Well it is pretty obvious playmaker and I dissagree about what the team needs to do to win. We NEED to score 100 points to win. It was like that last year too. We don't have the coaching staff OR the players to hold people down on defense. Martin is pretty good on defense though so that's a start I guess. The problem has been our rebounding though, it doesn't matter if you get a stop if you can't rebound the ball. I don't think it's too much of a coincidence Bibby's APG has risen over the last few games(10 each time). He has players who can fast break up and down the court and the players are faster. Also he's able to have the ball more with him and miller being the main 2 playmakers on the floor. Before you had Bonzi who can post up but was mainly being a garbage man, SAR holding the ball, and peja not getting any open looks. But now the team has some speed, he has players he can throw alley oops to(like last game he threw that alley oop to kevin), he has young speedy players who can actually make their layups, etc. Plus I know that everybody is mad about 2 jumpshooters at PF and C(well not everybody, but some people are). But it opens up more space on the floor and gets a shotblocker out of there(well not all the time, but sometimes). When you have more speed and athleticism it's easier to get more assists and it's easier to score more.
is rahim a dissapointment?
- Thread starter tyrant
- Start date
P
What is the obvious then? I'm not asking sarcastically - I am actually asking.
I agree - Reef DOES slow down the offense. There is no question. ANY post player would and does slow down an offense if the offense is to provide situations for them to score in. That's just basketball.
Of course, I'm not of the opinion that "fast" basketball is necessarily good basketball. More entertaining? Possibly, depending on your slant ... but not necessarily better.
As for the team losing - I've posted WHY I think the team is losing. The starters - for the most part - have done their job (even despite the terrible slumps that our two best outside shooters endured). Our bench was playing some of the worst basketball I've ever seen and costing us games.
Like I've said - I am interested to see how we perform when everyone is healthy again. I think if we can have faith that our bench is going to at least stay even with the other team - we'll be in a better spot.
At what cost though? Our defense is far worse.
Everyone is playing at a level FAR above anything they really are capable of for an extended period. It's GREAT! It's awesome to see a team hit on 90% capacity.
But to assume this is a standard, I think, would be folly.
I agree that this may just be true.
A good coach, though, finds a way to get the pieces to work together. That's their job. You don't hold onto something that "worked" because of that fact. You find what works for your current situation.
I agree - Reef DOES slow down the offense. There is no question. ANY post player would and does slow down an offense if the offense is to provide situations for them to score in. That's just basketball.
Of course, I'm not of the opinion that "fast" basketball is necessarily good basketball. More entertaining? Possibly, depending on your slant ... but not necessarily better.
As for the team losing - I've posted WHY I think the team is losing. The starters - for the most part - have done their job (even despite the terrible slumps that our two best outside shooters endured). Our bench was playing some of the worst basketball I've ever seen and costing us games.
Like I've said - I am interested to see how we perform when everyone is healthy again. I think if we can have faith that our bench is going to at least stay even with the other team - we'll be in a better spot.
At what cost though? Our defense is far worse.
Everyone is playing at a level FAR above anything they really are capable of for an extended period. It's GREAT! It's awesome to see a team hit on 90% capacity.
But to assume this is a standard, I think, would be folly.
I agree that this may just be true.
A good coach, though, finds a way to get the pieces to work together. That's their job. You don't hold onto something that "worked" because of that fact. You find what works for your current situation.
That we're just going in circles about this because of there are diametrically opposite positions and beliefs.
And I agree. I'm also interested. If, for example, integrating two starters back in works but adding the third leads to more problems, then we have do what I've been advocating all along: consider the REAL possibility of the true problem being that these pieces just won't ever fit quite right.
Nice sentiment but not one that can actually work every single time. Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, the pieces just don't fit together. It's not the coach's fault; it's not really anyone's fault. If every team was able to utilize every single player that passes through their roster, we'd never see players moving to other teams.
It's very early, but right now I'm wondering if Bibby/Bonzi/Peja/SAR/Miller doesn't contain at least ONE fatal flaw, and perhaps even two. Sticking to a starting lineup that looks good on paper but just isn't getting the job done is, to me, a much greater sin than deciding to switch out a starter - especially one in his first year with the team - with someone else to see if it works better.
I guess we'll see what happens down the road.
And I agree. I'm also interested. If, for example, integrating two starters back in works but adding the third leads to more problems, then we have do what I've been advocating all along: consider the REAL possibility of the true problem being that these pieces just won't ever fit quite right.
Nice sentiment but not one that can actually work every single time. Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, the pieces just don't fit together. It's not the coach's fault; it's not really anyone's fault. If every team was able to utilize every single player that passes through their roster, we'd never see players moving to other teams.
It's very early, but right now I'm wondering if Bibby/Bonzi/Peja/SAR/Miller doesn't contain at least ONE fatal flaw, and perhaps even two. Sticking to a starting lineup that looks good on paper but just isn't getting the job done is, to me, a much greater sin than deciding to switch out a starter - especially one in his first year with the team - with someone else to see if it works better.
I guess we'll see what happens down the road.
SacTownKid said:
And letting opposing teams shoot 50% +. I do agree with you that Reef doesn't fit into the offense like this new lineup has, but I agree with Playmaker that 96 points a game should be enough to win.
We need a shotblocker!
We need a shotblocker!
If we could get a shot-blocker/rebounder/interior defender to play alongside Miller then that would be perfect. We can always go to Bonzi for the low post scoring and he does have his way inside. Plus, Bonzi doesn't stall the offence as much as SAR.
SAR is a VERY good player and a real bargain by todays standards but you can't fit a sqaure peg into a round hole
Čarolija said:
A shot blocker won't make us an instant defensive force. It would help in the paint but it won't make a HUGE difference.
If we could get a shot-blocker/rebounder/interior defender to play alongside Miller then that would be perfect. We can always go to Bonzi for the low post scoring and he does have his way inside. Plus, Bonzi doesn't stall the offence as much as SAR.
SAR is a VERY good player and a real bargain by todays standards but you can't fit a sqaure peg into a round hole
If we could get a shot-blocker/rebounder/interior defender to play alongside Miller then that would be perfect. We can always go to Bonzi for the low post scoring and he does have his way inside. Plus, Bonzi doesn't stall the offence as much as SAR.
SAR is a VERY good player and a real bargain by todays standards but you can't fit a sqaure peg into a round hole
I saw what Greg Ostertag brought us when he got time last year, and I liked it. I think a shotblocker/Miller combo would be great, and as you said, we've got Bonzi for the post stuff. Maybe Petrie is listening?!
I tend to agree in parts. My whole philosophy is this: I don't buy into this "slowing down the offense" nonsense. It's critical to have a low post presence if you want to go anywhere. Jump shooting teams just look pretty in the regular season, winning or not. While the last two games have been fun, the deeper flaws in our team have not gone away.
But...
While a nice post presence to compliment Miller's passing from the high post, SAR does little to mitigate the interior defensive issues we have as a team. Nothing against SAR's defense, but it appears with Miller we need a very good interior defender to be getting a lot of minutes down low. It shouldn't have to come to this, but we may have to decide between Miller and SAR if we have any hope of contention in the future. I would choose Miller, simply because it would be harder to get equal value in return in a trade and it would be more difficult to replace what he brings to the table with his unique skillset. Again, it shouldn't have to come to this though.
But...
While a nice post presence to compliment Miller's passing from the high post, SAR does little to mitigate the interior defensive issues we have as a team. Nothing against SAR's defense, but it appears with Miller we need a very good interior defender to be getting a lot of minutes down low. It shouldn't have to come to this, but we may have to decide between Miller and SAR if we have any hope of contention in the future. I would choose Miller, simply because it would be harder to get equal value in return in a trade and it would be more difficult to replace what he brings to the table with his unique skillset. Again, it shouldn't have to come to this though.
I disagree to a point with your first paragraph.
Kings team in the past 7 years never really had a great low post scoring threat. Vlade had some great moves in the low post and could draw a double team but he never was much of a scorer. He was more a highly skilled role player.
Webber was never a great low post presence on the offensive end. He game was 90% mid-range stuff. Why that combination worked is because Vlade could defend reasonably well down low and actually knew how to flop. Webber wasn an explosive athlete could hold his own defensively. Those 2 players complemented each other well. An athlete with a savvy center. Both could also block and alter shots.
We all know if it weren't for that night in Dallas we would be singing a different tune now.
Low post scoring is very nice complement to a team and something thats handy to have but its not a must. Kings teams in the last 7 odd years are a proof of this.
Kings team in the past 7 years never really had a great low post scoring threat. Vlade had some great moves in the low post and could draw a double team but he never was much of a scorer. He was more a highly skilled role player.
Webber was never a great low post presence on the offensive end. He game was 90% mid-range stuff. Why that combination worked is because Vlade could defend reasonably well down low and actually knew how to flop. Webber wasn an explosive athlete could hold his own defensively. Those 2 players complemented each other well. An athlete with a savvy center. Both could also block and alter shots.
We all know if it weren't for that night in Dallas we would be singing a different tune now.
Low post scoring is very nice complement to a team and something thats handy to have but its not a must. Kings teams in the last 7 odd years are a proof of this.
SacTownKid said:
I agree, but the open lane to the basket crap has to stop. I really think the future of our perimeter D is in good hands with Garcia and especially Kevin Martin. Kevin puts maximum effort out there on the court and has the athleticism to back it up.
I saw what Greg Ostertag brought us when he got time last year, and I liked it. I think a shotblocker/Miller combo would be great, and as you said, we've got Bonzi for the post stuff. Maybe Petrie is listening?!
I saw what Greg Ostertag brought us when he got time last year, and I liked it. I think a shotblocker/Miller combo would be great, and as you said, we've got Bonzi for the post stuff. Maybe Petrie is listening?!
I definitely agree with this. The Kings aren't exactly looking like a playoff team at the moment so the point is basically moot, but offensive "flow" is great for the regular season as past Mavs, Kings and Suns teams can attest. But when the defenses tighten up in crucial situations and your team really needs a high-percentage shot it's pretty well crucial to have some sort of a low post presence on offense to get a shot. If the Kings were in the playoffs, Reef's offensive game would come in very handy.
Also, before his injury I think Shareef was showing signs of learning to fit into the offense. He was learning where Bibby and Peja like to get the ball and was setting great screens to set them up and was taking great shots at timely moments on offense.
Also, before his injury I think Shareef was showing signs of learning to fit into the offense. He was learning where Bibby and Peja like to get the ball and was setting great screens to set them up and was taking great shots at timely moments on offense.
K
Shareef clearly stated before the begining of the season that he does not want to come off the bench. Now the last thing this team needs is a angry player complaining about his pt and all that stuff. Plus we can talk all day about who's gonna start but when it comes to Adelman and the Kings staff, SAR is gonna start no matter what. He's just too good of a player not to start, look at his career stats, 19 ppg, 8 rpg. Not bad and he is a very good passer averaging 3.2 assists per game. Webber averaged 3.4 so I dont see anything wrong with him fitting in our offense. I blame Bibby for not finding him more in the low post. I feel like Adelman is wasting his talent and wants him to run different plays thats not really in his game. We need to get rid of this teams objective to score over a 100 points a expect a W. Its just not gonna happen, look at Dallas, Phoenix, and even us. You won't go anywhere if thats your goal. SAR may not be allstar player but he is a lot better then KT. If you put KT in he's gonna get you those 17 ft jumpshoots and thats about it. And he's never been a consistent jump shooter. You can rely on Shareef to get you those points near the rim against Allstars like Garnett and Duncan. He also challanges them well unlike KT who will get scraped by Garnett or Duncan. So Shareef has to stay in the lineup.
Oh, so SAR might get angry?
Sorry, but that really irks me. These guys have contracts to play basketball. They don't have contracts to start.
I sincerely hope that SAR doesn't have the same attitude that some of his more rabid fans seem to have. It shouldn't be about what SAR wants (or any other player). It should be about what is best for THE TEAM.
Adelman is wasting SAR's talent and running plays that aren't in his game? Oh, poor baby. Maybe - here's a radical thought - he could ADD something to his game then?
This team is not named the Sacramento Shareef or the Sacramento Kenny or the Sacramento Peja or even the Sacramento Bibby (although that one sounds kinda intriguing). It's the SACRAMENTO KINGS. This idea that ANY player's interests deserve to be put before the team's - is just ludicrous.
Sorry, but that really irks me. These guys have contracts to play basketball. They don't have contracts to start.
I sincerely hope that SAR doesn't have the same attitude that some of his more rabid fans seem to have. It shouldn't be about what SAR wants (or any other player). It should be about what is best for THE TEAM.
Adelman is wasting SAR's talent and running plays that aren't in his game? Oh, poor baby. Maybe - here's a radical thought - he could ADD something to his game then?
This team is not named the Sacramento Shareef or the Sacramento Kenny or the Sacramento Peja or even the Sacramento Bibby (although that one sounds kinda intriguing). It's the SACRAMENTO KINGS. This idea that ANY player's interests deserve to be put before the team's - is just ludicrous.
P
I definitely agree.
Reef is not a pouter. He accepted, without a whisper, the bench role in Portland. But, I wouldn't expect him to continue to accept it past the first year. When the year was over, I'm sure there would be a talk with management about a trade.
But, I know Reef would remain pretty mum.
I think at the end of the day - the majority of his "rabid fans" think that what's good for Reef is also best for the team.
If I believed that Reef touching the ball more on offense would be detrimental - then I wouldn't be for it. Unfortunately, he's been very efficient offensively and I think that it shows.
You don't ask a player to be something he's not.
Reef is an established player with a known skillset. His offensive game is among the tops in the league for forwards, albeit he doesn't have the mindset to dominate like most other players. He and Yao are two big wastes of talent when it comes to passiveness.
A good coach finds a way to maximize his players. ALL his players.
My feeling, since day one, is that there is no reason we can't do multiple things. When Reef is in the game, I honestly think this team is best served running a traditional offensive set and post up play 30-40% of the time. The other time we run the style that gets Bibby involved. I don't think it's exclusive of one another ... Reef getting the ball 30-40% of the time in the post doesn't mean he's shooting all the time, it's just where the offense is starting from. Kind of like when we go to Miller in the high post. Players get open looks when Reef works the paint and people get open looks when Miller plays the high post. It's just different styles... and I think you merge the styles to get something unique and potent.
Reef is not a pouter. He accepted, without a whisper, the bench role in Portland. But, I wouldn't expect him to continue to accept it past the first year. When the year was over, I'm sure there would be a talk with management about a trade.
But, I know Reef would remain pretty mum.
I think at the end of the day - the majority of his "rabid fans" think that what's good for Reef is also best for the team.
If I believed that Reef touching the ball more on offense would be detrimental - then I wouldn't be for it. Unfortunately, he's been very efficient offensively and I think that it shows.
You don't ask a player to be something he's not.
Reef is an established player with a known skillset. His offensive game is among the tops in the league for forwards, albeit he doesn't have the mindset to dominate like most other players. He and Yao are two big wastes of talent when it comes to passiveness.
A good coach finds a way to maximize his players. ALL his players.
My feeling, since day one, is that there is no reason we can't do multiple things. When Reef is in the game, I honestly think this team is best served running a traditional offensive set and post up play 30-40% of the time. The other time we run the style that gets Bibby involved. I don't think it's exclusive of one another ... Reef getting the ball 30-40% of the time in the post doesn't mean he's shooting all the time, it's just where the offense is starting from. Kind of like when we go to Miller in the high post. Players get open looks when Reef works the paint and people get open looks when Miller plays the high post. It's just different styles... and I think you merge the styles to get something unique and potent.
You don't ask a player to be something he's not?
Then why are people asking/expecting/demanding Peja to play help defense?
Sorry, but I think fans have every right to ask/hope that the players on their favorite team will be able to add something to their repertoires.
If SAR was playing his game and the Kings had been winning, then I could better support your position. But, for the most part, SAR has been playing his game and the team has been losing. Is that the fault of SAR? Is it the team? Is it the coach?
Who knows? All I know is that I like the Kings a lot better when they're winning and if it means SAR has to come off the bench for that to happen, then I would have no problem with it whatsoever. You continue to point at how effective SAR has been on offense. That's fine - for his stats. But the team has been losing.
We're never going to view SAR the same way. Especially since, based on some things you've said in the past, you have a much closer relationship with him than probably any of us. I recall you saying you hadn't spoken with him since the beginning of the season or something to that effect.
SAR may be the nicest guy in the world. He might be a perfectly good PF for some teams. I'm just not anywhere NEAR convinced he's the right PF for the Kings. My mind isn't going to be changed by discussions here. It's how my beloved Kings do that will dictate whether or not my opinion changes.
GO KINGS!!!!!
Then why are people asking/expecting/demanding Peja to play help defense?
Sorry, but I think fans have every right to ask/hope that the players on their favorite team will be able to add something to their repertoires.
If SAR was playing his game and the Kings had been winning, then I could better support your position. But, for the most part, SAR has been playing his game and the team has been losing. Is that the fault of SAR? Is it the team? Is it the coach?
Who knows? All I know is that I like the Kings a lot better when they're winning and if it means SAR has to come off the bench for that to happen, then I would have no problem with it whatsoever. You continue to point at how effective SAR has been on offense. That's fine - for his stats. But the team has been losing.
We're never going to view SAR the same way. Especially since, based on some things you've said in the past, you have a much closer relationship with him than probably any of us. I recall you saying you hadn't spoken with him since the beginning of the season or something to that effect.
SAR may be the nicest guy in the world. He might be a perfectly good PF for some teams. I'm just not anywhere NEAR convinced he's the right PF for the Kings. My mind isn't going to be changed by discussions here. It's how my beloved Kings do that will dictate whether or not my opinion changes.
GO KINGS!!!!!
And that's the problem in a nutshell, Folsom Al. I think they're struggling to figure that out, too.
SAR could be very effective, if he could learn to adapt his game somewhat to kick the ball back out from the low post. Peja could be very effective if he could get and stay healthy AND learn to create even a few shots on his own. Brad and Bibby, lately at least, have seemed to be playing with much more focus and energy. Garcia could be much more effective if he could just learn some patience (and I think there's even reason to believe that will come in time). KT and Martin need to be more consistent - even when they're coming off the bench.
Even if all those scenarios came true, however, we'd still be faced with some conceptual problems. As good as this current roster can be, I still firmly believe there are some pieces on the table that just aren't going to fit into the puzzle no matter how hard we push them or how many times we turn them around to try and fit them another way.
SAR could be very effective, if he could learn to adapt his game somewhat to kick the ball back out from the low post. Peja could be very effective if he could get and stay healthy AND learn to create even a few shots on his own. Brad and Bibby, lately at least, have seemed to be playing with much more focus and energy. Garcia could be much more effective if he could just learn some patience (and I think there's even reason to believe that will come in time). KT and Martin need to be more consistent - even when they're coming off the bench.
Even if all those scenarios came true, however, we'd still be faced with some conceptual problems. As good as this current roster can be, I still firmly believe there are some pieces on the table that just aren't going to fit into the puzzle no matter how hard we push them or how many times we turn them around to try and fit them another way.
P
I can deal with someone asking a player to play harder defense - since, in my opinion, defense is an effort thing and not so much a talent thing. Having talent is great and a bonus - but you don't NEED talent to be a decent defender.
Offense is a skill. It's a learned thing. It's harder to up and do something different.
I think that's fair to ask - but to ask it within the first half of a season is a little unfair.
I would LOVE Reef to add more to his game. I LOVED the beginning of the year when he was getting 8 assists a game out of the high post! I was thinking --- "HA! I knew he was a decent passer, dammit!" (Yes, I know ... it's a little self-centered ... but it's what I was thinking)
I think it's the team. We didn't start using Reef the way Reef is most effective until well after Bonzi got hurt and when Peja was in his slump. Reef performed, but there was no one backing him up.
That's why I keep saying I'm interested to see how they do when they all come back healthy. I want to see how Reef in the post works with the team hitting on more than half it's cylinders. I want to see Reef get some more of those assists in the high post. (granted this is all "Reef-centric" ... but it intrigues me)
I think we started to play quite well when we were going to Reef in the post. We beat Minnesota, hung with the Spurs, played better than before against the Pistons and pretty much played 3 QTRs even with the Mavs.
Considering we had two players out and a malfunctioning bench - I still hold out hope.
I think the Reef injury could very well turn out to be a good thing. It'll give our bench confidence ... as long as they don't cause issues when they return to the bench ... we could actually have something. A full team.
Not to mention, Reef's back HAS been bothering him. He tweaked it early in the Bobcats game. Hopefully it will be nice and rested.
That's true. Reef and I go way back to Wheeler - so I admit my bias.
Nor am I.
Despite the fact that I love Reef - I want him to be a part of something great. And I'd love it if it were Sacramento. So, I'm with you. We both want the same thing.
Offense is a skill. It's a learned thing. It's harder to up and do something different.
I think that's fair to ask - but to ask it within the first half of a season is a little unfair.
I would LOVE Reef to add more to his game. I LOVED the beginning of the year when he was getting 8 assists a game out of the high post! I was thinking --- "HA! I knew he was a decent passer, dammit!" (Yes, I know ... it's a little self-centered ... but it's what I was thinking)
I think it's the team. We didn't start using Reef the way Reef is most effective until well after Bonzi got hurt and when Peja was in his slump. Reef performed, but there was no one backing him up.
That's why I keep saying I'm interested to see how they do when they all come back healthy. I want to see how Reef in the post works with the team hitting on more than half it's cylinders. I want to see Reef get some more of those assists in the high post. (granted this is all "Reef-centric" ... but it intrigues me)
I think we started to play quite well when we were going to Reef in the post. We beat Minnesota, hung with the Spurs, played better than before against the Pistons and pretty much played 3 QTRs even with the Mavs.
Considering we had two players out and a malfunctioning bench - I still hold out hope.
I think the Reef injury could very well turn out to be a good thing. It'll give our bench confidence ... as long as they don't cause issues when they return to the bench ... we could actually have something. A full team.
Not to mention, Reef's back HAS been bothering him. He tweaked it early in the Bobcats game. Hopefully it will be nice and rested.
That's true. Reef and I go way back to Wheeler - so I admit my bias.
Nor am I.
Despite the fact that I love Reef - I want him to be a part of something great. And I'd love it if it were Sacramento. So, I'm with you. We both want the same thing.
P
I haven't seen the board - but I assume it's a "Reef" thread.
Well, I said it during the summer - I thought Swift was a terrible pickup for them. He's a poor defender and has a terrible IQ on the court.
I truly felt that Reef would bolster that team and fit that style the best.
I also knew that was a prime location for Reef. He loves Houston and has some friends out here.
But - Sacramento is where he ended up and I want good things here.
Well, I said it during the summer - I thought Swift was a terrible pickup for them. He's a poor defender and has a terrible IQ on the court.
I truly felt that Reef would bolster that team and fit that style the best.
I also knew that was a prime location for Reef. He loves Houston and has some friends out here.
But - Sacramento is where he ended up and I want good things here.
K
you guys tend to say that Shareef does not play with energy or passion. Well how could he when he tought he was just going to be an 3rd or 4th option with the Kings and that he would finally be on a winning team and lose his reputation as a loser. Well guess what now he is a loser again this time on the Kings team. Why would anyone bring energy or play with passion if the rest of your team,(mostly Bibby,Brad, and then bench) don't play defense and don't give their full effort. Trust me I've seen Shareef give his best effort out there every night and he seems that he wants to play defense and can play defense unlike Brad Miller and Mike Bibby who let defenders put season high numbers on them. Shareef is not the problem with the Kings losing its the rest of the players ( and I will say it again, BIBBY and Brad) who stop us from winning games by lack of defense. Oh yea and you could talk all you want about tonights game or the past 2 games on how the Kings are playing with full effort and winning but its not going to be like that for the whole season.
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all, if reef comes off the bench, and we are winning, then he won't mind being a bench player. You forget that these guys want to win a championship.
Even established players learn new stuff. They all want to get better.
It takes time for pieces to fall together, so Adelman can only do so much. If you took the Detroit Piston team and stuck all those guys together for the first time, they wouldn't dominate. It takes time to learn eachothers strengths and tendencies.
Even established players learn new stuff. They all want to get better.
It takes time for pieces to fall together, so Adelman can only do so much. If you took the Detroit Piston team and stuck all those guys together for the first time, they wouldn't dominate. It takes time to learn eachothers strengths and tendencies.
I tend to disagree. I think we could put a little more effort into defense but as you said, those guys are not defensive players. They never have been, so don't expect much change. Again, we are an offensive team. That is where we win and lose. Look at our close losses. In each of those close losses, one or more of our starters was offensively inefficient. Lets not get away from what makes us successful. We need to be offensively invincible. We need to be an offense that beats up on the best defenses.
Last edited:
K
Yea but what wins you games in the playoffs? Its not offense, its defense. Thats why we get rid of Bibby and Brad and get some defensive minded players and we also need a new coach that runs a more defensive system. You can win all the games you want in the season but it will never get you a championship or take you far in the playoffs. Just look at the Suns, Sonics, Mavs, and Kings. What do these teams all have in common, they are too focused on the offensive and win 50+ games in the season but when it comes to the playoffs they choke. The reason being is that in the post season you won't get many open looks like those KT 17 ft jump shots you guys brag about. So what is KT gonna do for you in the playoffs, nothing he is going to choke statistically just like Peja does every year in the playoffs.
suns, mavs, sonics, kings? Don't even act like you expected the mavs or sonics or suns to beat the spurs in the po's last year. There was a huge difference maker vs seattle and phoenix named TIM DUNCAN. Before webber injury we were going to win a ring for sure, we would've beat dallas and san antonio. And yeah, the suns weren't even expected to make the conference finals at the beginning of last season so don't even act like they were a dissapointment. They were the feel good story that year. I see your point that if you don't play good defense and you just let the other team score than they'll get points and you won't and you'll lose, but even if we get above average defensively and we're a top of the line offensive team then that can get you a ring.