J
jdbraver
Guest
Can thekings hire someone to make IT believe every quarter is the 4th.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
I'm going to again suggest something that sounds like an assualt on IT, but is just good team strategy: 6th man, ala Bobby Jackson 6th man.
Get the big three guys all going, put non-John Salmons clear rolrplayers next to them, so they all get shots and rhythm early. Then bring in IT like a punch to the gut. Do the same thing after half. Get the Big Three rolling in the third, then throw IT onto the party firing and put the game away late.
We've discovered another weapo in IT, which is a good thing. But you can see how much it takes away from our main two perimeter weapons when they are all out there so we are actually still underacheiving. We need to be smart and define roles and minutes. Everybody needs to know when its their time and their ball, and if IT loves to explode late in games, then great let's make sure he's in there and in position to do so. But let's just do it in a way that sees the other guys already in rhythm as well.
Last edited:
PurpleHaze
All-Star
I completely agree. IT is great at getting you were you want to get too but he's not a closer and shouldn't be. Look at tonight, he did what he's been doing all along. He ignited the offense but it was Thornton as main backcourt closer and in frontcourt it was Cousins who both dominated throughout and closed it out for the W.
jcwkings
All-Star
The problem is there is no one else on this team that can get our "big three" going. Cousins, Tyreke, and Thornton are all "get mine" iso players at heart. I think Thornton is much better as a 6th man as instant offense like James Harden. This team needs a pg, and no Tyreke is not and will never be a point gaurd, and he shouldn't be. Our development as a team hinges so much on the development of Tyreke, we just cant have a sg who shoots as bad as he does, it kills floor spacing and with Tyreke off the ball, he gets the ball swung to him for a jumper, cringing ensues.
MassachusettsKingsFan
All-Star
There are problems with every potential combination.
I, personally, don't like Tyreke and IT together. Neither can really play off the ball the way Thornton can. And by no means is Thornton a 'great' off the ball player, but he's pretty decent at cutting to the basket and finishing in traffic, plus he is a very good spot up shooter .. much better than IT or Tyreke. And comparing his off the ball skills to IT and Reke .. there is no question which one of our three main guards are the best at it.
This is why I don't love Thornton in the sixth man role so many people want to shove him into. This isn't to say I don't possibly want Thornton as my sixth man somewhere down the line, but with THIS team .. with IT and Evans as the other guards, I don't think it works.
It's unfortunate that Evans has kind of failed as Keith Smarts point guard. If that wasn't the case, having Isaiah playing like he is right now off the bench would be huge because our bench is veryyyy hit or miss. Evans is just .... I don't know what it is. He doesn't push the ball like Westphal or Smart wanted him too. He doesn't feed the ball to Cousins like IT, and even Marcus tend to do. When the ball is in Evans hands you know your going to bet 2-3 just horrible jumpers a game. And the same thing can be said for Thomas on the bad jumpers, the only difference is that Thomas can actually shoot... so a forced jumper here or there doesn't completely stall the offense because he CAN make a bad shot. When Evans does his dribble dribble dribble SHOT move, you can see the body language of the rest of the team. It's just not what you want.
Evans is in a tough spot at the moment. He doesn't totally fit in with what we are doing right now ... emphasis on right now, because young terrible teams can change their identity weekly.
With all of that being said .. I wouldn't be opposed to trading one of the four guards this trading deadline depending on what we could get in return. Something has to give with Jimmer .. he's to old of a rookie to ride the bench. We traded Beno to get him PT and IT stole it ... like last years glut of bigs, one of Thomas, Thornton, Evans, and Jimmer is going to need to go here eventually, and If I'm the Kings and I'm eying the playoffs next year I'd want my roster balanced and set as soon as possible. A bad old team could give up a nice veteran asset for one of our young guards ..
Just off the top of my head:
Jimmer for Ariza?
Jimmer for Brewer + protected pick?
Jimmer + Hickson + filler for Gerald Wallace?
Tyreke + Hickson + filler for Rudy Gay?
jcwkings
All-Star
I wouldn't trade Jimmer, at least yet. On a team that has no consitent shooters, he has the potential to be lights out game changing sub that sparks our 2nd unit. He also has a high basketball IQ and makes the right basketball play. I think this lockout has affected him alot more than most rookies, because hes being asked to change his game so much from what he did in college. Isiah has the same role he had in college. A full offseason where he know what to improve on, and a full training camp and pre season will do Jimmer wonders. At least im hoping.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
That, however, is a misconception. One its going to be hard to shake.
I don't want to have to recompile another massive set of numbers, so Ill use what I have and what I can easily total. In the month up until the AllStar game these were the 'Big Three' numbers (as I posted in another thread, numbers via yahoo):
MThort: 37.5min 20.3pts (.434 .854) 3.6reb 2.3ast 1.6stl 0.4blk 1.8TO
TEvans: 37.4min 19.2pts (.439 .885) 5.7reb 6.3ast 1.6stl 0.6blk 3.0TO
DCousi: 31.0min 18.6reb (.423 .779) 11.8reb 1.3ast 1.4stl 0.9blk 2.8TO
Now that includes 4 of IT's 5 starts, which is the part I didn't want to peel out of there manually, so there is some overlap. But now look at the numbers once IT became a starter. "Big Three" last 5 games:
MThort: 38.2min 22.2pts (.471 .880) 4.8reb 2.0ast 2.0stl 0.6blk 1.4TO
TEvans: 34.6min 16.4pts (.453 .813) 5.2reb 5.4ast 0.8stl 0.8blk 2.4TO
DCousi: 29.6min 18.4reb (.395 .727) 13.0reb 1.8ast 1.2stl 0.8blk 2.6TO
Isiah isn't benefiting the 'Big Three', with the posible exception of Thornton. Which would kind of make sense -- as a general rule PG play is more valuable the worse a player is. Kobe doesn't need a PG. He can play next to Derek Fisher his whole career and get his own. Kyle Korver is only as good as the guy passing him the ball. What I am suggesting is a way to maximize IT's value to us while getting the chains off of Reke and Cousins, who are more Kobe than they are Korver. Bobby Jackson didn't make Webber or Peja better either. He made Bobby Jackson better, and in the process us. You know where the scrubs on this team are in desperate need of a boost? On the bench. Our "Big Three' were coming together before Isiah's arrival, and if anything he represents competition for them. But the bench scrubbies need a leader in the worst way. And then after half you just bring IT in in th mid to late third and let him play the rest of the way. End result he's still 25+ minutes and can still give you the late game kick if he's on. But the main guns have a chance to establish their own games before he arrives, and if he comes into the game with the confidence he's been playing with, maybe he helps us avoid those deadly 2nd quarter/bench lulls we are always threatened with.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
It makes sense, Brick. The worst was of using our Big Four is to have them all on the court at the same time. The easiest way of seeing how this cause a problem is to lok at the guards and the easiest conclusion is to say that all three guards shouldn't play at the same time. Unfortunately when we try to discuss how best to use our guards the argument diverts to a Tyreke vs IT thread and we don't head towards a solution.
With proper substitution patterns, it should be possible to play only two of the guards at once as a general rule. This would maximize the use of each's abilities. It also would result in very different kinds of games depending on who was on the court acting as the PG. It might cause an adjustment problem for the defense but I wouldn't do it for that reason. It would use IT with the second unit. The 2nd unit appears clueless at times and is much more in need of a ball dominant PG like IT.
As this still remains a team game, it isn't so much a matter of who is better than who but what is best for the team. Right now we have huge second quarter lulls. IT might solve that problem if he played more in the 2nd quarter.
With proper substitution patterns, it should be possible to play only two of the guards at once as a general rule. This would maximize the use of each's abilities. It also would result in very different kinds of games depending on who was on the court acting as the PG. It might cause an adjustment problem for the defense but I wouldn't do it for that reason. It would use IT with the second unit. The 2nd unit appears clueless at times and is much more in need of a ball dominant PG like IT.
As this still remains a team game, it isn't so much a matter of who is better than who but what is best for the team. Right now we have huge second quarter lulls. IT might solve that problem if he played more in the 2nd quarter.
bluntsnbball
G-League
i got no problems trading Jimmer as long as we get a player that fits into our long term plan. i dont see a point in trading him just to trade him, but we have too many guards on this roster that have overlapping skills. If he could get us a SF or a defensive specialist, id be interested. We do need long range scoring, absolutely. But the roster is just so young, and we have all basically established that Sac isnt great at luring free agents, so we gotta get the players we need via trade. Who else on our roster even has significant trade value that we are willing to move?
That statement about basketball IQ i think is arguable. If he has it, he isnt showing it as he keeps making the same mistakes. I think he will definitely improve down the line, but we need vets, especially if we end up keeping whoever we draft this season. And also while he does help with long range shooting, he sure aint doin a damn thing on D, and i dont think thats a skill he can really improve on.
Bottom line, if the right deal comes along, get him outta here. If the offers are garbage, then sit on him and hope he benefits from more practice and an offseason.
Section 101
All-Star
Last 10 games shooting %
IT .457
Evans .420
So yes IT should be handling the ball more than Evans right now.
At this point it shouldn't be IT going to the bench it needs to be Thornton. Think how much better our second unit would be with him out there. Right now it's hit or miss with Garcia's and Jimmer's shooting.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
IT shooting better than Reke has nothign to do with who should be handling the ball -- that's a blatant miss. At that rate Ricky Rubio should never be allowed to touch the ball.
But the reason IT makes sense as the guy going to the bench is becuase of the numbers I posted -- our starters were doing just as well, better in fact, pre-IT. His playmaking, coming as it does at the expense of Reke's, doesn't advance our main guys' cause very much. But the place where it could have a real impact is leading the benchers, who are completely moribund and have no playmaking at all now. This past game we had to suffer through John Salmons bringing the ball up because Jimmer gets his dribble jumped so much. Moving Thornton to the bench, which is the other possiblity, doesn't really help that. In factIi would think Thornton's approach would likely be I'm not passing to any of you scrubs ever and just gunning at will.
So instead of IT playing minutes 1-12, he plays minutes 12-24. Instead of minutes 25-36 and 42-28, he plays minutes 34-48. The minutes don't change as much as his impact. You make sure either he or Reke are always on the court to run things, and then after a long game where both have had their chances to get into rhythm, THEN you pair them up for the stretch run.
sidney
Starter
This sounds good. Unfortunately until we have a SF that registers over 0.0 on the Rickter scale and forces Smart to start him, I think we'll keep up this 3 guard thing.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
There is that.
Maybe somebody at the trade deadline. Maybe.
Minor point -- I think it has to be at the back of Petrie's mind that we can't miss with our next SF reach. With Salmons, Cisco and Outlaw already on the books long term, we just can't afford to further clog our financial/roster arteries with more failed midrange scrubs at SF. The next one has to work or pretty soon half the roster will be composed of unplayable SFs sitting around rotting on long term contracts.
Last edited:
Section 101
All-Star
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Oh, Smart's increasing efforts to fire himself aren't amusing to me so I try to ignore it. Bright guy, speaks well. Its too bad in a way, but taking a real shot at a major pro coach is exciting in a way and could assure a nice team to transfer over by the time the new building is ready.
I read all the good discussion of IT starting or not and its effect on everyone. Good stuff. With the team we have I think the best starting five is the one we have used these last 5 games. If I were asked to suggest my best alternative it would replace Thornton with Garcia at the three. For now, what we are using is working better than before and improving.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
What is the roster of the bench unit? It is this unit that seems absolutely impotent and is more of a concern than the starters. Who is the PG on the second unit for instance?
kingsnation
All-Star
Or young, playable SFs with all the potential in the world (Greene and Honeycutt) rotting right along side of them.
MassachusettsKingsFan
All-Star
I think long-term Isaiah will be the bench guy (unless Evans gets traded between now and next season). The obvious problem right now is that there really isn't an adequate small forward on the roster.
I think we'll see IT in the starting lineup for the rest of the season barring any major changes that net us a SF while keeping all 3 guards, which seams unlikely.
For next season, I'd still like us to go after AK47 .. he'll be a year older and hopefully cost less money/years. Maybe 2 years 12 million?
Come into camp next season with the projected starting lineup of:
Evans
Thornton
AK
Hayes (his post defense, his only good skill, is being totally wasted when he isn't starting)
Cuz
With the main guns off the bench being Isaiah Thomas, Jason Thompson, and John Salmons (I liked what he did off the bench last game .. expecting 7pts, 3 rebound, 2 ast and good defense off the bench at either the 2 or 3 .. way overpaid, but valuable).
And lastly, draft John Henson who is my favorite long-term solution to start next to Cousins for the next 10 years in this draft (aside from Anthony Davis who he won't have a shot at).
If IT keeps up his 4th quarter magic, AK47 gives us a lot of end-game flexibility .. it makes a closing lineup of IT-Thornton-Evans-AK-Cousins possible.
For one thing, the "big 3's" stats are virtually the same as the were pre-IT. Second, I believe you are overlooking the fact that pre-IT you had a "big 3", and post-IT you have a "big 4". With IT averaging 19 and 7 on 50%from the floor in his last five games as a rookie, the fact that many of you fans want to demote him to the bench and cut his minutes is just mind boggling. If you don't want IT starting for this team, I'm sure the Lakers would love to have him starting for theirs.....
Thanks for the reference to the Bee article. I live in Nevada and we get no coverage of the Kings. I like the point forward label for Evans. His numbers are excellent at the 3. Thornton continues to move well without the ball. Thomas and Thornton both deserve some credit for shifting their focus to lay-ups when they have trouble hitting form outside. Both of them are consistent scorers. I like the assists that IT puts up. For a team that likes to stand around, the Kings are doing better with cuts, backcuts, and interior passing. Smart is right that the youngest team in the league needs to run. Point production is definitely up.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
So what is the starting lineup you propose?
Kingster
Hall of Famer
This thing about IT not making players better is rubbish. You're right - IT can't give Tyreke a jump shot. No help there. And he can't even give Salmons or Greene jump shots. No help there either. But he makes the team better. Anybody with eyeballs can see that. He's no Bobby Jackson. He's a MUCH better passer than Jackson, and again, anybody with a faint memory and eyeballs knows that's the case. A lineup of Tyreke, Thornton and Salmons doesn't work. A lineup of Tyreke, Thornton and Greene doesn't work. And if you substute Garcia in there for Greene, that doesn't work. Neither Greene nor Garcia nor Salmons handles the ball well enough to make for the deficit of ballhandling with Tyreke and Thornton in there. Except IT. And that's why we have the lineup we have. Because there is no 3 that is good enough to make up for the deficit in ballhandling from Tyreke and Thornton. Now if you you want to put Thornton as 6th man, great. Then you put in Donte in the starting lineup, and the lineup of IT, Donte and Tyreke isn't as good in ballhandling as IT, Tyreke and Thornton, but it's not as bad as all the other lineups noted above. It could make do, if IT was the primary ballhandler. Again, IF IT was the primary ballhandler.
IfAt1st
Starter
Look, Tyreke had his chance(s).
Go read Smart's comments.
Tyreke's not the PG of the Kings anymore, and the sooner KF's accept that, the sooner they'll be able to move into the Kings future.
The offense simply works better with IT handling the ball as the primary ballhandler. I don't give a crap about stats (even the stats that prove this), because I have eyes. Tyreke pounded the ball, and this offense, into submission when he was the primary ballhandler. It's not like he wasn't given the chance - he was given carte blanche for over 2 years, and the Tyreke-led offense didn't work at the NBA level. The teams packed the paint, and Tyreke couldn't find a way to make it work. And it wasn't all John Salmons' fault.
IT simply cannot be taken out of the starting rotation, because the Kings lost games in the 1st quarter how many times when Tyreke was running the show? They can't go back to that - they have to go forward and find a rotation that works.
Obviously this would include an NBA-level SF which they will AGAIN have to acquire somehow. As many people mention, it can't be a mid-range questionable SF - they have to be legit this time, which means they'll have to pay for a vet (as many of us have been screaming for some time).
But really - the only question is - who's going to be 6th man once they find a real SF?
Tyreke, or Thornton?
Go read Smart's comments.
Tyreke's not the PG of the Kings anymore, and the sooner KF's accept that, the sooner they'll be able to move into the Kings future.
The offense simply works better with IT handling the ball as the primary ballhandler. I don't give a crap about stats (even the stats that prove this), because I have eyes. Tyreke pounded the ball, and this offense, into submission when he was the primary ballhandler. It's not like he wasn't given the chance - he was given carte blanche for over 2 years, and the Tyreke-led offense didn't work at the NBA level. The teams packed the paint, and Tyreke couldn't find a way to make it work. And it wasn't all John Salmons' fault.
IT simply cannot be taken out of the starting rotation, because the Kings lost games in the 1st quarter how many times when Tyreke was running the show? They can't go back to that - they have to go forward and find a rotation that works.
Obviously this would include an NBA-level SF which they will AGAIN have to acquire somehow. As many people mention, it can't be a mid-range questionable SF - they have to be legit this time, which means they'll have to pay for a vet (as many of us have been screaming for some time).
But really - the only question is - who's going to be 6th man once they find a real SF?
Tyreke, or Thornton?
Mass
Starter
I'd say Thornton. I can see him as a 6th man in a future good Kings team, kinda like a Crowford or Harden. He can have a big impact from the bench, and I believe he would accept that role.
If we could somehow get Batum, draft a guy like Henson, let JJ walk and sign a backup veteran PG Who doesn't need minutes, I would be a very happy fan.
IT - Reke - Batum - JT - Cousins
Jimmer - Thornton - Salmons - Hanson - Hayes
Thornton would get around 30 mins and we could still play Reke at SF for 12/15 mins per game in a 3 guards rotation (even if it's not his role, he's always better than Salmons)
If we could somehow get Batum, draft a guy like Henson, let JJ walk and sign a backup veteran PG Who doesn't need minutes, I would be a very happy fan.
IT - Reke - Batum - JT - Cousins
Jimmer - Thornton - Salmons - Hanson - Hayes
Thornton would get around 30 mins and we could still play Reke at SF for 12/15 mins per game in a 3 guards rotation (even if it's not his role, he's always better than Salmons)
sidney
Starter
There's no starting 5 "decision" to make. As much as this 3 guard lineup makes no long term sense for the future, our SFs are so pathetic that you just have to let them ride it out the rest of the year. At least we are playing guys that have a future with the team.
Seriously...how is it that we have 4 SFs that contribute nothing to this team? (Salmons, Garcia, Greene, and Outlaw). Petrie has to fix this over the summer. Amnesty Salmons this summer, let Gacia rot at the end of the bench for final year, and let Greene walk. Time to clean house.
Seriously...how is it that we have 4 SFs that contribute nothing to this team? (Salmons, Garcia, Greene, and Outlaw). Petrie has to fix this over the summer. Amnesty Salmons this summer, let Gacia rot at the end of the bench for final year, and let Greene walk. Time to clean house.
