[GS/UTA] Western Semifinals
- Thread starter nebs
- Start date
Well, Jazz are the first entrants into the conference finals on either side of the bracket. In a way, I'm happy for Jerry Sloan, who has stuck with his system and demanded that guys play his way or don't play. And even though they won't have homecourt advantage and won't be favored, they have proven that they can win on the road to this point, so I think they'll have a fair shot to advance to the Finals.
Some of us "supposedly Kings fans" simply love exciting playoff basketball or are just as much NBA fans in general as Kings fans, won't apologize and definitely won't be branded yet another "sour-puss Sac fan." Some of us were here long before the Kansas City Kings showed up in Sacramento in 1985, thus rooted for the San Francisco Warriors in the 1960's or later G.S. Warriors by the early 1970's. Some of us college kids during that time would car pool down to Warriors games back in the day or cheered from less than a hundred miles away when the Warriors won an NBA title in 1975. In Sacramento, we happily shifted any loyalty which was never set in stone to the Kings, but kept one eye on the W's just for fun getting a big kick as local Sactown product Matt Barnes helped ignite their 2007 playoff run. I simply thought Golden State early on was "the story" of the playoffs and conjured up a most compelling script with each day of their crazy "We Believe" run. It was fun while it lasted, but clearly if the Kings would have made the playoffs this year it would never have gotten much attention at all in Sacramento.
Some of us oldtimers remember a time before the Kings came to Sac and the Warriors were all there was.
For me, it was a little nostalgia to watch the Warriors succeed, although I really don't have the passion for them like I do the Kings.
And that last game was like a game between men and boys. The boys couldn't control their tempers, made several bad decisions (bad shot attempts) down the stretch while the men calmly went about their business and won. I think we all saw that coming in this series.
For me, it was a little nostalgia to watch the Warriors succeed, although I really don't have the passion for them like I do the Kings.
And that last game was like a game between men and boys. The boys couldn't control their tempers, made several bad decisions (bad shot attempts) down the stretch while the men calmly went about their business and won. I think we all saw that coming in this series.
Really bad game
All in all, I think that was a really badly played game.
Utah dominated on the boards in a way I can't remember a team dominating, and yet, there it was for the Warriors to win... And instead of taking it inside and then passing out for threes (when necessary), GS just stayed on the perimeter... And then Utah couldn't hit free throws to save their lives...
That flagrant on Jackson wasn't a flagrant. It wasn't even a hard foul; it was a frustration foul in which no one was in any danger of being hurt. Heck, all that foul would have done is knock me down; it wouldn't have hurt anyone.
And out of that, Utah had the opportunity to score up to SEVEN (three free-throws, then the ball back to them for an opportunity for a three on which they could have been fouled) points, and they get ZERO. Good grief, even the Grizzlies would have gotten ONE point out of that opportunity. Those free throws were bricks.
All Phoenix or SA has to do is take care of the ball, and they'll win. Utah is a longshot. I expect them to lose. They may even be swept.
For me, I guess it would be nice to see Phoenix win it. SA has their rings; time for someone new to get some.
To take a potshot at the Kings here, just look at the talent gap between them and any of the remaining teams. I'm sorry, but Nelson could not have coached the Kings to 42-40. Just like Nelson told Mullin that Dunleavy and Murphy had to go, Nelson would have told Petrie that many players on the Kings would have to go. I read a comment on a Warriors blog that maybe they should go after SAR. The question that immediately came to mind: Why?? Don't they already have about 3 players just like SAR, only better? Like the Kings wouldn't take Jackson or Harrington in a trade for SAR??
All in all, I think that was a really badly played game.
Utah dominated on the boards in a way I can't remember a team dominating, and yet, there it was for the Warriors to win... And instead of taking it inside and then passing out for threes (when necessary), GS just stayed on the perimeter... And then Utah couldn't hit free throws to save their lives...
That flagrant on Jackson wasn't a flagrant. It wasn't even a hard foul; it was a frustration foul in which no one was in any danger of being hurt. Heck, all that foul would have done is knock me down; it wouldn't have hurt anyone.
And out of that, Utah had the opportunity to score up to SEVEN (three free-throws, then the ball back to them for an opportunity for a three on which they could have been fouled) points, and they get ZERO. Good grief, even the Grizzlies would have gotten ONE point out of that opportunity. Those free throws were bricks.
All Phoenix or SA has to do is take care of the ball, and they'll win. Utah is a longshot. I expect them to lose. They may even be swept.
For me, I guess it would be nice to see Phoenix win it. SA has their rings; time for someone new to get some.
To take a potshot at the Kings here, just look at the talent gap between them and any of the remaining teams. I'm sorry, but Nelson could not have coached the Kings to 42-40. Just like Nelson told Mullin that Dunleavy and Murphy had to go, Nelson would have told Petrie that many players on the Kings would have to go. I read a comment on a Warriors blog that maybe they should go after SAR. The question that immediately came to mind: Why?? Don't they already have about 3 players just like SAR, only better? Like the Kings wouldn't take Jackson or Harrington in a trade for SAR??
Well, first of all, let me pick myself off the floor because someone has agreed with me.
Now to answer your question: the Kings have (or had) more talent on their active roster this season than Jazz have on their active roster this season.
It is true that key players for the Kings may have had their poorest seasons of their careers this year, while key players for the Jazz may be having their best seasons. But, all in all, I think we have more talent than the Utah Jazz and I think many people would agree with me if I were posting this in October 2006.
Now to answer your question: the Kings have (or had) more talent on their active roster this season than Jazz have on their active roster this season.
It is true that key players for the Kings may have had their poorest seasons of their careers this year, while key players for the Jazz may be having their best seasons. But, all in all, I think we have more talent than the Utah Jazz and I think many people would agree with me if I were posting this in October 2006.
Maybe.
But hindsight is 20/20, and you have that benefit, yet choose to ignore it.
Maybe the Kings had players who have had better careers to this point, but I don't think many people would say that their roster, top to bottom, is more talented than the Jazz. I'm not gonna run down both teams' rosters and such, but I know that I'd give up any two players on our team (sans Kevin Martin, but maybe) for Carlos Boozer, and I'd give up any one player on our team (sans Kevin Martin) for Andrei Kirilenko. And I'd probably give up any one player besides Martin for Deron Williams.
Now, that has a lot to do with Ron Artest being a basketcase, but we still only have one player on our team, maybe two that is more talented than any of Utah's best three players. Then, when you venture down the lineup, it gets even worse for us.
I don't agree with you, even though I think I understand why you feel that way. But the Kings talent-level showed itself to be pretty poor this season, while the Jazz were a top four team in the West for most of the season.
But hindsight is 20/20, and you have that benefit, yet choose to ignore it.
Maybe the Kings had players who have had better careers to this point, but I don't think many people would say that their roster, top to bottom, is more talented than the Jazz. I'm not gonna run down both teams' rosters and such, but I know that I'd give up any two players on our team (sans Kevin Martin, but maybe) for Carlos Boozer, and I'd give up any one player on our team (sans Kevin Martin) for Andrei Kirilenko. And I'd probably give up any one player besides Martin for Deron Williams.
Now, that has a lot to do with Ron Artest being a basketcase, but we still only have one player on our team, maybe two that is more talented than any of Utah's best three players. Then, when you venture down the lineup, it gets even worse for us.
I don't agree with you, even though I think I understand why you feel that way. But the Kings talent-level showed itself to be pretty poor this season, while the Jazz were a top four team in the West for most of the season.
No we really don't, although its closer than the relative status of the teams might suggest.
Assuming, for a moment, that AK47 is still himself, and he certainly looked it this last series, we only have a clear edge at one position (OG) and a slight edge at SF. Meanwhile we get ruined at PF, have slight disadvanatages at PG and C, simiilar disadvanatges at 6th (Harpring) and 7th (Milsap -- who is actually damn impressive actually, wish we could have nabbed him) and likely even 8th (Giricek). By the time you throw in age, physicality (size, strength, toughness, quickness) and ability to fill important roles and function within a team concept, its not even close.
And yes, in October, it would have looked like a much closer deal to most. But that's only because most, including myself, could not foresee the huge strides made by Boozer and Williams, and the out of nowhere arrival of Milsap. I would trade any of our starters to get either of the first two, and any of our benchers to get Milsap. tehy are not a truly great team, and still do not have a truly Great player. But they are quite good. And one OG away from being very very good.
Meanwhile...we suck. If I were not a Kings fan I would rather watch paint dry than watch our disgusting pile of boring sludge blunder about.
Assuming, for a moment, that AK47 is still himself, and he certainly looked it this last series, we only have a clear edge at one position (OG) and a slight edge at SF. Meanwhile we get ruined at PF, have slight disadvanatages at PG and C, simiilar disadvanatges at 6th (Harpring) and 7th (Milsap -- who is actually damn impressive actually, wish we could have nabbed him) and likely even 8th (Giricek). By the time you throw in age, physicality (size, strength, toughness, quickness) and ability to fill important roles and function within a team concept, its not even close.
And yes, in October, it would have looked like a much closer deal to most. But that's only because most, including myself, could not foresee the huge strides made by Boozer and Williams, and the out of nowhere arrival of Milsap. I would trade any of our starters to get either of the first two, and any of our benchers to get Milsap. tehy are not a truly great team, and still do not have a truly Great player. But they are quite good. And one OG away from being very very good.
Meanwhile...we suck. If I were not a Kings fan I would rather watch paint dry than watch our disgusting pile of boring sludge blunder about.
Looking at draft position as a somewhat 'clean' measure of talent, we are more talented than the Jazz. I know how people around here love draft position for the acquisition of talent. Plus, draft position is based upon how talented a player appears before entering the "noise" factors of how well players perform in different systems, scenarios etc.
Average draft position of players averaging more than 15 minutes per game:
Jazz: 25.9
Kings: 19.5 (I even excluded SAR and Corliss because they were drafted high, but are clearly past their primes; this clearly favors the Jazz; with these two Kings included in the averages, the average draft position decreases to about 16; also I excluded Bmiller because he was undrafted).
The Jazz only have Deron as a very high draft pick and Harpering as a somewhat high (15th). The others are all late first rounders and second rounders.
It is not so much about the talent you have, but rather what you do with the talent you do have.
Average draft position of players averaging more than 15 minutes per game:
Jazz: 25.9
Kings: 19.5 (I even excluded SAR and Corliss because they were drafted high, but are clearly past their primes; this clearly favors the Jazz; with these two Kings included in the averages, the average draft position decreases to about 16; also I excluded Bmiller because he was undrafted).
The Jazz only have Deron as a very high draft pick and Harpering as a somewhat high (15th). The others are all late first rounders and second rounders.
It is not so much about the talent you have, but rather what you do with the talent you do have.
Clean measure of talent???
Uh...maybe clean measure of projected talent when these guys were all 18-20.
Any measuring scale where Carlos Boozer pulls you down is ratehr inherently flawed. Under that scale if the Jazz trade for Arenas next month to play OG, our talent gap over them will actually widen.
P.S. Actually the Jazz took major advantage of Okur/Boozer being two of the better 2nd round picks of the last decade by freeing up cap room and nabbing them from the teams that drafted them but had limited rights to them. If there is any attempt here to sneakily maneuver around and then claim see you can do it all with late picks and no cap room, that is patently wrong. the Jazz did it preceisely with a very high pick (Williams) and a year with massive cap room (Boozer + Okur). Been some nice little mvoes for sleepers around the edges, but at its heart its a classic rebuild. Big free agents, high draft picks.
Uh...maybe clean measure of projected talent when these guys were all 18-20.
Any measuring scale where Carlos Boozer pulls you down is ratehr inherently flawed. Under that scale if the Jazz trade for Arenas next month to play OG, our talent gap over them will actually widen.
P.S. Actually the Jazz took major advantage of Okur/Boozer being two of the better 2nd round picks of the last decade by freeing up cap room and nabbing them from the teams that drafted them but had limited rights to them. If there is any attempt here to sneakily maneuver around and then claim see you can do it all with late picks and no cap room, that is patently wrong. the Jazz did it preceisely with a very high pick (Williams) and a year with massive cap room (Boozer + Okur). Been some nice little mvoes for sleepers around the edges, but at its heart its a classic rebuild. Big free agents, high draft picks.
Last edited: