That's a terrible way to approach young players imo. Produce as much as a 10 year veteran and don't mess up or don't play. The only way for young players to find rhythms and work out their kinks is to play solid minutes consecutively to figure things out and build confidence. Giving a guy 30 minutes one night then barely playing him the next does absolutely nothing for development and only makes a player put more pressure on themselves than they need.
[Game] Kings @ Nets-Wed Dec 20th-4:30p
- Thread starter Suicide King
- Start date
- Status
The Nets are the worst team in the NBA right now. Their best player is Spencer Dinwiddie. Their 2nd best player is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson. 2 players who most would go, "who???"
I don't understand why Richardson's minutes goes from 17, 9, 1, 0, 0, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 6, 0, 19, then back to 0. Tonight would've been a great time to get him minutes. He played good defense to close out Philly only to be rewarded a DNP vs the worst team in the NBA? A team that constantly played 4-guard lineups? A team that attempted 42 3s? This is the stuff I don't like from Joerger.
I don't understand why Richardson's minutes goes from 17, 9, 1, 0, 0, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 6, 0, 19, then back to 0. Tonight would've been a great time to get him minutes. He played good defense to close out Philly only to be rewarded a DNP vs the worst team in the NBA? A team that constantly played 4-guard lineups? A team that attempted 42 3s? This is the stuff I don't like from Joerger.
Wow, a bunch of complaining about the second win in a row on the second night of a back to back against a team with a better record than us. This forum is something else. We are 5-5 in the last 10. Only two of our players where in the minus. We went 2-2 on the road with a big home stand coming. We are only 4 games back of the 8th seed behind our former player. Pretty dam good work if you ask me. But people here think we should be tanking. Pathetic!
I'm kinda team tank guy tbh, I realized it after the text message exchange with my girlfriend last night.
But on the other side, if the team is winning I can't help myself, but root for the wins if they are playing well.
And btw The messages went like this.
She- ''What are you doing?''
Me- ''Watching basketball game right now.''
She- ''Is your team winning?''
Me- ''You know it's complicated...''
But on the other side, if the team is winning I can't help myself, but root for the wins if they are playing well.
And btw The messages went like this.
She- ''What are you doing?''
Me- ''Watching basketball game right now.''
She- ''Is your team winning?''
Me- ''You know it's complicated...''
I'm team "Let the young guys actually run the team and if wins come from that, then so be it"
Buddy balls out last night, gets 16 minutes? Malachi DNP after a strong showing?
George Hill- 35 minutes
ZBO- 26 minutes
Temple- 28 minutes
Koufos- 21 minutes
....
Buddy- 16 minutes
Skal- 12 minutes
Frank (with no Fox I might add, great opportunity to get him some extended run) - 16 minutes
JJ- 20 minutes
Bogdan- 33 minutes
WCS- 30 minutes
Simply just drives me up a wall. None of the top 4 guys are going to be on the team in 2 years. Hell maybe not even next year. We're trying to figure out if any of the guys on the bottom row CAN be long-time Kings for the foreseeable future. Joerger is driving me nuts trying to eek out worthless wins riding players who have 0 future with the Kings. This is what fans are mad about... not actually winning games but the players we are doing it with.
Buddy balls out last night, gets 16 minutes? Malachi DNP after a strong showing?
George Hill- 35 minutes
ZBO- 26 minutes
Temple- 28 minutes
Koufos- 21 minutes
....
Buddy- 16 minutes
Skal- 12 minutes
Frank (with no Fox I might add, great opportunity to get him some extended run) - 16 minutes
JJ- 20 minutes
Bogdan- 33 minutes
WCS- 30 minutes
Simply just drives me up a wall. None of the top 4 guys are going to be on the team in 2 years. Hell maybe not even next year. We're trying to figure out if any of the guys on the bottom row CAN be long-time Kings for the foreseeable future. Joerger is driving me nuts trying to eek out worthless wins riding players who have 0 future with the Kings. This is what fans are mad about... not actually winning games but the players we are doing it with.
Yeah, all of us in the "lin brigade" have been pretty insufferable lately, I admit it.
I'm gonna keep it out of the game/postgame threads from here on out though!
Happy for all of you who can be happy for a win (not snark. I was like you all once, and I'll be one of you again next season)!
Honestly, I hate rooting against our guys (I'm pretty sure all of us linners do, we are Kings fans after all), I just reeeeealllly want that top 5 pick.
Anyways, I'll catch my fellow ping pong piners in the rebuild strategy thread. I think that's where we belong this season!
I'm gonna keep it out of the game/postgame threads from here on out though!
Happy for all of you who can be happy for a win (not snark. I was like you all once, and I'll be one of you again next season)!
Honestly, I hate rooting against our guys (I'm pretty sure all of us linners do, we are Kings fans after all), I just reeeeealllly want that top 5 pick.
Anyways, I'll catch my fellow ping pong piners in the rebuild strategy thread. I think that's where we belong this season!
Last edited:
Thank you! I appreciate that. I have very little problem with people posting their dissatisfaction with a win instead of a "lin" in the rebuild strategy thread, I don't need to go there after a win if I don't want to. I wish other people would follow your example. It's a real downer to come on here after a hard fault exciting win, make a positive comment and then have someone reply with the snarky "Well I hope you'll be happy with an 8th pick in the draft!" To me that is just rude and discourteous. Frankly, I am tired of after a win hearing about the lottery and how the top 3 picks are sure fired franchise players and we are going to miss out on it. I have some additional thoughts on the rebuild, but I am going to post those in the rebuild thread when I get some time to get my thoughts together. But thanks again for setting a good example on minimizing the negative comments in the game and post game threads after a win.
I will be glad when i can come in here one day and not see people bitching and complaining about a win. sick of this crap. its what this board has turned into. I have been here since before the crash and pretty much posted here daily. I stuck around through the Webber trade and the Cousins trade. I am here for this team. I will be damned if i am going to continue to sit idle while people complain about a win.
Team is on the road. Second night of a back to back. George Hill plays great after dealing with a serious personal loss. And the Kings win. I can't remember the last time this has happened. I log in here and see the usual suspects doing what they do.
I went through this game thread and put every negative response on ignore Sunshine and rainbows baby!
I went through this game thread and put every negative response on ignore
Sunshine and rainbows baby!
Last edited:
Reading some posts, the impression is that veterans are logging a ton of minutes holding back younglings that are being spoon fed minute here and there.
Min per game over the whole season so far:
Hill 26:22
Randolph 26:01
WCS 25:18
Fox 25:08
Temple 24:52
BB 24:51
Hield 22:48
Mason 18:49
Jackson 18:40
KK 18:24
Skal 15:50
Vince 13:22
Malachi 11:47
So which player exactly is deprived of the minutes to learn how to play NBA game?
I am very happy with the above platoon distribution balance of learning to play and earning the play time, while coach is evaluating what he has.
If this is the time distribution at the same time next season, I would be upset. Not this year.
Min per game over the whole season so far:
Hill 26:22
Randolph 26:01
WCS 25:18
Fox 25:08
Temple 24:52
BB 24:51
Hield 22:48
Mason 18:49
Jackson 18:40
KK 18:24
Skal 15:50
Vince 13:22
Malachi 11:47
So which player exactly is deprived of the minutes to learn how to play NBA game?
I am very happy with the above platoon distribution balance of learning to play and earning the play time, while coach is evaluating what he has.
If this is the time distribution at the same time next season, I would be upset. Not this year.
"Winning cures a lot of ills." say NBA coaches everywhere. There is nothing wrong with veteran players leading the way to show the young guys how it is done.
Coach deserves some credit. So do Hill and especially Zbo. The Kings are becoming much more watchable. Their defense has improved a lot. They are rebounding fine against some teams, but have a way to go against better teams. Randolph fills in a lot of gaps on offense. The Kings win two in a row on the road. Yippee.
It amazing how different the leading players were last night compared to the night before, although Randolph is really doing a good job of showing up every night.
Garrett Temple is a player I want to like. He plays hard and has some hot streaks, but then he finishes out a game like last night and I want to see him traded.
A winning record is how you get free agents to come to Sacramento and make trades for established players. Rookies are not in a position to lead teams to success in the NBA. The Kings' vets deserve credit not disparaging comments. The same with the coach. "Show me a good loser and I'll show you a real loser." says my Dad.
Coach deserves some credit. So do Hill and especially Zbo. The Kings are becoming much more watchable. Their defense has improved a lot. They are rebounding fine against some teams, but have a way to go against better teams. Randolph fills in a lot of gaps on offense. The Kings win two in a row on the road. Yippee.
It amazing how different the leading players were last night compared to the night before, although Randolph is really doing a good job of showing up every night.
Garrett Temple is a player I want to like. He plays hard and has some hot streaks, but then he finishes out a game like last night and I want to see him traded.
A winning record is how you get free agents to come to Sacramento and make trades for established players. Rookies are not in a position to lead teams to success in the NBA. The Kings' vets deserve credit not disparaging comments. The same with the coach. "Show me a good loser and I'll show you a real loser." says my Dad.
This drives me nuts too. I don't mind if we win, in fact I want us to win, but I want to do it while seeing some improvement and opportunity for the guys that actually are important to the Kings future. If we win because Fox, Mason, Richardson, and Hield each got significant minutes then great! Win as many games as you guys can. Grinding out wins off the backs of veterans on 1 and 2 year deals makes no sense. It doesn't help player development and it pushes us farther back in the draft. I don't understand this. Instead of trying to get the 8th seed off the back of Cousins we are just trying to get the 8th seed off the backs of Hill and Randolph.
I agree. So many keep asking what rebuild model we are following, but the truth is that I can't remember a team ever having this many players that needed to be developed at the same time. They have 5 rookies (one yet to play) and 4 2nd year players. There is no way to play them all 20+ minutes. At the same time, if you only play the young players then very few games would be competitive. That doesn't teach them much of anything.
Show me what other teams have minutes distributions like that. Plus, it's partly the inconsistencies from game to game. Seven minutes one night, 28 the next.
If this trend continues the whole season then the eventual blow up with carry into the summer. Platoons eventually get ugly even when teams are winning. Those who ignore history.
If this trend continues the whole season then the eventual blow up with carry into the summer. Platoons eventually get ugly even when teams are winning. Those who ignore history.
To be fully fair to Joerger, there has been a lot of inconsistency in play this year too. Think of how many times we were having trouble scoring 10 points in the first.
Only guys that have been real real consistent have been Randolph & Kosta, but Kosta isn't always a good match up to have on the floor.
Sure we've had guys go through hot stretches like Buddy there for a bit or Hill recently. But he's had to deal with a whole lot of up & down this year.
Only guys that have been real real consistent have been Randolph & Kosta, but Kosta isn't always a good match up to have on the floor.
Sure we've had guys go through hot stretches like Buddy there for a bit or Hill recently. But he's had to deal with a whole lot of up & down this year.
One thing I will say about Z-Bo in addition to the incredible streak he is on right now is the guys love to play with him.
Joerger said 2-3 times in an interview that Z-Bud has a "calming" effect. He used that word over and over "calming".
This is an indirect dig at Boogie Cousins even if it was unintentional or subconscious!
Z-Bo is shooting an extraordinary 61% FGs (9 games) this month after 39% FGs (5 games) in the first month.
This is NOT only an epic turnaround from the first handful of games it is conspicuous reversal of his scoring efficiency over the last 3 seasons.
You have to give credit to Z-Bong for keeping his game sharp and also I think he benefits from the direction of the league.
Infrequently does he go up against an opponent playing two bigs where he has to beat his own man and then deal with a weak side shot blocker.
But I want to go back to this "calming" comment:
Can anyone ever imagine the coach saying Boogie Cousins had a calming effect?!??! When the Kings find themselves in a close game I actually like their chances where in years past I almost knew that Boogie was going to self-implode, get distracted by the refs, fail to get back in transition, quick shoot a 3 in response to opponent run then be vulnerable to leak out, etc etc etc. The guy would make inopportune fouls, force shots, and cry to the refs when the intensity got turned to ten. By shipping him away we saved our young kids from this inauspicious indoctrination as to how conduct yourself as a veteran. Addition by subtraction.
Being fairly confident as a team with veterans who provide that calming influence (and I would put Hill and Temple in this category) as value to the young guys rather than the chaos that Boogie tended to invoke is difference between functional and dysfunction, even for a guy like Harry Giles sitting over there and traveling on the road soaking it all in. Just on these merits alone I think you have to appreciate what the vets have brought, in spite of George Hill passive play (until lately) and Z-Bong defensive struggles.
I didn't think Z-Bo had it in him to be 60% TS shooter. The stats projected the exact opposite.
So Randolph has gone from a negative overpay washed up backpack wearer to a crafty positive force based on his scoring and passing output and the "calming" leadership he provides that Cousins NEVER did.
George Hill played his best game of the season . He's now leading the NBA in 3 point shooting (50.6%)! A couple weeks ago I commented on his accuracy (45% at the time) and that he needed to double his attempts from 2.5 > 5.0. Well he took my advice.
Hill has averaged 5 three point attempts in the last three games and has made 12-16 on his 3s! The guy has been pure money. Trade proposal on Line #1 #2 and #3!
Now given that the Hill and Z-Bo are on the upswing, the question arises should we trade either or both or neither ???? Here's my current position:
I like the idea of moving Mason into a starting role, perhaps giving Buddy another crack as a starter. Buddy failed playing offensively as a SG. This is where it gets interesting with Buddy and Boggy.
Boggy can guard the bigger wing while also doing more initiating on offense. Buddy is not as crafty creating or savvy with the ball in his but his defense on SGs has improved quite nicely. So you run him more off the ball on offense and let him guard the smaller wing (SG) on defense.
What I am getting at long-winded is we can absorb the loss of George Hill in trade irrespective of what we get in return. Not so with Z-Bo if we want to remain semi-respectable and enhance the development of the youth.
A trade of Hill would precipitate this line-up:
PG - Mason
SG - Buddy (defense) Boggy (offense)
SF - Boggy (defense) Buddy (offense)
PF - Z-Bo
C - Giles . (or WCS)
I also like the idea of moving to De'Aaron to the bench for awhile where he can play more uptempo with the second unit instead of feeding Randolph and getting out of the way.
If Giles is All-Everything as a lot of the hype would indicate then the prospects of dealing Z-Bo differ. If Skal was not so frail and ineffective, then Z-Bo would also be expendable. It looks like those prospects are at best 6-12 months on the horizon, therefore you have to keep Randolph and I think appreciate having him around.
Will there be any takers for George Hill? A few weeks ago I would have said "heck no!!!" But if he strings together more games like last night then "undoubtedly yes" even with the bloated contract. I am less confident however that Vlade will be eager to trade him though it is in the best interest of the team (with Mason and Boogy there to absorb the minutes) and 2018 lottery prospects.
Joerger said 2-3 times in an interview that Z-Bud has a "calming" effect. He used that word over and over "calming".
This is an indirect dig at Boogie Cousins even if it was unintentional or subconscious!
Z-Bo is shooting an extraordinary 61% FGs (9 games) this month after 39% FGs (5 games) in the first month.
This is NOT only an epic turnaround from the first handful of games it is conspicuous reversal of his scoring efficiency over the last 3 seasons.
You have to give credit to Z-Bong for keeping his game sharp and also I think he benefits from the direction of the league.
Infrequently does he go up against an opponent playing two bigs where he has to beat his own man and then deal with a weak side shot blocker.
But I want to go back to this "calming" comment:
Can anyone ever imagine the coach saying Boogie Cousins had a calming effect?!??! When the Kings find themselves in a close game I actually like their chances where in years past I almost knew that Boogie was going to self-implode, get distracted by the refs, fail to get back in transition, quick shoot a 3 in response to opponent run then be vulnerable to leak out, etc etc etc. The guy would make inopportune fouls, force shots, and cry to the refs when the intensity got turned to ten. By shipping him away we saved our young kids from this inauspicious indoctrination as to how conduct yourself as a veteran. Addition by subtraction.
Being fairly confident as a team with veterans who provide that calming influence (and I would put Hill and Temple in this category) as value to the young guys rather than the chaos that Boogie tended to invoke is difference between functional and dysfunction, even for a guy like Harry Giles sitting over there and traveling on the road soaking it all in. Just on these merits alone I think you have to appreciate what the vets have brought, in spite of George Hill passive play (until lately) and Z-Bong defensive struggles.
I didn't think Z-Bo had it in him to be 60% TS shooter. The stats projected the exact opposite.
So Randolph has gone from a negative overpay washed up backpack wearer to a crafty positive force based on his scoring and passing output and the "calming" leadership he provides that Cousins NEVER did.
George Hill played his best game of the season . He's now leading the NBA in 3 point shooting (50.6%)! A couple weeks ago I commented on his accuracy (45% at the time) and that he needed to double his attempts from 2.5 > 5.0. Well he took my advice.
Hill has averaged 5 three point attempts in the last three games and has made 12-16 on his 3s! The guy has been pure money. Trade proposal on Line #1 #2 and #3!
Now given that the Hill and Z-Bo are on the upswing, the question arises should we trade either or both or neither ???? Here's my current position:
- Hill - YES! Trade him
- Z-Bo - NO! Keep him
I like the idea of moving Mason into a starting role, perhaps giving Buddy another crack as a starter. Buddy failed playing offensively as a SG. This is where it gets interesting with Buddy and Boggy.
- Boggy can guard 3s but he's better playing SG
- Buddy is better guarding 2s but he's better playing SF
Boggy can guard the bigger wing while also doing more initiating on offense. Buddy is not as crafty creating or savvy with the ball in his but his defense on SGs has improved quite nicely. So you run him more off the ball on offense and let him guard the smaller wing (SG) on defense.What I am getting at long-winded is we can absorb the loss of George Hill in trade irrespective of what we get in return. Not so with Z-Bo if we want to remain semi-respectable and enhance the development of the youth.
A trade of Hill would precipitate this line-up:
PG - Mason
SG - Buddy (defense) Boggy (offense)
SF - Boggy (defense) Buddy (offense)
PF - Z-Bo
C - Giles
. (or WCS)I also like the idea of moving to De'Aaron to the bench for awhile where he can play more uptempo with the second unit instead of feeding Randolph and getting out of the way.
If Giles is All-Everything as a lot of the hype would indicate then the prospects of dealing Z-Bo differ. If Skal was not so frail and ineffective, then Z-Bo would also be expendable. It looks like those prospects are at best 6-12 months on the horizon, therefore you have to keep Randolph and I think appreciate having him around.
Will there be any takers for George Hill? A few weeks ago I would have said "heck no!!!" But if he strings together more games like last night then "undoubtedly yes" even with the bloated contract. I am less confident however that Vlade will be eager to trade him though it is in the best interest of the team (with Mason and Boogy there to absorb the minutes) and 2018 lottery prospects.
Last edited:
One thing I will say about Z-Bo in addition to the incredible streak he is on right now is the guys love to play with him.
Joerger said 2-3 times in an interview that Z-Bud has a "calming" effect. He used that word over and over "calming".
This is an indirect dig at Boogie Cousins even if it was unintentional or subconscious!
Z-Bo is shooting an extraordinary 61% FGs (9 games) this month after 39% FGs (5 games) in the first month.
This is NOT only an epic turnaround from the first handful of games it is conspicuous reversal of his scoring efficiency over the last 3 seasons.
You have to give credit to Z-Bong for keeping his game sharp and also I think he benefits from the direction of the league.
Infrequently does he go up against an opponent playing two bigs where he has to beat his own man and then deal with a weak side shot blocker.
But I want to go back to this "calming" comment:
Can anyone ever imagine the coach saying Boogie Cousins had a calming effect?!??! When the Kings find themselves in a close game I actually like their chances where in years past I almost knew that Boogie was going to self-implode, get distracted by the refs, fail to get back in transition, quick shoot a 3 in response to opponent run then be vulnerable to leak out, etc etc etc. The guy would make inopportune fouls, force shots, and cry to the refs when the intensity got turned to ten. By shipping him away we saved our young kids from this inauspicious indoctrination as to how conduct yourself as a veteran. Addition by subtraction.
Being fairly confident as a team with veterans who provide that calming influence (and I would put Hill and Temple in this category) as value to the young guys rather than the chaos that Boogie tended to invoke is difference between functional and dysfunction, even for a guy like Harry Giles sitting over there and traveling on the road soaking it all in. Just on these merits alone I think you have to appreciate what the vets have brought, in spite of George Hill passive play (until lately) and Z-Bong defensive struggles.
I didn't think Z-Bo had it in him to be 60% TS shooter. The stats projected the exact opposite.
So Randolph has gone from a negative overpay washed up backpack wearer to a crafty positive force based on his scoring and passing output and the "calming" leadership he provides that Cousins NEVER did.
George Hill played his best game of the season . He's now leading the NBA in 3 point shooting (50.6%)! A couple weeks ago I commented on his accuracy (45% at the time) and that he needed to double his attempts from 2.5 > 5.0. Well he took my advice.
Hill has averaged 5 three point attempts in the last three games and has made 12-16 on his 3s! The guy has been pure money. Trade proposal on Line #1 #2 and #3!
Now given that the Hill and Z-Bo are on the upswing, the question arises should we trade either or both or neither ???? Here's my current position:
I like the idea of moving Mason into a starting role, perhaps giving Buddy another crack as a starter. Buddy failed playing offensively as a SG. This is where it gets interesting with Buddy and Boggy.
Boggy can guard the bigger wing while also doing more initiating on offense. Buddy is not as crafty creating or savvy with the ball in his but his defense on SGs has improved quite nicely. So you run him more off the ball on offense and let him guard the smaller wing (SG) on defense.
What I am getting at long-winded is we can absorb the loss of George Hill in trade irrespective of what we get in return. Not so with Z-Bo if we want to remain semi-respectable and enhance the development of the youth.
A trade of Hill would precipitate this line-up:
PG - Mason
SG - Buddy (defense) Boggy (offense)
SF - Boggy (defense) Buddy (offense)
PF - Z-Bo
C - Giles . (or WCS)
I also like the idea of moving to De'Aaron to the bench for awhile where he can play more uptempo with the second unit instead of feeding Randolph and getting out of the way.
If Giles is All-Everything as a lot of the hype would indicate then the prospects of dealing Z-Bo differ. If Skal was not so frail and ineffective, then Z-Bo would also be expendable. It looks like those prospects are at best 6-12 months on the horizon, therefore you have to keep Randolph and I think appreciate having him around.
Will there be any takers for George Hill? A few weeks ago I would have said "heck no!!!" But if he strings together more games like last night then "undoubtedly yes" even with the bloated contract. I am less confident however that Vlade will be eager to trade him though it is in the best interest of the team (with Mason and Boogy there to absorb the minutes) and 2018 lottery prospects.
Joerger said 2-3 times in an interview that Z-Bud has a "calming" effect. He used that word over and over "calming".
This is an indirect dig at Boogie Cousins even if it was unintentional or subconscious!
Z-Bo is shooting an extraordinary 61% FGs (9 games) this month after 39% FGs (5 games) in the first month.
This is NOT only an epic turnaround from the first handful of games it is conspicuous reversal of his scoring efficiency over the last 3 seasons.
You have to give credit to Z-Bong for keeping his game sharp and also I think he benefits from the direction of the league.
Infrequently does he go up against an opponent playing two bigs where he has to beat his own man and then deal with a weak side shot blocker.
But I want to go back to this "calming" comment:
Can anyone ever imagine the coach saying Boogie Cousins had a calming effect?!??! When the Kings find themselves in a close game I actually like their chances where in years past I almost knew that Boogie was going to self-implode, get distracted by the refs, fail to get back in transition, quick shoot a 3 in response to opponent run then be vulnerable to leak out, etc etc etc. The guy would make inopportune fouls, force shots, and cry to the refs when the intensity got turned to ten. By shipping him away we saved our young kids from this inauspicious indoctrination as to how conduct yourself as a veteran. Addition by subtraction.
Being fairly confident as a team with veterans who provide that calming influence (and I would put Hill and Temple in this category) as value to the young guys rather than the chaos that Boogie tended to invoke is difference between functional and dysfunction, even for a guy like Harry Giles sitting over there and traveling on the road soaking it all in. Just on these merits alone I think you have to appreciate what the vets have brought, in spite of George Hill passive play (until lately) and Z-Bong defensive struggles.
I didn't think Z-Bo had it in him to be 60% TS shooter. The stats projected the exact opposite.
So Randolph has gone from a negative overpay washed up backpack wearer to a crafty positive force based on his scoring and passing output and the "calming" leadership he provides that Cousins NEVER did.
George Hill played his best game of the season . He's now leading the NBA in 3 point shooting (50.6%)! A couple weeks ago I commented on his accuracy (45% at the time) and that he needed to double his attempts from 2.5 > 5.0. Well he took my advice.
Hill has averaged 5 three point attempts in the last three games and has made 12-16 on his 3s! The guy has been pure money. Trade proposal on Line #1 #2 and #3!
Now given that the Hill and Z-Bo are on the upswing, the question arises should we trade either or both or neither ???? Here's my current position:
- Hill - YES! Trade him
- Z-Bo - NO! Keep him
I like the idea of moving Mason into a starting role, perhaps giving Buddy another crack as a starter. Buddy failed playing offensively as a SG. This is where it gets interesting with Buddy and Boggy.
- Boggy can guard 3s but he's better playing SG
- Buddy is better guarding 2s but he's better playing SF
Boggy can guard the bigger wing while also doing more initiating on offense. Buddy is not as crafty creating or savvy with the ball in his but his defense on SGs has improved quite nicely. So you run him more off the ball on offense and let him guard the smaller wing (SG) on defense.What I am getting at long-winded is we can absorb the loss of George Hill in trade irrespective of what we get in return. Not so with Z-Bo if we want to remain semi-respectable and enhance the development of the youth.
A trade of Hill would precipitate this line-up:
PG - Mason
SG - Buddy (defense) Boggy (offense)
SF - Boggy (defense) Buddy (offense)
PF - Z-Bo
C - Giles
. (or WCS)I also like the idea of moving to De'Aaron to the bench for awhile where he can play more uptempo with the second unit instead of feeding Randolph and getting out of the way.
If Giles is All-Everything as a lot of the hype would indicate then the prospects of dealing Z-Bo differ. If Skal was not so frail and ineffective, then Z-Bo would also be expendable. It looks like those prospects are at best 6-12 months on the horizon, therefore you have to keep Randolph and I think appreciate having him around.
Will there be any takers for George Hill? A few weeks ago I would have said "heck no!!!" But if he strings together more games like last night then "undoubtedly yes" even with the bloated contract. I am less confident however that Vlade will be eager to trade him though it is in the best interest of the team (with Mason and Boogy there to absorb the minutes) and 2018 lottery prospects.
Don’t you think our coaches know that better than we do? Herding cats? The problem there is “cats”. We, the coaches, have at least 7 or8 “cats” when most young teams have half or less of them. I think Joerger is doing a mighty fine job of “herding cats”. Thank heavens for the vets, some of the best platers on our team. They are very productive and are a big help in “herding the cats”.
In the second half the young guys had their opportunity to solidify the lead or extend it and they just didnt get the job done. Take Hield for example, he was money in Philly...got good run. Against the Nets, he just wasn't playing well in any facet of the game. Same goes for most of the young reserves. They looked good in the first half and got extended run but in the second half, came up short and got the hook. Nothing wrong with that. I think the problem for the team would be just letting the young guys continue in the second half until we were down by 10. That would create a problem team wide. I think the vets are appreciative of how Joerger is handling this difficult job.
- Status