seriously. We still have to get through like 6 teams ahead of us, but it feels so damn good to actually be talking about a potential playoff spot almost half-way through a season. As much as getting a high draft pick would solidify our future, i would much rather see this team play as they have been the last 8 games and try and steal that 8th spot.
[Grades] Grades v. Thunder 02/09/12
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
seriously. We still have to get through like 6 teams ahead of us, but it feels so damn good to actually be talking about a potential playoff spot almost half-way through a season. As much as getting a high draft pick would solidify our future, i would much rather see this team play as they have been the last 8 games and try and steal that 8th spot.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
I put 4 and 3 but I wouldn't be surprised if they do better than that because four of the six road games are against bad teams.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Seventeen (17) blocked shots by OKC. Kings block 4. What's the correlation between shot blocking and winning, again?
PS I'd like to know what the statistical correlation is between taking charges and winning games. Probably pretty good. First, you get a foul on the other team, then you get the ball back 100% of the time. With a block, how many times exactly do you get it back? 50%? And of course you don't get the foul, which can contribute to the other team being in the penalty, and posssibly get the opposing team in foul trouble. Just a thought....
PS I'd like to know what the statistical correlation is between taking charges and winning games. Probably pretty good. First, you get a foul on the other team, then you get the ball back 100% of the time. With a block, how many times exactly do you get it back? 50%? And of course you don't get the foul, which can contribute to the other team being in the penalty, and posssibly get the opposing team in foul trouble. Just a thought....
Last edited:
Kingster
Hall of Famer
I've noticed that as well. There are so few gawdawful teams. NO and Washington would qualify, but it seems like there's been a flattening out in the NBA where teams like LA, Orlando, and SA are not quite as good, but a lot of the teams from last year's bottom tier have gotten better.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
They didn't bring it against NO. That's where they got that.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
I dunno, some teams in the East are gawdawful. Charlotte barely qualifies as a team right now and Detroit, NJ, and Toronto are struggling to say the least (though I still reserve the right to change my opinion on the Nets when Brooks and Lopez get back). The aforementioned 'Wizards' (Wizards of what exactly, I don't know, but it certainly ain't magically) complete this Eastern quintet of unspectacular b-ball.
If the Kings were in the East, we'd be a whopping 1 game out of the 8th seed.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
For the first half they didn't. After halftime, though, it was a different story.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Yeah, maybe it's just in the West, but then again we lost to Toronto and they didn't look terrible to me; they have some decent pretty good talent on that team.
I think that's a bit cavalier. I don't exactly fall into the group that thinks that shotblocking is the sine qua non of defense but being at the game last night it was quite clear that our offense was stymied by Ibaka. He made us hesitant to go into the lane, despite our ability to easily do so, and when we manned up and went in, he rejected us. Over and over. Did we fight through it? Yes. Some big threes, a stretch of great defense of our own, a huge crowd push, and we pulled it out. Take Serge Ibaka out of the middle, and this game isn't close. We tear up the OKC defense and possibly pull the starters with 6 minutes left. It was shotblocking (world-class, at that) that gave OKC the chance to win the game despite the fact that we were more rested and we wanted it far, far more.
Did OKC win the game? No. Did shotblocking affect the score? Yes, in OKC's favor.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Actually, I was thinking of the Timberwolves game. That was a tuurible, turrible game. If they watched that game in getting prepped for the OKC game it's understandable that they would have the impression the Kings didn't bring it. Then they take a look at the first half of the NO game, and it confirms a young inconsistent team. I really don't mind them calling the Kings out for this. It can't hurt to get a little heat from the media when they don't show up to play. Now we'll see what happens after a great victory over OKC. Are they going to rest on their laurels?
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Ahh, so if OKC only had a two to one margin in shot blocks the Kings would have blown them out, right? I don't think so. It was interesting to me that the stat expert who looked at the correlation between shot blocking and winning didn't find any. According to some, the intimidation factor of all those shot blocks should have been huge and this game shouldn't have been close. OKC had more than 4x blocked shots than the Kings. But against the youngest team in the league it didn't turn out that way. Out of all the teams in the league, the intimidation factor should have been more effective against the very young Kings team. Yet it wasn't.
kupman
Starter
All of the announcers seemed confused. If you are going to announce a game from Arco, you may want to take 5-10 minutes before hand to read-up on the current situation so you will know what to say to a national audience when you bring the topic up.
The Kings brought their "A" game. The Kings fans brought their "A+" game. The announcers brought their "D-" game.
Hoovtrain
All-Star
Way more charitable than me. I give him an F-. Not only was he woefully misinformed (and this is supposed to be a guy who is very close to the situation
), but then to continue to say what a long shot this was going to be really irritated me. And his "clarification" after being told he was wrong was pathetic. He still continued on with the whole longshot thing.
Last edited:
Don't be that guy.
The Kings outplayed OKC last night, yeah, but let's not act like they haven't won more games than they've lost. You think that Presti is trying to trade Ibaka because they didn't beat the Kings last night? Hardly. Last time I checked, the Thunder are still 11-1 when Ibaka has at least three blocks, and still 20-6 overall, and we're still six games under .500.
Eight of the top ten shot blockers in the league play on winning teams. You think that's an accident?
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Not to menton Ibaka nearly singlehandedly swatting us out of this one in the third.
If there was a culprit for the Thunder it was falling into our traditional low assist/high turnover trap.
If there was a culprit for the Thunder it was falling into our traditional low assist/high turnover trap.
Last edited:
The victory against OKC was amazing. Sir Charles says "Any team in the NBA can get up for a nationally televised game against a great opponent." The fact that most people still dis the Kings has to be used as an incentive. The Kings are still capable of some really ugly games like against MN. I have become a fan of DMC for life because of his level of effort, and the improvement in controlling his emotions. I was the same type of player but with little skill in comparison.
Smart is smart and knows how to motivate and instill confidence. B-ball will always be the thinking man's game. It is a chess match. When Westbrook fouled Cousins at the end, I knew we had them.
What a perfect stage to beat OKC on. Even when it is painful I cannot stop watching this team. I like the rotation now. It will be fun from here on out.
Smart is smart and knows how to motivate and instill confidence. B-ball will always be the thinking man's game. It is a chess match. When Westbrook fouled Cousins at the end, I knew we had them.
What a perfect stage to beat OKC on. Even when it is painful I cannot stop watching this team. I like the rotation now. It will be fun from here on out.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Chapter one
I've wanted to post a Kenny Smith note and this is as good a place as any. Kenny started off ambiguously to me. I didn't know what he was getting at because I was expecting a ration of dog doo doo. It really wasn't. He launched into a discussion of veterans and how the Kings missed having veterans. He kind of went on and on and even Charles kept his mouth shut. He discussed how young players don't know how to behave when on the road, in back to backs, etc. I thought he was knocking the Kings but really, this is what the Kings are missing now and it was his whole point. He kind of said no matter how good the youngsters are, they will never go far until they either add vets or become vets. That's true.
He was actually complimenting the Kings and simply analyzing what he thought was a major weakness. The fact he didn't focus on defensive centers or the SF position or Cousins or all the usual things but kept to a topic that actually can easily be fixed really upped my respect for him. It was also a lesson to people who get nervous when the Kings think of signing a vet. Vets are necessary whether they play or not.
Vets know how to handle the road. Vets don't go cruising at night, drinking, and picking up women. They rest. They have wisdom to pass on to the kids who are feeling the oats of being famous and rich. I imagine myself with a multi-million dollar contract visiting Miami my first time and I'd be out on the town looking for someone to take back to the hotel. Rookies have the toughest time as every road game is a new city.
Chapter two.
A long ago big time football coach addressed the idea of how he taught his team to get up for games and basically said that players can't walk around with their fists balled up every night. Teams take nights off and get up for other games. You can't play all out all the time. Some games truly are more important than others.
Back to the coach: he never taught his team that every game needed an all out effort. I don't know exactly how he got his message across but I think you get the idea. The guy was Woody Hayes of Ohio State.
So as an answer I would say you shouldn't expect this all out effort every game. It's not possible. It shouldn't even be demanded by the coaches although I realize there is a fine line of how to get the proper message across.
I think we saw the team at it's best and frankly, I saw a lot of problems. These were the kind of problems where a little veteran calm would have cured. I feel very good about the future of this team. It's good to be a Kings' fan.
Last edited:
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Way more charitable than me. I give him an F-. Not only was he woefully misinformed (and this is supposed to be a guy who is very close to the situation
Webber's career and reputation was made on a team called the Sacramento Kings. If that team disappears, it impacts him in a selfish way. His name will be attached to no existing team and his number is retired nowhere. I think he is genuinely scared the team will leave for the fans' sake but also for his sake. He isn't paying as much attention as he claims though, is he? That was a downer for me.
Hadlowe
Starter
Hear hear. Really wish I had been able to watch this one live. I have a hard time balancing my high hopes against my honest expectations for this team, and tonight they outperformed my hopes. Great job to the team.
K
Kingsguy881
Guest
Cousins needs to learn to go up over the top, little one handed runner or sweeping hook shot. Then = unstoppability is within his soft grasp.
IfAt1st
Starter
A few points about shotblocking vs taking the charge:
* There are too many variables in what team wins the game to point to one factor (shotblocking) and say it is responsible.
* This is a good test case game, since Ibaka was SO dominant.
If there was truly an "intimidation factor", I agree it should have shown up in this game.
But it didn't. I was proud of the Kings just pounding that ball inside every chance they could. I'm guessing Coach harped on them incredibly for them to drive into the teeth of Ibaka as much as they did.
* Inarguably, 1 successful charge taken is better than 1 block, for reasons I pointed out awhile back and was ridiculed for.
* If Ibaka had taken 10 charges, the Kings players would have fouled out before the 4th qtr.
* Ibaka fouled out because he attempted so many blocks. Similar to if a defender tries to take charges, he'll get some called on him.
* Like the TNT crew pointed out, the Thunder have an elite blocker AND an elite charge-taker (Collison). That is a double-whammy. Strange how it didn't win THIS game, but it is probably pretty important to the Thunder's ongoing success in the NBA. Ibaka isn't JUST a walking block factory - he's a fantastic DEFENDER, who knows where to be to stop a basket.
* There are too many variables in what team wins the game to point to one factor (shotblocking) and say it is responsible.
* This is a good test case game, since Ibaka was SO dominant.
If there was truly an "intimidation factor", I agree it should have shown up in this game.
But it didn't. I was proud of the Kings just pounding that ball inside every chance they could. I'm guessing Coach harped on them incredibly for them to drive into the teeth of Ibaka as much as they did.
* Inarguably, 1 successful charge taken is better than 1 block, for reasons I pointed out awhile back and was ridiculed for.
* If Ibaka had taken 10 charges, the Kings players would have fouled out before the 4th qtr.
* Ibaka fouled out because he attempted so many blocks. Similar to if a defender tries to take charges, he'll get some called on him.
* Like the TNT crew pointed out, the Thunder have an elite blocker AND an elite charge-taker (Collison). That is a double-whammy. Strange how it didn't win THIS game, but it is probably pretty important to the Thunder's ongoing success in the NBA. Ibaka isn't JUST a walking block factory - he's a fantastic DEFENDER, who knows where to be to stop a basket.
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
People watch things with agendas sometimes.
Ibaka absolutely dominated stretches of the game and caused all kinds of intimidation problems inside. We shot barely over 40%, and intimidation aside, 17(!) of those misses were directly due to shots being blocked. 17. To put that in perspective, all but one or two of those were layups or flips inside that you can conservatively say would have been finished at a 60% rate. 60% of 17 is TEN FGs. Roughly speaking without thier shotblocking we could have shot 50.5% or better, and blown their sloppy turnover prone asses right out of the gym.
And of course its silly to try to stretch conclusions from one game. There are reasons why OKC opponents shoot .426 and ours shoot .466.
P.S. BTW trying to take a charge is a riskier/more foul prone activity than trying to block a shot. When you try to take a charge you are forcing contact between you, something WILL be called in the majority of cases, on somebody. On the other hand if you properly execute a shotblock nothing need be called at all.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
He'll get it eventually. It took JT four years to finally develop his move.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
This gets lost in the whole shotblocking argument.
Justin Williams was pretty good at swatting shots but a crappily terrible defender. There is a distinct difference between just having a shotblocker (Hassan as of now, Biyombo) and having a good defender who can block shots (Ibaka and Mutumbo)
Kingster
Hall of Famer
This guy would say, yes, it is coinkeedink: http://www.sfandllaw.com/CM/Articles/Articles10.asp. To quote him: "....there is no correlation between a high team total of blocked shots and defensive efficiency."
Leaving aside the shotblocking dogma, you have to shake your head at the Kings win don't you? 17 freaking blocks by OKC. Kings get 4. That's quite an inverse correlation to winning, don't you think? How many shots do you think OKC would have had to block to win this game? 20? 21? 22? (Not a rhetorical question, by the way).
I wonder if the stats of the PhD above shows shot blocking to have a positive correlation decades ago. That's when the great shot blockers actually kept the ball in bounds and blocked it to their teamates. That seems like a lost art, for the most part. If a shot blocker could nearly every time control it to a teamate then it would basically be a turnover, which does appear to have a correlation to winning.
And like I said before, taking the charge would appear intuitively to be more instrumental in winning games. Everybody should be less concerned about Cousin's earthbound status as a defender. His charges, though less exciting, are probably more important than the Ibaka shot blocks.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
What would be interesting is to see how many of those shot blocks went to OKC versus the Kings. Another thing to consider: After a shot block, if the opposing team gets the ball, is the other team's defense set up to defend, or are they out of position? If they are out of position typically after a shot block AND the team that just got its shot blocked does get possession, then the teams with the ball should have a higher probability of scoring than they would otherwise. How often have you seen a guy block a shot, be out of position, the opposing team gets the ball, and scores? I've seen a ton.
This. We took 22 more shots than they did, shot a worst percentage (due in large part to the block party they were having), and won by 5 points. 22 more shots and we won by 5. Blocks kept it close. They had 11 more TO than we did. That's the only reason we won.
You can block 50 a game, but if you are blocking them out of bounds then it is a useless stat. Ibaka did have a nice one that led to a fast break though.
Similar threads
