Grades v. Pistons 12/14

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Peja ( C ) -- as expected, Peja's personal hell of a roadtrip continued. Hassel, Prince and then Bowen?? Oh my. This time out in the first half didn't look like Peja even really wanted to try it. Just passed it off rather than try to force the offense. Made a couple of solid passes off of pentration in the process though. A couple of times even saw guys not hit him for passes they normally would have tried. Had a brief spurt of life in
the mid-third with back to back threes, and also starting challenging Prince a little better. Showed a little pride I think. Night ended quite early as we went back to the bench in the early 4th.
Reef ( B- ) -- got off to a very nice offensive start, unfortunately Sheed was scoring back at him just as fast. Was able to iso and post several of the Pistons tough defensive bigs. Really getting ridiculous on the glass now. Had 2 rebounds last night, and then 2 more tonight.
Miller ( B ) -- hit a number of outside jumpers against the Pistons frontline, who want to pack the lane of course. Grabbed a decent number of rebounds, but of course it should be notes that his opposite numebr still grabbed twice as many.
Bonzi ( D+ ) -- got lit up by Rip all night long, and a night after being the big hero, the best thing he did was make some good dump off passes on dirve and dish plays. Forced it up in there a few times against the Pistons shotblockers, but mostly just got worked over by Rip.
Bibby ( C- ) -- scored well early, but it was Billups controlling the game on the other end. Went on a little run at the end of the third just when it looked like the Pistons might be going for the stranglehold. Forestalled the inevitable for a few minutes. But this grade sinks drasticlaly because of the working over he received at the other end of the court by Billups, who racked up a career hihg in assists and threw in 28 points to boot.
Garcia ( C ) -- played another good hustle game, but simply cannot hit a shot to save his life. Not even when he's not being an idiot and forcing. This was a guy known as a shooter in college, but you'd never know it. At least with the hustle is maybe figuring out how to make a consistent contribution of some sort.
Corliss ( B+ ) -- came in and gave is a nive little boost of energy. Int he first half, surprisingly mostly boardwork, but only had one nice finish on offense. But used his bulk effectively in the semi-garbagetime 4th to score repeatedly -- often on Mo. though of an A-, but most of his damage really did come after the game was over.
Thomas ( B- ) -- a nice pass early, but not much else until the dying minutes when he had a little flurry hitting a couple of perimeter jumpers and getting the assists on a couple of layups by the benchies. Not much boardwork, and untilt he final 3-4 minutes not much impact.
Skinner ( B ) -- good defensive activity in the first half, keying us inside ala Big Ben. Well...kinda. ;) Second half did not stand out, but still the second staright solid game from him. Maybe a good sign for us going forward.
Hart ( B ) -- did pretty well in his first half stint. Best in a while, and was actually running the team tonight. On the other hand, was also getting lit up on defense by Billups almost as often as Bibby (was effective against Carlos Arroyo though, who jsut seems to have forgotten how to play).
Martin ( INC ) -- garbagetime. Had as much luck against Rip as everyone else.
Price ( INC ) -- garbagetime. Got a gimme hoop in transition.

Adelman ( B ) -- we came out and laid a defensive egg in the first. Pistons threatened 40pts in the first quarter, and that was with the game feeling like it was played in slow motion. Liked the move to bump Corlissup in the rotation vs. his old team. Went deep into the bench trying to avoid fatigue, and got some energy that was missing from the starters. We built a lead in the second quarter, and it was an actual bench sighting! In some ways no surprise as the Pistons are the only more starter-centric team in the league, and their bench looked like ours often does. Went to a zone for the second night in a row, and that seemed to be part of the reason the Pistons bench was disrupted. Maybe starting to work that in consistently to compensate for our inferior defenders? Only real question tonight for Rick, was whether he intended the reinsertion of the bench for a fading starting group in the early 4th to be a surrender, just a breather, or a shot in the arm. In any case, eventually ended up being a surrender, as the backups weren't able to make up any ground and Rick decided to just let the starters take the rest of the night off rather than have them log unnecesary and futile minutes. I any case, thought rick was solid tongiht and finally got something out of his bench. We lost this one simply because we are not as good as they are, and came into town maybe a little tired. Rick did his jobn, but we were just outmatched. Next up: the team that beat this one in the Finals a few months back. Woohoo!

Evans ( A ) -- for old times sake, Mo decided to come out and show us by forcing all kinds of crap, in the process going 0-5 in the first half and helping us get back in it. Finished 0-7 and got worked over by Corliss to boot. Thx Mo!

Pistons crowd ( F ) -- you have to be kidding me. About as pathetic as any crowd I've ever "heard" in the NBA. Let alone one for a title-contending team. And I thought Arco fans had gotten spoiled. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Looking at the stats, the King's are not too far off from becoming a good team. Considering that they just lost to the best team in the Eastern Conference that has the best record in the NBA and has played together for years, these stats are decent:

http://www.nba.com/games/20051214/SACDET/livestats.html

Where the King's beat Detroit:

Point in the Paint: 40 to 32
Fast Break Pts: 17 to 15
Turn Overs: 11 to 12
Bench points: 36 to 8

They were competitive in rebounds. They were beat by 5 rebounds. They lost the game at the 3pt line and by 8 blocked shots vs 2.

The Kings put forth a good effort IMO. I think it might be a very different game if it were played in the 2nd half of the season after the King's had more time to solidify.
 
SacDoug said:
Looking at the stats, the King's are not too far off from becoming a good team. Considering that they just lost to the best team in the Eastern Conference that has the best record in the NBA and has played together for years, these stats are decent:

http://www.nba.com/games/20051214/SACDET/livestats.html

Where the King's beat Detroit:

Point in the Paint: 40 to 32
Fast Break Pts: 17 to 15
Turn Overs: 11 to 12
Bench points: 36 to 8

They were competitive in rebounds. They were beat by 5 rebounds. They lost the game at the 3pt line and by 8 blocked shots vs 2.

The Kings put forth a good effort IMO. I think it might be a very different game if it were played in the 2nd half of the season after the King's had more time to solidify.

The Pistons toyed with us and dismissed us. Wasn't as close as the stats indicate.
 
Bricklayer said:
The Pistons toyed with us and dismissed us. Wasn't as close as the stats indicate.


I think "toyed" is a bit too strong a word here. The King's fought hard and kept it close all the way to the 4th quarter and even took the lead in the 3rd. The Piston starters played a lot of minutes. This is the 4th game in 5 nights for the King's and the starters definately showed how weary they were. The Pistons are a very good team and it showed. But I think the Kings are not too far away from being a good team also.
 
SacDoug said:
I think "toyed" is a bit too strong a word here. The King's fought hard and kept it close all the way to the 4th quarter and even took the lead in the 3rd. The Piston starters played a lot of minutes. This is the 4th game in 5 nights for the King's and the starters definately showed how weary they were. The Pistons are a very good team and it showed. But I think the Kings are not too far away from being a good team also.

I think that last line colors what you saw.

I saw a home team and crowd casually going through the motions early and struggling to sustain intensity for the whole game. Even so, at no point did I sense the least bit of alarm from anyone that we were actually going to walk away with it. Then it kind of became time to win it, and they just made their push and ended it. We weren't a serious threat, and they and their crowd knew it from the start. Long gone are the days when teams even remotely got up for us coming into town. These road games are getting hard to watch they are so drab and low-intensity.
 
Bricklayer said:
I think that last line colors what you saw.

I saw a home team and crowd casually going through the motions early and struggling to sustain intensity for the whole game. Even so, at no point did I sense the least bit of alarm from anyone that we were actually going to walk away with it. Then it kind of became time to win it, and they just made their push and ended it. We weren't a serious threat, and they and their crowd knew it from the start. Long gone are the days when teams even remotely got up for us coming into town. These road games are getting hard to watch they are so drab and low-intensity.


Could you tell me when the "time to win it" came? Was there a signal given? Why didn't they just decide to win the game in the 3rd quarter instead of the 4th? The fact is that they really could not pull away until the King's starters were spent and couldn't really compete anymore.

Your comments are how the Pistons and crowd carried themselves is interresting but not a mystery. Why is it any wonder that the crowd and the Pistons acted with confidence? They have a title and were contenders last year. They also still have the same starting five this year.
 
I"m not sure I agree with Brick's comments. In my opinion, I think the Pistons had motivation for this game after getting throttled by Utah on MOnday night.

Moreover, the Kings had a few things working against them tonight:

1. 4th game in five nights
2. Coming off an emotional win the previous night
3. Road game

Combine those factors and the Kings were the ones who didn't play with passion, but for good reason.

That being said, it just seemed like they were content with putting up a good effort and not winning. Did anyone else come away with that impression? I mean, I"m happy they competed and looked all right, but at the same time, it looked like that's all they were content with.
 
What matters is THE FINAL SCORE ...

King's were so INCONSISTENT

Couldn't sustain any NOTABLE momentum

B2B - so what ... I'm tired of that excuse
4th game in 5 nights .... quit your whining ... try putting in 60 hour weeks

I'm sorry, but our Kings have got to find ways to win rather then excuses for losing. :cool:
 
Its no illusion that I think every team licks their lips when they play the Kings because they know they can get to the basket any time they want. Look at the T'Wolves game last night. Almost lost the game on a layup. WTF is that ****!! We now have post scorers in Bonzi and Reef so the points in the paint doesn't look so bad, but its they way they get their points in the paint. Other teams don't even have to work for it.
 
Folsom Al said:
What matters is THE FINAL SCORE ...

King's were so INCONSISTENT

Couldn't sustain any NOTABLE momentum

B2B - so what ... I'm tired of that excuse
4th game in 5 nights .... quit your whining ... try putting in 60 hour weeks

I'm sorry, but our Kings have got to find ways to win rather then excuses for losing. :cool:

Folsom Al, I"m a CPA, 60 hour weeks are a way of life for me.

It's not an excuse, it's a reality. A commonly known fact that in the NBA, the toughest game to play is the 4th game in five nights.

Other than that, I agree with you. It appeared to me there were content with just putting up a fight
 
3pt shooting is what killed the kings.... billups went 6-8 from long range, what are the chances of any team winning when a player does that?
 
cfechter said:
Folsom Al, I"m a CPA, 60 hour weeks are a way of life for me.

It's not an excuse, it's a reality. A commonly known fact that in the NBA, the toughest game to play is the 4th game in five nights.

Other than that, I agree with you. It appeared to me there were content with just putting up a fight

So's my wife ... she puts in about 70-80 hours a week !!! :eek:

4th game in 5 nights .... WHERE'S THE BENCH ????

Too many holes in this squad ... way too many holes

Piston's were having a DUCK SHOOT .... one can probably count on their hands and toes how may UNCONTESTED SHOTS Detroit took. Some where there wasn't even ONE King's defender within 10 feet ... unbelievable.

King's played for about 2-1/2 quarters this game .... fatigued = ???

Fans/Non-Players will use that as an excuse ... ask a player what they think.
 
Bricklayer said:
Only real question tonight for Rick, was whether he intended the reinsertion of the bench for a fading starting group in the early 4th to be a surrender, just a breather, or a shot in the arm.

Surrender?!?!?! Are you kidding me? If Rick intended that to be a surrender he should be fired immediately for just not giving a damn about winning. The Kings were trailing by 8 with 12 minutes to go, not an ideal situation, but not a bad spot for an underdog on the road just trying to hang around until the stretch. He went to the bench because that is what you do in that situation. You can't play the starters all 24 minutes of the second half on the 4th games in 5 nights. You bring in the bench looking for 3-4 solid minutes and then bring in the rested starters for the final minutes. Brick, that is Basketball 101. Plus, the bench had actually given us something in the first half. I don't think RA was expecting them to surrender a 7-0 run in the first 90 seconds. It only became a surrender once the Pistons pushed it to 18 and the game was effectively over.

The only quibble you can have with RA regarding the substitution pattern is why wait so long to get the bench in. It probably would have been a better idea to start subbing at the 4 or 3 minute mark of the 3rd, and gradually work the bench in and starters out instead of making a wholesale swap to start the 4th.

But if we have a coach who is surrendering down by 8 to start the 4th I don't want him. I don't care if you think Detroit was toying with us all night, we still had a chance to win at that point. Your suggestion that RA was surrendering is assinine.
 
cfechter said:
Folsom Al, I"m a CPA, 60 hour weeks are a way of life for me.

It's not an excuse, it's a reality. A commonly known fact that in the NBA, the toughest game to play is the 4th game in five nights.

Other than that, I agree with you. It appeared to me there were content with just putting up a fight

Does it give you an excuse to not do as good of a job since you're overworked?
 
Team Dime said:
Does it give you an excuse to not do as good of a job since you're overworked?
No, it means you can't do as good of a job. I've worked more than 60 hr weeks for extended periods out of necessity (short-staffed). But it was clear that even the best and smartest made more mistakes that had to be fixed the next morning. Fatigue affects performance, its a fact.
 
kennadog said:
No, it means you can't do as good of a job. I've worked more than 60 hr weeks for extended periods out of necessity (short-staffed). But it was clear that even the best and smartest made more mistakes that had to be fixed the next morning. Fatigue affects performance, its a fact.

Don't worry it's hard for people to understand it if they don't work.
 
Rain man said:
Surrender?!?!?! Are you kidding me? If Rick intended that to be a surrender he should be fired immediately for just not giving a damn about winning. The Kings were trailing by 8 with 12 minutes to go, not an ideal situation, but not a bad spot for an underdog on the road just trying to hang around until the stretch. He went to the bench because that is what you do in that situation. You can't play the starters all 24 minutes of the second half on the 4th games in 5 nights. You bring in the bench looking for 3-4 solid minutes and then bring in the rested starters for the final minutes. Brick, that is Basketball 101. Plus, the bench had actually given us something in the first half. I don't think RA was expecting them to surrender a 7-0 run in the first 90 seconds. It only became a surrender once the Pistons pushed it to 18 and the game was effectively over.

The only quibble you can have with RA regarding the substitution pattern is why wait so long to get the bench in. It probably would have been a better idea to start subbing at the 4 or 3 minute mark of the 3rd, and gradually work the bench in and starters out instead of making a wholesale swap to start the 4th.

But if we have a coach who is surrendering down by 8 to start the 4th I don't want him. I don't care if you think Detroit was toying with us all night, we still had a chance to win at that point. Your suggestion that RA was surrendering is assinine.

You know, before you make a completely unnecessary *** of yourself, its sometimes useful to get your ducks in a row.

The only starter removed to begin the 4th was Peja for Garcia, which was no great loss. By the time we had removed Miller and SAR at the 10:22 mark the lead was 13. Bonzi went at the 10:00 mark and the lead was 15. Bibby went at the 8:37 mark and the lead was 17. A staged withdrawal as things fell apart. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playbyplay?gameId=251214008&period=4
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top