[Grades] Grades v. Wolves 1/15/2014
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
When Boogie goes out 15 feet on the weak side, you're still have to be aware he is, because he can still drive hard the second he got the ball, so even soft doubles a bit problematic (come to think of it, soft doubles are not particularly effective against Gay, as he' just shooting over defenders) especially considering Boogie seems to prefer left post, while Gay likes that right baseline. Z-Bo/Gasol can drive on you, but it won't be nearly as explosive. I remember from watching few Grizzlies games that Gasol really like to operate from right high post. Maybe I'm exaggerating Cousins' abilities in comparison to Memphis big duo, and Grizzlies front court of Gay/Z-Bo/Gasol simply suffered from lack of spacing due to Conley being their main outside threat.
Yada yada and the Kings win again. That is 4 out of 5. Please read the SI article on IT. If you have read it, read it again.
Rudy Gay is the player of the game. Some day soon the name Ben Gay will put fear into the heart of the opposition, but probably not this year.
The Kings' played poorly in the last stretch, because they need more experience with winning. It was a back-to-back on the road people.
Look at Rubios line and compare it to IT's.
Sure some mistakes were made, but the KINGS WIN AGAIN, ON THE ROAD, AFTER PLAYING THE NIGHT BEFORE.
Rudy Gay is the player of the game. Some day soon the name Ben Gay will put fear into the heart of the opposition, but probably not this year.
The Kings' played poorly in the last stretch, because they need more experience with winning. It was a back-to-back on the road people.
Look at Rubios line and compare it to IT's.
Sure some mistakes were made, but the KINGS WIN AGAIN, ON THE ROAD, AFTER PLAYING THE NIGHT BEFORE.
Just look at half the comments on this board about him. Yeah he does the hero ball stuff sometimes but people gripe when he pulls up for a wide open jumper off a pick and roll. The point of the offense is to get the highest percentage shot on the floor. If IT has a wide open 15 foot shot, then he needs to take it rather than passing the ball and hoping a higher percentage one comes along at some point. People on this board gripe every game about his shot selection. He can go 10-16 from the floor and we're still going to hear about his selfishness. I mean if Gay and Cousins take the majority of shots while IT, your 3rd best offensive player, takes the 3rd most shots...doesn't that just....make sense? I don't know, maybe I'm being dense but people just gripe about anything and everything when it comes to this guy. If you want to complain, then complain about his weaknesses. Not his strengths.
Really? All of the criticism I see here stems from his idiotic behavior in the last five minutes of the game last night where he was repeatedly selfish, then stupid, then selfish again. General criticism regarding his game usually relates to his inconsistent defensive effort, his low ceiling on defensive ability, and his inability or unwillingness to defer to Cousins and Gay when he needs to.
If anyone is denying that he is a stellar offensive guard, then they're not watching him play. The dude can score in bunches, but you can't overlook the negatives just because he is a good offensive player, and especially on the defense-deficient Kings, and ESPECIALLY after he almost single-handedly gave the game away to Minnesota last night.
If anyone is denying that he is a stellar offensive guard, then they're not watching him play. The dude can score in bunches, but you can't overlook the negatives just because he is a good offensive player, and especially on the defense-deficient Kings, and ESPECIALLY after he almost single-handedly gave the game away to Minnesota last night.
EVERY SINGLE PLAYER on this team is subject to intense criticism at any time by members of this board. The level may vary, but no one is left out. Factors contributing to the amount of criticism any one player gets (other than how they actually play) include:
- Minute share / how much do they handle the ball? (IT touches the ball more than anyone)
- How high their ceiling is and how much they mean to the long-term success of the team (IT is no Boogie and is going to be more heavily criticized - live with it)
- How vocal their fanbase is in trying to defend their guy (that's why the smart Jimmerfans have shut-it-up by now)
- probably others, but I'm at work now, and probably need to make good on my contract with my employer....
It seemed to me like it was just stupid play at the end, not selfish. He kept turning the ball over trying to run out the clock and then he was forced to take a bad shot with the shot clock winding down. Just bone headed stuff but I wouldn't call it selfish at all.
What do you mean his unwillingness to defer to Cousins and Gay when he needs to? Looked to me like he let Rudy have at it with that 3 at the end and then Cousins got what was basically the game sealing bucket in the paint after that time out. It's not like he was unwilling to pass to those guys, he was just screwing up before he could even attempt a pass. That's not selfish.
What do you mean his unwillingness to defer to Cousins and Gay when he needs to? Looked to me like he let Rudy have at it with that 3 at the end and then Cousins got what was basically the game sealing bucket in the paint after that time out. It's not like he was unwilling to pass to those guys, he was just screwing up before he could even attempt a pass. That's not selfish.
He inbounded the ball for the Cousins play. Not sure he was choosing to defer there. Gay made the play. The Gay 3-pointer came on the next possession. Considering that these two plays came after IT not managing the clock, and then fouling Barea on the layup (how does anyone explain that? That was probably the worst play out of all of them), it appears that Malone, and not IT 'deferring', is the reason that IT didn't have the ball on those two plays.
the minnesota timberwolves are now 0-11 in close games, largely because they fail to execute defensively down the stretch. they score the second most points per game in the nba, but they can't stop their opponents from scoring when it matters. this will likely keep them out of the playoffs in a brutally tough western conference for the tenth straight season. they're the only team across the league with a longer playoff drought than our kings. i bring it up because, in my opinion, this is the source of much of the consternation around these parts; this is the reason that so many criticize isaiah thomas as a starter. nobody wants to be the team that's 0-11 in close games. nobody wants to blow it down the stretch when the playoffs are in the balance...
if the kings intend to make a serious run at the playoffs next season, do they want an erratic, unreliable, though admittedly gifted offensive talent running the show? will they end up like the timberwolves, unable to win close games despite their talent level and the quality of their coaching? will isaiah thomas' size and inability to defend with any level of consistency damn the kings' long term chances to compete in close games against winning teams? rudy gay was tasteful and measured in his post-game comments, but he was also clearly annoyed with IT's lack of discipline on both sides of the ball at the end of the game, as was coach malone. will thomas' affinity for hero ball create fractures in a team that's attempting to build sustainable chemistry? these and other questions abound: can the new regime throw big $$$ at the fan favorite IT and truly believe that he's the long term solution at the starting PG position? or can they be satisfied with the cap hit that would result from signing IT to big $$$ while sending him back to the bench as a sixth man? etc.
IT's most ardent acolytes might shrug off his flaws. they might attempt to deflect or outright deny these criticisms, but i guarantee that PDA and coach malone are giving serious thought to the above questions as the trade deadline approaches. i've said it before and i'll say it again: when the golden era sacramento kings decided to get serious about competing in the playoffs, they traded their erratic, unreliable, offensively-gifted, indisputable fan favorite starting PG in jason williams for a considerably less sexy but considerably more steady starting PG in mike bibby...
if the kings intend to make a serious run at the playoffs next season, do they want an erratic, unreliable, though admittedly gifted offensive talent running the show? will they end up like the timberwolves, unable to win close games despite their talent level and the quality of their coaching? will isaiah thomas' size and inability to defend with any level of consistency damn the kings' long term chances to compete in close games against winning teams? rudy gay was tasteful and measured in his post-game comments, but he was also clearly annoyed with IT's lack of discipline on both sides of the ball at the end of the game, as was coach malone. will thomas' affinity for hero ball create fractures in a team that's attempting to build sustainable chemistry? these and other questions abound: can the new regime throw big $$$ at the fan favorite IT and truly believe that he's the long term solution at the starting PG position? or can they be satisfied with the cap hit that would result from signing IT to big $$$ while sending him back to the bench as a sixth man? etc.
IT's most ardent acolytes might shrug off his flaws. they might attempt to deflect or outright deny these criticisms, but i guarantee that PDA and coach malone are giving serious thought to the above questions as the trade deadline approaches. i've said it before and i'll say it again: when the golden era sacramento kings decided to get serious about competing in the playoffs, they traded their erratic, unreliable, offensively-gifted, indisputable fan favorite starting PG in jason williams for a considerably less sexy but considerably more steady starting PG in mike bibby...
So, which are you arguing? IT is stupid or selfish? either way, does this mean you are off the band wagon?
[edit.... just to clarify, I'm not calling IT stupid]
[edit.... just to clarify, I'm not calling IT stupid]
We have absolutely zero production from our SG's on either side of the ball, yet the majority of the complaints on this board are about our 19point 6ast PG. Just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to complain about one of our best players as if he is the root of all the teams problems.
I'm not even a big fan of the guy. Like everyone says, he's better suited for the 6th man spot but it's just not in the cards right now. It's just annoying to watch a bunch of people put this guy under a microscope every game and then clown on every mistake he makes. He's not even a bad player yet he's the whipping boy of this team because a few posters had it out for him in years past and it's just caught on this season like wildfire for some reason.
Padrino speaks the truth.
For me, our pgs numbers are amazing at under a million a year. Being critical almost seems unfair since by any measure he's exceeded expectations.
But that rookie contract is just about over. When you start talking 8-10 million, you're talking pg of the future. You're saying he can lead you to the promised land. You're saying that because at that money it's unlikely you can afford anyone better.
His play at the end of quarters and games is 4 million money, not 10. It's a guy that needs to go to the bench at the end of games. The only way they won was by playing keep away from him in the last minute or so.
He shoots and scores phenomenally. Which is spectacular if you're a box score watcher. Problem is, he's the PG, not the SG. He has responsibilities for the running of the whole team, who takes shots, when, etc. Last night scared me silly thinking of him in an actual pressure situation, not a mostly meaningless game in January.
The scoring is cute. But he's the goddamn pg. He can't go brain dead like last night.
Didn't we try really hard to give away the game in Orlando as well?
For me, our pgs numbers are amazing at under a million a year. Being critical almost seems unfair since by any measure he's exceeded expectations.
But that rookie contract is just about over. When you start talking 8-10 million, you're talking pg of the future. You're saying he can lead you to the promised land. You're saying that because at that money it's unlikely you can afford anyone better.
His play at the end of quarters and games is 4 million money, not 10. It's a guy that needs to go to the bench at the end of games. The only way they won was by playing keep away from him in the last minute or so.
He shoots and scores phenomenally. Which is spectacular if you're a box score watcher. Problem is, he's the PG, not the SG. He has responsibilities for the running of the whole team, who takes shots, when, etc. Last night scared me silly thinking of him in an actual pressure situation, not a mostly meaningless game in January.
The scoring is cute. But he's the goddamn pg. He can't go brain dead like last night.
Didn't we try really hard to give away the game in Orlando as well?
So give him time to adjust and learn from his mistakes. He basically went from at the beginning of the year of being asked to be Iverson with the bench unit (shoot whenever you want) to being asked to be Steve Nash with the starters. There's going to be some growing pains with that transition. And for all the talk about being "selfish", Cousins and Gay have never been better in their careers over the 16 games. JT has started to rebound to his form of a few years ago. D-will is finding a groove again. Really, it's just the SG's who have stunk it up, which they've been doing all year. Of course, this isn't all IT's doing. But if he was actively hurting other guys with his play, wouldn't it show in the numbers of other guys? Wouldn't it show in the team record? Most would agree this is the stretch the team has played in years.
Abso-freaking-lutely nobody is saying that IT is consistently hurting the team. What we are saying is that his obvious limitations are going to be significant issues down the road, especially with his contract situation. He's also stuck in the constant mindset of point-hoarding, which is awesome when you're Jordan Crawford off the bench but not when you're supposed to be the smartest guy on the court.
Unless he grows a good 4 or 5 inches and magically learns how to play at least a little defense, IT's heroballing ways aren't really going to be acceptable on this team down the road.
Unless he grows a good 4 or 5 inches and magically learns how to play at least a little defense, IT's heroballing ways aren't really going to be acceptable on this team down the road.
Give him time to adjust to his new role on the team and learn from his mistakes. He was allowed to be AI the first 18 games, which fits his persona very well. He's been asked to be Nash the last 18 games. That's a difficult transition for anybody. We've seen signs of him trying to do so. Unless you expect him to be a polished product already in his 3rd season? 2 of which were under the powerhouse coaching abilities of Keith Smart? Very few PG's are ready to go by year 3, no matter the coaching situation
P.S. The defense has already seen improvements.
P.S. The defense has already seen improvements.
- we were on the road
- we were on the back side of back to back games
- Cousins played below average by his standards
- we played very sloppy/silly down the stretch
- Kevin Love started going-off down the stretch
...yet, we won the game. Just a short time ago, everything needed to go right for us to get a road win. Now look at us.
- we were on the back side of back to back games
- Cousins played below average by his standards
- we played very sloppy/silly down the stretch
- Kevin Love started going-off down the stretch
...yet, we won the game. Just a short time ago, everything needed to go right for us to get a road win. Now look at us.
IT's strengths make him best as a 6th man and not a starter. This is getting old. I think IT has trouble seeing the subtleties of the game such as running out the clock when you are ahead (real subtle) and so do his fans. It's always seen as a black and white thing and I realize some people can think in no other terms. (This is a fact, folks and not something simply seen on this forum). It doesn't make for a good conversation with those who can see shades of gray. The black and whiters are speaking a different language as the shades of gray people and it cannot change. I mean "cannot" and not "will not." There is no sense beating one's head against the wall communicating with each other.