[Game] Hawks at Kings 1/4/11 Game Thread
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
gunks
Hall of Famer
Our big is clutch from any place on the floor!
Kinda nuts that he was something like 2-11 at one point, ends up finishing the game going 11-22.
Reke's statline is nutty too: 29/4/8/5/2 ...Fillin it up!
Good effort. We almost stole this one.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
Yeah, I saw that too.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
It was looking like a blowout but The Kings made it close in the last few minutes. Good woss tonight.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
Probably would have, had we no forgotten how to play defense in the first couple of quarters.
kingzallday
Starter
Great game Kings!! I'm loving the never give up attitude!! Tyreke 29 pts and Cousins with 24pts....our future is bright!!
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
I didn't get a chance to watch this one until 3 something minutes left in the 4th quarter when the Kings were down 79-95. I was scratching my head wondering oh not another blowout, but by the looks of it we were getting blown out early in the game and most of the game as a matter of fact but made a nice little run in the end there. I wish they could play that hard and good all 4 quarters or close to it. Basing on the boxscore, it looked like it was just too much Joe Johnson & Crawford. Johnson was way too efficient, we might of stood a chance if he had a 9/24 like game or something like that. Horford didn't really do much. I'm not mad about the effort though, Reke/Cuz had awesome performances and if they BOTH could play like this or something resembling close to it then it might make Kings basketball fun to watch again! Anyway, I can't wait for the Denver game, I hope we compete this time around. Plus, it's a national TV game so we get to hear Charles Barkley make fun of us and keep repeating over and over and over and over again why they are playing the Kings on TNT. 
You could easily fool yourself into thinking this team is just not talented enough to compete on most nights but then you see the light bulb go on and everyone plays hard for 5 minutes and you start to wonder what's going on the rest of the game. The talent is there but they need to see some shots fall before they allow themselves to be aggressive offensively. And then when they have some success offensively they start working harder on defense which leads to more steals and easy shots. So when we're bad we're really bad. Passive, non-committal, pass the ball around and take bad shots, get caught sleeping on defense or gamble for steals, late rotations. But when we're good we're really good and we go on these kinds of runs. It's both discouraging and encouraging at the same time. But at least we've seen enough flashes to know the talent is there.
RookieOfTheDay
Starter
I really hope he keeps it up and earns the spot of Kings SF of the future. That would be a major step for the team.
I didn't like that Tyreke was taking those 3's at the end. He did make one of them, but pretty much anyone else on the floor, maybe even Cousins, is a better 3-pt shooter than him. I know he's supposed to be the go-to-guy in crunch time, but that's just not smart basketball to have him of all people take those 3's.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
In the last 3 mins, Tyreke went 1-2, Cousins 1-1, Cisco 1-1, and Donte 0-2 from 3. Tyreke assisted both 3's from Cousins and Donte. Not sure what you were watching.
Pretty much when Donte came in, the game changed completely. It was like the guys were having fun again. The two stats that really stood out tonight though: Rebound difference and 7 missed free throws. Great game. It was fun watching people leave at the 5 minute mark and for the Kings to go on a great run. I hope they enjoyed the radio call home.
He took (and missed) a 3 out of an inbound play when we were down 7 with 37 seconds to go, when there were open shooters a few feet away from him, and then another corner 3 (which he made) with 8 seconds to go and us being down 7 again. Those 3's had to be taken, of course. I'm just saying that as a team, if you need a 3 pointer you should go to your best 3-point shooter if possible. We went to (with all due respect) one of our worst ones.
I think that rainmaker's point was more along the lines of, given that he hit one out of the two he attempted, assisted on both of the two he didn't attempt, and attempted to assist on the other two that were missed, that your harping on the fact that he took two attempts make it look like you have an axe to grind. Like you're just looking for an excuse to find fault.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
With the exception of Cisco, however, our best 3-pt shooters (I'll assume you're talking about Omri for the most part) were having terrible nights from beyond the arc.
That's not the point at all. It's not about the numbers, it's about the game situation and what is the smart thing to do. It also has nothing to do with whther he made them or not. Logic tells you that if you desperately need a 3 point shot at the end of the game, you try to avoid having a guy who shoots 0.280 from distance take that shot and have someone with a better percentage take it. Of course, on a given night or two given shots, Shaq can make 2 out of 2 and Ray Allen can miss two in a row, but if Boston went to Shaq for that last 3 instead of Ray, even if he made it you would still go WTF...
Kings Fan Gerard
Bench
If our team played 4 quarters of solid, competitive basketball, we would have a lot more wins than we do right now. Nice to see that both Reke and DMC had a good game. I hope the two of them have more games like this.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
That's all fine and dandy but personally I would rather have my more proven clutch player making the plays and taking the shot than haphazardly passing it away so Joe Buckshot can peg some infant sitting in the forth row with an erstwhile gung-ho shotgun blast. Considering the fact that our team got back into the game by tying themselves onto the back of our two franchise guys, I would have probably thrown my shoe through a window had Reke not taken the single shot in question. Considering the fact that, as several other posters have mentioned, Reke did in fact pass the ball to shooters in the situation in question, I really feel as if you're grasping at straws to find some fault in Reke's game tonight. If that is the case, I suggest highlighting his airballarific first quarter rather than the end of the game in which he and DeMarcus were the primary factors keeping us afloat.
oh god, here we go again. It seems like with some people, every hint of criticism of a certain player is met with accusations of being a hater or a player-fan of another player. I am not bashing Tyreke's game. I am simply saying that a team that is trying to play smart basketball will go to its best shooters when it needs a lot of points in a short period of time. It's that simple. Just like Boston won't go to Rondo for that final shot unless there is absolutely no other option, and OKC will probably avoid having Green take those shots. Smart basketball is about giving yourself the best chance to win. Sometimes you can miss a layup and make a crazy half-court desperation shot, but that doesn't mean you choose the half-court shot in advance over the layup if you have a choice.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
But you keep ignoring the fact that its best shooters weren't exactly looking like our best shooters tonight. Considering that we rode the backs of our two stars back into contention in the game, it would have been stupid to go away from it. Just like how in the Suns game, we stuck with the lineup that was working, it was going to be in the best interest of our team have Reke and Cuz beast it up rather than decide that we want a sudden insertion of a third wheel on the bicycle. Omri was 1-5 from behind the arc tonight, Beno was playing like a blind rabbit tonight. I would have much rather let the big two do their thing than try to light a wet match with the game potentially on the line.
I am ignoring this fact for two reasons:
1. Researches have shown that there is absolutely no correlation between one shot to the next. In other words, there is no such thing as a "hot hand". We tend to think of shooters as streaky because their most memorable nights are the ones where they made all or none of their shots, and we dont really remember those nights when they shot 2-5. But the truth is, a player who shoots around 0.400 has about a 40% chance of making a 3, regardless of how many shots he previously made or missed on that given night, and a player who shoots 0.280 has a 28% of making that shot.
2. Until Tyreke finally made that final shot with 8 seconds to go he was 0-3, including an awful airball in the first quarter, so even if your hot-hand theory was accurate, that was not the case.
Again, if we needed a 2 and there was a driving lane, of course we go to Tyreke, because he is by far the best on the team at getting to the rim (or we could go to Cousins to power his way to the rim), but if what you need is lots of 3's fast, and you have Cisco and Omri on the floor, they have to become your first options. It should be a no-brainer, and no competent coach would go to his 0.280 3-pt shooter when he needs at least three or four of those on 100% shooting to even have a shot at winning the game.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
But Westphal didn't go to his .280 three point shooter, he went to his star. The whole "everyone should touch the ball in crunch time" method of play works great in the Y rec league, but in the NBA when the game is on the line, you go to your star. Be it through drawing attention or ultimately taking the shot himself, the star player is what will win or lose your game one way or the other. You may not believe in the "hot hand" but that doesn't mean that the dudes on the court don't. Think of it this way, your teammate is having a bad shooting night and you've just torched a team and are feeling it. Are you going to give him the ball and hope that it'll go in because he's statistically due for a shot to go in instead of trying to do it yourself when you feel like you could rend a bear limb from limb because you seem to have a homing device aimed at the hoop? 90% of people probably would have kept it themselves.
Now should Reke have taken that shot? That is up for debate. There have been situations where he's taken that shot and its gone in (See Spurs game last year when he single-handedly almost won the game). If that had happened tonight, I doubt we would be having this conversation as I have yet to have seen anyone ever complain about a made shot... scratch that, I have.
Wow, I have to hand it to you for the new and creative ways you are twisting what I said.
Where did I say that everyone should touch the ball in crunchtime, or anything that remotely implies that? I think I was extremely clear on what I thought should happen in every scenario, and none of the options I described had everyone touching the ball in crunchtime.
Another thing I didn't say was that anyone was "due" for a shot to go in. In fact, I said the exact opposite of that, and relied on scientific research. Statistically, any shot by Omri or Cisco has about a 40% chance of going in, regardless of whether they missed or made shots earlier, or if they are "due" or not for a shot to go in. By the same statistics, a shot by Tyreke has a 28% chance of going in. Going by who is "feeling it" is stuff for amateurs and journalists, but professionals who are paid to make informed decisions are supposed to consistently go with what gives them the best chance to win.
Chances are we would've still lost that game even if Omri or Cisco had taken those shots in place of Tyreke, but if Tyreke taking the shots gives us a 3% chance of winning, and Omri or Cisco taking the shots gives us a 5% chance to win, a competent coach goes with the latter. But then again, this is perfectly consistent with the non-system we have, that constantly relies on reacting instead of initiating.
That can't possibly be true. Over the course of a season, averages will normalize, and because he's currently a .280 3 point shooter, that doesn't mean he will be when the season is over. Omri shot .362 in November, .422 in December, and is currently .462 in January (3 point shots). Where will his overall average be? Who knows. He might slump in February having recently hit his peak, or he may stay at .462, which would be awesome. He also shoots .550 on Mondays, and .150 on Fridays - should we bench him on Fridays?
Shooting averages are not like flipping a coin. It's not the theoretical probability of heads/tails, or else more players would be closer to .500 when they shoot. Shooting a basketball is a much more experimental process, and you can "get hot" as your confidence increases. I've had games where my players have done everything but make the shot, and other games where they couldn't miss. There is a human element that can't be denied.
Shooting averages in basketball are good to tell you what has happened, but they aren't as reliable a predictor of future success - that's why you play the game.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
