Bobcats @ Kings Game Thread

[Kings Faithful]

Jt has absolutely no basketball IQ... I guess he needs more experience because I'm really not sure how one gets basketball IQ otherwise. I cringed when I watched him miss 2 free throws, rebound his miss, and just give the ball away. Would Tim Duncan have dropped the ball at that moment? Not saying JT should be Tim Duncan, but how hard is it to hold onto the ball?

 

[LookingAround]

Sergio gave it - Sergio took it

JT and Sergio miss 3 ft's. If they make them, its a 3 pt game.

yeah, Sergio's fault. As always, even when he is not playing...

 

[Lafayette]

Ultimately it was the team's constant bad D and 1on1 offense that created the hole. It's not like the Bobcats are an offensively studded team. They score through fast breaks and transition, and stagnant offense feeds that. Sergio came in and the Cats had to play halfcourt offense and the game changed again.

Thats what the 3rd qtr was, 1 on 1 and no D, crap but onto the next game.

 

[CWebb85]

Remember, JT is only on his second year, its not like hes been playing five or six years now, but of course he needs to learn to control his body and hands when setting screens or posting up. I just watched the last 6 mins of the game so I can't put a full remark about the game. Just give this team time, they need to play more together to get a feel for each other, at least there trying, unlike last year...

 

[Showtime]

OK, let's clear this up once and for all. According to the rules of the expansion draft, a team cannot protect an UNRESTRICTED free agent.

According to this report, the deadline for reporting the list of protected players for a team was June 11th, 2004.

According to this report, Peeler had an option for another season with the Kings, but he opted out of that additional year and was not a free agent until July 1st.

So let's look at this timeline:

May 2004 - Kings lose in the playoffs. Their season is over.

June 11th - the deadline for protected players to be reported.

July 1st - Peeler becomes a free agent after opting out.

July 29th - Peeler signs with Washington.


So while unrestricted free agents cannot be protected, Peeler was not a free agent until July 1st, well after the deadline to protect players. He was eligible for protection according to this timeline unless somebody can give me the exact protected list.

 

[FaStRmAn]

It drives me CRAZY that this team digs 20+ point holes and then make furious comebacks that usually fall short. Tyreke going down is a concern, but tell me it isnt exciting to watch these crazy comeback attempts! Sure, we would like to see them not come out in the 3rd quarter and just crap their diaper, but it is encouraging to see them make the effort to come back and make a game of it in the 4th.

Gerald Wallace pisses me off every time he comes back and kills the Kings. They should have left Songalia exposed to the expansion draft! Hindsight is 20/20 and Adelman never liked rookies so they let Gerald go. TOO BAD! Oh well, at least it wasn't a total loss this game. JT looks like he might be pulling out of his "FUNK" (12 and 16)! And Casspi looked better than he has in recent games. Martin had a bad shooting night (11-25) but still found a way to contribute to the cause (31 pts). All in all they are still just a young team finding a way to win games. It is the sign of a young team to come out in the third and dump a big turd on the court. It is the sign of a GOOD young team that can come back from being down 26 to making a game of it at the end of the game!

The Kings need to keep this group together for a year or two, acquire a big man that can defend the post either by free agency or draft, and they are going to be ok. Everyone wants it to happen so fast. But player development is measured in years. I want the Kings to be great right now but I know it is going to take a while with the youth they have. Watching these kind of games and watching this young team grow and finding their way is pretty awesome! Enjoy the ride...

 

[Bricklayer]

OK, let's clear this up once and for all. According to the rules of the expansion draft, a team cannot protect an UNRESTRICTED free agent.

According to this report, the deadline for reporting the list of protected players for a team was June 11th, 2004.

According to this report, Peeler had an option for another season with the Kings, but he opted out of that additional year and was not a free agent until July 1st.

So let's look at this timeline:

May 2004 - Kings lose in the playoffs. Their season is over.

June 11th - the deadline for protected players to be reported.

July 1st - Peeler becomes a free agent after opting out.

July 29th - Peeler signs with Washington.


So while unrestricted free agents cannot be protected, Peeler was not a free agent until July 1st, well after the deadline to protect players. He was eligible for protection according to this timeline unless somebody can give me the exact protected list.

I'm not sure about thge source there, but I think Peeler's contract was an opt in, not an opt out (i.e. a Player Option). And either way he was not eligible to be covered. In other words he was not our player unless he opted in, which he did not do.

 

[Larry89]

the entire basketball team just isnt organized and smart

 

[Showtime]

I'm not sure about thge source there, but I think Peeler's contract was an opt in, not an opt out (i.e. a Player Option). And either way he was not eligible to be covered. In other words he was not our player unless he opted in, which he did not do.

Even if he "opts IN", his status as a free agent didn't kick in until well after the deadline. So the argument that he was ineligible for protection due to free agent status is not accurate.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Even if he "opts IN", his status as a free agent didn't kick in until well after the deadline. So the argument that he was ineligible for protection due to free agent status is not accurate.

You appear to not understand how free agency and/or expansion drafts work.

From the definitive online source for all salary cap/contract questions: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q96

To supply an expansion team with its initial complement of players, the league holds an expansion draft prior to that year's NBA draft. Existing teams are allowed to protect up to eight players (including restricted free agents) from being selected in the expansion draft, but every team must expose at least one player who can't possibly become a free agent as the result of the exercise or non-exercise of an option or ETO. Unrestricted free agents can neither be protected from nor selected in the expansion draft, and are essentially ignored. Restricted free agents (see question number 36) may be selected, but become unrestricted free agents upon selection (with the caveat that they cannot then re-sign with the team from which they came). No team may lose more than one player in an expansion draft.

Peeler had a player option, meaning that he had the choice to become an unrestricted free agent, or accept his option. Players who may possibly become free agents cannot be exposed in an expansion draft.

Sorry, but you're wrong. I usually let NME or Capt. Factorial handle my light work when it comes to contracts and things, but I couldn't go to bed with this nonsense unchallenged.

EDIT - That said, I personally refuse to let Petrie off the hook for that **** up. While it is true that it is technically and semantically incorrect to say that we gave up Wallace to keep Peeler, it was Petrie's responsibility to ensure that someone besides Wallace was under contract who was eligible to be exposed, and he failed to do that.

Another way to look at the situation, instead of perpetuating the false "We gave up Wallace to keep Peeler" paradigm would be to look at it from an angle that actually could be argued as being accurate, which is to say that it could be argued that Petrie gave up Wallace to keep Darius Songaila.

 

[ReinadelosReys]

Don't know how concerned we should be about Tyreke's hip (for at least the next game of two only, I would think), coach said in the postgame "when it was time to put him back in the game in the second half he just couldn't go" ..

 

[Lafayette]

Rumor is that Tyreke is going to traded for Ricky Rubio since the whole Tyreke experiment has gone all wrong, oh well! HAHAHAHAHA!

 

[Slohoop]

BRAVO K-Mart, you've turned Kings back to Queens, taking half shots and make your teammates in to ''have i ever play basketball'' players.

 

[EHandel]

I'm kinda new here, but I've seen 99% of the Kings games the last few years, so here's my two cents. I think we as Kings fans are way too impatient with this team. I mean c'mon, we have one of the youngest least experienced teams in the league. This team has hit the wall, which to me is not at all surprising when you think about it. This is without question more minutes than most of these guys have ever played (sans vets like Beno or Noc) in one season, so are we really surprised they are beginning to sputter? Hey, I get just as frustrated as anyone else watching some of the play out of our young front court, but developing big guys takes time, so I think we might be hitting the panic button a little early.

In regards to Kevin, we all know that Kevin is a scorer first and foremost. We know his limitations. But he is one of the best, most efficient scorers in the league and a major asset to us. Did anybody really find it surprising that the chemistry between he (at the time our primary option on offense) and Tyreke (who became our primary option after Kevin got hurt) would not be all that great at first? I think tonight (before Tyreke left with the injury) we saw a preview of what could possibly be one of the of the most lethal backcourts in the entire league. And to those who question the amount of shots Kevin takes: a) do you really consider those poor shots within the offense? and b) who would you rather take these shots? Because, if we didn't have Kevin tonight, it would have gotten ugly early. If you remember correctly this slide in play occurred well before Kevin came back.

Not to come off like a Kevin homer, but he is definitely a valuable member of this team and his departure would ONLY benefit the Kings were it to land us an upper echelon big man (i.e. Brook Lopez at the worst) so that we have some options if either JT or Spencer don't pan out.

Lastly, don't panic Kings fans. Winning in the NBA takes time especially with a team as young as ours. I think we have a lot to be thankful for and a lot to look forward to in the future. So let's understand that there will be growing pains, but in IMO this team is definitely headed in the right direction, but there is no substitute for experience in this league

 

[Gabriel]

I'm kinda new here, but I've seen 99% of the Kings games the last few years, so here's my two cents. I think we as Kings fans are way too impatient with this team. I mean c'mon, we have one of the youngest least experienced teams in the league. This team has hit the wall, which to me is not at all surprising when you think about it. This is without question more minutes than most of these guys have ever played (sans vets like Beno or Noc) in one season, so are we really surprised they are beginning to sputter? Hey, I get just as frustrated as anyone else watching some of the play out of our young front court, but developing big guys takes time, so I think we might be hitting the panic button a little early.

In regards to Kevin, we all know that Kevin is a scorer first and foremost. We know his limitations. But he is one of the best, most efficient scorers in the league and a major asset to us. Did anybody really find it surprising that the chemistry between he (at the time our primary option on offense) and Tyreke (who became our primary option after Kevin got hurt) would not be all that great at first? I think tonight (before Tyreke left with the injury) we saw a preview of what could possibly be one of the of the most lethal backcourts in the entire league. And to those who question the amount of shots Kevin takes: a) do you really consider those poor shots within the offense? and b) who would you rather take these shots? Because, if we didn't have Kevin tonight, it would have gotten ugly early. If you remember correctly this slide in play occurred well before Kevin came back.

Not to come off like a Kevin homer, but he is definitely a valuable member of this team and his departure would ONLY benefit the Kings were it to land us an upper echelon big man (i.e. Brook Lopez at the worst) so that we have some options if either JT or Spencer don't pan out.

Lastly, don't panic Kings fans. Winning in the NBA takes time especially with a team as young as ours. I think we have a lot to be thankful for and a lot to look forward to in the future. So let's understand that there will be growing pains, but in IMO this team is definitely headed in the right direction, but there is no substitute for experience in this league

Where do people get this idea from? The idea that the Kings are certainly worse without Kevin Martin is an illogical assumption. Yes, the guy is a terrific scorer, so somehow that automatically means he's going to make this team better. There's a reason, all-be-it an easier schedule was part of it, that our record with him is worse as opposed to without him. You just can't ignore that.

 

[Jechtsphere]

Last night was my first time at Arco ever and it was fun, I didn't expect a win and our defense looks even worse live lol

But one thing I noticed is Arco is really better than say Oracle Arena which I've been to a few times, It seemed to me as I looked around there really isn't a bad seat in the house...it was overall just a treat for me to see the Webber and Divac's jersey's hanging up there and despite the loss it was a great experiece.

Although the people behind me annoyed me mainly because it was obvious that the guy brings the girl to the game and she knows nothing and they leave in the third quarter...she was obviously bored to death lol...she also rooted the other team on so he should of been like ok your walking home =p

I hope to go again before the season ends, most likely after the trade deadline to see if there are any new editions here.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Where do people get this idea from? The idea that the Kings are certainly worse without Kevin Martin is an illogical assumption. Yes, the guy is a terrific scorer, so somehow that automatically means he's going to make this team better. There's a reason, all-be-it an easier schedule was part of it, that our record with him is worse as opposed to without him. You just can't ignore that.

Well, it's certainly no less logical than the assumption that the Kings are certainly worse WITH Kevin Martin. Kevin Martin has spent the past 4 years being an above-average NBA player. For instance, if you look at Win Shares, which do a pretty good job of determining how valuable a player is in terms of wins, he has garnered 3.23 win shares per 1000 minutes, which turns out to be 155% better than the NBA average of 2.08. If you replace an above-average NBA player with an average NBA player, your team should get worse.

We can also look at how instrumental Martin has been for our last four seasons. If we simply look at our record when plays and when he doesn't, it's pretty remarkable. Over the previous 4 seasons, we won 44% of our games when Martin played, and only 25% when he didn't. Can we ignore that? Because it's a much larger sample size (almost 8 times larger) than the one which you say we can't ignore.

Martin has a long record of making the teams he has played on better. Clearly this is because of his offense, not his defense, but it's still the case. To assume that this particular team is somehow different requires a bit of a leap of faith. In general, it requires the assumption that now Martin suddenly makes his teammates worse, whereas that was never apparently the case before. And that's not a terribly logical assumption, not to my eye.

 

[pshn80]

Well, it's certainly no less logical than the assumption that the Kings are certainly worse WITH Kevin Martin. Kevin Martin has spent the past 4 years being an above-average NBA player. For instance, if you look at Win Shares, which do a pretty good job of determining how valuable a player is in terms of wins, he has garnered 3.23 win shares per 1000 minutes, which turns out to be 155% better than the NBA average of 2.08. If you replace an above-average NBA player with an average NBA player, your team should get worse.

We can also look at how instrumental Martin has been for our last four seasons. If we simply look at our record when plays and when he doesn't, it's pretty remarkable. Over the previous 4 seasons, we won 44% of our games when Martin played, and only 25% when he didn't. Can we ignore that? Because it's a much larger sample size (almost 8 times larger) than the one which you say we can't ignore.

Martin has a long record of making the teams he has played on better. Clearly this is because of his offense, not his defense, but it's still the case. To assume that this particular team is somehow different requires a bit of a leap of faith. In general, it requires the assumption that now Martin suddenly makes his teammates worse, whereas that was never apparently the case before. And that's not a terribly logical assumption, not to my eye.

Very good post. If we had three other starter quality players ........ well does anyone need to explain it. Evans and Martin are not the problem.

 

[steelevt]

Well, it's certainly no less logical than the assumption that the Kings are certainly worse WITH Kevin Martin. Kevin Martin has spent the past 4 years being an above-average NBA player. For instance, if you look at Win Shares, which do a pretty good job of determining how valuable a player is in terms of wins, he has garnered 3.23 win shares per 1000 minutes, which turns out to be 155% better than the NBA average of 2.08. If you replace an above-average NBA player with an average NBA player, your team should get worse.

We can also look at how instrumental Martin has been for our last four seasons. If we simply look at our record when plays and when he doesn't, it's pretty remarkable. Over the previous 4 seasons, we won 44% of our games when Martin played, and only 25% when he didn't. Can we ignore that? Because it's a much larger sample size (almost 8 times larger) than the one which you say we can't ignore.

Martin has a long record of making the teams he has played on better. Clearly this is because of his offense, not his defense, but it's still the case. To assume that this particular team is somehow different requires a bit of a leap of faith. In general, it requires the assumption that now Martin suddenly makes his teammates worse, whereas that was never apparently the case before. And that's not a terribly logical assumption, not to my eye.

i agree that this is a good post based on facts as opposed to biased assumptions, especially how he's using 4 seasons as a sample size vs a 6 game road trip to determine martins value to a team.

 

[Bricklayer]

i agree that this is a good post based on facts as opposed to biased assumptions, especially how he's using 4 seasons as a sample size vs a 6 game road trip to determine martins value to a team.

4 completely and totally irrelevant seasons as a sample size.

Its no different than an announcer who says the Kings all time record vs. the Blazers is 117-178! Or whatever. It means nothing here today. Everything has changed. And there is NO player, and certainly not a specialized offensive focused lesser light like Kevin Martin, who is a universal positive in every situation (defenders are more universally aplicable, but only if they don't muck up the preferred offense). That's either wishful thnking, or primitive thinking. Or both. The childlike simplicity of white hats and black hats. Not the way it works.

 

[Gabriel]

I'm not comparing records here.

What I meant to say was that just because you have an above-average NBA player such as Kevin Martin, you can't just plug him into our roster and expect the team to excel. We have specific needs, such as a low-post presence, a shot-blocker, etc. From what I have seen this season, without Kevin Martin, this team is very capable of putting up points on the board. My point is that he is more expendable then many fans want to believe. Don't get me wrong, Kevin Martin is a fantastic player, but what this team needs is a real center.

 

[steelevt]

4 completely and totally irrelevant seasons as a sample size.

Its no different than an announcer who says the Kings all time record vs. the Blazers is 117-178! Or whatever. It means nothing here today. Everything has changed. And there is NO player, and certainly not a specialized offensive focused lesser light like Kevin Martin, who is a universal positive in every situation (defenders are more universally aplicable, but only if they don't muck up the preferred offense). That's either wishful thnking, or primitive thinking. Or both. The childlike simplicity of white hats and black hats. Not the way it works.

sure some of the pieces have changed and its not an exact science, but it takes into account some of the same players, road games AND home games, winning streaks and slumps, games with healthy and injured players. some of the people here are basing everything on a player coming off a wrist injury on a slumping team that was on a 6 game road trip. some made up their minds after the first or second game of that road trip.
are you are saying that is more logical?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

sure some of the pieces have changed and its not an exact science, but it takes into account some of the same players, road games AND home games, winning streaks and slumps, games with healthy and injured players. some of the people here are basing everything on a player coming off a wrist injury on a slumping team that was on a 6 game road trip. some made up their minds after the first or second game of that road trip. are you are saying that is more logical?

I would say those were the late adopters. Most made up their minds before Kevin returned from his injury.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

4 completely and totally irrelevant seasons as a sample size. Its no different than an announcer who says the Kings all time record vs. the Blazers is 117-178!

Of course it's different. Obviously there's no value in comparing how the Kings did against the Blazers in 1972. There's no common factor.

But I was looking at the effect of an actual common factor: Kevin Martin. Of course it's relevant how his teams did in his presence and his absence.

The main argument, so far as I can see it, is that this is a different team, and that for some reason Kevin Martin will not be able to mesh with it. But it's not as if those other four teams were all the same team. Here's a list of players who played at least 500 minutes for those teams, and how many times they did so:

Mike Bibby (2)
Beno Udrih (2)
Bobby Jackson
Jason Hart
Ronnie Price
Bobby Brown

Francisco Garcia (4)
Ron Artest (3)
John Salmons (3)
Bonzi Wells
Peja Stojakovic
Andres Nocioni
Donte Greene
Quincy Douby


Brad Miller (4)
Kenny Thomas (2)
Shareef Abdur-Rahim (2)
Spencer Hawes (2)
Mikki Moore (2)
Jason Thompson
Corliss Williamson

That makes for a lot of team diversity (21 players getting significant minutes) over those four years. In fact, not counting Kevin, the average number of players who "carried over" (played 500 minutes in two consecutive seasons) is 5.3 per year. This year will probably be five (Thompson, Udrih, Hawes, Greene, Nocioni) unless Garcia comes back. So the roster turnover in terms of stability doesn't look that different than the previous four years. Kevin has been successful with four previous rosters with the same amount of turnover that we've had this year - it seems kind of silly to claim that all of a sudden he can't adapt to this roster. It seems more logical to assume that Kevin will be the same player he's always been.

 

[swisshh]

Out of the former players listed, the names that matter are the type of players no longer on the team. What those teams had was a guy who could play point-whatever. A guy who could set up the offense, run the offense and get others involved, get others the ball in the spots that were best for them. The problem with Martin is Martin/Evans. Evans has started to pass the ball to Martin, but its just become a two man game. The Grizz had this problem earlier, where Rudy Gay and Mayo only passed to each other. It takes a guy like Conley to see a team full of guys who want to score and sacrifice his points to get the team's points higher. This team does not have that guy.

*Okay maybe Sergio is that guy, but he's inconsistent and it means moving Evans to the 2/3. I guess the greater overall problem is management's smokescreen on Evans as a PG, so you'd have to get that guy who can do that form the SF or big man spot.

. . .

Oh god, are we drafting Greg Monroe?