Kings pick up option on G Ben McLemore (The Associated Press)

[swisshh]

My point of view is that it's pre-season and there's no reason to ponder or willingly trade McLemore at this point. This is something you reassess towards the mid-season trade deadline.

If you are more comfortable with Anderson then you start Anderson and bring a posse of 3pt shooters off the bench. If you feel McLemore will round out then you start him. There is enough surrounding talent that Ben starting off slow should not have a major impact. I could be wrong upon that, but it doesn't feel like an emergency.

I'm more concerned with making the decision on starting 2guard and then focusing on a regular rotation. The team is still often unfamiliar and awkward on the floor at times, creating turnovers and bad shots. When the team gets comfortable, they look really good.

Last two games should have a set rotation and make sure the team is in synch by the opener.

 

[Bricklayer]

The short-term gain isn't enough in a deal for a vet like Kmart. He doesn't win us a title, nor does he add more than a win or 2 to this team, if that.

That's an unsupported conclusion.

The issue here is that we only have 1 Marco, and he's damn useful off the bench. If we could clone him, then Ben could go sit down at the end of the bench and try to figure out how to play with assertiveness in garbagetime while Marco started and Marco came off the bench for Marco. But we don't. We've only got the one, and that still leaves us critically shy of shooting, really critically if Tuff Juice is aging out now and Ben is going to continue his muddle.

A guy like Kevin represents less savior than solution. For 2 years now we've been forced to start a bad player at SG because we had no options. That's a stupid situation to get into again. And we really REALLY do not have time for it anymore, as the events of this summer demonstrated. As Rajon's 1yr contract demonstrates. If things go south again this season...there's all kinds of disaster waiting at the end of that scenario. We need dependable professional NBA shooters in the worst way. We need a 3rd weapon in a starting lineup that's likely going to include 2-sub 10ppg guys in WCS and Rondo. If we don't get those things it absolutely IS going to shave wins off our total, again, as it has done for 2 years now. And with us projected as maybe just barely being in the playoff hunt for #8 as it is, losing 2, 3, 4 wins is all it would take to knock us out. Ben HAS to give us what we need to compete this year or he's pointless. You can't just keep on playing the adorable fluffy eared mutt that everybody likes too much to speak the truth about year after year. At some point you have to contribute or you have to go. All appearances aside this is still a professional organization who's goal is to win ballgames, and who's need is to win as many of them as humanly possible NOW.

Kevin Martin does not and never has inspired me. He reeks of passivity. He's not the guy I would normally choose to start or be part of my tough playoff team. But he is the vet who is available, who we know, who would cause no waves, and who has a very particular skillset that is pretty rare. He knows how to play. Ben is welcome to show the same at any time, bu if he doesn't,. then he's not pulling his weight and any results from that can hardly be surprsing for him.

 

[swisshh]

Just to kill the talk, Martin/Ben doesn't add up salary wise and you'd have to give Omri or Butler as well, or a bunch of extended bench guys like Moreland or Curry to do it.

edit: If there is a mid-season trade, I expect it to be for a stretch four. If it's a guard, I'd look more at former Karl draftee Fournier over in Orlando, whose salary matches up.

 

[jdbraver]

That was not my point.
You can tell that we have the best coach since Adelman (and maybe ever), did not need preseason for that.
My point was that Ben with current personnel fits to style that is not what typically Karl prefers (very fast paced, lot of ball movement, 3pts, less post-ups...).

I believe that Karl is still at learning stage with his players, and hope that he will be willing and knowledgeable to tweak little bit his preferred style to the personnel he has.
That would separate Karl as a very good coach and Karl as an elite coach... which might be the difference whether Kings will be in the playoff this year or not.

So what style does Ben fit then? Cuz I would think a fast pace would fit him just fine.

 

[andjel]

Fast pace would fit him personally fine, but I do not think that team with him and Rondo would benefit with that approach.

DC, Belli, Caspi and KK fit perfectly in their second unit role with heavy minutes if needed. Sliding them to take Ben's starting spot would create imbalance. Assumption is that Rondo, Gay, WCS and Cus are starters.

Finding the system that keeps Ben as a starter would be ideal. That requires hiding weaknesses in the starting lineup with Ben as a SG.
Specifically:
We are not going to outscore anyone with Rondo, Ben and WCS on the court
No spacing with Gay being the only (sort of) reliable 3pt threat.

Adding that that Ben is the best defensive SG and defensive skills (and size) of the rest of the guys, Memphis fits the model much more than Warriors.
It will also benefit DFC. I am not sold that he will thrive in the fast pace approach.

 

[twslam07]

At this point, I'm hanging on to McLemore. I'm not going to make any knee jerk reactions after a couple preseason games. McLemore improved last year. We're all hoping he can do it again.

For me it really comes down to maximizing this team's potential to be able to win a championship. To maximize that potential, we desperately need a 3 and D player at SG. Martin isn't that type of player nor is McLemore. However, McLemore still has the potential to become that player; whereas, Martin does not. Considering how valuable 3 and D players are to contending teams, and how unwilling those teams are to trade them away. I'd rather take a chance and hold on to McLemore.

The lack of scoring options is not as big of a need as it was last year. Cousins, Gay, Collison, Belinelii, and (to some extent) Casspi will be able to help us produce points, so adding Martin to act as another scorer is not as important to me. Martin is a strong floor spacer, but McLemore did shoot 35% from three last year. We obviously need him to continue improving, but 35% is nothing to scoff at.

I also am looking ahead to free agency next year. There is really only 1 SG next year that falls into the 3 and D mold, and that is Courtney Lee. If we hold on to McLemore, we essentially give ourselves two opportunities to find our starting SG (either through McLemore's development or through signing Lee). Trading McLemore for Martin, gives us just 1 shot at finding that player (just signing Courtney Lee). I'm not saying by holding on to McLemore that we will for sure find our ideal starting SG, but again, it gives us a better chance at finding that perfect fit and thus maximizing the potential of this team. Again, I'm trying to think about how to maximize the team's potential.

Taking one step forward to just take one step forward is not always the wisest move, and at this point, I think we have enough talent to not have to worry about the "Cousins will leave if this team doesn't improve" argument. Obviously, if the team isn't living up to our expectations as we start to get into the season, we can revisit the makeup of the team, but I'm starting to shift more to how can we mold this current roster to a championship contender, and to me, trading McLemore for Martin gives us less of a chance of finding the "perfect" fit at SG.

 

[LPKingsFan]

There's also the chance Martin declines his player option next summer and tries to cash in one last time, taking advantage of the rising cap.

 

[CVKingsfan]

Can the Kings Afford Another Developmental Season from Ben McLemore?

http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2015/...nother-developmental-season-from-ben-mclemore

(The author seems to have hit all the issues already discussed in this thread.)

 

[Bricklayer]

Can the Kings Afford Another Developmental Season from Ben McLemore?

http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2015/...nother-developmental-season-from-ben-mclemore

(The author seems to have hit all the issues already discussed in this thread.)

Probably because he read this thread first.

Nonetheless I am onboard with everything the author said.

 

[Sac.Kings]

Probably because he read this thread first.

Nonetheless I am onboard with everything the author said.

I've been on this board for around 7 years or so, and this is the first time I have ever seen you admit to agreeing to ALL of what the author said. Getting soft...

 

[King Baller]

Lets see..... there have been 4 preseason games I think I will wait until I see about 25 regular season games before I decide how Ben McLemore is playing. I think he will play fewer minutes and learn a lot from the Coaches and Veterans that have been added this year. He may turn into exactly what the Kings need.

I am sure Vlade is watching and having conversations all the time about this very subject along with many others. Vlade was going strong after Wes Matthews after all. Heck maybe Ray Allen signs with the Kings if they get off to a hot start

 

[Chubbs]

Probably because he read this thread first.

Nonetheless I am onboard with everything the author said.

It's spooky sometimes how various comments and ideas get lifted from here. On the radio, in print, etc

Where's the royalties?

 

[King Baller]

It's spooky sometimes how various comments and ideas get lifted from here. On the radio, in print, etc

Where's the royalties?

I mentioned in the game thread how the video feed was bad and inside two minutes it was tuned up.

 

[Albatros]

He simply won't ever be what you want him to be with his handle. His "magical" shooting stroke was supposed to make up for that but I'm afraid that was just a fantasy.

 

[KingsFanGER]

Problem still remains, that we shouldn't trade young assets only to reach the 8th spot in the West. The 8th spot will not attract many good veterans unless we overpay once again.
So basically we have to trade Ben for some player that still has some upside left.
Any suggestions?

Fournier was mentioned, but last time I watched a Magic game Fournier was the primary ball handler off the bench. Ben can't do that and the Magic won't bench Payton or Oladipo for Ben. Trading for Ben doesn't make too much sense for the Magic.
Terence Ross? Basically Ben with handles but shies away from pressure and is not the best defender.
Marcus Smart? Well maybe pipedreams are allowed on KingsFans.com
Alan Crabbe? Not bad, but I would prefer Ben.
K.J. McDaniels? Solid defender but can't shoot.
P.J. Hairston? Strong, bulky guy, who looked like a decent wing defender in the preseason.
Reggie Bullock? Didn't get much of a chance with the Clippers. Looked serviceable so far in preseason.
Dion Waiters? Selfish, low IQ, likes to handle the ball.
Archie Goodwin? Mostly a slasher.

Vets:
Jamal Crawford? No defense, shot happy veteran, best off the bench, no upside.
Kevin Martin? No defense, soft, no upside, 17 playoff games in 11 years.

Well that's pretty much it. Most teams right now won't actively try to trade key players. Ben's value shouldn't be too high, based on how desperately some people on this board are looking to get rid of him.
We need a wing player, that can shoot AND defend and is able to play off the ball.
Maybe we get a chance to aquire a decent player once the deadline is approaching and some teams came short of their expectations.
Right now there aren't many players that match our requirements.

Actually from the list above I think Ross (well besides Smart ofc..) would be the best fit and should be available right now. Maybe a change of scenery can get him back on track. But is he worth the risk giving up on Ben?

 

[Bricklayer]

Problem still remains, that we shouldn't trade young assets only to reach the 8th spot in the West. The 8th spot will not attract many good veterans unless we overpay once again.
So basically we have to trade Ben for some player that still has some upside left.
Any suggestions?

Fournier was mentioned, but last time I watched a Magic game Fournier was the primary ball handler off the bench. Ben can't do that and the Magic won't bench Payton or Oladipo for Ben. Trading for Ben doesn't make too much sense for the Magic.
Terence Ross? Basically Ben with handles but shies away from pressure and is not the best defender.
Marcus Smart? Well maybe pipedreams are allowed on KingsFans.com
Alan Crabbe? Not bad, but I would prefer Ben.
K.J. McDaniels? Solid defender but can't shoot.
P.J. Hairston? Strong, bulky guy, who looked like a decent wing defender in the preseason.
Reggie Bullock? Didn't get much of a chance with the Clippers. Looked serviceable so far in preseason.
Dion Waiters? Selfish, low IQ, likes to handle the ball.
Archie Goodwin? Mostly a slasher.

Vets:
Jamal Crawford? No defense, shot happy veteran, best off the bench, no upside.
Kevin Martin? No defense, soft, no upside, 17 playoff games in 11 years.

Well that's pretty much it. Most teams right now won't actively try to trade key players. Ben's value shouldn't be too high, based on how desperately some people on this board are looking to get rid of him.
We need a wing player, that can shoot AND defend and is able to play off the ball.
Maybe we get a chance to aquire a decent player once the deadline is approaching and some teams came short of their expectations.
Right now there aren't many players that match our requirements.

Actually from the list above I think Ross (well besides Smart ofc..) would be the best fit and should be available right now. Maybe a change of scenery can get him back on track. But is he worth the risk giving up on Ben?

yes you give up a young asset to make #8. You ABSOLUTELY do if you're the Kings.

1) we're going on 10 years of missing the playoffs. It would be huge for this franchise in a way it would not for Dallas.
2) our reputation is complete dirt. And yes, #8 to a team in that position makes a huge difference.
3) we'd then be a team on the rise. It would absolutely attract more FAs than otherwise. In order to pull it off we'd have to be at least 15 wins better in a season. It would draw a ton of positive press. Maybe even some awards for our players (All NBA Cuz, Comeback Rondo) and managers (COY Karl, EOY Vlade)
4) Rondo's contract is up. We need him to buy in, for that we need him to see we are a playoff team.
5) We're moving into a new building. We can do it off of 10 straight years of missing the playoffs, or off of a new beginning.
6) Karl, he doesn't lie to lose
7) Cousins, he doesn't like to lose
8) Cousins' agent, isn't going to tolerate his client being held back any longer.

If Ben is still not coming around, he absolutely is not worth blowing all of the above. If he's worth a damn he'll be a part of it. If not, time to move on to somebody else who can be.

 

[dude12]

Of all the things being discussed regarding Ben, you do make the trade if we get a piece back that helps us win. Or you can hold him and let him develop but that doesn't mean like the last two years he plays 28 minutes plus just because he's our best option and we are trying to develop him.....it's a different situation. He's not the best option nor is he the 2nd best option. Is he the 3rd best option.......maybe but quite frankly, based on current level of play James Anderson is a better fit than Ben. He just is. We can't afford the swings in production from Ben. Anderson will be more steady than that. Belli is obviously better. Collison at the 2 is better. I go with what I see regarding Ben and Anderson.....Ben shows potential but are you willing to risk potential losses to play him? If he plays well, then great but this start to the season (preseason) hasn't been very encouraging to this point....he's still a subpar starter. I'd deal him in a heartbeat to get more wins.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Problem still remains, that we shouldn't trade young assets only to reach the 8th spot in the West. The 8th spot will not attract many good veterans unless we overpay once again.
So basically we have to trade Ben for some player that still has some upside left.
Any suggestions?

Fournier was mentioned, but last time I watched a Magic game Fournier was the primary ball handler off the bench. Ben can't do that and the Magic won't bench Payton or Oladipo for Ben. Trading for Ben doesn't make too much sense for the Magic.
Terence Ross? Basically Ben with handles but shies away from pressure and is not the best defender.
Marcus Smart? Well maybe pipedreams are allowed on KingsFans.com
Alan Crabbe? Not bad, but I would prefer Ben.
K.J. McDaniels? Solid defender but can't shoot.
P.J. Hairston? Strong, bulky guy, who looked like a decent wing defender in the preseason.
Reggie Bullock? Didn't get much of a chance with the Clippers. Looked serviceable so far in preseason.
Dion Waiters? Selfish, low IQ, likes to handle the ball.
Archie Goodwin? Mostly a slasher.

Vets:
Jamal Crawford? No defense, shot happy veteran, best off the bench, no upside.
Kevin Martin? No defense, soft, no upside, 17 playoff games in 11 years.

Well that's pretty much it. Most teams right now won't actively try to trade key players. Ben's value shouldn't be too high, based on how desperately some people on this board are looking to get rid of him.
We need a wing player, that can shoot AND defend and is able to play off the ball.
Maybe we get a chance to aquire a decent player once the deadline is approaching and some teams came short of their expectations.
Right now there aren't many players that match our requirements.

Actually from the list above I think Ross (well besides Smart ofc..) would be the best fit and should be available right now. Maybe a change of scenery can get him back on track. But is he worth the risk giving up on Ben?

I see the concern about capping this team's upside, especially with no pick next year and everyone and their mom with cap space to spend. But I think both Cousins and Cauley Stein still have room to get better. And once the team shows it belongs in the playoff conversation, I think free agents show a bit more interest (and hey, we just signed a great free agent haul, IMO)

But I do agree that while moving Ben for a 3 and D guy (if he is showing signs he'll never be one) might make sense, when looking at the actuall scenarios it gets a lot harder to think of a realistic option that actually makes the Kings better.

 

[kpm308]

Just wanted to throw Thabo Sefalosha's name out there since I haven't seen it posted. Doubt Atlanta would move him but maybe with the off court drama and injury budenholzer might be interested in trying to mold a younger guy into his offense. At least the salaries work with him straight up

 

[upinsmoke]

2 guard just isn't what it used to be. Finding a guy who can fill up the box score used to be a dime a dozen but today they are in the Damian Lillard form. Let's let the season tip off before we start making trade scenarios for Ben.

 

[Livinthedream]

2 guard just isn't what it used to be. Finding a guy who can fill up the box score used to be a dime a dozen but today they are in the Damian Lillard form. Let's let the season tip off before we start making trade scenarios for Ben.

Agreed. The SG position has been turned into a role playing specialty spot for some reason. The PG now scores the points for the guard position and the SG is told to stand in the corner and wait in case they decide to throw the ball to him. I understand what a 3 and D guy is, but I don't understand why people think we absolutely HAVE to have one.

I think that spot is absolutely being wasted right now in the league when you tell your potentially best athletes on the court to just be a 3&D guy. That's something the old guy in the gym (me) can do. I think it's a fad the league is caught up in. Have to have Bruce Bowen (I know he's a SF) to emulate the Spurs. But what the Spurs do is work with what they have. They've gone from their main threat being the PF, to the PG and now to the SF. They don't lock themselves into a fad. Neither should we. If the SG on our team isn't suited for a certain style, then don't ask him to play that style. Same with Cousins or any other position. Players excel with the Spurs because they're never asked to be what they're not. Play defense, share the ball and then do what you do best.

 

[KingMilz]

Problem still remains, that we shouldn't trade young assets only to reach the 8th spot in the West. The 8th spot will not attract many good veterans unless we overpay once again.
So basically we have to trade Ben for some player that still has some upside left.
Any suggestions?

Fournier was mentioned, but last time I watched a Magic game Fournier was the primary ball handler off the bench. Ben can't do that and the Magic won't bench Payton or Oladipo for Ben. Trading for Ben doesn't make too much sense for the Magic.
Terence Ross? Basically Ben with handles but shies away from pressure and is not the best defender.
Marcus Smart? Well maybe pipedreams are allowed on KingsFans.com
Alan Crabbe? Not bad, but I would prefer Ben.
K.J. McDaniels? Solid defender but can't shoot.
P.J. Hairston? Strong, bulky guy, who looked like a decent wing defender in the preseason.
Reggie Bullock? Didn't get much of a chance with the Clippers. Looked serviceable so far in preseason.
Dion Waiters? Selfish, low IQ, likes to handle the ball.
Archie Goodwin? Mostly a slasher.

Vets:
Jamal Crawford? No defense, shot happy veteran, best off the bench, no upside.
Kevin Martin? No defense, soft, no upside, 17 playoff games in 11 years.

Well that's pretty much it. Most teams right now won't actively try to trade key players. Ben's value shouldn't be too high, based on how desperately some people on this board are looking to get rid of him.
We need a wing player, that can shoot AND defend and is able to play off the ball.
Maybe we get a chance to aquire a decent player once the deadline is approaching and some teams came short of their expectations.
Right now there aren't many players that match our requirements.

Actually from the list above I think Ross (well besides Smart ofc..) would be the best fit and should be available right now. Maybe a change of scenery can get him back on track. But is he worth the risk giving up on Ben?

Kent Bazemore: good D, elite athlete and plays hard every possession

 

[Hadlowe]

Agreed. The SG position has been turned into a role playing specialty spot for some reason. The PG now scores the points for the guard position and the SG is told to stand in the corner and wait in case they decide to throw the ball to him. I understand what a 3 and D guy is, but I don't understand why people think we absolutely HAVE to have one.

I think that spot is absolutely being wasted right now in the league when you tell your potentially best athletes on the court to just be a 3&D guy. That's something the old guy in the gym (me) can do. I think it's a fad the league is caught up in. Have to have Bruce Bowen (I know he's a SF) to emulate the Spurs. But what the Spurs do is work with what they have. They've gone from their main threat being the PF, to the PG and now to the SF. They don't lock themselves into a fad. Neither should we. If the SG on our team isn't suited for a certain style, then don't ask him to play that style. Same with Cousins or any other position. Players excel with the Spurs because they're never asked to be what they're not. Play defense, share the ball and then do what you do best.

I think it is mostly driven by statistics and large numbers and a little bit by the handcheck rule. Lets say that to be a lead guard in the NBA, you need to be able to handle the ball, pass the ball well, shoot reasonably well from outside and midrange, have good athleticism and be intelligent enough to manage an offensive scheme. Lets say that each of those traits has a quality score of 1-100 where 100 is elite level and 90 is bare minimum for NBA level quality, and the traits are distributed on a bell-curve, where only about 3% of the population is above 90% on any one of those levels. A guard who has each of those qualities above a 90 is extremely rare, let's say 1 in 100,000 people.

In the United States, there are approximately 6 million men between ages 16 and 35 who are between 6' and 6'4" (point guard sized.) That would mean you could expect to see about 60 individuals with all the qualities you would hope to find in an NBA lead point guard across the country.

There are only about 800,000 men between ages 16 and 35 who are 6'4" to 6'7". That means that you might expect to find 8 individuals with the qualities of a lead guard and the size to play the two in the NBA. That's a problem because there are 30 teams who each need at least two people to play the position. Okay, so what if you lower the thresholds for some of the qualities to where you are getting into the fatter portions of the bell curve (athleticism, ball handling, passing.) The question is, which attributes can you lower while still maintaining a two-way threat. Three point shooting creates space on the floor for your star players and punishes poor team defense off-ball. Solid defense is a good way to negate a lot of the offensive firepower from a two on the opposing team, especially if you are facing one of the guys who hits more points on the "ideal guard" chart.

The bottom line is, there are a lot more Kyle Lowry's than there are James Hardens despite having roughly similar skillsets, and that is driven by size being a pretty standard limiting factor for positions.

Handcheck used to weight perimeter defense more towards strength than quickness because you could more aggressively defend weaker guards on the perimeter. The result was that strong, tall guards who weren't great shots were equally (or more) valuable than their shorter, weaker shooting counterparts. That's why guys like Ron Harper were able to carve out decade-long careers despite being pretty terrible shooters and creators.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

yes you give up a young asset to make #8. You ABSOLUTELY do if you're the Kings.

1) we're going on 10 years of missing the playoffs. It would be huge for this franchise in a way it would not for Dallas.
2) our reputation is complete dirt. And yes, #8 to a team in that position makes a huge difference.
3) we'd then be a team on the rise. It would absolutely attract more FAs than otherwise. In order to pull it off we'd have to be at least 15 wins better in a season. It would draw a ton of positive press. Maybe even some awards for our players (All NBA Cuz, Comeback Rondo) and managers (COY Karl, EOY Vlade)
4) Rondo's contract is up. We need him to buy in, for that we need him to see we are a playoff team.
5) We're moving into a new building. We can do it off of 10 straight years of missing the playoffs, or off of a new beginning.
6) Karl, he doesn't lie to lose
7) Cousins, he doesn't like to lose
8) Cousins' agent, isn't going to tolerate his client being held back any longer.

If Ben is still not coming around, he absolutely is not worth blowing all of the above. If he's worth a damn he'll be a part of it. If not, time to move on to somebody else who can be.

I don't disagree with the tone of this post, only with the laughable notion going around (though not specifically in this post) that James Anderson would be an upgrade over anybody. The idea that James Anderson is "steady" does not appear to be supported by anything that he's ever done, at any point in his entire life. I can't even call him a bust, because he was never good enough to qualify for bust status. He's just not any good. And I don't mean that he's not very good, I mean that he's not any good.

Kings Fans stay on some "grass is always greener," and it perplexes me. I'm not even saying that McLemore is that good. I don't think that McLemore is good, at all. If you think that McLemore is going to hold us back, then get rid of him, but the idea of starting Anderson? That's bull**** on a stick. Basically where I'm coming from with McLemore is the same place that I was at with Jason Thompson: it's not love for the incumbent so much as complete and utter disdain for the alternative. Ben McLemore might not be any good, and we might have to get rid of him, but anybody who thinks that we'd be better off with James Anderson is on one. That dude can't play.

 

[Livinthedream]

I think it is mostly driven by statistics and large numbers and a little bit by the handcheck rule. Lets say that to be a lead guard in the NBA, you need to be able to handle the ball, pass the ball well, shoot reasonably well from outside and midrange, have good athleticism and be intelligent enough to manage an offensive scheme. Lets say that each of those traits has a quality score of 1-100 where 100 is elite level and 90 is bare minimum for NBA level quality, and the traits are distributed on a bell-curve, where only about 3% of the population is above 90% on any one of those levels. A guard who has each of those qualities above a 90 is extremely rare, let's say 1 in 100,000 people.

In the United States, there are approximately 6 million men between ages 16 and 35 who are between 6' and 6'4" (point guard sized.) That would mean you could expect to see about 60 individuals with all the qualities you would hope to find in an NBA lead point guard hss the'ountry.

There are only about 800,000 men between ages 16 and 35 who are 6'4" to 6'7". That means that you might expect to find 8 individuals with the qualities of a lead guard and the size to play the two in the NBA. That's a problem because there are 30 teams who each need at least two people to play the position. Okay, so what if you lower the thresholds for some of the qualities to where you are getting into the fatter portions of the bell curve (athleticism, ball handling, passing.) The question is, which attributes can you lower while still maintaining a two-way threat. Three point shooting creates space on the floor for your star players and punishes poor team defense off-ball. Solid defense is a good way to negate a lot of the offensive firepower from a two on the opposing team, especially if you are facing one of the guys who hits more points on the "ideal guard" chart.

The bottom line is, there are a lot more Kyle Lowry's than there are James Hardens despite having roughly similar skillsets, and that is driven by size being a pretty standard limiting factor for positions.

Handcheck used to weight perimeter defense more towards strength than quickness because you could more aggressively defend weaker guards on the perimeter. The result was that strong, tall guards who weren't great shots were equally (or more) valuable than their shorter, weaker shooting counterparts. That's why guys like Ron Harper were able to carve out decade-long careers despite being pretty terrible shooters and creators.

I don't disagree with anything you said. My question is, what do you do when you find a guy who can possibly do more?

My observation of Ben has always been that he usually plays a lot better in games when Rudy or Cousins is out. Even better when both are out. During those times he's given the freedom to shoot as much as he needs and is never an after thought and doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

He's a guy that you run plays for. And not just once or twice in the 1st quarter and then never again throughout the game. Is he a statistical liability because he's between 6'4 and 6'7 but his game is suited to being a bigger part of the offense?

This is what I mean by squandering talent by trying to force someone into a mold. Harden wouldn't be Harden if he was still in OKC. He wouldn't have freedom to pound the ball for 15 seconds of the shot clock. Guys like Ron Harper didn't fit into a mold either.

I'm not saying Ben is or will be a break out player. But I think he has no chance if we say he's only valuable if he plays the average role of 3&D.

Maybe Ben does need to be traded for his own growth

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

I don't disagree with anything you said. My question is, what do you do when you find a guy who can possibly do more?

My observation of Ben has always been that he usually plays a lot better in games when Rudy or Cousins is out. Even better when both are out. During those times he's given the freedom to shoot as much as he needs and is never an after thought and doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

Agreed...and it's why he should never at any point, have been put in the starting lineup. I'm convinced his production and development would increase, if he played off the bench

 

[kingsboi]

This is a James Anderson vs Ben McLemore debate...both are terrible but I'd stick with Ben until Vlade can find something more useful from a two guard.

 

[Bricklayer]

I don't disagree with the tone of this post, only with the laughable notion going around (though not specifically in this post) that James Anderson would be an upgrade over anybody. The idea that James Anderson is "steady" does not appear to be supported by anything that he's ever done, at any point in his entire life. I can't even call him a bust, because he was never good enough to qualify for bust status. He's just not any good. And I don't mean that he's not very good, I mean that he's not any good.

Kings Fans stay on some "grass is always greener," and it perplexes me. I'm not even saying that McLemore is that good. I don't think that McLemore is good, at all. If you think that McLemore is going to hold us back, then get rid of him, but the idea of starting Anderson? That's bull**** on a stick. Basically where I'm coming from with McLemore is the same place that I was at with Jason Thompson: it's not love for the incumbent so much as complete and utter disdain for the alternative. Ben McLemore might not be any good, and we might have to get rid of him, but anybody who thinks that we'd be better off with James Anderson is on one. That dude can't play.

I think the one thing that can be said about Anderson is that he "can play". He just doesn't have much talent. But he spent three years with Pop and he knows what he's doing out there. That, and what looks to be some steady defense, are the only reasons you have him in a starting lineup, but these things are all relative. Consider:

Can't Play Anderson Career per36: 12.4pts (.523TS%) 4.7reb 2.5ast 1.0stl 0.4blk 1.7TO
Big Tease Mclemore Career per36: 12.7pts (.522TS%) 3.5reb 1.6ast 0.9stl 0.3blk 1.7TO

Last NBA Season Anderson per36: 12.6pts (.530TS%) 4.7reb 2.3ast 1.2stl 0.4blk 1.7TO
Last NBA Season McLemore per36: 13.4pts (.552TS%) 3.2reb 1.9ast 1.0stl 0.3blk 1.9TO


Anderson is a walking mediocrity, but let's not pretend we are pondering replacing an All Star. Anderson looks to be tougher, more physical on defense and the boards, a better ballhandler. Ben's continuing claim is that maybe one day his shot results will equal his shot form. But neither guy has been very productive, and if one of them struggles it really shouldn't raise eyebrows if the other gets a nod.

 

[dude12]

I don't disagree with the tone of this post, only with the laughable notion going around (though not specifically in this post) that James Anderson would be an upgrade over anybody. The idea that James Anderson is "steady" does not appear to be supported by anything that he's ever done, at any point in his entire life. I can't even call him a bust, because he was never good enough to qualify for bust status. He's just not any good. And I don't mean that he's not very good, I mean that he's not any good.

Kings Fans stay on some "grass is always greener," and it perplexes me. I'm not even saying that McLemore is that good. I don't think that McLemore is good, at all. If you think that McLemore is going to hold us back, then get rid of him, but the idea of starting Anderson? That's bull**** on a stick. Basically where I'm coming from with McLemore is the same place that I was at with Jason Thompson: it's not love for the incumbent so much as complete and utter disdain for the alternative. Ben McLemore might not be any good, and we might have to get rid of him, but anybody who thinks that we'd be better off with James Anderson is on one. That dude can't play.

Yeah, your defense of Jason Thompson went way beyond not wanting the alternative. The defense of Jason Thompson as a quality 3rd big on a playoff team......now that was perplexing as Koufos has shown exactly what a quality 3rd big on a playoff team is. There is no comparison between JT and Koufos.

The only defense of Anderson going on is that he's a possible better option than Ben and his inconsistency. That is as much a knock on Ben as anything. Ben has looked crapty this preseason.

 

[KingsFanGER]

Kent Bazemore: good D, elite athlete and plays hard every possession

Agreed. I forgot about him. But I think Bazemore is a key player for the Hawks. He really stepped up last season, when Thabo went down.
I don't know, if they would consider a trade for Ben.