[Game] Game 16: Sacramento Kings @ San Antonio Spurs. 11/28/14 5PM PST, 8PM EST
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
Chubbs
Starter
There shall be no fairness!
So, it works like this. Every loss is Malone's fault, every win is despite him? Is that how it goes?
I did not say anything about me and you know that. Like some comments in this thread my comments were about the coach and not directed on you or me. At the end of the day, we're ALL JUST FANS trying to voice our dismay.
I know you have powers in this board. Do not start something juvenile and silly that will disrespect yourself. We are too old for that ***t.
Last edited:
Seems to be the case. I think Malone is damn good and although I'd like to see Ray in more, Ray also hasn't stepped it up when getting early shots in the rotation...has had some good moments and just nothing moments.
Ryan Hollins has averaged 3 pts and 2 Rebs for his 9 year career. That's 9 years. That might have been a career game for him last night. There is a reason he doesn't play much.
I might buy that except that, according to Kayte, Malone has said on the record that McCallum is his best perimeter defender. I have difficulty grasping why a defensive coach would leave his best perimeter defender on the bench in a game where we're getting torched from outside.
It wasn't. But, when you factor in the rebounds, it's still probably in his Top 5.
Chubbs
Starter
Hollins really isn't that good. 9 year career and he's done essentially nothing, under malone or anyone else.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Ray...I've been saying since last year that he deserves time based on his defense alone. He's physical and makes the opposing guards work.....but there has to be a reason why he doesn't play him more. I'd like to here Malone give his reasons on Sessions/Ray. I don't need to hear any reasons about why Hollins doesn't play. Hollins has length but really isn't that strong of an interior defender or shot blocker......and I get the frustration with Landry playing out of position at the 5 but that probably says a lot about Hollins.
They could use a seasoned Eric Moreland. They need someone who can guard the stretch 4s and they need a steady backup SG and maybe a better backup PG although it seems like Ray could be that guy. Sessions defense is just really bad.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Does Malone get credit for taking the team to an 8 pt loss against what might be the best team in the NBA on its own court? I am surprised we did that well. From minute to minute we can be critical of the coach but when you look at the big picture of the whole game, SOMEBODY did petty darn good.
We can stand in judgment of Malone because we are fans and that's what fans do. It doesn't mean we are correct.
We can stand in judgment of Malone because we are fans and that's what fans do. It doesn't mean we are correct.
I fail to see how one contradicts the other. Hollins isn't a decent backup, but he's as good as we have. We need a significant upgrade at that position, so D'Alessandro should be 'hammered' for not finding a better replacement. At the same time, he's here, and we don't have anybody more qualified, so Malone should be 'hammered' for not playing him. The two circumstances are mutually exclusive.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
That's not the argument, and I'm quoting you as I've been one of the posters making the argument. The argument and situation we find ourselves in is that we need a backup center who'll actually backup Cuz, who isn't an undersized 4 like Reggie and Carl.
If Hollins actually was playing and performing as a backup center, there'd be far fewer complaints. But given he wasn't and until yesterday wasn't deemed good enough to even supplant Landry in the backup center role, you're damn right there's been pressure on PDA not having acquired a backup who could fill that role. After Hollins showed he is more of a defensive and inside presence than any backup center we've thrown out there this season, the attention turns to Malone and whatever reason he's had for not playing Hollins.
Can anyone who watched last night give a good reason as to why Hollins had under 20 mins all season while our bench continues to get slaughtered at the rim? I'm all ears.
This really isn't that complicated.
randymoss1881
Starter
People are hammering our coach over Hollins. Hahaha freakin Hollins
I don't really see what's funny, and this post rather misses the point. Is it your position that we don't need a backup center, that we'll be just fine the rest of the season without one?
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Yes, we need a backup center. What I think is amazing is that the other 9 positions are filled either by vets in their prime or inching past it or youngsters who will definitely get better. I am pleased that as far as I am concerned, we have everything but the center, a backup one at that. I don't know who gets credit for that but I suspect it is the same guy who is being critisized for the center vacancy. A lot has happened in the last year and a half which has resulted in almost a total makeover of the team. The makeover has been very good. I think by the beginning of next season, we will have that one position filled. I hope people can wait that long.
K
KingMilz
Guest
Thing is we have not shown we can dominate bad teams yet, honestly we have looked much better against 500. or above teams than we have against the sub 500. teams.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Two teams were sub .500. Not sure what huge conclusion can be made from that.
K
KingMilz
Guest
We played poorly in both I thought. It just seems like we play a lot better vs the elite teams this year than the average (on our level) to below average teams.
To whatever extent that may be true, I am not sure how it is significant.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Did we win or lose or what? I don't keep track of thee things as some people. I like the way the Kings are playing. I'm not in the mood for complaining.
Chubbs
Starter
There are only 4 sub .500 teams in the west. And I'd bet that OKC doesn't finish under .500.
The kings have already played 15 conference games, which leads the league. Lakers next with 14. Then no one else has more than 11 (houston has 11).
Everyone else 10 or fewer. Memphis is 10-0 against the west. That's impressive, even if it's really 9-1.
Kings are in very good shape assuming they can beat up on the east like everyone else is doing.
The kings have already played 15 conference games, which leads the league. Lakers next with 14. Then no one else has more than 11 (houston has 11).
Everyone else 10 or fewer. Memphis is 10-0 against the west. That's impressive, even if it's really 9-1.
Kings are in very good shape assuming they can beat up on the east like everyone else is doing.
Hollins is 7 ft. That's all he has over Evans and Landry. Probably a better passer, but not by much. You don't play a guy just because he's tall.
Eh, I gotta push back on this, too. I tend to feel like some posters are getting a little 'Chicken Little' about some of this stuff but, at the same time, I'm not willing to handwave away all concerns, just 'because winning'. This team is improving everyday, and is fun to watch for the first time in forever, but we also have actual problems that need to be addressed. There are real questions which need to be asked, and '9-7' is not an answer.
I would say that being seven feet tall is fairly significant when the guy you're guarding is also seven feet tall. Hollins contests shots by accident that Landry and Evans can't hope to get to. It only matters that the other two are better rebounders if the other team is missing shots.
Did Hollins show anything in his previous 7 games to warrant more playing time? Has Hollins showed anything in his previous 7 years that makes you think he's better than he actually is? Why would one game change the book on Hollins?
I won't speak for rainmaker, but my response to that would be that McCallum has shown plenty to warrant more playing time. And he's still not getting it. So, why wouldn't I necessarily figure that Malone's decisions regarding Hollins aren't totally capricious, just as his decisions regarding Sessions appear to be?
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
Everybody has been wanting a player who can protect the rim. We haven't had one since Dalembert. We do have have one now, in an athletic very mobile and long player in Hollins. He's not a starter, but so what? Lets at least play him in some spot minutes on a semi consistent basis to see what he can do. We got a nice glimpse last night and it sure looked better than any other option we have in that category, which is nobody.
It didn't appear that what he was doing, was pure luck. Lets see more and go from there. We'll never know, if he never gets a chance. People change, players improve in different environments. Example A, is Omri Casspi. Lets explore the possibility that maybe Hollins could help us in a specific area of need
Last edited:
Sessions is an established vet with a ling track record. No coach is going to play a 2nd year player over a vet after 16 games. It's not just malone who does this. Every fan base complains that they want to see a young player over an established vet. Many posters here wanted Landry gone after last year, but he's proven to be an asset of the bench. Imagine if we had a knee jerk coach who sat players every time they struggled. There would be no consistency.
If sessions continues to stink up the joint, Malone should bench Sessions, but it's only November of a long season.
Except the reasons why people were down on the Landry signing still apply today: we paid a lot of money for a backup PF, when what we needed was a backup center, and/or a rim protector. And we still need those things. Nobody who was down on the Landry signing said he couldn't play.
I reject your 'no coach' premise. Mike Malone owes no loyalty to Ramon Sessions, and I have a hard time believing that he believes that Sessions gives him a better chance to win.
I reject your 'no coach' premise. Mike Malone owes no loyalty to Ramon Sessions, and I have a hard time believing that he believes that Sessions gives him a better chance to win.
