Joerger
- Thread starter Kingster
- Start date
Not true for the most part. Very few young players get drafted into a situation where they can win and when they do they likely sit and fester until they get their shot. It's the natural order of the NBA. They get confidence by being able to do what they do while in a position to do it. It's going toe to toe with one of their heroes, or being selected as a rookie of the month. Or making a 1st or 2nd team all nba rookie team. If wins come along with that great, then they are beating the percentages, but if they can't do those other things and they lose? Oh man, just add some more destroyed first rounders to the list of milk carton Kings.
I find the stability thing bizarre. The Kings have one of the most messed up ownership situations in the NBA. Vivek isn’t good, owns a small chunk of the team, many of the other Kings owners dislike his work and do what they can to get rid of him. The person running business ops was horrible during the Maloof era, is back again, and seems to present issues. Vlade isn’t good. If the team fired him, no team would hire him as their GM. None.
The situation is bad.
Yet, it’s praised as “stable.”
If you are in a portable toilet, someone tips it over, and you decide to stay in there ... your situation is stable ... but it’s not good
The situation is bad.
Yet, it’s praised as “stable.”
If you are in a portable toilet, someone tips it over, and you decide to stay in there ... your situation is stable ... but it’s not good
In my opionion Fox needs to be used and play like a lillard or westbrook etc. We sink or swim with how high he can fly. Give him the ball and put him in agressive attack mode at all times. He is not a selfish player so wont be lost to tbe extream like a westbrook is. It is what utah did with Mitchel. Belive in him and push him forward as our star. Making him be a stand in the corner role player is nit the solutionp
My option A,B,C set would be putting Fox in the PnR with any of our 3 athletic bigs and getting him downhill attacking the rim. He's one of the quickest players in the league and we're wasting his generational ability (his quickness). He's just impossible to stay in front of and for some reason we're content not using that ability.
I don't think the vet vs. youngin choices are as tough this year. If a vet is much better than the youngin, you've got to play the vet. When it comes to KK I think he's clearly better than Stein, and I don't think Stein should be considered a youngin anymore, as he's in his 4th year. ZBO shouldn't play because he hurts you more on defense than he helps on offense and is not complementary to the running players on the Kings. JJ shouldn't play over any vet because he is a far lesser player than the vets that can play the position (Shump and Bogs); Gabriel is the only guy I'd be thinking about that's young at the SF position.
While I agree Z- Bo is better suited to sit most/all nights, he has at least been imparting his wisdom on Marvin according to this STR article.
https://www.sactownroyalty.com/2018...ses-preseason-and-his-transition-into-the-nba
"What have you been learning from Zbo?
To have somebody like that who has been playing in the league for that long teaching you different tricks to score and how to use your body, just small stuff like that that I try to pick up on and I see him do in practice and things like that. So, I’m just asking questions and learning."
https://www.sactownroyalty.com/2018...ses-preseason-and-his-transition-into-the-nba
"What have you been learning from Zbo?
To have somebody like that who has been playing in the league for that long teaching you different tricks to score and how to use your body, just small stuff like that that I try to pick up on and I see him do in practice and things like that. So, I’m just asking questions and learning."
From hoopshype kings twitter:
Jason Jones @mr_jasonjones
yesterday
Dave Joerger said the analytics from the preseason support the team playing small lineups with Justin Jackson at power forward
whaaaaaaat?
Jason Jones @mr_jasonjones
yesterday
Dave Joerger said the analytics from the preseason support the team playing small lineups with Justin Jackson at power forward
whaaaaaaat?
Heard Joerger on 1140 and he gave a pretty candid answer to Buddy going under screens when he shouldn't go under screens (like the Warriors' game). He gave a general answer to the specific question and said that the only real leverage he has is the bench; but when you're in a situation where the guy you want to "instruct" is a lot better than the guy that you substitute for him, that guy just "sticks his tongue out at you" on the bench and says, "See, that's what you get when you sit me down." Joerger says that as the roster gets filled out over time there will be competition at every position and that kind of thing won't be happening.
I think Joerger was trying to be as honest as he could about the situation without calling out Hield by name. I did notice last year that Joerger did sit Hield down for a fairly long time, and then lo and behold Hield started to pass the ball more and make plays for others and even play better defense. Hield was asked about it and he grudgingly told the report that he had to play more like what the coach wanted. You could tell that he wasn't excited about doing so, but that he knew he had to do it to get more playing time. This is when Bogs and Temple were around to take his minutes if he didn't play the right way.
I'm going to watching Buddy in tonight's Utah game to see how many times he goes under screens versus over screens when he's playing against good shooters (not Rubio). It will be an indication to see if he's on the same page as Joerger or going rogue.
I'm going to watching Buddy in tonight's Utah game to see how many times he goes under screens versus over screens when he's playing against good shooters (not Rubio). It will be an indication to see if he's on the same page as Joerger or going rogue.
No, bigger picture he's starting to go full steam ahead into some of the excuses he was toying around with at times last year. I get it, he's in a tough spot where the rug was yanked out from under him. This is where coaches earn their stripes and he's not at the moment. He sat Hield down, one of the Kings most prized young pieces and how many players did the Kings get into the top 100 again? Hield regardless is also the one player right now that keeps the Kings competitive when they shouldn't be if he's "on". That's something Joerger somewhat alluded to but his impact was noticeable and that's all considering his misuse as one of the leagues best catch and shoot players rarely in a position to catch and shoot as a result of the system he's playing in. This is a rebuild, there is more than one side to this and the more I see, the more I see the potential for them to be boxed in for a long while as they restart another rebuild under someone else. I sincerely hope not though.
My personal belief is that it's not as simple as "going over screens". If it were the top 4 teams wouldn't be built specifically to switch screens. If anything it just addresses the fact that the Kings are antiquated in almost every fashion relative to the rules of today. Bogs got caught on more screens last year than I could count. Zbo statistically was a weeping hole on both ends according to those analytics yet he played. Sure looked like favortism to me and considering it's the same thing Grizz fans warned about it should cause concern. The issues go much higher than any of this on the floor stuff.
On the positive side, I do like that he's pushing the young players even if the results are unrealistic. Now he needs to do his defense a favor though and put together an offense that doesn't see them burning the candle at both ends. They use all their energy on the offensive side attempting to create low yield looks. In time they will find their rhythm in his offense, they did last year, but if it yields the same low impact productivity the season is lost. Wins and losses shouldn't even be the goal as sacrilegious as it many sound. They need to grow as individuals first because without that they'll never ever be able to win at a sustainable clip nor make the necessary personnel changes that come along with any rebuild. This is the problem when you have a coach toeing the line, and a GM widely considered to be the worst in basketball. Which sucks, because Vlade has done a good job getting some pieces together. Vlade has to realize that it might be misuse by others that will see his work come crashing down. Unless he's making those stylistic calls of course.
My personal belief is that it's not as simple as "going over screens". If it were the top 4 teams wouldn't be built specifically to switch screens. If anything it just addresses the fact that the Kings are antiquated in almost every fashion relative to the rules of today. Bogs got caught on more screens last year than I could count. Zbo statistically was a weeping hole on both ends according to those analytics yet he played. Sure looked like favortism to me and considering it's the same thing Grizz fans warned about it should cause concern. The issues go much higher than any of this on the floor stuff.
On the positive side, I do like that he's pushing the young players even if the results are unrealistic. Now he needs to do his defense a favor though and put together an offense that doesn't see them burning the candle at both ends. They use all their energy on the offensive side attempting to create low yield looks. In time they will find their rhythm in his offense, they did last year, but if it yields the same low impact productivity the season is lost. Wins and losses shouldn't even be the goal as sacrilegious as it many sound. They need to grow as individuals first because without that they'll never ever be able to win at a sustainable clip nor make the necessary personnel changes that come along with any rebuild. This is the problem when you have a coach toeing the line, and a GM widely considered to be the worst in basketball. Which sucks, because Vlade has done a good job getting some pieces together. Vlade has to realize that it might be misuse by others that will see his work come crashing down. Unless he's making those stylistic calls of course.
People are realistic. No one expects the Kings to win 40 games but they do expect the players to be used correctly. If Buddy is going under screens for Klay, that's on Buddy. If Buddy only gets set up for one or two good looks at a 3 pointer per game, that's on Joerger for installing the 20% of his offense that does nothing other than get 3 assists and 4 mid range jumpers per game for the center.
Has he ever taken the blame himself and covered for his players? These guys are young and they make a lot of mistakes but they do have skill sets that they are very good at and up until this point they only get to use them sparingly.
There would be zero heat on Joerger if the players were allowed to do what they do best but that's not the case so it's only natural that people point the finger at him. They don't point the finger because the Kings aren't winning a bunch of games, they're pointing it for the blatant misuse of the roster and the archaic way he has these guys playing offense. I already know that the Kings will never have a winning record with Joerger coaching this way. Regardless of how well these players may or may not develop. Joerger feels like he is restricted by management but in turn he restricts his own players as well. It's multiple levels of illogical philosophies all piled on top of each other.
Has he ever taken the blame himself and covered for his players? These guys are young and they make a lot of mistakes but they do have skill sets that they are very good at and up until this point they only get to use them sparingly.
There would be zero heat on Joerger if the players were allowed to do what they do best but that's not the case so it's only natural that people point the finger at him. They don't point the finger because the Kings aren't winning a bunch of games, they're pointing it for the blatant misuse of the roster and the archaic way he has these guys playing offense. I already know that the Kings will never have a winning record with Joerger coaching this way. Regardless of how well these players may or may not develop. Joerger feels like he is restricted by management but in turn he restricts his own players as well. It's multiple levels of illogical philosophies all piled on top of each other.
Not defending screen situations properly is just an example of a guy not doing what the coach wants. Not passing the ball, setting up others, and defending are additional examples of not doing what coach wants until a guy must do what coach wants because he's benched. So, it's about "what coach wants," not which team is built to switch screens or how the Kings are antiquated. Those issues deal with the value of what coach wants. This is the question that I'd really like answered: How much of what coach wants is being willfully disregarded? From what I can tell from Joerger's comments and Hield's comments of last year there has been some willful disregard of his instruction. No doubt, there are many other situations in which guys are really trying to do what Joerger says, but just haven't been able to master it quite yet. And along a very similar theme, I'd like to know this: Are players not picking up guys in the back court on defense because Joerger doesn't want to pick up guys in the back court, or are they just blowing off Joerger? Answers to these questions will be useful in assessing Joerger as a coach, as well as evaluating the maturity and/or coachability of individual players on this team.
Lets look at the difference between going under, and through a screen. Are there times when it's beneficial to go under a screen? I would argue yes, there is. If the other teams PG isn't a very good outside shooter, but is quick, then it's beneficial to go under the screen which keeps him out of the lane and forces him to either shoot from out there, or pass the ball. But if that PG is Lillard, or Curry etc, then you have to fight through the screen or they'll kill you from out there with the long ball.
Against a PG like Rubio from Utah, we should have gone under the screen and forced him to shoot from out there, but instead we were trying to fight our way through the screen and allowing Rubio to get into the lane. So what happens then defensively? Willie leaves his man (Gobert) to move up in the lane and stop the ball. No one on the Kings rotates over to the basket, and Gobert scores on an alley oop. The first mistake was fighting through the screen. We should have gone under and forced a terrible shooter like Rubio to shoot from out there. The 2nd mistake was lack of recognition by our PF who failed to rotate over.
However, recognition comes with experience, and neither Bagley, in this case, or Giles has any experience. Of course the third option would have been for Willie to stay with Gobert, and make Rubio shoot a midrange shot. But, he is a much better midrange to basket scorer. Of course you were referring to the Hield situation, and obviously he was making big mistakes. There is a reason that the P&R is so popular. Because it works
Against a PG like Rubio from Utah, we should have gone under the screen and forced him to shoot from out there, but instead we were trying to fight our way through the screen and allowing Rubio to get into the lane. So what happens then defensively? Willie leaves his man (Gobert) to move up in the lane and stop the ball. No one on the Kings rotates over to the basket, and Gobert scores on an alley oop. The first mistake was fighting through the screen. We should have gone under and forced a terrible shooter like Rubio to shoot from out there. The 2nd mistake was lack of recognition by our PF who failed to rotate over.
However, recognition comes with experience, and neither Bagley, in this case, or Giles has any experience. Of course the third option would have been for Willie to stay with Gobert, and make Rubio shoot a midrange shot. But, he is a much better midrange to basket scorer. Of course you were referring to the Hield situation, and obviously he was making big mistakes. There is a reason that the P&R is so popular. Because it works
