Chubbs
Starter
I gave his PER elsewhere. It's the worst on the team. Among the worst in the nba.
He's shooting 35%. It's hard to be worse all around than he is.
http://espn.go.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/sac/cat/PER/sacramento-kings
[Grades] Grades v. Jazz 12/7/2013
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
He's shooting 35%. It's hard to be worse all around than he is.
http://espn.go.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/sac/cat/PER/sacramento-kings
Glenn
Hall of Famer
I have been pondering Salmons for a few years. Malone isn't the first coach to use him yet have fans call him all kinds of names. I may be wrong but I think that was true of his first time with the Kings also. Most breathed a sigh of relief when he left. I may be wrong in my memory. In any way, coaches like him and we are all perplexed. Some of it may have to do with the lack of skill of team mates but I have a simple way of looking at Salmons.
I think he is a very knowledgeable vet who knows when the pass should be made, when the shot should be taken and might even have the skills to be a pg, albeit a slow one. He is a sg playing out of position. If we all remember, last year when the team was falling apart under Smart, he was the guy who called a players' only meeting. The most recent players' only meeting involved Salmons and someone else as leaders. The man knows basketball. The man is respected as a leader believe it or not. He DOES smile.
His problem is that he cannot translate what he knows into physical actions on the court that result in points, etc. He is intelligent and not skilled. I don't know at what point his skill left him but I think it has to do with Indian burial grounds and the like. 
When he went to Milwaukee I sent a note to my best friend since high school (that's a long friendship folks) about what a bad deal they got. At that time, Salmons was averaging 20 ppg for the Bucks and he thought I was crazy.
I will never disparage Salmons. I WILL disparage people who are not trying but never a guy who is giving all he has even if that is next to nothing.
I think he is a very knowledgeable vet who knows when the pass should be made, when the shot should be taken and might even have the skills to be a pg, albeit a slow one. He is a sg playing out of position. If we all remember, last year when the team was falling apart under Smart, he was the guy who called a players' only meeting. The most recent players' only meeting involved Salmons and someone else as leaders. The man knows basketball. The man is respected as a leader believe it or not. He DOES smile.
His problem is that he cannot translate what he knows into physical actions on the court that result in points, etc. He is intelligent and not skilled. I don't know at what point his skill left him but I think it has to do with Indian burial grounds and the like. When he went to Milwaukee I sent a note to my best friend since high school (that's a long friendship folks) about what a bad deal they got. At that time, Salmons was averaging 20 ppg for the Bucks and he thought I was crazy.
I will never disparage Salmons. I WILL disparage people who are not trying but never a guy who is giving all he has even if that is next to nothing.
What's his 3 pt %? How's it compare to teammates? Who on the team has more assists? Is that normal for a small forward? How about blocked shots? Nah, he' one of the worst players on the team. How come the coach has consistently played him big minutes? I guess the coach and I are crazy.
ForlornKing
Starter
Play of the night for me was jerry calling that bag pipe player "horny" and then the awkward silence afterwards. Lol.
Are we comparing him to the rest of the team or are we trying to establish the fact that he is not a very good starting option at SF. I don't think it's very hard to establish him in the bottom tier of SFs in the league.
Chubbs
Starter
Not crazy, just loyal. Salmons seems to get that from multiple coaches. He's a knowledgable vet.
I'd just rather see Williams in there at this point, that's all. For better or worse.
Kingsfan23
All-Star
Whether or not salmons is decent or garbage he isn't a part of the future, and this season should be about grooming the future, possibly at the expense of wins - IMHO
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Again, for the particular roles Salmons brings -- ballhandling swingman/SF and defensive swingman/SF, Salmons is literally the only option on the roster right now. Just is what it is. There are no young guys who can handle or defend at those positions. He's not taking time from anybody with his skills.
Now with Greivis starting he's such a ball dominant passing oriented guard that we feel we can get away with two non-ballhandling athletes at the 2/3 in Ben/Williams. They finish, Greivis creates. But when we go to the bench IT is more me oriented, and so you can't really have him be the only ballhandler or the rest of the team gets frozen out. Hence, Salmons. When we need a Cousins post feeder, and Greivis is out, again its Salmons. When somebody drops 12 in a quarter on Ben/Thornton, who you gonna call? You got it. If we still had a younger option who could do any of that stuff, sure, absolutely you play the young guy. But we really don't. If anything, now is the last time in the last 3 years of Stinky Fish to be complaining about him getting minutes. Now is the first time there has been a real reason for it.
MassachusettsKingsFan
All-Star
Thanks, Uncia, for going over the post entry's possessions by possession.
As the resident 'Thomas should start' guy, here is my unrequested reaction:
In lineups where Cousins and Thomas were on the court together, Cousins got the ball in the post 9/13 post attempts. I have no issue with the coach finding someone else to get the ball into Cousins if IT can't do it effectively, that is why I wouldn't use that as a huge factor in Thomas vs. Vasquez. Getting the ball into the post (when that is what the play calls for) is a relatively easy skill. This is where Thomas's size hurts him, and where GV's size helps him. It's a no question win for Vasquez. I wouldn't argue that.
But you can use Ben, or Williams, or Salmons, or whoever to get the ball into Cousins. That's a pretty easy wart to cover.
What you can't cover, or what this current roster can't cover for is the worst defensive point guard in the NBA. A bad shooter in a lineup that can't shoot. A bad scorer in a lineup that can't score, etc. In my mind, Vasquez's strengths will never outweigh his weaknesses. Thomas's do.
And the simple fact that Thomas and Cousins are consistently out there in crunch time closing games drives a little part of me crazy. These guys are good enough together to be your best late game lineup, but couldn't possibly help keep this team from going down 10+ in the first quarter most games? I just think we are over thinking the entire point guard situation here, not to mention the Vasquez era HAS been a failure so far. That isn't even a question. If people want more time, fine, but don't tell me he has had a successful year, or that what we have now is working.
As the resident 'Thomas should start' guy, here is my unrequested reaction:
In lineups where Cousins and Thomas were on the court together, Cousins got the ball in the post 9/13 post attempts. I have no issue with the coach finding someone else to get the ball into Cousins if IT can't do it effectively, that is why I wouldn't use that as a huge factor in Thomas vs. Vasquez. Getting the ball into the post (when that is what the play calls for) is a relatively easy skill. This is where Thomas's size hurts him, and where GV's size helps him. It's a no question win for Vasquez. I wouldn't argue that.
But you can use Ben, or Williams, or Salmons, or whoever to get the ball into Cousins. That's a pretty easy wart to cover.
What you can't cover, or what this current roster can't cover for is the worst defensive point guard in the NBA. A bad shooter in a lineup that can't shoot. A bad scorer in a lineup that can't score, etc. In my mind, Vasquez's strengths will never outweigh his weaknesses. Thomas's do.
And the simple fact that Thomas and Cousins are consistently out there in crunch time closing games drives a little part of me crazy. These guys are good enough together to be your best late game lineup, but couldn't possibly help keep this team from going down 10+ in the first quarter most games? I just think we are over thinking the entire point guard situation here, not to mention the Vasquez era HAS been a failure so far. That isn't even a question. If people want more time, fine, but don't tell me he has had a successful year, or that what we have now is working.
K
KingMilz
Guest
I agree with all of this, Vasquez is the definition of a player who put's up empty stats and get's destroyed by fairly pretty much every PG we have played this season including rookie Trey Burke. I rather have Salmons as a make shift starting PG ( to keep IT in his epic bench role) with Ben Mac defending the opposition PG and Fish on the SG than watch Vasquez. Salmons if he was instructed that all he had to do is feed the ball to Cuz he could easily do that and he's a better athlete and ball handler than Vasquez anyway.
If we are going to take out Thornton from the line up for his garbage play and Outlaw (who played well) it's really time to remove Vasquez.
That's a good basis for me to leave the subject. Knowledgeable vet is not bad. I'll happily leave the "who
So, what do you want?
Chubbs
Starter
Now we have a 35 shot a game ball dominant wing. And I like the trade anyway. Good times.
Chubbs
Starter
Or not. Apparently he can be traded. In a poopoo platter with Hayes and ppat.
When they talked culture change, I was in favor of cleaning house. Dumping a third of the team qualifies.
Thank goodness we don't have to discuss john salmons anymore. Now we can all argue about Rudy gay, where we can at least all agree (i think) is a large step up talent wise from fish. And we get another guy who can do the things john salmons was doing at the low level he was doing them. I can't complain.
A third gone? We only have a third left.
Chubbs
Starter
4/12=1/3. I meant in one day. Not bad. Technically it might be 4/15. But anyhoo.
I know what you meant; I wasn't talking about one day. I was talking about all the changes which have been made since he got here.
Only six guys who were here when D'Alessandro took the job are still here, and two of them don't get in the game. And yes, I was also using "Gary Braun" math.
Only six guys who were here when D'Alessandro took the job are still here, and two of them don't get in the game. And yes, I was also using "Gary Braun" math.
Chubbs
Starter
Prob 3-4 more players to go. The question is whether that includes IT or not.
I used to think that IT was likely to be a very good trade sweetener to get us out of a bad contract, but now with Vasquez gone, I doubt that IT will be sent out this year unless we get a very good starting PG in return. We're really unlikely to go into win-now mode by grabbing Gay and then resort to a Jimmer/Ray PG rotation.
Chubbs
Starter
I'm not sure this is win now mode at all. Which makes a jimmer at pg scenario not impossible. It's just another stab at a sf. A rental. He's among the most inefficient players ever right now (Gay). That's not going to lead to wins.
IT would be moved for a PG or shot blocker. Either one. Packaged with MT and Williams if need be.
Gay is having his least efficient season, but it also coincides with an astronomical usage rate (something he wouldn't expect to see here due to Cousins and IT also having high usage). When Gay has had more reasonable usage rates, he has a history of a bit over average efficiency. Take a look at the second plot here:
http://www.sbnation.com/2013/12/9/5191354/rudy-gay-trade-kings-raptors-grizzlies-hook
Anyhow, I just find it difficult to look at spending $37M on player and calling it "just another stab". We picked up Derrick Williams on a flyer, sure. But Gay was picked up specifically to be that #2 option, and freeing minutes for IT makes him a pretty serious #3. We have dug ourselves an 8-game-under-.500 hole and we may not be able to rise up into the playoffs in the tougher Western Conference, but we didn't make this trade with the idea of being a .278 team the rest of the way. We intend to move up in the standings. Maybe we don't, because maybe Rudy Gay is the Toronto version and not the Memphis version. But if it works, we probably challenge for the playoffs next year.
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
Good point. These moves are pointing towards a potential playoff run before the new arena opens. Whereas many were thinking that it would take up to 3 seasons, before we could really have playoffs in mind in the West
Chubbs
Starter
Well, we will see what the intent is for gay. I don't see him as part of the future, so it's really just a change of scenery and good if it turns out. And fine if it doesn't. But it's not a long term commitment, just one more season. And financially, it doesn't make us any worse off, not significantly. But to resign him he'd have to take half his current salary. Is he had that hated by gms that he'd do that?
It actually did not dawn on me they might be trying to make the playoffs right now. I guess we will see what they say at the presser. I think that's not even close to realistic. The west is still tough, and this team has never played together.
Also, designing a team, like the Raptors did, around 2 high volume/relatively inefficient wings is a horrid way to design an offense. Derozan and Gay operated in almost identical ways and neither really have much of an off-ball game. Just take a look at what happened with Ellis when he got away from Jennings and next to an elite offensive big in Dirk. Efficiency has gotten to much more respectable levels and even above average this season
While IT is a high usage player, he's also unique in the fact that he's very comfortable with a spot-up game. Whether or not he can adapt to that adding a high USG guy like Gay remains to be seen
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
