[Grades] Grades v. Wolves 3/1/2014

[whozit]

You actually think IT affected Thornton's shooting? As if Thornton would still be a Kings if only IT was not the pg? And how does Vasquez fit into it all? Did Thornton somehow show his old shooting self when playing with Vasquez? Hardly. The pass first assist maker didn't have much of an effect on Thornton and McLemore, did he? But maybe IT caused Jimmer's poor defense and ballhandling, but he certainly had nothing to do with Jimmer's shooting. The fact that we have had urine-poor two-guard production leads you to the inescable conclusion that IT must be the reason. If only Vasquez were back and all of our 2-guards would miraculously find their shooting prowess. No, it just couldn't be that our two guards can't shoot. Your criticism of IT is pathologically absurd.

IT was not Thornton's problem. The team structure was plus he's a streaky shooter. That's not on IT.

My problem with IT is not IT himself. He has a place in the league and on this team. Does he have a place starting next to Cousins and Gay? Cousins makes Gay better and Gay makes Cousins better, does IT make anyone else better when he's on the floor with the other two?

The team's starting five is unbalanced. If IT had better defenders around him to cover his shortcoming on defense that would be one thing. But the team doesn't and all offense and hardly any defense is a glaring problem. Malone was talking about this in the post-game press conference. The team's success has to start with defense because some nights the shots won't fall. One of the big three in a ideal world would come from the bench. But for the time being, it is what it is (no pun intended).

 

[Chubbs]

Is Malone pathologically absurd?

Notice he's not talking about assist numbers. It's stuff that doesn't show up in the box score. It's not letting rudy disappear for an entire half, for example. It's feeding Ben when he has brief moments of competence. If Ben hits a couple, don't wait a quarter before going back to him. It's recognizing situations.

 

[kupman]

For real. McLemore sucks because he sucks. Will he suck forever? Only time will tell...

MT scored 25 last night. Who cares? He's streaky as hell and probably wont hit 20+ for another month. And if you look at the boxscore ALL he did was score 25 points (well, he had 2 rebounds). He remains the one dimensional streaky player he was on the Kings.


We dont even need scoring from the SG, we need defense and the ability to hit an open 3.

I don't like this post. I love it.

 

[whozit]

I don't like this post. I love it.

I don't.

For real. McLemore sucks because he sucks. Will he suck forever? Only time will tell...

Maybe he appears bad simply because he's raw. He was a project coming in, and knowing that why should we expect him not to struggle. But time will tell.

 

[peacelate]

Not one person has said IT is a perfect PG. Why is it that defending a player equates to an individual thinking he is perfect. Enlighten me.

That seems to be the running gag around here - blame everything on IT. This discussion was initially about McLemore's struggles an once again has deviated into a discussion about how IT isn't the PG of the future...he needs to be traded even though McLemore's struggles are his own fault.

Some of you have an unhealthy obsession with IT. It's like the polar opposite of Grant and Jerry. Instead of talkin about a specific topic, why not spin it as a way to denigrate IT every opportunity you get.

 

[The_Jamal]

Since some of you believe Isaiah is already the perfect pg, here's Michael Malone discussing ways he needs to improve. Nothing that hasn't been said here, but here it is from the coach.

1. "Kings coach Michael Malone often talks about calling plays for players who aren’t primary options on offense to highlight where his team might have an advantage.
   
   Malone would like his players to do that on their own more. That’s where the development of point guards Isaiah Thomas and Ray McCallumbecomes essential. Their improved ability to understand matchups and situations will allow Malone to trust them more to put the offense in the right position.
   
   “I think that’s part of the process for Isaiah, going from a scoring guard to a starting point guard,” Malone said. “That’s part of the process for Ray McCallum as a rookie point guard trying to learn the league and his teammates coming in the game.”
   
   Malone regularly mentions guard Ben McLemore and forward Derrick Williams as players who need to have more plays called for them. The coach wants his point guards to continue making strides in setting them up while having a better overall awareness of what works for their teammates.
   
   “Understand who has the hot hand and how you can get them the ball where they are most effective – that’s what being a point guard is,” Malone said. “Understanding your teammates, where they’re most effective, who’s got the matchup, whose player is in foul trouble, all the things that go into running your team as a point guard. I think Ray and Isaiah are continuing to get better in those areas.”
   
   
   Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/01/6201111/kings-notes-malone-wants-his-point.html#storylink=cpy

You're spouting nonsense. Absolutely 0 people have said IT is the perfect PG. Just because some of us don't think every problem with the team is his fault, doesn't mean we think he's ready to overtake CP3 or anything. He's a talented player who works extremely well with Cuz and Gay.

 

[treach1976]

You're spouting nonsense. Absolutely 0 people have said IT is the perfect PG. Just because some of us don't think every problem with the team is his fault, doesn't mean we think he's ready to overtake CP3 or anything. He's a talented player who works extremely well with Cuz and Gay.

what Chubbs is spouting is no more nonsense than what answered back with. There are absolutely 0 people that think that every problem with the team is his fault...

 

[FaStRmAn]

We're witnessing a tank. (No pun intended off of above post). The FO has turned the roster over so much with trades and the last minute acquisition of OJ that it's no wonder there is no cohesiveness to the team. It puts the coach in a very difficult situation; it's not like there is a training camp to get everyone up to speed on offensive and defensive assignments. Everybody is playing hard. The coach is coaching hard. It's just that he's just got a new team and now has to put it together on the fly. Sure, you can point to an individual player here (McLemore) or a particular play (the Gay non-pass) there, but the context of all of it is huge roster turnover that induces a tank.

Induces a tank or results in a tank? I think we can all agree that turnover was not only necessary but inevitable. Out with the Mediocre known and in with the unknown. Complete turnover of the roster sans Cousins and JT really. With that kind of turnover there is bound to be a disconnect. But truth is there was a disconnect before the turnover. It was a disaster going nowhere. Now it is a new ownership, new coaching staff, and a new opportunity to fashion something out of nothing. It is going to take time to make something new out of the pieces provided. Malone has done a decent job of getting the team motivated. The FO has done a good job of purging the roster of the mediocre and restocking the shelves with players. It is a work in progress. I don't judge a painting until it is completed. This work of art wont be done until the least the middle of next season. I patiently await the results

 

[pshn80]

Quickie on problems the team has:

Turn the ball over way too much.

Don't maintain effort on defense.

Volatile all-star center.

Real weakness at SG.

Miscellaneous others.


Improve these and we improve our record. Improve some more and we are a .500 team.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

what Chubbs is spouting is no more nonsense than what answered back with. There are absolutely 0 people that think that every problem with the team is his fault...

Actually, there is a logical distinction between asserting what your opponent believes (e.g. Chubbs) and asserting what you do not believe (e.g. Jamal).

Still, at this point pretty much every discussion about IT looks like this to me now:

 

[Bricklayer]

Not one person has said IT is a perfect PG. Why is it that defending a player equates to an individual thinking he is perfect. Enlighten me.

That seems to be the running gag around here - blame everything on IT. This discussion was initially about McLemore's struggles an once again has deviated into a discussion about how IT isn't the PG of the future...he needs to be traded even though McLemore's struggles are his own fault.

Some of you have an unhealthy obsession with IT. It's like the polar opposite of Grant and Jerry. Instead of talkin about a specific topic, why not spin it as a way to denigrate IT every opportunity you get.

All PGs of ITs ilk are inherently poisonous to the SGs next to them, because "PGs" of that ilk are basically SGs themselves. In the new NBA the rules have allowed a ton of guys who wouldn't be viable goto guys in the past to play at it now, and the only place I can think where a full fledged SG has worked as a pairing has been Golden State. But you go down the list looking at the other teams with gun-first PGs, Chicago, Oklahoma City, Cleveland, etc., and there's no room for an offensive SG. Just isn't. I actually initiated conversation on just that point years ago in Reke's rookie year explaining why Kevin could not work as the SG next to him. Its no different with IT. Worse actually, since IT is consciously selfish.

Now has IT made Ben bad? Well...Ben has some enormous holes in his game that were going to be bad IT or no IT. What having a chucking PG HAS done though is prevent any chance that Ben could try to compensate with shooting/scoring into an overall ok package. And yes, having a PG take all the shots does very much matter to a SG who needs a rhythm, or a rookie who needs confidence. It just does. ITs presence absolutely suppressed Reke, Thornton, now Ben. So would have Kyrie's presence. Or Westbrook's. Any little man who has his eyes firmly on the hoop rather than his teammates.

The question would be is that necessarily a bad thing? In Reke's case my answer was yes. Bigger, less selfish, better rounded guard. In Marcus's case...eh.... And in Ben's case...well come on now. We aren't the Sacramento Ben McLemore's no matter what the gerbil may think. Fact is that IT is a better SG than Ben, and might be a better SG than Thornton. His Me suppresses those guys' opportunities, but frankly Cousins suppresses JT's opportunities too. Doesn't mean that's necessarily a disaster. It is what it is though. If you're going to have a little guy run around out there looking for himself, Ben is not your SG. Thabo is your SG. And frankly if Thabo were here, it would remove a major source of angst for the fanbase. IT has selfish instincts which he sometimes fights, sometimes does not. That creates problems for a lot of other players. So if you have IT and are going with him your goal should be to find guys for whom it doesn't create major issues, same way if you have Cousins you should be trying to find him a shotblocker as wingman.

 

[LPKingsFan]

All PGs of ITs ilk are inherently poisonous to the SGs next to them, because "PGs" of that ilk are basically SGs themselves. In the new NBA the rules have allowed a ton of guys who wouldn't be viable goto guys in the past to play at it now, and the only place I can think where a full fledged SG has worked as a pairing has been Golden State. But you go down the list looking at the other teams with gun-first PGs, Chicago, Oklahoma City, Cleveland, etc., and there's no room for an offensive SG. Just isn't. I actually initiated conversation on just that point years ago in Reke's rookie year explaining why Kevin could not work as the SG next to him. Its no different with IT. Worse actually, since IT is consciously selfish.

Now has IT made Ben bad? Well...Ben has some enormous holes in his game that were going to be bad IT or no IT. What having a chucking PG HAS done though is prevent any chance that Ben could try to compensate with shooting/scoring into an overall ok package. And yes, having a PG take all the shots does very much matter to a SG who needs a rhythm, or a rookie who needs confidence. It just does. ITs presence absolutely suppressed Reke, Thornton, now Ben. So would have Kyrie's presence. Or Westbrook's. Any little man who has his eyes firmly on the hoop rather than his teammates.

The question would be is that necessarily a bad thing? In Reke's case my answer was yes. Bigger, less selfish, better rounded guard. In Marcus's case...eh.... And in Ben's case...well come on now. We aren't the Sacramento Ben McLemore's no matter what the gerbil may think. Fact is that IT is a better SG than Ben, and might be a better SG than Thornton. His Me suppresses those guys' opportunities, but frankly Cousins suppresses JT's opportunities too. Doesn't mean that's necessarily a disaster. It is what it is though. If you're going to have a little guy run around out there looking for himself, Ben is not your SG. Thabo is your SG. And frankly if Thabo were here, it would remove a major source of angst for the fanbase. IT has selfish instincts which he sometimes fights, sometimes does not. That creates problems for a lot of other players. So if you have IT and are going with him your goal should be to find guys for whom it doesn't create major issues, same way if you have Cousins you should be trying to find him a shotblocker as wingman.

Now, if only we could find that ideal SG who could defend and handle the ball as a secondary playmaker...

 

[pshn80]

I like Brick's post above because I see it as realistic, and logical. I do see significant bits of parallel between IT and Cuz. Their basic success is based on a degree of "selfishness." They know how to score in many ways and they do, sometimes to the disadvantage of their teammates. Brick is right, you need to pick the teammates to best fit. In this case the SG and the PF. At SG we don't have nor have we all season a close match of a player there. At PF Thompson is a better fit and maybe acceptable if we had the SG we need. Thompson would be perfect if he was a shot blocker/better defender/rebounder. It would be very interesting to see our current starters with Doug Christie starting at SG or a potential talent like Ray if he were 3 inches taller. Onward and upward, make it a good game for me tonight, I'll be there.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Now, if only we could find that ideal SG who could defend and handle the ball as a secondary playmaker...

We would have been a much better team this year, had John Salmons been our starter at the 2 position from day 1 all the way till now. Not the starter at the 3, where he started the season

 

[pshn80]

We would have been a much better team this year, had John Salmons been our starter at the 2 position from day 1 all the way till now. Not the starter at the 3, where he started the season

Agree. He would be a great backup and certainly a steady ,reliable starter for us now. Our ex big three at
Toronto must be successful, they are the Raptors' 6th,7th and 8th men off the bench and the team is doing well.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Agree. He would be a great backup and certainly a steady ,reliable starter for us now. Our ex big three at
Toronto must be successful, they are the Raptors' 6th,7th and 8th men off the bench and the team is doing well.

I wonder if they could have swapped Jimmer in that trade, instead of Salmons? Had they wanted to and if they were actually interested in playing John at the 2,...which never seemed to be the case. I never did understand that, as he always seemed more effective playing against 2's on both sides of the floor