is rahim a dissapointment?

[funkykingston]

Shareef has done pretty much exactly what I expected him to do. His post defense has been better than expected, and though I thought he was a decent passer he (like most guys traded to Sacramento) has shown better passing skills than I thought. His rebounding MUST improve, especially when the other starting big is Brad Miller, but I've been happy with his production. He hasn't exceeded my expectations, but to call him a disappointment is ridiculous.

Just for reference, here's a list of Kings players who are earning more than Shareef this season:

Mike Bibby
Brad Miller
Bonzi Wells
Peja Stojakovic
Kenny Thomas
Corliss Williamson

And Brian Skinner is only making $50,000 less. Abdur-Rahim is the seventh highest paid player on the team. Considering that the Kings got a starting PF who is putting up good numbers for the MLE, I don't know where the disappointment comes from.

 

[BawLa]

Philadelphia is, in fact, contending for the third playoff spot, not the last.

And Abdur-Rahim's advantages as a SF come in the form of:

1) Offense; Abdur-Rahim is much stronger than the average SF in the league, and could post them up with ease, and
2) Rebounding; as poorly as Abdur-Rahim rebounds relative to other power forwards, his best rebounding seasons came at the small forward position, where he could easily dominate the glass over opposing SF.

Saying that Abdur-Rahim shouldn't play SF because he couldn't keep up with elite SFs is a red herring, because the average SF in the league can't keep up with them, either; you don't think that Abdur-Rahim could keep up with Bruce Bowen? Jared Jeffries? James Posey?

Agreed.

And if he lost a little weight it would be easier for him to keep up.

The main disadvantage I see is perimeter offense. With a SF that would post up as much as SAR, we would need more 3 pt game from the PG and SG.

 

[SacKings384]

He's a post scorer. Unfortunately in te offense we run, post scoring really isn't what we need...

 

[Warhawk]

You guys are nuts if you expected him to be more than he is giving you. Bibby is the one who was going to "carry" this team, remember? SAR never said or was proffered as the guy to "lead" this team. He came in at a bargain price to be the PF. I think he's done well. Doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. Give him the ball more if you want his stats to increase.

 

[DirkAB]

How anybody can say that Garnett and Webber don't make the players around them better is beyond me, especially pre-injury Webber. Do you even watch the games or are you looking solely at statistics? If you want to look at statistics, then look at the Kings record since they traded Webber. The Kings were on track to be a 50 win team even after his injury last season, but look what they have done since. He may have missed a lot of shots and even been soft on defense, but they were a better team with him because he made everbody around him better. jThere is no arguing with results.

BTW do you think that the experts are wrong about Garnett? Hell you shouldn't even need the experts to tell you that Garnett makes everybody around him better, you should be able to see it by watching him play. He is the man.

 

[SDKing]

If SAR lost some weight do you think he could play SF?

He's going to lose weight whether he wants to or not with his jaw wired shut.

 

[playmaker0017]

Philadelphia is, in fact, contending for the third playoff spot, not the last.

Unfortunately, no ... Phili is 15 and 14. They are currently 7th in playoff seeding.

2) Rebounding; as poorly as Abdur-Rahim rebounds relative to other power forwards, his best rebounding seasons came at the small forward position, where he could easily dominate the glass over opposing SF.

That's actually not true either. Shareef started at PF in his 3rd or 4th year. At that point he became a consistant 9 rebound guy - except for one year when he tweaked his back and it required surgery in the offseason. He came back the following year to have 9.3 rebounds a game.

Saying that Abdur-Rahim shouldn't play SF because he couldn't keep up with elite SFs is a red herring, because the average SF in the league can't keep up with them, either; you don't think that Abdur-Rahim could keep up with Bruce Bowen? Jared Jeffries? James Posey?

Fact is that Reef's defense against PFs is among the best in the league right now. Last year his defense against SFs was not as strong as his defense against PFs this year.

 

[BibityBobtyBoom]

i didn't expect him to be mr. all start but i expected him to play good and he has so no dissapointment to me.

 

[playmaker0017]

How anybody can say that Garnett and Webber don't make the players around them better is beyond me, especially pre-injury Webber. Do you even watch the games or are you looking solely at statistics?

I watch the games, but even if I didn't it's a misnomer to assume I can't make a call based on statistics. You ask this question as a pronged attack and it's quite irrelavent either way.

If you want to look at statistics, then look at the Kings record since they traded Webber.

Go back to when I mentioned systems. The system was designed in a way that Webber could easily dominate. It thrived with him at the helm because the system was suited for his style of play. The system suited him like a glove. The better he did the better his team did.

The Kings were on track to be a 50 win team even after his injury last season, but look what they have done since. He may have missed a lot of shots and even been soft on defense, but they were a better team with him because he made everbody around him better. jThere is no arguing with results.

If there is no arguing with results why is Phili miring in .500-ball? Why were the majority of his teams pre-Sacramento quite plain?

He had some success, but for the most part, outside of Sacramento, it was mired in mediocrity. He did well, but his teams didn't. People used to say the same things they now say about Shareef. (and at the time, I used to say the same things I now say about Shareef)

BTW do you think that the experts are wrong about Garnett?

Experts? You mean the guys on ESPN?

No, the experts aren't wrong in respect to his talent-level. But, he doesn't elevate the game of those around him. There are only a select few that can truly do that and most of them, if not all of them, come in the form of a SG or a PG.

Hell you shouldn't even need the experts to tell you that Garnett makes everybody around him better, you should be able to see it by watching him play. He is the man.

He is the man. He carries his team, but he's never made anyone better by having them on his team. No one performs at a level above anything they've done previously or after.

He's a guy that is so extremely talented that he can will his team to win through force. But, he isn't making people better by his play. He's making himself better and people are just playing their game around him.

This "making people better" thing is all media nonsense. Kevin Garnett in Vancouver produces 5-10 wins more because he is a better defender. But, that team doesn't elevate it's whole level of play because of Garnett.

What influences people the most is the system they play in and the places they are asked to produce from. Period.

 

[Bonzinator]

i heard grant say during a game that SAR would box out and bonzi would fly in and grab the rebound. so as long as he boxes out its fine with me. thats more then what C-WEBB ever did the last couple of years. if anyone has been a disappointment its peja and kenny thomas.

 

[playmaker0017]

i heard grant say during a game that SAR would box out and bonzi would fly in and grab the rebound.

This is what I've been trying to point out when everyone drives home about Reef with 6 rebounds a game.

I think he should exert himself and get the board, but as long as someone on our team gets the ball, and the man Reef boxes out does not ... he did his job.

 

[bcfy]

agree with SAR has been doing the box out job...

and also, when your opponent team not missing many shots with our GREAT Kings defense, you can't expect many rebounds.

 

[DaMan]

Philadelphia is, in fact, contending for the third playoff spot, not the last.

The only reason that might happen is because the Alantic divison is weak and who ever wins it will have to take the 3rd, 2nd, or 1st seed by rule. but looking at the east today det, miami, and nj will must likely take the top seeds and will the sixers will just take the 7th or 8th seed.

Personly i think that sar could avg 18 to 21 points, dammit he has the second highest fg avg in the leauge, he just needs to get the ball more. He does avg 16 points off only 11 shots, i think if u give more shots he can get in the 20 point range.

And shareef is not a leader, even dough many people in the media and many avg people thought that shareef could replace webber and become leader.

 

[DirkAB]

I watch the games, but even if I didn't it's a misnomer to assume I can't make a call based on statistics. You ask this question as a pronged attack and it's quite irrelavent either way.

Go back to when I mentioned systems. The system was designed in a way that Webber could easily dominate. It thrived with him at the helm because the system was suited for his style of play. The system suited him like a glove. The better he did the better his team did.

If there is no arguing with results why is Phili miring in .500-ball? Why were the majority of his teams pre-Sacramento quite plain?

He had some success, but for the most part, outside of Sacramento, it was mired in mediocrity. He did well, but his teams didn't. People used to say the same things they now say about Shareef. (and at the time, I used to say the same things I now say about Shareef)

Experts? You mean the guys on ESPN?

No, the experts aren't wrong in respect to his talent-level. But, he doesn't elevate the game of those around him. There are only a select few that can truly do that and most of them, if not all of them, come in the form of a SG or a PG.

He is the man. He carries his team, but he's never made anyone better by having them on his team. No one performs at a level above anything they've done previously or after.

He's a guy that is so extremely talented that he can will his team to win through force. But, he isn't making people better by his play. He's making himself better and people are just playing their game around him.

This "making people better" thing is all media nonsense. Kevin Garnett in Vancouver produces 5-10 wins more because he is a better defender. But, that team doesn't elevate it's whole level of play because of Garnett.

What influences people the most is the system they play in and the places they are asked to produce from. Period.

Webber hasn't had success outside of Sacramento? Maybe by some standards, SAR would be thrilled with Webber's team success even outside of Sacto. Webber made the playoffs with 4 different teams for a total of 9 different times.

SAR hasn't made the playoffs once! He's been the first scoring option on almost every team he's been on besides Portland, but his teams haven't even reached mediocracy. You say it is all about the system, which has some truth to it, but some players are more able to adapt to multiple systems. SAR has played for lots of coaches in lots of systems, are we to believe that he just hasn't found a system that fits his style of play? Is he continually getting the short end of the stick? Or maybe he isn't good enough to be the focal point or even second fiddle of an offense and he belongs being the 3rd scoring option.

He is a tweener, he probably belongs coming of the bench playing the 6th man. He is too small and doesn't rebound well enough to play a starting PF especially without a center that has no interior presence and is a poor rebounder. Also he is too slow and can't shoot well enough to play a starting SF, especially playing alongside a poor outside shooting SG like Bonzi. SAR hasn't been a disapointment at all, I just think that some may have too high of expectations for him. He is definitely worth the MLE, but I do have a few complaints. First he obviously hasn't been rebounding, and second I think that he slows the offense down and hangs on to the ball too long sometimes. I'm sure the ball movement will improve the longer he plays in the offense.

 

[JJ22L]

If you thought SAR was going to replace Webber, he isn't. If you have watched him play over any point in his career, he is giving you what he always has (not as many rebounds, and he wont fit into our offensive system- is that why this question is brought up?), so for me he hasn't been a dissapointment at all, we got exactly what we should have expected. Look at how much the man is making.....i mean seriously, a little more then skinner? less then KT and corliss?? ....for his output, 16.5 points on about 11 shots per game, and at least some consistency that this team lacks, to call that a dissapointment is absurd, Petrie got exactly what he signed.

S.A.R. will not lead this team to victory though (and THAT should be apparent), but i think he is the 3rd or 4th wheel behind someone that will.

 

[ParniValjak]

No he hasn't been a disappointment for me. He has played as well as I expected him to. The only disappointment for me so far is his rebounding. I expected him to average about 8 rebounds per game which I thought was reasonable for a player of his caliber. He started the year off rebounding wise but then lost his way since. If he can get his rebounding average up to 8 per game, I would be very happy with what we got.

Having said that, he has been far from disappointing.

 

[Bricklayer]

Disappointment always depends on expectations.

Since my read on Reef has always been as a non-impact stats-only player, I am not particularly disappointed in him. In the front office for thinking he was an answer, yes. In Reef, not so much.

But hey, here's one for you old school Kings fans -- we've had Reef on the team before! And coincidentally we used to suck the last time we had him too:

Shareef Abdur-Rahim:
05-06 16.5pts (.547 .500 .792) 6.4rebs 3.2ast 0.7stl 0.9blk 2.0TO

Shareef Abdur-Tisdale:
91-92 16.6pts (.500 .000 .763) 6.5rebs 1.5ast 0.8stl 1.1blk 1.7TO
92-93 16.6pts (.509 .000 .758) 6.6rebs 1.4ast 0.7stl 0.6blk 1.5TO

 

[Bballkingsrock]

Reef has done plenty this year for the price we got him for. POst game anyone? Nice 1-2 punch with Bonzi? Not outstnading rebounder but is not badddd...... and points is great. Dont forget is FG%!

 

[SacKings384]

Regaurdless of Reefs bad rebounding. He has been responsible for SHUTTING down some of the leagues best I.E KG and Duncan

 

[Bricklayer]

Not outstnading rebounder but is not badddd......

??

Try statistically the worrssstt starting "PF" rebounder in the NBA.

8.7 rebs/per 48. That's 103rd in the league amongst PFs. If you call LaFrentz the PF in Boston rather than the C, then Shareef is miscrosopically better as the 29th of 30 starting PF rebounders. Call LaFrentz a C, and Reef is dead last. There are also 25 SFs, 19 OGs, (there is some overlap there) and 1 PG (Kidd) above that number. He is being outrebounded by Mike Miller.

 

[JJ22L]

??

Try statistically the worrssstt starting "PF" rebounder in the NBA.

8.7 rebs/per 48. That's 103rd in the league amongst PFs. If you call LaFrentz the Pf in Boston rather than the C, then Shareef is miscrosopically better as the 29th of 30 starting PF rebounders. Casll LaFrentz a C, and Reef is dead last. There are also 25 SFs, 19 OGs, (there is some overlap there) and 1 PG (Kidd) above that number. He is being outrebounded by Mike Miller.

Wow, Nice stat Brick, actually shows how much reefs rebounding HAS gone down.

 

[playmaker0017]

SAR hasn't made the playoffs once! He's been the first scoring option on almost every team he's been on besides Portland, but his teams haven't even reached mediocracy.

Actually, Reef has never been a true "first option". He's been more of an option 1a or option 1b.

He led the team in shots, but being a first option isn't just about number of shots.

SAR has played for lots of coaches in lots of systems, are we to believe that he just hasn't found a system that fits his style of play?

Name one good coach that Reef played under? Name one team with any real direction as to overall personnel choices that Reef has been a part of ... including Sacramento?

It's not just the system, but also the talent level surrounding him. Not many players can say they could make those teams contend for a playoff spot - especially with a rudderless coach at the helm.

Reef's not a leader and needs a coach to set the guidelines. If the coach doesn't ... Reef won't. That's Reef's downfall. Not talent.

Or maybe he isn't good enough to be the focal point or even second fiddle of an offense and he belongs being the 3rd scoring option.

That's so absurd it makes me chuckle. It's not that it's about Reef, it's just absurd that one can think a proficient scorer who isn't shut down by anyone can't lead an offense.

If he were not performing in the final minutes (which he always has) or had a high number of TOs (which he doesn't) or had a pee-poor shooting % which he doesn't ... then MAYBE. But, he's scored at will on almost everyone in the league.

His only problem in this area is deferring too much. He wants too hard to be a "team player" instead of a "me player". He doesn't realize that if he played more selfishly he'd probably have more impact.

He is a tweener, he probably belongs coming of the bench playing the 6th man. He is too small and doesn't rebound well enough to play a starting PF especially without a center that has no interior presence and is a poor rebounder.

Too small? Too small to hold his man to a lower efficiency than Duncan and Garnett? To small to score on everyone in the league? What's too small? If he's performing well ... then what is too small?

As for rebounding - he's a decent rebounder usually. This year is off. He's averaged 9+ rebounds every year he played PF except when he had a bad back ... I don't know how many rebounds he needs to get to pass.

Right now he's underperforming, but I have a hard time saying that one third of one season in a new environment is a determinator of how he has rebounded through his whole career.

hangs on to the ball too long sometimes.

That's been my complaint for a while. This developed under Sid Lowe and "A-Train" as his coaches. They wanted him to wait for the double team and kick to a guard instead of spinning into the lane quickly for the bucket.

For whatever reason, it stuck with him and he's been slower with the ball ever since.

Remember, Reef used to get doubled/tripled every possession. So, I guess it wasn't a bad thought ... it's just bad that it stuck.

 

[Bballkingsrock]

??

Try statistically the worrssstt starting "PF" rebounder in the NBA.

8.7 rebs/per 48. That's 103rd in the league amongst PFs. If you call LaFrentz the PF in Boston rather than the C, then Shareef is miscrosopically better as the 29th of 30 starting PF rebounders. Call LaFrentz a C, and Reef is dead last. There are also 25 SFs, 19 OGs, (there is some overlap there) and 1 PG (Kidd) above that number. He is being outrebounded by Mike Miller.

For his size I meant he not baddd............... He is really a SF so he is doingf better than Peja.......

 

[VF21]

Actually, Reef has never been a true "first option". He's been more of an option 1a or option 1b.

He led the team in shots, but being a first option isn't just about number of shots.



Name one good coach that Reef played under? Name one team with any real direction as to overall personnel choices that Reef has been a part of ... including Sacramento?

It's not just the system, but also the talent level surrounding him. Not many players can say they could make those teams contend for a playoff spot - especially with a rudderless coach at the helm.

Reef's not a leader and needs a coach to set the guidelines. If the coach doesn't ... Reef won't. That's Reef's downfall. Not talent.



That's so absurd it makes me chuckle. It's not that it's about Reef, it's just absurd that one can think a proficient scorer who isn't shut down by anyone can't lead an offense.

If he were not performing in the final minutes (which he always has) or had a high number of TOs (which he doesn't) or had a pee-poor shooting % which he doesn't ... then MAYBE. But, he's scored at will on almost everyone in the league.

His only problem in this area is deferring too much. He wants too hard to be a "team player" instead of a "me player". He doesn't realize that if he played more selfishly he'd probably have more impact.



Too small? Too small to hold his man to a lower efficiency than Duncan and Garnett? To small to score on everyone in the league? What's too small? If he's performing well ... then what is too small?

As for rebounding - he's a decent rebounder usually. This year is off. He's averaged 9+ rebounds every year he played PF except when he had a bad back ... I don't know how many rebounds he needs to get to pass.

Right now he's underperforming, but I have a hard time saying that one third of one season in a new environment is a determinator of how he has rebounded through his whole career.



That's been my complaint for a while. This developed under Sid Lowe and "A-Train" as his coaches. They wanted him to wait for the double team and kick to a guard instead of spinning into the lane quickly for the bucket.

For whatever reason, it stuck with him and he's been slower with the ball ever since.

Remember, Reef used to get doubled/tripled every possession. So, I guess it wasn't a bad thought ... it's just bad that it stuck.

You know, all of this ^^^ could be true.

BUT it also could be true that Shareef Abdur-Rahim is one of those players who is tantalizingly close to being really good but, for who knows what reasons, may just never cross over into the elite class.

I don't question his heart, his desire, etc. because it's clear that he really wants to do the very best he can. I just believe that he's close to becoming the epitome of "always a bride's maid, never a bride"...

To answer the question of the thread...No, to me he's not a disappointment primarily because I was never totally convinced he was THAT great to begin with. He's been adequate for the most part...but not someone I'd build a team around.

 

[natedizzle]

When we got SAR I compared him to vanilla ice cream-good but not spectacular. I am not dissapointed because this is about what I expected of him.

 

[BMiller52]

You know, all of this ^^^ could be true.

BUT it also could be true that Shareef Abdur-Rahim is one of those players who is tantalizingly close to being really good but, for who knows what reasons, may just never cross over into the elite class.

I don't question his heart, his desire, etc. because it's clear that he really wants to do the very best he can. I just believe that he's close to becoming the epitome of "always a bride's maid, never a bride"...

To answer the question of the thread...No, to me he's not a disappointment primarily because I was never totally convinced he was THAT great to begin with. He's been adequate for the most part...but not someone I'd build a team around.

I feel the same way. Nobody's ever going to totally convince me of SAR's greatness and I don't get the point of holding onto a bad fit for the team either. He's been okay, but not as great as playmaker007 wants everyone to believe. He's a 3rd or 4th option or probably a 6th man on a good team, and he won't be a sixth man(portland already tried that).

 

[ONEZERO]

start skinner(when everyone is healthy and we keep the same team intact.. i dont really want the team to stay the same, but lets pretend it does) and have miller move to PF, then bring SAR off the bench and who knows what will happen with kenny... but right now im up for any kind of rotation... our whole starting 5 doesnt compliment eachother very good... we need skinner in there to do the dirty work and have miller and bibby as the main scorers... bonzi does everything for us... hecan just continue to do that.. and when we bring in our benchers(cisco, martin, kenny or whoever along with SAR we have SAR in there for the others to feed him the ball as much as possible... cisco and martin can do A LOT of the little things like hustling and flying for boards... that way we dont have to worry about the bench coming in and us losing the lead we had cause the bench we have now cant score worth s***... with SAR as a bencher(that is the MAIN bencher- al a 6th man-) we dont have to worry about the offense falling asleep... that way, ladies and gentleman, is how you can make SAR NOT a dissapointment!

 

[SacTownKid]

Shareef hasn't disappointed me. The team has. But it's not Shareefs fault.

 

[Gary]

I think that Shareef is doing what he was brought in to do. 9 shots, and 16 points is pretty productive offensively. BUT I feel he should come off the bench and bring us some offense that way rather than start. Thomas has proven he does not want to, and is not very good at coming off the bench.

 

[DaMan]

He's been okay, but not as great as playmaker007 wants everyone to believe. He's a 3rd or 4th option or probably a 6th man on a good team, and he won't be a sixth man(portland already tried that).

I agree with playmaker, shareef is made to be a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd, option on a team he could be avg 20 points if he got more shots. High is to good of a scorer to to be higher then a 3rd. But i really belive if put as a 2nd option to a superstar (more like a guard) I belive is carreer would reach new hights. His problem is not scoring that is his best part of his game. His problem is being a leader and if u expect him to be a leader expect to lose.