Kings sign Darren Collison
- Thread starter Dime Dropper
- Start date
No, actual professionals understand fit. They understand chemistry. The understand how parts effect one another. They understand statistical achievements don't reside in a vacuum.
Fans however, get caught up in the "feel good" stories. They get emotional attachments to a player. They pretend stats tell most of the story.
Fans however, get caught up in the "feel good" stories. They get emotional attachments to a player. They pretend stats tell most of the story.
S
I haven't the faintest idea why you feel the need to be so depressing. Although with a profile pic like yours currently Im not surprised by the sadness. "hardly any different from what we saw of the latter day maloof/petrie kings. it's still a lotta patchwork acquisitions, offense-heavy philosophy, defensively deficient personnel, questionable draft day decisions, dearth of useful trade assets, etc. who knows when or if this team will turn the corner". ????
LOL! again its been one year bro.... LOL! Petrie would have never traded Marcus Thornton for basically Reggie Evans. Draft wise those last years. Petrie took Spencer Hawes, Jimmer, Quincy Douby, can't Fault anyone for taking Thomas Robinson or Ben McL. cause those were "no brainers at the time" although both had mental flags.
Patchwork? Salmons , Patterson, Hayes ,GV for Gay? thats patchwork? he played at an all-star caliber after coming to Sacramento. ??? plus we UNLOADED A BUNCH OF PETRIES PATCHWORK. Same with the Thornton trade. the only thing you have to claim might be patch work was landry which most of us on here have figured out wasn't even as much about what he was gonna do on the court as much as it was to support Malone and bring some mental stability .
Also while we don't currently have the most appealing trade assets by all-star break that will be a different story...
we're at least not taking on more terrible deals. Collision is very reasonable considering that Avery Bradley deal jeez... he can be the answer at PG for a little bit or slide to back up.
Anyway this offseason isn't even over yet. breath buddy . maybe change your profile pic to a rainbow and smiling sun.
LOL! again its been one year bro.... LOL! Petrie would have never traded Marcus Thornton for basically Reggie Evans. Draft wise those last years. Petrie took Spencer Hawes, Jimmer, Quincy Douby, can't Fault anyone for taking Thomas Robinson or Ben McL. cause those were "no brainers at the time" although both had mental flags.
Patchwork? Salmons , Patterson, Hayes ,GV for Gay? thats patchwork? he played at an all-star caliber after coming to Sacramento. ??? plus we UNLOADED A BUNCH OF PETRIES PATCHWORK. Same with the Thornton trade. the only thing you have to claim might be patch work was landry which most of us on here have figured out wasn't even as much about what he was gonna do on the court as much as it was to support Malone and bring some mental stability .
Also while we don't currently have the most appealing trade assets by all-star break that will be a different story...
we're at least not taking on more terrible deals. Collision is very reasonable considering that Avery Bradley deal jeez... he can be the answer at PG for a little bit or slide to back up.
Anyway this offseason isn't even over yet. breath buddy . maybe change your profile pic to a rainbow and smiling sun.
All this chatter about Collison vs IT's ability to distribute the ball and run an offense is meaningless then, isn't it? Will we get worse? Something was jamming up team play last year. I think part of it was IT. If Collison is a bit of a ball hog or chucker, let's see how he reacts when he is on team with Boogie and Gay. Chemistry can't be measured and sometimes just can't be predicted. We see it on the court when it is good and see it on the court when it is bad. We have seen a lot of bad.
In the end, all the stats in the world do not tell us how Collison will fit with the team re: chemistry. Predicting the ability to fit with the team, OUR team, may be in the mental attitude. IT wanted to show the world he was the best little guy in the NBA. You don't get that reputation by assisting. You get it by scoring and he was damn good. If Collison is more passive, he may be more inclined to find a role for himself. That means distributing and the occasional 3 pt shot. We don't need an All Star nor could we afford one.
I really can't knock this pick up as the more ideal choices were unrealistic.
In the end, all the stats in the world do not tell us how Collison will fit with the team re: chemistry. Predicting the ability to fit with the team, OUR team, may be in the mental attitude. IT wanted to show the world he was the best little guy in the NBA. You don't get that reputation by assisting. You get it by scoring and he was damn good. If Collison is more passive, he may be more inclined to find a role for himself. That means distributing and the occasional 3 pt shot. We don't need an All Star nor could we afford one.
I really can't knock this pick up as the more ideal choices were unrealistic.
Last edited:
I'll reserve judgment on this move until the offseason is over.
A little over $5mm per year is the right value for a decent rotation player who comes off the bench.
If we re-sign IT and make no other moves, I'm fine with it. That is also likely a vote of no-confidence or little confidence in Ben.
If we trade IT for Rondo or another good PG, I'm fine with Collison in the rotation.
If we let IT walk and start Collison I will be very upset. IT at $8mm is better than Collison at 5.
A little over $5mm per year is the right value for a decent rotation player who comes off the bench.
If we re-sign IT and make no other moves, I'm fine with it. That is also likely a vote of no-confidence or little confidence in Ben.
If we trade IT for Rondo or another good PG, I'm fine with Collison in the rotation.
If we let IT walk and start Collison I will be very upset. IT at $8mm is better than Collison at 5.
Nice straw man approach to Kingsfans. The vast majority of posters are happy with the acquisition but you choose to nitpick a few who aren't and then lecture us about it? Shake your head all you like, but KF is still around because we do analyze, discuss, argue, debate, etc. Yes, some people may go overboard at times but isn't that exactly what sports message boards are all about? Geez...
First, honoring a brilliant late actor isn't depressing.
Second, you're significantly overrating those moves.
Gay was viewed as untradable by most of the league and we sent expirings which have arguably worked out better for Toronto than us.
And thorntons deal was broken into 2 deals expiring the same time. Wasn't much else we could do with it but let's not act like it was a brilliant steal.
The front office was dealt a crappy hand. They've had moves that turned that crap into potentially more valuable pieces. They've also had moves that potentially added more crap .
Second, you're significantly overrating those moves.
Gay was viewed as untradable by most of the league and we sent expirings which have arguably worked out better for Toronto than us.
And thorntons deal was broken into 2 deals expiring the same time. Wasn't much else we could do with it but let's not act like it was a brilliant steal.
The front office was dealt a crappy hand. They've had moves that turned that crap into potentially more valuable pieces. They've also had moves that potentially added more crap .
This is a good signing and a slight upgrade. And I say this being an IT fan.
For those that like to compare stats, DC played almost 10 mins less than IT and took about 7 shots less a game. You need to factor that in.
I've always liked DC as a player and always wondered why did the Pelicans trade him after 1 rookie season where he played exceptionally well. The crazy thing is right after they traded him, they said the hole that they need to fill is a back up PG for Cliff Paul. I'm thinking its more on CP and not DC, at least I hope so.
Other than that, I think if given the same minutes and shots, Collison will have much similar production as IT. But the increase in size and defense, even little, helps.
For those that like to compare stats, DC played almost 10 mins less than IT and took about 7 shots less a game. You need to factor that in.
I've always liked DC as a player and always wondered why did the Pelicans trade him after 1 rookie season where he played exceptionally well. The crazy thing is right after they traded him, they said the hole that they need to fill is a back up PG for Cliff Paul. I'm thinking its more on CP and not DC, at least I hope so.
Other than that, I think if given the same minutes and shots, Collison will have much similar production as IT. But the increase in size and defense, even little, helps.
i'm not even sure how to respond to this kind of hyperventilating over a very reasonable assessment of the new regime's work thus far. ya know, the good and the bad. it's quite ironic that you're suggesting i stop to breathe, though; you might consider making use of fewer emphatic punctuations and fewer all-caps exclamations when attempting to illustrate even-handedness. i'd hate to see how you might try and talk someone down from a ledge...
i'm not even sure how to respond to this kind of hyperventilating over a very reasonable assessment of the new regime's work thus far. ya know, the good and the bad. it's quite ironic that you're suggesting i stop to breathe, though; you might consider making use of fewer emphatic punctuations and fewer all-caps exclamations when attempting to illustrate even-handedness. i'd hate to see how you might try and talk someone down from a ledge...
I think you should cc this to Gary. It wasn't me that used the word, "dominate," in the post.
Also, making moves on the basis of several "ifs" is a foolish endeavor, indeed. Stauskas is unproven, McCallum hasn't seen close to a full season at pg, Gay didn't show any evidence whatsoever that he could be a point forward, and even Cousins up to this point makes more TOs than assists. So if we're adding Collison and subtracting Thomas from that mix, I think there's a good chance we're going backward, not forward, in aggregate ballhandling. (If they retain Thomas or add another good ballhandler to the mix, that's a different story). Now an excellent coach might be able to have an offense incorporating a lot of movement and little dribbling with that group, but it remains to be seen if Malone is that guy. He'd have to transform Gay and Cousins to being much less ISO oriented. However, I saw nothing in the offense last year to indicate something other than ISO would be forthcoming. At the least, I'd like to hear a plan from Malone on how he's going to institute a motion offense with these guys and how they're all excited to buy-in. Until then, I'm not buying-in.
Also, making moves on the basis of several "ifs" is a foolish endeavor, indeed. Stauskas is unproven, McCallum hasn't seen close to a full season at pg, Gay didn't show any evidence whatsoever that he could be a point forward, and even Cousins up to this point makes more TOs than assists. So if we're adding Collison and subtracting Thomas from that mix, I think there's a good chance we're going backward, not forward, in aggregate ballhandling. (If they retain Thomas or add another good ballhandler to the mix, that's a different story). Now an excellent coach might be able to have an offense incorporating a lot of movement and little dribbling with that group, but it remains to be seen if Malone is that guy. He'd have to transform Gay and Cousins to being much less ISO oriented. However, I saw nothing in the offense last year to indicate something other than ISO would be forthcoming. At the least, I'd like to hear a plan from Malone on how he's going to institute a motion offense with these guys and how they're all excited to buy-in. Until then, I'm not buying-in.
i'm not even sure how to respond to this kind of hyperventilating over a very reasonable assessment of the new regime's work thus far. ya know, the good and the bad. it's quite ironic that you're suggesting i stop to breathe, though; you might consider making use of fewer emphatic punctuations and fewer all-caps exclamations when attempting to illustrate even-handedness. i'd hate to see how you might try and talk someone down from a ledge...
Hello? Who are you and what have you done with sactownfan? (And yes, I know I've said that at least once before...)
Padrino is Padrino just like you're you. He is not a glass-half-full person. He is, however, fair and articulate and well-versed in all things Kings.
You're acting as though there's a lot more negativity in Padrino's posts than I'm seeing and I am (especially after cataract surgery) able to spot complete negativity a mile away,
It's all good, stf.
Padrino is Padrino just like you're you. He is not a glass-half-full person. He is, however, fair and articulate and well-versed in all things Kings.
You're acting as though there's a lot more negativity in Padrino's posts than I'm seeing and I am (especially after cataract surgery) able to spot complete negativity a mile away,
It's all good, stf.
Not totally related to Collison, but I was curious about something so I figured I'd share my results here.
Ray McCallum as a starter (Only 10 games) 13.8 PPG, 7.3 AST, .365 FG%, .357 3P%
I mean, who knows what his potential or future is, but I know I saw some things I really liked out of him. He played fairly well considering the circumstances and limited opportunities.
Ray McCallum as a starter (Only 10 games) 13.8 PPG, 7.3 AST, .365 FG%, .357 3P%
I mean, who knows what his potential or future is, but I know I saw some things I really liked out of him. He played fairly well considering the circumstances and limited opportunities.
i think the assumption is that nik stauskas will be able to handle the ball in significant measure. that's my read on what the kings are planning, at any rate. i'm not fond of entrusting unproven rookies with so much responsibility, but his ballhandling and playmaking abilities have been well-scouted, and they're top-notch for a SG prospect...
My initial reaction is that offensively, Collison is likely to be a better fit than IT. Much more willing to give up the rock and play off the ball. More of a ball mover. Ast% as usual is misleading and it's also dependent on usage% and the number of ballhandlers on the floor. We saw that with Vasquez in NO. His Ast% was inflated due to being the only ballhandler on the floor much of the time. A worry is Collisons is not a good in catch and shoot situations for up top or on the wings from 3, however from the corners on assisted 3's he's pretty good. Spacing would have to be correct with Collisons floating more to the corners with Stauskas spreading the floor up top.
When Collison steps inside the arc, from 18-22ft, he's a considerably better shooter from the wings and off the elbows. With the attention Boogie draws, he will get a number of shots elbow extended off Boogie kickouts. That's a plus.
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=201954
My main concern is defense. He's not a good defender. He's a bit better than IT but that's not saying much. If the plan is a Collisons/Stauskas backcourt, we're at a disadvantage on that end, although it will be better than IT/Ben.
I would think ideally, Collisons is more a top gap for a year as a starting PG and a year from now the hope is Ray is either ready to step into the starting role or we drop Ray, get another starting PG and move Collisons to backup point.
This biggest bonus here for me is that while IT is clearly a better and more talented player, Collisons is better at running a team and more willing to step back and play off the focal points of the offense. He won't be coming here to prove to the world he's the next Iverson and demanding respect for being a scoring point, which should fit better with Rudy/Boogie.
When Collison steps inside the arc, from 18-22ft, he's a considerably better shooter from the wings and off the elbows. With the attention Boogie draws, he will get a number of shots elbow extended off Boogie kickouts. That's a plus.
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=201954
My main concern is defense. He's not a good defender. He's a bit better than IT but that's not saying much. If the plan is a Collisons/Stauskas backcourt, we're at a disadvantage on that end, although it will be better than IT/Ben.
I would think ideally, Collisons is more a top gap for a year as a starting PG and a year from now the hope is Ray is either ready to step into the starting role or we drop Ray, get another starting PG and move Collisons to backup point.
This biggest bonus here for me is that while IT is clearly a better and more talented player, Collisons is better at running a team and more willing to step back and play off the focal points of the offense. He won't be coming here to prove to the world he's the next Iverson and demanding respect for being a scoring point, which should fit better with Rudy/Boogie.
Last edited:
Agreed. And that's why I like this move. He may be a stop gap, but he represents more of a shift toward a balanced offense. I also don't think he's a poor defender. At worst he's average. Thomas was well below average, so it's still an upgrade. A 3 year commitment doesn't say "we've found our PG of the future" it says Ray isn't ready yet and we don't have money to spend this summer on anyone substantially better.
I'm assuming we did this because the FO knows IT is no longer in their price range. I'll bet Collison is getting the contract that they were going to offer IT. IT's offense is superior but Collison is no slouch. Collison actually plays defense. I'm very confident that Stauskas will soften the blow of losing IT's scoring (assuming we lose IT).
I'll just add, this isn't about who's the better player. IT is without a doubt a more talented player than Collison. It's about fit. On paper, this is a better fit. In terms of salary, it's also a better deal.
Is this the upgrade at point we all wanted or hoped for? No. Is it an upgrade in terms of chemistry and meshing with Rudy/Boogie? Most likely yes.
A clear positive I'll take from this, although it's partly an assumption, is that PDA/FO appears to be planning on Rudy/Boogie being the main focal points and the team around them must compliment them and put them in a position to have the most success. A scoring PG does not accomplish that. Of course we need a defensive PF and some 3&D guys as well, but this is a start. It tells me the FO at least understands the hierarchy argument and Rudy/Boogie need to be the focal points, get touches and have everything run off them, rather than being in competition for the rock.
That's a positive change from the previous regime who not only put numerous chuckers out on the floor, but chuckers who are ball dominant and/or are more volume shooters to get into a rhythm. That never meshed nor will it ever mesh. We've now got Rudy/Boogie as focal points and ball dominant players, surrounded by a Stauskas who's fine off the ball and Collisons who's more than willing to play off the ball.
That is better balance. Not ideal, but a positive step.
Is this the upgrade at point we all wanted or hoped for? No. Is it an upgrade in terms of chemistry and meshing with Rudy/Boogie? Most likely yes.
A clear positive I'll take from this, although it's partly an assumption, is that PDA/FO appears to be planning on Rudy/Boogie being the main focal points and the team around them must compliment them and put them in a position to have the most success. A scoring PG does not accomplish that. Of course we need a defensive PF and some 3&D guys as well, but this is a start. It tells me the FO at least understands the hierarchy argument and Rudy/Boogie need to be the focal points, get touches and have everything run off them, rather than being in competition for the rock.
That's a positive change from the previous regime who not only put numerous chuckers out on the floor, but chuckers who are ball dominant and/or are more volume shooters to get into a rhythm. That never meshed nor will it ever mesh. We've now got Rudy/Boogie as focal points and ball dominant players, surrounded by a Stauskas who's fine off the ball and Collisons who's more than willing to play off the ball.
That is better balance. Not ideal, but a positive step.
I really like this move. Collison will be a solid, but not flashy point guard. He will do as he is asked by Coach Malone.
I think he will have a break out year in a stable situation. I can see him having a year similar to Goran Dragic did with Phoenix this year. Dragic bounced around for a few years until he landed in his ideal situation with the Suns this year and I think Collison will do the same.
I have been a UCLA fan here in So.Cal and watched Collison since he was a freshman. He is a solid, team-first type of player. He will work his tail off in defense and he is not a ball hog, but can score when asked to.
I predict he will be a solid started and defender and get DMC and Gay the ball more efficiently than IT.
I can easily see him averaging 14-15ppg and 6-7assist/game and 1.5 steals per game as a starter. I think he will be a top candidate for the NBA most improved player award next year.
Now if they can do a S&T for IT and Thompson or Landry for a defensive big,( i.e. Josh Smith or Larry Sanders) this would be a very good off season.
I think he will have a break out year in a stable situation. I can see him having a year similar to Goran Dragic did with Phoenix this year. Dragic bounced around for a few years until he landed in his ideal situation with the Suns this year and I think Collison will do the same.
I have been a UCLA fan here in So.Cal and watched Collison since he was a freshman. He is a solid, team-first type of player. He will work his tail off in defense and he is not a ball hog, but can score when asked to.
I predict he will be a solid started and defender and get DMC and Gay the ball more efficiently than IT.
I can easily see him averaging 14-15ppg and 6-7assist/game and 1.5 steals per game as a starter. I think he will be a top candidate for the NBA most improved player award next year.
Now if they can do a S&T for IT and Thompson or Landry for a defensive big,( i.e. Josh Smith or Larry Sanders) this would be a very good off season.
So much to be excited about. But yet some still feel the need to be negative about every minute detail, and move. Those who speak negativity 24/7 on here, I assume, would find a way to bash a LeBron James acquisition, or something similar to that. Calm down people...The Titanic was never built over night. The Sacramento Kings won't, either....
