Do all the better NBA teams play a shot blocker?

#1
Do all the better NBA teams play a shot blocker? Can a team experience consistent success without a shot blocker in the lineup?

Can you have an effective intimidator without him being a shot blocker? Is there any reasonable hope that we will have an improved inside defense with the four or five bigs we have now?

Petrie said and says we need a shot blocker and outside (3 point) shooter. Apparently the consensus is that Robinson is not and will not be a shot blocker. It is also a common thread here that Whiteside will not get many minutes.

Does anyone or can anyone have any real hope that our defense will improve with the team we have now?
 
#2
I am huge on team defense and believe that with the right system that fits the personnel, a team that doesn't look good defensively on paper can at the very least be decent/respectable. This, however, falls on the coaching staff, and Smart enjoys ignoring this aspect of basketball. We will suck defensively again this season (maybe less so than this past season, but still suck) because we hire unproven coaches/coaches that don't focus enough on defense. Sure we can have a shotblocker on the team and it may shave off several points a game, if that, but real defense starts from the perimeter in, not from the paint out. We desperately need a super defensive minded assistant coach to instill discipline. We have enough personnel on the roster that can play decent defense. All we need is structure.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#3
Do all the better NBA teams play a shot blocker? Can a team experience consistent success without a shot blocker in the lineup?

Can you have an effective intimidator without him being a shot blocker? Is there any reasonable hope that we will have an improved inside defense with the four or five bigs we have now?

Petrie said and says we need a shot blocker and outside (3 point) shooter. Apparently the consensus is that Robinson is not and will not be a shot blocker. It is also a common thread here that Whiteside will not get many minutes.

Does anyone or can anyone have any real hope that our defense will improve with the team we have now?
All the better teams do their damndest to play shotblockers, yes. Sometimes injury or a free agent defection may deprive them for a year or two, but then again they don't win big in that year or two.

I think, btw, that this really is a Kings fan unique blindspot. I see a lot of holes in peoples basketball knowledge when I am passing through Knicks boards, Philly boards etc., but as a rule they don't question the shotblocker nearly as much as it is questioned here. I can only blame that on our franchise. Kings fans have very little personal history with shotblockers. The fact that they seem to resist the connection to also having very little personal history with good defensive teams, or even winning teams, is bizarre to me.

So here were most of your elite teams last year:

Chicago (Noah, Asik, Gibson)
Miami (Anthony + considered a hole they've been trying to patch, first with Daly, now with Camby, they will continue looking)
OKC (Ibaka, Perkins)
Indiana (Hibbert) (just matched a max contract to keep him)
Clippers (Jordan)
Lakers (Bynum)
Knicks (Chandler) (now aded Camby as well)
Atlanta (Smith)
Boston (O'Neal, Stiesma)
Spurs (Duncan)
Dallas (Haywood) (lost Chandler fromtheir title team, did not repeat)
Denver (McGee, Anderson)

Now my point in listing all that is not even that you need a shotblocker to win. My point in listing it is that its pretty bleeping obvious that the good teams THINK you need a shotblocker to win. They all find ways to get them and play them. Some of those guys have no other discernible basketball skills and play 20-25min. Some are better players and anchor the defense all game long. But almost every single team chasing a title makes damn sure that one way or the other they have one on their roster. If their roster is lacking one for a year or two, one of their primary goals is to patch that hole.

This has been one of the easiest to spot and most consistent trends in the NBA since the days of Bill Russel at least. The fact we even have to continue to debate it is ludicrous. CAN you win without a shotblocker/intimidator? Depends on what you mean by win. You can make the playoffs, even advance. And if you have multiple HOFers and all defensive team members you can invoke the Jordan exception, except the Bulls were not stupid and always carried some length and intimidation on those teams too. It might be possible. But it is strictly a backup plan if you caught with your shotblocking pants down and 9 out of 10 teams built that way fall short.

P.S. as Tyson Chandler has shown if you are huge you can possibly intimidate wihtout blocking that many shots. To a certain degree you can get some of that out of old guys who used to be great shotblcokers and still have the size and presence, just without the explosiveness. Back in the day you might even have been able to get a little of that by employing a thug like Laimbeer to make people think twice about going inside for another reason. But those days are gone (Laimbeer would be banned wihtin a year in this league), and none of the above is a true substitute.
 
Last edited:
#4
If the team will employ a IT/MT/Reke perimeter, they will need a shotblocker. If those guys are limited to the backcourt, and they can get an above avg SF, the Kings can get by without a true shotblocker. Though as long as MT and Jimmer will be on the team, the team will probably not be much more than avg without one.
 
#5
Here are some interesting stats.

Of all qualified players Serge Ibaka is first in blocks per 48 minutes (6.46) AND blocks per foul (1.35)

But if you open it up to all players, Ibaka is actually 2nd in blocks per 48. In very limited minutes, Hassan Whiteside blocked at a higher rate (6.61/48 min) and was actually 2nd in the entire league in blocks per foul at 1.25.

There's an obvious danger in projecting stats, especially from such a limited sample size. And in fact I wasn't at all surprised that Whiteside was first in blocks per 48 minutes. But the second stat IS surprising.

If you look at the other guys that pop up in the blocks/48 list when not putting the "qualifying players only" restriction on you see such NBA luminaries as Hamed Haddadi and Larry Sanders in the 3rd and 4th spots behind Whiteside and Ibaka. This isn't surprising, as there are always guys that put up great "per minute" stats especially when most of their play presumably comes in garbage time. The glaring difference to me is that Haddadi and Sanders have block/PF rates of 0.60 and 0.57. And fifth on that list is Greg Stiesma (who IS a qualified player) who has a block/PF rate of 0.60

Again, small sample size for Whiteside, but it illustrates what becomes very clear if you watch him in a game - he KNOWS how to block shots and is a natural at it. He has obviously has the athletic gifts (obviously) and he certainly has a willingness/eagerness but most importantly he just has a true feel for rejections. What's perhaps most puzzling is how he understands angles and timing and body positioning so well in order to block shots and yet appears so lost on both the offensive AND defensive ends.

That said, how much of a role do the Thunder ask Ibaka to play? Whiteside shows enough flashes (soft touch on the midrange jumper, fluid movement, added muscle, willing rebounder) that if he had the right mindset and desire he could still be a significant piece for the Kings. Because on paper he's still a perfect compliment to Cousins. More than likely it's a pipe dream, but nevertheless I'll be watching him in the summer league games much more than anyone else.
 
#6
Here are some interesting stats.

Of all qualified players Serge Ibaka is first in blocks per 48 minutes (6.46) AND blocks per foul (1.35)

But if you open it up to all players, Ibaka is actually 2nd in blocks per 48. In very limited minutes, Hassan Whiteside blocked at a higher rate (6.61/48 min) and was actually 2nd in the entire league in blocks per foul at 1.25.

There's an obvious danger in projecting stats, especially from such a limited sample size. And in fact I wasn't at all surprised that Whiteside was first in blocks per 48 minutes. But the second stat IS surprising.

If you look at the other guys that pop up in the blocks/48 list when not putting the "qualifying players only" restriction on you see such NBA luminaries as Hamed Haddadi and Larry Sanders in the 3rd and 4th spots behind Whiteside and Ibaka. This isn't surprising, as there are always guys that put up great "per minute" stats especially when most of their play presumably comes in garbage time. The glaring difference to me is that Haddadi and Sanders have block/PF rates of 0.60 and 0.57. And fifth on that list is Greg Stiesma (who IS a qualified player) who has a block/PF rate of 0.60

Again, small sample size for Whiteside, but it illustrates what becomes very clear if you watch him in a game - he KNOWS how to block shots and is a natural at it. He has obviously has the athletic gifts (obviously) and he certainly has a willingness/eagerness but most importantly he just has a true feel for rejections. What's perhaps most puzzling is how he understands angles and timing and body positioning so well in order to block shots and yet appears so lost on both the offensive AND defensive ends.

That said, how much of a role do the Thunder ask Ibaka to play? Whiteside shows enough flashes (soft touch on the midrange jumper, fluid movement, added muscle, willing rebounder) that if he had the right mindset and desire he could still be a significant piece for the Kings. Because on paper he's still a perfect compliment to Cousins. More than likely it's a pipe dream, but nevertheless I'll be watching him in the summer league games much more than anyone else.
Great post.

As I mentioned the other day, Whiteside could be the perfect fit next to Cousins and challenge both JT and TRob for the starting spot if he ever figures it all out. We'll know a lot more after Summer League whether Whiteside is has improved enough to even challenge for playing time next year.

Aside from Anthony Davis, there wasn't another shotblocking big better than Whiteside in the last draft. Drummond would be up there as well, but he has a ton of question marks around his game. So if we were drafting a shotblocking project in this last draft, it would have been between Drummond and Whiteside, so it would be great to see Whiteside develop more.

Most realistically he'll be fighting Hayes as the 4th big, but if he's able to dominate in SL and put it all together he could shake things up. And I'd be perfectly fine with seeing him make a huge leap and having things 'click', because then you're faced with a nice problem of have 4 quality bigs. Most likely the FO would have to get involved to smooth things out, but as mentioned, it's a good place to be.
 
#7
Do all the better NBA teams play a shot blocker? Can a team experience consistent success without a shot blocker in the lineup?

Can you have an effective intimidator without him being a shot blocker? Is there any reasonable hope that we will have an improved inside defense with the four or five bigs we have now?

Petrie said and says we need a shot blocker and outside (3 point) shooter. Apparently the consensus is that Robinson is not and will not be a shot blocker. It is also a common thread here that Whiteside will not get many minutes.

Does anyone or can anyone have any real hope that our defense will improve with the team we have now?
Having a good shot blocker helps without question, but it isn't a necessity.

The Heat just won a championship without one. (Yes, Joel Anthony is a good shot blocker. But he blocked 16 shots in the entire playoffs and didn't even scratch 20mpg. You can put any big man in the league in his position and the outcome would have been the same.)

The Kings were pretty close to a championship back in 2002 without a great shot-blocker, as well.

As for the current Kings squad, I'd say you are right about Robinson, although he certainly has the tools to be a good shot-blocker. Cousins isn't a bad shot blocker by any means, however. When you adjust for minutes Cousins averaged 1.5 bpg, which compares favorably to Tyson Chandlers 1.7.
 

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#8
I'm worn out with this subject. Anybody with me? I wonder how much attention this topic would attract if it wasn't Bricklayer taking an unmovable stance. He isn't the first to be unmovable; just the most exciting guy to try to take down. C'mon folks, admit it. :) Team composition may determine whether a shotblocker is absolutely essential but it seems clear that having one would be very, very nice.

To turn to the practicle, so far we have had no chance to get a shotblocker and I think the implied criticism of the Kings by saying they haven't solved their major problems is premature. With Hassan still on the team, who knows? I wish he didn't look so clueless at times but getting a few regular minutes on the court would serve the Kings at the least to see what we have. He absolutely needs the experience at the NBA level. Maybe we already have our shotblocker.

There is still time to upgrade our defense and I will be as angry as I was last year if we don't address that general subject and the SF position in particular. We may not end up with a great shot blocker/intimidator but at least let us upgrade our defense in whatever way possible. I think now that we are committed to Cuz/TRob/JT it would make little sense to trade for a shotblocker at least right off the bat.

I have nothing to add and I doubt anyone else does either. TDOS.
 
#9
I'm worn out with this subject. Anybody with me? I wonder how much attention this topic would attract if it wasn't Bricklayer taking an unmovable stance. He isn't the first to be unmovable; just the most exciting guy to try to take down. C'mon folks, admit it. :) Team composition may determine whether a shotblocker is absolutely essential but it seems clear that having one would be very, very nice.

To turn to the practicle, so far we have had no chance to get a shotblocker and I think the implied criticism of the Kings by saying they haven't solved their major problems is premature. With Hassan still on the team, who knows? I wish he didn't look so clueless at times but getting a few regular minutes on the court would serve the Kings at the least to see what we have. He absolutely needs the experience at the NBA level. Maybe we already have our shotblocker.

There is still time to upgrade our defense and I will be as angry as I was last year if we don't address that general subject and the SF position in particular. We may not end up with a great shot blocker/intimidator but at least let us upgrade our defense in whatever way possible. I think now that we are committed to Cuz/TRob/JT it would make little sense to trade for a shotblocker at least right off the bat.

I have nothing to add and I doubt anyone else does either. TDOS.
I agree with you. History has told us that you don't have to have a shot blocker as part of the starting lineup. If you can have a player come off the bench and give you 15-20 minutes a game (blocking shots), that may be all you need.
 
#10
I agree with you. History has told us that you don't have to have a shot blocker as part of the starting lineup. If you can have a player come off the bench and give you 15-20 minutes a game (blocking shots), that may be all you need.
All I can say is ALL those people who think a shot-blocker is not a necessity in BASKETBALL may really haven't played basketball at all.

The answer to this question should be common sense.
 
#11
Having a good shot blocker helps without question, but it isn't a necessity.

The Heat just won a championship without one. (Yes, Joel Anthony is a good shot blocker. But he blocked 16 shots in the entire playoffs and didn't even scratch 20mpg. You can put any big man in the league in his position and the outcome would have been the same.

The Kings were pretty close to a championship back in 2002 without a great shot-blocker, as well.

As for the current Kings squad, I'd say you are right about Robinson, although he certainly has the tools to be a good shot-blocker. Cousins isn't a bad shot blocker by any means, however. When you adjust for minutes Cousins averaged 1.5 bpg, which compares favorably to Tyson Chandlers 1.7.
I think we should acknowledge that the Heat have an AMAZING collection of talent on their roster. Throughout history there havent been many teams with as much firepower as the Heat have. Theyre great in almost ever category of the game with a full roster. Sorry, didnt mean to be a naysayer.
 
#12
I'm worn out with this subject. Anybody with me? I wonder how much attention this topic would attract if it wasn't Bricklayer taking an unmovable stance. He isn't the first to be unmovable; just the most exciting guy to try to take down. C'mon folks, admit it. :) Team composition may determine whether a shotblocker is absolutely essential but it seems clear that having one would be very, very nice.

To turn to the practicle, so far we have had no chance to get a shotblocker and I think the implied criticism of the Kings by saying they haven't solved their major problems is premature. With Hassan still on the team, who knows? I wish he didn't look so clueless at times but getting a few regular minutes on the court would serve the Kings at the least to see what we have. He absolutely needs the experience at the NBA level. Maybe we already have our shotblocker.

There is still time to upgrade our defense and I will be as angry as I was last year if we don't address that general subject and the SF position in particular. We may not end up with a great shot blocker/intimidator but at least let us upgrade our defense in whatever way possible. I think now that we are committed to Cuz/TRob/JT it would make little sense to trade for a shotblocker at least right off the bat.

I have nothing to add and I doubt anyone else does either. TDOS.
I agree that team composition can certainly overcome a lack of shotblocking. Unfortunately for the Kings that type of team requires that an infinite amount of money is willing to be spent.
 
#13
No, I firmly believe that we don't need more of an interior defensive presence because we have our all-nba defensive perimeter players in Isaiah, Marcus Thornton, Jimmer and Tyreke.
 

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#14
All I can say is ALL those people who think a shot-blocker is not a necessity in BASKETBALL may really haven't played basketball at all.

The answer to this question should be common sense.
Definitely helps when you're out there.:D

The conversation is getting annoying but my guess is it won't end until we either win a ring with a shotblocker, or without. But really there's two ways to be a great defensive team which can go deep in the playoffs.

1) Good team defense with above average perimeter defenders and a shotblocking or intimidating presence down low.

2) No shotblocker, but still a somewhat defensive minded presence down low(Chi had Wennington/Longly among others) with excellent one on one perimeter defenders and very good team defense as well.

You need team defense first and foremost which could probably get you into the playoffs and maybe win a round. To take the next step and become a true contender, you need a shotblocking presence or elite wing defenders cutting off penetration.

The two teams in recent history who won rings without true shotblockers are Miami and Chicago. Yet both had elite defenders. MJ/Pippen/Rodman were arguably the top defenders in the league at their positions. Wade/Lebron are two of the top defenders at their positions with Lebron clearly being the best. Chalmers is a very good defender, as is Haslem. Battier off the bench is known for defense. Anthony isn't a great shotblocker by any means but is intimidating and does alter shots.

Then you have the other champions who were very strong inside. Lakers had Shaq, which pretty much speaks for itself. Also had Kobe who's an elite defender, various very good PF defenders from Horace Grant to Horry, and very good defensive PG's from Harper to Fisher. The Spurs had the Robinson/Duncan combo obviously, but then Duncan centering the defense for the last decade plus. SA is known for plugging in very good wing defenders as well, and most know Bowen. Manu has always been a very good defender. Detroit had Wallace of course, a shotblocker, an in his prime Prince who was a lockdown 3 and Billups who's a very good defender.

I can go on, but why? I've taken the time before and the posts are discarded until someone pops up a few weeks later and asks the same questions again, the the conversation starts all over again like various points have never been brought up. Forgot who said it in another thread, maybe Telemachus, but he said getting a shotblocker doesn't change your defense automatically.Well, Ibaka, Chnadler or D12 does but outside of them you do need good team defense to use a shotblocker effectively which I agree with. We had Daly, yet I often complained when Reke/MT/Beno/our SF's didn't shade the defender towards Daly. You need team defense to understand how to send the attacking players towards a shotblocker. You funnel them to the shotblocker. So in general I agree with Telemachus's point.

But you'll never have a good defensive team with IT/MT/Jimmer/undersized SF playing mins and no shotblocker( a good defensive team could cover one of them and I personally think IT is a better defender than Jimmer/MT), which is what we have right now. I'll also add though with a good defensive coach(Thibs, where are you? Get Sloan or JVG!) a shotblocker would really help us, as if we got a defensive SF, paired with Reke, and Cuz who should be a pretty good team defender, a shotblocker would really round things out. Yet, we still don't have the defensive SF, or the defensive minded coach who taught team defense. Holes to fill.....
 
Last edited:
#15
Having a shotblocker is like having a pool in your backyard. All the nicest houses have one. If you have a nice place, you can spend a ton of money on a nice backyard, but really a pool is what separates something that is pretty nice from something that is amazing. The problem though, is that if you're hurting for money, and your house is falling apart and needs repairs, putting a pool in your backyard isn't a great way to allocate the little resources you have. So if you are in that situation, the best thing to do isn't blowing all your money on that right now, but you fix the other things that need to be fixed, you make your backyard as nice as you can without spending too much on it but still leave the room for the pool if you end up being able to afford it.

Kings are in the same situation. The house was neglected for a long time. We have finally started to do some work to fix it back up, but there are still some major repairs that need to be done. We have repainted different rooms, made repairs in places, but the house right now has the potential but is still mostly patched together. It still needs one more big remodel to make everything fit together, then when that is done, you add the pool to the backyard.
 
#16
All I can say is ALL those people who think a shot-blocker is not a necessity in BASKETBALL may really haven't played basketball at all.

The answer to this question should be common sense.
There have been plenty of very successful teams who didn't feature an elite shot-blocker.

The Kings didn't have one in the early 2000s.
The Suns didn't have one in any of their three trips to the conference finals.
The Nets didn't have one in back-to-back finals appearances.
The Cavs didn't have one when they went to the finals.
The Celtics didn't have one this year.
And neither did the Heat for that matter.

None of this is to say that having a great shot blocker isn't a huge asset. But the idea that such a player is a necessity for a team to be great--to compete for and win championships--doesn't hold water.
 
#17
Having a shotblocker is like having a pool in your backyard. All the nicest houses have one. If you have a nice place, you can spend a ton of money on a nice backyard, but really a pool is what separates something that is pretty nice from something that is amazing. The problem though, is that if you're hurting for money, and your house is falling apart and needs repairs, putting a pool in your backyard isn't a great way to allocate the little resources you have. So if you are in that situation, the best thing to do isn't blowing all your money on that right now, but you fix the other things that need to be fixed, you make your backyard as nice as you can without spending too much on it but still leave the room for the pool if you end up being able to afford it.

Kings are in the same situation. The house was neglected for a long time. We have finally started to do some work to fix it back up, but there are still some major repairs that need to be done. We have repainted different rooms, made repairs in places, but the house right now has the potential but is still mostly patched together. It still needs one more big remodel to make everything fit together, then when that is done, you add the pool to the backyard.
In which case you better spend on the right designer or architect to make sure that your backyard is as nice as you can without spending too much on it. It's all related when it comes to team defense. You need a coach that teaches good defense, especially because we're a young team, then you need guys capable of following that blueprint set by the coach (which frankly I don't think Thornton and Jimmer cna at this point, or Tyreke if he's played at SF).

What is defense? The bulk of it isn't forcing TOs - it's forcing the opponents into difficult shots. That is achieved by first taking away points in the paint, keeping the opponents on the perimeter and then challenging their outside shots.

Preventing points in the paint
1. Prevent dribble penetration - requires guards to stay in front of their man (communication from bigs to call out screens) and bigs/wings to rotate to trap/ice, OR funneling the dribbler towards a shotblocker (to challenge inside shot)
2. Defending post players - need good individual defense and strength from big, perimeter players need to know very clearly who, when and how hard to double team if necessary. Perimeter player who comes over needs to have length, or offensive player can easily pass out of the double team.

Challenging shots
You obviously need length here, which is why any mixture of IT/Jimmer/Thornton will never get it done. Guys also have to be in good position to close out on shots (we got burned hell a lot last season because we kept double teaming off of 3 point shooters). Having small guards again hurts here in the event that your bigs are the ones having to close out on outside shooters, because then you have Jimmer/Thornton/IT/Tyreke having to go get the defensive board.

So based on that, it's evident that to get by on defense we need to either shore up our perimeter defense, or ensure that we have length inside to challenge shots nearer the basket, so that our perimeter guys can force the offense towards our interior defenders. People go on and on about team defense which while important, cannot happen unless your team has the right tools to play good team defense. We can rotate very efficiently, call out screens and all but Kevin Durant will still laugh in our face and drain jumpshot after jumpshot if we have someone 3" shorter guarding him.

And at some point you just have to see that clinging on to the hope of good team D is not going to work. We've been pretty bad at team D for a good 5 years now. If playing good team D was that easy I think we would have started doing it long ago. You need defensive players to play good D as a team, and you need a good coach to ensure that the team as a whole plays good defense and not just those 1 or two players.
 
Last edited:
#18
Whiteside is due

IMO, We won't be adding anymore big until we see how Clifford Ray has polished Whiteside's game. The summer league and the first 2 months of this season will be the barometer on how badly we need that shot blocking big.

I am a believer that Hassan has already turned that corner and we're up for a surprise this season. I hope so. I hope so!
 
#20
Shotblocking is an outlier statistic.
It doesn't reveal actual strength of defense.

Just because many good shotblockers are good at overall defense doesn't mean shotblocking = good defense, and it says nothing about the TEAM defense. Correlation does not imply causation.

There are 5 players on a court, and one guy rejecting above-average shots doesn't equal good team defense.

Plus, since KF's seem to forget - the Kings had a pretty darn good shotblocker in the form of Samuel Dalembert, and those blocked shots didn't mean the team got good at defense. In fact, I clearly recall many times when he goaltended or when he rotated for the block, he left his man and they scored. Shot blocking is not all that.
It takes a whole team and COACHING to be good at defense.

Oh, if only there was a veteran coach out there who has proven for decades he can instill solid defense to his teams! :eyeroll:
 
#21
In which case you better spend on the right designer or architect to make sure that your backyard is as nice as you can without spending too much on it. It's all related when it comes to team defense. You need a coach that teaches good defense, especially because we're a young team, then you need guys capable of following that blueprint set by the coach (which frankly I don't think Thornton and Jimmer cna at this point, or Tyreke if he's played at SF).

What is defense? The bulk of it isn't forcing TOs - it's forcing the opponents into difficult shots. That is achieved by first taking away points in the paint, keeping the opponents on the perimeter and then challenging their outside shots.

Preventing points in the paint
1. Prevent dribble penetration - requires guards to stay in front of their man (communication from bigs to call out screens) and bigs/wings to rotate to trap/ice, OR funneling the dribbler towards a shotblocker (to challenge inside shot)
2. Defending post players - need good individual defense and strength from big, perimeter players need to know very clearly who, when and how hard to double team if necessary. Perimeter player who comes over needs to have length, or offensive player can easily pass out of the double team.

Challenging shots
You obviously need length here, which is why any mixture of IT/Jimmer/Thornton will never get it done. Guys also have to be in good position to close out on shots (we got burned hell a lot last season because we kept double teaming off of 3 point shooters). Having small guards again hurts here in the event that your bigs are the ones having to close out on outside shooters, because then you have Jimmer/Thornton/IT/Tyreke having to go get the defensive board.

So based on that, it's evident that to get by on defense we need to either shore up our perimeter defense, or ensure that we have length inside to challenge shots nearer the basket, so that our perimeter guys can force the offense towards our interior defenders. People go on and on about team defense which while important, cannot happen unless your team has the right tools to play good team defense. We can rotate very efficiently, call out screens and all but Kevin Durant will still laugh in our face and drain jumpshot after jumpshot if we have someone 3" shorter guarding him.

And at some point you just have to see that clinging on to the hope of good team D is not going to work. We've been pretty bad at team D for a good 5 years now. If playing good team D was that easy I think we would have started doing it long ago. You need defensive players to play good D as a team, and you need a good coach to ensure that the team as a whole plays good defense and not just those 1 or two players.
Great post.

You need a coach who will not only teach defense, but demand that defense is played properly and hold players accountable when they fail. You also need a coach that will put players in a position to succeed.

You can all correct me if I'm not remembering this correctly, but wasn't Tayshaun Prince absolutely destroying us when Smart put Thornton on him to guard for a good part of the game, and after the game Smart said something like 'Prince was hot and there was nothing we could do to prevent him from scoring' and the obvious response from those watching was 'Put someone taller/bigger/longer, like a legit SF, on Prince!'

Second, you need the right players to have the very best defense, and it's either elite individual defensive players playing team defense, or good defensive players playing team defense in conjunction with a paint intimidator.

Well last year I don't think our coach was preaching much defense and he certainly did not appear to hold players accountable or put them into positions to succeed. Having said that, we did not put good defensive line-ups on the floor.

So a lot of things are going to have to change if we want to improve on defense. Hopefully we'll see some progress this upcoming season.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#22
Here are some interesting stats.

Of all qualified players Serge Ibaka is first in blocks per 48 minutes (6.46) AND blocks per foul (1.35)

But if you open it up to all players, Ibaka is actually 2nd in blocks per 48. In very limited minutes, Hassan Whiteside blocked at a higher rate (6.61/48 min) and was actually 2nd in the entire league in blocks per foul at 1.25.

There's an obvious danger in projecting stats, especially from such a limited sample size. And in fact I wasn't at all surprised that Whiteside was first in blocks per 48 minutes. But the second stat IS surprising.

If you look at the other guys that pop up in the blocks/48 list when not putting the "qualifying players only" restriction on you see such NBA luminaries as Hamed Haddadi and Larry Sanders in the 3rd and 4th spots behind Whiteside and Ibaka. This isn't surprising, as there are always guys that put up great "per minute" stats especially when most of their play presumably comes in garbage time. The glaring difference to me is that Haddadi and Sanders have block/PF rates of 0.60 and 0.57. And fifth on that list is Greg Stiesma (who IS a qualified player) who has a block/PF rate of 0.60

Again, small sample size for Whiteside, but it illustrates what becomes very clear if you watch him in a game - he KNOWS how to block shots and is a natural at it. He has obviously has the athletic gifts (obviously) and he certainly has a willingness/eagerness but most importantly he just has a true feel for rejections. What's perhaps most puzzling is how he understands angles and timing and body positioning so well in order to block shots and yet appears so lost on both the offensive AND defensive ends.

That said, how much of a role do the Thunder ask Ibaka to play? Whiteside shows enough flashes (soft touch on the midrange jumper, fluid movement, added muscle, willing rebounder) that if he had the right mindset and desire he could still be a significant piece for the Kings. Because on paper he's still a perfect compliment to Cousins. More than likely it's a pipe dream, but nevertheless I'll be watching him in the summer league games much more than anyone else.
I saw Whiteside play quite a bit in college, so his block percentages aren't a surpirse to me. He set the NCCA record for one year for blocked shots. Of course Anthony Davis broke that record this past season. But Whiteside is number two on that list now. His problem was that in college, he did almost the same thing Thabeet did. He hung out at the basket and played goalie. Something you can't do in the NBA, where they have the nasty habit of pulling you away from the basket. Anyway, as a result, he had no idea how to defend a pick and roll, or do simple rotations on defense, much less how to play offense away from the basket. He knew nothing about how to space the floor. His handles wern't very good, and now, going on memory, I believe he only had around 12 or 14 assists the entire year. Needless to say, his passing game needed a little work.

So in short, he was a major project coming out of college. He really only had one polished skill, shotblocking, and he had a decent 15 foot jumpshot. So the question is, how much has he learned in the past couple of years? Can we put him on the floor for 12 to 18 minutes and have him be a plus instead of a liability. I'm hoping that we can, and that if so, that floor time will help increase his knowledge, and therefore increase his minutes. I can't wait to see him in summer league and see where he is right now.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#23
All I can say is ALL those people who think a shot-blocker is not a necessity in BASKETBALL may really haven't played basketball at all.

The answer to this question should be common sense.
All right, I'm going to divulge something I shouldn't, but in this instance I have to. Telemachus is my son, and, he's a hell of a basketball player. So you sir don't have a clue what your talking about.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#25
In which case you better spend on the right designer or architect to make sure that your backyard is as nice as you can without spending too much on it. It's all related when it comes to team defense. You need a coach that teaches good defense, especially because we're a young team, then you need guys capable of following that blueprint set by the coach (which frankly I don't think Thornton and Jimmer cna at this point, or Tyreke if he's played at SF).

What is defense? The bulk of it isn't forcing TOs - it's forcing the opponents into difficult shots. That is achieved by first taking away points in the paint, keeping the opponents on the perimeter and then challenging their outside shots.

Preventing points in the paint
1. Prevent dribble penetration - requires guards to stay in front of their man (communication from bigs to call out screens) and bigs/wings to rotate to trap/ice, OR funneling the dribbler towards a shotblocker (to challenge inside shot)
2. Defending post players - need good individual defense and strength from big, perimeter players need to know very clearly who, when and how hard to double team if necessary. Perimeter player who comes over needs to have length, or offensive player can easily pass out of the double team.

Challenging shots
You obviously need length here, which is why any mixture of IT/Jimmer/Thornton will never get it done. Guys also have to be in good position to close out on shots (we got burned hell a lot last season because we kept double teaming off of 3 point shooters). Having small guards again hurts here in the event that your bigs are the ones having to close out on outside shooters, because then you have Jimmer/Thornton/IT/Tyreke having to go get the defensive board.

So based on that, it's evident that to get by on defense we need to either shore up our perimeter defense, or ensure that we have length inside to challenge shots nearer the basket, so that our perimeter guys can force the offense towards our interior defenders. People go on and on about team defense which while important, cannot happen unless your team has the right tools to play good team defense. We can rotate very efficiently, call out screens and all but Kevin Durant will still laugh in our face and drain jumpshot after jumpshot if we have someone 3" shorter guarding him.

And at some point you just have to see that clinging on to the hope of good team D is not going to work. We've been pretty bad at team D for a good 5 years now. If playing good team D was that easy I think we would have started doing it long ago. You need defensive players to play good D as a team, and you need a good coach to ensure that the team as a whole plays good defense and not just those 1 or two players.
Excellent post! I don't disagree with anything you said. I wonder who the so called defensive assistant coach on the Kings is? If you go around the league, just about every good defensive team has a very good defensive coach, or coordinator. Not to say you don't need the right players as well, but I don't think you really know how good or bad the players you have are, until you get someone with the ability to coach them properly.

What was troubling to me, was that Tyreke, who showed the ability in his rookie year to possibly be a lockdown defender, was just average at best most of last year. I attribute some of that to playing out of position at SF, where he no longer had the size and strength advantage he had at guard. But he wasn't great shakes in his second year either, except at times. If Robinison proves to be a good defender, and Tyreke can return to the defense he showed his rookie year, throw in T. Will at SF, and perhaps an improved Cuz at center, our defense might improve dramaticly.

Now add an improved Whiteside into that mix, and who knows, we might actually be a decent to good defensive team. I just want to know who the defensive coach is? What are his credentials?
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#26
There have been plenty of very successful teams who didn't feature an elite shot-blocker.

The Kings didn't have one in the early 2000s.
The Suns didn't have one in any of their three trips to the conference finals.
The Nets didn't have one in back-to-back finals appearances.
The Cavs didn't have one when they went to the finals.
The Celtics didn't have one this year.
And neither did the Heat for that matter.

None of this is to say that having a great shot blocker isn't a huge asset. But the idea that such a player is a necessity for a team to be great--to compete for and win championships--doesn't hold water.
While you claim that the idea "doesn't hold water," it's worth pointing out that the six teams you mentioned only accounted for four Finals appearances during the twelve-year span you selected ("early 2000s"-this season, your criteria, not mine), and one win. And, the one team that did win had three guys playing 30+ minutes in the playoffs that are multiple-time All-Defensive selectees, including one whom (James), had the DPOY selection been a coaches vote, rather than a writer's vote, probably would have been this year's DPOY. The other three finalists ('02 Nets, '03 Nets, '07 Cavaliers) combined to win two games between them.

So, yeah, you're right: if we can surround Cousins and Evans with three All-Defensive quality players, we totally don't need a shot blocker. Problem solved!
 
#27
While you claim that the idea "doesn't hold water," it's worth pointing out that the six teams you mentioned only accounted for four Finals appearances during the twelve-year span you selected ("early 2000s"-this season, your criteria, not mine), and one win. And, the one team that did win had three guys playing 30+ minutes in the playoffs that are multiple-time All-Defensive selectees, including one whom (James), had the DPOY selection been a coaches vote, rather than a writer's vote, probably would have been this year's DPOY. The other three finalists ('02 Nets, '03 Nets, '07 Cavaliers) combined to win two games between them.

So, yeah, you're right: if we can surround Cousins and Evans with three All-Defensive quality players, we totally don't need a shot blocker. Problem solved!
The topic is whether or not a great shot blocker is a prerequisite for NBA success. I think I have given plenty of examples of successful teams who didn't feature elite shot blockers.

Did they all win championships? No. But one did and at least two (this years Celtics and the '02 Kings) were strong contenders to win a championship .

And, yes, the Heat had great defenders on their roster. Every championship team does. If the Kings want to win a championship, then we absolutely have to improve on that side of the ball. My argument is that the Kings don't have to make drastic personnel decisions (say, for example, drafting Drummond over Robinson) on the assumption that we must have a shot blocker to contend for a championship.
 
Last edited:

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#28
And, yes, the Heat had great defenders on their roster. Every championship team does. If the Kings want to win a championship, then we absolutely have to improve on that side of the ball. My argument is that the Kings don't have to make drastic personnel decisions (say, for example, drafting Drummond over Robinson) on the assumption that we must have a shot blocker to contend for a championship.

I'm afraid that assumption would be largely wrong unless you are planning on magically replacing 2 or 3 of our starters with All Defense Team members. Oh, and having multiple first ballot HOFers on the roster helps too.

You know the beauty of the shotblocker paradigm? You know why people who fight it are kind of being ridiculous? Because its ONE player. ONE roster spot. That's your big disruption. One guy. And people will fight and kick and scream and pee their pants and refuse to go to bed desperately trying to find ways to avoid bringing in that ONE guy, while insted arguing for bizarre longshot schemes involving swapping out half of the roster. Yeah, that makes sense.

The key connecting factor BTW is that AT ALL COSTS you have to protect that rim. You can do it with 5 great perimeter defenders so that nobody ever gets close to the rim. You can do it with one superstud shotblocker so that anybody who gets close to the rim meets him. Or you can do it with a whole platoon of good but not great shotblockers who collectively shoo people away. The problem for this Sacramento Kins team is that we have all 3 frontcourt positins theoretically filled, and of the three only Cousins could even be part of a shotblocking platoon as maybe the #3 guy. So we can't create a platoon, and there isn't even room for a big shotblocker to get the minutes he needs. So you are forced down the most unlikely of paths, having to add 2 or 3 all world perimeter defenders, while dumping a lot of current personnel, who have to be even better than normal because they have almost no backline shotblocking help at all. All in all getting one major shotblocker to make everybody's life easier is a far FAR more elegant plan.
 
Last edited:
#29
Come on guys.

Every team in the NBA, every player, every GM, every coach, and every fan in this forum wish they have a shot-blocker on their team. The question should really never been brought-up. It is what everyone wants, but somehow and somewhat - it is a luxury.

Now those who says it is not a necessity better ask yourselves if you are being true to yourselves or just want to prove some people in this board wrong. And I will give you a very good excuse - We are SOUR-GRAPING here because we think we will never get one soon enough under Petrie.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#30
Come on guys.

Every team in the NBA, every player, every GM, every coach, and every fan in this forum wish they have a shot-blocker on their team. The question should really never been brought-up. It is what everyone wants, but somehow and somewhat - it is a luxury.

Now those who says it is not a necessity better ask yourselves if you are being true to yourselves or just want to prove some people in this board wrong. And I will give you a very good excuse - We are SOUR-GRAPING here because we think we will never get one soon enough under Petrie.
Blah, blah, blah...mandatory Petrie hate.

Don't you ever get tired of that same old tired refrain? And no, for the record, I am not wishing we had a shot-blocker on the team. For me it would be a nice luxury, but not something I'm going to look at first and foremost. If in your mind that makes me less of a fan, or somehow less knowledgeable about basketball, so be it. And for the record? I'm incredibly true to myself.