing player mini camps before last season, and in general tries to be a leader for this "team"? Thats the thing we have no TEAM, over the past 5 years we've been the posterchild of mediocrity. We need an identity, we need stability, we need wins. This "team" has been nothing but a bunch of individuals putting on the same uniform and playing pick up ball out there for the last 5 years(last year was a bit of an improvement). If you want to hear IT say that, than I want to hear Cousins say and play like that(not complaining to the refs every other play, or trotting back on defense because he's complaining, pass the ball when you get tripled in the paint instead of throwing up some junk). How about Rudy Gay, prove your a team player too, earn your 19 million.
Whatever.
I refuse to get into a pissing contest with you over your love affair for IT. Demarcus Cousins HAS said it's about team for him and his play this past season was not anything close to what you've described. But, as usual, a straw man approach to anything even remotely resembling criticism of the Great and Powerful IT is much easier than actually addressing the comment.
I like IT. My granddaughters are among his biggest fans and will be heart-broken if he leaves. They even own a headband he tossed to them after a game this year.
BUT, IT is about IT. I get it and I understand it. He's had to fight and fight hard to get to where he is. He wants to get paid and he's going to fight hard to earn whatever he ends up getting. MY OPINION is that he doesn't understand that he's made it, he's in the NBA and he needs to work hard now to become the ultimate team player because doing so will increase his worth and his value to his team. It's not about HIM scoring the most or having the most minutes or being the starter. It's about him fulfilling his role in a manner that maximizes his efficiency and that of his team. Thus my comparison to Manu Ginobli.
It's a shame that so many IT fans cannot understand the difference between bashing and honest criticism.
I refuse to get into a pissing contest with you over your love affair for IT. Demarcus Cousins HAS said it's about team for him and his play this past season was not anything close to what you've described. But, as usual, a straw man approach to anything even remotely resembling criticism of the Great and Powerful IT is much easier than actually addressing the comment.
I like IT. My granddaughters are among his biggest fans and will be heart-broken if he leaves. They even own a headband he tossed to them after a game this year.
BUT, IT is about IT. I get it and I understand it. He's had to fight and fight hard to get to where he is. He wants to get paid and he's going to fight hard to earn whatever he ends up getting. MY OPINION is that he doesn't understand that he's made it, he's in the NBA and he needs to work hard now to become the ultimate team player because doing so will increase his worth and his value to his team. It's not about HIM scoring the most or having the most minutes or being the starter. It's about him fulfilling his role in a manner that maximizes his efficiency and that of his team. Thus my comparison to Manu Ginobli.
It's a shame that so many IT fans cannot understand the difference between bashing and honest criticism.
Lets get one thing straight here! Manu is and always has been an ultimate pro that has ALWAYS sacrificed his game for the good of the team even back in europe when he was THE best player on his team and arguably the continent.
The mentality of the two players could not be further apart. On one hand you have Ginobili who is sure of himself and his quality as a player and does not need to shout it off the rooftops. On the other hand you have IT, a player with a chip on his shoulder trying to tell anyone who will listen that he is a starter and a scoring PG.
This has very little to do with how good their respective teams are and everything to do with their mental make up and character. Manu has been brought up in basketball systems where teams always come first and players are more enouraged to make plays for their team mates than themselves. IT could not be further away from that if he tried!
The mentality of the two players could not be further apart. On one hand you have Ginobili who is sure of himself and his quality as a player and does not need to shout it off the rooftops. On the other hand you have IT, a player with a chip on his shoulder trying to tell anyone who will listen that he is a starter and a scoring PG.
This has very little to do with how good their respective teams are and everything to do with their mental make up and character. Manu has been brought up in basketball systems where teams always come first and players are more enouraged to make plays for their team mates than themselves. IT could not be further away from that if he tried!
I understand your criticism, and I agree that ALL players on this team could be better team players, that starts from the top and trickles down to the guys on minimum contracts. I love the strides Cousins made last year, but he is still QUITE FAR from being where we need him to be(if he's supposed to be our cornerstone, our Tim Duncan). Stop complaining to the refs, if you miss a shot and think you got fouled, run back on defense get a stop and go back at them(the refs will respect it and give you the next call). You are making the big bucks now, no more taking games off(period after all star snub). I like to support all our players, but when one is so overwhelmingly bashed on HERE, dissecting his every move on the court, while others get passes, it just gets me fuming. I don't have a love affair with IT, I didn't even know who he was prior to the Kings drafting him(all I knew was some undersized PG that made a game winner in the Pac 10 tourney). He won me over though with his hard work, passion for the game and competitiveness. I'm not a blind fan either, i'll be the first to call him out in the living room when he overdribbles, takes a rushed shot, or makes a lazy play on defense. He isn't perfect(like no Kings is), but he plays his heart out EVERY night, and that has earned my respect(especially on a team drowned in medicority).
I hate when people bring up GREAT teams when comparing them to use, we are a TERRIBLE team, we don't even belong in the same conversation as the Spurs. If the Spurs have built a castle, we have one line of bricks(if that) cemented down. If you put IT on the Spurs(or any King for gods sake), your damn right he(they) buy and and play their role.
My question is what do you guys want from IT? For him to shoot 5 shots a game? He is what he is, when he played with Cousins and Gay he naturally faded to third in line as far as offensive focal points. His biggest shooting games where when Cousins and Gay were out or when one of Gay or Cousins(usually Gay) were doing squat/taking the night off.
That is the best breakdown of what IT brings/does't bring to the team. He is what he is, a scoring PG with decent playmaking, decent passing, great quickness, good shooter, great intangibles, physical limitations. He has negatives, more positives, he isn't going to demand a huge contract, would make a great 6th man, or a hell of guy to have available in case of injuries or bad play form other players.
My question is what do you guys want from IT? For him to shoot 5 shots a game? He is what he is, when he played with Cousins and Gay he naturally faded to third in line as far as offensive focal points. His biggest shooting games where when Cousins and Gay were out or when one of Gay or Cousins(usually Gay) were doing squat/taking the night off.
That is the best breakdown of what IT brings/does't bring to the team. He is what he is, a scoring PG with decent playmaking, decent passing, great quickness, good shooter, great intangibles, physical limitations. He has negatives, more positives, he isn't going to demand a huge contract, would make a great 6th man, or a hell of guy to have available in case of injuries or bad play form other players.
your absolutely right again. i'll add that he is willing to sacrifice a starting role, $$$ to ensure the team has a chance to win. i believe IT said he needs to take care of his family, needs to be loved for being a chuckster and has a gigantic chocolate chip on his shoulder.
players need to buy into the team for it to work? or it just magically happens because they are drinking san antonio water?
players need to buy into the team for it to work? or it just magically happens because they are drinking san antonio water?
I haven't posted much, but here's my take. It seems like you feel like IT is the best Kings player on the floor. I think that in a one-on-one tournament, you might be right. Dude can flat out score.
However, as others have said, that's not enough at the PG position in the NBA. Scoring is okay, but you have to get everyone else involved, especially with talents like Rudy and DMC on the team. It's as important to give them the ball as it is to score yourself...and some would argue that it's more important. It's even good to pass the ball to other people (Ben, JT, whoever) so that they can score a bit, too. The best point guards try to get everyone involved, then hit their shots when the team needs it. Isaiah worries about his points first, and passes the ball if he gets into trouble.
San Antonio's philosophy is that the ball should never stick in one place. It's a cliché, but "when everyone touches the ball, the team does well."
I honestly don't think IT sees it that way. I think his primary goal every time down the court is to figure out how he can score. He gets assists, sure, but I personally think that's because he has the ball in his hands so much. He's not looking to pass. I'm not advocating a pass-first point guard, because that draws out the whole "OMG Grievis-look-how-well-that-worked-out" thing, but we also don't benefit from a PG who is always looking to shoot.
There's a happy medium in there somewhere. IT doesn't appear to be it. Maybe he can learn to become someone who passes more readily, I don't know. I personally think that he's one of those guys who looks at his stats during the game and if he doesn't have enough points, he's shooting the ball no matter what that does to the team's chances of winning. Rudy even practically called him out on it after one game last year...he said something like "he'll figure it out, he's young."
As others have said, an awesome 6th man...maybe the ideal 6th man, in fact. But he's made it clear, at least to me, that it's very important to him that he starts. Big chip on his shoulder, hero, proving it to the world, whatever you want to call it. If he can't get around that somehow, OR become a much more willing distributor, then he needs to go. Addition by subtraction. He's NOT the best Kings player for the team as a whole. He's not the hero we need, even if he wants to be.
Someone like DC might make the team better just by distributing the ball more, even though he's clearly not as talented. We don't need "talent"...we need the ball to move around more.
However, as others have said, that's not enough at the PG position in the NBA. Scoring is okay, but you have to get everyone else involved, especially with talents like Rudy and DMC on the team. It's as important to give them the ball as it is to score yourself...and some would argue that it's more important. It's even good to pass the ball to other people (Ben, JT, whoever) so that they can score a bit, too. The best point guards try to get everyone involved, then hit their shots when the team needs it. Isaiah worries about his points first, and passes the ball if he gets into trouble.
San Antonio's philosophy is that the ball should never stick in one place. It's a cliché, but "when everyone touches the ball, the team does well."
I honestly don't think IT sees it that way. I think his primary goal every time down the court is to figure out how he can score. He gets assists, sure, but I personally think that's because he has the ball in his hands so much. He's not looking to pass. I'm not advocating a pass-first point guard, because that draws out the whole "OMG Grievis-look-how-well-that-worked-out" thing, but we also don't benefit from a PG who is always looking to shoot.
There's a happy medium in there somewhere. IT doesn't appear to be it. Maybe he can learn to become someone who passes more readily, I don't know. I personally think that he's one of those guys who looks at his stats during the game and if he doesn't have enough points, he's shooting the ball no matter what that does to the team's chances of winning. Rudy even practically called him out on it after one game last year...he said something like "he'll figure it out, he's young."
As others have said, an awesome 6th man...maybe the ideal 6th man, in fact. But he's made it clear, at least to me, that it's very important to him that he starts. Big chip on his shoulder, hero, proving it to the world, whatever you want to call it. If he can't get around that somehow, OR become a much more willing distributor, then he needs to go. Addition by subtraction. He's NOT the best Kings player for the team as a whole. He's not the hero we need, even if he wants to be.
Someone like DC might make the team better just by distributing the ball more, even though he's clearly not as talented. We don't need "talent"...we need the ball to move around more.
What you appear to be missing is that a PG with two options/focal points like we have here with Boogie and Rudy, should not be talking about his own numbers, how much he's scored and will score and how much he wants to be wanted for being a scoring PG.
I’m ready for it. Like I said, I just want to go somewhere where I’m wanted. Where I’m wanted for being 5-9 and I’m wanted for being a scoring point guard. That’s all I want.
It's the PG's responsibility as the floor general to recognize what his team needs and to help everyone increase their success levels in those roles. A PG on a team with Rudy and Cousins talking about his numbers, his scoring, rather than getting them more shots in better areas, as well as getting looks for his teammates is quite a red flag, given our PG's responsibility is to get others involved and in a rhythm. Some like comparing IT to Kyrie, which misses the point that Kyrie is not playing with two options like Rudy and Cousins. He has to be aggressive. That would likely change with Wiggins and possibly Lebron next to him. Kyie however has been Cle's #1 option on offense, a key difference.
Something interesting I came across is passing efficiency and points created per pass. Like all analytics, it's only part of the story, a piece of the equation, but a PG playing with Rudy and Cousins should not be this far down the list. Of course, one of the guys at the top is quite interesting given what some here thought of him previously and it's quite amusing to see those who went the hardest after Reke for not being able to play PG or create are those fighting the hardest to suggest that's exactly what IT can do and will do.
http://princetonsportsanalytics.com/2014/02/20/dishes-and-dimes-part-ii-passing-efficiency/
In combination with the complete dominance IT has on the ball which Brick has brought up and proven statistically, it's just doesn't mesh well with our needs at the position. We need a PG who's comfortable giving up the rock, comfortable playing off the ball, and is efficient in the touches he does get. What we don't need is a guy who doesn't want to give up the ball, is inefficient in his touches/passes yet keeps talking about being a scoring point. On another team without Rudy/Boogie, it might be different. We aren't that other team though.
It's not hard btw to pull up quotes of everyone from CP3 to Tony Parker to John Wall to Rondo to Damian Lillard saying their job as PG is to get other guys going. Have we ever heard anything of the like from IT? What we did hear this year was this:
“Isaiah’s got to be an extension of me on the court,” Malone said. “He’s got to make sure he’s getting guys looks, know what plays to call, now what matchups he’s going to exploit and how to get those guys going where they’re most effective, and that’s part of his maturation of going from being a scoring guard off the bench to being a playmaking guard.”
But, rumors now suggest our FO sees him more as a bench spark than anything else. Wasn't able to adjust to what Malone asked him to do, then comes out this off season and talks more about scoring. He's a scoring PG who hasn't been able to settle into a creator role. Not in his DNA. It is what it is.
I’m ready for it. Like I said, I just want to go somewhere where I’m wanted. Where I’m wanted for being 5-9 and I’m wanted for being a scoring point guard. That’s all I want.
It's the PG's responsibility as the floor general to recognize what his team needs and to help everyone increase their success levels in those roles. A PG on a team with Rudy and Cousins talking about his numbers, his scoring, rather than getting them more shots in better areas, as well as getting looks for his teammates is quite a red flag, given our PG's responsibility is to get others involved and in a rhythm. Some like comparing IT to Kyrie, which misses the point that Kyrie is not playing with two options like Rudy and Cousins. He has to be aggressive. That would likely change with Wiggins and possibly Lebron next to him. Kyie however has been Cle's #1 option on offense, a key difference.
Something interesting I came across is passing efficiency and points created per pass. Like all analytics, it's only part of the story, a piece of the equation, but a PG playing with Rudy and Cousins should not be this far down the list. Of course, one of the guys at the top is quite interesting given what some here thought of him previously and it's quite amusing to see those who went the hardest after Reke for not being able to play PG or create are those fighting the hardest to suggest that's exactly what IT can do and will do.
http://princetonsportsanalytics.com/2014/02/20/dishes-and-dimes-part-ii-passing-efficiency/
In combination with the complete dominance IT has on the ball which Brick has brought up and proven statistically, it's just doesn't mesh well with our needs at the position. We need a PG who's comfortable giving up the rock, comfortable playing off the ball, and is efficient in the touches he does get. What we don't need is a guy who doesn't want to give up the ball, is inefficient in his touches/passes yet keeps talking about being a scoring point. On another team without Rudy/Boogie, it might be different. We aren't that other team though.
It's not hard btw to pull up quotes of everyone from CP3 to Tony Parker to John Wall to Rondo to Damian Lillard saying their job as PG is to get other guys going. Have we ever heard anything of the like from IT? What we did hear this year was this:
“Isaiah’s got to be an extension of me on the court,” Malone said. “He’s got to make sure he’s getting guys looks, know what plays to call, now what matchups he’s going to exploit and how to get those guys going where they’re most effective, and that’s part of his maturation of going from being a scoring guard off the bench to being a playmaking guard.”
But, rumors now suggest our FO sees him more as a bench spark than anything else. Wasn't able to adjust to what Malone asked him to do, then comes out this off season and talks more about scoring. He's a scoring PG who hasn't been able to settle into a creator role. Not in his DNA. It is what it is.
Last edited:
I had to look this up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonzi_Wells#Houston_Rockets
For some reason, I always thought Bonzi was a part of the Celtics at some part of his career.
For some reason, I always thought Bonzi was a part of the Celtics at some part of his career.
I'll answer everybody here. When did I EVER say IT was our best player? He's our third best player and the dropoff from there is VERY significant. When he played with Cousins and Gay he differed to them, that is a clear sign of a player understanding his role, he still is what he is and will look to score, but if you say he played hero ball when Cousins and Gay were on the floor you are lying to yourself in order to convince yourself all our struggles were because of IT. Cousins and Gay are black holes too, literally ball stoppers ,which is fine at times, but that also contributes to your role players looking like crap. Everyone on this team is responsible for lack of ball movement, lack of passing etc. Should Cousins get a pass when he throws up junk over 3 players in the paint when shooters are open? Should Gay get a pass when he dribbles into a crowd and takes a long fadeaway 2? All that plus IT overdribbling, taking ill advised shots contributes to bad team play. Our team sucks, there are many reasons it sucks, Isaiah Thomas being on the roster wasn't/won't be one(or at least a huge reason why). I would love to see him come back as a 6th man, its still a possibility, but if he leaves, so be it we move on.
I agree with your honest criticism but also realize that our PG's options last year were severely limited because good basketball wisdom did not allow him to use his SG as a person to pass to as is the case on normal NBA teams. It's like being a PG with part of an arm tied behind his back. All I can do is assume if he had Christie or Vasquez playing the SG position the scene would have been a totally different and better world for the Kings. That's my major reservation about laying responsibility for bad PG play at IT's feet.
The year before he had Tyreke. IT was just as selfish, but he only had the ball half as much. That was a key. Maybe Stauskas can help. But IT and Tyreke both took from each other's games. Its IT's ball. Take it away from him and you have a 5'9" SG. Instead he and Tyreke ended up just splitting possessions with little interaction.
Wow. Good job putting those quotes together. I forgot about that Malone quote. This says it all. The Kings wanted IT to play a certain way and it appears as though he's refused and was even offended they asked. How can someone argue to keep IT with that staring you in the face. He's not trying to buy in to what the Kings want to build. Has nothing to do with talent.
- Status