[Grades] Grades v. Altitude, the Refs, & the Celtics

[Kingster]

Celts had the grit and the stamina; the King didn't. The altitude excuse is bogus.

 

[Telemachus]

One word for this game:

@#$)^&!_^&!

I think that is more than one word.

 

[Kingster]

Regarding defense, it was noteworthy that Grant and Reynolds remarked upon Curry fighting through a screen. That says something. NEWS FLASH: CURRY JUST FOUGHT THROUGH A SCREEN! What a remarkable event. I guess Karl has taught Curry how to fight through a screen, but nobody else on this team.

 

[Livinthedream]

Regarding defense, it was noteworthy that Grant and Reynolds remarked upon Curry fighting through a screen. That says something. NEWS FLASH: CURRY JUST FOUGHT THROUGH A SCREEN! What a remarkable event. I guess Karl has taught Curry how to fight through a screen, but nobody else on this team.

Nope. Karl just hasn't told him he's supposed to be switching.

 

[Kingster]

Nope. Karl just hasn't told him he's supposed to be switching.

Ahh, so Curry has the privilege of switching and all the other guards don't!

 

[Livinthedream]

Ahh, so Curry has the privilege of switching and all the other guards don't!

Curry hasn't been infected yet. He's young and innocent still.

 

[rainmaker]

Brad Stevens is on a different level than Karl.
But the key to the Celtics success is no rocket science. It all starts with the energy and hard work every player puts in on the defensive end.
And making excuses, that we don't have the personnel, to put in excactly this type of effort, is wrong from my point of view.

A Stevens type coach would fit this team far better than an old geezer. Young, energetic, easier to relate to, far more defensive minded and it comes out on the floor where again I'll say, even if you ignore last night our team doesn't really "get after it" like it did under a year ago under a younger and more energetic coach.

Teams tend to take on the personality of their coach. Now we have guys who bring it at times, Rondo will get after it, Cuz will get after it, Omri knows only one speed and that's all out, but team wide as part of an identity? We seriously lack energy/intensity as a group.

Of course, confusion in the system and roles can come across as lacking energy. And this team still looks as confused defensively as it did in preseason game #1 and outside when Rondo is handling/patrolling, looks confused on offense. I've never seen guys like DC/Rudy/Marco look so unsure about a system before.

 

[Larry89]

what a depressing game

 

[VF21]

I think that is more than one word.

Actually, no - it's one word, with an ! at the end for emphasis.

 

[VF21]

Celts had the grit and the stamina; the King didn't. The altitude excuse is bogus.

And the world is flat...and the moon is made of green cheese.

Don't let facts or science get in the way of your argument.

 

[Amit149]

And the world is flat...and the moon is made of green cheese.

Don't let facts or science get in the way of your argument.

It's not as black and white as you say it is...

Altitude sickness usually happens in places above 8,000 ft, which is not the case... most people won't suffer difficulty from it in Mexico City, and your body should get used to it fairly quick.

 

[Bricklayer]

Celts had the grit and the stamina; the King didn't. The altitude excuse is bogus.

No, its really not when the Kings looked gassed from the opening minute, long before the Celtics had any say in it.

 

[Bricklayer]

I've never heard of anyone suffering altitude sickness below 8000 feet. It's absolutely a real condition that affects people regardless of their level of physical fitness. I've seen it happen to other people and it's happened to me in a mild way (basically just a terrible headache that won't go away). 7300 feet is going to take some of your wind but equating it to what you experience at 11,500 feet is really a stretch. The inability of the refs to call the game straight was a bigger factor in our first quarter collapse than the altitude was I think. Cousins was forcing some ugly shots through contact, nobody could get anywhere near their little guys without picking up a foul. Over the past 10 years the NBA has apparently decided that it's going to call the game in a way that drastically favors quick ball handlers. Look at the current scoring leaderboard (here) -- there are 9 small guards in the top 20. Compare that to 5 years ago (2010) or 10 years ago (2005). They're going to continue to call the game however they want to call the game. It's on us to make the adjustment.

The thing about Mexico City is it combined 7300 feet with this:

 

[VF21]

It's not as black and white as you say it is...

Altitude sickness usually happens in places above 8,000 ft, which is not the case... most people won't suffer difficulty from it in Mexico City, and your body should get used to it fairly quick.

If you say so...

 

[Amit149]

If you say so...

I typed "altitude sickness" in google... here are excerpts from the first 4 results:

Wikipedia- " It commonly occurs above 2,400 metres (8,000 feet)... most people can ascend to 2,400 metres (8,000 ft) without difficulty."

WebMD- " It happens most often when people who are not used to high altitudes go quickly from lower altitudes to 8000 ft (2438 m) or higher."

altitude.org- "Most people remain well at altitudes of up to 2500m (8.200 feet), the equivalent barometric pressure to which aeroplane cabins are pressurised."

NHS- "In its mildest form, altitude sickness can occur at heights over about 2,500m (8,000 feet) above sea level, which is a common height for many ski resorts.

However, the more severe symptoms of altitude sickness tend to occur at altitudes of 3,600m (about 12,000 feet) and above."


If you have different/better sources, by all means go ahead... of course some can feel different there, but this is not the big deal a lot are making it out to be, and most people should get used to it pretty quickly.

 

[mac]

A Stevens type coach would fit this team far better than an old geezer. Young, energetic, easier to relate to, far more defensive minded and it comes out on the floor where again I'll say, even if you ignore last night our team doesn't really "get after it" like it did under a year ago under a younger and more energetic coach.

Teams tend to take on the personality of their coach. Now we have guys who bring it at times, Rondo will get after it, Cuz will get after it, Omri knows only one speed and that's all out, but team wide as part of an identity? We seriously lack energy/intensity as a group.

Of course, confusion in the system and roles can come across as lacking energy. And this team still looks as confused defensively as it did in preseason game #1 and outside when Rondo is handling/patrolling, looks confused on offense. I've never seen guys like DC/Rudy/Marco look so unsure about a system before.

Did our team really "get after it" under Malone though? I feel like many fans are just thinking of the 9-6 start and forgetting a lot of the details. First of all, we went through some pretty bad stretches even in that 9-6 streak, squandering away some big leads. When Cousins was out the team also didn't play well. You would also not characterize our guys as playing hard every night under Malone in his first season here.

Karl has had one full offseason with the guys, and less than a full season with the team overall. More than half of our rotation consists of new players, and he never got to play Collison last season. His best defensive player is a rookie who looks clueless at times on offense, and 2 of his better players are small and play the same position. His system is still not fully in place, guys are clearly not buying in completely. For example - Rondo/Cuz wanting to slow the pace down. Yeah, you can talk about how the best coaches adapt their systems to fit the personnel, but that's a separate discussion. Point being, the guys haven't bought into his system. We have had some games where we played hard, and games where we haven't.

So IMO when you look at it objectively, it's really not fair to pin this on Karl. He hasn't had a full season, he's dealing with a lot of new players in the rotation, and guys clearly aren't buying into his system. And that isn't necessarily indicative of a flawed system, as guys weren't buying in defensively in Malone's first year either. Winning solves everything. If we string together a 4-5 game winning streak I can assure you that the guys will suddenly believe a lot more in Karl's system and play a lot harder. We're so sick of losing that we tend to look back at this tiny little stint of winning under Malone and cling to it, refusing to let go and making it into something it simply wasn't. There were guys calling for Malone to be fired even then, because admittedly our offense was stagnant. I guess what I'm saying is ... don't be so quick to blame Karl. Give him more time.

 

[macadocious]

I typed "altitude sickness" in google... here are excerpts from the first 4 results:

Wikipedia- " It commonly occurs above 2,400 metres (8,000 feet)... most people can ascend to 2,400 metres (8,000 ft) without difficulty."

WebMD- " It happens most often when people who are not used to high altitudes go quickly from lower altitudes to 8000 ft (2438 m) or higher."

altitude.org- "Most people remain well at altitudes of up to 2500m (8.200 feet), the equivalent barometric pressure to which aeroplane cabins are pressurised."

NHS- "In its mildest form, altitude sickness can occur at heights over about 2,500m (8,000 feet) above sea level, which is a common height for many ski resorts.

However, the more severe symptoms of altitude sickness tend to occur at altitudes of 3,600m (about 12,000 feet) and above."


If you have different/better sources, by all means go ahead... of course some can feel different there, but this is not the big deal a lot are making it out to be, and most people should get used to it pretty quickly.

I had a friend pass out in Tahoe from Altitude Sickness, that was about 6800 feet. If you live at sea level and go to an altitude you can get sick. The Kings did not have Altitude sickness though, the Altitude was affecting their ability to breathe though.

 

[kingsboi]

Well I certainly did not see the issue beforehand. Thought we would beat them. Still think we would have beat them in Sacramento. They aren't that good.

But we were almost unwatchable from the opening bell of this one. Looked completely exhausted. Were the Celtics good? Maybe. But more than anything IT just looked like he'd been born at altitude and was running twice as fast as our guys just visibly, VISIBLY dragged around the court, took shots with dead legs, and obviously did not hustle after balls. You could see it. A ball would be loose, and there was this hesitation as our guys all had to force themselves to lurch after it. When we got bumped and hit the floor, nobody bounced up off it. Never been to Mexico City, but after watching that don't think I ever want to go -- looked like we were halfway up Everest and got rousted from our tents at midnight to play a game. The Cs just had vastly more energy than us, so of course they ran circles around us.

I think people are drawing far far too many conclusions from this. That wasn't us. We haven't played like that. Something was going on, and given the environment, you've got several choices. Physically we were shot from the opening tip.

So does that mean that this team is lacking players that are physically well conditioned to play defense and hustle?

 

[kingsboi]

Celtics had open looks at 3's time and time again....just like most teams. If you can knock down your open looks against the Kings, your going to win.

so did the Mavericks...difference was Celtics were able to capitalize and the Mavs were not.

 

[Merdiesel]

Shame on anybody who voted altitude wtf. The Celtics played on the same court

Seriously...

Grades v. Altitude, the Refs, & the Celtics

Anymore excuses we want to make for these guys?

 

[IfAt1st]

Did our team really "get after it" under Malone though? I feel like many fans are just thinking of the 9-6 start and forgetting a lot of the details. First of all, we went through some pretty bad stretches even in that 9-6 streak, squandering away some big leads. When Cousins was out the team also didn't play well. You would also not characterize our guys as playing hard every night under Malone in his first season here.

Karl has had one full offseason with the guys, and less than a full season with the team overall. More than half of our rotation consists of new players, and he never got to play Collison last season. His best defensive player is a rookie who looks clueless at times on offense, and 2 of his better players are small and play the same position. His system is still not fully in place, guys are clearly not buying in completely. For example - Rondo/Cuz wanting to slow the pace down. Yeah, you can talk about how the best coaches adapt their systems to fit the personnel, but that's a separate discussion. Point being, the guys haven't bought into his system. We have had some games where we played hard, and games where we haven't.

So IMO when you look at it objectively, it's really not fair to pin this on Karl. He hasn't had a full season, he's dealing with a lot of new players in the rotation, and guys clearly aren't buying into his system. And that isn't necessarily indicative of a flawed system, as guys weren't buying in defensively in Malone's first year either. Winning solves everything. If we string together a 4-5 game winning streak I can assure you that the guys will suddenly believe a lot more in Karl's system and play a lot harder. We're so sick of losing that we tend to look back at this tiny little stint of winning under Malone and cling to it, refusing to let go and making it into something it simply wasn't. There were guys calling for Malone to be fired even then, because admittedly our offense was stagnant. I guess what I'm saying is ... don't be so quick to blame Karl. Give him more time.

I'm sorry..... WHAT?!?!

Karl is not to blame?
Give him more time?
The Kings have NO TIME LEFT.
NONE.

Let me ask you something - can you tell us what Karl's system is?

Currently, the only "system" I'm aware of is:
* Deliberately switching on pick and rolls instead of fighting through/over/under them. We have all seen the results of that strategy so far. There is ZERO uncertainty in concluding that system does not work (either with this personnel, but more likely at this level).
* Deliberately subbing in shorter players and playing 3-guard sets with a SF as a PF. We have all seen the results of this strategy so far. I think they've won one game so far this year when they did that. Every other time, the leads have evaporated quickly and the other team gained momentum.
* Playing people who simply don't work together. We have all seen the +/- on line-ups, there's no way the Kings' staff isn't aware, yet Karl keeps playing the lineups that have been unsuccessful this year - what's the definition of insanity? In particular, the insistence on subbing in Collison while keeping Rondo in is baffling. Rondo playing off-ball? Collison can't pass or run a play for crap anymore for some reason.
* Completely ignoring height and defensive prowess. His ignoring WCS is borderline discipline-worthy. Having Rudy (a defensive shambles this year) on the court for key defensive plays that costed the Kings 2 games is unforgivable.
* Deliberately moving the best post-player and offensive rebounder in the league (a potential Hall-of-Fame talent) and having him hang out outside the 3-pt line, not even attempting to offensive rebound.
* Instilling a drive-and-kick offense without the personnel to play it well.
* Forcing pace pace pace without the personnel to play it well.

Any other system you are aware of?

 

[VF21]

I typed "altitude sickness" in google... here are excerpts from the first 4 results:

Wikipedia- " It commonly occurs above 2,400 metres (8,000 feet)... most people can ascend to 2,400 metres (8,000 ft) without difficulty."

WebMD- " It happens most often when people who are not used to high altitudes go quickly from lower altitudes to 8000 ft (2438 m) or higher."

altitude.org- "Most people remain well at altitudes of up to 2500m (8.200 feet), the equivalent barometric pressure to which aeroplane cabins are pressurised."

NHS- "In its mildest form, altitude sickness can occur at heights over about 2,500m (8,000 feet) above sea level, which is a common height for many ski resorts.

However, the more severe symptoms of altitude sickness tend to occur at altitudes of 3,600m (about 12,000 feet) and above."


If you have different/better sources, by all means go ahead... of course some can feel different there, but this is not the big deal a lot are making it out to be, and most people should get used to it pretty quickly.

My source is my own personal experience, which I have alluded to several times. If you note, your sources say "commonly" and "most often" and "most people" etc. Had you read the comments of several other posters, they were also speaking from personal experience which I happen to think is a little more relative in this instance. But hey, believe whatever you want. I couldn't possibly care less at this point.

Further clarification: You keep alluding to "altitude sickness". What I am talking about is the effect of altitude on someone who isn't used to it. It doesn't necessarily fall into the full-blown altitude sickness classification but there are real and tangible effects that have different impacts on different people. I already mentioned them in previous posts and I know for a fact they occur.

 

[hrdboild]

The thing about Mexico City is it combined 7300 feet with this:

I mean... I live in LA so this looks like a lovely day to me That's not altitude sickness though. And I'm pretty sure the game was played indoors. It was obvious watching the game that the altitude was a factor working against us, I just think calling it "altitude sickness" is either a misunderstanding of what that term actually means or a significant exaggeration. I don't think any of our players were experiencing nausea, dizziness, lack of blood circulation, or severe headaches. They were winded. That's a whole other thing. You pretty much need to be at 10,000 feet or higher to be at risk for altitude sickness. Maybe if you're out of shape to the point that a 1 mile run would be difficult for you at sea level than trying to perform physical activity at 7300 feet would be very difficult, but these are professional athletes. It's not the reason we lost the game.

 

[VF21]

I mean... I live in LA ...

I'm so sorry.

 

[hrdboild]

I'm so sorry.

Me too. Work y'know? Now you see why I'm so angry all the time. This is what my morning commute looks like (more or less). Good news though, I'll be in Sacramento for a month starting this Sunday. I'll be hanging out on the American River Bike trail as much as possible inhaling nature until my blood pressure returns to normal. I haven't decided yet whether watching Kings games will be a regular part of my "de-stressing" routine or not though...

 

[Section 101]

I'm not sure that's true. I could swear I heard someone say that the Celtics got to Mexico City about 5-6 hours before game time. And I know there have been times when the Kings haven't arrived in a game city until the day of the game.

Nope. League rules. Have to be in the city you are playing the night before. The only time they get there late is due to weather delays/plane problems. They have also received waivers a few times when playing GS and driving down that day, but they haven't done it in years.

 

[VF21]

Nope. League rules. Have to be in the city you are playing the night before. The only time they get there late is due to weather delays/plane problems. They have also received waivers a few times when playing GS and driving down that day, but they haven't done it in years.

That's what I was remembering.

 

[pshn80]

I typed "altitude sickness" in google... here are excerpts from the first 4 results:

Wikipedia- " It commonly occurs above 2,400 metres (8,000 feet)... most people can ascend to 2,400 metres (8,000 ft) without difficulty."

WebMD- " It happens most often when people who are not used to high altitudes go quickly from lower altitudes to 8000 ft (2438 m) or higher."

altitude.org- "Most people remain well at altitudes of up to 2500m (8.200 feet), the equivalent barometric pressure to which aeroplane cabins are pressurised."

NHS- "In its mildest form, altitude sickness can occur at heights over about 2,500m (8,000 feet) above sea level, which is a common height for many ski resorts.

However, the more severe symptoms of altitude sickness tend to occur at altitudes of 3,600m (about 12,000 feet) and above."


If you have different/better sources, by all means go ahead... of course some can feel different there, but this is not the big deal a lot are making it out to be, and most people should get used to it pretty quickly.

Unless you are out of shape n the first place (Cuz and Gay for sure).

You know, I suspect there is a difference between altitude sickness and being severely pooped because of altitude and poor conditioning.

 

[Kingster]

And the world is flat...and the moon is made of green cheese.

Don't let facts or science get in the way of your argument.

Let's see that determinative statistical data that says that arriving a day earlier has anything significant effect whatsoever. It's a crock.

 

[Bricklayer]

Let's see that determinative statistical data that says that arriving a day earlier has anything significant effect whatsoever. It's a crock.

There is a logic behind that speculation.

Either way there is an incontrovertible fact standing behind it, or something: we weren't right from the opening tip. VERY obviously not right. for anybody who knows basketball it was obvious. We were laboring like mad. Breathing hard. Cousins the worst of the bunch. The legs were shot and the shots clanking off the front of the rim, the reactions slow. We looked exhausted from the start. Given the list of possible reasons, and the general obvious gasping for breath going on, looking to Mexico City's uniquer altitude/bad air combination is a real good place to start. Far LESS speculative than well, they ate bad food, parties too hard, suddenly didn't care, or whatever.