FG% and our stars

Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
If you are a naysayer, you may want to check out now before you choke on this.

Our two stars*, FG% since the new year:
*note: neither of our two stars is 5'9"

Cousins
Jan: 17gms .477FG%
Feb: 12gms .526FG%
Mar: 12gms .514 FG%
--------------------------
41gms 278-556 .500FG%

Evans
Jan: 13gms .500FG%
Feb: 12gms .482FG%
Mar: 14gms .487 FG%
--------------------------
39gms 223-456 .489FG%

That's half a season folks with your two main guns, your two young guns, top lottery picks etc., shooting 50% and 49% respectively. Only a handful of elite teams like the Heat and Spurs can make a statement like that. There is something serious brewing here if the summer is handled well and you get the right coach and teammates around these guys.
 
Good shooters and I do look forward to them and next year. I'm looking forward to next year whether there is a new coach or new complimentary players or not. What change are you looking for?
 
i watched every game for the past 5 plus years and been a fan since 1989...very serious.... and this team we have now since the trade deadline has been the best team we have had since our glory days...
if we would have made this trade before the season we would have made the 8th spot.. and then lost in the 1st round because of our coach lol
 
yup...i am so more excited for next year (if they stay) than i was with this year with trob and fredette when we started. I hope we can retain ppat....maybe even douglas and an improved aldrich, i'm pretty sure jimmer won't be around but i really hope him the best (i really liked him)
 
pshn80 said:
Good shooters and I do look forward to them and next year. I'm looking forward to next year whether there is a new coach or new complimentary players or not. What change are you looking for?
Click to expand...
I would take defense and rebounding if shooting stayed around the current level, as in no Hayes, Johnson or Outlaw on the floor. That's more than enough to achieve decent spacing.
 
HereWeStay said:
i watched every game for the past 5 plus years and been a fan since 1989...very serious.... and this team we have now since the trade deadline has been the best team we have had since our glory days...
if we would have made this trade before the season we would have made the 8th spot.. and then lost in the 1st round because of our coach lol
Click to expand...

We're 8-9 since the trade, good for .471 win percentage. That would be 11th place, ~34 wins right now.
 
Bricklayer said:
If you are a naysayer, you may want to check out now before you choke on this.

Our two stars*, FG% since the new year:
*note: neither of our two stars is 5'9"

Cousins
Jan: 17gms .477FG%
Feb: 12gms .526FG%
Mar: 12gms .514 FG%
--------------------------
41gms 278-556 .500FG%

Evans
Jan: 13gms .500FG%
Feb: 12gms .482FG%
Mar: 14gms .487 FG%
--------------------------
39gms 223-456 .489FG%

That's half a season folks with your two main guns, your two young guns, top lottery picks etc., shooting 50% and 49% respectively. Only a handful of elite teams like the Heat and Spurs can make a statement like that. There is something serious brewing here if the summer is handled well and you get the right coach and teammates around these guys.
Click to expand...

Yup.

I am hoping new ownership does their homework. Last thing we want is them shipping Reke out (or letting him walk) for being a "disappointment" and trading Cuz for being a "headcase".

We ship out some of the blackholes, get one or two role players and a legit coach...We're gonna be making some noise.
 
Bricklayer said:
If you are a naysayer, you may want to check out now before you choke on this.

Our two stars*, FG% since the new year:
*note: neither of our two stars is 5'9"
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

While I agree with you that Isaiah is not one of our two "stars", let's give the little guy some credit, too, as his FG% is over 45% during that same time span (Jan thru March) as well as for the entire season. That is a good percentage for a guard, especially one that takes as many perimeter shots as IT does.

In the 15 games during the month of March, IT was just a sliver under 50% (.497) and the Kings record was 7-8.
 
So Smart is an idiot and IT is making the team worse but the 2 stars are flourishing in the second half of the season.......
 
Npliam said:
So Smart is an idiot and IT is making the team worse but the 2 stars are flourishing in the second half of the season.......
Click to expand...

You can slow down their development, but young players with talent have a tendency to figure it out over time anyway.
 
Bricklayer said:
There is something serious brewing here if the summer is handled well and you get the right coach and teammates around these guys.
Click to expand...

That's been the story here for the past 3 years. Granted there's reason to believe this summer could be different, but the sad thing is that almost everyone on this forum saw what we had with those two right away while the front office has at times treated both of them like red-headed step children so that we can find more minutes for a revolving cast of journeymen. The offense is starting to come around the past few weeks now that most of the chuckers are gone, but the defense still needs a lot of work.
 
hrdboild said:
That's been the story here for the past 3 years. Granted there's reason to believe this summer could be different, but the sad thing is that almost everyone on this forum saw what we had with those two right away while the front office has at times treated both of them like red-headed step children so that we can find more minutes for a revolving cast of journeymen. The offense is starting to come around the past few weeks now that most of the chuckers are gone, but the defense still needs a lot of work.
Click to expand...

well, strictly speaking, they're not "gone." neither t-rob nor francisco garcia were chuckers. but demarcus cousins, tyreke evans, marcus thornton, isaiah thomas, and jimmer fredette are all ball dominant players. just giving jimmer's limited minutes to toney douglas, a defensively-minded role player, has made considerable difference. and patrick patterson consistently plays the kind of role that t-rob could not in his abbreviated rookie season with the kings. it's amazing what balancing a rotation will do for a team's success. we can talk in circles about whether or not any of the following deserve to be on the court, but i would be most pleased if none of jimmer fredette, travis outlaw, nor james johnson saw the court for the remainder of the season. of course, that won't happen with keith smart at the helm, but some players just don't fit, some players just aren't good enough, and some players belong at the end of the bench even if they are good enough. such is professional basketball...

that said, you're absolutely right that the defense still needs a lot of work. as a fan, i feel cheated, because you're also right that the story for the last three years has been trumpeting each offseason as a watershed moment, an opportunity to build up a team that can make a legitimate push towards the playoffs. with the right owners, a GM with his eyes open, and a proper coaching staff, this team might already be on their way. but, because circumstances are what they are, they're battling from behind, and by the time ownership changes hands, tyreke evans may have decided to move on from the kings, and demarcus cousins may be angling to do the same, either by way of trade demand or by way of biding his time until free agency comes around in another year...
 
Padrino said:
well, strictly speaking, they're not "gone." neither t-rob nor francisco garcia were chuckers. but demarcus cousins, tyreke evans, marcus thornton, isaiah thomas, and jimmer fredette are all ball dominant players. just giving jimmer's limited minutes to toney douglas, a defensively-minded role player, has made considerable difference. and patrick patterson consistently plays the kind of role that t-rob could not in his abbreviated rookie season with the kings. it's amazing what balancing a rotation will do for a team's success. we can talk in circles about whether or not any of the following deserve to be on the court, but i would be most pleased if none of jimmer fredette, travis outlaw, nor james johnson saw the court for the remainder of the season. of course, that won't happen with keith smart at the helm, but some players just don't fit, some players just aren't good enough, and some players belong at the end of the bench even if they are good enough. such is professional basketball...

that said, you're absolutely right that the defense still needs a lot of work. as a fan, i feel cheated, because you're also right that the story for the last three years has been trumpeting each offseason as a watershed moment, an opportunity to build up a team that can make a legitimate push towards the playoffs. with the right owners, a GM with his eyes open, and a proper coaching staff, this team might already be on their way. but, because circumstances are what they are, they're battling from behind, and by the time ownership changes hands, tyreke evans may have decided to move on from the kings, and demarcus cousins may be angling to do the same, either by way of trade demand or by way of biding his time until free agency comes around in another year...
Click to expand...

I suppose I was referring more to the early part of the season when we were routinely watching Aaron Brooks, Marcus Thornton, and Jimmer Fredette take turns playing keep away with the ball. I don't think I've ever seen so many step-back jumpers taken off of screens in one game before. It was uncanny. And the less said about bizarro James "I Think I'm Kobe" Johnson the better. Thornton is still doing his thing of course, just hitting those shots now, but Brooks is gone and Jimmer and Johnson have been mostly pacified. I've never had a problem with Garcia. He was generally a positive contributor and a team player and I wouldn't characterize Robinson as a chucker, he was just under-prepared for whatever sortof role Coach Smart had envisioned for him. I would describe the shift we saw this season offensively as what happens when you remove players from the rotation who are only effective as scorers and replace them with complimentary role-players who stay out of the way when they need to and allow our best scorers to score more efficiently.

It may sound counter-intuitive to some (though I doubt most on this board would disagree at this point), but a team composed of entirely scorers is actually less efficient offensively than one with 3 or 4 designated scorers and 3 or 4 opportunistic scorers who are there to take easy shots when they have them and otherwise keep the ball moving. That's the Spurs philosophy anyway and it's worked pretty well for them. Which is all just a long-winded way of saying that I don't think the fault lies with Francisco Garcia or Thomas Robinson or even Aaron Brooks. All three of those guys can be effective when used properly. But throwing a team together with two guys at every position who do the same things and then expecting them to somehow figure out how to play together is a recipe for disaster. Put Aaron Brooks on a defensive-minded squad like Chicago, for instance, and his ability to make shots becomes an asset rather than a distraction. We've long since moved past the point where acquiring as much talent as possible regardless of fit is a viable development strategy (if it ever is). The sooner the guys in charge realize that, the better off this franchise will be going forward.
 
You lost me at the star stuff. We don't have any stars. So maybe we should just look at all the non-stars on this team for your analysis. Stars actually achieve something. There are All-Stars and there are superstars, all of which accomplish something. We have a bunch of non-stars who haven't accomplished .500 ball. How in the world could the Kings possibly have two real stars on your team and not play .500 ball? Even Smart couldn't screw that up. Now you can arguably say we have potential stars, or imaginary stars. If it were any board other than this one on the internet, you might not get LOL'd for potential stars. But ascribing stardom to players on a sub .500 team who haven't been in even a conversation about being an All-Star for one year is laughable. It's also just inaccurate. It assigns a higher value to them than they deserve. LBJ is a star. CP3 is a star. Kobe is a star. Who can dare to put Cousins and Tyreke in that company? Please stop with the star stuff. It's a transparent attempt to assign more value to a player by the shear fact that well, you are calling them a star. It's also a transparent attempt to define the question for the answer that you want. I guess it works with those in the bubble that you've attempted to create. But that's a very small bubble.
 
Last edited:
Kingster said:
You lost me at the star stuff. We don't have any stars. So maybe we should just look at all the non-stars on this team for your analysis. Stars actually achieve something. There are All-Stars and there are superstars, all of which accomplish something. We have a bunch of non-stars who haven't accomplished .500 ball. How in the world could the Kings possibly have two real stars on your team and not play .500 ball? Even Smart couldn't screw that up. Now you can arguably say we have potential stars, or imaginary stars. If it were any board other than this one on the internet, you might not get LOL'd for potential stars. But ascribing stardom to players on a sub .500 team who haven't been in even a conversation about being an All-Star for one year is laughable. It's also just inaccurate. It assigns a higher value to them than they deserve. LBJ is a star. CP3 is a star. Kobe is a star. Who can dare to put Cousins and Tyreke in that company? Please stop with the star stuff. It's a transparent attempt to assign more value to a player by the shear fact that well, you are calling them a star. It's also a transparent attempt to define the question for the answer that you want. I guess it works with those in the bubble that you've attempted to create. But that's a very small bubble.
Click to expand...

As far as this team goes they are our stars. Nobody else on the current roster is going to lead us to victory, I can guarantee you that. Every team has their stars, whether they are actual stars by your definition or not. Coaching has also played a big part in things. The only reason why Kyrie Irving seems like so much more of a star is because he's the only one on his team that draws any attention. The Cavs record is worse than ours. Irving is averaging 23/3.6/5.7 in 35 mpg on .466 FG% and 18.2 FGA. Evans is averaging 15.6/4.5/3.7 and 12.1 FGA, .478FG% per 32 = 17/5/4 per 35 on 13.2 shots, and he gets the ball a whole lot less than Kyrie. The stats aren't THAT different: Kyrie scores 6 more points on 5 more shots, Evans gets an extra rebound and has a better FG% and Kyrie gives you an extra assist or two. Yet Irving is known around the league as one of the best up and coming young players, and was an allstar this year, and Evans is about as useful to you as James Johnson.

I'm pretty sure someone could make a similar argument for DMC.
 
Give Cousins and Evans starter minutes and you'll see what they can do. It's hard to be a star when you routinely play 3/4 of a game.
Don't be fooled by the fact that they've been horribly mismanaged lead you to think that they're not stars. Hard to be a star when the "system" in which you're playing doesn't allow for your talents to shine. Evans at SF? Please.

Are Evans and Cousins at the CP3 level yet? Pretty close. Cousins is definitely one of the best centers in the game, and I don't see how that is even questionable. People were saying the same thing about Durant before the coaching switch. There are many here who can see the talent and skill that the players in question possess.

The LBJ and Kobe level? No - that's pretty elite. Kobe wasn't even Kobe when he started, but he's had pretty good coaching, and now he's a vet who really doesn't need the coach to get him there. We need the coach. These guys need proper management.

LBJ is a freak. Elite from the start, and nobody doubted that. But we're not talking elite. We're talking "star", and they're definitely "stars".

Listen, it's fine if you don't see their talent, but if your only argument is that they are on a sub .500 team, then it's frankly not a very good argument. Just last night you witnessed the gross mismanagement of Evans and Cousins - how many more wins would we have with a competent coach? Then what would the argument be? What if we actually had a roster built around those two? Think back two years. This team was on the cusp of it. It wasn't a great roster, but it was certainly better in terms of fit.

Did Evans and Cousins suddenly regress? No we went small, and the coaching became "Smarter."
 
Kingster said:
You lost me at the star stuff. We don't have any stars. So maybe we should just look at all the non-stars on this team for your analysis. Stars actually achieve something. There are All-Stars and there are superstars, all of which accomplish something. We have a bunch of non-stars who haven't accomplished .500 ball. How in the world could the Kings possibly have two real stars on your team and not play .500 ball? Even Smart couldn't screw that up. Now you can arguably say we have potential stars, or imaginary stars. If it were any board other than this one on the internet, you might not get LOL'd for potential stars. But ascribing stardom to players on a sub .500 team who haven't been in even a conversation about being an All-Star for one year is laughable. It's also just inaccurate. It assigns a higher value to them than they deserve. LBJ is a star. CP3 is a star. Kobe is a star. Who can dare to put Cousins and Tyreke in that company? Please stop with the star stuff. It's a transparent attempt to assign more value to a player by the shear fact that well, you are calling them a star. It's also a transparent attempt to define the question for the answer that you want. I guess it works with those in the bubble that you've attempted to create. But that's a very small bubble.
Click to expand...

wrong. dead wrong. 16 teams make the playoffs. that's 14 teams with 14 message boards filled with fans attempting to figure out whether their potential stars will someday grow into legitimate stars, whether their coaching staffs are up to the challenge of developing that potential, whether the draft will deliver a savior, whether their front office is capable of acquiring complementary pieces, whether their owners are willing to shell out for big contracts, etc, etc, etc...

you've got some kinda horse-vision, friend, to assume that no other team's fans would be interested in taking a chance on the star potential of tyreke evans and/or demarcus cousins. who can dare put cousins and tyreke in the company of upper echelon talents? nobody, but those talents were supported by management and coaching structures that aided them in their early success, and their teams weren't subject to complete sabotage at the hands of ownership, as the kings have been. well, chris paul was subject to something similar later in his career, though to a much lesser degree, and a star talent played for a loser until they were forced to trade him. do we strip him of his "star" status just because the circumstances surrounding his team kept them from posting a winning record?

sports writers around the league continually label the kings as the team with the worst future prospects, strictly because of how badly they've been mismanaged in this transition period as the maloofs have cut costs and lurched ever so slowly in the direction of selling. evans and cousins did not arrive in the nba as lebron james did, a superstar talent waiting to explode. then again, very few in the history of the league do, in fact, arrive in such a fashion. young talents that need the push of proper coaching, management, and veteran leadership on the court are much more common. have the kings been properly coached or managed since the drafting of tyreke evans? since the drafting of demarcus cousins? have they been provided with adequate veteran leadership to help guide them, to help them grow? each has improved considerably since his rookie season in spite of the black hole that currently exists at every level of the kings organization...

now, you are certainly welcome to delude yourself into believing in the kind of lunacy that assigns much greater value to a diminutive player like isaiah thomas than he's worth, but i'm gonna stick with the two players who can elevate this team in an upward trajectory when something a little more sturdy than the rubble of collapsing columns is supporting this franchise at it's upper levels of ownership and management...
 
Last edited:
Good comments about how to go forward and make a better team. I do think Cuz and Tyreke bear more of the responsibility for their limited minutes than folks on here put at their feet. To the extent that is true, it could make a significant impact on team development, both in the past and in the future. I'd be interested to see others views on this (besides the view that I'm crazier than a marsh hen).
 
pshn80 said:
Good comments about how to go forward and make a better team. I do think Cuz and Tyreke bear more of the responsibility for their limited minutes than folks on here put at their feet. To the extent that is true, it could make a significant impact on team development, both in the past and in the future. I'd be interested to see others views on this (besides the view that I'm crazier than a marsh hen).
Click to expand...

big cuz still gets into occasional foul trouble. and when he's heated, it's not a bad idea to sit him. and, of course, he's been ejected several times this season, as well. so i do agree that he bears much of the responsibility for his limited playing time, but there's very rarely a worthy excuse for how often keith smart jerks around tyreke's minutes. he's the team's second best player, and he should be on the court often, if only as a matter of development...
 
Padrino said:
big cuz still gets into occasional foul trouble. and when he's heated, it's not a bad idea to sit him. and, of course, he's been ejected several times this season, as well. so i do agree that he bears much of the responsibility for his limited playing time, but there's very rarely a worthy excuse for how often keith smart jerks around tyreke's minutes. he's the team's second best player, and he should be on the court often, if only as a matter of development...
Click to expand...

Cousins causes his own problems with minutes and most of that is on him. His conditioning and attitude on the court as well as foul trouble limit his minutes as much or more than smart does.

The problem with Tyreke is that Thornton and IT need and deserve minutes too so the options are don't play Thornton or let Tyreke play the 1. I don't think the Tyreke does as good of a job at the one as IT does. Coach Smart makes mistakes but he didn't form the roster.
 
Npliam said:
Cousins causes his own problems with minutes and most of that is on him. His conditioning and attitude on the court as well as foul trouble limit his minutes as much or more than smart does.

The problem with Tyreke is that Thornton and IT need and deserve minutes too so the options are don't play Thornton or let Tyreke play the 1. I don't think the Tyreke does as good of a job at the one as IT does. Coach Smart makes mistakes but he didn't form the roster.
Click to expand...

He did however, choose to spend an entire season sacrificing Tyreke's development by playing him at SF just so that he wouldn't have to bench Thornton, and also to support the stupid IT ROY thing. Smart chose to take the easy way out, trying not to offend anyone and going small so that we could show off a high scoring offense with no defense whatsoever. The result is obvious: we still suck. And to make matters worse we still sacrifice defense for scoring. Someone from a team we played recently said it: our guys aren't looking to rotate back on D. They all want to leak out to get fast break points. Smart simply chose to attempt to avoid growing pains, trying to win now instead of developing and COACHING guys so that maybe, just maybe they'd be a little better the next season. I don't know about you, but in my eyes the team pretty much plays the same way it did last season, and it's no surprise that they're winning at about the same clip.
 
mac said:
He did however, choose to spend an entire season sacrificing Tyreke's development by playing him at SF just so that he wouldn't have to bench Thornton, and also to support the stupid IT ROY thing. Smart chose to take the easy way out, trying not to offend anyone and going small so that we could show off a high scoring offense with no defense whatsoever. The result is obvious: we still suck. And to make matters worse we still sacrifice defense for scoring. Someone from a team we played recently said it: our guys aren't looking to rotate back on D. They all want to leak out to get fast break points. Smart simply chose to attempt to avoid growing pains, trying to win now instead of developing and COACHING guys so that maybe, just maybe they'd be a little better the next season. I don't know about you, but in my eyes the team pretty much plays the same way it did last season, and it's no surprise that they're winning at about the same clip.
Click to expand...
Right but too heavy on the negative Smart stuff. The team had a problem withTyreke at PGwhich went on for a full year because of the ROY run. Smart may not have done it everyone's way playing Thornton and Tyreke in the starting lineup but it had some legitimacy. He' tried many uther things maybe not as we would. But to dump the whole thing on him as we do on here is a little too much for me. We do point out his perceived deficiencies but let's not throw the baby out with the wash. With me it's just a matter of fairness and smart deserves that just like the next guy.
 
Npliam said:
Cousins causes his own problems with minutes and most of that is on him. His conditioning and attitude on the court as well as foul trouble limit his minutes as much or more than smart does.

The problem with Tyreke is that Thornton and IT need and deserve minutes too so the options are don't play Thornton or let Tyreke play the 1. I don't think the Tyreke does as good of a job at the one as IT does. Coach Smart makes mistakes but he didn't form the roster.
Click to expand...

Both IT and Thornton are role players while Tyreke is the 2nd best player on the team. You don't make one of your best players sacrifice his minutes to get your role players more minutes (that is just bad coaching). There is no reason for Tyreke to be averaging at least 5 more minutes a game.

As for Cousins, there is no doubt that he has been part of the reason why he hasn't played as much as he should. However, there have been many games this year when he has sat for long periods of time for no reason. He has cut down on his fouling this season and his conditioning hasn't been a problem for him either. I will point out that most of the players on the team have also suffered from Smart's randon rotations, not just Tyreke and Cousins. The only player who seems to be immune is Salmons (which I am sure thrills just about everyone:rolleyes:).
 
pshn80 said:
Right but too heavy on the negative Smart stuff. The team had a problem withTyreke at PGwhich went on for a full year because of the ROY run. Smart may not have done it everyone's way playing Thornton and Tyreke in the starting lineup but it had some legitimacy. He' tried many uther things maybe not as we would. But to dump the whole thing on him as we do on here is a little too much for me. We do point out his perceived deficiencies but let's not throw the baby out with the wash. With me it's just a matter of fairness and smart deserves that just like the next guy.
Click to expand...

To start with, I don't think Tyreke at PG was as bad as you make it out to be. You say the team had a problem, yet with a much less talented group we went 25-57 that year, while we are now sitting on 27-48 with 5 games to go against playoff teams, 1 against Dallas who is desperately chasing the 8th seed, and 1 against the Hornets, who are only a game behind us. I say 3 games out of those 7 would be a decent accomplishment, which would put as at 30-52 for the year. Again, this despite an improved Evans in his 4th year, Demarcus Cousins, the addition of Thornton and future HOFer Isaiah Thomas.

But in any case, it was Smart who stuck Tyreke at SF for a year. If Tyreke at PG was a problem, we should have moved him to SG last season. It is Smart, who up till now has not developed a reliable offense or defense, who has lost the respect of many on the team. He certainly doesn't deserve all the blame, but really when is anything ever solely one person's fault? Petrie and the Maloofs deserve a fair share of criticism, as do the players themselves. But this is a young team we have, and when a young team achieves so little you look at the people who are in charge of teaching, developing and leading them. Unfortunately, I look at Smart and I don't see him teaching or developing them and if he has it certainly hasn't shown on the court.

The bottom line is this: what do you expect out of the people at each position, and what excuses do they have to mitigate their poor performance? On the players end you expect some form of self-development; Cousins to control his emotions better, to foul less, and Tyreke to improve his jumpshot. Yet, we have a problem with players' development because DMC goes into the offseason thinking coach wants him to shoot more 3s. You have Tyreke, who isn't sure which position he'll be playing at or guarding on any given night. You expect your GM to fill the gaping SF hole in our roster, and to accomplish the things he said he wanted to add: shotblocking and perimeter shooting. With all our off-season acquisitions/ draft picks there is still no one who fills those roles. Lastly you have your coach, who you expect to instill an offensive and defensive scheme, while aiding the players in their development. I don't know about you, but up to recently our offense hasn't been very reliable, and our defense is the worst in the league.
 
pshn80 said:
Right but too heavy on the negative Smart stuff. The team had a problem withTyreke at PGwhich went on for a full year because of the ROY run. Smart may not have done it everyone's way playing Thornton and Tyreke in the starting lineup but it had some legitimacy. He' tried many uther things maybe not as we would. But to dump the whole thing on him as we do on here is a little too much for me. We do point out his perceived deficiencies but let's not throw the baby out with the wash. With me it's just a matter of fairness and smart deserves that just like the next guy.
Click to expand...

meh, you sound like keith smart assembling his "rotation," trying to dole out "fairness" as if it deserves to be spread around evenly. but it doesn't. there is a hierarchy. now, keith smart is hardly the kings' only problem; the maloofs and geoff petrie account for most of it. but smart is the one with the most power to establish forward progress with these kings in the immediate sense, and he has failed at that job--the job of a head coach--miserably. it's not "too heavy on the negative smart stuff" to say so...
 
And I respectfully dis agree. I read our long standing problems that you iterate as also a strong indication that this team has some the least capable learners in the league. Since I haven't read such ideas from anyone else, I thought it useful to point it out.
 
Or maybe that they're being coached incorrectly. We already know, for example, that players are coached to leave who their guarding on the perimeter in order to help inside. Every time. The end result, because teams know this, is open shot after open shot. That doesn't even get to the predictable 1-4 flat series to end quarters/games... If you're told to do the wrong thing, you'll look like you don't know what you're doing.

I'm betting most of the players here are being coached to do things that go against the coaching they received in college/other teams. So you've been taught that one way of doing things is right, and then you have someone like Smart telling you something different. That doesn't even get into his strange minute system that doesn't allow for any consistency because starters don't play together for consistent minutes.

Did the IQ of everyone on the 49ers jump a notch the past two years, or was it because an ineffective coach was replaced with an effective one? Sure looks like the Golden State players got a lot smarter these past two years...or did they get a little less smart? I think low IQ is bandied about when people don't know general schemes and just see players looking lost and confused.

In fairness, I don't really blame Smart, because he's an idiot. I blame the people who thought he would be a good idea, which, in retrospect, seems right up their alley.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top