[Game] Kings @ Clippers - 1/16/16 - 7:30 PT, 10:30 ET

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Very well said. It's funny how people clamour for Karl to adapt and coach to our strengths. But when we see changes then these same people are unwilling to credit Karl...

Miss me with that. It's like I said after the Jazz game: you can't be on some nonsense for thirty-two games, and then get right for eight, and then come around my way asking me to give you some credit. You better be right for at least as many games as you were in the wrong, before you even fix your mouth to ask me for some credit. 'Cause, in the words of the great American philosopher Positive K, I'm not tryin' to hear that, see!

 

[bajaden]

I stood up and cheered every big basket! I'm gonna take a lil credit for the win tonight ur welcome guys! Casspi hitting daggers was fun!

Damm, I don't remember seeing you on the court. Stealth mode perhaps?

 

[bajaden]

The funny thing is, I think he is "losing" the team, or rather the team is "losing" him.

I think Rondo and perhaps some assistant coaches are influencing the philosophy and style of play. They went inside to Cousins a lot tonight, and at key moments. It's like Karl's not on board. One of the weirdest coaching situations I've witnessed.

So let me get this straight. If the team loses and plays badly, it's Karl's fault, but if they play well and win, it's because they disregarded what Karl had to say, and listened instead to Rondo and Karl's assistant coaches. Now there's an objective point of view. At least you had no agenda when you wrote your unbiased opinion.

 

[bajaden]

Did you find it curious that in the second half when LA went small and they had Prig, Crawford, Wesley Johnson and I forget the others but we had Collison continuing to guard Crawford while Ben was on Prigioni who was just spotted up. There was no switching, it was by plan to have Collison on Crawford.

So the questions that come up...Why? Why wouldn't Ben check Crawford.....and I get when Crawford goes hot, he is a load but why go with an inferior defender in Collison who is much shorter than Crawford? It's stuff like this that I can't wrap my head around.

LA attempted their highest 3 point attempts for a game last night.....this is the Karl scheme by design and last night it worked because, they just didnt make enough. I don't doubt the players effort last night, I just question these schemes and lack of anything resembling a defensive lineup.

Look, I'm not a fan of having both Rondo and Collison on the floor at the same time for extended periods of time, so anyone that's upset about that, I'm on board. I don't agree with every decision that Karl makes. I think WCS should play more, but last night with the Clips going small, I could understand why Karl stayed with the players on the floor, especially when they were retaining the lead. I don't agree that having Collison guard Crawford was by design. At least not Karl's design. Unfortunately, I had to listen to the Clippers announcers, and they commented on how the Clippers were doing a good job of creating a switch that put Collison on Crawford.

When you play a switching defense (closer to a zone than man to man) your going to get bad matchups from time to time (Dirk on Collison, I doubt Karl drew it up that way). Smart teams are going to take advantage of that. One of the advantages of having a tall PG is that it limits those bad matchup's. If your the coach, you pick your poison, and hope you don't die with it. If you have five great man to man defenders you can put out there, and you don't have to deal with this, but even then, your going to get switches in the pick and roll. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, the Kings roster has more offensive minded players than defensive players. Hard to find players that are capable of both. At least at the NBA level.

Someone once said, I think it was Mark Twain, that if your 18 years old, and your not an idealist, you have no heart, but if your 50 years old, and your not a realist (actual word was conservative) you have no brain. I'm well past 50, so I'm sure I'm a realist. As a result, I tend to see things as they are, and not what I want them to be. I remember my high school science teacher telling me, that if you go into any experiment with a preconceived agenda, your experiment fails before it starts. You must have an open mind to make objective decisions. I understand that passion trumps logic at times, but at the end of the day, if your the one making the decisions, logic must prevail.

That was my polite way of saying, that some of you are living in fairy tale land. You see things that aren't there, because you've already arrived at your decision before all the facts are in. Back in the day, a day long, long, ago, a new coach used to get two to three years to change the direction of a team. Today, we tend to make such decisions in 20 or 30 games, instead of years. If you take the time to step back and take a look at who succeeds in any form of competition, it's those that are patient. They take the time to build a solid foundation. Things are well thought out and snap/ kneejerk decisions are avoided. Yes, I know, only in politics does the new guy get a clean slate and four years to change things.

The irony of what I'm saying, is that people with the least amount of time to wait, are the those who preach patience. God's little joke on us. By the time we figure it out, time's up. No, there's no hidden message there. All I'm saying folks, is to keep an open mind, and stop thinking that Karl is some inept old dude that doesn't know what he's doing. It's OK to disagree with some of his decisions, but do it for the right reasons, not some fantasy land notion. New's flash, Lord of the Rings isn't real! Being objective means looking at both sides of the picture. If you can't do that, and I know it's hard at times, then your opinion is nothing but a biased opinion.

 

[Glenn]

It could also be that the western conference is uncharacteristically weak at the bottom this season, and for the first time in Cousins' career, his season isn't over by now. He actually has something to play for, and that's where his focus is, instead of all of the **** that normally has him pissed off.

I'm going to pursue this just a little bit further. I distinctly remember a game, perhaps the first game of January, where Cuz was smiling and almost appeared to be having a good time. It's like a switch was flipped. As the games have progressed through January, he is not smiling but he's not scowling either; at least not any more than an average NBA player. It's like he is making an emotional correction and has found a center for himself and the team.

The discussion can get circular on what is causing what. Cuz has been a beast since that "smiley" game. He has gotten more touches. The offense still drives me nuts but at least Cuz is not hanging out at the three point line. He is not making wild dashes to the rim from the arc. He comes out to set a pick but that's appropriate. I think someone told him basketball is not life or death and as that relaxed him and he succeeded more, he kept at what was working. This is much to the relief of me and I suspect everyone.

I suspect Vlade has intervened as to his emotional approach as I have seen the two chatting at half time but also the offense is changing.

 

[dude12]

Look, I'm not a fan of having both Rondo and Collison on the floor at the same time for extended periods of time, so anyone that's upset about that, I'm on board. I don't agree with every decision that Karl makes. I think WCS should play more, but last night with the Clips going small, I could understand why Karl stayed with the players on the floor, especially when they were retaining the lead. I don't agree that having Collison guard Crawford was by design. At least not Karl's design. Unfortunately, I had to listen to the Clippers announcers, and they commented on how the Clippers were doing a good job of creating a switch that put Collison on Crawford.

When you play a switching defense (closer to a zone than man to man) your going to get bad matchups from time to time (Dirk on Collison, I doubt Karl drew it up that way). Smart teams are going to take advantage of that. One of the advantages of having a tall PG is that it limits those bad matchup's. If your the coach, you pick your poison, and hope you don't die with it. If you have five great man to man defenders you can put out there, and you don't have to deal with this, but even then, your going to get switches in the pick and roll. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, the Kings roster has more offensive minded players than defensive players. Hard to find players that are capable of both. At least at the NBA level.

Someone once said, I think it was Mark Twain, that if your 18 years old, and your not an idealist, you have no heart, but if your 50 years old, and your not a realist (actual word was conservative) you have no brain. I'm well past 50, so I'm sure I'm a realist. As a result, I tend to see things as they are, and not what I want them to be. I remember my high school science teacher telling me, that if you go into any experiment with a preconceived agenda, your experiment fails before it starts. You must have an open mind to make objective decisions. I understand that passion trumps logic at times, but at the end of the day, if your the one making the decisions, logic must prevail.

That was my polite way of saying, that some of you are living in fairy tale land. You see things that aren't there, because you've already arrived at your decision before all the facts are in. Back in the day, a day long, long, ago, a new coach used to get two to three years to change the direction of a team. Today, we tend to make such decisions in 20 or 30 games, instead of years. If you take the time to step back and take a look at who succeeds in any form of competition, it's those that are patient. They take the time to build a solid foundation. Things are well thought out and snap/ kneejerk decisions are avoided. Yes, I know, only in politics does the new guy get a clean slate and four years to change things.

The irony of what I'm saying, is that people with the least amount of time to wait, are the those who preach patience. God's little joke on us. By the time we figure it out, time's up. No, there's no hidden message there. All I'm saying folks, is to keep an open mind, and stop thinking that Karl is some inept old dude that doesn't know what he's doing. It's OK to disagree with some of his decisions, but do it for the right reasons, not some fantasy land notion. New's flash, Lord of the Rings isn't real! Being objective means looking at both sides of the picture. If you can't do that, and I know it's hard at times, then your opinion is nothing but a biased opinion.

Gibberish bajaden.....Collison picked up Crawford and Ben was relegated to Prigioni by design....no switching because I watched it for 4-5 straight possessions. That is not the right matchup. I've read how you wax poetically because your over 50, as am I, and that you have seen lots of basketball. Your not the only one here on this forum who has seen the game for a long time. Fantasyland my ass. You should know better. You just don't like when people are blunt in there assessment of what they see....which is fine, but I'm going to call it like I see it. George Karl is mismanaging this roster and he is a fail as a defensive coach. Stats prove it, the naked eye proves it, his lineups and unwillingness to coach with an eye on both sides of the court proves it.....fantasyland? Maybe your in denial?

 

[bajaden]

I'm going to pursue this just a little bit further. I distinctly remember a game, perhaps the first game of January, where Cuz was smiling and almost appeared to be having a good time. It's like a switch was flipped. As the games have progressed through January, he is not smiling but he's not scowling either; at least not any more than an average NBA player. It's like he is making an emotional correction and has found a center for himself and the team.

The discussion can get circular on what is causing what. Cuz has been a beast since that "smiley" game. He has gotten more touches. The offense still drives me nuts but at least Cuz is not hanging out at the three point line. He is not making wild dashes to the rim from the arc. He comes out to set a pick but that's appropriate. I think someone told him basketball is not life or death and as that relaxed him and he succeeded more, he kept at what was working. This is much to the relief of me and I suspect everyone.

I suspect Vlade has intervened as to his emotional approach as I have seen the two chatting at half time but also the offense is changing.

Well the answer is obvious. The credit belongs to me. I disowned him and said I was done defending him after that horrible Warrior game where he got himself ejected with two technicals. So it's obvious he respects what I say and took it to heart. Thus the change. OK, I don't really believe that. I'd love to think I had that much influence but that's not reality. However, coincidentally, his change came right after that game. His demeanor on the court is much better. Hell, he even went over to Chris Paul after the game last night and shook hands with him. Don't know if they showed that on the Kings broadcast. That wouldn't have happened last season. Gotta give credit when it's due.

 

[pshn80]

U

Miss me with that. It's like I said after the Jazz game: you can't be on some nonsense for thirty-two games, and then get right for eight, and then come around my way asking me to give you some credit. You better be right for at least as many games as you were in the wrong, before you even fix your mouth to ask me for some credit. 'Cause, in the words of the great American philosopher Positive K, I'm not tryin' to hear that, see!

You don't ask for credit, you give credit - when it is due like you criticize when due.
​

 

[Bricklayer]

I don't know about this. When you have Cole Aldrich and Josh Smith on Cousins, why would you not want to exploit it? Both have about 0 chance vs. Cousins...

Aldrich is actually a stout defender, and after it happened again last night I am ready to annoint him one of the few guys who seems to consitently give Cousins problems.

 

[The Hammer]

I don't know about this. When you have Cole Aldrich and Josh Smith on Cousins, why would you not want to exploit it? Both have about 0 chance vs. Cousins...

Most of the league has about zero chance vs. Cousins.

He absolutely tore up Zaza Pachulia, the guy who's getting more votes than him to be a starter for the all star game. And it wasn't so much that he was beating Aldrich and Smith directly, but he was warping their defense, and he was passing out of double teams. 6 assts, and many more plays that developed out of going to Cuz in the post. Every team has to double Cousins. And on teams that have good post defenders, they still double, and he can still pass out of those double teams, and it's actually sometimes even more advantageous because most of their defensive firepower is then wasted on Cuz and he can find a guy making a cut or coming off an off ball screen who's being guarded by not as elite defender.

 

[The Hammer]

So let me get this straight. If the team loses and plays badly, it's Karl's fault, but if they play well and win, it's because they disregarded what Karl had to say, and listened instead to Rondo and Karl's assistant coaches. Now there's an objective point of view. At least you had no agenda when you wrote your unbiased opinion.

Just because I came to that conclusion does not mean I was unbiased.

The scenario I painted is plausible, therefore you cannot dismiss it on it's face, simply out of bias.

They lose when he is forcing his inane offensive ideas on the team.

They win when they eschew them and Rondo essentially takes over as a coach, slowing down the offense and going through Cousins a lot.

Not sure why that theory is so difficult to understand. And it is a theory, an opinion. But it's based on what I've seen a lot of this year: Karl illogically forcing the team to play a style that didn't work... LONG after it was obvious it didn't work for our personnel. It's possible that Karl headed up that change, I just don't see it as likely.

Also, Willie being back is HUGE for the defense.

 

[bajaden]

Gibberish bajaden.....Collison picked up Crawford and Ben was relegated to Prigioni by design....no switching because I watched it for 4-5 straight possessions. That is not the right matchup. I've read how you wax poetically because your over 50, as am I, and that you have seen lots of basketball. Your not the only one here on this forum who has seen the game for a long time. Fantasyland my ass. You should know better. You just don't like when people are blunt in there assessment of what they see....which is fine, but I'm going to call it like I see it. George Karl is mismanaging this roster and he is a fail as a defensive coach. Stats prove it, the naked eye proves it, his lineups and unwillingness to coach with an eye on both sides of the court proves it.....fantasyland? Maybe your in denial?

Wow, quite an angry, and if I must say, condescending reply to my post. But lets assume that your right and my eye's have deceived me. Wouldn't be the first time, cataracts and all. Would it have made any difference? Did you even think about why Karl might have had Collison guarding the 6'5" Crawford instead of the 6'3"Prigioni? Maybe he decided to have Collison on the older of the two as the lesser of the two evils. My problem isn't with the matchups in that case because no matter who Collison would have been guarding, he would have been giving away height. Perhaps, in the film session, McLemore didn't fare very well in previous matchups with Crawford, who is hard guard for anyone.

My problem with your analysis is that it is based on Karl being a stupid old man that doesn't know how to coach anymore. Or at least that's how it comes across to me. And my age has nothing to do with it. Yes, I've been watching NBA basketball for over 50 years, actually, make that almost 60 years now, but by no means does that mean I'm right all the time. I like to think that I'm still learning. If you were to ask me if I'm happy with everything that Karl is doing, my answer would be Hell No! But, I do see obvious improvements in the team, and if you don't see them, then you don't want to see them, or your blind. As long as I see improvement, then I'm going to continue to be patient and give Karl more time. I'm sorry, you can't blame Karl for everything that goes wrong, and credit everything that goes right to luck or subversion within the assistant coaches ranks.

By the way, I have no problem with people being blunt. I just don't like it when people are rude, which originally, you wern't, but in this post you were. I would say that your the one that doesn't like being disagreed with, and I base it on your response, which was more angry than instructive. I will admit that my post was more of a generalization than a reply to a specific event, so I will admit that you could be right in that specific matchup. Obviously we're not going to agree. Which is fine with me.

 

[206Fan]

Aldrich is actually a stout defender, and after it happened again last night I am ready to annoint him one of the few guys who seems to consitently give Cousins problems.

Cousins was a very dominant on Aldrich in the 1st half. Something weird about Cousins that I've observed, is that he's not very good on offense down the stretch.. I don't know what it is about him. Any time he posts up, it seems like he either has the ball poked away, throws a bad pass, or misses his shot. I want to credit Aldrich for that, but it's just been a reoccurring problem for Cuz on offense even before last night.

Cuz struggles against a combo of strength and height. While Aldrich has both, I think his lack of playing experience has really rusted him out of game shape. He's only recently received PT because of Griffin being out.

I think Aldrich can be a very solid big, but he's never had the opportunities to show it.

 

[dude12]

Wow, quite an angry, and if I must say, condescending reply to my post. But lets assume that your right and my eye's have deceived me. Wouldn't be the first time, cataracts and all. Would it have made any difference? Did you even think about why Karl might have had Collison guarding the 6'5" Crawford instead of the 6'3"Prigioni? Maybe he decided to have Collison on the older of the two as the lesser of the two evils. My problem isn't with the matchups in that case because no matter who Collison would have been guarding, he would have been giving away height. Perhaps, in the film session, McLemore didn't fare very well in previous matchups with Crawford, who is hard guard for anyone.

My problem with your analysis is that it is based on Karl being a stupid old man that doesn't know how to coach anymore. Or at least that's how it comes across to me. And my age has nothing to do with it. Yes, I've been watching NBA basketball for over 50 years, actually, make that almost 60 years now, but by no means does that mean I'm right all the time. I like to think that I'm still learning. If you were to ask me if I'm happy with everything that Karl is doing, my answer would be Hell No! But, I do see obvious improvements in the team, and if you don't see them, then you don't want to see them, or your blind. As long as I see improvement, then I'm going to continue to be patient and give Karl more time. I'm sorry, you can't blame Karl for everything that goes wrong, and credit everything that goes right to luck or subversion within the assistant coaches ranks.

By the way, I have no problem with people being blunt. I just don't like it when people are rude, which originally, you wern't, but in this post you were. I would say that your the one that doesn't like being disagreed with, and I base it on your response, which was more angry than instructive. I will admit that my post was more of a generalization than a reply to a specific event, so I will admit that you could be right in that specific matchup. Obviously we're not going to agree. Which is fine with me.

Go read your response to my other post......and then tell me that wasn't condescending....that is the way it came out and was intended. We don't agree on much and I don't have a problem with that...ever. Lots of people here who I don't see eye to eye with...it's inevitable. I usually don't rip into head coaches because of a myriad of unknowns but in this case, I'm done giving Karl the benefit of the doubt because of his refusal to coach this team,with regard to defense. Hard to defend him or give the benefit of the doubt to the guy when he doesn't address the other side of the ball with lineups that can produce on the defensive side.....you want to preach patience in his approach, I'm questioning his ability or judgement or decision making at this point. 30+ games is surely enough to make that judgement.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You don't ask for credit, you give credit - when it is due like you criticize when due.
​

Yeah, that's right. When it's due. You and I are working from different criteria regarding when that credit is, in fact, due. According to the criteria that I'm working from, he'll be due credit after he's coached the way he has for the past eight games for at least another twenty-four.

 

[Glenn]

Well the answer is obvious. The credit belongs to me. I disowned him and said I was done defending him after that horrible Warrior game where he got himself ejected with two technicals. So it's obvious he respects what I say and took it to heart. Thus the change. OK, I don't really believe that. I'd love to think I had that much influence but that's not reality. However, coincidentally, his change came right after that game. His demeanor on the court is much better. Hell, he even went over to Chris Paul after the game last night and shook hands with him. Don't know if they showed that on the Kings broadcast. That wouldn't have happened last season. Gotta give credit when it's due.

I suspect he reads what you have to say. That game where you disowned him should have hit him like a sledge hammer to the face. Some people adjust and some people don't. Boogie is showing that he can change/adjust. To me, that's GREAT!!!!

Last night's game may have been a learning time also. He didn't dominate and didn't try to dominate. His mere presence on the court changes what the opposition does. This allows team mates to do their thing.

 

[bajaden]

Just because I came to that conclusion does not mean I was unbiased.

The scenario I painted is plausible, therefore you cannot dismiss it on it's face, simply out of bias.

They lose when he is forcing his inane offensive ideas on the team.

They win when they eschew them and Rondo essentially takes over as a coach, slowing down the offense and going through Cousins a lot.

Not sure why that theory is so difficult to understand. And it is a theory, an opinion. But it's based on what I've seen a lot of this year: Karl illogically forcing the team to play a style that didn't work... LONG after it was obvious it didn't work for our personnel. It's possible that Karl headed up that change, I just don't see it as likely.

Also, Willie being back is HUGE for the defense.

I don't dismiss it, I just disagree with it. OK? If you know anything about the dribble drive offense, it allows the PG a lot of freedom to do what he wants. It's based more on the set up of the offense, than the pace of the offense. Karl just likes to play at a faster pace, and it seems that the majority of the league has endorsed that as well. I don't disagree with some of your complaints, I just disagree with your total conclusion that Karl is totally inept and doesn't know what he's doing. Quite the contrary, I think some of the players don't know what their doing out there because they don't have the BBIQ necessary for the concept.

Just so you know, the dribble drive offense requires that the center plant his butt in the post and never leave the post. As you can see, Cousins is sometimes in the post, and sometimes not. To my mind, that's Karl trying to please Cousins and also to use all of his skills. He gives Cousins the freedom to decide on his own, which you could argue is a good or a bad thing. The center in the dribble drive offense is the clean up guy. I don't have trouble understanding the concept, I just don't believe in conspiracy theories. So we'll just have to disagree.

 

[The Hammer]

I don't dismiss it, I just disagree with it. OK? If you know anything about the dribble drive offense, it allows the PG a lot of freedom to do what he wants. It's based more on the set up of the offense, than the pace of the offense. Karl just likes to play at a faster pace, and it seems that the majority of the league has endorsed that as well. I don't disagree with some of your complaints, I just disagree with your total conclusion that Karl is totally inept and doesn't know what he's doing. Quite the contrary, I think some of the players don't know what their doing out there because they don't have the BBIQ necessary for the concept.

Just so you know, the dribble drive offense requires that the center plant his butt in the post and never leave the post. As you can see, Cousins is sometimes in the post, and sometimes not. To my mind, that's Karl trying to please Cousins and also to use all of his skills. He gives Cousins the freedom to decide on his own, which you could argue is a good or a bad thing. The center in the dribble drive offense is the clean up guy. I don't have trouble understanding the concept, I just don't believe in conspiracy theories. So we'll just have to disagree.

Claiming that it's biased is a way of invalidating, or yes, dismissing it. biased = invalid = dismissing

 

[dude12]

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/defense-per-game/sort/scoringEfficiencyOpponent

Here's how our defense is stacking up compared to the remainder of the league. If you just looked simply at the points given up per game we are dead last. George says that when you play at a fast pace though, your going to give up additional points just with the sheer increase in possessions which is probably true but if you then focus on points per possession we are still in the bottom tier. If you look at a team like Chicago who changed coaches so that they could play at an increased pace, they are ranked number 1 in PPS. Indiana is also a team that has increased pace and a team that has held up defensively. I won't even compare us to GS as they are the poster team for the league for pace but they play tremendous defense and are stacked with excellent interior and perimeter defensive players.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/possessions-per-game
This link shows the pace leaders and we are right up there near the top with Chicago 5 and Indiana 6. So Chicago HAS increased it's pace but is still playing very good defense....may be a carryover from Thibs. Indiana who we probably are more closely aligned to in talent is also proving that you can do both pace and play defense.

So the question becomes for George, and lets assume that his schemes are workable, at what point does he go away from his small lineups, 3 guard lineups, his worst defensive 3 guard lineups in favor of a more traditional blend of offense and defensive lineups? So far his answer is he's not going to do that nor it appears does he have an interest in doing this. Their is blind faith with sticking with his vets and then there is trusting the abilities of the guys who could help on the defensive side such as WCS, Acy, Ben, Curry.

As of right now, looking at the team stats of the winning teams, trying to outscore other teams in an effort to win is gimmicky and though George says the right things in post game interviews, his actions speak loudly.

 

[bajaden]

Go read your response to my other post......and then tell me that wasn't condescending....that is the way it came out and was intended. We don't agree on much and I don't have a problem with that...ever. Lots of people here who I don't see eye to eye with...it's inevitable. I usually don't rip into head coaches because of a myriad of unknowns but in this case, I'm done giving Karl the benefit of the doubt because of his refusal to coach this team,with regard to defense. Hard to defend him or give the benefit of the doubt to the guy when he doesn't address the other side of the ball with lineups that can produce on the defensive side.....you want to preach patience in his approach, I'm questioning his ability or judgement or decision making at this point. 30+ games is surely enough to make that judgement.

It's never my intent to be condescending, and if you took it that way, I apologize. I usually go over everything I write to make sure it doesn't insult anyone, but I've found that's very difficult to do. No inflection in the written word. The irony is that we actually agree on the defensive side of the ball. I disagree with a lot of Karl's rotations and his love affair with two PG's on the floor at the same time. I've been a huge WCS fan for a long time and I think he should get more minutes, but I'am biased when it comes to Willie. I'd love to have a sit down with Karl and get his reasoning. My only guess is that he's not willing to sacrifice a little offense to have better defense. If so, I totally disagree with that idea. I also know that there are things that go on behind the scenes that can influence what happens on the floor. Don't know if that's the case or not.

So your patience has run out, and I understand that. So far, mine hasn't. That doesn't mean it won't at some point. Let me ask you something. How is it possible that the team will play solid defense for one quarter, and then not for the next two and a half quarters. Is that Karl and his system, or is that players not putting out the effort? Yes, I agree that at times we end up with terrible match ups, but that aside, why is it that the team can play good defense seemingly when it wants to? To my mind, that's not coaching, that's players not putting out the effort. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Section 101]

It's never my intent to be condescending, and if you took it that way, I apologize. I usually go over everything I write to make sure it doesn't insult anyone, but I've found that's very difficult to do. No inflection in the written word. The irony is that we actually agree on the defensive side of the ball. I disagree with a lot of Karl's rotations and his love affair with two PG's on the floor at the same time. I've been a huge WCS fan for a long time and I think he should get more minutes, but I'am biased when it comes to Willie. I'd love to have a sit down with Karl and get his reasoning. My only guess is that he's not willing to sacrifice a little offense to have better defense. If so, I totally disagree with that idea. I also know that there are things that go on behind the scenes that can influence what happens on the floor. Don't know if that's the case or not.

So your patience has run out, and I understand that. So far, mine hasn't. That doesn't mean it won't at some point. Let me ask you something. How is it possible that the team will play solid defense for one quarter, and then not for the next two and a half quarters. Is that Karl and his system, or is that players not putting out the effort? Yes, I agree that at times we end up with terrible match ups, but that aside, why is it that the team can play good defense seemingly when it wants to? To my mind, that's not coaching, that's players not putting out the effort. But that's just my opinion.

Give Baja a break, he's old.

 

[bajaden]

Claiming that it's biased is a way of invalidating, or yes, dismissing it. biased = invalid = dismissing

So not you want to argue semantics. To be biased, is to not be open minded. It's to have already made up your, or my mind. I don't know if your biased or not, just that on this subject you appear to be. Only you know if your biased or not. I'm certainly biased about many things, like religion and politics. In basketball, I have a style that I like more than others. I'm biased in that I think WCS should be playing 30 minutes a night. I don't think being biased is always a bad thing, especially when you have all the facts to back up your point of view. I don't think saying that someone is biased is an insult, or that its dismissive. If I was dismissive, I wouldn't respond to your post in the first place.

On this forum, we deal mostly in opinion, and most of the time, its opinion that's not based on fact, and that's fine. There are things in life that are, and will always be subjective. It just depends on your point of view. Many times there is no proven right or wrong point of view in something that's subjective. That's sort of where we are right now. It's just my opinion versus your opinon. Neither of us can prove the other wrong, even though we both feel the other person is wrong. It's not personal. I don't dislike you because I think your wrong. If I operated that way, I wouldn't like my wife very much.

 

[bajaden]

Give Baja a break, he's old.

I knew I could count on you for support.

 

[bajaden]

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/defense-per-game/sort/scoringEfficiencyOpponent

Here's how our defense is stacking up compared to the remainder of the league. If you just looked simply at the points given up per game we are dead last. George says that when you play at a fast pace though, your going to give up additional points just with the sheer increase in possessions which is probably true but if you then focus on points per possession we are still in the bottom tier. If you look at a team like Chicago who changed coaches so that they could play at an increased pace, they are ranked number 1 in PPS. Indiana is also a team that has increased pace and a team that has held up defensively. I won't even compare us to GS as they are the poster team for the league for pace but they play tremendous defense and are stacked with excellent interior and perimeter defensive players.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/possessions-per-game
This link shows the pace leaders and we are right up there near the top with Chicago 5 and Indiana 6. So Chicago HAS increased it's pace but is still playing very good defense....may be a carryover from Thibs. Indiana who we probably are more closely aligned to in talent is also proving that you can do both pace and play defense.

So the question becomes for George, and lets assume that his schemes are workable, at what point does he go away from his small lineups, 3 guard lineups, his worst defensive 3 guard lineups in favor of a more traditional blend of offense and defensive lineups? So far his answer is he's not going to do that nor it appears does he have an interest in doing this. Their is blind faith with sticking with his vets and then there is trusting the abilities of the guys who could help on the defensive side such as WCS, Acy, Ben, Curry.

As of right now, looking at the team stats of the winning teams, trying to outscore other teams in an effort to win is gimmicky and though George says the right things in post game interviews, his actions speak loudly.

Let me ask you a question, and I'm seriously asking this question. I'm not trying to be a smart ass or anything. What would you do about Rondo on the defensive side of the ball. A couple of weeks ago there was a 7 point difference between when he's on the floor, and when he's not on the floor defensively, and it's a negative 7 points. If your the coach, how do you balance out what he brings offensively against his liability on defense? One of my suggestions is to always have WCS on the floor with him whenever possible to help plug the holes. And I'll give you in advance that playing Collison along side of him doesn't help.

 

[dude12]

It's never my intent to be condescending, and if you took it that way, I apologize. I usually go over everything I write to make sure it doesn't insult anyone, but I've found that's very difficult to do. No inflection in the written word. The irony is that we actually agree on the defensive side of the ball. I disagree with a lot of Karl's rotations and his love affair with two PG's on the floor at the same time. I've been a huge WCS fan for a long time and I think he should get more minutes, but I'am biased when it comes to Willie. I'd love to have a sit down with Karl and get his reasoning. My only guess is that he's not willing to sacrifice a little offense to have better defense. If so, I totally disagree with that idea. I also know that there are things that go on behind the scenes that can influence what happens on the floor. Don't know if that's the case or not.

So your patience has run out, and I understand that. So far, mine hasn't. That doesn't mean it won't at some point. Let me ask you something. How is it possible that the team will play solid defense for one quarter, and then not for the next two and a half quarters. Is that Karl and his system, or is that players not putting out the effort? Yes, I agree that at times we end up with terrible match ups, but that aside, why is it that the team can play good defense seemingly when it wants to? To my mind, that's not coaching, that's players not putting out the effort. But that's just my opinion.

Ok...here's a fist bump. . I guess the question is who is on the floor when they play good defense? And you and I agree as do most about not playing WCS enough and the 2 PG lineup, etc. Effort in some games has been bad as has been acknowledged. But I feel as if George could hold guys accountable with their effort level but its a touchy thing if your players are not all in on his concepts and him in general.

If you look at the post I made with links to our defensive performance and then George continues with the Rondo, Dc, Bellinelli lineup...that is frustrating. I'm not opposed to the Gay and Casspi pairing but to a certain extent. I think he should be playing WCS more than he is. I like Bellinelli but man at what point do you hold him and DC accountable for defense. There has got to be a balance in his lineups and he just won't make that happen but then he'll rip the team for defensive effort in a game but he's running out bad, bad defensive lineups. I just think is gimmicky and not a way to build this team now and for future success. I think most of the time when we hold a team down in scoring, say Utah, is that us playing defense or is it Hayward having an atrocious game.

 

[dude12]

Let me ask you a question, and I'm seriously asking this question. I'm not trying to be a smart ass or anything. What would you do about Rondo on the defensive side of the ball. A couple of weeks ago there was a 7 point difference between when he's on the floor, and when he's not on the floor defensively, and it's a negative 7 points. If your the coach, how do you balance out what he brings offensively against his liability on defense? One of my suggestions is to always have WCS on the floor with him whenever possible to help plug the holes. And I'll give you in advance that playing Collison along side of him doesn't help.

You answered the question. I get that we are not going to have 2 way guys at most positions but with Rondo on the floor isn't imperative hat you have WCS on the floor? And this is way out there but I've been wondering about why not start Bellinelli,with Rondo and Gay, Cuz and WCS.....reason being that it would allow Bellinelli to be more spot up on offense and take away some of these wild curl shots....the problem is the guard defense but the reality is that I don't know who is a worse defensively Rondo or DC.

DC plays with Ben and Casspi and Koufos and Gay....that unit looks more balance and better defensively. But as for now, I'd rather just see WCS and Acy rotation at PF with some of Gay and Casspi at times.

 

[bajaden]

You answered the question. I get that we are not going to have 2 way guys at most positions but with Rondo on the floor isn't imperative hat you have WCS on the floor? And this is way out there but I've been wondering about why not start Bellinelli,with Rondo and Gay, Cuz and WCS.....reason being that it would allow Bellinelli to be more spot up on offense and take away some of these wild curl shots....the problem is the guard defense but the reality is that I don't know who is a worse defensively Rondo or DC.

DC plays with Ben and Casspi and Koufos and Gay....that unit looks more balance and better defensively. But as for now, I'd rather just see WCS and Acy rotation at PF with some of Gay and Casspi at times.

I agree with just about everything you said. Not sure about Belinelli starting, but I see your point and think it would help Belinelli offensively. Were using him differently than the Spurs did, where he was mostly a spot up shooter who got a lot of open looks. We started out letting him create on his own, then realized that he couldn't, and now run him off screens and double screens, similar to how we used Martin. Difference is, Martin was a more consistent shooter, and was better at getting to the line. So I agree that in the starting lineup, it's likely that he'll get more open spot up shots, which in theory should improve his efficiency.

I would suggest to Karl that if he wants to go with a two PG line up, that it would be better defensively to use Curry instead of Collison. Unfortunately, I doubt that Karl is willing to cut down on either Rondo's or Collison's minutes to use Curry. If nothing else, he could spot use him when we need to tighten up the defense. Casspi has turned out to be a better defender than I thought he could be, and I wouldn't mind seeing him spotted at SG once in a while, although he would be at a disadvantage at times. The last option is to bring Doug Christie out of retirement.

 

[VF21]

Funny how everything that worked well is because of Rondo, Cuz or even Vlade, but when things go bad Karl is the one to blame.
Of course Karl is just some dumb Nellie ball believer. It can't be, that he wants his team to play Cuz inside, when the Clippers only have one guy above 6'9 available.
With all due respect, but your point of view looks very biased to me.

To me it's obvious, that Karl and the team managed to built a solid professional relationship and Karl is actually making adjustments to the way we act on offense and defense.
In no way Karl is a basketball mastermind and I think his decision making when it comes to rotations leaves a lot to be desired. But he after a rough stretch he has Cousins playing great, he gets the most out of some role players and while I don't like watching our offense we certainly are not a bad team on offense.
Gotta give Karl at least some sort of credit.

Do you get to see the post-game interviews? I only ask because the George Karl you're talking about isn't the George Karl who talks to reporters after the game. I have to agree with those who think Rondo is doing more and more "coaching" both on the court and when he's "on the bench". You see Rondo talking to Cousins all the time. I think there is a very real possibility that he is, in fact, subtly restructuring our offense to better fit DMC and the rest of the guys.

 

[Bricklayer]

Do you get to see the post-game interviews? I only ask because the George Karl you're talking about isn't the George Karl who talks to reporters after the game. I have to agree with those who think Rondo is doing more and more "coaching" both on the court and when he's "on the bench". You see Rondo talking to Cousins all the time. I think there is a very real possibility that he is, in fact, subtly restructuring our offense to better fit DMC and the rest of the guys.

Even if he is its not like he can that without Karl's acquiescence.

 

[VF21]

Even if he is its not like he can that without Karl's acquiescence.

True. I wonder if that's part of the outcome of the summit meeting between Karl, Rondo and Cuz.