[Game] Game 72: Kings @ New Orleans Pelicans, 3/27/15, 5pdt, 8edt

[rainmaker]

i have to disagree here. reke will bend a opposing team's defense where as rudy can be shut down. not only will reke bend the defense, he draws fouls on guards and big men. there is a significant advantage when an opposing teams best players are in foul trouble on the bench. people only look at the #s but there are other dynamics which make reke a special player.

What's extremely valuable in regards to the attention he draws is it creates easy shot for others, particularly Davis, and Reke has matured to the point he'll find and hit the open guy with an accurate pass.....most of the time anyway.

And when I see Cuz repeatedly forced to go 1v1 and create looks out of nothing, I fail to see how a guard who creates numerous dunks and open jumpers for Davis is not only undervalued, but wouldn't fit with Cuz here, never mind that creating easy looks for teammates is a chief responsibility of a PG. If and when we actually start creating easy looks for Cuz rather than repeatedly having him go 1v1 from 20ft out, the argument would hold more weight. But as it is, Davis is a benefactor of easy baskets created for him far more than Cuz is here, and it's largely due to Reke. And the numbers back it up, just compare how many baskets Davis gets assisted on to Cuz.

Why does Cuz have to keep going 1v1 here? Because no one else is collapsing the defense and drawing attention. It's not like defenses aren't aware of Davis and choose to leave him, they're forced to. But the ability to draw that attention was ignored when Reke was here and is ignored now. Is what it is.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

What's extremely valuable in regards to the attention he draws is it creates easy shot for others, particularly Davis, and Reke has matured to the point he'll find and hit the open guy with an accurate pass.....most of the time anyway.

And when I see Cuz repeatedly forced to go 1v1 and create looks out of nothing, I fail to see how a guard who creates numerous dunks and open jumpers for Davis is not only undervalued, but wouldn't fit with Cuz here, never mind that creating easy looks for teammates is a chief responsibility of a PG. If and when we actually start creating easy looks for Cuz rather than repeatedly having him go 1v1 from 20ft out, the argument would hold more weight. But as it is, Davis is a benefactor of easy baskets created for him far more than Cuz is here, and it's largely due to Reke. And the numbers back it up, just compare how many baskets Davis gets assisted on to Cuz.

Why does Cuz have to keep going 1v1 here? Because no one else is collapsing the defense and drawing attention. It's not like defenses aren't aware of Davis and choose to leave him, they're forced to. But the ability to draw that attention was ignored when Reke was here and is ignored now. Is what it is.

gotta love the FO for choosing not to retain him. they want steph curry or klay thompson backcourt.

 

[IfAt1st]

You know, all this speculation would be a whole hell of a lot more persuasive if we didn't already have Reke and he didn't already prove he doesn't create good looks for Demarcus.

It's not like Tyreke didn't have a chance to build chemistry and become a complement to Demarcus - they had three full seasons to make it work. That's PLENTY to determine if they work together, and they didn't.
I cannot recall Tyreke making plays to Demarcus often, or helping him get the ball in good positions, making his game easier, etc.

The weirdest thing is - some KFs STILL think Tyreke would be good for the Kings, when it was already PROVEN he wasn't good with Demarcus.

 

[mac]

You know, all this speculation would be a whole hell of a lot more persuasive if we didn't already have Reke and he didn't already prove he doesn't create good looks for Demarcus.

It's not like Tyreke didn't have a chance to build chemistry and become a complement to Demarcus - they had three full seasons to make it work. That's PLENTY to determine if they work together, and they didn't.
I cannot recall Tyreke making plays to Demarcus often, or helping him get the ball in good positions, making his game easier, etc.

The weirdest thing is - some KFs STILL think Tyreke would be good for the Kings, when it was already PROVEN he wasn't good with Demarcus.

How many of said seasons was he played at PG/ given a more ball dominant role next to Cousins? You can't reasonably expect a SF to be creating looks for your center. How many looks does Rudy Gay, a prolific scorer, create for Cousins?

You seem to be forgetting that a) Tyreke missed a bunch of games his first season with Cousins, b) thereafter we drafted a certain ball-hogging PG and relegated Tyreke to SF for essentially two seasons.

You are certainly right in saying that what we had when Tyreke was here wasn't working for the most part. But where most would contest the point is the fact that Tyreke was not utilized to his strengths, by that genius of a coach Keith Smart. Monty Williams isn't the brightest crayon in the box either, but at least it only took him one and a quarter seasons and a bunch of injuries to realise that you can't move Evans primarily off the ball. He has found success in NO because Gordon and the other wing players are able to play off the ball and space the floor, something Evans did not have in Sacramento. It will be interesting to see what happens once Holiday returns.

 

[Spike]

You know, all this speculation would be a whole hell of a lot more persuasive if we didn't already have Reke and he didn't already prove he doesn't create good looks for Demarcus.

It's not like Tyreke didn't have a chance to build chemistry and become a complement to Demarcus - they had three full seasons to make it work. That's PLENTY to determine if they work together, and they didn't.
I cannot recall Tyreke making plays to Demarcus often, or helping him get the ball in good positions, making his game easier, etc.

The weirdest thing is - some KFs STILL think Tyreke would be good for the Kings, when it was already PROVEN he wasn't good with Demarcus.

Sigh.

Anything where Keith Flippin Smart is used to try and prove a point should be sent to the depths of internet purgatory.

His coaches didn't prove crap, other than that they couldn't handle a dribble drive offense, which is, surprisingly, elements of what Karl is trying to do here.

 

[KingsFanGER]

There was a time when all players were like that. The specialist notion of point guard, shooting guard, etc. , is fairly recent. I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that having a talented player who's not a specialist is a negative, unless you're determined, above and beyond anything else to make him fit into a specialist role.



I find these sentences to be incongruous. It should stand to reason that a player with Evans' drive-and-kick ability should be highly valuable in a league that you claim to be all about floor spacing. The only way it wouldn't be is if you have your mind made up that he has to be one of the guys doing the spacing.

You may be right about the specialist role, but this was not my point. My point is that Reke has a major weakness. His jumpshot is bad and he will never fix this issue.
With a player like Reke you need guys to do the floor spacing. We certainly agree on this. Now this works for the Pels to some degree, because AD more or less plays like a 6'10 off-guard. He is used to play off the ball, to come off screens, to roll to the basket for lobs.
DMC is at his best, when he has the ball in his hands and has control over his game. The closest thing to DMC in the league is Marc Gasol - a center, that is able to play like a SF, able to be a playmaker for his team, able to put the ball on the floor, hit cutters with passes and make the decisions for the team. To play like this, DMC needs space. Therefore the rest of the starting 5 should provide some spacing by hitting open shots and being able to play off the ball. My point is quite simple - you put the ball into the hands of your best player and best playmaker in order to make your team better.
When you give the ball to a scoring PG like Reke, you take it out of DMC hands. Now if Reke would be able to hit jumpshots, I would have no problem with a pairing of him and DMC. But given his inability to fix his shot for 6 years now, the only thing he would give the Kings is the ability to break down the defense off the dribble, while using this ability to score most of the time.
Now if we want a drive and kick player with a bad jumpshot next to DMC, I would prefer a player, that's mainly a distributor and not a score first player (Rondo with better defense f.e.....).
The likes of Reke or Stephenson tend to overdribble and to freeze superior players out of the offense. That doesn't mean, that they are bad players by any means. But it's very difficult to balance their natural instinct to score off the dribble so that it really benefits their team.
The experiment of the Hornets to pair the playmaking ability of Stephenson with one of the best offensive big man in the league failed miserably to this point. Now Stephenson may be a poor mans version of Reke and Jefferson is nowhere close to DMC, but this raises some red flags for me and leads me to the question if a ball dominant, score first combo-guard without a reliable jumpshot is a good fit next to a dominant center.
We will most likely never know, what would be if Reke would still play for the Kings. I don't think a coach couldn't find a way to make it work. But I think combining players like Gay and DMC is a bit easier.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You may be right about the specialist role, but this was not my point. My point is that Reke has a major weakness. His jumpshot is bad and he will never fix this issue.
With a player like Reke you need guys to do the floor spacing. We certainly agree on this. Now this works for the Pels to some degree, because AD more or less plays like a 6'10 off-guard. He is used to play off the ball, to come off screens, to roll to the basket for lobs.
DMC is at his best, when he has the ball in his hands and has control over his game. The closest thing to DMC in the league is Marc Gasol - a center, that is able to play like a SF, able to be a playmaker for his team, able to put the ball on the floor, hit cutters with passes and make the decisions for the team. To play like this, DMC needs space. Therefore the rest of the starting 5 should provide some spacing by hitting open shots and being able to play off the ball. My point is quite simple - you put the ball into the hands of your best player and best playmaker in order to make your team better.
When you give the ball to a scoring PG like Reke, you take it out of DMC hands. Now if Reke would be able to hit jumpshots, I would have no problem with a pairing of him and DMC. But given his inability to fix his shot for 6 years now, the only thing he would give the Kings is the ability to break down the defense off the dribble, while using this ability to score most of the time.
Now if we want a drive and kick player with a bad jumpshot next to DMC, I would prefer a player, that's mainly a distributor and not a score first player (Rondo with better defense f.e.....).
The likes of Reke or Stephenson tend to overdribble and to freeze superior players out of the offense. That doesn't mean, that they are bad players by any means. But it's very difficult to balance their natural instinct to score off the dribble so that it really benefits their team.
The experiment of the Hornets to pair the playmaking ability of Stephenson with one of the best offensive big man in the league failed miserably to this point. Now Stephenson may be a poor mans version of Reke and Jefferson is nowhere close to DMC, but this raises some red flags for me and leads me to the question if a ball dominant, score first combo-guard without a reliable jumpshot is a good fit next to a dominant center.
We will most likely never know, what would be if Reke would still play for the Kings. I don't think a coach couldn't find a way to make it work. But I think combining players like Gay and DMC is a bit easier.

Are you sure you're following my side of the argument? Because it sounds like you're putting someone else's words in my mouth. My interest in this discussion is to point out that Tyreke Evans is not overvalued; that he is valued right where he should be, relative to his production. No more, and no less, than that. I didn't say anything (in this thread, anyway) about pairing him with Cousins.

My point is quite simple - you put the ball into the hands of your best player and best playmaker in order to make your team better.

Well, make up your mind, your best player, or your best playmaker? Because those are often the same player, but not always. On at least half of the current playoff teams, the best player and the best playmaker are not the same person.

The experiment of the Hornets to pair the playmaking ability of Stephenson with one of the best offensive big man in the league failed miserably to this point. Now Stephenson may be a poor mans version of Reke and Jefferson is nowhere close to DMC, but this raises some red flags for me and leads me to the question if a ball dominant, score first combo-guard without a reliable jumpshot is a good fit next to a dominant center.

The Hornets have struggled with Stephenson for the same reasons why we struggled, and the same reason why New Orleans has struggled: you can afford to have one ball-dominant player with a dominant big, but you can't afford to have multiple ball-dominant players with a dominant big. There's only room on a basketball team for one James Harden, one Russell Westbrook, one Monta Ellis, etc... That's why Dallas' offense has gone to hell, too. Lance Stephenson and George Hill can work; Lance Stephenson and Kemba Walker, evidently, can't work. You can have Tyreke Evans and Beno Udrih, but you can't have Tyreke Evans and Isaiah Thomas, or Tyreke Evans and Jrue Holiday. And if you want to make it work, you pretty much have to do it like Phoenix tried to do it, with no bigs at all.

Now, the difference between Lance Stephenson and Tyreke Evans is that Tyreke Evans is not psychotic, and will come off the bench, if asked, for the good of the team. More to the point, his disposition is such that he has proven that he can still be a productive player off the bench, unlike Stephenson.

 

[KingsFanGER]

Are you sure you're following my side of the argument? Because it sounds like you're putting someone else's words in my mouth. My interest in this discussion is to point out that Tyreke Evans is not overvalued; that he is valued right where he should be, relative to his production. No more, and no less, than that. I didn't say anything (in this thread, anyway) about pairing him with Cousins.

To be honest - no!
You are right, I missed the point.
11 Million $ is the right value for Evans? Still tend to disagree, cause he is so flawed. But if he is on a team, that is built around his unique playstyle, you may be right.

How do you define the term playmaker?

Still I see differences in what you call a dominant big. Harden and Howard, Reke and AD, even Stephenson and Jefferson are not very similar to Cousins and Reke in my opinion.