VF21 said:
Sorry, but I still just don't understand why someone has to give up shots to Reef.
You seem to think that everything I say is based on my desire to see Reef do well .... and for a lot of the things I say, it's true.
Unfortunately, it doesn't necessarily mean it isn't well thought out. It also doesn't invalidate the logic behind the argument.
It's NOT about them giving up shots. It's about efficiency. Jumpshooting is NOT a viable long term solution for any success. Period. End of story. Close the book.
So, let me rephrase the question back to you - Why should Reef give up shots? Why doesn't he just force up garbage and covered shots repeatedly?
VF21 said:
SAR is the PF, filling the slot previously occupied by Webber. The PG is still the same, the SF is still the same, the center is still the same and the SG is comparable to DC. So why, all of a sudden, should Reef become the first option?
Well, first, if he is filling in for Webber - then he would be the first option, no? 18-20 shots a game is what Webber was averaging. Those are first to second option numbers on ANY team. I've never really seen Reef as a replacement for Webber. Webber, in the Princeton offense, was a top 3 PF ... an argument that he was among the top 10-15 at the position ever. Reef is NOT Webber. Nor should he be asked to try to be Webber.
Second, instead of putting words in my mouth, why not try to understand the argument. I've not said Reef should be the first option. No where in this thread or in any of my posts. I've said *I* would like that, in a post a long time ago ... and I've said he could handle it ... but I've never said that he is or should be. Do I think this team would have more success with Reef as the primary option? Yes, I think they would. But, I also think if Reef were the first option, he'd still only take 15-16 shots a game and someone else would lead the team in shots.
Being the first option does not necessitate the most number of shots. I think if we establish plays where Reef gets it on the low block, it will open up shots for our spot shooters. Just as Miller on the high block opens up shots for slashers and cutters.
Third, the reason the team should make a concerted effort to get Reef the ball (and they have over the past 3-4 games) is because of efficiency. You have to utilize a player down low to have any modicrum of sustainable success in this league. Peja can't do it. Bibby can't do it. Bonzi can't do it. And for the most part - Miller can't do it. None of them are consistant in the post or big enough.
So, I am a proponent of getting the ball into the post. I like Bonzi down there occationally, but he's easy to shut down and doesn't see the floor extremely well when he's down there. Which leaves .... Reef.
You seem to be stuck in a mindset. Just because the players are similar, doesn't mean they are the same. Doesn't mean they should do the same thing. That Sacramento team was THAT Sacramento team. Trying to plug holes with these players, instead of playing to the team's strengths, is asinine.
There is no question that this team has had more success the further we get from the old way of doing things. We've run a more traditional offense since the San Antonio game. We've thrown motion and a lot of Princeton into it, but we've changed. AND we look all the better for it.
If we want to go back to straight jacking, then so be it. The lottery is fun. We can all sit around and talk about who we want to pick with our top 10 pick.
). Seats 11 and 12 - drop by and say hi if you're in the area.
GO KINGS!
