Kings random comments thread
- Thread starter macadocious
- Start date
Honestly. These master threads in Kings Rap and Personnel Moves are rediculous. I would much rather have multiple threads with different topics. It keeps it a lot easier to organize, and we don't have to sift through subjects we don't care about.
If you're upset about too many new threads talking about the same thing, then talk to the moderators and see if they can move all of them into one thread. But making a master thread is not the answer.
I vote we delete these two master threads as it will lead to disorganization of the topics.
If you're upset about too many new threads talking about the same thing, then talk to the moderators and see if they can move all of them into one thread. But making a master thread is not the answer.
I vote we delete these two master threads as it will lead to disorganization of the topics.
No it doesn't, you have the same conversation going on in 5 different threads. It makes it much more difficult. I have been a mod at a couple different of forums and they both have catchall threads. They are better for the community as people have conversations that keep going vs. these 4 and 7 post threads that repeat threads over and over and over. And instead of clicking on whole bunch of different threads to catchup you only have one big one and a few topical ones.
They are not all discussing the same topics so that makes your point completely irrelevant.
If you just look at the front page of Kings Rap there are no overlapping topics beside maybe Jimmer and Jimmer's Defense and the Concept of Team Sport. That's it. Everything else has it's own discussion and own debate. I don't see any need for these threads beside you and I arguing how necessary or unnecessary they are.
Perhaps, if I don't reply, it will eventually fizzle all the way down to the bottom, and we can rid ourselves of this thread in that way
If you just look at the front page of Kings Rap there are no overlapping topics beside maybe Jimmer and Jimmer's Defense and the Concept of Team Sport. That's it. Everything else has it's own discussion and own debate. I don't see any need for these threads beside you and I arguing how necessary or unnecessary they are.
Perhaps, if I don't reply, it will eventually fizzle all the way down to the bottom, and we can rid ourselves of this thread in that way
Not sure if anybody heard but on knbr 680 yesterday Tolbert was interviewing Bogut. Bogut was talking a lot of crap about Cousins. Said he pretty much takes everything too personally. He said that basketball is a game that you sometimes get hit with elbows and forearms and that it is not personal, it is just basketball. Said that Cousins kept telling him on the court that he was going to "mess" him up. Bogut response was, come on really? You are going to mess me up in front of 20,000 fans and all the TV cameras.
They then started talking crap about what they described as scrap metal type "stuff" that was falling from the scoreboard. Said that it was a joke and that they obviously need a new arena. I'm surprised that Bogut didn't correct them and tell them that it was just tarp-like stuff falling.
Just thought I would share what I heard in case anybody didn't hear it.
They then started talking crap about what they described as scrap metal type "stuff" that was falling from the scoreboard. Said that it was a joke and that they obviously need a new arena. I'm surprised that Bogut didn't correct them and tell them that it was just tarp-like stuff falling.
Just thought I would share what I heard in case anybody didn't hear it.
just saw Scott Howard-Cooper on NBATV. hes at Sleep Train Arena. they asked him about the seattle-sacramento situation. he said that even though most people think seattle will get a team next year, its most likely to happen 2 seasons from now if it happens. he also said the mayor of seattle does not want to rip the team away from Sacramento and he hopes the Kings can stay here AND he can get a team in Seattle
How do you guys feel about adjusting the starting line-up? I think this starting line-up has too few outside threat, which makes it easier for teams to clog up the paint which makes it harder for players like Reke and JJ to score near the basket.
This would be more ideal offensively I believe:
IT - Thornton - JJ - Thompson - Cousins
and a second unit
Jimmer/Brooks(I prefer Jimmer at this point, with the way he's been shooting the ball lately) - Tyreke(main ballhandler) - Salmons - Robinson - Hayes
This would be more ideal offensively I believe:
IT - Thornton - JJ - Thompson - Cousins
and a second unit
Jimmer/Brooks(I prefer Jimmer at this point, with the way he's been shooting the ball lately) - Tyreke(main ballhandler) - Salmons - Robinson - Hayes
I think people forget that there was a plan going into last year, not a good plan, but a plan nonetheless. Westphal lobbied hard for Salmons, though he could be the SF cog we needed. So we traded down, got Salmons and still drafted the player we wanted: Jimmer. Jimmer was brought in to play next to Tyreke and solve some of the shooting woes we had. We had only had Thorton for a handful of games at that point.
Westphal was total failure. Salmons trade was worse than we thought it would be. Jimmer was awful last year and just not ready to play, especially hurt by not having training camp. You add in the cheapness of the Maloofs and the roster fillers in Outlaw and Brooks and this is the team we now have, with a coach who is like Cybill when it comes to playing time.
Westphal was total failure. Salmons trade was worse than we thought it would be. Jimmer was awful last year and just not ready to play, especially hurt by not having training camp. You add in the cheapness of the Maloofs and the roster fillers in Outlaw and Brooks and this is the team we now have, with a coach who is like Cybill when it comes to playing time.
That's the lineup I'd like to see. And if that didn't work I'd try IT, Tyreke, Salmons, Thompson, Cousins. Both lineups give you four guys that can shoot from the outside. It's not perfect, but you've got to find the least imperfect lineup you can find at this point, until there is a trade that finally makes sense of it all.
I agree its not the ideal matchup situation, but there's no one lineup we can put on the floor thats perfect. And you know what? The team that puts the ball in the basket the most times wins the game. That doesn't mean you throw out the idea of playing defense, but you try and balance it with offense. Sometimes you have to give up something to gain something.
If Tyreke continues to shoot the ball that way he's shot it so far, our starting lineup is doomed! You can't have two players in your starting lineup that can't shoot the ball, and both those players best attribute is taking the ball to the basket. All any team has to do is simply pack the paint and wait. And the paint is where Cousins hangs out, so his job just got significantly more difficult.
I like the idea of Tyreke coming off the bench with Jimmer. He can bring the ball up the court taking that pressure off of Jimmer. Once up the court, Jimmer can either float and spot up, or he can run the offense, depending on which plays they want to run. You still have some good defenders on the floor with either unit, and you also have more balanced scoring out of the starting unit.
If Tyreke continues to shoot the ball that way he's shot it so far, our starting lineup is doomed! You can't have two players in your starting lineup that can't shoot the ball, and both those players best attribute is taking the ball to the basket. All any team has to do is simply pack the paint and wait. And the paint is where Cousins hangs out, so his job just got significantly more difficult.
I like the idea of Tyreke coming off the bench with Jimmer. He can bring the ball up the court taking that pressure off of Jimmer. Once up the court, Jimmer can either float and spot up, or he can run the offense, depending on which plays they want to run. You still have some good defenders on the floor with either unit, and you also have more balanced scoring out of the starting unit.
Last edited:
Excellent! Exactly what I've been saying all year. Our offense has been at its best when we have 2+ guys on the floor who have the capability of hitting a jumper. Perimeter shooting is such a crucial aspect of any offense as it opens up the paint for post play and penetration (two things we have a plethora of talent for).
Either Reke or JJ need to go to the bench. Watching defenses sag 7-10 feet off of them and daring them to shoot is destroying any chance of seeing a real offense. Smart's "lack of offensive sets" has been well-documented on this forum, but how can we judge his offense when you have two guys on the floor bricking jumpers all game? By moving one of them to the bench, you all of a sudden fix your spacing problem by having a natural rotation of 2 shooters being on the floor at all times.
Either Reke or JJ need to go to the bench. Watching defenses sag 7-10 feet off of them and daring them to shoot is destroying any chance of seeing a real offense. Smart's "lack of offensive sets" has been well-documented on this forum, but how can we judge his offense when you have two guys on the floor bricking jumpers all game? By moving one of them to the bench, you all of a sudden fix your spacing problem by having a natural rotation of 2 shooters being on the floor at all times.
Last edited:
so... IT, MT, JJ, JT, Cousins is line up that is what we can live with, but lineup IT,MT,Reke, JT, Cousins was awful, unbalanced, defenseless small-ball royal?
We were not scorched by SFs last year, but by guards. I do not see JJ being able to defend any guard position.
This has been presented as one line up or the other issue.
Should not be.
We actually have quite a choice with our personnel.
I will just focus on g-sf positions.
If opponent has no guard of mention, the above lineup could work.
If we want to have the most aggressive lineup, I would prefer MT/Reke/Salmons.
If we want lock down, JJ instead of Salmons.
Heck, we can even go briefly with small ball from last year for change of pace.
If you are talking about last minutes, after timeouts, best lineup, I do not see absolutely any problem with MT/Reke/Salmons/JT/Cous on offense, and then switching JJ for Salmons on defense.
We were not scorched by SFs last year, but by guards. I do not see JJ being able to defend any guard position.
This has been presented as one line up or the other issue.
Should not be.
We actually have quite a choice with our personnel.
I will just focus on g-sf positions.
If opponent has no guard of mention, the above lineup could work.
If we want to have the most aggressive lineup, I would prefer MT/Reke/Salmons.
If we want lock down, JJ instead of Salmons.
Heck, we can even go briefly with small ball from last year for change of pace.
If you are talking about last minutes, after timeouts, best lineup, I do not see absolutely any problem with MT/Reke/Salmons/JT/Cous on offense, and then switching JJ for Salmons on defense.