Amick: Kings find themselves at another turning point

[Glenn]

What a very selective analysis. It would be great to have great individual defenders but not a lot of teams have those. Good defensive teams are good because they have good defensive schemes where they defend as a team. Again I go back to Malone's starting five last year and there are no big defensive names there.

Collison in Malone's scheme was a lot better defender than he is now. McLemore again was a better defender under Malone's tutelage. Rudy Gay was infinitely better defensively. JT was a good defender and Cousins was and still is a good defender.

WCS is a defensive stud in the making and at least on par with JT.

Bottom line is that this team, as it stands now should be a lot better team defensively than Malone's team from last year because we have a lot more good defenders now than we did last year. We had the best defensive starting 5 in the entire league and there was not an elite defender amongst them. Our issue was the lack of depth which Vlade addressed in the off-season.

This roster, as it is now, would be a very good defensive team with a coach than preches defense and has a scheme to get these guys defending as a team.

Before the start of last season, during the training camp, all we heard from the players and the coaches was how we were practicing how to defend and how defense was what we were working on the most. During Karl's first training camp all we heard was how we were practicing offense and how we are even doing so with a reduced shot clock. There in lies the problem. It's not the players on the roster, it is the laughable defensive scheme that Karl has implemented that will never work. Whenever we need a stop in the game, he sends out the offensive team out there trying to outscore the opponents. He even mentioned yesterday that he is thinking of moving Marco into the starting line up despite the team breaking down defensively constantly. Therein lies our biggest problem. Instead of getting these guys practicing defense, making adjustments to his defensive scheme, he is considering brining in arguably our worst defender into the starting line up!

And then people say that Karl is not the problem. No wonder he lost the team with that crap because he is losing anyone that knows anything about basketball.

Well put. Karl does not do what he says he is doing. His answer to the problem with defense is he doesn't think the players are trying hard enough. That's his answer. At the same time they must run faster and at some point the players' bodies scream, "I've had enough."

 

[The Hammer]

What a very selective analysis. It would be great to have great individual defenders but not a lot of teams have those. Good defensive teams are good because they have good defensive schemes where they defend as a team. Again I go back to Malone's starting five last year and there are no big defensive names there.

Collison in Malone's scheme was a lot better defender than he is now. McLemore again was a better defender under Malone's tutelage. Rudy Gay was infinitely better defensively. JT was a good defender and Cousins was and still is a good defender.

WCS is a defensive stud in the making and at least on par with JT.

Bottom line is that this team, as it stands now should be a lot better team defensively than Malone's team from last year because we have a lot more good defenders now than we did last year. We had the best defensive starting 5 in the entire league and there was not an elite defender amongst them. Our issue was the lack of depth which Vlade addressed in the off-season.

This roster, as it is now, would be a very good defensive team with a coach than preches defense and has a scheme to get these guys defending as a team.

Before the start of last season, during the training camp, all we heard from the players and the coaches was how we were practicing how to defend and how defense was what we were working on the most. During Karl's first training camp all we heard was how we were practicing offense and how we are even doing so with a reduced shot clock. There in lies the problem. It's not the players on the roster, it is the laughable defensive scheme that Karl has implemented that will never work. Whenever we need a stop in the game, he sends out the offensive team out there trying to outscore the opponents. He even mentioned yesterday that he is thinking of moving Marco into the starting line up despite the team breaking down defensively constantly. Therein lies our biggest problem. Instead of getting these guys practicing defense, making adjustments to his defensive scheme, he is considering brining in arguably our worst defender into the starting line up!

And then people say that Karl is not the problem. No wonder he lost the team with that crap because he is losing anyone that knows anything about basketball.

This is the post of the year so far if you ask me.

 

[Amit149]

What a very selective analysis. It would be great to have great individual defenders but not a lot of teams have those. Good defensive teams are good because they have good defensive schemes where they defend as a team. Again I go back to Malone's starting five last year and there are no big defensive names there.

Collison in Malone's scheme was a lot better defender than he is now. McLemore again was a better defender under Malone's tutelage. Rudy Gay was infinitely better defensively. JT was a good defender and Cousins was and still is a good defender.

WCS is a defensive stud in the making and at least on par with JT.

Bottom line is that this team, as it stands now should be a lot better team defensively than Malone's team from last year because we have a lot more good defenders now than we did last year. We had the best defensive starting 5 in the entire league and there was not an elite defender amongst them. Our issue was the lack of depth which Vlade addressed in the off-season.

This roster, as it is now, would be a very good defensive team with a coach than preches defense and has a scheme to get these guys defending as a team.

Before the start of last season, during the training camp, all we heard from the players and the coaches was how we were practicing how to defend and how defense was what we were working on the most. During Karl's first training camp all we heard was how we were practicing offense and how we are even doing so with a reduced shot clock. There in lies the problem. It's not the players on the roster, it is the laughable defensive scheme that Karl has implemented that will never work. Whenever we need a stop in the game, he sends out the offensive team out there trying to outscore the opponents. He even mentioned yesterday that he is thinking of moving Marco into the starting line up despite the team breaking down defensively constantly. Therein lies our biggest problem. Instead of getting these guys practicing defense, making adjustments to his defensive scheme, he is considering brining in arguably our worst defender into the starting line up!

And then people say that Karl is not the problem. No wonder he lost the team with that crap because he is losing anyone that knows anything about basketball.

Not a selective analysis, just described the roster we have- we weren't a great defensive team under Malone, not even close (23th for his first year and even at the 9-6 run we were 15th) and I think that our defensive potential is much more limited than what you think because even in a good scheme we still lack a good perimeter defender and between Rondo, Marco and Rudy most of our minutes there goes to defenders ranging from bad to very bad.

Our perimeter defense is worse now than under Malone roster-wise because we play Rondo extended minutes over DC (who proved he can be a solid PG defender last year but can only play very few minutes at the PG spot).

I never said that Karl's defensive schemes are not a problem (I have said the opposite many times) but you are so eager to jump on the offensive in order to write another "Karl is bad, I know basketball" comment, even if there is no one disagreeing with you- what I said was I think we can't be a top 10 defense with this very poor perimeter defending team and 3 defensive bigs that can share the floor only in one combination (Cousins-WCS).

 

[mac]

What a very selective analysis. It would be great to have great individual defenders but not a lot of teams have those. Good defensive teams are good because they have good defensive schemes where they defend as a team. Again I go back to Malone's starting five last year and there are no big defensive names there.

Collison in Malone's scheme was a lot better defender than he is now. McLemore again was a better defender under Malone's tutelage. Rudy Gay was infinitely better defensively. JT was a good defender and Cousins was and still is a good defender.

WCS is a defensive stud in the making and at least on par with JT.

Bottom line is that this team, as it stands now should be a lot better team defensively than Malone's team from last year because we have a lot more good defenders now than we did last year. We had the best defensive starting 5 in the entire league and there was not an elite defender amongst them. Our issue was the lack of depth which Vlade addressed in the off-season.

This roster, as it is now, would be a very good defensive team with a coach than preches defense and has a scheme to get these guys defending as a team.

Before the start of last season, during the training camp, all we heard from the players and the coaches was how we were practicing how to defend and how defense was what we were working on the most. During Karl's first training camp all we heard was how we were practicing offense and how we are even doing so with a reduced shot clock. There in lies the problem. It's not the players on the roster, it is the laughable defensive scheme that Karl has implemented that will never work. Whenever we need a stop in the game, he sends out the offensive team out there trying to outscore the opponents. He even mentioned yesterday that he is thinking of moving Marco into the starting line up despite the team breaking down defensively constantly. Therein lies our biggest problem. Instead of getting these guys practicing defense, making adjustments to his defensive scheme, he is considering brining in arguably our worst defender into the starting line up!

And then people say that Karl is not the problem. No wonder he lost the team with that crap because he is losing anyone that knows anything about basketball.

While I will certainly agree with you that Karl doesn't have the team playing good defense, I think a lot of your criticism stems from the underlying and somewhat subjective belief that defense is the most important aspect of the game. If we're talking about who preaches defense more it's obviously Malone, but Karl also has the team playing better offensively IMO. Which is why at the end of the day it all comes down to wins. It doesn't matter what approach you're taking, defense first or offense first, as long as it leads to wins. And it's not as if Karl is out there going "DONT DEFEND OMG DEFENSE IS BAD STAY AWAY". It's just which is the priority, and for you and many on this board (myself included), we believe that it should be defense first. But like I said, it should ultimately come down to wins. The offense was extremely stagnant under Malone for the most part of his time in Sac, but that was not highlighted as much because the general culture of this board is to want defense first (and again, I am very much part of that). There are two sides to basketball, and both are important. I don't see anything fundamentally wrong in preaching one over the other.

What use is all the talk of defense first, or all the talk of pace and offense first, if at the end of the day it doesn't lead to wins? That's the bottom line for me. And for the record, Rondo's defense has been really bad. With a bit more effort in a few of our games our record after the 1-7 start is pretty much .500, despite all this offense-first training camp and guys playing worse D you speak of.

 

[ParniValjak]

While I will certainly agree with you that Karl doesn't have the team playing good defense, I think a lot of your criticism stems from the underlying and somewhat subjective belief that defense is the most important aspect of the game. If we're talking about who preaches defense more it's obviously Malone, but Karl also has the team playing better offensively IMO. Which is why at the end of the day it all comes down to wins. It doesn't matter what approach you're taking, defense first or offense first, as long as it leads to wins. And it's not as if Karl is out there going "DONT DEFEND OMG DEFENSE IS BAD STAY AWAY". It's just which is the priority, and for you and many on this board (myself included), we believe that it should be defense first. But like I said, it should ultimately come down to wins. The offense was extremely stagnant under Malone for the most part of his time in Sac, but that was not highlighted as much because the general culture of this board is to want defense first (and again, I am very much part of that). There are two sides to basketball, and both are important. I don't see anything fundamentally wrong in preaching one over the other.

What use is all the talk of defense first, or all the talk of pace and offense first, if at the end of the day it doesn't lead to wins? That's the bottom line for me. And for the record, Rondo's defense has been really bad. With a bit more effort in a few of our games our record after the 1-7 start is pretty much .500, despite all this offense-first training camp and guys playing worse D you speak of.

Except that a road to a championship is paved by a great defense! There in lies the problem. Even the Warriors who everyone is in love with are a GREAT defensive team. Offense is important but you have to make stop and great defense is a catalyst to a good offense.

So which team that has won a championship in the last 30 years was not a very very good defensive team? I can name a few that were not great offensive team.

There is a reason why guys like Nelson and Karl never won a championship in their coaching careers. Think about that for a second!

 

[sono]

...snip...
You don't reshape a roster to fit a coach who has one or two seasons left before retirement.
...snip...
And you don't fire Karl to appease Cousins. The ONLY reason you fire Karl is if you legitimately think this team is capable of making the playoffs and Karl's coaching is what is holding them back.
...snip...

These about sum up my thoughts.

 

[Albatros]

Forget championships, we might be best thinking about how to build a team that can get 30 wins.

 

[whozit]

Not a selective analysis, just described the roster we have- we weren't a great defensive team under Malone, not even close (23th for his first year and even at the 9-6 run we were 15th) and I think that our defensive potential is much more limited than what you think because even in a good scheme we still lack a good perimeter defender and between Rondo, Marco and Rudy most of our minutes there goes to defenders ranging from bad to very bad.

Our perimeter defense is worse now than under Malone roster-wise because we play Rondo extended minutes over DC (who proved he can be a solid PG defender last year but can only play very few minutes at the PG spot).

I never said that Karl's defensive schemes are not a problem (I have said the opposite many times) but you are so eager to jump on the offensive in order to write another "Karl is bad, I know basketball" comment, even if there is no one disagreeing with you- what I said was I think we can't be a top 10 defense with this very poor perimeter defending team and 3 defensive bigs that can share the floor only in one combination (Cousins-WCS).

According to Team ranking NBA stats (don't know their accuracy), they have the Kings at 25th. If Malone's first year as a rookie coach he was 23rd (better than our current HOF coach) and his second year we were 15th (according to the stats you provided) in a fifteen game span, is it reasonable he would be able to sustain the team at least at 19th? I'm not advocating bringing back or even pining for Malone, his offense was pretty stagnant. But if he could do that defensively as a second year coach, shouldn't our HOF coach with a better team AT THE VERY LEAST be able to get the defense to that level? What would our record look then?

 

[mac]

Except that a road to a championship is paved by a great defense! There in lies the problem. Even the Warriors who everyone is in love with are a GREAT defensive team. Offense is important but you have to make stop and great defense is a catalyst to a good offense.

So which team that has won a championship in the last 30 years was not a very very good defensive team? I can name a few that were not great offensive team.

There is a reason why guys like Nelson and Karl never won a championship in their coaching careers. Think about that for a second!

Tons of teams and coaches have not won championships, even defensive ones. Not Thibs with the Bulls, or Vogel's Pacers, or the Grizzlies recently. I agree that you need to be a good defensive team to be the champion, but you also need to be a good offensive team (unless you are super solid defensively like the Pistons). Suns would have arguably made the finals if not for some injuries and whatnot. Nonetheless, that doesn't mean you need a coach who is known as a "defense-first" guy. Carlisle, Spoelstra, Phil Jackson aren't exactly defense-first guys themselves.

I understand that talk is one thing, results is another, and you are right that even Karl's winning teams recently weren't known for their defense. That's a fair point, but in and of itself has nothing to do with whether Karl spends his first training camp talking defense or offense. Like I said, it's not as if Karl's telling them not to play defense, or that he hasn't mentioned defense at all. I didn't hear the quote so I don't know who's correct, but according to Bajaden the recent quote where Karl talked about them not running was in the context of getting back on defense, but posters have only used it in reference to offensive pace.

Lastly, I have to admit that I have very much softened my stance from a few years ago. Prior to Malone's hiring I was hoping for JVG, I hated the idea of Mullin being coach and was very much on your current side of things. Defense does win championships, and I wanted us to build with a playstyle that could win championships in the long-run. Constant first round exits from the playoffs would be terrible. Fast forward to today, and frankly I don't give a damn whether we can win a championship anymore. I started following the team more closely in 2004, when there was no leaguepass broadband in my country, where it was just highlight videos on NBA.com. That progressed to me having sports channels on cable, and even then they only aired 2 NBA games a week, and I would be lucky to get to watch one game of the Kings in a season. I have gotten to watch maybe 4 full Kings playoff games on TV in 12 years of supporting them, and at this point it would make my day if they could even make it to the playoffs, first round exits or not. Karl, at least according to history, is a winning coach who can get his teams to the playoffs. If it requires trading Cousins then so be it, because we haven't won more than 30 games in 6 years with him and I honestly don't see us winning a championship with him in the next 5 years, not because of him necessarily, but because our franchise is a joke. So I'm at the point where it's do whatever it takes, it's not like long-term success is guaranteed anyway. Just get to the playoffs!

 

[dude12]

Maybe the term defense-first is inaccurate.....how about values defense greatly and puts in a scheme that works coach? Karl's teams are able to put up points and he does talk about defense. Defensively his schemes don't seem to work. He just ripped into the team about defense but then: plays our worst defensive guards possible together in Rondo, DC and Bellinelli quite a bit during crunch time. Rarely, if ever, will make any situational defensive substitutions. Left WCS on the bench when his defense could help. The Charlotte game was a head scratcher when he left all big men on the bench and Rudy Gay was our paint protector. Easy bucket for Kemba Walker. Moves like that tend to make people think he has very little concept of defense.

 

[whozit]

Tons of teams and coaches have not won championships, even defensive ones. Not Thibs with the Bulls, or Vogel's Pacers, or the Grizzlies recently. I agree that you need to be a good defensive team to be the champion, but you also need to be a good offensive team (unless you are super solid defensively like the Pistons). Suns would have arguably made the finals if not for some injuries and whatnot. Nonetheless, that doesn't mean you need a coach who is known as a "defense-first" guy. Carlisle, Spoelstra, Phil Jackson aren't exactly defense-first guys themselves.

I understand that talk is one thing, results is another, and you are right that even Karl's winning teams recently weren't known for their defense. That's a fair point, but in and of itself has nothing to do with whether Karl spends his first training camp talking defense or offense. Like I said, it's not as if Karl's telling them not to play defense, or that he hasn't mentioned defense at all. I didn't hear the quote so I don't know who's correct, but according to Bajaden the recent quote where Karl talked about them not running was in the context of getting back on defense, but posters have only used it in reference to offensive pace.

Lastly, I have to admit that I have very much softened my stance from a few years ago. Prior to Malone's hiring I was hoping for JVG, I hated the idea of Mullin being coach and was very much on your current side of things. Defense does win championships, and I wanted us to build with a playstyle that could win championships in the long-run. Constant first round exits from the playoffs would be terrible. Fast forward to today, and frankly I don't give a damn whether we can win a championship anymore. I started following the team more closely in 2004, when there was no leaguepass broadband in my country, where it was just highlight videos on NBA.com. That progressed to me having sports channels on cable, and even then they only aired 2 NBA games a week, and I would be lucky to get to watch one game of the Kings in a season. I have gotten to watch maybe 4 full Kings playoff games on TV in 12 years of supporting them, and at this point it would make my day if they could even make it to the playoffs, first round exits or not. Karl, at least according to history, is a winning coach who can get his teams to the playoffs. If it requires trading Cousins then so be it, because we haven't won more than 30 games in 6 years with him and I honestly don't see us winning a championship with him in the next 5 years, not because of him necessarily, but because our franchise is a joke. So I'm at the point where it's do whatever it takes, it's not like long-term success is guaranteed anyway. Just get to the playoffs!

Fair enough but not good enough. Sell the future for short term success? That's what I'm getting out of your post. Sorry if my sugar level is throwing off my comprehension.

I don't expect the championship but that should be the ultimate goal. I want my team to be competitive (and actually win more than occasionally) most all nights (we all have off days) and not just win because the other team had the off night but because their good, fundamentally good on both sides of the court.

 

[mac]

Fair enough but not good enough. Sell the future for short term success? That's what I'm getting out of your post. Sorry if my sugar level is throwing off my comprehension.

I don't expect the championship but that should be the ultimate goal. I want my team to be competitive (and actually win more than occasionally) most all nights (we all have off days) and not just win because the other team had the off night but because their good, fundamentally good on both sides of the court.

The issue is that to me the "future" is very much not guaranteed. We haven't won 30 games with Cousins here in 6 years, what makes you so sure we can build a successful team around him that goes deep into the playoffs in the next 4-5? Malone isn't coming back, so that little "certainty" is gone. Obviously if it were a certainty that we'd win I'd take long-term, sustained, deeper playoff success. But it simply isn't, and so I'll gladly take success any time, the sooner the better. Best case scenario is we have both. Of course, everything at this point is very much over-simplification. Offense-first approach (i.e. Karl) doesn't necessarily equal short term success, nor does it necessarily mean losing long term success (e.g. trade Cousins to play Karl's preferred style now, get picks in return for Cousins). Likewise, Cousins + Mr Defensive Coach also doesn't necessarily mean long-term success, but IMO it means a bit less short-term success as you throw away another 1-2 seasons of needing some roster changes, scheme changes etc.

 

[King Baller]

I don't think that you can make a great defensive team out of this roster (of course there is a lot that can be improved).

Rondo is a bad defender, and DC is not working defensively with him.
Ben is arguably our best perimeter defender and he is average at best, Marco is flat out bad.
Rudy is a bad defender at the 3, and though Omri is playing with a lot of heart and hustle he is far from a lockdown defender.
WCS is a good (potentially great) defender but he is a rookie and him and Kosta don't work together.
Cousins could be a very good defender but has flaws (that are being discussed all over this forum) and Kosta is potentially a good defender but since he doesn't really work next to Cousins or WCS he doesn't make a difference.

I don't think you can turn this roster with the lack of perimeter defenders into a top-10 defensive team.

Rondo is not a bad defender. DC should have been on Ish Smith more in the Philly game since he is faster. This one move alone could have changed the games outcome. Rondo and DC should not be in the game together unless the other team is running two small guards. Playing two small guards against bigger lineups has led to more losses.

Ben is a good defender man vs. man. Ben has been pulled too soon and sat too many 4th quarters while the other team took the win from the Kings midget lineup. Marco cannot stay with the fast guys but is a good team defender. Karl should have the starters and bench play a different scheme.

Rudy is not a bad defender at the 3. He should not be trying to defend PF's and certainly not be trying to box them out and rebound against them on a regular basis. Omri should be coming in with the Bench Mob playing team defense.

WCS is a good defender and Karl has left him on the bench at key points leading to losses. Koufos is a very good defender and so is Cousins. When Cousins has needed a blow coming off the injuries Koufos has sat. Karl's use of Cousins and Koufos has been especially poor. If Cousins looks like he needs a blow for goodness sake put Koufos in!!!!!!! I cannot recall too many times when Koufos and WCS have been on the floor together. Certainly too small of a sample size to make a judgement. Overall Karls use of his Bigs has sucked and is one of the big reasons the Kings are struggling.

Karl has a defensive scheme that challenges teams to shoot threes. This in an era when the three point shot is KING! I mean teams pass up easy twos to shoot open threes and Karl's game plan gives it to them!!!!!! WTF!!!!!!!! Plus the Kings have three solid Bigs to man the paint and Karl hardly ever plays two Bigs. And often he puts Cousins way out on the perimeter!!!! Who is supposed to rebound???? Cousins is one of the best rebounders in the Association and KARL TAKES HIM OUT OF THE PAINT BY DESIGN!!!!!!

Karl is the Coach. He is supposed to be the wiser more mature person. IMO he is ruining this season for Cousins and the Kings on purpose. The only other option I see is that Karl is delusional.

 

[King Baller]

Not a selective analysis, just described the roster we have- we weren't a great defensive team under Malone, not even close (23th for his first year and even at the 9-6 run we were 15th) and I think that our defensive potential is much more limited than what you think because even in a good scheme we still lack a good perimeter defender and between Rondo, Marco and Rudy most of our minutes there goes to defenders ranging from bad to very bad.

Our perimeter defense is worse now than under Malone roster-wise because we play Rondo extended minutes over DC (who proved he can be a solid PG defender last year but can only play very few minutes at the PG spot).

I never said that Karl's defensive schemes are not a problem (I have said the opposite many times) but you are so eager to jump on the offensive in order to write another "Karl is bad, I know basketball" comment, even if there is no one disagreeing with you- what I said was I think we can't be a top 10 defense with this very poor perimeter defending team and 3 defensive bigs that can share the floor only in one combination (Cousins-WCS).

Karl's scheme gives the other team the perimeter. His game plan is to concede the three, pack the paint and run out on the shooter.

As far as your statement about the Bigs, HOW DO WE KNOW!!!!!!! Karl has played two Bigs so little there is no chemistry. Rudy Gay and Omri Casspi are not PF's. neither of these guys are Draymond Green

 

[bajaden]

PS - I'm sick of the dribble drive offense.

Why be sick of something you haven't seen? I'm very familiar with the dribble drive offense, and I don't see the Kings running it. Take what you want from that, but in the dribble drive offense, the big man is planted in the post near the basket, not out beyond the three point line. Yes, the PF tends to be planted out at the three point line, but not the center. So for whatever reason, Karl has modified his offense, and the only reason I can think of, is because if Cousins is going to be late getting back in offensive transition, and the team has to wait for him everytime, the dribble drive offense doesn't work as well. In the dribble drive offense, there's always a trailer, who slides in behind the PG when he drives into the lane. They've made Cousins the trailer.

At Kentucky, Calapari uses the dribble drive offense, and if you look at Cousins minutes you'll see that he didn't play nearly as minutes. Calapari would leave him in until he went up and down the floor a few times, and then send him to the bench for a blow, and then back into the game and repeat that process for the entire game. Reality is, that Cousins game doesn't fit the dribble drive offense, and that Karl has tried to modify it to appease Cousins. As a result, we may not be getting the best of what both Cousins or Karl can do. I don't think Karl has forgotten how to coach, but I do think he's having a hard time finding a way to fit Cousins effectively into his system. All of Cousins injuries haven't helped because it's difficult to stay in game shape when your out of action due to an injury.

 

[whozit]

The issue is that to me the "future" is very much not guaranteed. We haven't won 30 games with Cousins here in 6 years, what makes you so sure we can build a successful team around him that goes deep into the playoffs in the next 4-5? Malone isn't coming back, so that little "certainty" is gone. Obviously if it were a certainty that we'd win I'd take long-term, sustained, deeper playoff success. But it simply isn't, and so I'll gladly take success any time, the sooner the better. Best case scenario is we have both. Of course, everything at this point is very much over-simplification. Offense-first approach (i.e. Karl) doesn't necessarily equal short term success, nor does it necessarily mean losing long term success (e.g. trade Cousins to play Karl's preferred style now, get picks in return for Cousins). Likewise, Cousins + Mr Defensive Coach also doesn't necessarily mean long-term success, but IMO it means a bit less short-term success as you throw away another 1-2 seasons of needing some roster changes, scheme changes etc.

Actually to me, the best case scenario is Karl adjusting his style to play a more balanced approach. I don't want either Offense at the expense of defense or Defense at the expense of offense ONLY approach. There are times for both. Karl seems fixated only on one approach and that in my opinion is a mistake. You can be a better offensive team than defensive but you still better be competent on the defensive side. The team sucks defensively despite the personnel.

 

[King Baller]

While I will certainly agree with you that Karl doesn't have the team playing good defense, I think a lot of your criticism stems from the underlying and somewhat subjective belief that defense is the most important aspect of the game. If we're talking about who preaches defense more it's obviously Malone, but Karl also has the team playing better offensively IMO. Which is why at the end of the day it all comes down to wins. It doesn't matter what approach you're taking, defense first or offense first, as long as it leads to wins. And it's not as if Karl is out there going "DONT DEFEND OMG DEFENSE IS BAD STAY AWAY". It's just which is the priority, and for you and many on this board (myself included), we believe that it should be defense first. But like I said, it should ultimately come down to wins. The offense was extremely stagnant under Malone for the most part of his time in Sac, but that was not highlighted as much because the general culture of this board is to want defense first (and again, I am very much part of that). There are two sides to basketball, and both are important. I don't see anything fundamentally wrong in preaching one over the other.

What use is all the talk of defense first, or all the talk of pace and offense first, if at the end of the day it doesn't lead to wins? That's the bottom line for me. And for the record, Rondo's defense has been really bad. With a bit more effort in a few of our games our record after the 1-7 start is pretty much .500, despite all this offense-first training camp and guys playing worse D you speak of.

Malone had no bench. Karl has a pretty good bench. The starters played superb defense during that little era of Malone inspired defense last season. The bench not so much.

A NBA team plays defense about half of the game. But the reality is that if you cannot stop the other team the best you can hope for is a tie. Then if you give them open three point shots and they hit them they win. Karl's defensive scheme is not working and he is blaming the players!

Also I include rebounding as part of defense and Karl plans for the Kings to be a poor rebounding team. He puts Cousins up top outside the paint. He plays most of the game with no real Power Forward! He play large portions of critical end of games with midget lineups! Kael is conceding the rebounds.

So how good can your defense be if you concede the 3 point shot and the rebounds?

 

[bajaden]

Rondo is not a bad defender. DC should have been on Ish Smith more in the Philly game since he is faster. This one move alone could have changed the games outcome. Rondo and DC should not be in the game together unless the other team is running two small guards. Playing two small guards against bigger lineups has led to more losses.

Ben is a good defender man vs. man. Ben has been pulled too soon and sat too many 4th quarters while the other team took the win from the Kings midget lineup. Marco cannot stay with the fast guys but is a good team defender. Karl should have the starters and bench play a different scheme.

Rudy is not a bad defender at the 3. He should not be trying to defend PF's and certainly not be trying to box them out and rebound against them on a regular basis. Omri should be coming in with the Bench Mob playing team defense.

WCS is a good defender and Karl has left him on the bench at key points leading to losses. Koufos is a very good defender and so is Cousins. When Cousins has needed a blow coming off the injuries Koufos has sat. Karl's use of Cousins and Koufos has been especially poor. If Cousins looks like he needs a blow for goodness sake put Koufos in!!!!!!! I cannot recall too many times when Koufos and WCS have been on the floor together. Certainly too small of a sample size to make a judgement. Overall Karls use of his Bigs has sucked and is one of the big reasons the Kings are struggling.

Karl has a defensive scheme that challenges teams to shoot threes. This in an era when the three point shot is KING! I mean teams pass up easy twos to shoot open threes and Karl's game plan gives it to them!!!!!! WTF!!!!!!!! Plus the Kings have three solid Bigs to man the paint and Karl hardly ever plays two Bigs. And often he puts Cousins way out on the perimeter!!!! Who is supposed to rebound???? Cousins is one of the best rebounders in the Association and KARL TAKES HIM OUT OF THE PAINT BY DESIGN!!!!!!

Karl is the Coach. He is supposed to be the wiser more mature person. IMO he is ruining this season for Cousins and the Kings on purpose. The only other option I see is that Karl is delusional.

Well if you believe in stats, they don't back your statement of Rondo being a good defender. I posted them earlier, but I'll post then again and you can make what you want from them. With Rondo on the floor, our points allowed per 100 possessions is 109.5 points. With Rondo off the floor, our points allowed per 100 possessions is 102.7 points. That's almost a 7 point difference, which is a lot mi amigo. An the problem is that according to stats, his offensive abilitys don't make up for it. With Rondo on the floor our points scored per 100 possessions is 105.1 points. With Rondo off the floor, our points scored per 100 possessions is 104.8 points. Thats a mere three tenths of a point difference.

 

[King Baller]

Why be sick of something you haven't seen? I'm very familiar with the dribble drive offense, and I don't see the Kings running it. Take what you want from that, but in the dribble drive offense, the big man is planted in the post near the basket, not out beyond the three point line. Yes, the PF tends to be planted out at the three point line, but not the center. So for whatever reason, Karl has modified his offense, and the only reason I can think of, is because if Cousins is going to be late getting back in offensive transition, and the team has to wait for him everytime, the dribble drive offense doesn't work as well. In the dribble drive offense, there's always a trailer, who slides in behind the PG when he drives into the lane. They've made Cousins the trailer.

At Kentucky, Calapari uses the dribble drive offense, and if you look at Cousins minutes you'll see that he didn't play nearly as minutes. Calapari would leave him in until he went up and down the floor a few times, and then send him to the bench for a blow, and then back into the game and repeat that process for the entire game. Reality is, that Cousins game doesn't fit the dribble drive offense, and that Karl has tried to modify it to appease Cousins. As a result, we may not be getting the best of what both Cousins or Karl can do. I don't think Karl has forgotten how to coach, but I do think he's having a hard time finding a way to fit Cousins effectively into his system. All of Cousins injuries haven't helped because it's difficult to stay in game shape when your out of action due to an injury.

Hhhmmm, this must be why Vance Wahlbergs seat is now in the second row of Coaches Seriously that statement I made was in frustration

Baja I just don't want the Kings to make the same mistake the Warriors made back in the day when they Chose Don Nelson over Chris Webber. Sooner or later Karl needs to go.

I agree Karl has left Cousins playing when he should have subbed in Koufos. If Cousins is laboring give him a blow. It is almost like Karl is punishing Cousins at times. Whether consciously or subconsciously Karl is hurting Cousins game.

 

[King Baller]

Well if you believe in stats, they don't back your statement of Rondo being a good defender. I posted them earlier, but I'll post then again and you can make what you want from them. With Rondo on the floor, our points allowed per 100 possessions is 109.5 points. With Rondo off the floor, our points allowed per 100 possessions is 102.7 points. That's almost a 7 point difference, which is a lot mi amigo. An the problem is that according to stats, his offensive abilitys don't make up for it. With Rondo on the floor our points scored per 100 possessions is 105.1 points. With Rondo off the floor, our points scored per 100 possessions is 104.8 points. Thats a mere three tenths of a point difference.

Rondo has played a lot of minutes this season and the Kings have not played well. So I'm not sure what the stats really mean. Collison is a good defender and IMO should have been glued to Ish Smith the other night.

Baja what is your take on Rondo?

 

[KingMilz]

If Rondo is not playing high level defence we are essentially paying 10 million for 39 year old Andre Miller who we could have had for less than one million while DC who has been a better PG over the last 3 years starting.

Rondo has to play high level defense for him to warrant making nearly double of what DC makes.

 

[fansinceday1]

Karl is the Coach. He is supposed to be the wiser more mature person. IMO he is ruining this season for Cousins and the Kings on purpose. The only other option I see is that Karl is delusional.

Ive thought this for a while now.
The team told Karl he couldn't trade cousins in the offseason so he just decided to coach to Cousins weaknesses. **** him off so he melts down and let the fanbase and the kings talking heads pressure the FO into giving Cousins the boot.
Problem solved. Karl ultimately gets what he wanted and comes out smelling like a peach. The problem for Karl is we have some knowledgable fans who are able to see the game he's playing.