[Grades] Grades v. Grizzlies 11/6/10
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
Well... I might be a minority here, but .....
the great numbers of Tyreke are not impress me at all. our point guard is a egoist that does not pass the ball, unless he is in trouble.
it seems that Tyreke is trying to prove how good he is, and only afterwards he thinks about winning.
don't get me wrong, I'm crazy about this guy. but he must pass the ball a lot more than he does right now, and a lot faster.
Regarding Coach PW ....
I don't know what he is trying to do out there, but....
Beno can not guard anyone his D is disastrous.
you have a .50% 3pt shooters (Casspi and Garcia) - why not playing in the offense some plays for them? it was all incidental.
I wish the kings will pass more that 2-3 passes within 1 offense.
I think that it all starts and ends with PW and Tyreke. how much the coach will let Tyreke be such an egoist and how much he will demand him to be a real point guart
the turnovers are pathetic. espaciallty DMC turnovers killed me. Dalembert is much better than him for the moment, as well as Jacson than Landry. I would consider Jackson become a starter instead of Landry.
we had to win this one. dammit!
the great numbers of Tyreke are not impress me at all. our point guard is a egoist that does not pass the ball, unless he is in trouble.
it seems that Tyreke is trying to prove how good he is, and only afterwards he thinks about winning.
don't get me wrong, I'm crazy about this guy. but he must pass the ball a lot more than he does right now, and a lot faster.
Regarding Coach PW ....
I don't know what he is trying to do out there, but....
Beno can not guard anyone his D is disastrous.
you have a .50% 3pt shooters (Casspi and Garcia) - why not playing in the offense some plays for them? it was all incidental.
I wish the kings will pass more that 2-3 passes within 1 offense.
I think that it all starts and ends with PW and Tyreke. how much the coach will let Tyreke be such an egoist and how much he will demand him to be a real point guart
the turnovers are pathetic. espaciallty DMC turnovers killed me. Dalembert is much better than him for the moment, as well as Jacson than Landry. I would consider Jackson become a starter instead of Landry.
we had to win this one. dammit!
I didn't really expect them to make the playoffs, though I think they have a small chance of fighting for the 8th seed. I expected/expect them to win 35-40 games realistically, which would be a good improvement over last year. But if they can't take advantage of this home stand and build a little cushion, then things are apt to get ugly real quick in Dec and Jan.
There's generally plenty of criticism around here. Always has been. It can go over board either way at times. Rebutting your negative comments does not mean those people aren't being just as collected and logical as you.
After all, many, if not all, of your comments have been opinion, not fact. Nothing wrong with that, but other people have other opinions. I find people often criticize others simply because those others don't agree with that person's opinions. Me, I happen not to find many of your arguments to be persuasive. Darn, there I go being all emotional.
After all, many, if not all, of your comments have been opinion, not fact. Nothing wrong with that, but other people have other opinions. I find people often criticize others simply because those others don't agree with that person's opinions. Me, I happen not to find many of your arguments to be persuasive. Darn, there I go being all emotional.
You're getting the wrong idea if you think I'm claiming that people shouldn't make rebuttals, shouldn't disagree, etc. Quite the opposite. I welcome differing opinions, but based on my experience on this board, it seems some do not. One other thing I've noticed, is that some folks seem to regard their opinions as facts and their rebuttals often reflect that. Facts are things like Tyreke Evans averaged 20/5/5, Donte Green has been benched, The Kings are 3/3, etc. What are not facts, but that seem to be presented as facts by some, are things like, The Kings handled the FA market just fine, Rudy Gay wouldn't have made the Kings a better team, No big FA would have came here anyways, etc. Those things are all opinions (or beliefs) but get presented in ways that suggest that maybe folks believe them to be facts.
RookieOfTheDay, I see where you're coming from. A lot of people on here have a problem with well-deserved criticism of their team. However, that's what a forum is for. Otherwise we would have nothing to talk about. First off, I agree with every point you made. Westphal is using a goofy coaching style, and should just stick to the plain of playing whoever is producing out there.
I'll give you that. Saying those things that you mentioned is, in fact, stating an opinion. However, there is a lot of evidence to support those opinions that have been laid out quite clearly. The problem with your side of the argument is that you haven't shown any evidence that supports the possibility that we could've landed Amar'e or another worthy free agent, or facts that support your opinion that the Kings did not handle this offseason properly. As for Rudy Gay making this team better, I don't think anyone would disagree with you that he would, in fact, make this team better RIGHT NOW. It's the long term implications of overpaying a player of Gay's caliber that's in debate here.
I'm not sure what evidence there would need to be beyond them being available and The Kings having enough salary available to try and retain them. It's certainly a fact that attaining a top 10 FA was within the realm of possibility for The Kings, based of their availability, and the Kings available money, but to try and determine to what degree it was possible just seems like speculation.
If by possibility, you mean a snowball's chance in hell, then yes. The last meaningful FA we signed was Vlade (whom we also overpaid [debateable considering his impact on the team as a whole]) And other than that, there haven't been any other big name free agents coming over to the Kings ever in their tenure in Sacramento.
That's why, as intelligent human beings, we have the ability to analize situations based on the known facts, and make a realistic assessment. Now, given the current rules of the NBA, we were unable to offer any of the top free agents more than teams like Miami, NYK, Chicago, Atlanta and Memphis offered them. So money, in fact, is not even at play here. The only thing that IS at play here is how attractive the Kings are as a possible destination for free agents, and as much as we all love the Kings, reality shows us that we are much less attractive to free agents than those teams we were competing against. And that, my friend, is a fact.
Now, in a couple of years, if our young players do fulfill their potential and we are a legitimate playoff team that is one major free agent signing away from becoming a contender, THEN there will be some sort of insentive for a worthy FA to come here. Not only that, but by then we will know exactly which of the players panned out and which ones didn't, and we will be able to pursue not just any big name, but the right one. If Tyreke converts to playing SG full time, then we might want to go after a star PG. If Omri or Donte continue to be inconsistent then we might want to pursue a Rudy Gay type of player, but if one of them suddenly has a breakout year and becomes an allstar, there really would be no point in giving a huge contract to another small forward. These are the reasons, that in my opinion and the opinions of most others here, the Kings were wise to not make big free agent moves this offseason. Sometimes staying put is just the best thing you can do. It seems like your approach is that they should've made a move, any move, at all cost. But unless you can point out things that the FO definitely could have done and chose not to do at the expense of the Kings' long term success, you are going to keep getting these rebuttals, because you can't convince people with far fetched "maybe" scenarios.
Now, in a couple of years, if our young players do fulfill their potential and we are a legitimate playoff team that is one major free agent signing away from becoming a contender, THEN there will be some sort of insentive for a worthy FA to come here. Not only that, but by then we will know exactly which of the players panned out and which ones didn't, and we will be able to pursue not just any big name, but the right one. If Tyreke converts to playing SG full time, then we might want to go after a star PG. If Omri or Donte continue to be inconsistent then we might want to pursue a Rudy Gay type of player, but if one of them suddenly has a breakout year and becomes an allstar, there really would be no point in giving a huge contract to another small forward. These are the reasons, that in my opinion and the opinions of most others here, the Kings were wise to not make big free agent moves this offseason. Sometimes staying put is just the best thing you can do. It seems like your approach is that they should've made a move, any move, at all cost. But unless you can point out things that the FO definitely could have done and chose not to do at the expense of the Kings' long term success, you are going to keep getting these rebuttals, because you can't convince people with far fetched "maybe" scenarios.
That's right. I don't know where I got the idea he was a FA signing. At any rate, the problem of FA not wanting to come here isn't anything to do with Sacramento or being a small market. It all has to do with perceptions about the organization and that reflects directly on the ownership/management, not the city.
I don't mind rebuttals. I'm also not trying to convince anyone to change their views to match mine. I have no problem with people holding differing opinions. It's not about right or wrong, I see it as simply exchanging ideas and seeing other sides of the situation by reading what other people think about it. Having said that, It's just silly to say someone is "wrong" because they can't prove a hypothetical. This isn't a court of law where everything has to be meet a burden of proof. It's just a forum of people expressing their ideas, opinions, beliefs, feelings, etc.
Well, obviously you're trying to convince people here of something, otherwise you wouldn't have bothered to respond to everyone that responded to your posts. I don't know if anyone said you were "wrong" in the sense that you are saying something that is in direct opposition to the "truth". However, this is a discussion featuring two opposing opinions as to what is the best approach for the Kings to take in order to reach the destination that hopefully we all agree upon - to make this team a top tier team in the NBA and a true contender for the title. Opinions are, and should be, based on facts and realistic assessments. You don't have to prove the hypothetical, but if you want your opinion to be considered seriously, you have to base it on a solid and realistic assessment.
Let me put it to you this way - Danny De Vito and Brad Pitt walk into a bar. They are both dressed in the same clothes, have the exact amount of money with them, and are armed with the same opening line (basically, same everything but their looks). Who does the hot chick in the bar go home with at the end of the night? I dare you to go out and try to convince people that it's Danny...
Let me put it to you this way - Danny De Vito and Brad Pitt walk into a bar. They are both dressed in the same clothes, have the exact amount of money with them, and are armed with the same opening line (basically, same everything but their looks). Who does the hot chick in the bar go home with at the end of the night? I dare you to go out and try to convince people that it's Danny...
We have fundamental differences in how we approach and what we expect from discussions. I'm not trying to, nor do I expect to bring anyone around to my way of thinking. Similarly, I regard differing opinions as alternate points of view that I can understand, learn from, etc. but may not necessarily agree with insofar as them altering my own opinions. It's possible for people to understand where each other are coming from and still disagree.
"Taken seriously" to me would just indicate that someone reads and considers what I've said. I don't really expect anything beyond that. Having said that, I believe that my opinion on The Kings and 2010 FA is based on facts and realistic assessments. I admit that Stoudamire was a long shot but don't think someone like Rudy Gay was a long shot. I think it's a fact that they would have had a shot at Rudy Gay and I think it's very probable that he would have significantly improved the team, not just in the near future, but long term as well. He's 24, just coming into his prime, plays a position The Kings are not very strong at (forward), and would rival Tyreke for the title of best player on the team. Gay is legit and If I was GM, I'd rather lock up Gay long term than take a gamble on players like Thompson, Whiteside, Casspi, or Greene to be the forward of The Kings future. Yeah I fully understand the risks involved with the new CBA, possible hard cap, etc. but I would still take the gamble if it meant being able to lock up Gay long term. A proven player is worth more to me than three or four with "potential".
Last edited:
So assuming we give Rudy more (if that's even possible) than what he's getting from Memphis and he comes to the Kings. We still need a good big, the draft goes normally and we end up with Cousins. Few years down the road, Reke and DMC's rookie contracts expire. Tyreke by now is better than Rudy Gay, and is averaging 24 6 7. DMC has become the dominant big we want, putting up 15points and 12 rebounds a game. We would like to sign both Tyreke and DMC, while retaining players like Garcia, Beno, Omri, JT and Hassan. Show me the money.
That's assuming players like JT, Hassan, and Omri pan out and are vital pieces in a few years. Frankly, I'm a bit skeptical of that happening. I don't think any of them will ever be as good a player as Gay is. We don't even know if they'll be here then, any of them could feasibly be packaged as part of a trade before then. Given the option, I'd opt for locking up a trio of Evans/Gay/DMC for the long term if I could. Beno and Cisco are great role players but they aren't going to command top money and I suspect if they're resigned, it will be for considerably less than what they make now. All of this is doable, all it takes is a willingness to pay some luxury tax.