Does Skinner help our defensive woes?

[Gary]

I was looking at the games Skinner played a decent-good defensive game, and 99% of the time the opposing team still scored 100+ on us.

My question is........ Is Skinner the type of player that we should use to help rebuild us into a defensive type team, or are his stats looking good only on "paper". I ask this, because Raef LaFrentz has similar type stats with the blocks, and rebounding, yet is not know for a defensive player. Is Skinner someone we should keep soley for the purpose of helping us defensively?

 

[tyrant]

any player who attempts a swipe at the ball on the defensive end is a plus for the kings. i like skinner. he'll go for the block, unlike other kings who stand starring in space.

 

[SacTownKid]

One player alone can't solve an entire teams defensive incapabilities. Before the injuries Brian gave it a darn good try though. I doubt he gets traded this offseason.

Bottom line, as Petrie has stated, Brad, Peja, and Mike have to improve in these ares first and foremost. I don't think even getting a premier defensive PF and a premier defensive SG could make up for how horribly this team played defense last season. Would it help? Sure. But at what cost?

 

[tyrant]

the problem is that our core; miller, peja and mike are not leading. mike is great on offense, but he has to step it up and play with some intensity on defense. alot of times intensity plays a big part, but it's also knowing how to play defense. you gotta be a smart defender and not just roam around like a 4 year old. i want to see peja in the act of shooting before he even catches the ball. not catch, think about it, then shoot. and brad miller has to be tough. he's gettin knocked on his back side every other play. miller needs to play big and start dunking that ball on someone's head. if miller, mike and peja can bring the same intelligence and heart as core players like tim, tony and manu we are gonna be tough to beat. most of the time all i can think about is how dominant and skilled we used to be on the offensive end. when webber was healthy we literally ran through teams. we were so good offensively it made us a descent team on the defensive end. now that webber is gone and brad was out down the stretch of the season we struggled misserably on offense. that took whatever confidence we had on defense away.

It's bottom line next year. either we get back to scoring at will, or call it quits before the all-star break; becuase petrie will never bring in a coach that can teach our kings how to stay in a game if the offense is struggling.

 

[Bricklayer]

I actually agree Gary and made some rumblings about that back during the season.

Here was my impression -- Brian Skinner is a tough prototypical PF, but he was NEVER known as a great defensive stopper before arriving in Sacto. Just a solid rugged guy who would grab more than his share of rebounds and get a fair share of blocks as a PF.

Wht I think happened in Sacramento was simply that because he was ALL we had defensively, he kind of ended up being our last line of defense for maybe the first time in his career. And so his block numbers shot up, but his defensive effectiveness was not really any better than it had been over his career. He was still the same guy. He was just getting more blocks because opponents did not respect him or us at all and just charged right down the lane ignoring him. End result? Brian was a guy blocking 2+ shots a game there for a few weeks, but that was ALL of the shots he was effecting.

A great shotblocker (let's say Duncan) blocks 2.5 shots a game but his mere presence deters or alters another 10 shots by people trying to avoid getting blocked. That didn't happen with Brian. He blocked 2.5 shots, but that was it. Nobody cared. They kept right on coming. And so it is a bit deceptive. If opponents treated/disrespected Duncan's interior defense the way they did Brian's, Tim would block 8 shots a night.

Throw in the fact that Skinner played almost the entire half season with us out of position at C and was being overwhelmed one on one by bigger players, and I think its clear that he was not and will not be a big impact defender. But he's a good solid one who could help. He's not going to turn anything around for us by himself, but he could definitely be part of a good defensive frontcourt if we got him a lot of help.

 

[BobbyJ_for3!]

I actually agree Gary and made some rumblings about that back during the season.

Here was my impression -- Brian Skinner is a tough prototypical PF, but he was NEVER known as a great defensive stopper before arriving in Sacto. Just a solid rugged guy who would grab more than his share of rebounds and get a fair share of blocks as a PF.

Wht I think happened in Sacramento was simply that because he was ALL we had defensively, he kind of ended up being our last line of defense for maybe the first time in his career. And so his block numbers shot up, but his defensive effectiveness was not really any better than it had been over his career. He was still the same guy. He was just getting more blocks because opponents did not respect him or us at all and just charged right down the lane ignoring him. End result? Brian was a guy blocking 2+ shots a game there for a few weeks, but that was ALL of the shots he was effecting.

A great shotblocker (let's say Duncan) blocks 2.5 shots a game but his mere presence deters or alters another 10 shots by people trying to avoid getting blocked. That didn't happen with Brian. He blocked 2.5 shots, but that was it. Nobody cared. They kept right on coming. And so it is a bit deceptive. If opponents treated/disrespected Duncan's interior defense the way they did Brian's, Tim would block 8 shots a night.

Throw in the fact that Skinner played almost the entire half season with us out of position at C and was being overwhelmed one on one by bigger players, and I think its clear that he was not and will not be a big impact defender. But he's a good solid one who could help. He's not going to turn anything around for us by himself, but he could definitely be part of a good defensive frontcourt if we got him a lot of help.

i HAD thought he was gonna be big for us defensively, but you make some very good points, so ive changed my mind...good defender, not amazing

 

[ParniValjak]

I actually agree Gary and made some rumblings about that back during the season.

Here was my impression -- Brian Skinner is a tough prototypical PF, but he was NEVER known as a great defensive stopper before arriving in Sacto. Just a solid rugged guy who would grab more than his share of rebounds and get a fair share of blocks as a PF.

Wht I think happened in Sacramento was simply that because he was ALL we had defensively, he kind of ended up being our last line of defense for maybe the first time in his career. And so his block numbers shot up, but his defensive effectiveness was not really any better than it had been over his career. He was still the same guy. He was just getting more blocks because opponents did not respect him or us at all and just charged right down the lane ignoring him. End result? Brian was a guy blocking 2+ shots a game there for a few weeks, but that was ALL of the shots he was effecting.

A great shotblocker (let's say Duncan) blocks 2.5 shots a game but his mere presence deters or alters another 10 shots by people trying to avoid getting blocked. That didn't happen with Brian. He blocked 2.5 shots, but that was it. Nobody cared. They kept right on coming. And so it is a bit deceptive. If opponents treated/disrespected Duncan's interior defense the way they did Brian's, Tim would block 8 shots a night.

Throw in the fact that Skinner played almost the entire half season with us out of position at C and was being overwhelmed one on one by bigger players, and I think its clear that he was not and will not be a big impact defender. But he's a good solid one who could help. He's not going to turn anything around for us by himself, but he could definitely be part of a good defensive frontcourt if we got him a lot of help.

Excellent post

Another pet peeve of mine is when people say that we must improve defensively and should go after player X because he averages so many blocks per game and player Y because he averages so many steals per game. It just doesn't mean they are good defenders. Everyone says we must improve defensively but then say we should get Swift as our PF. Yes he is athletic and yes he blocks shots BUT he is ordinary one on one defender. Someone like Kurt Thomas is infinetly better defender that Stro even though he doesn't block as many shots.

A good shot blocker is not neccessarily someone who averages more blocks per game but someone who blocks shots and just as importantly alters them on regular basis. You comparison of Duncan and Skinner is a very valid one.

 

[FrenchCanadianKING]

I actually agree Gary and made some rumblings about that back during the season.

Here was my impression -- Brian Skinner is a tough prototypical PF, but he was NEVER known as a great defensive stopper before arriving in Sacto. Just a solid rugged guy who would grab more than his share of rebounds and get a fair share of blocks as a PF.

Wht I think happened in Sacramento was simply that because he was ALL we had defensively, he kind of ended up being our last line of defense for maybe the first time in his career. And so his block numbers shot up, but his defensive effectiveness was not really any better than it had been over his career. He was still the same guy. He was just getting more blocks because opponents did not respect him or us at all and just charged right down the lane ignoring him. End result? Brian was a guy blocking 2+ shots a game there for a few weeks, but that was ALL of the shots he was effecting.

A great shotblocker (let's say Duncan) blocks 2.5 shots a game but his mere presence deters or alters another 10 shots by people trying to avoid getting blocked. That didn't happen with Brian. He blocked 2.5 shots, but that was it. Nobody cared. They kept right on coming. And so it is a bit deceptive. If opponents treated/disrespected Duncan's interior defense the way they did Brian's, Tim would block 8 shots a night.

Throw in the fact that Skinner played almost the entire half season with us out of position at C and was being overwhelmed one on one by bigger players, and I think its clear that he was not and will not be a big impact defender. But he's a good solid one who could help. He's not going to turn anything around for us by himself, but he could definitely be part of a good defensive frontcourt if we got him a lot of help.

That was simply Bang on... cant agree more!

 

[cycl0nus]

I actually agree Gary and made some rumblings about that back during the season.

Here was my impression -- Brian Skinner is a tough prototypical PF, but he was NEVER known as a great defensive stopper before arriving in Sacto. Just a solid rugged guy who would grab more than his share of rebounds and get a fair share of blocks as a PF.

Wht I think happened in Sacramento was simply that because he was ALL we had defensively, he kind of ended up being our last line of defense for maybe the first time in his career. And so his block numbers shot up, but his defensive effectiveness was not really any better than it had been over his career. He was still the same guy. He was just getting more blocks because opponents did not respect him or us at all and just charged right down the lane ignoring him. End result? Brian was a guy blocking 2+ shots a game there for a few weeks, but that was ALL of the shots he was effecting.

A great shotblocker (let's say Duncan) blocks 2.5 shots a game but his mere presence deters or alters another 10 shots by people trying to avoid getting blocked. That didn't happen with Brian. He blocked 2.5 shots, but that was it. Nobody cared. They kept right on coming. And so it is a bit deceptive. If opponents treated/disrespected Duncan's interior defense the way they did Brian's, Tim would block 8 shots a night.

Throw in the fact that Skinner played almost the entire half season with us out of position at C and was being overwhelmed one on one by bigger players, and I think its clear that he was not and will not be a big impact defender. But he's a good solid one who could help. He's not going to turn anything around for us by himself, but he could definitely be part of a good defensive frontcourt if we got him a lot of help.

i agree. skinner is a hardworking pf that will get his. in order for the kings to be effective, the bigs need to HELP each other, whether its miller and skinner, tag and thomas, whichever. the bigs that the kings have are not great individual defenderrs, so they will need to rely on each other.

i feel, like every1 else here, that the kings need to pick up a qualtiy big, who's noted for their defense. the kings have enough players who could score. the bigs need to set good hard picks that will allow shooters such as bibby and pedja to get their looks.

 

[Gary]

Excellent post Brick.

Exact feeling I have regarding Skinner. Basically he is not the "defensive stopper" we are looking for, but he cannot hurt us in the direction we are going. Problem is that if we Put someone along side Skinner besides Miller than we lose pretty much all of our offense on the front line.

Kurt Thomas would be a good fit imo.

 

[AriesMar27]

if skinner had been healthy during the playoffs, we still would have lost but he would have made a difference..... paring him with miller will be something else next season, he doesnt make us that much better but once people become aware that he will block their shot, he will be more valuable.....

that and he's taller than 6'7......

 

[SacTownKid]

Excellent post Brick.

Exact feeling I have regarding Skinner. Basically he is not the "defensive stopper" we are looking for, but he cannot hurt us in the direction we are going. Problem is that if we Put someone along side Skinner besides Miller than we lose pretty much all of our offense on the front line.

Kurt Thomas would be a good fit imo.

I would take Skinner over Kurt Thomas anyday. We don't need another "big" jackin up 18 footers for the whole game. Plus the Suns could actually use Kurt.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

Skinner is great off the bench at PF, we shouldnt let him go, he knows his role, his contract is too big to unload on anyone(even though I thought the same thing about C-Webb, too). Brian is a good fit for our bench, he brings energy on the defensive end.

 

[Londonking]

I'm surprised to read such positive views regarding our possible use of Skinner in a back-ip PF role for his defensive qualities.

If we agree that last season he did have a tough time in the matchups at Centre and so need to look for another positional slot for him are we not going to find ourselves severely lacking on offensive options if he is playing PF.

I thought the PF role was primarily about dominating the other team on offense, typically with a physical presence inside, but not necessarily about taking it to the rim if the PF has a decent mid-range jumper.

I could be (and probably am) totally wrong in this assumption, but if my viewpoint is correct then doesnt that relegate the use of Skinner to a sort of 'special teams' type role where you use him because you need to get a stop at all costs and will worry about what we do with the ball when (if) we regain possession.

If that useage is enough to justify his name on the roster, that's fine with me. It's just that isnt my perception of what a PF 'off the bench' would need to give us.

 

[AriesMar27]

he could be a effective center off of the bench.... what back up centers are going to overpower him or give him any real trouble? he doesnt hurt our defense and on this team, thats a good thing....

coming oof the bench at either position will not hurt us as long as we have scorers on the floor with him.... he probably wouldnt touch the ball except on a rebound or blocked shot.... i see no harm in keeping him.... hes definitely more useful than ostertag....

 

[Bricklayer]

6'9" is NOT a center, except on the Kings. We seriously have to get past this stupid smallball obsession. Unless you are talking about a monster like Ben Wallace, it does not work. 6'9" however is a solid size for a PF. At PF he has muscle and can compete. No matchup problems. Why would want to intentionally play him out of position is beyond me.


As for PFs being offensive monsters -- that is a very recent development in the NBA. By tradition a PF would be just about the roughest, toughest, meanest S.O.B. on the court, and anything else would be gravy. In our current position in particular, we have no choice. If we're sticking with our soft core, if we are going to trot out a bunch of skinny kids at OG, the last and only hope the team has to patch its toughness, size, defensive holes is at the PF position.

 

[Gary]

What about starting Skinner at PF? Does this actually hurt us since our offensively minded starters wont assist in helping? What about starting Evans as well. (saying we keep him.

Would you be happy with...

Miller, Skinner, Peja, Evans, Bibby? Evans and Skinner are dcent defenders, and Peja is getting there. Miller and Bibby on the other hand kind of stink it up..

 

[Superman]

Skinner doesn't hurt our defense, and that's a good thing for a team that has been defensively challenged for years. I would not mind seeing him come off the bench for 15-20 minutes a night.

Like Brick said, he doesn't have the size to play center (and is going to get abused by a lot of power forwards), but he is better at power forward than anyone we've had off the bench in the past two seasons.

 

[Alacron]

What about starting Skinner at PF? Does this actually hurt us since our offensively minded starters wont assist in helping? What about starting Evans as well. (saying we keep him.

Would you be happy with...

Miller, Skinner, Peja, Evans, Bibby? Evans and Skinner are dcent defenders, and Peja is getting there. Miller and Bibby on the other hand kind of stink it up..

I like the toughness, defense, and rebounding there, but I would worry about where our scoring's coming from. I can just imagine in the fourth quarter, Bibby forced to drive into the teeth of the opposition on every possession since Miller won't shoot and Peja won't take the ball.

Not that that lineup wouldn't work, as we haven't even seen that group on the floor together. I think it'd be worth a shot, but I'd aim higher. Try to get Brand first (have I mentioned that before? ).

And if we were to use that lineup, Skinner should be playing center and Miller PF. Skinner actually rotates on defense to protect the basket.
~~

 

[VF21]

Hopefully the acquisition of Garcia and increased use of Martin will address a little of the scoring woes.

Either that or we'll just get the ball into Kevin Garnett for every play.

 

[SacTownKid]

Hopefully the acquisition of Garcia and increased use of Martin will address a little of the scoring woes.

Either that or we'll just get the ball into Kevin Garnett for every play.

Hopefully it will address a little of the defensive woes as well. Garcia should help very much in this area b/c he is a great weakside and team defender.

Also last season it was fresh to see Special K get some court time b/c he ACTUALLY PLAYED SOME DEFENSE!!!

One thing about Skinner I like and can see him prospering on this team at PF is that he has little to no gait issues. He is a lot like Ben Wallace in that sense. He has good feet, can run the court well, and has quick lateral movement.

 

[Bricklayer]

What about starting Skinner at PF? Does this actually hurt us since our offensively minded starters wont assist in helping? What about starting Evans as well. (saying we keep him.

Would you be happy with...

Miller, Skinner, Peja, Evans, Bibby? Evans and Skinner are dcent defenders, and Peja is getting there. Miller and Bibby on the other hand kind of stink it up..

I don't think he's a starter on a good team. Not even always a starter for bad/middling ones. Solid PF in the way you want backup PFs to be solid, but lacking the spark you would like out of a major player. I think that initial surge he had with us was really just a "prove it to you" burst that players sometimes have when they get traded. Never been that good before. Doubt he will be for any long stretches in the future. But a good classic 4pt 4reb in 15minutes backup PF if we can just get a legit starter.

 

[Ryle]

I've always liked Skinner and I think he is vital to this team on the front line. He is stronger than most of the guys we have and is not afraid to mix it up inside. He is the type of role player that helps teams win games.

 

[Superman]

Role player, not primary big man.

 

[ESP47]

Match Skinner up with PF's that are his size and he will do even better.

Fans came to love him because of his intensity and willing to go up for those blocks.

 

[malcolm_m03]

i think he's too small he should be playing back up pf role like you guys said, watching skinner i didn't expect much from him due to his hieght and how he plays the center role, but not only did he play big defensively, but he showed me he can drop a couple in as he plays. we shouldn't get rid of a defensive threat. we need it.

 

[AriesMar27]

im on a new band wagon now.... steven hunter... having him and skinner would be nuts, if we wer to get him, we would need to get an offensive starting pf..... subbing in hunter and skinner for miller and "offensive starting pf" would be nice..... especially with bobby, peja's "back up" and martin.... having the 2 of them would allow our more offensive minded players to be a little more daring with the ball because if the shot doesnt fall and no one rebounds it you have 2 quick, athletic, shot blockers waiting on the other end... which honestly would be good for bobby....

 

[VF21]

...Fans came to love him because of his intensity and willing to go up for those blocks.

And don't forget his resemblance to King Tut...as shown in great detail by Bricklayer, among others:

 

[AriesMar27]

And don't forget his resemblance to King Tut...as shown in great detail by Bricklayer, among others:

thats why i like 'em.... i stopped shaving for three weeks after i realized that he looked like king tut.... i was tryin to rock the skinny....