[Game] Kings v. Pacers, Saturday, Dec. 1 (7PT/10ET)

Capt. Factorial

Cantry Member
Staff member
And if a ref calls a charge instead of a blocking foul. Those techs don't do crap. Or if a buddy shot rattles in, those technicals don't cost us a game. That's the thing, a point in the 1st quarter doesn't come back to haunt you because so many factors come into play after the fact that could change the game.
Of course those techs do do crap. They cost points. The thing is, all of those other factors that come into play we don't have control over.

Ref makes a bad call? We don't have any control over it.
Shot rattles out? We don't have any control over it.
We get called for two technicals? Oh, wait, we had full control over that. We didn't have to argue in the face of the official, but we did.

I mean, if Dave Joerger went to the official scorer at halftime and said, "Hey, we're feeling cocky, why don't you just add two points to Indiana's score", and the scorer actually did so, would you think that was totally cool, because there's lots of other factors? Or would you find it to be a completely unnecessary move that would have the potential to cost us the game if the game ends up close?

To put it another way, if sometime during the middle of the game while Fox was dribbling up court he had stopped, picked up his dribble, kindly handed the ball over to Collison and just let Collison go back for an uncontested layup, hey, that's OK. We shouldn't have any problem with that because those two points "don't do crap", right?
 
Last edited:

Kingster

Hall of Famer
It got in his head and he became a liability on offense. Getting the ball down low and becoming too tentative and kicking the ball out. Not only did his missed shots at the rim get in his head but the missed free throws got in his head too because you could tell Willie wanted no part of holding on to the ball long enough to get fouled. He was screwing up on the offense on multiple possessions all night. They probably win by 6 or 7 if Willie had just played a normal game. Then he goes out and gets the winning bucket. Crazy game.
At the very beginning of the game WCS missed on three straight possessions at point blank range on great assists from Fox. That's six points right there, not counting the fact that he might have gotten a plus one. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say he left at least 10 easy points on the floor in this game, and that doesn't even include free throws.
 
Of course those techs do do crap. They cost points. The thing is, all of those other factors that come into play we don't have control over.

Ref makes a bad call? We don't have any control over it.
Shot rattles out? We don't have any control over it.
We get called for two technicals? Oh, wait, we had full control over that. We didn't have to argue in the face of the official, but we did.

I mean, if Dave Joerger went to the official scorer at halftime and said, "Hey, we're feeling cocky, why don't you just add two points to Indiana's score", and the scorer actually did so, would you think that was totally cool, because there's lots of other factors? Or would you find it to be a completely unnecessary move that would have the potential to cost us the game if the game ends up close?

To put it another way, if sometime during the middle of the game while Fox was dribbling up court he had stopped, picked up his dribble, kindly handed the ball over to Collison and just let Collison go back for an uncontested layup, hey, that's OK. We shouldn't have any problem with that because those two points "don't do crap", right?
You’re right, of course. But because Grant makes such a big deal about it (and harps and harps), I find myself wanting to say that focusing on two technicals all through the game is a defeatist’s attitude. Just go out and play like you can play and beat these guys! But, yeah, games are won by 1 point. Point taken. Now can we drop it?!!
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
If we got dominated in the paint again the issue should be obvious to everyone by now

Fox now with a relatively struggling 4 games, hopes he snaps out

Giles, though playing better and being nice eventually, can’t be relied upon to play winning basketball just yet (hence RPM and Joerger shying away in a tight game). Still needs to improve rim protection and rebounding
If I apply the "what have you done for me lately" test, Giles is a better defender than WCS, certainly not a worse rim protector or rebounder than WCS, and by far a superior offensive threat to WCS, especially when you factor in free throws. That is why I don't quite understand the lack of any time for Giles. I appreciate the fact that Joerger wants to win, but I don't see at all that Giles is inferior to WCS. If anything, Giles should get minutes to enhance the ability of this team to win.
 
I wanted to see Giles out there as well but playing Koufos was the smart play if winning the game was the end goal. Sabonis is a terror out there and would have probably carved Giles up. I don't know if there is a better backup big man in the league right now.

Sabonis pulled down some boards and had some assists but Koufos had a big hand in keeping Sabonis at 6 points with 7 turnovers. Also had zero free throws and Giles certainly would have fouled him and sent him to the line.
 
Fox had a rough shooting night, but actually pulled a rabbit out of a hat late in the game with his defense. He dished the ball well. He found a way to win. Bogie and Bjelica played well. Willie had a good night in some ways. Better rebounding.

The Kings dominated most of the categories in this game. The one glaring exception is points in the paint where we got killed. This is a consistent theme and needs to get fixed. Koufus helped on defense. He needs to get the rust off on offense. KK is part of the solution to stopping other teams under the basket. Bagley may be. Willie probably never will be.

When you can straight lock someone down it smooths out the damage of bad offensive stretches.
 
Of course those techs do do crap. They cost points. The thing is, all of those other factors that come into play we don't have control over.

Ref makes a bad call? We don't have any control over it.
Shot rattles out? We don't have any control over it.
We get called for two technicals? Oh, wait, we had full control over that. We didn't have to argue in the face of the official, but we did.

I mean, if Dave Joerger went to the official scorer at halftime and said, "Hey, we're feeling cocky, why don't you just add two points to Indiana's score", and the scorer actually did so, would you think that was totally cool, because there's lots of other factors? Or would you find it to be a completely unnecessary move that would have the potential to cost us the game if the game ends up close?

To put it another way, if sometime during the middle of the game while Fox was dribbling up court he had stopped, picked up his dribble, kindly handed the ball over to Collison and just let Collison go back for an uncontested layup, hey, that's OK. We shouldn't have any problem with that because those two points "don't do crap", right?
Another way to look it changes the game. Those 2 points also mean the Pacers and Kings maybe call different plays based on time and score. Maybe the Pacers are behind and draw up a 3pt play that they make instead of a turnover protecting the lead.
 
Giles would be more viable if he weren't fouling at an astronomical rate.
Well that problem certainly got taken care of yesterday.

Not sure if any reporters asked Joerger why Giles didn't play but it really is a mystery. I'd imagine he could have really helped too when the offense was a mess half the game and nobody could make a pass or hold onto a pass. That is one thing Giles can do well, catch the ball and pass the ball.
 
I believe I see the reason buddy really did not play in the end.
He wanted fox and Bogdan running the team with a good defensive stopper at SF. In other words he felt the need to play a grind out game at the end. If we needed more than 3 points at the end buddy would be in.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
I wanted to see Giles out there as well but playing Koufos was the smart play if winning the game was the end goal. Sabonis is a terror out there and would have probably carved Giles up. I don't know if there is a better backup big man in the league right now.

Sabonis pulled down some boards and had some assists but Koufos had a big hand in keeping Sabonis at 6 points with 7 turnovers. Also had zero free throws and Giles certainly would have fouled him and sent him to the line.
I wouldn't take minutes from Koufos. I'd take them from WCS to give to Giles.
 
I wouldn't take minutes from Koufos. I'd take them from WCS to give to Giles.
wtf? where is this coming from? harry giles has not proved he's deserved big minutes. i really don't understand the fascination around him. in his "good game" the other game he was still 5-14 in a blown out game where he was -15.

WCS gave us 17pts 13rebs including the game winning shot.
 
At the very beginning of the game WCS missed on three straight possessions at point blank range on great assists from Fox. That's six points right there, not counting the fact that he might have gotten a plus one. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say he left at least 10 easy points on the floor in this game, and that doesn't even include free throws.
yeah but then he hit 8 of his next 10 shots shooting 61% for the game. he also had 6 offensive rebounds. that is 6 extra chances for a basket!
and I doubt everyone else was without mistakes
 
How long is Bagley3 going to be out? Over the last 6 games he has put up impressive stats. 16p/10r/2a/1b per game. (28 mins per game). Noticed earlier today that the whole WC except for Phoenix are at/near/over .500... Wow!
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
How long is Bagley3 going to be out? Over the last 6 games he has put up impressive stats. 16p/10r/2a/1b per game. (28 mins per game). Noticed earlier today that the whole WC except for Phoenix are at/near/over .500... Wow!
out of all the years I've watched basketball, it's never been this entertaining to be honest. Parity really gives the league a much needed breath of fresh air, in my opinion.
 
If I apply the "what have you done for me lately" test, Giles is a better defender than WCS, certainly not a worse rim protector or rebounder than WCS, and by far a superior offensive threat to WCS, especially when you factor in free throws. That is why I don't quite understand the lack of any time for Giles. I appreciate the fact that Joerger wants to win, but I don't see at all that Giles is inferior to WCS. If anything, Giles should get minutes to enhance the ability of this team to win.
It's hard to trade a guy who doesn't start for anything of value.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Contributor
Well that problem certainly got taken care of yesterday.

Not sure if any reporters asked Joerger why Giles didn't play but it really is a mystery. I'd imagine he could have really helped too when the offense was a mess half the game and nobody could make a pass or hold onto a pass. That is one thing Giles can do well, catch the ball and pass the ball.
No, it isn't. As others have said, it's all about matchups - and the fact we desperately needed Koufos, especially with MB3 out. Giles simply could not compete with Sabonis. You know it, I know it, the Pacers know it and the Kings know it. He would have fouled out in minutes.
 
Of course those techs do do crap. They cost points. The thing is, all of those other factors that come into play we don't have control over.

Ref makes a bad call? We don't have any control over it.
Shot rattles out? We don't have any control over it.
We get called for two technicals? Oh, wait, we had full control over that. We didn't have to argue in the face of the official, but we did.

I mean, if Dave Joerger went to the official scorer at halftime and said, "Hey, we're feeling cocky, why don't you just add two points to Indiana's score", and the scorer actually did so, would you think that was totally cool, because there's lots of other factors? Or would you find it to be a completely unnecessary move that would have the potential to cost us the game if the game ends up close?

To put it another way, if sometime during the middle of the game while Fox was dribbling up court he had stopped, picked up his dribble, kindly handed the ball over to Collison and just let Collison go back for an uncontested layup, hey, that's OK. We shouldn't have any problem with that because those two points "don't do crap", right?
Getting a T called has some amount of chance, just like a shot rattling around the rim. I was at the game, and Collison could have been called for a T in the 4th with the way he reacted to a specific call. Without knowing what Buddy said, his T looked to be a similar to Collison's reaction. I disagree that any of the Kings have control over what another human being does on the court, including the refs. Sure, they can decrease the probability to near zero but there are no guarantees.

I also disagree with your premise that getting T's is like throwing points away or Joerger just asking to add two points to the other team. First, the tech FT is not a guaranteed point. Second, there could be some added value in either Joerger backing up a player on his team, getting a point across to the official, or simply blowing off some steam. One could argue that's all worth the expected value of a FT.
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
This would be true if durant stayed away but come May GSW won’t lose more than 3-4 games in the playoffs
maybe so, but you best believe the rest of the West will be fighting tooth and nail for their spots and will be tough outs if not facing the Warriors
 
Getting a T called has some amount of chance, just like a shot rattling around the rim. I was at the game, and Collison could have been called for a T in the 4th with the way he reacted to a specific call. Without knowing what Buddy said, his T looked to be a similar to Collison's reaction. I disagree that any of the Kings have control over what another human being does on the court, including the refs. Sure, they can decrease the probability to near zero but there are no guarantees.

I also disagree with your premise that getting T's is like throwing points away or Joerger just asking to add two points to the other team. First, the tech FT is not a guaranteed point. Second, there could be some added value in either Joerger backing up a player on his team, getting a point across to the official, or simply blowing off some steam. One could argue that's all worth the expected value of a FT.
I totally agree with your take on the T's. Grant really wears me out with his obsession over the "remember those 2 points" line EVERY SINGLE GAME, whether it be a technical, a bad turnover, missed layup, or whatever. He acts like the game will end and then they will add the 2 points to the other team's score. It doesn't work like that. The points were given up well prior to that and the game is being played differently from that point on based on whatever the score is at that time. He really just needs to drop it.
 
Sometimes a T works to your advantage, especiallly if it comes from a quiet player that is not a complainer. It makes the refs think.
Sometimes a coach will get one on purpose to fire up his team.
Yep agreed. When a well mannered guy like Buddy Hield complains or gets a tech it probably means something and a good ref will think to themselves "maybe I got that one wrong" or "I better pay attention to ......."

The guys (like Cousins) that complain to the refs after every single foul called against them are really doing themselves a disservice. Subconsciously that has to have an effect on the refs. They're not going to believe your word and probably not going to like you too. You're better off just putting your arm up in agreement and acknowledging when you commit a blatant foul and not arguing when you yourself are not sure. It's about putting in equity to where your word means something and who knows down the line on a close call that equity may pay off.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
wtf? where is this coming from? harry giles has not proved he's deserved big minutes. i really don't understand the fascination around him. in his "good game" the other game he was still 5-14 in a blown out game where he was -15.

WCS gave us 17pts 13rebs including the game winning shot.
To my mind, WCS has not proven a thing. In fact, he's had 3+ years to prove something and he hasn't. He's on my "very skeptical" list. Giles, on the other hand, is coming on strong in the past few games; he's certainly looked better than WCS.