Kings roster:

[bajaden]

Hahaha, and what does that say!? Heck, 29 teams won more games than we did!

I agree with the last statement 100%.

You beat me to that one. How about 26 teams that made their players drink milk before the game all won more games than we did.

 

[Telemachus]

common sense would say it at least will improve opposing FG% against... I will let a player shoot a jumpshot over a layup/dunk 10 out of 10 times, whether it be contested or not. But, good way to put it fnordius, I wholeheartedly agree.

Let's take a look at the top 5 shot-blocking teams from last season and the bottom 5 as well. Then compare how they ranked in points allowed and defensive FG%.

Top 5 - Pts Allowed - Def. FG%
1. GS - 30 - 23
2. Denver - 19 - 4
3. LAC - 25 - 24
4. Chicago - 21 - 14
5. Miami - 12 - 13

Bottom 5 - Pts Allowed - Def. FG%
26. New Orleans - 5 - 7
27. SA - 2 - 9
28. Minnesota - 22 - 26
29. Milwaukee - 16 - 15
30. NY - 28 - 28

Make of that what you will. In case you were wondering, the Kings were ranked 25th in blocks per game last season.

 

[Bricklayer]

Was not quite able to ferret out the stats from that last one telemachus, but I think the point would be this:

Taking overall shotblocking in a given year is a crude measure aiming for the absolute key: interior defensive presence. No interior defensive presence = you almost can not be a good defensive team. Now when you look at the Ten Worst Teams in the league last year in shotblocking, most of them are exaclty who you expect them to be -- crappy lottery teams who could not stop anybody inside and got pummeled in the paint night in and night out. New York, Milwaulkee, Minnesota, Sacramento, Washington, OKC. Blech.

But there were three exceptions that could mislead until you think about it: San Antonio, Houston, and New Orleans. Three strong defensive teams sitting there amongst the garbage squads like ourselves. The explanation? All three teams HAD their big defensive anchors, which is the real key -- Duncan, Yao, Chandler? Three of the most imposing 7'0+ roadblocks in the league inside. What they did not have was any support staff -- everybody else was a midget. David West? Luis Scola? Matt Bonner? Come on. But what it shows is that accumualted blocked shots can be decieving -- your guard blocking 50 shots is nice but it doesn't help you actually shut down the middle. The thing that matters is having somebody to shut down that paint, to deter drivers, to stop the layup parade. And if you have that, you can build a very sturdy defense around it regardless of whether your PG is a sneaky shotblocker or not.

 

[Oprostaj]

Was not quite able to ferret out the stats from that last one telemachus, but I think the point would be this:

Taking overall shotblocking in a given year is a crude measure aiming for the absolute key: interior defensive presence. No interior defensive presence = you almost can not be a good defensive team. Now when you look at the Ten Worst Teams in the league last year in shotblocking, most of them are exaclty who you expect them to be -- crappy lottery teams who could not stop anybody inside and got pummeled in the paint night in and night out. New York, Milwaulkee, Minnesota, Sacramento, Washington, OKC. Blech.

But there were three exceptions that could mislead until you think about it: San Antonio, Houston, and New Orleans. Three strong defensive teams sitting there amongst the garbage squads like ourselves. The explanation? All three teams HAD their big defensive anchors, which is the real key -- Duncan, Yao, Chandler? Three of the most imposing 7'0+ roadblocks in the league inside. What they did not have was any support staff -- everybody else was a midget. David West? Luis Scola? Matt Bonner? Come on. But what it shows is that accumualted blocked shots can be decieving -- your guard blocking 50 shots is nice but it doesn't help you actually shut down the middle. The thing that matters is having somebody to shut down that paint, to deter drivers, to stop the layup parade. And if you have that, you can build a very sturdy defense around it regardless of whether your PG is a sneaky shotblocker or not.

Well... doesn't it also play into consideration how good the team overall defensively is? For example, a team like San Antonio has a very good defensive philosophy that prevents teams from constantly pounding it inside by switching up zone coverage as well as having smart and above average individual defenders. This does not allow teams to consistently pound it inside therefore skewing the block numbers. Like someone said above, it's not just about pure numbers - having someone in the middle to alter shots is more important than then number of blocks themselves - I always considered opponents FG % to be the main telling sign of how good a team is defensively. Again, it's a combination of everything but I'm just afraid that putting such a high importance on BPG might be a bad thing.

 

[bajaden]

I'm one of those that says shotblocking isn't the be all, end all. However, I would love to have a great shotblocker on the team. If you have good perimiter defenders, then having a great shotblocker isn't as big a necessity. However, you still need good interior defense. But, if you have decent to good interior defenders, and terrible perimiter defenders, then the interior defenders are going to look worse than they are. Think of a football secondary with a terrible defensive line that puts no pressure on the QB. I don't care how good the secondary is, sooner or later the lack of a pass rush is going to catch up with them.

Last year the Kings perimiter defense was absolutely terrible. It was so bad that it was hard to even judge how good or bad the interior defense was. They looked like a B52 bomber being attacked by thousands of fighter planes. If you have the ability to stop the ball on the perimiter you'd be amazed how much better the interior defense will look. I will admit that if you have a good perimiter defense and then you also have a very good shotblocker, then you have the best of both worlds. Now you present the opposition with a double edged sword. Your comfronted with a tough perimiter defense, that if you get by, your comfronted with an intimidating shotblocker. And as with any good shotblocker, its not about how many shots he blocks, but rather how many shots he didn't have to block because they settled for something else.

I don't see a Mutumbo anywhere on our roster. Last year in Hawes and Thompson, you had one rookie and one young second year player trying to defend the basket with Martin and Beno, and even Jackson who defensively is a mere shell of his former self, allowing everything but a Mack truck to go straight to the basket. If your Jason Thompson, and your trying your best to stay out of foul trouble, and you know your not going to get any breaks from the ref, and your trying to adjust to the speed of the NBA, your in trouble. Ditto Hawes. I've said it before, but I can't tell you how many times I saw Thompson do a show off the pick and roll and then be left hanging out there because Beno didn't switch back.

My point is, that yes, the interior defense needs improving and certainly a shotblocker would help. But the defense starts on the perimiter, and there is no way they should get a free pass. They were absolutely terrible last year.

 

[Bricklayer]

My point is, that yes, the interior defense needs improving and certainly a shotblocker would help. But the defense starts on the perimiter, and there is no way they should get a free pass. They were absolutely terrible last year.

While not disagreeing a bit with your last line, actually, defense starts in the middle. Its the place closest to the hoop. If you don't control that, you are screwed unless you have an entire set of HOF defenders around the perimeter. And as I keep on repeating, that interior defender helps make everybody on the perimeter better -- he stands behind them. If he can protect the rim, the perimeter guys have less they have to do to get a stop. Its the difference between having a good goalie in soccer/hockey, or having a lousy one (or in our case, basically having pulled him). If you have a good one, you can be aggressive on defense and let the goalie clean up the mistakes. If you have a bad one, you have to be perfect on defense and oh so careful, because you can't count on the guy behind you to stop anything that gets through.

When the Pacers had a Mark Jackson and Reggie Miller tandem in the backcourt, they should have by all rights been absolutely awful defensively. But they made up for it by putting a stopper at SF, and divying up the frontcourt minutes between a 7'4" behemoth (not a great defender, but a huge space eater) and the two Davis boys, who would clean the clock of anybody who got around the weak perimeter guys. I have been merciless on the pathetic nature of Kevin and Beno's defense -- and it deserves it. Being that bad on defense is soft, prima donna, I don't care about anything but my contract or my stats stuff. But you put Ditkembe Mutumbo in his prime back there behind them, and all of a sudden their defense would not have looked as bad. Instead of having to stop everythign theri man might want to do, they only have to stop the jumper and maybe guide him into the teeth of the shotblocking if he is going to drive. They may still be awful defenders, but they only have to defend half the court then. It gets easier.

 

[VF21]

I probably should know this, but when exactly was the last time the Kings had a legitimate interior defender of the caliber you're talking about? I'll be honest. None come to mind.

 

[Chupacabra]

^ Keon Clark 6 years ago. He wasnt dikembe, but he was an intimidating shotblocking presence.

 

[Bricklayer]

I probably should know this, but when exactly was the last time the Kings had a legitimate interior defender of the caliber you're talking about? I'll be honest. None come to mind.

Keon

But the Webb/Vlade/Pollard trio combined to give us adequate defensive presence through most of our run. Webb and Vlade were on the soft side, but surprisingly good shotblockers when younger. And Pollard was the physical challenge everything thug. As as aside, those teams kind of illustrated the overall shotblocking vs. interior presence dichotomy -- we had three bigs giving us 1+ blocks a game, and so we had enough interior defensive presence. But our overall shotblocking as a team was mediocre because we surrounded those bigs with a whole fleet of undersized and/or groundbound Peja Stojakovics and Mike Bibbys around the perimeter.

 

[VF21]

When you look at the other interior defenders you've mentioned, somehow Keon Clark just isn't in the same league. And, to the best of my recollection, he wasn't ever a starter for us for an appreciable length of time.

Webber, Vlade and Pollard may have given "adequate defensive presence" but I do not think the Kings have ever possessed the kind of shotblocker extraordinaire that would even be mentioned in the same paragraph as the likes of Duncan, Robinson, Mutumbo, etc.

 

[VF21]

^ Keon Clark 6 years ago. He wasnt dikembe, but he was an intimidating shotblocking presence.

I beg to differ. Keon Clark was NOT intimidating. He made some nice blocks but very few people stayed away from the inside because KEON CLARK was in the paint.

 

[Bricklayer]

I beg to differ. Keon Clark was NOT intimidating. He made some nice blocks but very few people stayed away from the inside because KEON CLARK was in the paint.

That's really not true. There is a reason that that team was the best defensive squad in the Sacramento era, and Keon was a big part of it.

Even if you don't run from him, a shotblocker makes you think when you drive the lane.

To flesh that a bit, I think Keon for us was very much what John Salley was for the Bad Boys Pistons. Alone on his own, too skinny, can be taken advanatge of, not going to turn a team around. But as a specialist on a team with incredible depth, a guy who can make an impact by doing somethign better than any of his teammates. Still annoys me that that team did not win a title -- had everything you need except luck.

 

[VF21]

I agree with almost everything you say. I guess my main objection is with the use of the word "intimidating" when referring to Keon Clark. When I think "intimidating," Keon Clark would not even be in the top 50 names that come to mind.

And I'd have to go back and check the stats, but I don't remember Clark getting that many minutes on a nightly basis. Intimidating shotblocker, in my mind, means a starter who guards the hoop like he has to pay for every bucket scored against him...

 

[Showtime]

I think the last legit shot blocking center the kings had was Brian Skinner. But he wasn't that intimidating at 6'9''.

 

[SacTownKid]

Keon

But the Webb/Vlade/Pollard trio combined to give us adequate defensive presence through most of our run. Webb and Vlade were on the soft side, but surprisingly good shotblockers when younger. And Pollard was the physical challenge everything thug. As as aside, those teams kind of illustrated the overall shotblocking vs. interior presence dichotomy -- we had three bigs giving us 1+ blocks a game, and so we had enough interior defensive presence. But our overall shotblocking as a team was mediocre because we surrounded those bigs with a whole fleet of undersized and/or groundbound Peja Stojakovics and Mike Bibbys around the perimeter.

Actually the last one, and IMO the best we have ever had at it, was the big 'Tag. He really should have played more (or actually PLAYED for that matter) and still to this day I do not understand why Adelman benched him after he was the only one to even slow down the mighty Jerome James from wiping his butt with Brad Miller. Tag is a guy that doesn't even need to rack up blocked shots because he's going to change 6-8 times more shots than he blocks. Changing the shots you don't block is the key to interior defense. Even the best shotblockers are only going to get you 2-3 a night, but if they can change 10, then they've made an impact.

 

[Bricklayer]

Actually the last one, and IMO the best we have ever had at it, was the big 'Tag. He really should have played more (or actually PLAYED for that matter) and still to this day I do not understand why Adelman benched him after he was the only one to even slow down the mighty Jerome James from wiping his butt with Brad Miller.

No, that's true (well somewhat -- not sure I would call Tag "the best" at anything except Chippendale dancing in his bikini briefs). I just overlooked him because he got so few minutes that we barely saw it.

 

[bajaden]

The only exception I would make is Otis Thorpe, who was a very good defender. Too long ago for most people to remember though.

 

[bajaden]

While not disagreeing a bit with your last line, actually, defense starts in the middle. Its the place closest to the hoop. If you don't control that, you are screwed unless you have an entire set of HOF defenders around the perimeter. And as I keep on repeating, that interior defender helps make everybody on the perimeter better -- he stands behind them. If he can protect the rim, the perimeter guys have less they have to do to get a stop. Its the difference between having a good goalie in soccer/hockey, or having a lousy one (or in our case, basically having pulled him). If you have a good one, you can be aggressive on defense and let the goalie clean up the mistakes. If you have a bad one, you have to be perfect on defense and oh so careful, because you can't count on the guy behind you to stop anything that gets through.

When the Pacers had a Mark Jackson and Reggie Miller tandem in the backcourt, they should have by all rights been absolutely awful defensively. But they made up for it by putting a stopper at SF, and divying up the frontcourt minutes between a 7'4" behemoth (not a great defender, but a huge space eater) and the two Davis boys, who would clean the clock of anybody who got around the weak perimeter guys. I have been merciless on the pathetic nature of Kevin and Beno's defense -- and it deserves it. Being that bad on defense is soft, prima donna, I don't care about anything but my contract or my stats stuff. But you put Ditkembe Mutumbo in his prime back there behind them, and all of a sudden their defense would not have looked as bad. Instead of having to stop everythign theri man might want to do, they only have to stop the jumper and maybe guide him into the teeth of the shotblocking if he is going to drive. They may still be awful defenders, but they only have to defend half the court then. It gets easier.

I don't think there's that much disagreement between us. I certainly can't argue against having a Wilt Chamberlin, Bill Russell, Mutumbo, Akeem, D. Robinson clone being the centerpiece of our defense. I would love it. My problem is that I don't see one on the horizon for the Kings. I know that you were high on Thabeet and that I wasn't. A subjective disagreement. It remains to be seen whether his name can be mentioned with the one's that I just posted. Those kind of players are rare. Particularly one's that do it on both ends of the floor.

Because of the rarity, I guess I tend to look for other ways to improve the defense. That doesn't mean I think your way is wrong. Just more difficult to aquire. But hey, if you can find that rare player for us I'm on board. Other than that we'll have to settle for the Skinner's of the world, unless Hawes's or Thompson develop into one.

 

[Bricklayer]

I don't think there's that much disagreement between us. I certainly can't argue against having a Wilt Chamberlin, Bill Russell, Mutumbo, Akeem, D. Robinson clone being the centerpiece of our defense. I would love it. My problem is that I don't see one on the horizon for the Kings. I know that you were high on Thabeet and that I wasn't. A subjective disagreement. It remains to be seen whether his name can be mentioned with the one's that I just posted. Those kind of players are rare. Particularly one's that do it on both ends of the floor.

Because of the rarity, I guess I tend to look for other ways to improve the defense. That doesn't mean I think your way is wrong. Just more difficult to aquire. But hey, if you can find that rare player for us I'm on board. Other than that we'll have to settle for the Skinner's of the world, unless Hawes's or Thompson develop into one.

You don't need a Bill Russel in order to have an achor to your defense. That's as over the top as saying you need a Michael Jordan in order to score points.

A couple of years back the Mavs did it with Dampier and Diop. The aformentioned Pacers did it with Dale and Antonio Davis. It doesn't take a HOF mulitple year DPOY. But it does take an effort by your front office to start stocking the frontcourt with big players that can take care of business in there and take pride in locking down the paint on defense.

 

[bajaden]

You don't need a Bill Russel in order to have an achor to your defense. That's as over the top as saying you need a Michael Jordan in order to score points.

A couple of years back the Mavs did it with Dampier and Diop. The aformentioned Pacers did it with Dale and Antonio Davis. It doesn't take a HOF mulitple year DPOY. But it does take an effort by your front office to start stocking the frontcourt with big players that can take care of business in there and take pride in locking down the paint on defense.

Well I suggested Russell and company as the ideal, not necessarily as the necessity. A little tongue in cheek if you will.. But lets take a look at what you suggested as a comprimise.

A. Davis: 1st year- 81 games- 7.7 PPG- 6.2 RPG- 1.0 BPG
2nd year- 44 games- 7.6 PPG- 6.4 RPG- 0.6 BPG
3rd year- 82 games- 8.8 PPG- 6.1 RPG- 0.8 BPG
4th year- 82 games- 10.5 PPG- 7.3 RPG- 1.0 BPG
It wasn't until Antonio's 7th season that he broke out and became a good shot blocker..

D. Davis: 1st year- 64 games- 6.2 PPG- 6.4 RPG- 1.1 BPG
2nd year- 82 games- 8.8 PPG- 8.8 RPG- 1.8 BPG
3rd year- 66 games- 11.7 PPG- 10.9 RPG- 1.6 BPG
4th year- 74 games- 10.6 PPG- 9.4 RPG- 1.5 BPG
Obviously a more prolific shot blocker from day one..

E. Dampier: 1st year- 72 games- 5.1 PPG- 4.1 RPG- 1.0 BPG
2nd year- 82 games- 11.8 PPG- 8.7 RPG- 1.6 BPG
6th year- 73 games- 7.6 PPG- 5.8 RPG- 2.2 BPG
7th year- 82 games- 8.2 PPG- 6.6 RPG- 1.8 BPG
About the only thing Dampier was good at was blocking shots. Finally in his 8th season he averaged 12 rebounds a game and the Warriors traded his lazy butt. I omited his 3rd, 4th, and 5th seasons because he simply didn't play enough games for the stats to have any meaning.

Diop: 1st year- 80 games- 1.5 PPG- 2.7 RPG- 1.0 BPG
3rd year- 56 games- 2.3 PPG- 3.6 RPG- 0.9 BPG
5th year- 81 games- 2.3 PPG- 4.6 RPG- 1.8 BPG
6th year- 81 games- 2.3 PPG- 6.6 RPG- 1.3 BPG
Obviously Diop isn't much of an offensive player, nor does he rebound very well. Pretty much a one dimensional defensive player. I skipped his 2nd and 4th years because of lack of games played.

Just for the hell of it:

Chris Kaman: 1st year- 82 games- 6.1 PPG- 5.6 RPG- 0.8 BPG
2nd year- 63 games- 9.1 PPG- 6.7 RPG- 1.0 BPG
3rd year- 77 games- 11.9 PPG- 9.6 RPG- 1.4 BPG
4th year- 75 games- 10.1 PPG- 7.8 RPG- 1.5 BPG
A player that I like. He has a nice balance of offense and defense.

Another player that is preceived as a good defensive player and shot blocker is Joel Przybilla. It wasn't until his 7th season that he broke out and became notable.

Jason Thompson: 1st season- 11.1 PPG- 7.4 RPG- 0.7 BPG
His BPG are a little below the others, but his overall averages are better for a first year player.

Spencer Hawes: 2nd season- 11.4 PPG- 7.1 RPG- 1.2 BPG
I skipped his 1st season because of lack of MPG. Looking at his 2nd year avearges he's right up there with just about everyone in BPG and has better averages in PPG and RPG for a second year player.

So is it possible that this duo could develop into what you desire. It won't happen overnight, but when compared with the others it does seem possible. There's a tendacy to look at finished players and then compare what we have to them. Forgeting that what we have is very young. I realize that I'm dealing with just stats here, and stats don't tell the whole story. There's always that intangible thing. Only two players mentioned came out of the gate as shotblockers from day one. Dale Davis and Eric Dampier. I wouldn't give you the powder to blow Dampier to hell. I have no respect for the dude. Although I suspose he did fill a role in Dallas.

Anyway, its possible we already have the horses in the stable, and they just need time. This is a big year for Spencer, and if Jason can just improve his offense and rebounding by a couple of points and a couple of rebounds, and get his blocks up to one a game, that will be a good second year for him. I'm cautionaly optimistic..

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Shotblocking is kind of overrated. So many things go into a shot being blocked that its hard to say one guy is a better shotblocker than another when you just look at the numbers.

Take Hawes, for example. He blocked over a shot a game, not to shabby. My theory is that he got those blocks because the our defense was so bad. I know, it sounds crazy. I watched almost every game last year, and night in night out players were beating Kmart and Beno off the dribble taking it to the hoop for a drop off or lay up .. at some point our bigs are going to make a block or two happen.

Its very subjective.

Is there a stat for blocks per chance? that would be interesting.

Basically what im saying is the defense as a whole needs to get better. Alot better. We dont need that shotblocker right now. It would be nice, and it would be fun to see, but its not really all that important right now. Thats why the Mason move is so wierd. Its not that we NEED an athletic 7ft backup center, but we sure do need one more than we need a washed up 3.