bajaden
Hall of Famer
Better get used to it! More to come..
[Grades] Grades v. Suns 12/13/2013
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
Better get used to it! More to come..
I agree, it is a tough, tough coaching situation. It can get done but it will take time. And in that time maybe someone or several will step up and improve their play. Certainly Cousins could and it would help us a lot. Gay and Williams could do that. I don't know about IT. It is so obvious that we need floor-generalship and he hasn't responded so far. He responds by scoring when we need something else from him.
It's hard to imagine Fredette stepping up and hard to imagine McCallum getting the chance to step up. Acey plays the wrong position to step up. You can rely on Thompson and Outlaw to continue at their regular pace. Nice to see a good first step by Gray. I'm sure the FO is burning the lights late to find improvements.
Chubbs
Starter
Amen to this.
He's all machismo. His thoughts last night were, "Oh yeah, you think I'm the third option. Not on my watch. I'm better than gay. Watch." That's what it looked like. Gay, on the other hand, blended in beautifully, forced few shots (even those went in) and got his points in a much less disruptive way.
They've really taken a misstep with IT starting.
Chubbs
Starter
I honestly don't think you even try to change him. You let him be what he is and don't let him start. Absolutely zero,options right now of course.
Not a misstep, a situation that needs to be corrected. How? That' what we pay the staff big bucks to figure out. I'm sure V. Ranadive is expecting his ace staff to come with some answers.
Chubbs
Starter
It's needs to be as temporary as possible. I think the FO is much smarter than people on this board and sees that IT starting is not a long term recipe.
It's sure great to get some exciting losses though. Although the jazz game was somewhat less than amazing.
Despite the 12 assists I didn't think he looked like a playmaker. He was creating lots of open perimeter shots for a team that is 24th in the league in 3P%. That and getting guys layups in fast break situations which he always does anyway. What he didn't do was run pick and rolls with Cousins, or feed him down low. Cousins was strangely setting up from the elbow instead of in the deep post.
The other thing that is blatantly obvious with IT is that he jumps to shoot first/ fake a shot (who knows?) and then passes the ball. I don't see any other starting PG do that, but maybe that's just because he's short. In any case, that flies in the face of the basic don't leave your feet unless you're shooting principle. Even Kobe in his first game back was trying to set guys up rolling to the rim and stuff. IT just doesn't do that. His 12 assists came off of him being a big scoring threat and then kicking out to shooters who for that one night only were knocking shots down. That's not the kind of PG that you pair with a dominant big and a ball-dominant SF. It's not a knock on IT that he can't play or anything like that, it's simply a matter of fit. He could start at PG on some other team in the league! He's lucky that Cousins does have the ability to start his offense from the free throw line, or the problem with his lack of feeding the post would be magnified.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Hmmm! I didn't think he disappeared. He played with energy, scored 14 pts, grabbed 4 boards, had a steal, and one blocked shot. Certainly not his best game, but I thought he was one of the few players that played fairly well last night. McLemore, Thornton, and JT are the one's that disappeared.
Mclemore and Thornton were never there to begin with. They gave us the same production they do every single game.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I really have no dog in this hunt, but IT was down right terrible in defending the pick and roll last night. Twice he went under the screen, and twice Dragic just pulled up and shot the ball resulting in two baskets. When IT gets his ears pinned back trying to go over the screen, all he does is chase the play instead of getting in the passing lane, like Jimmer did in his brief 6 minutes, and stole the ball. A lot of what happened to Cousins was a result of IT's screw ups. Early in the first quarter, Plumlee set a pick on IT, who ran straight in to it. Dragic turned the corner and headed into the paint. Cousins did what he was supposed to do, he stepped into the lane to stop the ball. Of course Plumlee cut down the lane behind Cousins, recieved the pass from Dragic and dunked the ball. Where was IT on that play? No where to be seen. Cousins isn't capable of guarding two players at the same time. There's something called help defense. Where was it?
I'm not relieving Cousins of all guilt. He made some mistakes. But our pick and roll defense is terrible, and it starts with IT. In his short time on the floor last night, Jimmer probably played better defense than any other guard on our team. That speaks more about the other guards than it does Jimmer.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
So therefore, they don't share any responsibility in the loss. As long as they just give us 7 points between them, all is well with the world. First off, I don't agree with your premise, but even if I did, they're still responsible for lack of contribution. As I said in my grade, McLemore usually finds a way to contribute when his shot isn't falling. But last night, nothing. I can give you a play by play of both players if you want. I have about 5 pages of notes on the two of them.
Hillbilly
G-League
I am no expert at this stuff, my most recent experience actually playing competitive basketball was high school, a mere 37 years ago. That said I think our biggest problem is pretty obvious.
We still don't have a team out there.
We have 5 guys with varying degrees of skill, all playing the game...but not playing together. We've seen a few flashes of what can happen when they do play as a team, and when they play off of each others strengths...and it is fun to watch.
But it is still the exception, by a wide margin.
It is going to be awhile, and there are going to be more changes before things settle down. I think this core group can get a heck of a lot better, and they need to focus on all of the basics, and get after it. My expectations are pretty high, and I ain't spending millions of dollars. I don't think the people that are are going to suffer fools very long. WE still have some ballast to jettison. Jimmer for sure, but we need to keep his memory close, so we don't do THAT again.
We still don't have a team out there.
We have 5 guys with varying degrees of skill, all playing the game...but not playing together. We've seen a few flashes of what can happen when they do play as a team, and when they play off of each others strengths...and it is fun to watch.
But it is still the exception, by a wide margin.
It is going to be awhile, and there are going to be more changes before things settle down. I think this core group can get a heck of a lot better, and they need to focus on all of the basics, and get after it. My expectations are pretty high, and I ain't spending millions of dollars. I don't think the people that are are going to suffer fools very long. WE still have some ballast to jettison. Jimmer for sure, but we need to keep his memory close, so we don't do THAT again.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Steve Nash used to jump in the air to either shoot or pass the ball early in his career. Got himself in a lot of trouble doing it, and eventually cured himself of it. Don't know if its habit or as you say, he trying to see over other players. Either way, its a bad idea that can result in a turnover.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I suspect that they're going to ride McLemore so he can get experience. Personally I think it would be easier for him to come off the bench, but if so, then who do you start. Thornton is a mess, and other than Jimmer, there's no one else. Hell, the way those two are scoring, I'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that Jimmer would score a hell of lot more points in 30 minutes on the floor. I'm hopeful that soon after Dec 15th, Thornton is moved in a trade. Jimmer I don't care about. He's not making that much money, and he's a freeagent at years end.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Yes, I tracked IT last night as I was grading him and his defense was quite poor, beyond what I had the time/space to mention in the grades. It's almost as if many times he doesn't see the screen coming. You have to set yourself up to fight over the screen as the screen is being set. You change your path and get into the ballhandler to effect the ballhandlers path so you don't get rubbed off. Get hit by the screen and you've already lost. You actually have to defend against being screened. What I saw regularly was one of two results from IT.
A) Just flat out walked/ran right into the screen and stopped. Didn't fight through, didn't follow the roll man. Just stopped.
B) Went under the screen and just kind of stood in no-man's land. Didn't go under, then close out the ballhandler, nor did he track the roll man. Just went under and pretty much stood there.
In general he was playing too far off the ballhandler, either Dragic or Bledsoe. It wasn't just the pick & roll defense and stopping the ballhandler or roll guy, he also wasn't close enough to either to shut down passing lanes. That's also a problem given his size. It's easy enough to whip passes over his head but when he's also playing 5-7 ft off the opposing PG there's little pressure on the ball. Makes it much easier for the opponent to convert back doors or to hit a shooter in rhythm, which is what we saw last night. It's the opposite of what we see with his entry passes sometimes where the opponent gets into him and he has a tough time getting it into the post. IT's defense makes it easier for the opposing PG to make whichever pass he's looking for or setting up due to minimal pressure closing down the passing lanes/angles.
I think this is part of MLM's problem on defense. He's sagging off his man too far as he expects to have to slide over and help stop penetration, then due to being a rook and inexperienced he's losing sight of his man and isn't recovering fast enough, but the initial breakdown in the last three games has been overloading to help on penetration. It's partly why MLM has been a superior on the ball defender than rotating off the ball. Defense almost always starts at the point of attack and when that isn't up to par it effects everyone else, which is what we're seeing. It puts everyone else at a disadvantage. MLM's youth just compounds it.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
What?? But he's the franchise player.
It also is a tad insulting when IT's problems are pointed out you are considered biased, a hater. I want the Kings to be better. I am not foolish enough that anything I say here will change anything but the amount of acidity in my stomach (where's the brandy, VF21?) but we get to pretend we can make changes, don't we? There is no prize awarded.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I agree with everything you wrote. I think in MLM's case, he's finding that his athleticism isn't going to save him in a close out on a good shooter. I agree that he appears to be cheating toward whoever has the ball. I noticed Jimmer doing the same thing last season, but this year he's staying home more. The bottom line is, that once a savvy PG gets into the paint off a pick and roll, bad things are going to happen. On the play where Cousins got burn't by Plumlee on the pick an roll, it was JT's job to come over with help defense. He didn't, and by the time Cuz realized what was happening, about all he would have accomplished by trying to stop Plumlee would have been to foul him, which he wisely didn't do.
By the way, it was shortly after that play that Malone jerked JT and put in Williams.
I really think is the case almost every night. Jimmer is an adequate team defender and is much bigger, faster (not quicker) and stronger than IT. Every time he makes a mistake on d this board erupts with posts about how bad his d is and how terrible he is but almost nothing is said when IT and Thornton get torched over and over again. I guess those 2 just look better playing bad d than Jimmer does.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
What?? But he's the franchise player.
It also is a tad insulting when IT's problems are pointed out you are considered biased, a hater. I want the Kings to be better. I am not foolish enough that anything I say here will change anything but the amount of acidity in my stomach (where's the brandy, VF21?) but we get to pretend we can make changes, don't we? There is no prize awarded.
This hate thing is just nonsense. I like IT, but like any player, he has his faults. When his faults only affect him in the game, I'm not as concerned. But when they affect others on the team, then that's a different story. There are games when he's a liability on defense. As long as his offense offsets his mistakes, or a lack of ability on defense, I'm alright with him. Last night wasn't one of those nights. that doesn't mean he's a bad player, or that we should trade him. To my mind, it means his role as a spark plug off the bench is a more fitting role for him. I know he wants to be a starting PG in the NBA. Well you know what, join the club.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
I think that people get so used to seeing what they read, that they don't notice when a player actually improves. Last night, and as I said earlier, it was only for 6 minutes, Jimmer played very good defense. On one occasion he defended Dragic on the perimeter, and Dragic couldn't get by him. On another occasion when guarding Bledsoe on the left wing, Dragic ran a pick and roll on the right wing. Jimmer smelled it out and left Bledsoe, slide under the basket, stopped the ball and caused Plumlee to pass the ball. Not saying he can do it every game, but he's improving. He's light years ahead of where he was two years ago.
Out of curiosity, why do you believe this?
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Aren't you a bit old? What I like about IT is that I don't think he is affected by whether he starts or comes of the bench. I don't know if being on the bench is considered a demotion in his mind but it sure seems like it is considered a demotion by some of his fans. I think IT has a long future in the NBA and I would like it to be with the Kings because he causes electricity at times. And .. tah dah!..he delivers a mean pizza. I just want the electricity and pizza to come from the bunch. The team needs that.
It's simple and not taking other "criticisms " in mind: one ball, one basket, 3 1/2 shooters theoretically. It doesn't work efficiently for the Kings. Even if IT had no faults, I would still want him to come off the bench as for every point he scores as a starter, subtract a certain proportion from the other shooting starters. Why is that concept so complicated?
It has nothing to do with dislike or "hate." My ego isn't involved in this but the team's w/l record may be involved.
Last edited:
Chubbs
Starter
They already tried to replace IT as the starter once. I'm confident they'll do it again.
....
I'm not sure you understood the question.
I'm not sure you understood the question.
Chubbs
Starter
You took my quote completely out of context. I put the context back in.
This was what I said "I think the FO is much smarter than people on this board and sees that IT starting is not a long term recipe."
You quoted me as saying "I think the FO is much smarter than people on this board..."
Pick on someone else.
I should have said SOME people on this board, because some have been wanting IT to start all season, even when there was another option.
I just want to know how you come to determination that they're at all smart. I don't question that they have access to more/better information about the players than we do, but I don't particularly equate better informed to smart.
As far as your context, I don't feel I took your quote out of context. I feel that the second part of your statement is not a logical conclusion of the first part, so I disregarded it. It would have been equally accurate had you said, "I think the FO is much smarter than people on this board and sees that IT is under six feet tall." I don't grok why you consider the second part of your statement to be, in any way, support of evidence of the first part of your statement, which is why I asked the question in the first place.
As far as your context, I don't feel I took your quote out of context. I feel that the second part of your statement is not a logical conclusion of the first part, so I disregarded it. It would have been equally accurate had you said, "I think the FO is much smarter than people on this board and sees that IT is under six feet tall." I don't grok why you consider the second part of your statement to be, in any way, support of evidence of the first part of your statement, which is why I asked the question in the first place.
FWIW, I also think the front office is smarter than a lot of people on this board for the simple reason I tend to equate "smart" with "informed and knowledgeable." I have no problem believing they - the FO - are better informed and knowledgeable about what's going on, including the big picture. They know what they're striving for and what they hope to be able to do.
To be honest, however, hasn't this all just turned into an argument of semantics? It seems like the real point has been lost somewhere along the line.
To be honest, however, hasn't this all just turned into an argument of semantics? It seems like the real point has been lost somewhere along the line.
Most of that is irrelevant, especially in this game. Gay scored 24 points on 12 shots, IT scored 29 on 50%+ shooting and Demarcus scored 16 points on 15 shots that were his own doing because of frustration. The offense was fine. They scored 107 points. Who cares if you get 2 assists or 10 assists, they scored enough points to be able to win most every game. If you want to talk about his pathetic defense, then go right ahead but his offensive game is on point right now.
People are far too concerned with changing IT's offense into something it's not. There is basically nothing wrong with the guy on offense. He is a first rate scorer, excellent shooter and has average passing skills. It's his defense that is the problem. The Suns putting up 116 against us was the problem. Dragic and Bledsoe putting up 57 points on us was the problem. Isaiah putting up 29 points, 6 reb and 2 ast on 50%+ shooting absolutely was not the problem.
I agree that that is a perfectly acceptable definition. I just don't agree, out of hand, that they are necessarily informed and knowledgeable, but I'm also not limiting that statement to the Kings' front office. I look at it like this: there's a reason why so many bad teams stay bad, year after year, after year. And, far too often, the common denominator seems to be poor general managing. Which begs the question, if they're so smart, why are they so bad at their jobs?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll
