Kings @ Warriors Gameday Thread
- Thread starter nebs
- Start date
Just some observations. Did Cisco look terrible or what. He looked slow and tired from the start. Hope he rounds into shape. Jason Thompson is still moving on screens, and otherwise playing poorly. He seems to have improved his free throw shooting however. Evans looked tired and his jumper seemed to fall off late in the game. No game legs. Jimmer looked great as long as he wasnt on defense. He is a legit threat from the 3 point line. He is nifty with the ball and looks like he could make a good PG perhaps? I think Hickson had a bad game. Not a good start on his new team. He looked slow. He kinda blew his opportunities when they came. Donte Greene looked very good. No one else stood out.
It's the preseason. The first of only 2 preseason games. I have a feeling most teams will look poorly for at least 10 games into the truncated regular season. I hope the Kings have the ability to play thru the funk and hold on until they can get their game together. Having Cousins would have made the rebounding look better but the Warriors just outplayed the Kings on both sides of the court.
It's the preseason. The first of only 2 preseason games. I have a feeling most teams will look poorly for at least 10 games into the truncated regular season. I hope the Kings have the ability to play thru the funk and hold on until they can get their game together. Having Cousins would have made the rebounding look better but the Warriors just outplayed the Kings on both sides of the court.
you guys are going to kill me for saying this but it seems like we actually did have some ball movement and some sort of a system going when Tyreke wasn't in there. I am a big fan of his but I don't think he's a PG anymore, he's a 2/3 wing player. Not sure how much of a system you can have when 1 guy is dominating the ball.
This is why Dalembert is of great importance to us but our hierarchy does not see it because he can't shoot off the dribble! 
Here is the problem, when our team talks about getting better defensively by getting Hayes and Salmons, its about getting better on man defence. Those guys can shut down their man but don't make your team defence better over all.
Dalembert is important on so many levels:
1. He is a good man defender and great team defender. He comes across when our perimeter players allow their man to blow by them.
2. By doing 1, he is directly protecting Cousins from picking up cheap fouls.
3. He plays well WITH Cousins both defensively and offensively because he has that reasonable mid range jump shot.
4. He is a pretty good free throw shooter for someone who is now known for his offensive game
5. He even showed glimpses of being a solid passer from high post last year
6. He provides size and they don't get any shorter as they game goes now. He is an elite rebounder in the NBA and has been for his entire career. He is an elite shotblocker and has been for his entire career.
Sure he has some flaws BUT the goods he brings to us FAR, FAR outweigh his shortcomings. Imagine how much better defensively we would be just by bringing Dalembert back?! You can just about half that points in paint number tonight and guess what impact that has on the end result?!
Just as you always try and start your attack from inside and work out if needed, you always build your defence from inside out. We seem to like doing it back to front. The problem with our approach is that while our defenders slow down their man, the other players pick up the slack by driving to the basket at will. Why do people think scrubs end up playing great games against the Kings?! Because we have no interior presence that covers for others' mistakes
Here is the problem, when our team talks about getting better defensively by getting Hayes and Salmons, its about getting better on man defence. Those guys can shut down their man but don't make your team defence better over all.
Dalembert is important on so many levels:
1. He is a good man defender and great team defender. He comes across when our perimeter players allow their man to blow by them.
2. By doing 1, he is directly protecting Cousins from picking up cheap fouls.
3. He plays well WITH Cousins both defensively and offensively because he has that reasonable mid range jump shot.
4. He is a pretty good free throw shooter for someone who is now known for his offensive game
5. He even showed glimpses of being a solid passer from high post last year
6. He provides size and they don't get any shorter as they game goes now. He is an elite rebounder in the NBA and has been for his entire career. He is an elite shotblocker and has been for his entire career.
Sure he has some flaws BUT the goods he brings to us FAR, FAR outweigh his shortcomings. Imagine how much better defensively we would be just by bringing Dalembert back?! You can just about half that points in paint number tonight and guess what impact that has on the end result?!
Just as you always try and start your attack from inside and work out if needed, you always build your defence from inside out. We seem to like doing it back to front. The problem with our approach is that while our defenders slow down their man, the other players pick up the slack by driving to the basket at will. Why do people think scrubs end up playing great games against the Kings?! Because we have no interior presence that covers for others' mistakes
I agree with everything you said but appraising Donte Greene as "very good," on the night. He recorded a whopping -26(+/-) and as usual seems most together went entering the game with his gyrations, giggles and pointing to the heavens in another look at me moment. Then it was usual chucking from downtown going 3-5 with one successful drive off glass. Otherwise, totally outclassed inside by the W's where we needed him most. Read Bricks appraisal of Greene which is extremely charitable in giving "Buckets" C-.
Last edited:
So you actually think Cousins absence tonight was irrelevant. You don't think our interior offense and defense along with rebounding wouldn't have been impacted by the presence of Cousins? Well hell, why don't we just sit him out for the year then if he's not going to make any difference. What a joke!
Once again, I don't remember having much of it last season. No doubt he brings positives but once again, at what cost? That was always the question and just like last year when people thought having a big rangy shot blocker would cure all defensive woes, you tell me what it looked like last year.
What does post Landry have to do with it? He was here before Landry was traded, pre-all star to post all star there was only an 8 minute increase in minutes per game. If there was any increase it is directly tied to more than just one individual. I wish it were that simple, but it's not. This is a team thing and if this team has any hope defensively it has to do it as a team. Not saying having a shotblocker wouldn't be great, but if the idea that Sam Dalembert was the savior to any team was legit, I'd think he'd be signed right now. Would love to see him come back if on a fair contract though. Hayes and Daly next to Cousins could be everything you could want and more.
At the end of the year the Kings defensive efficiency rating was 20th in the league, their offensive rating was in the bottom 5. The only team that gave up more points in the paint per game than the Kings were the Raptors. The Kings were also 28th in the league in opponent FG%. Yeah, Daly made all the difference in the world. As I said, defense is a TEAM thing.
What did it look like once we started to use the size advantage we had? pretty damn good. No personal offense intended, but you've been spouting this same nonsense all off season. If you dont think the kings team defense improved with dally starting regularly and that a shot blocking presence is irrelavant, I'm not sure how well you understand the game.
It matters. 50+ years of the nba shows it matters. Trot out undersized guys, especially when you have defensively challenged perimeter players and you will lose, a lot. A guy like dally doesnt make that all change but not having him makes it far less likely you will win.
It matters. 50+ years of the nba shows it matters. Trot out undersized guys, especially when you have defensively challenged perimeter players and you will lose, a lot. A guy like dally doesnt make that all change but not having him makes it far less likely you will win.
Regarding the areas of paint defense and rebounding? Yes, he wouldn't have turned the tables. He isn't an above-the-rim center, especially on defense, so he wouldn't have been able to help contest shots, especially on help D when JT or JJ gets beaten. He would help a bit on the boards, but overall, he would be paired with one of the other horrible rebounders/defenders on the frontline, so the team would still be on the lower end.
The 3-man frontline of JT, Dalembert, and Cousins had adequate play on both ends of the floor no matter what two guy were on. With the current frontline, there are deficiencies with just about every pairing.
The 3-man frontline of JT, Dalembert, and Cousins had adequate play on both ends of the floor no matter what two guy were on. With the current frontline, there are deficiencies with just about every pairing.
Last edited:
It looked mediocre, but that was due to the two major factors of Cousins developing (and looking downright terrible at times), and Landry being on the team.
You brought up the stats for the season, whereas my point revolved around how the team performed with the physically imposing 3-man frontline rotation after he was traded to the hornets.
That's right, and that means what parts fit together, and Dalembert was a better fit for this team than what it currently has on the frontline. The entire frontline currently constructed without Dally is worse than what it would be with him.
Again, what do those numbers look like when the rotation was shortened after the Landry trade when the Kings had a big frontline? That's my point: they are now moving in a direction AWAY from physical dominance and TOWARD smaller, more athletic frontline players, which makes them WORSE defensively regarding rebounding and paint defense.
I don't understand how you aren't getting my point. Adding Hayes does nothing for this team defensively if they still have no answer for players who break down the defense and get shots in the paint, whereas their size at the end of last season provided teams with an answer. Not only did they often have the advantage over their opposing front lines, but they performed better on defense as well. With a smaller approach that GP & Paul want to take the team this season, they lose that advantage, and now have nobody to contest shots once the perimeter players *cough* jimmer *cough* get beaten.
You brought up the stats for the season, whereas my point revolved around how the team performed with the physically imposing 3-man frontline rotation after he was traded to the hornets.
That's right, and that means what parts fit together, and Dalembert was a better fit for this team than what it currently has on the frontline. The entire frontline currently constructed without Dally is worse than what it would be with him.
Again, what do those numbers look like when the rotation was shortened after the Landry trade when the Kings had a big frontline? That's my point: they are now moving in a direction AWAY from physical dominance and TOWARD smaller, more athletic frontline players, which makes them WORSE defensively regarding rebounding and paint defense.
I don't understand how you aren't getting my point. Adding Hayes does nothing for this team defensively if they still have no answer for players who break down the defense and get shots in the paint, whereas their size at the end of last season provided teams with an answer. Not only did they often have the advantage over their opposing front lines, but they performed better on defense as well. With a smaller approach that GP & Paul want to take the team this season, they lose that advantage, and now have nobody to contest shots once the perimeter players *cough* jimmer *cough* get beaten.
Last edited:
Exactly. People seem to forget that when the rockets had these guys, while they played their asses off with Landry, Scola, and Hayes, they were absolutely outmatched without Yao when they were facing the big frontlines of the Lakers. With teams now like the Griz, it's hard enough to compete down low, but without Dalembert, the kings have no chance. Dalembert on this team would have given the kings a huge advantage over most of the league, whereas now they are just mediocre.
Being a fan can encompass more than merely acknowledging the positives. A fan can be critical of the negatives, too. I'm always a little baffled as to why so many "glass is half full" types are so insistent that less optimistic folks adopt a more positive outlook. What's wrong with just letting people speak their minds/share their feelings be they positive or negative? Personally, I'd much rather an open discourse where individuals feel free/comfortable to be themselves rather than being pressured into putting up a facade of optimism just for the purpose of appeasing those who can't handle a little negativity.
Last edited:
I can make excuses for the rookies. I just find myself still cringing when Garcia pulls up for a long three. I just don't have any faith in him at all. I once commented about the team having a spark of hope until Garcia came in and peed on it. My opinion hasn't changed.
Jason Jones put this out this morning on his kings blog
Westphal calls out "sluggish" Tyreke Evans
http://blogs.sacbee.com/sports/kings/archives/2011/12/westphal-calls.html
Westphal calls out "sluggish" Tyreke Evans
http://blogs.sacbee.com/sports/kings/archives/2011/12/westphal-calls.html
And you're not getting my point, Dalembert didn't effect it all that much either. They still ended up 29th in points in the paint against. You go find the stats, but I can tell you right now, Daly was here for the whole year and any idea that he somehow made a world of difference on his own via his presence alone just isn't fact. I totally agree with you in the theory of paint defense, but a lot of people aren't associating the actual person in Sam Dalembert with the type of player you describe. There are negatives and positives to Dalemberts game and those can't be overlooked, not at 10 million a year.
I don't know what you mean by smaller, I doubt he's going to role with too many super undersized lineups, Hayes and Cousins isn't that undersized. The only real area that this team dominated in last year was rebounding, but as I brought up before, it was at the expense of subtle things like spacing and a controlled offense.
Worse without him? Not in every way, at least not in the long run. You're not looking at the whole picture, offensively this team should be much better without him and offense was this teams biggest weakness, even beyond defense last year. One of the worst apg teams in the league hovering at around a pitiful 20 per game. When they started running offense through Cousins that number jumped to 22 a game. If Hayes comes back with his passing and team play that should increase as well.
All I'm saying is you have to separate the person from some of the aspects of the game he can provide. And if you or anyone else thinks that tonights rebounding effort is going to be a consistent theme, well, go ahead, I'll stand by historical perspective and say that Jason Thompson isn't going to get you 2 rebounds a night in 30 minutes
. Dalemberts biggest asset to the team was his rebounding, this team should be fine in that area with the pieces they have.
And you're not getting my point, Dalembert didn't effect it all that much either. They still ended up 29th in points in the paint against. You go find the stats, but I can tell you right now, Daly was here for the whole year and any idea that he somehow made a world of difference on his own via his presence alone just isn't fact. I totally agree with you in the theory of paint defense, but a lot of people aren't associating the actual person in Sam Dalembert with the type of player you describe. There are negatives and positives to Dalemberts game and those can't be overlooked, not at 10 million a year.
I don't know what you mean by smaller, I doubt he's going to role with too many super undersized lineups, Hayes and Cousins isn't that undersized. The only real area that this team dominated in last year was rebounding, but as I brought up before, it was at the expense of subtle things like spacing and a controlled offense.
Worse without him? Not in every way, at least not in the long run. You're not looking at the whole picture, offensively this team should be much better without him and offense was this teams biggest weakness, even beyond defense last year. One of the worst apg teams in the league hovering at around a pitiful 20 per game. When they started running offense through Cousins that number jumped to 22 a game. If Hayes comes back with his passing and team play that should increase as well.
All I'm saying is you have to separate the person from some of the aspects of the game he can provide. And if you or anyone else thinks that tonights rebounding effort is going to be a consistent theme, well, go ahead, I'll stand by historical perspective and say that Jason Thompson isn't going to get you 2 rebounds a night in 30 minutes. Dalemberts biggest asset to the team was his rebounding, this team should be fine in that area with the pieces they have.
I don't know what you mean by smaller, I doubt he's going to role with too many super undersized lineups, Hayes and Cousins isn't that undersized. The only real area that this team dominated in last year was rebounding, but as I brought up before, it was at the expense of subtle things like spacing and a controlled offense.
Worse without him? Not in every way, at least not in the long run. You're not looking at the whole picture, offensively this team should be much better without him and offense was this teams biggest weakness, even beyond defense last year. One of the worst apg teams in the league hovering at around a pitiful 20 per game. When they started running offense through Cousins that number jumped to 22 a game. If Hayes comes back with his passing and team play that should increase as well.
All I'm saying is you have to separate the person from some of the aspects of the game he can provide. And if you or anyone else thinks that tonights rebounding effort is going to be a consistent theme, well, go ahead, I'll stand by historical perspective and say that Jason Thompson isn't going to get you 2 rebounds a night in 30 minutes
. Dalemberts biggest asset to the team was his rebounding, this team should be fine in that area with the pieces they have.
I'm not putting too much into this game. Not only is it the first game of pre-season after a rushed training camp but they were missing their starting front court and starting SF. What I am taking from this game is that Jimmer looks like he's for real. If we can expect that kind of shooting from him on a regular basis then he was a great pick for the Kings and will surely be a fan favorite.
Yeah, he did, when paired with bigger PFs at his side. Dalebmert was always helping a lot and chasing blocks (often leading to goaltending calls and leaving his man open), because the early Cousins and Landry were often beaten by their man, along with penetration. Dally did provide help defense a lot for perimeter penetrators throughout the season. At the end of the season, Cousins's defense improved and Landry was gone, leaving a bigger frontline pair, and Dalebmert didn't have to worry as much about frontline players, and was even more effective because of the overall size of the frontline.
There is no way for me to find points in the paint for only part of a season. Your stats don't make your point. One shot blocker isn't going to prevent a red carpet lane, he's going to help lessen the damage of one. But, when you pair that shot blocker with big bodies and decent defenders up front, his impact will be significantly higher, which is what we are missing now. My point is more regarding the entire frontline with him (size, PF/C combinations, etc) than without him. I'm not just talking about what he alone does, but how he fits into the mix, and how that overall mix is vastly better with him in it than without it. It is about the team, and how they look as a whole with the aspects of the game he provides.
You don't know what I mean by smaller? Ok: it's about last season's PF's becoming our C's, and playing thinner, shorter players at PF instead. It's a total shift. Cousins and JT played spot minutes at C (mostly Cousins in place of Dalembert with JT at PF), and now they are moving over to C to make room for Hayes and JJ at PF. JT will probably be the backup 5 now. That's a big downgrade in overall size. And because nobody on the frontline is a shot blocker, and they don't have a size advantage, they are going to get abused even more by the frontline opposition. They will get out rebounded, they will lose second chance opportunities, and they will not be able to defend the rim once somebody gets beaten.
Offense was never the issue. This team has even more weapons this season than last, and putting the ball in the hoop is not a concern. Once they got Thornton, they averaged 111 PPG last season.
As if Hayes will ever have an offense run through his hands. Have you ever even seen the guy play? Have you seen the kings play? They have enough trouble getting it to an open offensive weapon, let alone Hayes. But that's beside the point. Offensive production is irrelevant, as I have already pointed out. Frontline defense and rebounding is the point.
You are totally missing the point. It's not just about Dalembert, but what the whole group looks like with and without him. With him, this seasons centers become PF's, leading to a size advantage, a clogged paint, better rebounding, and gives the team shot blocking capabilities. Without him, PF's move to C, the team runs a smaller lineup, most of the work has to be done on the floor, they lose their size advantage, they can't clog the paint with monster bodies, they lose rebounding opportunities and second chance points.
A frontline with Cousins and JT at PF, with Dally at C and Hayes rotating in at PF and Cousins or JT playing spot minutes at C is a much, much better rotation than Cousins/JT at the 5, with Hayes/JJ at the 4.
There is no way for me to find points in the paint for only part of a season. Your stats don't make your point. One shot blocker isn't going to prevent a red carpet lane, he's going to help lessen the damage of one. But, when you pair that shot blocker with big bodies and decent defenders up front, his impact will be significantly higher, which is what we are missing now. My point is more regarding the entire frontline with him (size, PF/C combinations, etc) than without him. I'm not just talking about what he alone does, but how he fits into the mix, and how that overall mix is vastly better with him in it than without it. It is about the team, and how they look as a whole with the aspects of the game he provides.
You don't know what I mean by smaller? Ok: it's about last season's PF's becoming our C's, and playing thinner, shorter players at PF instead. It's a total shift. Cousins and JT played spot minutes at C (mostly Cousins in place of Dalembert with JT at PF), and now they are moving over to C to make room for Hayes and JJ at PF. JT will probably be the backup 5 now. That's a big downgrade in overall size. And because nobody on the frontline is a shot blocker, and they don't have a size advantage, they are going to get abused even more by the frontline opposition. They will get out rebounded, they will lose second chance opportunities, and they will not be able to defend the rim once somebody gets beaten.
Offense was never the issue. This team has even more weapons this season than last, and putting the ball in the hoop is not a concern. Once they got Thornton, they averaged 111 PPG last season.
As if Hayes will ever have an offense run through his hands. Have you ever even seen the guy play? Have you seen the kings play? They have enough trouble getting it to an open offensive weapon, let alone Hayes. But that's beside the point. Offensive production is irrelevant, as I have already pointed out. Frontline defense and rebounding is the point.
All I'm saying is you have to separate the person from some of the aspects of the game he can provide. And if you or anyone else thinks that tonights rebounding effort is going to be a consistent theme, well, go ahead, I'll stand by historical perspective and say that Jason Thompson isn't going to get you 2 rebounds a night in 30 minutes . Dalemberts biggest asset to the team was his rebounding, this team should be fine in that area with the pieces they have.
. Dalemberts biggest asset to the team was his rebounding, this team should be fine in that area with the pieces they have.
A frontline with Cousins and JT at PF, with Dally at C and Hayes rotating in at PF and Cousins or JT playing spot minutes at C is a much, much better rotation than Cousins/JT at the 5, with Hayes/JJ at the 4.
Last edited:
On one hand you say he would have helped out a bit on the boards, and on the other you said that Dalembert was one of the top rebounders in the league. Guess who led the team in rebounding last season? COUSINS!!!!!! And he was a rookie!! Are you one of these people that stamp finished product on a player based on his rookie season. How about waiting till you see what Cousins can do this season. I'm about up to my eyeballs with this idea that if you can't jump out of the building and block shots, that your condemmed to be a lousy defender for the rest of your career.
Bogut is an excellent defender when healthy, but he won't dazzle anyone with his leaping ability. Kaman, when healthy was one of the top shotblockers in the league, and yet he's hardly a freak athlete. M. Gasol blocked more shots than Dalembert last season, and in my humble opinion is a much better man defender than Dalembert, but he's hardly a blow your mind athlete with great leaping ability.
I'm not going to tell you that Cousins will ever be a great defender! But I'm not going to tell you he won't either. All I know is that he's one of the most talented players at the center position to come along in a long time. I know he has a chip on his shoulder about wanting to prove people wrong. So I won't be surprised if he becomes a good defender. He's smart, and he studies the game.
Back in our hayday, the Kings were one of the top defensive teams in the league. How did that happen? Because of Vlade and his great leaping ability and athleticism. Because of Webber with his poor lateral movment and wanting to live on the perimiter. Peja, who was an average athlete, but actually was a very underrated defender. Bibby, because of his lightning quick movement on defense. Where was the great shotblocker on that team? The only player on that team known for his defense was Christie. And yet, it was a good defensive team. Because they played great team defense. They rotated properly. They defended the pick and roll. I'll say it again. Mutombo was one of the best shotblocker the NBA has ever seen. How many championship rings does he have?? None!!!! How about Dalembert? None!!.
I'm not arguing against having a shotblocker. I'd love to have one. But its not the end of the world if you don't. To look at a team with new additions to the roster, after one week of practice, and then with three of their proposed starters out of the lineup, and then pass judgement, is ignorance of reality, or a willful discarding of it.
Bogut is an excellent defender when healthy, but he won't dazzle anyone with his leaping ability. Kaman, when healthy was one of the top shotblockers in the league, and yet he's hardly a freak athlete. M. Gasol blocked more shots than Dalembert last season, and in my humble opinion is a much better man defender than Dalembert, but he's hardly a blow your mind athlete with great leaping ability.
I'm not going to tell you that Cousins will ever be a great defender! But I'm not going to tell you he won't either. All I know is that he's one of the most talented players at the center position to come along in a long time. I know he has a chip on his shoulder about wanting to prove people wrong. So I won't be surprised if he becomes a good defender. He's smart, and he studies the game.
Back in our hayday, the Kings were one of the top defensive teams in the league. How did that happen? Because of Vlade and his great leaping ability and athleticism. Because of Webber with his poor lateral movment and wanting to live on the perimiter. Peja, who was an average athlete, but actually was a very underrated defender. Bibby, because of his lightning quick movement on defense. Where was the great shotblocker on that team? The only player on that team known for his defense was Christie. And yet, it was a good defensive team. Because they played great team defense. They rotated properly. They defended the pick and roll. I'll say it again. Mutombo was one of the best shotblocker the NBA has ever seen. How many championship rings does he have?? None!!!! How about Dalembert? None!!.
I'm not arguing against having a shotblocker. I'd love to have one. But its not the end of the world if you don't. To look at a team with new additions to the roster, after one week of practice, and then with three of their proposed starters out of the lineup, and then pass judgement, is ignorance of reality, or a willful discarding of it.
In law there is a law latin term "sine qua non", which essentially translates to "that without which". The essential item without which something else cannot exist. In the NBA, the sine qua nons (actually the plural would probably be sine quibus non) for an NBA champion are a) a superstar; and b) a great interior defender. And in fact the Detroit aberration means that in the last 25 years the great interior defender has been even more universal than the superstar.
And of course this is fairly obvious:
Shotblocking, per 36 minute, current Kings:
Dalembert 2.2
Cousins 1.1
Hickson 0.9
Thompson 0.9
Hayes 0.8
P.S. M.Gasol 1.9 (who benefitted immensely from having multiple all world perimeter defenders)
Rebounding per 36 last year, current Kings:
Dalembert: 12.2
Hickson 11.1
Cousins: 10.9
Hayes 10.4
Thompson 9.4
I mean its just inarguable. Dalembert is the big dog in those aspects. Nobody on the roster except for Whiteside, who looks miles away, has any hope at all of replacing that shotblocking. And while everybody on paper is a good rebounder, nobody is as dominant as Dalembert there either. I have hopes Cousins may get there, but he's got a lot on his plate and does so many things he amy never be abel to specialize at that level. Losing Daly without an adequate replacement really hamstrings us.
And of course this is fairly obvious:
Shotblocking, per 36 minute, current Kings:
Dalembert 2.2
Cousins 1.1
Hickson 0.9
Thompson 0.9
Hayes 0.8
P.S. M.Gasol 1.9 (who benefitted immensely from having multiple all world perimeter defenders)
Rebounding per 36 last year, current Kings:
Dalembert: 12.2
Hickson 11.1
Cousins: 10.9
Hayes 10.4
Thompson 9.4
I mean its just inarguable. Dalembert is the big dog in those aspects. Nobody on the roster except for Whiteside, who looks miles away, has any hope at all of replacing that shotblocking. And while everybody on paper is a good rebounder, nobody is as dominant as Dalembert there either. I have hopes Cousins may get there, but he's got a lot on his plate and does so many things he amy never be abel to specialize at that level. Losing Daly without an adequate replacement really hamstrings us.
Last edited:
Wrong. I never said that, so stop making up an argument I never attempted.
I never said he won't. I'm saying that him at PF with Dally at C is a much more solid combination than Cousins at C and X player (JJ, Hayes, etc) at PF. I'm also saying Cousins won't be able to help out those other guys while on the weakside, something Dalembert could do.
No, just the end of the team's chances with this current frontline roster. Having the right personnel on the frontline for rebounding and defense makes the difference between lottery teams and playoff teams.
It's not ignorance, but rather evaluation. I know what these players can do, and don't have to watch 60+ games in order to understand how they will work together. I would agree with you had I never seen any of these guys play, but I have, know what they can and can't do, and therefore can draw conclusions about the roster. I'm not making a judgement based on one game, but rather showing how this example enforces an opinion I had before this game was even played.
This frontline will have a much more difficult time rebounding and defending than last season's post-Landry frontline. If you want to wait until the end of the season to agree with me, then fine.
I never said he won't. I'm saying that him at PF with Dally at C is a much more solid combination than Cousins at C and X player (JJ, Hayes, etc) at PF. I'm also saying Cousins won't be able to help out those other guys while on the weakside, something Dalembert could do.
No, just the end of the team's chances with this current frontline roster. Having the right personnel on the frontline for rebounding and defense makes the difference between lottery teams and playoff teams.
It's not ignorance, but rather evaluation. I know what these players can do, and don't have to watch 60+ games in order to understand how they will work together. I would agree with you had I never seen any of these guys play, but I have, know what they can and can't do, and therefore can draw conclusions about the roster. I'm not making a judgement based on one game, but rather showing how this example enforces an opinion I had before this game was even played.
This frontline will have a much more difficult time rebounding and defending than last season's post-Landry frontline. If you want to wait until the end of the season to agree with me, then fine.
Last edited:
The Maloofs promised they would spend. My answer is "yes" to the $10 mil. Unfortunately, we have even lost that opportunity by signing Outlaw.
I have a dwindling yet still present faith that Petrie has some idea working. I assume Daly's asking price is falling and still within our range. I will scream bloody ef'in murder if we gave him up over a 3 or 4 year contract averaging $10 mil. You bet!
I have a dwindling yet still present faith that Petrie has some idea working. I assume Daly's asking price is falling and still within our range. I will scream bloody ef'in murder if we gave him up over a 3 or 4 year contract averaging $10 mil. You bet!
Last edited:
If I'm the GM I know that I will inevitably give somebody $10mil or $12 mil to do those things because that is what players who can do them cost, if you can even get them. And if you want to somepte at the highest levels you are almost inevitably going to need players who do those sorts of things.
And short answer btw = yes.
And short answer btw = yes.
They did promise to spend and they're been putting a lot of offers out there. They didn't promise to overpay just for the sake of spending, though. I just have a problem with letting role players dictate their price to the degree that you overpay them. I could see overpaying to keep your stars but giving north of 10$ million for an 8 and 8 center who just turned 30 doesn't make much sense to me. It would be one thing if he was a great passer or a leader like Divac was but he isn't. As far as I can tell you'd basically be paying 10$ million for someone to defend and block shots.