KF Kings Prediction Poll #4: Thornton's Fate?

[mac]

Because usually he's been playing most of the game and has been worked into it at that point. A player being able to heat up in crunch time and being asked to manufacture points in the middle of quarters in limited minutes is a completely different thing. He's a player that seems to rely on that rhythmic aspect of the game. If the whole point revolves around him getting free reign offensively off the bench that would assume most likely without other shot munchers there to get in his way. When would he do that exactly and for how long? The 5-10 minutes that Reke/Cousins aren't on the floor? Yeah, that's for Bobby Jackson, not Marcus Thornton if history tells us anything.

Maybe he could develop into that type of player but I think the one he is now is just fine for any team looking for a TRUE shooting guard.

Jamal Crawford averaged 30 min his career playing that scorer role off the bench. Same with Jason Terry the past few years. You speak as if coming off the bench means getting 10 minutes a game or something. Ginobili comes off the bench. So does Harden. So Thornton comes in off the bench in the late 3rd, plays till around the 7 min mark of the 4th, takes a breather and then comes back to close out the game together with Tyreke and DMC, or Brooks/IT and Tyreke/DMC if we choose to go small for playmaking's sake.

 

[bajaden]

Jamal Crawford averaged 30 min his career playing that scorer role off the bench. Same with Jason Terry the past few years. You speak as if coming off the bench means getting 10 minutes a game or something. Ginobili comes off the bench. So does Harden. So Thornton comes in off the bench in the late 3rd, plays till around the 7 min mark of the 4th, takes a breather and then comes back to close out the game together with Tyreke and DMC, or Brooks/IT and Tyreke/DMC if we choose to go small for playmaking's sake.

I agree with you 100%. If a player is valuable, he'll get his minutes. Its that simple. A great 6th man is a terrific asset for a team. I know there are some unknowns at this point. What will the new improved version of Tyreke look like? If Tyreke shows up with a consistent midrange jumpshot, and a renewed dedication to defense, there's no doubt that he's more valuable to the starting lineup at the SG position than Thornton is. Tyreke is 2 inches taller, he's stronger, and a much better defender and rebounder. With a jumpshot, he's a nightmare matchup for just about any SG in the league. And on both ends of the court.

None of that is a criticism of Thornton. He's a very good offensive player, but not yet a great offensive player. And, he's still young, so one has to assume that he'll get better. I think we all know that Tyreke isn't going to come off the bench. And the only logical spot for Tyreke is at the SG position. I think we can safely assume that the PG experiment is over now that we have IT and Brooks firmly locking down that position, and Jimmer lurking in the wings. So once again, logically, that puts Thornton in the 6th man position, where he should get his fair share of minutes. There's only one person on the team that could make Thornton vunerable to a trade, and thats Fredette. If at some point, Jimmer becomes a consistent scorer off the bench, he might look like a cheap replacement for Thornton. And a replacement that might be more grateful for the opportunity to be a 6th man.

Not likely to happen soon, but it might happen sooner than most think.

 

[SacTownKid]

Jamal Crawford averaged 30 min his career playing that scorer role off the bench. Same with Jason Terry the past few years. You speak as if coming off the bench means getting 10 minutes a game or something. Ginobili comes off the bench. So does Harden. So Thornton comes in off the bench in the late 3rd, plays till around the 7 min mark of the 4th, takes a breather and then comes back to close out the game together with Tyreke and DMC, or Brooks/IT and Tyreke/DMC if we choose to go small for playmaking's sake.

Those are also players accustomed to playing a combo guard role. They are players that are used to having the ball in their hands to create offense for themselves and others and have obviously succeeded in being put in some limited minute spurts to get offense going. Thornton has some ability to create for others but he's certainly more true to the SG spot.

The idea of Thornton off the bench mainly stems from one place: so that Tyreke can play SG. Well, the majority of the players you mention are either multi-positional players or on teams where they can pretty much play at all teams with any other member of their teams backcourt and most certainly typical play with the main "core" of their team. That right there is the entire crux of this issue. If they are stashing Thornton or anyone of the bench because this "core" can't play together then they are either really wrong or figuring out the exact wrong way to solve this.

This is almost as if Thornton is being punished because Tyreke can't play the SF or PG spot. Then on the other hand Tyreke is a SG that can't shoot and would rather create with the ball in his hand, more like Crawford, Terry, etc. My personal preference is to play Thornton and Tyreke together. This team isn't desperate for scoring off the bench, or at least that's a blip on the radar of need, it's desperate for a real system where it's best players can excel simultaneously. If they can't play together after trying out different systems or playsets then make some moves, but I don't think the franchise has really given it much of a shot.

Bottom line, if your "core" is Marcus Thornton, Tyreke Evans, and Demarcus Cousins and you feel that two of those parts can't play together and play the same spot essentially then bringing one off the bench has to basically revolve around the idea that when one is off the floor, one is on it. Now how do the minutes work then?

 

[SacTownKid]

I agree with you 100%. If a player is valuable, he'll get his minutes. Its that simple. A great 6th man is a terrific asset for a team. I know there are some unknowns at this point. What will the new improved version of Tyreke look like? If Tyreke shows up with a consistent midrange jumpshot, and a renewed dedication to defense, there's no doubt that he's more valuable to the starting lineup at the SG position than Thornton is. Tyreke is 2 inches taller, he's stronger, and a much better defender and rebounder. With a jumpshot, he's a nightmare matchup for just about any SG in the league. And on both ends of the court.

None of that is a criticism of Thornton. He's a very good offensive player, but not yet a great offensive player. And, he's still young, so one has to assume that he'll get better. I think we all know that Tyreke isn't going to come off the bench. And the only logical spot for Tyreke is at the SG position. I think we can safely assume that the PG experiment is over now that we have IT and Brooks firmly locking down that position, and Jimmer lurking in the wings. So once again, logically, that puts Thornton in the 6th man position, where he should get his fair share of minutes. There's only one person on the team that could make Thornton vunerable to a trade, and thats Fredette. If at some point, Jimmer becomes a consistent scorer off the bench, he might look like a cheap replacement for Thornton. And a replacement that might be more grateful for the opportunity to be a 6th man.

Not likely to happen soon, but it might happen sooner than most think.

Valuable how? JJ Hickson looked pretty good for the Blazers. Didn't look so hot in limited minutes here did he? It's not about minutes when you are asking for numbers out of your players, it's about opportunity.

If this is the way things are going to be constructed moving forward then Jimmer, if he were able to develop into the scorer that Thornton is, would probably be more ideal as a 6th man because he seems to have potential to develop more PG related skills.

 

[bajaden]

Valuable how? JJ Hickson looked pretty good for the Blazers. Didn't look so hot in limited minutes here did he? It's not about minutes when you are asking for numbers out of your players, it's about opportunity.

If this is the way things are going to be constructed moving forward then Jimmer, if he were able to develop into the scorer that Thornton is, would probably be more ideal as a 6th man because he seems to have potential to develop more PG related skills.

J.J. Hickson is not Thornton. Hickson had his opportunities here, and he stunk the place up. I don't care what he did in Portland. He had no excuses. He didn't rebound. He forced up bad shots, and didn't know what the word pass mean't. Its an insult to Thornton to mention Hickson and Thornton in the same breath. Here's your logic as I see it. Since Thornton isn't multidiminsional, he then should force Tyreke into playing PG (not going to happen), or SF,(a position Tyreke is ill suited for). In other words, a less talented player should be given his preference at position and starting over a more talented player. That makes no sense at all. There is only one facet of the game that Thornton is better at than Tyreke, and thats outside shooting. If Tyreke comes to camp with a midrange shot, then that advantage is nulified.

In time, Tyreke may be able to match Thorntons shooting abilities, but never in Thorntons lifetime, will he ever be able to match Tyreke in ballhandling, rebounding, defending and passing the basketball. Sorry, but if I have to choose between Tyreke and Thornton, its not even close. Having said all that, I know there are fans that share your opinion. And I understand to some extent why. Tyreke stagnated the last two years and it was easy to forget just how talented he is. I don't have any emotion involved with either Tyreke or Thornton. I just go by pure talent and who has the biggest upside. To my mind, Tyreke wins that battle. Just my opinion though!

 

[mac]

Those are also players accustomed to playing a combo guard role. They are players that are used to having the ball in their hands to create offense for themselves and others and have obviously succeeded in being put in some limited minute spurts to get offense going. Thornton has some ability to create for others but he's certainly more true to the SG spot.

The idea of Thornton off the bench mainly stems from one place: so that Tyreke can play SG. Well, the majority of the players you mention are either multi-positional players or on teams where they can pretty much play at all teams with any other member of their teams backcourt and most certainly typical play with the main "core" of their team. That right there is the entire crux of this issue. If they are stashing Thornton or anyone of the bench because this "core" can't play together then they are either really wrong or figuring out the exact wrong way to solve this.

This is almost as if Thornton is being punished because Tyreke can't play the SF or PG spot. Then on the other hand Tyreke is a SG that can't shoot and would rather create with the ball in his hand, more like Crawford, Terry, etc. My personal preference is to play Thornton and Tyreke together. This team isn't desperate for scoring off the bench, or at least that's a blip on the radar of need, it's desperate for a real system where it's best players can excel simultaneously. If they can't play together after trying out different systems or playsets then make some moves, but I don't think the franchise has really given it much of a shot.

Bottom line, if your "core" is Marcus Thornton, Tyreke Evans, and Demarcus Cousins and you feel that two of those parts can't play together and play the same spot essentially then bringing one off the bench has to basically revolve around the idea that when one is off the floor, one is on it. Now how do the minutes work then?

That's where you're mistaken. The issue is that you can't have the 3 of them playing together for the majority of the game or you'll end up with 1 of the 3 being rather upset that he's not getting enough shots. It's different in the late 4th when teams just want baskets, regardless of who scores or whether anybody passes the ball.

And I can't possibly disagree with you more about the need for scoring off our bench. We lost a good percentage of our games to the simple fact that our bench was incapable of scoring (see - running offense primarily through Chuck Hayes and trying to get Jimmer to run the offense). If I'm not wrong we ranked last or pretty near last in bench scoring. That's pretty bad considering we were also one of the highest scoring teams.

 

[SacTownKid]

J.J. Hickson is not Thornton. Hickson had his opportunities here, and he stunk the place up. I don't care what he did in Portland. He had no excuses. He didn't rebound. He forced up bad shots, and didn't know what the word pass mean't. Its an insult to Thornton to mention Hickson and Thornton in the same breath. Here's your logic as I see it. Since Thornton isn't multidiminsional, he then should force Tyreke into playing PG (not going to happen), or SF,(a position Tyreke is ill suited for). In other words, a less talented player should be given his preference at position and starting over a more talented player. That makes no sense at all. There is only one facet of the game that Thornton is better at than Tyreke, and thats outside shooting. If Tyreke comes to camp with a midrange shot, then that advantage is nulified.

In time, Tyreke may be able to match Thorntons shooting abilities, but never in Thorntons lifetime, will he ever be able to match Tyreke in ballhandling, rebounding, defending and passing the basketball. Sorry, but if I have to choose between Tyreke and Thornton, its not even close. Having said all that, I know there are fans that share your opinion. And I understand to some extent why. Tyreke stagnated the last two years and it was easy to forget just how talented he is. I don't have any emotion involved with either Tyreke or Thornton. I just go by pure talent and who has the biggest upside. To my mind, Tyreke wins that battle. Just my opinion though!

I think statistically you'll notice two fairly striking differences between Hicksons time in Portland vs. Sacramento. Some players are players that need time to produce as well as shot attempts. Hickson is an offensive player by nature, if he doesn't suit your needs then move him for something that does.

Speaking of need, what does this team need exactly? More ball handling? More playmaking? More rebounding? Or more shooting? Talent for talent it may not be close, but what does this team need is the question. Especially if the idea is to have more of a traditional PG next to Tyreke anyway.

My personal opinion is to take the freaking leash off of Tyreke, put him next to Thornton and Cousins and run sets for all 3, as well as find a way to have both Reke and Thornton play off of Cousins passing abilities. There should be more than enough assists for this team just out of those 3.

Just to add, Thornton is fairly multi-dimensional, I'm assuming that since this team is loaded with ball handlers that it's an area where there will be stressed circumstances already. The areas in which Thornton is multi-dimensional, in particular in regards to his off ball movement are reasons why he is perfectly suited for this teams needs and why he really should be the only non-complete question mark at the moment.

 

[SacTownKid]

That's where you're mistaken. The issue is that you can't have the 3 of them playing together for the majority of the game or you'll end up with 1 of the 3 being rather upset that he's not getting enough shots. It's different in the late 4th when teams just want baskets, regardless of who scores or whether anybody passes the ball.

And I can't possibly disagree with you more about the need for scoring off our bench. We lost a good percentage of our games to the simple fact that our bench was incapable of scoring (see - running offense primarily through Chuck Hayes and trying to get Jimmer to run the offense). If I'm not wrong we ranked last or pretty near last in bench scoring. That's pretty bad considering we were also one of the highest scoring teams.

Uh, I have to tell you, the examples you mentioned without fault feature the trios involved playing the majority of the game together. Having 3 15-17 shot attempt per game players as your core is not improbable or even an issue, it's almost ideal if they are unselfish or are skilled in more than one area which all 3 are. Now the issue comes in when you stack every single spot around them with another crop of shot munchers who don't excel in any other area of the game besides ball handling, shot creating, or offensive rebounding.

You're incorrect about the Hayes part, when they ran the offense through Hayes and started using Salmons for his skills the bench became quite potent and even put an early benching to some of the starters in some games if you recall. Something I didn't see as a total positive mind you. That's still doesn't pass the consistent coaching smell test, roles have to be defined, not entirely dictated by the moment. A coach needs to dictate the game, not let the game dictate how he coaches, not always at least.

 

[mac]

Uh, I have to tell you, the examples you mentioned without fault feature the trios involved playing the majority of the game together. Having 3 15-17 shot attempt per game players as your core is not improbable or even an issue, it's almost ideal if they are unselfish or are skilled in more than one area which all 3 are. Now the issue comes in when you stack every single spot around them with another crop of shot munchers who don't excel in any other area of the game besides ball handling, shot creating, or offensive rebounding.

You're incorrect about the Hayes part, when they ran the offense through Hayes and started using Salmons for his skills the bench became quite potent and even put an early benching to some of the starters in some games if you recall. Something I didn't see as a total positive mind you. That's still doesn't pass the consistent coaching smell test, roles have to be defined, not entirely dictated by the moment. A coach needs to dictate the game, not let the game dictate how he coaches, not always at least.

Which again goes to the whole point that Marcus Thornton is pretty selfish. That's who he is! It's not that he doesn't want to pass, it's that he wants to be the one taking the shots and making them. But whatever man, you think he's this super willing passer awesome team mate that will sacrifice his shots to play within the offense and what not. I just don't believe that at all based on watching him play.

And no, the examples I mentioned do not have them playing the majority of the game together. It has them closing games or quarters together. And for the record, Ginobili/Parker and Westbrook/Harden are far far better playmakers than Evans/Thornton. That means that they can all play together and still have good offensive flow, as opposed to just going 1 on 1 with a primary focus on scoring. That's what Crawford does, and that's what Thornton should be doing at a higher level for us

 

[Chupacabra]

I dont know about the whole liability on defense thing. Jimmer is a liability on defense. Thornton a liability on defense? He seems pretty average to me.

 

[bajaden]

I think statistically you'll notice two fairly striking differences between Hicksons time in Portland vs. Sacramento. Some players are players that need time to produce as well as shot attempts. Hickson is an offensive player by nature, if he doesn't suit your needs then move him for something that does.

Speaking of need, what does this team need exactly? More ball handling? More playmaking? More rebounding? Or more shooting? Talent for talent it may not be close, but what does this team need is the question. Especially if the idea is to have more of a traditional PG next to Tyreke anyway.

My personal opinion is to take the freaking leash off of Tyreke, put him next to Thornton and Cousins and run sets for all 3, as well as find a way to have both Reke and Thornton play off of Cousins passing abilities. There should be more than enough assists for this team just out of those 3.

Just to add, Thornton is fairly multi-dimensional, I'm assuming that since this team is loaded with ball handlers that it's an area where there will be stressed circumstances already. The areas in which Thornton is multi-dimensional, in particular in regards to his off ball movement are reasons why he is perfectly suited for this teams needs and why he really should be the only non-complete question mark at the moment.

This team doesn't need more shooting, it needs more efficient shooting. Something, that last season, Thornton wasn't a part of, even if he was one of the more effecient shooters on the team. He shot 43% overall. Not horrible, but certainly not great either. Actually I.T. and Jimmer were more effecient from beyond the arc. And yes, this team does need better ballhandling and passing. And particularly from the second unit, better rebounding. When Hayes was on the floor without either Cousins or JT, we got killed on the glass, and it lost us some games.

But that aside, can we deal with reality and not fantasy. Tyreke isn't going to be the starting PG on the team. IT established himself last season, and then we went out and signed Brooks. So one of those two will be the starting PG. Tyreke isn't going to be the starting SF on the team. Unless everyone else at that position is a total failure. So the reality is, Tyreke is going to be playing SG. And I suspect he'll be the starter. That puts Thornton on the bench. Now you, I, and everyone else can dream of other scenarios, but this is the reality of the situation. Therefore I'm not going to waste my time arguing over something thats not going to happen.

Right now, Thornton is a good player, but he's far from a great player. He may well still acheive that status at some point, but right now, he's not as good a player as Harden, and if the bench is good enough for Harden, then its good enough for Thornton.

 

[SacTownKid]

This team doesn't need more shooting, it needs more efficient shooting. Something, that last season, Thornton wasn't a part of, even if he was one of the more effecient shooters on the team. He shot 43% overall. Not horrible, but certainly not great either. Actually I.T. and Jimmer were more effecient from beyond the arc. And yes, this team does need better ballhandling and passing. And particularly from the second unit, better rebounding. When Hayes was on the floor without either Cousins or JT, we got killed on the glass, and it lost us some games.

But that aside, can we deal with reality and not fantasy. Tyreke isn't going to be the starting PG on the team. IT established himself last season, and then we went out and signed Brooks. So one of those two will be the starting PG. Tyreke isn't going to be the starting SF on the team. Unless everyone else at that position is a total failure. So the reality is, Tyreke is going to be playing SG. And I suspect he'll be the starter. That puts Thornton on the bench. Now you, I, and everyone else can dream of other scenarios, but this is the reality of the situation. Therefore I'm not going to waste my time arguing over something thats not going to happen.

Right now, Thornton is a good player, but he's far from a great player. He may well still acheive that status at some point, but right now, he's not as good a player as Harden, and if the bench is good enough for Harden, then its good enough for Thornton.

Shooting is shooting, I'll leave it at this, this teams needs shooting ability. It needs players that can shoot the ball. That is a skill you typically either have or you don't up to a certain level at least. This team is in relatively short supply of it outside of the PG spot. That is a skill Thornton has. Now, getting good shots for shooters is typically a function of the offense itself, which was another major issue with this team last year but still beside the point that this team was and is in short supply of shooting at the SG/SF spot.

This could very well be another year where the brass wonders what went wrong and why this team isn't able to do the things it needs to, or they want it to. It's all right there under their noses.

 

[SacTownKid]

Which again goes to the whole point that Marcus Thornton is pretty selfish. That's who he is! It's not that he doesn't want to pass, it's that he wants to be the one taking the shots and making them. But whatever man, you think he's this super willing passer awesome team mate that will sacrifice his shots to play within the offense and what not. I just don't believe that at all based on watching him play.

And no, the examples I mentioned do not have them playing the majority of the game together. It has them closing games or quarters together. And for the record, Ginobili/Parker and Westbrook/Harden are far far better playmakers than Evans/Thornton. That means that they can all play together and still have good offensive flow, as opposed to just going 1 on 1 with a primary focus on scoring. That's what Crawford does, and that's what Thornton should be doing at a higher level for us

No he's not selfish. Any player can have selfish tendencies but if you're looking for flat out selfishness then look elsewhere.

There are things that Crawford can't do that Thornton does. Thornton is a more efficient scorer and players much bigger than some of the examples you brought up, unless you want to argue that Crawford is a better player than Thornton, to that I say, good luck.