[Grades] Grades v. Nuggets 1/26/2014

[VF21]

...Teams let him score, because he won't often get others involved. Several times they noted that he's not giving up the ball if he thinks he sees daylight. IT missed BMac cutting around a curl 6 ft from the rim to then himself drive into traffic...

And that, I'm afraid, is how every single team in the league is going to look at us as long as IT is in the starting PG slot. Add that to his problems on D and, even if you're the biggest IT fan on the planet, you have to at some point realize what it's costing the team.

 

[Spike]

A contender would love to have a sixth man like IT if their bench is not currently strong.

I think it'd be an interesting exercise to see who that would be. It's likely a half-year rental, as IT will surely test the free market. What are you willing to give up if you really feel that IT is one of the missing pieces to a deep playoff run? Will an extra draft pick be enough in this year's draft? I don't think you can get that starting PG or elite defender*. I think it'll likely be someone like D. Will, a player with potential who may fit the role that we need.

It's a long time to go before Feb. 20th, and I think PDA is likely going to hold out as long as he can, assuming the team wants to move IT.

*Now that I think about it, you might get a pretty even swap if some team thinks that IT is a better fit as a starter than he is on our team. Depends on what that team covets.

 

[Bricklayer]

I think IT's most rabid supporters, and here I think that Grant & Jerry are doing him a huge disservice too by constantly bleating about him like two starstruck teen girls at a Justin Bieber concert, are helping to exacerbate the impression that he is failing here.

When you get down to it let's assume that I am right. Its a safe assumption, I normally am. But let's assume I am right, and IT is basically a 3rd option best suited as a score first 6th man. Ok, now if that is true, if I am right about that, IT's performances these last two games are not "failures". They are predictable for what happens to everybody's 3rd option/top 6th men when you remove the guys ahead of him in the pecking order. Would things go any differently for Jamal Crawford? For Craig Parsons? For our own Bobby Jackson back int he day (although not sure he was ever above 4th in the pecking order). I doubt it.

The impression that they are "failures" largely stems from the push, by IT, by his Beliebers, for him to be something more. Oh, he's a Top 10 PG, oh if you don't think IT is dreamy you just don't know basketball! (sincerely, Jerry Reynolds, President IT Flub Club). Oh he's an All Star caliber guy. Oh, he wants to be the best little man of all time. Oh...just etc. And yeah, if all that nonsense is true then sure, IT is failing to be that. There is a gap between that rhetoric and his performance. Its one of the major reasons why I have been bothered by IT getting puffed up like a blowfish as a gunning starter with a greenlight and legions of fans wearing little heart shaped lockets with his face on them. It ruins what should be a decent narrative. IT as 6th man, sans the overhype, the demands for shots as a route to respect, could be coming into these games as the plucky little 6th man doing his best to fill in when the team's stars were out, trying to carry us to unlikely victories while outmanned etc. Instead he gives the impression he's out there for himself, viewing everything a an opportunity to be the hero, to garner his "respect", as do the worst of his fans. And so yeah, now its failing. Its like the pretty homecoming queen form Middle of Nowhere, Iowa. If she's just a sweet humble girl with a pretty face and a nice figure, she's beloved and remembered fondly as a pretty girl that everyone wanted to dance with at prom. On the other hand if she and her escort claim that Mila Kunis and Nina Agdal ain't got nothing on this and she prances around the room trying to steal everybody's boyfriends, she'll be despised and ridiculed. And there is just no reason for it. Same face, same figure. In this case same basketball player. But by claiming too much and letting egos write checks that a 5'9" body can't check you can take what should be a success story and raise expectations to the point that it now looks like a failure, and its causing a backlash that is exceeding reality the other way. Now the girls are whispering in the hall about how heinous the would be queen is, how her nose is too big and she's probably got acne underneath her pancake makeup. And that's not reality either. Its an allergic reaction to the overreaching. She's still a pretty girl. She's just not Mila Kunis.

 

[funkykingston]

A contender would love to have a sixth man like IT if their bench is not currently strong.

I think Pete is shopping for an elite Defensive PF or a staring quality PG. I'm guessing IT and any combination of players not named Cousins or Gay would be included. I think D. Will and Ray are here for awhile unless they make or break the deal.

KB

And here's where the difficulty with Thomas comes into play. If he isn't the long term starter for the Kings then one of two things will happen if he's still on the team after the trade deadline.

1. The Kings lose him to a team willing to offer him starter money.
2. The Kings vastly overpay and give IT starter money to be a sixth man.

If Thomas is not the long term solution as a starting PG then I think the Kings have to be putting together packages (due to IT"s currently low salary) to deal him.

 

[HndsmCelt]

And here's where the difficulty with Thomas comes into play. If he isn't the long term starter for the Kings then one of two things will happen if he's still on the team after the trade deadline.

1. The Kings lose him to a team willing to offer him starter money.
2. The Kings vastly overpay and give IT starter money to be a sixth man.

If Thomas is not the long term solution as a starting PG then I think the Kings have to be putting together packages (due to IT"s currently low salary) to deal him.

Think sign and trade this off season.

 

[Glenn]

And here's where the difficulty with Thomas comes into play. If he isn't the long term starter for the Kings then one of two things will happen if he's still on the team after the trade deadline.

1. The Kings lose him to a team willing to offer him starter money.
2. The Kings vastly overpay and give IT starter money to be a sixth man.

If Thomas is not the long term solution as a starting PG then I think the Kings have to be putting together packages (due to IT"s currently low salary) to deal him.

Isn't a sign and trade possible or have they been eliminated?

 

[Toasty]

The coach seems to be a belieber in IT. He seems to even be a fanboy.

My feeling is that it will be really hard in our current state to find something better.

 

[Glenn]

The coach seems to be a belieber in IT. He seems to even be a fanboy.

My feeling is that it will be really hard in our current state to find something better.

I think the coach looks down the bench for a pg, sighs, and plays who is obviously the best athlete, IT.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Sign and trade is possible, as is the situation that happened with Jeff Teague--the market dries up, he signs a reasonable offer sheet with another team, and the Kings match (or no team offers him any more than the Kings think is reasonable for a 6th man and he simply accepts an offer from the Kings). May not be likely, but is a possibility.

 

[King Baller]

And here's where the difficulty with Thomas comes into play. If he isn't the long term starter for the Kings then one of two things will happen if he's still on the team after the trade deadline.

1. The Kings lose him to a team willing to offer him starter money.
2. The Kings vastly overpay and give IT starter money to be a sixth man.

If Thomas is not the long term solution as a starting PG then I think the Kings have to be putting together packages (due to IT"s currently low salary) to deal him.

I agree that IT has to be packaged with another player due to his relatively low salary for the rest of this season.

I'm thinking if the Kings brain trust would not pay Tyreke due to a perception of being one dimensional, then they won't pay IT. And if you are not going to pay IT it is best to move him now while a team can still use his production at a low salary.

 

[King Baller]

It would not surprise me to see a trade that does not include a PG coming to the Kings. Then the Kings would just roll with Ray taking his lumps learning to start and Jimmer continuing in his backup role.

Pete is really high on Ray. And perhaps rightly so. Lets see what the young man can do if he gets the ball.

 

[LPKingsFan]

I agree that IT has to be packaged with another player due to his relatively low salary for the rest of this season.

I'm thinking if the Kings brain trust would not pay Tyreke due to a perception of being one dimensional, then they won't pay IT. And if you are not going to pay IT it is best to move him now while a team can still use his production at a low salary.

I certainly agree that they should be aggressive in figuring out what the market may be for an IT trade.

But I think the Tyreke situation is apples to oranges--you can't just say "they won't pay IT." They won't pay IT $7 million? Maybe. They won't pay IT $8 million or more? I sure hope not. But they won't pay IT $5 million? I think that would be a mistake.

 

[King Baller]

By the way, when Outlaw is your best play maker as he was in this game, something is screwy?

 

[Glenn]

Sign and trade is possible, as is the situation that happened with Jeff Teague--the market dries up, he signs a reasonable offer sheet with another team, and the Kings match (or no team offers him any more than the Kings think is reasonable for a 6th man and he simply accepts an offer from the Kings). May not be likely, but is a possibility.

Quite honestly I am missing something about the sign and trade. If a team has a player we covet who is making $8 mil and the team that has him no longer wants him, why can't we sign IT to $8 mil and trade him to that team? To me, it seems the easiest way of getting full value for IT.

Trading him in a package deal would involve adding people we just want to get rid of. I certainly wouldn't trade away IT plus a serviceable player like JT or Landry just to make sure we get some value out of IT. Depends on who we get, of course.

In any case, I trust PDA on this one.

 

[Glenn]

It would not surprise me to see a trade that does not include a PG coming to the Kings. Then the Kings would just roll with Ray taking his lumps learning to start and Jimmer continuing in his backup role.

Pete is really high on Ray. And perhaps rightly so. Lets see what the young man can do if he gets the ball.

Carnage coming.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Quite honestly I am missing something about the sign and trade. If a team has a player we covet who is making $8 mil and the team that has him no longer wants him, why can't we sign IT to $8 mil and trade him to that team? To me, it seems the easiest way of getting full value for IT.

Trading him in a package deal would involve adding people we just want to get rid of. I certainly wouldn't trade away IT plus a serviceable player like JT or Landry just to make sure we get some value out of IT. Depends on who we get, of course.

In any case, I trust PDA on this one.

I don't see any reason why we couldn't pursue the scenario you suggest, although it wouldn't take place until July. That said, from my experience it seems like 1-for-1 sign and trades are rare. It's usually like the Tyreke trade and you get a combination of players that usually don't match up in value for the guy you're sending out.

I'm not opposed to a package deal right now (in fact, one would be almost assuredly necessary given IT's low salary). Long term, I think you have to roll with only one of either Landry or JT as your third big, pairing Cousins with the elusive "defensive anchor" in the starting lineup--so packaging one with IT to get a long-term upgrade at any non-SF/C position would be worthy move IMO.

 

[bajaden]

Anyone not named Gay or Cousins is a scrub? That is precisely what is wrong with the people on this forum. Last night's game would be very typical 25 or more years ago in the NBA. Not much emphasis on defense, lots of up and down and scores well over 100 points. That was the norm for a long time until some coaches like Popovich got tired of losing on nights when his team scored a lot of points. Last night is a good example. We can learn a lot from watching a game like last night. The Kings' were in this game the whole time. A few stops here and there and they could have won. Many games the Kings' play with everyone in the line-up ,the SCENARIO IS EXACTLY THE SAME.

It is obvious to anyone that knows basketball that the Kings' weaknesses are all on the defensive side of the ball. Cousins will never be the defensive savior of the team. The Kings' are likely to struggle to outscore opponents for some time to come.

I detest the weak term "heroball." With a thin lineup, someone has to step forward and try to lead the team. A player that is willing carry the load without a lot of help should not be chastised for taking the responsibility. Very soon I am going to give up and stop making comments about IT.

There is a disconnect between the way IT is viewed on this forum, and the way he is viewed by the owners, the coaches and most sportscasters. It is ironic that he is held in such low esteem by his "fans." Be careful what you wish for or the team will be lead by another Vasquez.

I like the part about giving up and not making comments about IT, because quite honestly, you lost all credibility with me a long time ago. If you want to praise IT for, as you call it, stepping up, despite the results, remember, while he's dominating the ball, it becomes very hard for anyone else to step up and lead the team. It becomes omission by domination. If you don't like the term hero ball, which I might add has been used on other players besides IT, then how about selfish ball, black hole ball, blinder ball, stat ball, or I can do it all by myself ball. I don't give a damm about semantics, I only care about results. When IT playes well, I'll praise him, and I've given him A's as a grader. But when he plays poorly, then he gets criticized and a low grade. That my friend is how it works in the real world.

 

[bajaden]

That can't be right: I have it on Good Authority™ that everyone loves Isaiah Thomas, except for the posters on this message board... and only us.

How can you not like that cute little munchkin? I mean, he's the pizza guy. Actually, I do like IT, but just like with my wife, we just don't always agree on how to get something done. Of course in her case, she's always right!

 

[Bricklayer]

By the way, when Outlaw is your best play maker as he was in this game, something is screwy?

The question would be, if Bobby Jackson were on this roster instead of IT, would the above really have been any different this game?

IT isn't bad at everything, that's what's being lost. He's just bad at involving teammates in his little game of 1 on 1. But even that is not a hopeless flaw if he knows it, we know it, and we don't have him in a position requiring it.

 

[mac]

The Denver announcers were lousy. It's a small sample size, but IT has not looked good without the two big guns out there.

Anyone who calls out IT for not passing the ball and saying that it's hard to win with such a PG isn't lousy in my books

 

[bajaden]

well there should certainly be other contributors on offense in addition to demarcus cousins and rudy gay. my point was simply that this team leans so ridiculously towards the offensive side of the ball that, at some point, exchanges need to be made that prioritize the defensive side of the ball, even if it comes at the expense of overall offensive production. right now, the kings need cousins, gay, and isaiah thomas to be as efficient as they've been, offensively, because the kings don't stop the opposition from scoring often enough to justify inefficiency from their so-called "big three."

however, a stronger defensive kings team could absorb the loss of, say, isaiah thomas via trade. with cousins and gay already in place, you don't need a player like IT who puts up 20 a night if you can hold opposing teams under 100 ppg. it's just going to require guts on the part of the kings' front office to say, "all right, enough is enough. i don't care how many points we can score per game. i want us to be able to stop somebody. let's make some calls and leverage our offensive talent to gain what we simply do not have on the defensive side of the ball."

I would hope that somehow, if the price is right, we could keep IT and have him return to his role off the bench. He's just so perfect as a leader of the second unit. However, I suspect that he'll be gone by the trade deadline. I don't think the Kings can afford to gamble that they'll be able to retain him at the price they want.

 

[mac]

I think IT's most rabid supporters, and here I think that Grant & Jerry are doing him a huge disservice too by constantly bleating about him like two starstruck teen girls at a Justin Bieber concert, are helping to exacerbate the impression that he is failing here.

When you get down to it let's assume that I am right. Its a safe assumption, I normally am. But let's assume I am right, and IT is basically a 3rd option best suited as a score first 6th man. Ok, now if that is true, if I am right about that, IT's performances these last two games are not "failures". They are predictable for what happens to everybody's 3rd option/top 6th men when you remove the guys ahead of him in the pecking order. Would things go any differently for Jamal Crawford? For Craig Parsons? For our own Bobby Jackson back int he day (although not sure he was ever above 4th in the pecking order). I doubt it.

The impression that they are "failures" largely stems from the push, by IT, by his Beliebers, for him to be something more. Oh, he's a Top 10 PG, oh if you don't think IT is dreamy you just don't know basketball! (sincerely, Jerry Reynolds, President IT Flub Club). Oh he's an All Star caliber guy. Oh, he wants to be the best little man of all time. Oh...just etc. And yeah, if all that nonsense is true then sure, IT is failing to be that. There is a gap between that rhetoric and his performance. Its one of the major reasons why I have been bothered by IT getting puffed up like a blowfish as a gunning starter with a greenlight and legions of fans wearing little heart shaped lockets with his face on them. It ruins what should be a decent narrative. IT as 6th man, sans the overhype, the demands for shots as a route to respect, could be coming into these games as the plucky little 6th man doing his best to fill in when the team's stars were out, trying to carry us to unlikely victories while outmanned etc. Instead he gives the impression he's out there for himself, viewing everything a an opportunity to be the hero, to garner his "respect", as do the worst of his fans. And so yeah, now its failing. Its like the pretty homecoming queen form Middle of Nowhere, Iowa. If she's just a sweet humble girl with a pretty face and a nice figure, she's beloved and remembered fondly as a pretty girl that everyone wanted to dance with at prom. On the other hand if she and her escort claim that Mila Kunis and Nina Agdal ain't got nothing on this and she prances around the room trying to steal everybody's boyfriends, she'll be despised and ridiculed. And there is just no reason for it. Same face, same figure. In this case same basketball player. But by claiming too much and letting egos write checks that a 5'9" body can't check you can take what should be a success story and raise expectations to the point that it now looks like a failure, and its causing a backlash that is exceeding reality the other way. Now the girls are whispering in the hall about how heinous the would be queen is, how her nose is too big and she's probably got acne underneath her pancake makeup. And that's not reality either. Its an allergic reaction to the overreaching. She's still a pretty girl. She's just not Mila Kunis.

My issue has always been that he looks for himself first, and only first. It's not about helping the team win. It's always about helping Isaiah Thomas look good, about Isaiah Thomas being the next Iverson. When he wasn't starting he made it very very clear that he wanted to start, despite being put in the position he was in by the coach. His postgame comments reek of selfishness, of taking credit for everything he does right and passing blame for everything he does wrong, or saying that the TEAM needs to do such and such when it was really just him who was failing in that regard. It's not just this season either.

Compare this with say Jimmer Fredette. How is it that a guy who's own coaches reportedly don't even view him as a PG makes more of an effort to share the ball? This guy is known league-wide as a shooter/scorer, could probably come in and just jack shots the same way IT does (before getting pulled), but still attempts to run the offense and set guys up. Sometimes you even wish he would just shoot the ball and not try to pass it to Quincy Acy on a pick and roll. Postgame always calls it a good team win, says that everyone did a good job defensively, and when he scores a little more credits team mates with setting him up for good shots.

Obviously IT has been the far far better player in the league, but it's so much easier to root for someone who is honestly really fighting for his NBA career and still tries to play for the team than for himself.

 

[mac]

I would hope that somehow, if the price is right, we could keep IT and have him return to his role off the bench. He's just so perfect as a leader of the second unit. However, I suspect that he'll be gone by the trade deadline. I don't think the Kings can afford to gamble that they'll be able to retain him at the price they want.

I hope he's gone by the trade deadline. It would make watching the Kings a lot more enjoyable for me personally.

 

[whozit]

Anyone who calls out IT for not passing the ball and saying that it's hard to win with such a PG isn't lousy in my books

Even louses have good points. I don't really think their louses 'cause I don't even know them, but simply lousy. They made some good observations but often it seemed that what they were witnessing they were stating it as fact for each and every game the Kings played. But then again, maybe I just wasn't in a good mood and attributed my cause of annoyance to them.

 

[Glenn]

The question would be, if Bobby Jackson were on this roster instead of IT, would the above really have been any different this game?

IT isn't bad at everything, that's what's being lost. He's just bad at involving teammates in his little game of 1 on 1. But even that is not a hopeless flaw if he knows it, we know it, and we don't have him in a position requiring it.

I hate to correct my superiors but what actually is being lost is that NO ONE has EVER said he is bad at everything. Now, if his fans read what is said is that IT can't do ANYTHING right, that's on them.

 

[The_Jamal]

Was happy to see Ben have a strong game. This was MUCH needed for his confidence level. It looked like he was able to really find a groove because he was give some opportunities to shoot the ball.

 

[jalfa]

Even louses have good points. I don't really think their louses 'cause I don't even know them, but simply lousy. They made some good observations but often it seemed that what they were witnessing they were stating it as fact for each and every game the Kings played. But then again, maybe I just wasn't in a good mood and attributed my cause of annoyance to them.

nah, don't question yourself, the Nuggets guys are pretty terrible, no matter who they're playing. on the, very short, list of crews Grant and Jerry are better than.

 

[funkykingston]

Think sign and trade this off season.

Isn't a sign and trade possible or have they been eliminated?

I think a sign-and-trade for IT is highly unlikely for a few reasons.

Mostly because the Kings would likely be getting pennies on the dollar in such a scenario vs dealing him at the trade deadline. If a team has the money to offer IT a deal outright then there's zero reason for them to engage in a sign-and-trade and give up assets, unless of course they are contracts that are actively trying to dump. If a team DOESN'T have the room to offer IT a deal outright then then the only reason for the Kings to sign-and-trade IT would be the risk of losing him for nothing to another team that does have the money. We only have to look back to the Tyreke deal. The Kings could have simply matched the offer and retained him. Or they could have simply let NO sign him and lose him for nothing. Instead they got a little back by doing a sign-and-trade for Vasquez who wasn't in the Hornets plans anyway. And given the Kings attempt to sign Calderon, I'm not sure Vasquez was really in the Kings' plans either. Just a consolation prize with some value as a player and possibly more value as a low cost ending contract.

And starting this offseason, sign-and-trade deals will be less likely anyway. The new rules kick in that state that (1) teams that pay luxury tax cannot acquire a player via S&T AND any team that DOES acquire a player via sign-and-trade loses their ability to use the mid-level exception that offseason.

Again, I say that if the Kings like IT as a starting PG then they hold on and resign him. If they don't then they should probably try to package him in a deal. The only other option is to wait for the offseason and hope nobody makes him a huge deal and then get him back for slightly above MLE money as a super sub. Problem is, I think SOME team will offer IT more money AND I think Thomas will be pushing hard for a starting job.

We'll see.

 

[funkykingston]

I would hope that somehow, if the price is right, we could keep IT and have him return to his role off the bench. He's just so perfect as a leader of the second unit. However, I suspect that he'll be gone by the trade deadline. I don't think the Kings can afford to gamble that they'll be able to retain him at the price they want.

I think the Gay trade has largely been a success for the Kings. However, one negative about it is that it elevated IT from "Sixth man super sub" to "Only real option to start at PG". The last two games he's shot poorly but in general IT has shown himself to be a VERY potent and efficient scorer which has likely priced him out of the JJ Barea or Jamal Crawford pay range where I think he belongs. I could be wrong though. A deal for a starting PG or drafting a guy like Exum or Smart (who I am personally not high on) and a reasonable new contract for IT would give the Kings a potent 2nd unit.

I love Thomas as a scorer off the bench. I don't like him much at all as the starting PG. And if he returns next year I'd hope its in the role and pay grade of the former and not the latter.

 

[Toasty]

IT averages almost 7 assists per game. He is a good distributor of the ball.