Boogie By the Numbers -- A Statistical Breakdown of DeMarcus Cousins

[The_Jamal]

Did you even read my post? My main point is that there were circumstances being dictated by the Maloofs that at least forced the three guard thing as an option. That's exactly my point. That it may not have been his choice. We at least know one of the cogs was the choice of the owners. You think the Maloofs would have allowed Tyreke to come off the bench? Yeah right. He could have made Thornton come off the bench, but if the Maloofs are already meddling in the starting line up with IT, it's not hard to see them telling Smart to not have Thornton come off the bench.

Now, in my opinion, if you're forced to start IT by the owners, then you find a way to have Thornton come off the bench, that would be the next logical step. But then there's that family connection between Smart and Thornton too so.... we don't have all the info.

Where we really have to get worried is if we acquire a real SF (MKG, Barnes, AK47, Batum, etc) and we still see the 3 guard line-up from Smart.

 

[The Hammer]

Where we really have to get worried is if we acquire a real SF (MKG, Barnes, AK47, Batum, etc) and we still see the 3 guard line-up from Smart.

Fully agree.

 

[Tyndel]

Did you even read my post? My main point is that there were circumstances being dictated by the Maloofs that at least forced the three guard thing as an option. That's exactly my point. That it may not have been his choice. We at least know one of the cogs was the choice of the owners. You think the Maloofs would have allowed Tyreke to come off the bench? Yeah right. He could have made Thornton come off the bench, but if the Maloofs are already meddling in the starting line up with IT, it's not hard to see them telling Smart to not have Thornton come off the bench.

Now, in my opinion, if you're forced to start IT by the owners, then you find a way to have Thornton come off the bench, that would be the next logical step. But then there's that family connection between Smart and Thornton too so.... we don't have all the info.

I read your post but I disagree with making excuses for a coach not trying to win(before the season is lost at the very least). If he is a pushover on top of being inept then its even worse for him and this team. I also don't buy he was forced to because we lacked a SF don't we have like 10 on our roster? We don't need a star from that position with Cousins Reke MT and IT all eating shots but in a lot of peoples minds more points are always better.... or at least the potential of more points I guess.

We don't know what goes on behind the scenes but we do know he wanted to run sans defense and he wanted to put 3 guards on the floor as the primary lineup for the second 1/2 the season. If he was "forced" into it then he still isn't our guy.


Edit
I liked what I saw from smart for the first few to several weeks but he knee-jerked low offensive numbers too far when we literally had our best 3 point shooters shooting in the teens and early 20s among other problems. When it didn't turn into wins he needed to try something else.

 

[Rookie]

Where we really have to get worried is if we acquire a real SF (MKG, Barnes, AK47, Batum, etc) and we still see the 3 guard line-up from Smart.

I think if that would happened, the "fire Smart" thread would have no objection. Until I see that happening, I don't see Smart is blindly in love with a 3 guards team. Too many inept players and unknown behind the curtains to fully label Smart as "small ball" coach.

 

[The Hammer]

I read your post but I disagree with making excuses for a coach not trying to win(before the season is lost at the very least). If he is a pushover on top of being inept then its even worse for him and this team. I also don't buy he was forced to because we lacked a SF don't we have like 10 on our roster? We don't need a star from that position with Cousins Reke MT and IT all eating shots but in a lot of peoples minds more points are always better.... or at least the potential of more points I guess.

We don't know what goes on behind the scenes but we do know he wanted to run sans defense and he wanted to put 3 guards on the floor as the primary lineup for the second 1/2 the season. If he was "forced" into it then he still isn't our guy.


Edit
I liked what I saw from smart for the first few to several weeks but he knee-jerked low offensive numbers too far when we literally had our best 3 point shooters shooting in the teens and early 20s among other problems. When it didn't turn into wins he needed to try something else.

Wow. Well I don't think you understand who was calling the shots then.

And it's not "making excuses". It's called perceiving what's really going on. If he doesn't do what the Maloofs call for he's out of a 1.5 million dollar job next year. What would you do?

The insanity with this team starts and more than likely ends with the Maloofs.

They've completely screwed up everything from the physical building to the relationships with sponsors and now the fans. That's ample evidence to believe it's possible they're messing with the line up on a nightly basis. They would do this no matter the coach. You say it's the coach's decision. That's pretty naive.

Again, not to say that Smart doesn't have a penchant for running/smallball. But I'm specifically talking about Reke at the 3 spot for half the season. Given the freedom, I don't think he does that. If he goes against the owners he's out of a job for next year, and might not get a third chance head coaching in the NBA. Which, last time I checked is about a 2-4 million dollar a year job. Would you go against the owners knowing you'd get canned and perhaps end your run as an NBA head coach just so you can try to eek out a couple more wins? Or do you try to compromise with the situation and make it a learning opportunity (a legit one) for Reke and his development, keep your job, give your kids a chance to go to any college they can get into... etc. I can't stand when people think in black and white, like you're doing. It's never that simple. You want it to be, but it's not.

 

[bajaden]

What about Hakeem?

From what I've heard, and some of what I've seen, Hakeem seems to be a pretty good coach. He is, in my opinion, the best post player I've ever seen in my life as far as moves, counter moves, and counter, counter moves go. If he got the ball in a post up within 6 or 7 feet from the basket, your were just about helpless as a defender. So I would say that Hakeem is one of the exceptions to the rule. And I'm sure there are others. But in general, players that had to really work hard at what ever position they played, tend to be better coaches.

Even if you look at the greatest coaches. Pat Riley, Pop's, Jackson, etc. All ex-players in the league, but none were stars. As a result, in order to be a good player, they became students of the game. Which in turn, lent itself to being a good coach.

 

[bajaden]

I read your post but I disagree with making excuses for a coach not trying to win(before the season is lost at the very least). If he is a pushover on top of being inept then its even worse for him and this team. I also don't buy he was forced to because we lacked a SF don't we have like 10 on our roster? We don't need a star from that position with Cousins Reke MT and IT all eating shots but in a lot of peoples minds more points are always better.... or at least the potential of more points I guess.

We don't know what goes on behind the scenes but we do know he wanted to run sans defense and he wanted to put 3 guards on the floor as the primary lineup for the second 1/2 the season. If he was "forced" into it then he still isn't our guy.


Edit
I liked what I saw from smart for the first few to several weeks but he knee-jerked low offensive numbers too far when we literally had our best 3 point shooters shooting in the teens and early 20s among other problems. When it didn't turn into wins he needed to try something else.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again. I think Smart made the decision to play an up-tempo game. We wern't playing very good defense, and our offense was stagnant. So, rightly or wrongly, he decided to go to an up-tempo game. Tyreke doesn't have a natural tendecy to push the ball, unless its on a break. So Smart decided to put IT at the point in order to get the ball up the court quicker. However, now he was stuck with how to keep both Thornton, and Tyreke in the lineup at the same time with IT at the point.

Now if we had a Granger, or a Batum, or a Paul Pierce, then the decision would have been an easy one. But we had Cisco, Greene, and Outlaw. None of which were consistent. So he moved Tyreke to the SF position and kept Thornton at the SG. One could argue that our defense got worse, if thats possible. But our offense got better, and more entertaining. So I don't think there were any conspiricys going on. Or that the Maloof's were dictating who played and didn't play. I think it was just a natural result of Smart wanting to have a running team, and still keep his best players on the floor.

 

[Kingster]

I've said this before, but I'll say it again. I think Smart made the decision to play an up-tempo game. We wern't playing very good defense, and our offense was stagnant. So, rightly or wrongly, he decided to go to an up-tempo game. Tyreke doesn't have a natural tendecy to push the ball, unless its on a break. So Smart decided to put IT at the point in order to get the ball up the court quicker. However, now he was stuck with how to keep both Thornton, and Tyreke in the lineup at the same time with IT at the point.

Now if we had a Granger, or a Batum, or a Paul Pierce, then the decision would have been an easy one. But we had Cisco, Greene, and Outlaw. None of which were consistent. So he moved Tyreke to the SF position and kept Thornton at the SG. One could argue that our defense got worse, if thats possible. But our offense got better, and more entertaining. So I don't think there were any conspiricys going on. Or that the Maloof's were dictating who played and didn't play. I think it was just a natural result of Smart wanting to have a running team, and still keep his best players on the floor.

I agree with all of what you say. And I think Smart made the correct decision to go uptempo. The last thing you want this young, and oftentimes brain-dead group, is a slow down half court offense. That's like wanting the elementary schoolers to read Kant. There was nothing wrong with the offense. It's the defense that was aweful. The switching was horrid Terrible close outs. Not seeing ball and man. Not getting back on defense. It's just pathetic stuff that can't be tolerated next year. Smart worked under Pop for a while. Well, next year he better start channeling Pop and demanding these guys play defense. I don't care who we draft, trade for, or get in FA. If they don't become students at the defensive end of the floor, this team will continue to be a laughingstock.

 

[Glenn]

From what I've heard, and some of what I've seen, Hakeem seems to be a pretty good coach. He is, in my opinion, the best post player I've ever seen in my life as far as moves, counter moves, and counter, counter moves go. If he got the ball in a post up within 6 or 7 feet from the basket, your were just about helpless as a defender. So I would say that Hakeem is one of the exceptions to the rule. And I'm sure there are others. But in general, players that had to really work hard at what ever position they played, tend to be better coaches.

Even if you look at the greatest coaches. Pat Riley, Pop's, Jackson, etc. All ex-players in the league, but none were stars. As a result, in order to be a good player, they became students of the game. Which in turn, lent itself to being a good coach.

I have to put in a word for Kevin McHale. I saw Kevin as an 18 yr old freshman in college and he was good. He kept adding moves not only through college but even through the pros. He didn't have all the moves right off he bat. Hawes reminds me of a young McHale esxcept Hawes had far more moves than McHale as a kid. Now it's not like Kevin would like to tutor Hawes 'cause he has another job but I don't think anything came naturally to Kevin except he could put the ball in the basket. Hawes never seemed to master the shot making aspect of all the moves. I haven't seen him recently. Some pro said Kevin went to school and kept getting degrees but where some stopped at a Masters, McHale got a couple PhDs. McHale is a student of the big man game although his game was unique because of his length.

I think he had some natural ability but then he worked hard and earned himself the reputation as a black hole. If one move didn't work, he tried another and another, until he had an open shot. I REALLY thought Hawes looked like McHale as a kid.

 

[Glenn]

What we have to hope for or even pray for is that Smart did all he could in the time he had and has more to each. It certainly seemed to me that he was installing ideas as time went by. I just didn't like where it all ended. We have to hope small ball is not the end of his bag of tricks. He WAS coached by Bobby Knight, after all.

 

[Widowmaker2k]

I'm not sure if this has been posted, but it pertains to DeMarcus (and Thompson):

THE SACRAMENTO KINGS are trying to reverse the decline of the center position and brought on Ray as a consultant toward the end of this season to help them do it. In 2010, the team used the fifth overall pick on DeMarcus Cousins, an intriguing but temperamental center from the University of Kentucky. After already selecting 6'11", 250-pound big man Jason Thompson with their first-round pick in 2008, the hope was that the traditional way of building a team--from the center on down--would help revitalize this bottom-feeder of the league for the better part of the last decade.

The Mystery of the Disappearing NBA Center - The Atlantic

 

[bajaden]

I'm not sure if this has been posted, but it pertains to DeMarcus (and Thompson):



The Mystery of the Disappearing NBA Center - The Atlantic

Right now, if you look around the league, there aren't that many quality big men over 6'10". When you have guys like Hayes, or Joel Anthony playing center, I think it speaks for itself. Point is, that if you already have a couple of good big men, it behoves you to keep them, because replacing them isn't that easy. Why do the Atlanta Hawks have Horfold playing center instead of PF, his natural position? Because they can't find an adequete center.

 

[Tyndel]

That also why JT is going to pull more then 5 million a year and why we will let him walk. Hopefully Whiteside gets the minutes needed to make some progress.

 

[Bricklayer]

That also why JT is going to pull more then 5 million a year and why we will let him walk. Hopefully Whiteside gets the minutes needed to make some progress.

Its actually why you don't let him walk. This team has enough hole sthat you don't let another one open up for no reason.

 

[bajaden]

Its actually why you don't let him walk. This team has enough hole sthat you don't let another one open up for no reason.

Here's the multimillion dollar question. How much would you be willing to pay him?

 

[Glenn]

Here's the multimillion dollar question. How much would you be willing to pay him?

You know I will make wild arsed guesses about the future and what I think we should do. I think it would be absolutely stupid to let JT walk if there is any honest attempt being made by the ownership to improve this team. IF!! Room can be made for future use using the amnesty clause with other players. This also assumes the ownership is making an honest attempt to win. I sure wouldn't count on Whiteside to make progress as I think that assumotion will go the way of thinking that Hickson and Hayes would help us. We KNOW JT can help us. If this was a team with enough money to fund an NBA team I would squirm at $10 mil but if the draft didn't get us a big man, he'd have us over the barrel. We can't enter a season with only one bonafied big man or depending on a trade for that matter. I am not counting Hayes, Whiteside, or Greene as a useable big man. I don't think he is worth $10 mil but if NOT signing him left us with only Cousins, I'd go the overpay route and pay him that. I am counting on him not wanting more than $8 mil given that's what MT signed for and probably could be had for less but you can't teach height and a tall guy of similar skills as a guard is worth a million a year more.

Given the Kings being what they are, I wouldn't go over $6 mil. The price will be set by other teams so we just wait and see in passive mode as usual.

 

[bajaden]

You know I will make wild arsed guesses about the future and what I think we should do. I think it would be absolutely stupid to let JT walk if there is any honest attempt being made by the ownership to improve this team. IF!! Room can be made for future use using the amnesty clause with other players. This also assumes the ownership is making an honest attempt to win. I sure wouldn't count on Whiteside to make progress as I think that assumotion will go the way of thinking that Hickson and Hayes would help us. We KNOW JT can help us. If this was a team with enough money to fund an NBA team I would squirm at $10 mil but if the draft didn't get us a big man, he'd have us over the barrel. We can't enter a season with only one bonafied big man or depending on a trade for that matter. I am not counting Hayes, Whiteside, or Greene as a useable big man. I don't think he is worth $10 mil but if NOT signing him left us with only Cousins, I'd go the overpay route and pay him that. I am counting on him not wanting more than $8 mil given that's what MT signed for and probably could be had for less but you can't teach height and a tall guy of similar skills as a guard is worth a million a year more.

Given the Kings being what they are, I wouldn't go over $6 mil. The price will be set by other teams so we just wait and see in passive mode as usual.

The last statement is the correct one. The price will be set by the market. You can almost bet the house that a team like the Heat will automaticly offer him the midlevel, which is somewhere just over 5 mil a year. So that will probably be the bottom. I follow JT on twitter, and he's already back to his workout routine. Yesterday he said he had just finished his workout after taking a 1000 shots. He's made himself into a valuable player. Thats what you want your players to do. The downside of course, is that you also have to reward them for that.

 

[Bricklayer]

Here's the multimillion dollar question. How much would you be willing to pay him?

That, I think, has to depend on how we solve the #2 big/shotblocker question.

Lot of little nuances to it, but at least under the old CBA you could pay about $30-35mil for a top frontcourt. So my absolutes are:

-- #1 big = Cousins, cheap for 2 years, then max contract
-- #5 big = Whiteside, cheap for today, if somebody else takes that role, also a min contract/rookie type

The numerous questions that all play off each other surround the #2 and #4 bigs (Jason is the #3 in a smart world):
#4 big = Hayes, overpriced and eating cap, but better than showed last year and a reasonable 4th big behind a strong top 3. Can we move him? It could save us $5mil if we can and potentially open the door to a "stretch" 4 as our 4th big.
#2 big =
Possiblity 1) fill in draft fairly cheaply;
Possibility 2) fill in draft via Anthony Davis = future big contract;
Possiblity 3) fill from existing NBA players fairly cheaply -- which coudl eman that our #2 big may not be any better than our #3;
Possiblity 4) fill from existing NBA players at full price ($10mil+)

I can't tell how high to go on Jason until I know how much its goign to cost us til fill in #2 and #4. I certainly wouldn't pay $10mil under any circumstances, but then again I highly doubt anybody else will either. I certainly would pay MLE under almost any circumnstances -- even in a worst case scenario with costs spiking in two years, Jason is a moveable player at MLE.

Sample scenario:

#1 draft Anthony Davis, stuck w/Hayes
Yr1 = Cousins $3.9mil , Davis $5.1mil, Thompson, Hayes $5.5mil, Whiteside $0.9mil = $15.4mil + JT
Yr2 = Cousins $4.9mil, Davis $5.5mil, Thompson, Hayes $5.7mil, Whiteside $0.9mil = $17.3mil + JT
Yr3 = Cousins $15.0mil, Davis $5.9mil, Thompson, Hayes $6.0mil = $26.9mil + JT + min wage #5big
Yr4 = Cousins $16.0mil, Davis $7.5mil, Thompson = $23.5mil +JT + #4big + min wage #5big
* just guessed at max under new deal, and used Irving's numbers for Davis as the #1

What that tells me is that even in a scenario where we end up with the #1 pick in the entire draft, a 4yr deal for JT is not going to give us an overpriced frontcourt through the end of the deal. Here are the frontcourt salaries of the teams remaining in the playoffs:

Lakers $38mil (Bynum, Gasol, Murphy, McRoberts)
Thunder $18.8 (Perkins, Ibaka, Collison, Muhammed, Aldrich) + will rise $10-12mil in two years once its time to pay Ibaka
Spurs $29.8mil (Duncan, Blair, Bonner, Diaw, Splitter)
Clippers $18.0mil (Jordan, Griffin, Evans, Martin) + obviously will rise $10mil when Blake's deal is up after next season
Celtics $32-40mil (Garnett, Bass, Hollins, Steisma, but also O'Neal & Wilcox)
76ers $30.7mil (Hawes, Brand, Young, Vucevic, Allen)
Heat $25.6mil (Bosh, Haslem, Anthony, Turiaf, Pittman, Howard)
Pacers $18.0 (Hibbert, West, Hansbrough, Amunsdson, Pendergraph) +will rise $10mil here with Hibbert's payday this summer


So if we fill that #2/shotblocking big in the draft, then we can sign JT for 4 years with ease, even if we are caught holding the Hayes bag for the whole period. If its Davis etc. we might have to let him go 4 years from now when his deal would be coming up at ths same time as Davis would be looking for mega$$ next to Cousins, but that's another worry for another very speculative time. Right now the only way Jaosn is priced out of our market is if we fill the shotblocker spot with a big$$ veteran AND we can't move Hayes, AND it still won't be too much to pay until 2014-15 when Cousins' contract comes on line. So worst case scenario as long as we sign him to an eventually moveable contract we can keep Jason for two more years, regardless of how anything else plays out. In most scenarios we can keep him for the full 4 years before having to make tough decisions.

 

[bajaden]

That, I think, has to depend on how we solve the #2 big/shotblocker question.

Lot of little nuances to it, but at least under the old CBA you could pay about $30-35mil for a top frontcourt. So my absolutes are:

-- #1 big = Cousins, cheap for 2 years, then max contract
-- #5 big = Whiteside, cheap for today, if somebody else takes that role, also a min contract/rookie type

The numerous questions that all play off each other surround the #2 and #4 bigs (Jason is the #3 in a smart world):
#4 big = Hayes, overpriced and eating cap, but better than showed last year and a reasonable 4th big behind a strong top 3. Can we move him? It could save us $5mil if we can and potentially open the door to a "stretch" 4 as our 4th big.
#2 big =
Possiblity 1) fill in draft fairly cheaply;
Possibility 2) fill in draft via Anthony Davis = future big contract;
Possiblity 3) fill from existing NBA players fairly cheaply -- which coudl eman that our #2 big may not be any better than our #3;
Possiblity 4) fill from existing NBA players at full price ($10mil+)

I can't tell how high to go on Jason until I know how much its goign to cost us til fill in #2 and #4. I certainly wouldn't pay $10mil under any circumstances, but then again I highly doubt anybody else will either. I certainly would pay MLE under almost any circumnstances -- even in a worst case scenario with costs spiking in two years, Jason is a moveable player at MLE.

Sample scenario:

#1 draft Anthony Davis, stuck w/Hayes
Yr1 = Cousins $3.9mil , Davis $5.1mil, Thompson, Hayes $5.5mil, Whiteside $0.9mil = $15.4mil + JT
Yr2 = Cousins $4.9mil, Davis $5.5mil, Thompson, Hayes $5.7mil, Whiteside $0.9mil = $17.3mil + JT
Yr3 = Cousins $15.0mil, Davis $5.9mil, Thompson, Hayes $6.0mil = $26.9mil + JT + min wage #5big
Yr4 = Cousins $16.0mil, Davis $7.5mil, Thompson = $23.5mil +JT + #4big + min wage #5big
* just guessed at max under new deal, and used Irving's numbers for Davis as the #1

What that tells me is that even in a scenario where we end up with the #1 pick in the entire draft, a 4yr deal for JT is not going to give us an overpriced frontcourt through the end of the deal. Here are the frontcourt salaries of the teams remaining in the playoffs:

Lakers $38mil (Bynum, Gasol, Murphy, McRoberts)
Thunder $18.8 (Perkins, Ibaka, Collison, Muhammed, Aldrich) + will rise $10-12mil in two years once its time to pay Ibaka
Spurs $29.8mil (Duncan, Blair, Bonner, Diaw, Splitter)
Clippers $18.0mil (Jordan, Griffin, Evans, Martin) + obviously will rise $10mil when Blake's deal is up after next season
Celtics $32-40mil (Garnett, Bass, Hollins, Steisma, but also O'Neal & Wilcox)
76ers $30.7mil (Hawes, Brand, Young, Vucevic, Allen)
Heat $25.6mil (Bosh, Haslem, Anthony, Turiaf, Pittman, Howard)
Pacers $18.0 (Hibbert, West, Hansbrough, Amunsdson, Pendergraph) +will rise $10mil here with Hibbert's payday this summer


So if we fill that #2/shotblocking big in the draft, then we can sign JT for 4 years with ease, even if we are caught holding the Hayes bag for the whole period. If its Davis etc. we might have to let him go 4 years from now when his deal would be coming up at ths same time as Davis would be looking for mega$$ next to Cousins, but that's another worry for another very speculative time. Right now the only way Jaosn is priced out of our market is if we fill the shotblocker spot with a big$$ veteran AND we can't move Hayes, AND it still won't be too much to pay until 2014-15 when Cousins' contract comes on line. So worst case scenario as long as we sign him to an eventually moveable contract we can keep Jason for two more years, regardless of how anything else plays out. In most scenarios we can keep him for the full 4 years before having to make tough decisions.

Everything you posted seems very reasonable to me. Obviously the best case scenario would be for us to get lucky, and draft Davis. That solves our shotblocking problem, and cheaply at that. And as you said, that would make resigning Thompson a lot easier. How all that would play out 4 years later would depend on whether the Maloofs still owned the team. If we have a deep pocketed owner by then, resigning Davis to a big contract wouldn't be a problem. You notice how easily I spend his money!.

However, if we can't land Davis, the next best shotblocker is Henson, and I'm just not sold on him as a starter in the league. So I'd rather go in a different direction in the draft at that point and see if we can't find a starting SF that can defend. You look at a couple of players that wern't considered good shooters coming out of college, Paul George and K. Leonard, and see the impact both are having in the playoffs with just their defense, it shows that you can come up with good players later in the draft that make a difference. Chandler Parsons is another example.

Of course that leaves up either trading for a starting PF, or finding a way to come up with more capspace in order to sign someone. It would be nice to move Hayes. Its rumored that the Warriors are looking for a SG. I wonder if they would want Salmons?