Help at the 2

[Bricklayer]

Let BenMcLemore grow into the position. He's got the tools, just need to build his confidence. Reminds of Clay Thompson when he first started, Jackson and Malone kept playing him even if didn't play and shoot very well early in his rookie year. And now look at where he is now, the other half of Splash brothers with Curry. Trading Ellis actually helped and hastened Curry and Thompson's growth.

I know that story about Klay Thompson gets repeated around, but it really doesn't stand much scrutiny. The fact was that almost as soon as Klay was put on the court he shot the lights outs. He shot 44% from 3pt land in his very first month as a rookie. He shot 48% from 3pt land during his second month. The only thing that held back his minutes was the Ellis situation that last year. He was productive from the start.

The unfortunate fact is right now Ben's numbers look a lot more like Austin Rivers last year than they do like Klay Thompson as a rookie, and we're approaching the halfway mark of the season now.

In the past, and again here I will mention Kevin Martin as a young Sg who came in, put up poor numbers/did not show much, and then turned out pretty good. But the difference here is that Kevin didn't get any time as a rookie. Averaged 10min a game of mop up duty. He showed us nothing, but behind the scenes apparently he looked good in practice. Waht's distressing with Ben is that he's been given tons of opportunities, and thus far has just failed. Even his best streak/encouraging point is a bit of a problem. right back at the beginning of December he was starting to show a little something maybe. Was putting up more points at least, even though he still was shooting poorly. But then the trade changed our team, and now the fact of the matter is that so long as we persist in our current structure, Ben will never have that role/those shots again. This last game he played better defense. That would help. But he has so far to go on that end there are 100 guys you could trade for in the NBA with equal or better defensive prospects anytime in the remotely immediate future.

Here are the per 36 numbers of 5 guys as rookies:

Fredette 14.7pts (.386 .361 .833) 2.3reb 3.4ast 1.0stl 0.1blk 2.1TO
KevMart 10.4pts (.385 .200 .655) 4.6reb 1.7ast 1.3stl 0.2blk 1.9TO
McLemor 11.5pts (.360 .336 .792) 4.2reb 1.5ast 0.7stl 0.2blk 1.6TO
AuRivers 9.6pts (.372 .326 .546) 2.8reb 3.2ast 0.7stl 0.2blk 1.9TO

KlayThom 18.5pts (.443 .414 .868) 3.6reb 3.0ast 1.1stl 0.4blk 2.3TO

 

[fanop]

I don't want to turn this into a draft thread, but I think bleak is a little extreme. Maybe if your only referring potential star players, but there are some players that could turn into fine NBA players.

Gary Harris
Jordan Adams
Zach Lavine
Jordan Clarkson
P. J. Hairston (Suspended for the year)
Nik Stauskas
Dez Wells

All these guy have NBA potential, just some more than others. None are top ten players however, except for maybe Lavine, if he declares, and Gary Harris, with Jordan Adams going mid to late first round.

Talking about the draft.... you brought up a UCLA player, but you forgot to mention Kyle Anderson! He's going to be Magic 2.0!

 

[twslam07]

I like Wiggins better at the SF position, because of his 6'8" height, and because he doesn't have the handles of a SG yet. And yeah, I would add Smart, and for that matter, you could add Exum, who while being a PG, is 6'6" and a tremendous athlete with very good handles

In regards to Wiggins, I just label him as a wing. He's got the the height and length of a SF, but he's got the quickness and strength of a SG. You're right about his handles. They do need work, but you can get away with them if you have a good ballhandler at PG and SF (which the Kings happen to have). However, if Wiggins wants to live up to his hype, he needs to improve on his handles.

 

[jcwkings]

I'm just happy that McLemore will spend his first 3 years (at least) under Coach Malone. It's got to bode well for his development on the defensive side of the ball to come to a team and instantly have that type of coach in your ear everyday. I love it.

In regards to your last paragraph, I don't even know why you're bringing IT into this argument. We're talking about needing a SG. Additionally, I don't know why you're making a general statement like the majority of KingsFans.com want to trade him for a starting PG. I would say the large majority of us would love to acquire a starting PG and put Thomas in the sixth man role. We don't dislike him, and many of us see the value he brings to the team.

to get Slim Citrus-level pedantic for a moment, it should be noted that "the foreseeable future" includes a very tough six-game road trip in which the kings could easily backslide and drop the entire set, while losing grip on their budding chemistry in the process. i certainly hope that they don't walk away from this road trip having gone 0-6 or 1-5 or even 2-4, but those are hardly unthinkable scenarios, and i seriously doubt that PDA is about to put down the phone as the trade deadline approaches just because the kings clobbered a couple of eastern conference basement-dwellers at home...

that said, i wouldn't be a bit surprised if IT remains the kings starting PG for the remainder of the season, and i also wouldn't be surprised if another trade occurs that brings a starting-caliber PG to the kings, or if IT himself was traded before the deadline, considering that his value is at an all-time high. there are just so many variables up in the air for this team that it's impossible to predict what the roster will look like when training camp opens for the '14-'15 season, when the kings should be considerably more poised to make a legitimate playoff run...

Well my response was to Padrino's paragraph on IT. I came in to defend Mac a little, but since someone else brought up the "we need a real PG arguement", I decided I would defend IT too. Whether IT is better off the bench or starting is debatable, but theres no question he is good enough to be a starter in this league. Theres a reason Cousins and Gay have actually increased their stats since IT was inserted into the starting lineup. In the modern NBA you need your PG to be able to penetrate and be a shooting threat from the outside. IT does both better than very few PG's in the league. In theory Vasquez was a great answer to us at PG, but he is not what you need from a PG in 2014, he has good court vision but he can't beat his man off the dribble or create his own shot. Vasquez and PG's like him are remnants of the 90's when handchecking was allowed and there was no 3 second rule, meaning less was asked of PG's and dribble penetration was not as vital as it is today. Scoring/penetrating PG's and Stretch 4's are what developed from these rule changes.

 

[Bricklayer]

Ben needs a lot of work, but to call him a bust already is beyond stupid. Plenty of rookies have had shooting struggles(let alone 20 year old ones). Also defensively there are rarely any rookies who would even be considered average. Ben shows flashes of being a good defender and he has the phsyical tools, but he is very raw. The problem is the early comparisons to Ray Allen, fans expect way too much right away.

Also if I posted these stats

19.3 PPG, 6.3 APG, 2.9 Reb, .453 FG%, .410 3P%, .860 FT%, 1.4 ST, 2.6 TO, 22.38 PER

Everyone on this board would be ecstatic to get that kind of production from the PG position in the modern NBA(not the John Stockton/Gary Payton era). Also that player has great intangibles(great leadership, tough as nails, plays with a passion, not afraid of the big moment), but since he's 5'9 we need to trade him and get a real PG.

No, Since we are a team with 2 huge scorers already in the starting lineup that player you listed becomes problematic unless he changes his style of play. So would Derek Rose for that matter, but for a player of Derek's talent you think about changing something else.

Team's aren't built via computer game models. One ball, only a certain number of shots. If someone tells me they want to trade for James Harden at the SG tomorrow I'll tell them they are an idiot too unless they dump one or more of our big shot munchers in the process. IT is a selfish little gunning PG by nature. There has been some evidence of him trying to tame that, but it comes and goes. The real difficulty is he is a 5'9" selfish little gunning PG. If he was 6'5" you could try to convince him to back it off, and even though he wasn't scoring, he could help you on the glass, on defense. With IT though, if you tell him to back it off, his effectiveness goes right with it. The scoring punch is what he is, basically what he can do. So you have him, and don't use him as a scorer, his value quickly sinks. you have him, DO use him as a scorer with Cuz and Gay both here, then it forces you into a very particular structure with pure defensive roleplayers at PF and SG to cover for him and stiffen your defense. Can it be done? Sure. But its a hole shot to get the right structure in place this way. There's only one way to build now with him as starter. Trade Ben for a Thabo clone, JT for a shotblocker, Carl takes over as 6th man, get a fullsized passing defensive minded backup PG (not an inconsequential list)...all those things become just pretty much flat necessary, not options. So you gotta be sure and committed this is what you want to do.

 

[twslam07]

I know that story about Klay Thompson gets repeated around, but it really doesn't stand much scrutiny. The fact was that almost as soon as Klay was put on the court he shot the lights outs. He shot 44% from 3pt land in his very first month as a rookie. He shot 48% from 3pt land during his second month. The only thing that held back his minutes was the Ellis situation that last year. He was productive from the start.

The unfortunate fact is right now Ben's numbers look a lot more like Austin Rivers last year than they do like Klay Thompson as a rookie, and we're approaching the halfway mark of the season now.

In the past, and again here I will mention Kevin Martin as a young Sg who came in, put up poor numbers/did not show much, and then turned out pretty good. But the difference here is that Kevin didn't get any time as a rookie. Averaged 10min a game of mop up duty. He showed us nothing, but behind the scenes apparently he looked good in practice. Waht's distressing with Ben is that he's been given tons of opportunities, and thus far has just failed. Even his best streak/encouraging point is a bit of a problem. right back at the beginning of December he was starting to show a little something maybe. Was putting up more points at least, even though he still was shooting poorly. But then the trade changed our team, and now the fact of the matter is that so long as we persist in our current structure, Ben will never have that role/those shots again. This last game he played better defense. That would help. But he has so far to go on that end there are 100 guys you could trade for in the NBA with equal or better defensive prospects anytime in the remotely immediate future.

Here are the per 36 numbers of 5 guys as rookies:

Fredette 14.7pts (.386 .361 .833) 2.3reb 3.4ast 1.0stl 0.1blk 2.1TO
KevMart 10.4pts (.385 .200 .655) 4.6reb 1.7ast 1.3stl 0.2blk 1.9TO
McLemor 11.5pts (.360 .336 .792) 4.2reb 1.5ast 0.7stl 0.2blk 1.6TO
AuRivers 9.6pts (.372 .326 .546) 2.8reb 3.2ast 0.7stl 0.2blk 1.9TO

KlayThom 18.5pts (.443 .414 .868) 3.6reb 3.0ast 1.1stl 0.4blk 2.3TO

To be fair, Klay did spend three years in college compared to Ben's one year. The general idea is that the more years you play in college the more "NBA ready" you are. He's not a finished product yet. Give him some time.

 

[jcwkings]

No, Since we are a team with 2 huge scorers already in the starting lineup that player you listed becomes problematic unless he changes his style of play. So would Derek Rose for that matter, but for a player of Derek's talent you think about changing something else.

Team's aren't built via computer game models. One ball, only a certain number of shots. If someone tells me they want to trade for James Harden at the SG tomorrow I'll tell them they are an idiot too unless they dump one or more of our big shot munchers in the process. IT is a selfish little gunning PG by nature. There has been some evidence of him trying to tame that, but it comes and goes. The real difficulty is he is a 5'9" selfish little gunning PG. If he was 6'5" you could try to convince him to back it off, and even though he wasn't scoring, he could help you on the glass, on defense. With IT though, if you tell him to back it off, his effectiveness goes right with it. The scoring punch is what he is, basically what he can do. So you have him, and don't use him as a scorer, his value quickly sinks. you have him, DO use him as a scorer with Cuz and Gay both here, then it forces you into a very particular structure with pure defensive roleplayers at PF and SG to cover for him and stiffen your defense. Can it be done? Sure. But its a hole shot to get the right structure in place this way. There's only one way to build now with him as starter. Trade Ben for a Thabo clone, JT for a shotblocker, Carl takes over as 6th man, get a fullsized passing defensive minded backup PG (not an inconsequential list)...all those things become just pretty much flat necessary, not options. So you gotta be sure and committed this is what you want to do.

Then what player or example of a player do you pair with Gay and Cousins? IMO I don't want to run constant Isolation for Gay and Cousins, you could do it here and there(and in theory down the stretch of games), but our offense shouldn't be throw it Gay/Cousins, get out of the way. The strenghts of Gay and Cousins is that they are so dangerous on the move, Cousins with his strength, nimble feet and great hands, and Rudy with his length, skill and athleticism. IT being able to penetrate from pick and rolls and shoot the 3 at a high clip opens up much more for Gay and Cousins. As opposed to defenses knowing they just have to key in on Gay and Cousins in iso situations. From my view Gay, Cousins, IT have made each other better from our small sample size. For example Gay got at least two wide open 3's against the Cavs due to IT penetration, something that wouldn't happen in a Cousins/Gay high usage only lineup with facilitating PG.

 

[Jkbiker]

To get help at the 2 spot you would have to move JT or Landry to get a quality 2 guard to play in front of Ben

I really doubt anyone would trade their 2 guard for our 8 mil a year Thorton, we would have a hard time finding anyone to take Thorton this year

I guess you need to find a team with too many PF that needs a SG that will trade bad contract for bad contract, hopefully you get a Shot Blocking Big

Then you look for a team that needs JT as a big or Landry as a Scoring PF that has too many Shooting guards

I guess what Im saying you would have to trade One of Our PF for a SG

and trade Thorton for a shot blocking big of any kind to get rid of his salary

The second trade will be the real tough one

both or either trades will be real hard to accomplish

 

[twslam07]

To get help at the 2 spot you would have to move JT or Landry to get a quality 2 guard to play in front of Ben

I really doubt anyone would trade their 2 guard for our 8 mil a year Thorton, we would have a hard time finding anyone to take Thorton this year

I guess you need to find a team with too many PF that needs a SG that will trade bad contract for bad contract, hopefully you get a Shot Blocking Big

Then you look for a team that needs JT as a big or Landry as a Scoring PF that has too many Shooting guards

I guess what Im saying you would have to trade One of Our PF for a SG

and trade Thorton for a shot blocking big of any kind to get rid of his salary

The second trade will be the real tough one

both or either trades will be real hard to accomplish

Thornton for a shotblocker is not going to net you a starting caliber shotblocker which happens to be what we need.

 

[Jkbiker]

I would think for this to work, Thorton has to play big time minutes and get his scoring up before the trade deadline to get him traded

Then you work on a PF trade for SG help

 

[jcwkings]

I would think for this to work, Thorton has to play big time minutes and get his scoring up before the trade deadline to get him traded

Then you work on a PF trade for SG help

Thornton can get all the minutes he wants right now if he could hit his open shots. He is at least giving effort on defense and most of his shots are spot 3's playing off of IT/Gay/Cousins. We don't need him to be a volume scorer on this team like we did a few years ago just to be competitive. Play hard and hit an open shot in theory wouldn't be asking much of Thornton, but he has been absolutely dreadful shooting the ball this season.

 

[Bricklayer]

Then what player or example of a player do you pair with Gay and Cousins? IMO I don't want to run constant Isolation for Gay and Cousins, you could do it here and there(and in theory down the stretch of games), but our offense shouldn't be throw it Gay/Cousins, get out of the way. The strenghts of Gay and Cousins is that they are so dangerous on the move, Cousins with his strength, nimble feet and great hands, and Rudy with his length, skill and athleticism. IT being able to penetrate from pick and rolls and shoot the 3 at a high clip opens up much more for Gay and Cousins. As opposed to defenses knowing they just have to key in on Gay and Cousins in iso situations. From my view Gay, Cousins, IT have made each other better from our small sample size. For example Gay got at least two wide open 3's against the Cavs due to IT penetration, something that wouldn't happen in a Cousins/Gay high usage only lineup with facilitating PG.

Depends on what alternate structure you had in mind. You actually serious about Ben being a factor ever (not speaking to whether he is actually up to that) in a starting lineup with Cuz and Gay, then you actually are looking for a Rubio character. If you just want a more flexible structure allowing for guys to breath (and in particular for Cousins to grow into a high 20s scorer in his prime), maybe its more of a Conley (before this year) figure at 12-15ppg. Right now though our offensive system is as highly stressed as any I've seen. The last team that I know of with 3 20pt scorers was the Sonics in 1987 I think it might have been with X-Man, Dale Ellis, and Tom Chambers. And they were pretty mediocre.

 

[Arkitect]

Then what player or example of a player do you pair with Gay and Cousins? IMO I don't want to run constant Isolation for Gay and Cousins, you could do it here and there(and in theory down the stretch of games), but our offense shouldn't be throw it Gay/Cousins, get out of the way. The strenghts of Gay and Cousins is that they are so dangerous on the move, Cousins with his strength, nimble feet and great hands, and Rudy with his length, skill and athleticism. IT being able to penetrate from pick and rolls and shoot the 3 at a high clip opens up much more for Gay and Cousins. As opposed to defenses knowing they just have to key in on Gay and Cousins in iso situations. From my view Gay, Cousins, IT have made each other better from our small sample size. For example Gay got at least two wide open 3's against the Cavs due to IT penetration, something that wouldn't happen in a Cousins/Gay high usage only lineup with facilitating PG.

A player who I think would have been perfect is younger Derrick Fisher. Let Gay/Cousins run the offense much like Shaq/Kobe did. Solid defense, spot up shooting, and good enough handles to bring it up the court and get it to one of the main guys. Not sure who a modern equivalent would be.

 

[SacKings2002NBAChampions]

I don't want to turn this into a draft thread, but I think bleak is a little extreme. Maybe if your only referring potential star players, but there are some players that could turn into fine NBA players.

Gary Harris
Jordan Adams
Zach Lavine
Jordan Clarkson
P. J. Hairston (Suspended for the year)
Nik Stauskas
Dez Wells

All these guy have NBA potential, just some more than others. None are top ten players however, except for maybe Lavine, if he declares, and Gary Harris, with Jordan Adams going mid to late first round.

Yeah, I meant no potential superstar players in those guys.
Lavine is probably the only one but he probably won't declare for this summer which would be smart for him.

 

[KingMilz]

I would think for this to work, Thorton has to play big time minutes and get his scoring up before the trade deadline to get him traded

Then you work on a PF trade for SG help

It will have the opposite effect the longer he plays the longer he gets exposed for a no heart quitter, we need to limit the damage Mclemore/Thornton do but either not playing them or only doing it in short spurts. Your not going to build a winning culture this year if you play Thornton or Mclemore for extended playing time.

Thornton career has basically followed the same path as Ben Gordon minus some good playoff performances no one will want him until his contract is done and can sign him for super cheap.

 

[ParniValjak]

There are thousands of hyper athletic guys with no NBA careers at all. With no real ability to create, he's GOT to be able to hit open shots on one end, and defend on the other end in order to have a career as anything more than a dunk contest participant. His blatant ability to do neither at this level so far is distressing.

Gerald Green Mk2?!

- Good size for a SG (check)
- Great athleticism (check)
- low basketball IQ (check)
- high long term potential / low production (check)

It took Green years to find a role in the NBA.

All I want from Ben is to develop into a defensive specialist SG who can guard multiple positions and knock down a 3 at 40% clip. That production is years away, if in fact it ever comes.

 

[ppine]

Having more scoring in the line-up is never a bad thing. Some teams have figured out how to frustrate Cousins by double-teaming him. The Kings' need multiple other options.

The fact that anyone would show a line-up with Ben continuing to start and IT coming off the bench is not logical.

As a matter of fact, IT ranks around 13 th in assists in the NBA. If the Kings' had a shooting guard that could hit over .400 from 3pt land, IT could easily have 1-2 more assists per game. That would put him in the top 8 in the league. That takes care of the argument that he is selfish and doesn't find the open man.

I have always liked the "lowest hole in the barrel" theory. If a barrel is full of water and had holes in it, fill the lowest hole first. That will result in more water staying in the barrel (more wins). The Kings' have a 1-3-5 punch. With JT, Acy and Landry the Kings have at least journeymen level play at the 4. That leaves the 2 as the glaring weakness averaging under 5 points a game.

 

[twslam07]

Having more scoring in the line-up is never a bad thing. Some teams have figured out how to frustrate Cousins by double-teaming him. The Kings' need multiple other options.

I would rephrase this to "Having more shooting in the line-up is never a bad thing" because having more scoring in the lineup can definitely be a bad thing.

The fact that anyone would show a line-up with Ben continuing to start and IT coming off the bench is not logical.

As a matter of fact, IT ranks around 13 th in assists in the NBA. If the Kings' had a shooting guard that could hit over .400 from 3pt land, IT could easily have 1-2 more assists per game. That would put him in the top 8 in the league. That takes care of the argument that he is selfish and doesn't find the open man.

I have always liked the "lowest hole in the barrel" theory. If a barrel is full of water and had holes in it, fill the lowest hole first. That will result in more water staying in the barrel (more wins). The Kings' have a 1-3-5 punch. With JT, Acy and Landry the Kings have at least journeymen level play at the 4. That leaves the 2 as the glaring weakness averaging under 5 points a game.

You posted something like this in the thread already, and I replied to it with why it makes more sense for us to go after a shotblocker versus a SG. If you want the team to be more successful for just this year, go after a SG this season. If you want the team to be more successful in the future when we have a shot in the playoffs, either go after a shotblocker this season or stay pat. It's that simple.

 

[Padrino]

Having more scoring in the line-up is never a bad thing. Some teams have figured out how to frustrate Cousins by double-teaming him. The Kings' need multiple other options.

The fact that anyone would show a line-up with Ben continuing to start and IT coming off the bench is not logical.

As a matter of fact, IT ranks around 13 th in assists in the NBA. If the Kings' had a shooting guard that could hit over .400 from 3pt land, IT could easily have 1-2 more assists per game. That would put him in the top 8 in the league. That takes care of the argument that he is selfish and doesn't find the open man.

I have always liked the "lowest hole in the barrel" theory. If a barrel is full of water and had holes in it, fill the lowest hole first. That will result in more water staying in the barrel (more wins). The Kings' have a 1-3-5 punch. With JT, Acy and Landry the Kings have at least journeymen level play at the 4. That leaves the 2 as the glaring weakness averaging under 5 points a game.

it is, indeed, a bad thing if it comes at the expense of defense. and it remains to be seen whether or not isaiah thomas can sustain a consistent defensive effort across the long term, particularly against good teams, on the road, etc. but, to wheel out my "basketball height prejudice," IT's size will always present a problem on the defensive side of the ball, even when he's giving a consistent effort...

note: the spurs regularly start danny green at SG (and sometimes they even start marco belinelli in smallball formation alongside tony parker, depending on the matchups) over manu ginobili, because they understand that balance is important to their rotation. ginobili's sparkplug nature has served them well in a sixth man's capacity for many seasons now, despite the fact that he is a considerably more talented scorer than someone like danny green. and that's a perennial playoff team, both during their best defensive years and their less impressive defensive years. they don't overload their starting unit with shot-happy scorers, because pop understands that 1) shot distribution matters to a team's morale and effort level, and 2) the bench needs to be able to pull its weight...

at the moment, IT should be the starting PG for the kings because jimmer should not be the starting PG for the kings. there's no one else to even remotely suggest is a worthy replacement for thomas' current production at PG. but, if the kings were to acquire a full-sized starting-caliber PG who is able to defend with some measure of consistency, while also moving the ball effectively and otherwise staying out of the way, then there's no reason whatsoever not to maximize thomas' talent by having him lead the second unit, where he can do the most damage, offensively...

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Gerald Green Mk2?!

- Good size for a SG (check)
- Great athleticism (check)
- low basketball IQ (check)
- high long term potential / low production (check)

It took Green years to find a role in the NBA.

All I want from Ben is to develop into a defensive specialist SG who can guard multiple positions and knock down a 3 at 40% clip. That production is years away, if in fact it ever comes.

I'd disagree with two of these. First, I don't think you can remotely compare Gerald Green and Ben McLemore is terms of size at the SG. Green measured out 6'6" barefoot at the NBA Combine, McLemore measured out 6'3.5". That 2.5 inches is a relatively big deal. Green has good size for a SG; Ben has adequate size at best.

On the other side of things, I'm not convinced that Ben has a low basketball IQ. I see him doing a lot of the right things out there. Not 100% of the time, but it's not like he's lost on the court. He has some trouble keeping his man in check on D, but I keep seeing him make some really savvy coverages off-ball as if he reads the opponent really well when he doesn't have to concentrate on staying in front of a ballhandler.

Anyway, like you said, too early to give up on him.

 

[Chubbs]

There seems to be the idea that an nba team is a video game. You just get more scorers and the team scores more points. Maybe if you play with multiple basketballs, otherwise it makes more sense to spread the scoring throughout the full 48 minutes.

That also ignores defense. Which does matter.

And the fact is, we have our sg of the future. Until that plan is scrapped, this is what we have. The glaring problem with the sgs on the team is not the rookie, it's MT. MT was almost a 20 ppg scorer two years ago. What happened? People bash Ben relentlessly on here, and that's ok I guess. Pick on the rookie if you want. I expected more from Ben, but not much more really. I'm hoping he'll turn it around. MT on the other hand, wow. Got the starting job back and somehow got even worse.

There should be at least one "what should we do with Marcus?" topic. That's all I'm saying. What we are doing with Ben seems fine to me.

Thank you cap'n! I'm getting a little tired of the low BBIQ tag on Ben. I see signs of him growing into a decent defender and he seems to want to to do the right thing. He's just learning like a lot of rookies have in this league.

 

[Jkbiker]

It will have the opposite effect the longer he plays the longer he gets exposed for a no heart quitter, we need to limit the damage Mclemore/Thornton do but either not playing them or only doing it in short spurts. Your not going to build a winning culture this year if you play Thornton or Mclemore for extended playing time.

Thornton career has basically followed the same path as Ben Gordon minus some good playoff performances no one will want him until his contract is done and can sign him for super cheap.

Well the thread is about help at the 2, since it is too early to give up on Ben, how else can we move Thorton to free up a spot and salary for another 2?

ONLY chance is to showcase Thorton, hope he finds his rythum, and someone is desparate enough for a SG, that has an extra BIG with a bad contract

Chance of it really happening? Probably less than 10%

So thorton is here until next January when he has some value as an Ender

 

[FaStRmAn]

It seems the age old question arises again. Which defense is worse, our Perimeter D or our Interior D ? I'd say right now our Perimeter D is hurting the overall defensive effort of the team. Penetration by opposing guards has caused defensive collapses in every game. It would seem that improving the perimeter defense would help to contain that somewhat, but at what cost. Do you trade assets for a vet 2 guard to help shore up the guard line knowing that will hamper the development of the Rookie ? And using up assets to shore up the 2 guard position now when it may not be necessary later once McLemore starts to develop? So if you trade for a guard, it should be a combo guard that can be used in the future rotations as a 3 and D type. Any combination of Jimmer, Thorton, and Outlaw, Gray, and Acy could be traded for a combo guard. Keep your draft picks.

 

[Hallama]

There should be at least one "what should we do with Marcus?" topic. That's all I'm saying. What we are doing with Ben seems fine to me.

I've been thinking along these lines as well. If the Kings had a vet SG who was just average, nobody would care much for Ben's struggles other than he's a green rook learning the ropes. I think some of the extra criticism on Ben from some other posters is because they subconsciously blame Ben for Tyreke being let go since the FO was so high on Ben.

He's been much worse than I thought overall, just lost at this point. But I think he can turn it around once he gets a glimmer of confidence. He reminds me a little of Pietrus his first season.

 

[upinsmoke]

C'mon Marcus Thornton if there was ever a day to put an end to this nasty streak and catch fire today is the day.

 

[Chubbs]

I've been thinking along these lines as well. If the Kings had a vet SG who was just average, nobody would care much for Ben's struggles other than he's a green rook learning the ropes. I think some of the extra criticism on Ben from some other posters is because they subconsciously blame Ben for Tyreke being let go since the FO was so high on Ben.

He's been much worse than I thought overall, just lost at this point. But I think he can turn it around once he gets a glimmer of confidence. He reminds me a little of Pietrus his first season.

Well, there's no doubt about that. And it's not subconscious. For some it's very conscious.

The thing is, Ben is the prototype player for what we tried to force Tyreke to be. Tyreke isn't good without the ball in his hands. Ben fits better with this group really. Again, in that theoretical sense that we haven't quite seen work yet. It's just way too early to abandon the plan.

 

[Gilles]

Well my response was to Padrino's paragraph on IT. I came in to defend Mac a little, but since someone else brought up the "we need a real PG arguement", I decided I would defend IT too. Whether IT is better off the bench or starting is debatable, but theres no question he is good enough to be a starter in this league. Theres a reason Cousins and Gay have actually increased their stats since IT was inserted into the starting lineup. In the modern NBA you need your PG to be able to penetrate and be a shooting threat from the outside. IT does both better than very few PG's in the league. In theory Vasquez was a great answer to us at PG, but he is not what you need from a PG in 2014, he has good court vision but he can't beat his man off the dribble or create his own shot. Vasquez and PG's like him are remnants of the 90's when handchecking was allowed and there was no 3 second rule, meaning less was asked of PG's and dribble penetration was not as vital as it is today. Scoring/penetrating PG's and Stretch 4's are what developed from these rule changes.

Well, I don't believe Gay played a game without IT in the starting lineup. So actually there's a reason Cousins has better stats since Gay and IT got inserted into the starting lineup.
As for Ben again little statistics:
extreme case of Joe Johnson (drafted after 2 years in college, in the second season shot .443 from 3pt on 2.6 attempts per game) in his last season with Phoenix(4th in the NBA) shot .478 on 4.5 attempts per game in a role of shooting finisher, the same as Ben will likely have for the forseeable future, in two previous with Suns in similar role he had .366 on 2.5 shots per game and .305 on 3.3 shots.
there are multiple guys, who shot very well in college, dropped to .300-.350 from 3pt as rookies, and were back to shooting .400 or better from 3. His shooting will be fine. Defense is also slowly starting to pick up.
Much more problematic is his inability to finish inside. And it's not like he creates for himself and just has to settle for terrible finishes. It's mostly layups and dunks.

 

[Spike]

Thank you cap'n! I'm getting a little tired of the low BBIQ tag on Ben. I see signs of him growing into a decent defender and he seems to want to to do the right thing. He's just learning like a lot of rookies have in this league.

I've noticed over the years that many people (some of the same people, actually) on this forum tend to confuse "low BBIQ" with "youth". Kids do dumb things, that doesn't make them dumb people.

 

[Glenn]

There seems to be the idea that an nba team is a video game. You just get more scorers and the team scores more points. Maybe if you play with multiple basketballs, otherwise it makes more sense to spread the scoring throughout the full 48 minutes.

That also ignores defense. Which does matter.

And the fact is, we have our sg of the future. Until that plan is scrapped, this is what we have. The glaring problem with the sgs on the team is not the rookie, it's MT. MT was almost a 20 ppg scorer two years ago. What happened? People bash Ben relentlessly on here, and that's ok I guess. Pick on the rookie if you want. I expected more from Ben, but not much more really. I'm hoping he'll turn it around. MT on the other hand, wow. Got the starting job back and somehow got even worse.

There should be at least one "what should we do with Marcus?" topic. That's all I'm saying. What we are doing with Ben seems fine to me.

Thank you cap'n! I'm getting a little tired of the low BBIQ tag on Ben. I see signs of him growing into a decent defender and he seems to want to to do the right thing. He's just learning like a lot of rookies have in this league.

I will put my stamp of approval on all of this. Why not give Ben a whole year before passing judgment? All we have to do is look at Jimmer and we can see that a little experience can make a difference. Let us remember Jimmer had 4 years of college also. Ben is 20. Saying that Ben is the part of our defensive problems is merely a statement of fact but then to take the leap forward and say we should unload him is going too far. He is fast. His shot looks great. He has major hops. He is just a few shots falling to get people off his back yet I really want him working hard at defense also. Finally, he isn't a TRob.

 

[Padrino]

Well, there's no doubt about that. And it's not subconscious. For some it's very conscious.

The thing is, Ben is the prototype player for what we tried to force Tyreke to be. Tyreke isn't good without the ball in his hands. Ben fits better with this group really. Again, in that theoretical sense that we haven't quite seen work yet. It's just way too early to abandon the plan.

really, what it boils down to is how much ben mclemore's development will be hurt (if at all) by an eventual reinstatement as the kings' starting SG of the future, as well as how much the team's playoff chances next season will be hurt (if at all) by the necessity of ben mclemore's development. in my opinion, this is not the season to worry about it. but if the kings look as if they're legitimately in the playoff picture next season and mclemore just isn't cutting it, then you start to worry about it. i suspect he'll be fine in the long run, though i seriously doubt that he'll ever reach the ceiling that many predicted for him on draft day...

ideally, the kings will pick up a flexible quality veteran SG in the offseason who can serve the purpose of either backing up a young and improving mclemore, or replacing a young and struggling mclemore in the starting lineup. the kings' problem right now is that replacing mclemore with marcus thornton in the starting lineup hardly constitutes an improvement with respect to overall effectiveness at the SG position. you'd really like to have a guy who's much more consistent either in front of or behind mclemore in the rotation to take some of the pressure off the rookie...