Iman Shumpert
- Thread starter dude12
- Start date
I do. I just think it's a little early for statements about what is a failure and what isn't. Iman hasn't played ball in a while, is still somewhere near his physical prime, and is on a young team that at least wants to play fast. Given that scenario and his contract situation he may not be completely useless. If motivated he has the chops to be the best perimeter defender on the Kings.
SLAB I always thought highly of you as a recognizable user around here, maybe it’s the Sam Cassell avi...but saying Iman serves no purpose on this team is shoddy analysis in my honest opinion. Whether it’s solid defense, a little athleticism, or the ability to knock down shots at a decent clip, if Shump can do any of these he will see considerable floor time as a veteran presence in Joegers system, sorry to be the one to break it to you.
I get that. I don't know that it's quite that black and white. If Justin's progress is slow but positive then I can see Coach Joerger giving Iman some minutes at the 3 especially if he's defending well and hitting the 3 and bring Justin along off the bench or slowly revving up his minutes as he shows more. If something like that happens I don't believe it should be considered a failure. Of course Vlade could use our stable of bigs to trade for another SF and then all bets are off.
Inman is in same situation as Ben, he is a 3rd string player
As long as Bogi,Buddy,Beli and JJ are not injured he and Ben can play in practice and Garbage min
They are both gone at end of the season or thru trade by Feb
I love that we Mason,Ben,Shump,Zbo,KK as our Third Wave , but really would like the 1st,2nd string to get most of mins for time together to gel as two units
Three Deep Baby!!!!
As long as Bogi,Buddy,Beli and JJ are not injured he and Ben can play in practice and Garbage min
They are both gone at end of the season or thru trade by Feb
I love that we Mason,Ben,Shump,Zbo,KK as our Third Wave , but really would like the 1st,2nd string to get most of mins for time together to gel as two units
Three Deep Baby!!!!
There's been a lot of dismissive talk about Shump in the past. But he did shoot 40% and 36% from 3 in two years in his career. Everyone knows about his defense, with some saying he isn't as good as he used to be.
He's 28, on a contract year.
He should show up fired up and ready to go. Got a lot of rest last year. I'm sure he has been working. Has a ring too.
He'll be in the rotation. I'd of said he would likely to have started at 3 if we didn't sign Bjelica. I imagine he gets 15 minutes a game in between 2-3, and we will hear the scorn of play the young guys more.
Positive note, if he looks real good maybe a playoff team will have need of his services at the deadline. Overpaid sure, but if they really need the depth they may be interested.
He's 28, on a contract year.
He should show up fired up and ready to go. Got a lot of rest last year. I'm sure he has been working. Has a ring too.
He'll be in the rotation. I'd of said he would likely to have started at 3 if we didn't sign Bjelica. I imagine he gets 15 minutes a game in between 2-3, and we will hear the scorn of play the young guys more.
Positive note, if he looks real good maybe a playoff team will have need of his services at the deadline. Overpaid sure, but if they really need the depth they may be interested.
Shump has had a couple of good years from 3 at certain times and certain places.
Two years ago
http://nbasavant.com/player.php?ddlYear=2016&ddlShotMade=&ddlTeamDefense=&player_id=202697
A long time ago, look how hot he was in the corner 3
http://nbasavant.com/player.php?ddlYear=2012&ddlShotMade=&ddlTeamDefense=&player_id=202697
Two years ago
http://nbasavant.com/player.php?ddlYear=2016&ddlShotMade=&ddlTeamDefense=&player_id=202697
A long time ago, look how hot he was in the corner 3
http://nbasavant.com/player.php?ddlYear=2012&ddlShotMade=&ddlTeamDefense=&player_id=202697
Just to clarify, a players prime is considered to be between the ages of 27 and 32, so he's hardly past his prime. In fact, he just entered into his prime. You don't like him, fine! But don't make up crap to fit your agenda. To be honest, I haven't been his biggest fan, but he can defend, and if he can shoot consistently, which he has in the past, then he could help this team with his experience. If he gets injured, and can't play, we aren't losing someone that we expected big things out of.
The upside of him playing well, and getting the minutes to do so, is that he then becomes a trade asset at the trade deadline. Just because you don't like him, doesn't mean other teams won't. Strange how Lebron liked your nothing player. Shumpert plays with attitude, and that's something that this team needs. This is a contract year for Shumpert, so whatever we get from him, I can guarantee you it will be his best.
If I may say something about a defensive rating. Temple has always been considered a good defender. His defensive rating before coming to the Kings was always around 100. Sometimes a little over and sometimes a little under. However with the Kings, his defensive rating was hovering around 112 to 114. Did Temple suddenly become a bad defensive player? By the same token, Koufos defensive rating was around 103 on average until he got to the Kings. This last season it was 110, and that folks was the best defensive rating on the team. As matter of fact, Koufos and Willie have been taking turns being the best defensive player on the team the last few years.
Once again, did Koufos suddenly become a bad defender? No is the answer to both Temple and Koufos, but when your on a team surrounded by young inexperienced players, it's going to affect your overall rating. I don't think it's an accident that Willie's best defensive rating occurred when he was on the floor with Koufos. Your as good a defender as the players around you. For that reason you can't take the plus/minus or the defensive ratings at face value. You have to dig a little deeper to get the truth.
The reason I bring this up, is because people tend to use those ratings as the be all, end all, and they're not. As a matter of fact, they're far from it. I think over a long period of time, they can be useful, but as a short term measuring stick, I put little value in them. I'm more inclined to go with the eye test. If you disagree, then someone explain to me how Cousins can put up 25 points, grab 12 rebounds, have 5 assists, block a shot or two, and end up with a minus 15 rating. Somehow my brain has a hard time figuring out how Cuz had a negative impact on the game. It's all about the company you keep.
The upside of him playing well, and getting the minutes to do so, is that he then becomes a trade asset at the trade deadline. Just because you don't like him, doesn't mean other teams won't. Strange how Lebron liked your nothing player. Shumpert plays with attitude, and that's something that this team needs. This is a contract year for Shumpert, so whatever we get from him, I can guarantee you it will be his best.
If I may say something about a defensive rating. Temple has always been considered a good defender. His defensive rating before coming to the Kings was always around 100. Sometimes a little over and sometimes a little under. However with the Kings, his defensive rating was hovering around 112 to 114. Did Temple suddenly become a bad defensive player? By the same token, Koufos defensive rating was around 103 on average until he got to the Kings. This last season it was 110, and that folks was the best defensive rating on the team. As matter of fact, Koufos and Willie have been taking turns being the best defensive player on the team the last few years.
Once again, did Koufos suddenly become a bad defender? No is the answer to both Temple and Koufos, but when your on a team surrounded by young inexperienced players, it's going to affect your overall rating. I don't think it's an accident that Willie's best defensive rating occurred when he was on the floor with Koufos. Your as good a defender as the players around you. For that reason you can't take the plus/minus or the defensive ratings at face value. You have to dig a little deeper to get the truth.
The reason I bring this up, is because people tend to use those ratings as the be all, end all, and they're not. As a matter of fact, they're far from it. I think over a long period of time, they can be useful, but as a short term measuring stick, I put little value in them. I'm more inclined to go with the eye test. If you disagree, then someone explain to me how Cousins can put up 25 points, grab 12 rebounds, have 5 assists, block a shot or two, and end up with a minus 15 rating. Somehow my brain has a hard time figuring out how Cuz had a negative impact on the game. It's all about the company you keep.
I was referring to a particular game that Cousins played in while he was still with the Kings. It was one of many, and not just Cousins, but other Kings players who had good games, but got a minus rating. And, I agree with you that those ratings are swayed by who your on the floor with. I wasn't implying that those ratings were running rampart, but they are referred to from time to time and they don't carry much weight with me.
Hey, I go check the defensive ratings of players all the time, but I usually do a historical look as well, like I did with Temple and Koufos. It can help put things into a little different perspective. For instance, if by looking at Temple and Koufos, and realizing that their defensive rating is being inflated by who their playing with, then maybe I can apply that same logic to other King players.
Hey, I go check the defensive ratings of players all the time, but I usually do a historical look as well, like I did with Temple and Koufos. It can help put things into a little different perspective. For instance, if by looking at Temple and Koufos, and realizing that their defensive rating is being inflated by who their playing with, then maybe I can apply that same logic to other King players.
Oh ok I thought you meant over an entire season.
Yeah the ratings are affected quite a bit by what team the players play for and they also tend to favor big men as well. I can't remember for sure but I believe the stat might put a big emphasis on rebounding? Which is why Cousins defensive rating seemed to be a bit inflated compared to what I actually saw on the court.
Koufos has always been a solid defender but last year Temple's defense looked like it took a step back. It didn't pass the eye test and the defensive metrics backed it up too. I'm a bigger fan of the defensive plus minus stat but like the ratings, they can be compared to the rest of the team fairly accurately but you do have to consider the bump in ratings players on good teams get.
Yeah the ratings are affected quite a bit by what team the players play for and they also tend to favor big men as well. I can't remember for sure but I believe the stat might put a big emphasis on rebounding? Which is why Cousins defensive rating seemed to be a bit inflated compared to what I actually saw on the court.
Koufos has always been a solid defender but last year Temple's defense looked like it took a step back. It didn't pass the eye test and the defensive metrics backed it up too. I'm a bigger fan of the defensive plus minus stat but like the ratings, they can be compared to the rest of the team fairly accurately but you do have to consider the bump in ratings players on good teams get.
Too early to say, but the Kings can put a decent defensive second unit on the floor with Yogi, Shump, Giles, Kosta, and ??? We'll have to see, but many of these players play with tenacity, and from the little I know, take pride in their defense.
Scoring and spacing might be an issue, and we may not see them together much for this reason (along with the fact, that if Buddy comes off the bench, Shump is likely seeing very little time). However, I think such units can serve the purpose of setting the tone for the rest of the team, frustrate the opponents a bit, and get the crowd going in home games.
Scoring and spacing might be an issue, and we may not see them together much for this reason (along with the fact, that if Buddy comes off the bench, Shump is likely seeing very little time). However, I think such units can serve the purpose of setting the tone for the rest of the team, frustrate the opponents a bit, and get the crowd going in home games.
This is what I was hoping for. I think he and Kosta represent our best chance of getting something for a vet. Both are vets who are still relatively young, are on reasonable contracts, and can help teams fighting to make PO, or give them a little extra once they are in it. Plus, with their expiring status, teams are not taking a huge risk in trading for them. That said, their expiring also means we won't get much for them.
In any case, given that neither is in our long term plans, and they both play positions where we are stacked, if we can get anything reasonable for them, will be nice. Will help them too, as they will likely get more playing time and exposure elsewhere for a new contract.
In any case, given that neither is in our long term plans, and they both play positions where we are stacked, if we can get anything reasonable for them, will be nice. Will help them too, as they will likely get more playing time and exposure elsewhere for a new contract.
Shumpert plays with swagger when he's right. We could use that relative to the mousey unassuming demeanors of Ben and Jackson. That kind of fire can rub off. Shumpert just turned 28 and being over two years since his ACL he should have some bounce left in his step. We could use tough D if he has any left. This is how he can get into the rotation by setting a tone defensively.