What does this team mostly need?
- Thread starter K F Jay
- Start date
Ball movement has been an issue for several years now. Our primary need is a PG that can create for others at a rate greater than 6 apg and 2:1 A/TO, a threshold that Bibby, Beno, and Tyreke had trouble breaking consistently. We were able to mask Mike's shortcomings as an average passer by surrounding him with other passers, like Brad Miller, C-Webb, Divac, and Christie. We're all pretty current with Beno's passing ability - decent, but not starting-worthy - and Tyreke just can't seem to master that 2:1 Assist-to-turnover ratio nor consistently pass above 5 apg. With our current roster, most of which probably won't be on the team when we finally become a playoff contender again, we need someone to create for them. Plus, if you get a great passer, passing is contagious...just like poor defensive effort is contagious.
On that note, our secondary need is a strong perimeter defender. One player on the wing can't solve all of your problems, but a player who's "defensive specialist" would be of great benefit to the team. I think with the right coaching and effort, Tyreke has potential to be a great defender, but it's going to take a huge change in culture (or scenery) for that to happen IMO.
The problem with both of these needs is that both personnel are few and far between. And we don't have the right management in place to go get it done. Nor the ownership who will pay for it. But, these are glaring needs that have not been heeded for years. Perhaps if we get lucky and there's some change at the very top, we'll start seeing are primary needs addressed on the floor.
On that note, our secondary need is a strong perimeter defender. One player on the wing can't solve all of your problems, but a player who's "defensive specialist" would be of great benefit to the team. I think with the right coaching and effort, Tyreke has potential to be a great defender, but it's going to take a huge change in culture (or scenery) for that to happen IMO.
The problem with both of these needs is that both personnel are few and far between. And we don't have the right management in place to go get it done. Nor the ownership who will pay for it. But, these are glaring needs that have not been heeded for years. Perhaps if we get lucky and there's some change at the very top, we'll start seeing are primary needs addressed on the floor.
Ball movement is a problem, but it can change with maybe one more pass savvy player. Once you get enough unselfish guys, it tends to bleed into the rest of the team. The Kings problem is that have too many guys who want their shots and the seflishness bleeds into the rest of the team.
Anyways, I voted PG or backup PG, SF and a backup PF unless its like Anthony Davis calibre that is the bigtime shotblocker you need next to Cousins.
Anyways, I voted PG or backup PG, SF and a backup PF unless its like Anthony Davis calibre that is the bigtime shotblocker you need next to Cousins.
IMO ball movement comes as a result of having a savvy, veteran team as well as a good coach. You don't need super-duper ball movement if you have real superstars on your team. And frankly, you don't win championships if you don't have superstars on your team, the one exception in the last decade being the Pistons of course. We've already got a superstar in the making, find a way to build around him and maximise the abilities of your other fringe stars/ better players.
Derek Fisher's career averages are 3.1 apg, 1.19TO - far from the 5apg mentioned above. Funny how he has more championships than Steve Nash, John Stockton, Rajon Rondo and Jason Kidd combined. Kobe Bryant's are 4.7 and 2.96 - so much for that 2:1 ratio.
This need for a super pure passing PG just amuses me. Ball movement is necessary to win, a pure PG is not. Ball movement and championships can be achieved with backcourts that average somewhere between 7-9 assists per game and 4-5 TO per game. The much simpler formula to follow is:
1) Draft or bring in a superstar.
2) Surround him with good role players and 1 or 2 other stars
3) Get a coach that can use a system to make it all work together
For those that think DMC is our superstar, what exactly is the point of having a PG with Nash-like passing abilities? The whole point of a star big is his ability to create for himself, to just dominate the other team. Any run-of-the-mill big can finish inside when he's wide open off a Steve Nash assist.
Back to the main topic:
Team needs - SF, backup C
Derek Fisher's career averages are 3.1 apg, 1.19TO - far from the 5apg mentioned above. Funny how he has more championships than Steve Nash, John Stockton, Rajon Rondo and Jason Kidd combined. Kobe Bryant's are 4.7 and 2.96 - so much for that 2:1 ratio.
This need for a super pure passing PG just amuses me. Ball movement is necessary to win, a pure PG is not. Ball movement and championships can be achieved with backcourts that average somewhere between 7-9 assists per game and 4-5 TO per game. The much simpler formula to follow is:
1) Draft or bring in a superstar.
2) Surround him with good role players and 1 or 2 other stars
3) Get a coach that can use a system to make it all work together
For those that think DMC is our superstar, what exactly is the point of having a PG with Nash-like passing abilities? The whole point of a star big is his ability to create for himself, to just dominate the other team. Any run-of-the-mill big can finish inside when he's wide open off a Steve Nash assist.
Back to the main topic:
Team needs - SF, backup C
Uh, it's a huge advantage for your big if you have a guard who can set him up. I think part of the Magic's problem is that Jameer was often injured and never got up to all-star level play. When they lost Hedo, probably the most PG-savvy player they had, and their play took a step back.
Bigs don't bring the ball up court and they seek to get the ball in limited sections of the court, and because of this they are reliant on their team members to give them the ball in those select spots. Ask Hakeem if he'd rather play with Iverson or Nash and I'm sure he'd say Nash.
Bigs don't bring the ball up court and they seek to get the ball in limited sections of the court, and because of this they are reliant on their team members to give them the ball in those select spots. Ask Hakeem if he'd rather play with Iverson or Nash and I'm sure he'd say Nash.
Oh please, that comparison is silly. No where did I say that you want a guy like Iverson either. My point is that Shaquille O'Neal does not need a John Stockton, does not need a Steve Nash. He just needs someone to get him the ball, period. You're right - bigs are reliant on their team members to give them the ball in those select spots. But are you suggesting that only pure, Nash-like PGs are able to feed bigs? The whole point of such PGs is to create easy opportunities for the rest of their team. It's how Mikki Moore seemed as good as he did playing next to Jason Kidd. Real superstar bigs just need any decent point guard to give them the ball and get out of the way.
Obviously it's a "huge advantage" to anybody on the team to have any other superstar level player. It'd be a "huge advantage" to have Nash on our team, just as it would be a" huge advantage" to have Lebron James on our team. The reality is that you don't get to assemble such teams, and you should find the correct baskets to place your eggs in.
Obviously it's a "huge advantage" to anybody on the team to have any other superstar level player. It'd be a "huge advantage" to have Nash on our team, just as it would be a" huge advantage" to have Lebron James on our team. The reality is that you don't get to assemble such teams, and you should find the correct baskets to place your eggs in.
This team needs pieces that fit, and it needs quality over quantity. Right now, I think you could classify our assets like this:
C: Cousins, Whiteside
PF: Thompson, Hayes
SF: Greene, Honeycutt, Outlaw
SG: Evans, Thornton, Williams, Fredette?, Salmons, Garcia
PG: Thomas
Unfortunately, it looks like two of our three best players play the same position, as well as two of our most promising bench players. Also unfortunate is that some of our longest contracts are guys who are best suited to be 12 men at this point (Garcia, Outlaw). Not to mention Salmons, who would be decent at SG I think, but you have to play him at SF because that's where the minutes are. Maybe you get away with shifting Williams to SF, and maybe Jimmer will develop into a PG at this level. But that's all maybe. There are some decent assets here, but the fit is just not there.
C: Cousins, Whiteside
PF: Thompson, Hayes
SF: Greene, Honeycutt, Outlaw
SG: Evans, Thornton, Williams, Fredette?, Salmons, Garcia
PG: Thomas
Unfortunately, it looks like two of our three best players play the same position, as well as two of our most promising bench players. Also unfortunate is that some of our longest contracts are guys who are best suited to be 12 men at this point (Garcia, Outlaw). Not to mention Salmons, who would be decent at SG I think, but you have to play him at SF because that's where the minutes are. Maybe you get away with shifting Williams to SF, and maybe Jimmer will develop into a PG at this level. But that's all maybe. There are some decent assets here, but the fit is just not there.
I think your sorting is pretty accurate. Looking at it I see a blank at SF. Maybe, just maybe, one of them might get backup but we have the greatest need at starting SF. Don''t think that Jimmer qualifies yet to be backup 1 or 2. So we need a backup PG or a starter. If we had those two and got rid of a couple of SGs and SFs we'd be in fat city. But the kind of SF we need doesn't grow on trees and may not be available without giving up the ranch ($$$$),
I am going to say something potentially unpopular... the Kings need to draft the best player possible regardless of position and sign free-agent PG Steven Nash to a 3 year deal (third year being a team option)... Steven Nash is EXACTLY what this team of young bucks needs. A top tier veteran leader and a great pass-first PG. Sure he is busted up and old, but Thomas can fill in at the PG when Nash is out... it's that leadership the Kings need so badly... Steve Nash could be the Kings next Vlade Divac... a player who is the heart of the team... I think with those moves, this team could make the playoffs year after year.
Let me take your unpopular idea, which has some questions about feasibility I think, and put a spin on it that is out of character for me: Not Steve Nash. Jason Kidd.
Consider:
-- We want to run n gun. Kidd is old, but one of the all time masters.
-- Kidd is 6'4" and once one of the best PG defenders in the game. He's not a scrawny mini like Nash. Why is that important?
-- because of IT. The problem with acquiring ANY small PG at this point is that you can't play them next to IT without going pathetic midget ball. So IT becomes a short minute backup. But now you get Kidd, then he's tall enough to guard the SGs when he and IT are paired and its similar to Kidd/Barea.
-- Kidd is from Northern Calfiornia, so finishing up his career in Sacto may be more appealing than it might for other players
-- Kidd already won his title, so he does not necessarily have to go ring chasing anymore
-- he really looks close to done anymore. One more contract, let's say for 2 years, he can be a platoon player rather than a 36min a night guy
For all of the above reasons I have been pondering whether maybe its time to bring in a REAL veteran voice (as in old and decrepit) who's been to the mountaintop. He needs no shots, so doesn't steal from Reke/Thornton/Cousins. The only shots he does take are fastbreak layups and three pointers on the kick. The drawback is he looks very much finsihed, and you could be throwing money just at an old cheerleader. But I think as far as fit, cost, and feasibility he is a more likely target than Nash.
Consider:
-- We want to run n gun. Kidd is old, but one of the all time masters.
-- Kidd is 6'4" and once one of the best PG defenders in the game. He's not a scrawny mini like Nash. Why is that important?
-- because of IT. The problem with acquiring ANY small PG at this point is that you can't play them next to IT without going pathetic midget ball. So IT becomes a short minute backup. But now you get Kidd, then he's tall enough to guard the SGs when he and IT are paired and its similar to Kidd/Barea.
-- Kidd is from Northern Calfiornia, so finishing up his career in Sacto may be more appealing than it might for other players
-- Kidd already won his title, so he does not necessarily have to go ring chasing anymore
-- he really looks close to done anymore. One more contract, let's say for 2 years, he can be a platoon player rather than a 36min a night guy
For all of the above reasons I have been pondering whether maybe its time to bring in a REAL veteran voice (as in old and decrepit) who's been to the mountaintop. He needs no shots, so doesn't steal from Reke/Thornton/Cousins. The only shots he does take are fastbreak layups and three pointers on the kick. The drawback is he looks very much finsihed, and you could be throwing money just at an old cheerleader. But I think as far as fit, cost, and feasibility he is a more likely target than Nash.
I'm fine with signing Kidd. Yeah, he's not playing at the same level as Nash is, but he provides leadership on both ends of the floor. I am not sure what Kidd is looking for at this point though. Unfortunately, the ownership and the youth of the roster makes the Kings not that attractive to a veteran player.
Add an athletic shotblocker and a nba sized SF who can defend and shoot. (Sounds a lot like what they needed last year)
What would be awesome is if that could be the same player. Terrence Jones fits the bill. He isn't a lights out shooter (42/128 in 2 years) , but he can play both forward spots, and a shot is easier to develop than shotblocking. If there is a different BPA or Jones isn't there, John Surna can be had in the 2nd round as a backup. He isn't athletic but he is sort of a bigger Francisco Garcia, a 3/4 non rebounding tweener who can block shots from the weakside and hit the 3.
I would like Kidd although it looks like this year was the cliff for him. And the team will have to move one of the guards, mostly because I don't want to see anymore Tyreke at the 3 smallball.
I love what IT brings but if they bring in Kidd you'd have to think Jimmer/Evans and Kidd/Thornton are the strongest backcourt pairings. Realistically Kidd would probably have to start because of his status and such, but he pairs with Thronton so well (and Jimmer/Evans too) it's ridiculous. Plus with Williams at the 3 he can take some of the playmaker load off our combo guards when Kidd isn't in the game.
Plus adding Kidd (at least a decent spot shooting threat) makes 3pters less of a priority in adding a SF, and I could live with a Kidd/Thronton/Evans/Athletic shotblocker (Terrence Jones)/Cousins closer lineup (a rare instance where I like Reke at the 3).
What would be awesome is if that could be the same player. Terrence Jones fits the bill. He isn't a lights out shooter (42/128 in 2 years) , but he can play both forward spots, and a shot is easier to develop than shotblocking. If there is a different BPA or Jones isn't there, John Surna can be had in the 2nd round as a backup. He isn't athletic but he is sort of a bigger Francisco Garcia, a 3/4 non rebounding tweener who can block shots from the weakside and hit the 3.
I would like Kidd although it looks like this year was the cliff for him. And the team will have to move one of the guards, mostly because I don't want to see anymore Tyreke at the 3 smallball.
I love what IT brings but if they bring in Kidd you'd have to think Jimmer/Evans and Kidd/Thornton are the strongest backcourt pairings. Realistically Kidd would probably have to start because of his status and such, but he pairs with Thronton so well (and Jimmer/Evans too) it's ridiculous. Plus with Williams at the 3 he can take some of the playmaker load off our combo guards when Kidd isn't in the game.
Plus adding Kidd (at least a decent spot shooting threat) makes 3pters less of a priority in adding a SF, and I could live with a Kidd/Thronton/Evans/Athletic shotblocker (Terrence Jones)/Cousins closer lineup (a rare instance where I like Reke at the 3).
Last edited:
Kidd is another great option... sure, he is over the hill, but having Jimmer, Reke, IT, and others learn the PG position the way we all want it played (pass first) from a master of pass-first PG, would be awesome. Plus, when the Kings pass the ball, they win more than they lose. This has ALWAYS been the case. Bring in Kidd or Nash... let them show these guys how to pass, and, more importantly, how to be leaders and professionals.
LOL at the thought of J-Kidd signing here lets move on. We were on a much better path before the summer started but letting Dally & Beno go and bringing in Salmons & Outlaw and drafting Jimmer instead of Leonard or Knight set us back. With that said this mess of a roster can still be turned around. First order of business would be to re-sign JT and make a decision between T-will and Greene. Then come draft night anything outside of the #1 pick we should make Portland an offer for Batum.
