In case you missed it... (split from VLADE GONE thread)

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Staff member
#1
Also, Brick where you at?
Well...

1) Vlade was never technically a full member of my list. Although he could have been on an addendum, and certainly earned the spot by mishandling the two greatest bird-in-the-hand talents of his era, and somehow ending up with neither of them. Not to mention continuing the ridiculous worst in the league Kings coaching carousel.

2) the toxic media has largely been purged. That's a flat yay, and Grant being drug out into the light by Boogie remains one of the few lol highlights of this most ridiculously bad of years. Given some time to bleed out, it may even drain some of the toxicity from the fanbase and restore lovable loserdom to the franchise.

3) A GM with a plan might even open a future. But with the remaining list members still holding ultimate authority in the kIngs hierarchy, the chances are dim. You figure Vivek can't possibly be as big of a dumbass as he was when he bought the team. Maybe. But every failure is an invitation to meddle. And the heir apparent, while I would be intrigued, is the guy who drafted Darko over DWade, Melo and Bosh.

4) Unfortunately I do not like the NBA's current product to such a degree I now actively encourage people not to watch it and have been engaging, pre-COVID, with Mark Cuban to try to convince him to table a motion to fix the damn rules and restore basketball rather than trashball. The COVID catastrophe has cost them billions and might shake the tree, but then again maybe it will allow them to defer the concerns about plummeting TV ratings and just blame all the problems on the disease. Or worse yet, Adam Silver can continue his fatuous beta-boying fawning over Euroball and actually pervert the league even further. And Vivek would be just the guy to hire Daryl Morey and Alvin Gentry this offseason and turn the franchise into everything that is wrong with the league.

5) Ironically, after 35 years of futility, the Kings team that the current squad reminds me most of is the one that first arrived in Sacramento. Opportunity after opportunity to acquire or retain superstars have been blown, and instead you have a high scoring defense free group of soft perimeter players peaking just at the fringes of All Stardom (Theus, EJ, Woodson etc.). You have a disappointing young big with some star but no superstar potential (Thorpe in this comparison, although at the moment Bagley could end up being Pervis). A nice flavorless placeholder coach. A big all offense PG (Theus). and the ability to win in the mid to upper 30s, sneak into a playoffs maybe (and avoid the all time futility record) and get bounced. It's almost come full circle for the franchise, with a giant jelly filled doughnut of a Sacto tenure. 8 glory years at its heart, same ole everywhere else.

There is more potential for health than there has been in a long time, but the top decisionmakers who helped create and nurture the sickness are still there to do it again. There is a breathing moment here worth paying attention to, but the Kings are just as likely to draft Joe Kleine and hire Shaq to be the new coach as they are to get it right.


P.S. Longstanding note for the next GM, and Vivek's brain: During the Rick Adelman era the Kings DRTGs were 103.1, 102.1, 99.6, 101.1, 99.1, 104.9, 108.2, 105.0 and they made the playoffs all 8 years. In the other 27 Kings seasons, they have only been under 108.0 ONE (1) time. And they made two playoffs as 8th seeds in all those years. Best argument for Dumars might be at least he understands that defense matter.s
 
Last edited:
#2
Well...

1) Vlade was never technically a full member of my list. Although he could have been on an addendum, and certainly earned the spot by mishandling the two greatest bird-in-the-hand talents of his era, and somehow ending up with neither of them. Not to mention continuing the ridiculous worst in the league Kings coaching carousel.

2) the toxic media has largely been purged. That's a flat yay, and Grant being drug out into the light by Boogie remains one of the few lol highlights of this most ridiculously bad of years. Given some time to bleed out, it may even drain some of the toxicity from the fanbase and restore lovable loserdom to the franchise.

3) A GM with a plan might even open a future. But with the remaining list members still holding ultimate authority in the kIngs hierarchy, the chances are dim. You figure Vivek can't possibly be as big of a dumbass as he was when he bought the team. Maybe. But every failure is an invitation to meddle. And the heir apparent, while I would be intrigued, is the guy who drafted Darko over DWade, Melo and Bosh.

4) Unfortunately I do not like the NBA's current product to such a degree I now actively encourage people not to watch it and have been engaging, pre-COVID, with Mark Cuban to try to convince him to table a motion to fix the damn rules and restore basketball rather than trashball. The COVID catastrophe has cost them billions and might shake the tree, but then again maybe it will allow them to defer the concerns about plummeting TV ratings and just blame all the problems on the disease. Or worse yet, Adam Silver can continue his fatuous beta-boying fawning over Euroball and actually pervert the league even further. And Vivek would be just the guy to hire Daryl Morey and Alvin Gentry this offseason and turn the franchise into everything that is wrong with the league.

5) Ironically, after 35 years of futility, the Kings team that the current squad reminds me most of is the one that first arrived in Sacramento. Opportunity after opportunity to acquire or retain superstars have been blown, and instead you have a high scoring defense free group of soft perimeter players peaking just at the fringes of All Stardom (Theus, EJ, Woodson etc.). You have a disappointing young big with some star but no superstar potential (Thorpe in this comparison, although at the moment Bagley could end up being Pervis). A nice flavorless placeholder coach. A big all offense PG (Theus). and the ability to win in the mid to upper 30s, sneak into a playoffs maybe (and avoid the all time futility record) and get bounced. It's almost come full circle for the franchise, with a giant jelly filled doughnut of a Sacto tenure. 8 glory years at its heart, same ole everywhere else.

There is more potential for health than there has been in a long time, but the top decisionmakers who helped create and nurture the sickness are still there to do it again. There is a breathing moment here worth paying attention to, but the Kings are just as likely to draft Joe Kleine and hire Shaq to be the new coach as they are to get it right.
Welcome back Brick!

I knew I could count on you recognizing that the likes of Morey are trash.

You’re exactly right re: what’s wrong with this league. Couldn’t agree more.

Also, I like the comparison to the inaugural KINGS team. I never thought it about it before, but it’s a pretty good comparison.
 
#3
P.S. Longstanding note for the next GM, and Vivek's brain: During the Rick Adelman era the Kings DRTGs were 103.1, 102.1, 99.6, 101.1, 99.1, 104.9, 108.2, 105.0 and they made the playoffs all 8 years. In the other 27 Kings seasons, they have only been under 108.0 ONE (1) time. And they made two playoffs as 8th seeds in all those years. Best argument for Dumars might be at least he understands that defense matter.s
But according to the ‘experts’ here, Hinkie and Morey are the types of guys we should be looking at. SMH.

Yeah, those guys sure understand the concept of defensive!

Let’s hire the guy that traded away his center to play a 6’5” PJ Tucker in his spot. Or the guy that fields G-League lineups so he can then play a game of craps!

But they had ‘plans’ so it’s all so genius.

Good, great, wonderful, grand! Sign me up!
 
#4
Welcome back Brick!

I knew I could count on you recognizing that the likes of Morey are trash.

You’re exactly right re: what’s wrong with this league. Couldn’t agree more.

Also, I like the comparison to the inaugural KINGS team. I never thought it about it before, but it’s a pretty good comparison.
Better hope history doesn't repeat itself. Traded the future for the honor of being swept in first round by the Rockets. And didn't sniff post season again for how long? Do it smart and do it right.
 
#5
Better hope history doesn't repeat itself. Traded the future for the honor of being swept in first round by the Rockets. And didn't sniff post season again for how long? Do it smart and do it right.
Not that I don’t agree with your point, but, to clarify, I think the comparison was good from the standpoint of a strong offensive team that couldn’t stop anyone. And really wasn’t interest in doing so.

Loved Reggie and Eddie, but they weren’t known for their defense.

At this point, I’ll be ecstatic if Marvin Bagley manages to become anything close to Otis Thorpe. At least that’d mean he’s actually healthy and playing!
 
#7
Well...

1) Vlade was never technically a full member of my list. Although he could have been on an addendum, and certainly earned the spot by mishandling the two greatest bird-in-the-hand talents of his era, and somehow ending up with neither of them. Not to mention continuing the ridiculous worst in the league Kings coaching carousel.

2) the toxic media has largely been purged. That's a flat yay, and Grant being drug out into the light by Boogie remains one of the few lol highlights of this most ridiculously bad of years. Given some time to bleed out, it may even drain some of the toxicity from the fanbase and restore lovable loserdom to the franchise.

3) A GM with a plan might even open a future. But with the remaining list members still holding ultimate authority in the kIngs hierarchy, the chances are dim. You figure Vivek can't possibly be as big of a dumbass as he was when he bought the team. Maybe. But every failure is an invitation to meddle. And the heir apparent, while I would be intrigued, is the guy who drafted Darko over DWade, Melo and Bosh.

4) Unfortunately I do not like the NBA's current product to such a degree I now actively encourage people not to watch it and have been engaging, pre-COVID, with Mark Cuban to try to convince him to table a motion to fix the damn rules and restore basketball rather than trashball. The COVID catastrophe has cost them billions and might shake the tree, but then again maybe it will allow them to defer the concerns about plummeting TV ratings and just blame all the problems on the disease. Or worse yet, Adam Silver can continue his fatuous beta-boying fawning over Euroball and actually pervert the league even further. And Vivek would be just the guy to hire Daryl Morey and Alvin Gentry this offseason and turn the franchise into everything that is wrong with the league.

5) Ironically, after 35 years of futility, the Kings team that the current squad reminds me most of is the one that first arrived in Sacramento. Opportunity after opportunity to acquire or retain superstars have been blown, and instead you have a high scoring defense free group of soft perimeter players peaking just at the fringes of All Stardom (Theus, EJ, Woodson etc.). You have a disappointing young big with some star but no superstar potential (Thorpe in this comparison, although at the moment Bagley could end up being Pervis). A nice flavorless placeholder coach. A big all offense PG (Theus). and the ability to win in the mid to upper 30s, sneak into a playoffs maybe (and avoid the all time futility record) and get bounced. It's almost come full circle for the franchise, with a giant jelly filled doughnut of a Sacto tenure. 8 glory years at its heart, same ole everywhere else.

There is more potential for health than there has been in a long time, but the top decisionmakers who helped create and nurture the sickness are still there to do it again. There is a breathing moment here worth paying attention to, but the Kings are just as likely to draft Joe Kleine and hire Shaq to be the new coach as they are to get it right.


P.S. Longstanding note for the next GM, and Vivek's brain: During the Rick Adelman era the Kings DRTGs were 103.1, 102.1, 99.6, 101.1, 99.1, 104.9, 108.2, 105.0 and they made the playoffs all 8 years. In the other 27 Kings seasons, they have only been under 108.0 ONE (1) time. And they made two playoffs as 8th seeds in all those years. Best argument for Dumars might be at least he understands that defense matter.s

Luka and who?
 
#11
But according to the ‘experts’ here, Hinkie and Morey are the types of guys we should be looking at. SMH.

Yeah, those guys sure understand the concept of defensive!

Let’s hire the guy that traded away his center to play a 6’5” PJ Tucker in his spot. Or the guy that fields G-League lineups so he can then play a game of craps!

But they had ‘plans’ so it’s all so genius.

Good, great, wonderful, grand! Sign me up!
It doesn't take a genius to see that defense isn't what it used to be in today's league though. You can (and I'll join you) in bemoaning how soft the league is today, but while we do that other teams are y'know actually making the playoffs year after year. Brick brought up this magic number of 108 for DRTG; well last season 25 out of 30 teams had DRTGs higher than that. Obviously that reflects a change in overall pace and scoring vs the 90s/early 2000s, but here's something for consideration (all 2018-19 numbers):
- GSW was 13th in the league
- PHI 15th
- POR 16th
- HOU 18th
- SAS 19th
- LAC 21st

Ultimately it's about having balance - play to your strengths but don't be overly deficient one way or the other. With our roster, the focus really shouldn't be defense - it should be being great offensively. We do not have great individual defenders, nor do we even have POTENTIALLY great individual defenders. But we do have potentially great scorers. If you want to tear that down and rebuild with Kawhis and Jimmy Butlers then have at it, but for goodness sake align your roster and strategy. And also ask yourself which is easier to be in this day and age - a great offensive team with decent defense or a great defensive team with decent offense.
 
#12
It doesn't take a genius to see that defense isn't what it used to be in today's league though. You can (and I'll join you) in bemoaning how soft the league is today, but while we do that other teams are y'know actually making the playoffs year after year. Brick brought up this magic number of 108 for DRTG; well last season 25 out of 30 teams had DRTGs higher than that. Obviously that reflects a change in overall pace and scoring vs the 90s/early 2000s, but here's something for consideration (all 2018-19 numbers):
- GSW was 13th in the league
- PHI 15th
- POR 16th
- HOU 18th
- SAS 19th
- LAC 21st

Ultimately it's about having balance - play to your strengths but don't be overly deficient one way or the other. With our roster, the focus really shouldn't be defense - it should be being great offensively. We do not have great individual defenders, nor do we even have POTENTIALLY great individual defenders. But we do have potentially great scorers. If you want to tear that down and rebuild with Kawhis and Jimmy Butlers then have at it, but for goodness sake align your roster and strategy. And also ask yourself which is easier to be in this day and age - a great offensive team with decent defense or a great defensive team with decent offense.
You can have the greatest defensive team of all time in this era, if you don’t have a superstar you’re not leaving the second round. No matter how good that defense is superstars will get calls and weaken that defense in the playoffs. How good is the defense gonna be we you run into Houston, both LA teams or GSW.

You need a very good offensive team and a serviceable defense. If your offense if good than you just need to be able to get stops when it matters in the 4th
 
#13
So Brick is back, will DMC follow him here? 2020 is really a strange year.
This team plays well when there's really big man setting the hard screens and taking a big chunk of space down low like how it all turned around when Alex Len takes good minutes.
 
#15
I've been watching NBA since late 60s and NCAA basketball just as much or more during all that time. NBA has from my perspective changed its M.O. far more than any of the other major pro sports, NFL, MLB, NHL. Today damn hard to watch the product as much as once did. Run, run, run and shoot, pace, pace, pace, jack threes from anywhere, the more the better. Defense has long been kind of thing that only matters in the NBA start of 4th quarter and especially if the game tight last 4-5 minutes. That has not changed, as most games end up with winning team the one who locks down opponent in the 4th. Think San Antonio with all those hard earned championships. There main calling card always defense, not necessarily for entire game locked-in every single second because had very efficient offense too in Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, et al. But tough defense was Spurs identity and they had HOF coach who drilled it endlessly right into their individual face during the game if necessary to accomplish team goal. If I want to see run and shoot, run and shoot, defense as an afterthought can go onto YMCA or playground court and some pickup game can look like same M.O.
 
Last edited:
#16
I've been watching NBA since late 60s and NCAA basketball just as much or more during all that time. NBA has from my perspective changed its M.O. far more than any of the other major pro sports, NFL, MLB, NHL. Today damn hard to watch the product as much as once did. Run, run, run and shoot, pace, pace, pace, jack threes from anywhere, the more the better. Defense has long been kind of thing that only matters in the NBA start of 4th quarter and especially if the game tight last 4-5 minutes. That has not changed, as most games end up with winning team the one who locks down opponent in the 4th. Think San Antonio with all those hard earned championships. There main calling card always defense, not necessarily for entire game locked-in every single second because had very efficient offense too in Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, et al. But tough defense was Spurs identity and they had HOF coach who drilled it endlessly right into their individual face during the game if necessary to accomplish team goal. If I want to see run and shoot, run and shoot, defense as an afterthought can go onto YMCA or playground court and some pickup game can look like same M.O.
100% of real basketball fans agree with this I remember it was a topic in RealGM. It’s so played out man that’s why I love guys like Nurkic/Jockic they play pretty basketball, old school
 
#17
Two counter points--the NBA has changed. No hand checking, zone defenses, a few generations of bigs developing all around games rather than just focusing on the low post and defense, and a league that has (correctly) emphasized the three ball and thereby placing a premium on shooters. So I agree that defense wins, but I agree much less that this version of the NBA is worse than the older version. It is a reflection of the changes. Adapt or die. Dumars, hopefully, will learn from his mistakes (when he went full dinosaur) the last few years of his Detroit tenure.

Grant was a bit over the top at times. But I would argue that replacing him wasn't the solution. Having more media is/was the solution.
 
#18
Two counter points--the NBA has changed. No hand checking, zone defenses, a few generations of bigs developing all around games rather than just focusing on the low post and defense, and a league that has (correctly) emphasized the three ball and thereby placing a premium on shooters. So I agree that defense wins, but I agree much less that this version of the NBA is worse than the older version. It is a reflection of the changes. Adapt or die. Dumars, hopefully, will learn from his mistakes (when he went full dinosaur) the last few years of his Detroit tenure.

Grant was a bit over the top at times. But I would argue that replacing him wasn't the solution. Having more media is/was the solution.
Correctly? Wouldn't that be personal taste?
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#19
Correctly? Wouldn't that be personal taste?
not necessarily. Where numbers are concerned, the efficiency of the three point shot trumps old 90s style post-up offenses every time.

In terms of production, there is absolutely no argument that three pointers are more valuable than iso plays inside the line. It’s not that no one plays defense, it’s that people only play defense when it counts/when they’re Rudy Gobert.
 
#20
not necessarily. Where numbers are concerned, the efficiency of the three point shot trumps old 90s style post-up offenses every time.
In terms of production, there is absolutely no argument that three pointers are more valuable than iso plays inside the line. It’s not that no one plays defense, it’s that people only play defense when it counts/when they’re Rudy Gobert.
I guess it depends on context. In terms of scores, you are right. In that context, yes. In terms of the game, not so sure. There should be a balance between being ABLE to play defense and offensive beauty.

The NBA skewing the game to the offensive side negates a fair portion of the other half of the game. The corner three that is shorter than long two's anywhere else on the court, don't know about that.

But this is just my opinion. And I'm not sure my opinion helps the bottom line of the league. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....
 
#21
I've been watching NBA since late 60s and NCAA basketball just as much or more during all that time. NBA has from my perspective changed its M.O. far more than any of the other major pro sports, NFL, MLB, NHL. Today damn hard to watch the product as much as once did. Run, run, run and shoot, pace, pace, pace, jack threes from anywhere, the more the better. Defense has long been kind of thing that only matters in the NBA start of 4th quarter and especially if the game tight last 4-5 minutes. That has not changed, as most games end up with winning team the one who locks down opponent in the 4th. Think San Antonio with all those hard earned championships. There main calling card always defense, not necessarily for entire game locked-in every single second because had very efficient offense too in Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, et al. But tough defense was Spurs identity and they had HOF coach who drilled it endlessly right into their individual face during the game if necessary to accomplish team goal. If I want to see run and shoot, run and shoot, defense as an afterthought can go onto YMCA or playground court and some pickup game can look like same M.O.
You ever notice how most movie sequels aren't nearly as good as the original? It's because they take the exciting parts of the original and throw them in your face for an hour and a half in the sequel while they forget about what gave the original it's character to begin with.

I can't comment on the NHL but MLB and the NFL have done the same thing. Seems like fans cheer a lot when home runs are hit so lets juice the baseballs, ignore steroid usage, build smaller ballparks and just the balls fly out of the park at a clip never seen before (they're currently trying to fix this but analytics have messed up the sport).

Seems like fans cheer a lot when deep passes are completed on the football field. So lets tie the defensive back's hands behind their backs and lets make it so linemen can only hit the QB on a certain area of their body at a specific time during the play and lets watch those deep passes get completed so we can see "exciting" high scoring games.

Basketball has done the same thing, just with the 3 point shot and the "acting" job that players like Harden do to get to the line. They think they're giving the fans what they want but in reality they're just creating a crappy sequel. We liked those home runs, long bombs and clutch 3 point shots because they were rare and that's what made them special. Now every sport has been spammed with this crap and it's no longer special anymore.
 
#22
I guess it depends on context. In terms of scores, you are right. In that context, yes. In terms of the game, not so sure. There should be a balance between being ABLE to play defense and offensive beauty.

The NBA skewing the game to the offensive side negates a fair portion of the other half of the game. The corner three that is shorter than long two's anywhere else on the court, don't know about that.

But this is just my opinion. And I'm not sure my opinion helps the bottom line of the league. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....
Daryl Morey has gone all in on the numbers, bcz if you can field a team full of 35% shooting three point shooters vs a team full of 40% low post players, you’re going to win. 3 pointers = 50% more valuable per shot x more volume (shots) per game. Only way to combat teams like the rockets is to go slow like the Joeger led Grizzlies. But to do so, you need two defensive anchors (Gasoline, Zbo), elite perimeter defenders (Tony Allen,Conley in his prime), n PGs n bigs who can kill the clock n score at an efficient rate. That Grizzlies team was a winner, but it wasn’t pretty at all n certainly wasn’t a better version (of play) then the Warriors, who they could never beat.

Now, if the Kings somehow get the second coming of Tim Duncan than an argument for a 90s, early 2000s version of the Spurs makes sense. But bigs of this n future generations are trying to become future Giannis.
 
#23
Daryl Morey has gone all in on the numbers, bcz if you can field a team full of 35% shooting three point shooters vs a team full of 40% low post players, you’re going to win. 3 pointers = 50% more valuable per shot x more volume (shots) per game. Only way to combat teams like the rockets is to go slow like the Joeger led Grizzlies. But to do so, you need two defensive anchors (Gasoline, Zbo), elite perimeter defenders (Tony Allen,Conley in his prime), n PGs n bigs who can kill the clock n score at an efficient rate. That Grizzlies team was a winner, but it wasn’t pretty at all n certainly wasn’t a better version (of play) then the Warriors, who they could never beat.

Now, if the Kings somehow get the second coming of Tim Duncan than an argument for a 90s, early 2000s version of the Spurs makes sense. But bigs of this n future generations are trying to become future Giannis.
One extreme to the other. Neither preferable. Golden State had the pretty offense and the defense.

I don't know. Extend the three point shot out 6 inches and make it uniform. If there isn't enough room on the side lines, too bad, the shot doesn't exist then. Fouling a three point shot is only two shots unless the player is in the air or intentional (no running through a player to stop a shot).