He's just too slow to guard PGs. Add to the fact he isn't 100% (or atleast claims he isn't) and he's going to struggle. Not to mention JT and Cuz are lazy help defenders. They will go after the PG if they can block the shot, but when they can't they don't even really try and contest. He really need an Anthony Davis backing him up.
[Game] Kings vs. Clippers, 29 Nov 2013, 22:00 EST
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
He's just too slow to guard PGs. Add to the fact he isn't 100% (or atleast claims he isn't) and he's going to struggle. Not to mention JT and Cuz are lazy help defenders. They will go after the PG if they can block the shot, but when they can't they don't even really try and contest. He really need an Anthony Davis backing him up.
HereWeBoogie
Hall of Famer
Vasquez continues to kill us on D by getting blown by on every play. and the next 2 opponents don't get any easier. Curry and Westbrook. yikes
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Which is the reason he seems to get minutes, or at least did. When you had Reke and Cousins out there together the best fit was the guy who knew how to stay out of the way. He's got the most role player type of qualities, or did, at the time.
Bottom line, tonight the Kings were at their best in the 4th with Patterson, Williams, and Cousins out there together.
Entity
Hall of Famer
Well of course cuz can't help Vasquez. Remember he spends the whole night helping JT
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10052149/biggest-ball-hogs-league
Isaiah was 6th in ESPN's ball hog statistic which was time of possession between passes. (Isaiah was at 6.7 sec before each pass, Westbrook led the league at 7.8) Then they had a black hole statistic which was lowest rate of passes per shot attempt, and Thornton was 4th. (Averaging 1.63 passes per shot attempt, Klay Thompson led the league at 1.3)
Just an interesting article to me.
Isaiah was 6th in ESPN's ball hog statistic which was time of possession between passes. (Isaiah was at 6.7 sec before each pass, Westbrook led the league at 7.8) Then they had a black hole statistic which was lowest rate of passes per shot attempt, and Thornton was 4th. (Averaging 1.63 passes per shot attempt, Klay Thompson led the league at 1.3)
Just an interesting article to me.
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
Yes, it basically has. Ben hasn't been helped to the rim much at all by his team. Tonight was a different story and the only difference was our new man. Ironically, Williams who was receiving much doubt about his ability to play the 3, came right out and and set up Ben better than our point guards have
HereWeBoogie
Hall of Famer
JT was out there fumbling passes, dribbling off his feet, losing the ball, and had an astonishing 6pts and 4reb in 23 minutes
How dare you say anything bad about JT?!?!
You know what's really astonishing? How all of this alleged pass fumbling, foot dribbling and ball losing only resulted in one turnover. The way you describe his game, you'd have thought he'd had at least two...
And, yeah, turns out that it can be difficult to get rebounds when the guy you're guarding is camped out around twenty feet from the basket. Who knew?
ShastaKingsFan
All-Star
Can we see McCallum already. What are they waiting for
TheBadGuy
Bench
Bye now!
K
KingMilz
Guest
Trade Vasquez for Shumpert maybe try throw in a 3year deal Kings player and maybe get Felton back for him if they are unwilling to do it straight up
So he picked up 4 fouls in 20 minutes guarding someone camped out on the perimeter? Who knew?
Based on the fact that the Kings outscored the Clippers by 20 inside, I'm guessing everybody. Griffin only hit two field goals in the paint, all night, and both of them came when Patterson was guarding him.
So is Thompson not a problem to you? I can't imagine anybody thinking this guy is a starter in this league.
When we have somebody better, get back to me. In case it escaped your memory, Malone already tried starting Patterson, and it failed spectacularly.
The problem isn't Thompson. It isn't even really Patterson. The problem is that we have three backup PF's, and no starters. None of those guys ought to be starting, but Thompson is slightly less awful than the alternatives.
The problem isn't Thompson. It isn't even really Patterson. The problem is that we have three backup PF's, and no starters. None of those guys ought to be starting, but Thompson is slightly less awful than the alternatives.
Last edited:
TheBadGuy
Bench
Just awhile ago you were saying JT didn't do a good job, then you said "How dare you say anything bad about JT?!?!" , then you're criticizing JT again as per your post.
I didn't say we had anything better right now either so I don't know what were arguing. You defend him like you believe he's a good starter in this league, though..
I'm not defending him. I'm simply saying that your perception of his play is not particularly based on facts, and that your sense of his "awfulness" is skewed.
Thompson is, actually, very good at what he does, but there are many Kings Fans who resent him for what he doesn't do, because they expect him to be something that he isn't and, frankly, never has been. Nor was he ever advertised as being.
Thompson is a good fit as a specialist, role playing, third big. It's not his fault that we don't have a legitimate second big.
EDIT - Okay, so I guess now I'm defending him...
Thompson is, actually, very good at what he does, but there are many Kings Fans who resent him for what he doesn't do, because they expect him to be something that he isn't and, frankly, never has been. Nor was he ever advertised as being.
Thompson is a good fit as a specialist, role playing, third big. It's not his fault that we don't have a legitimate second big.
EDIT - Okay, so I guess now I'm defending him...
Last edited:
TheBadGuy
Bench
Then you would you want to start? PPat? he was benched by Malone because of his poor play, Landry is still injured, Hayes? if the team wants to tank maybe they can start him.
A specialist? A specialist is a Thabo Sefolosha or a Jared Dudley. Those are specialists, and valuable as hell if not overpaid. JT is not a specialist. I guess at best he's a 3rd big. But I believe we could get the same production on both ends of the floor from a guy like Ryan Hollins IMO.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Most people here think Thompson is a solid guy off the bench but we have no starter so he is the starter.
Your definition of specialist is too narrow to be taken seriously. Roughly two thirds of the players in the league could be accurately classified as "specialists."
That's all well, and to the good, as far as it goes, but if we can't get Hollins to sign in Sacramento, that's kind of moot. You know else would give us much better production, for less money? Chris Andersen. Let me know when we can sign him...
Ok but my point was that Hollins has been nothing more than a journeyman fighting to stay in rotations his whole career and I believe in 20 min a night he would pretty much do exactly what our starting PF does getting paid 7 mill a year. I'm done talking about JT but I still don't think he is a very good NBA player. Borderline 3rd big.
You're entitled to your opinion, just like I'm entitled to mine. My opinion is that your player evaluation skills are somewhat suspect.
It's not his fault that we don't have a legitimate second big, but like you said he's pretty much been our second big for 4-5 years now. So why shouldn't we judge him as our second big? So I take it that you had zero issues with the Landry signing, and that we shouldn't resent him for what he doesn't do (block shots, rebound) because he was never advertised as being a defensive big man?
Oh, Marcus Thornton, Vasquez and IT play terrible D. But we can't blame them for our terrible perimeter defense because it's not their fault that we haven't put an elite perimeter defender next to them. It's not their job to be all-defense players.
I actually don't disagree with you on JT's play. He does a decent job as a roleplaying 3rd big, ala Udonis Haslem when Wade won his first ring. He hasn't improved very much over his career but you know what you're getting from him. I also get that you think JT receives a lot more criticism than he deserves, when he isn't really the source of the team's problems. JT is by no means or in any way "awful". I just think you're extremely quick to jump down others' throats any time they say JT isn't doing a good job, and this argument that we should just look past all and any holes in his game because he's supposed to be a 3rd big is a little silly if you asked me. I mean, hello John Salmons actually does a decent job if you pigeon-hole him as a role-playing backup wing player who defends a little, scores a little and makes plays. It's not his fault we haven't had a legit SF and he's forced into a starter role(OR IS IT? :O) But everyone (including myself) always criticizes his play. Don't see you jumping in then ...
On the contrary, I had very much of a problem with the Landry signing, and the two things are not remotely equivalent. Landry was a player we already had, in his prime, who failed to unseat Thompson in the rotation, and now he has been brought back to fill a role he doesn't actually fit into on this team. At least, in Thompson's case, we need someone who can do what he does; we just don't need it in the starting lineup. We don't particularly need someone who does what Landry does.
I will also say that your assessment of me "jumping down others' throats" is not entirely accurate. I don't like to see players get criticized for **** that is ostensibly made up, is all. You never see me "jumping down the throat" of someone criticizing Thompson's decision making, or his shot selection. You almost never see me "jumping down the throat" of someone who criticizes Thompson for complaining about calls, except for the handful of posters who have convinced themselves that he's the only player in the entire league who does that, or that he does it the most of any player in the league. You never see me "jumping down the throat" of someone who criticizes Vasquez for his defense. You brought up Salmons, and say you don't see me "jumping in then". You know why that is? Because there isn't a vocal minority of people on this message board making **** up about John Salmons out of whole cloth, that's why. Nobody is criticizing Salmons for reasons that aren't valid. When people start slamming Salmons for **** that's not actually happening, you bet your ass I'll "jump down their throat." But that hasn't happened, so I don't feel the need to.
I'm a pedant, mac, and you've been around here long enough that you oughta know that. I don't much care how bad posters dog the players, as long as they "get their nomenclatures correct," so to speak. Don't bash the guy for fumbling the ball off his hands all game long, when he only has one turnover, is all I'm saying. Don't say that he's getting "bullied" by the other guy, when the other guy's shot chart is pretty clear evidence that that's not true.
I feel as though I would "defend" any player (in the rotation; end of the bench guys are on their own) that was getting bashed for invalid reasons. It just so happens, for whatever reason, that the player on the Kings roster who is most likely to get criticized for stuff that he's not actually doing wrong is Jason Thompson.
I will also say that your assessment of me "jumping down others' throats" is not entirely accurate. I don't like to see players get criticized for **** that is ostensibly made up, is all. You never see me "jumping down the throat" of someone criticizing Thompson's decision making, or his shot selection. You almost never see me "jumping down the throat" of someone who criticizes Thompson for complaining about calls, except for the handful of posters who have convinced themselves that he's the only player in the entire league who does that, or that he does it the most of any player in the league. You never see me "jumping down the throat" of someone who criticizes Vasquez for his defense. You brought up Salmons, and say you don't see me "jumping in then". You know why that is? Because there isn't a vocal minority of people on this message board making **** up about John Salmons out of whole cloth, that's why. Nobody is criticizing Salmons for reasons that aren't valid. When people start slamming Salmons for **** that's not actually happening, you bet your ass I'll "jump down their throat." But that hasn't happened, so I don't feel the need to.
I'm a pedant, mac, and you've been around here long enough that you oughta know that. I don't much care how bad posters dog the players, as long as they "get their nomenclatures correct," so to speak. Don't bash the guy for fumbling the ball off his hands all game long, when he only has one turnover, is all I'm saying. Don't say that he's getting "bullied" by the other guy, when the other guy's shot chart is pretty clear evidence that that's not true.
I feel as though I would "defend" any player (in the rotation; end of the bench guys are on their own) that was getting bashed for invalid reasons. It just so happens, for whatever reason, that the player on the Kings roster who is most likely to get criticized for stuff that he's not actually doing wrong is Jason Thompson.
Let's try to at least get our numbers right. Thompson makes $5.6M this year, which in no way rounds to $7M. He makes $6.0M next year, $6.4M the year after that, and $6.8M in the final year of his contract - the first which can reasonably be rounded to $7M, though only $2.65M of that year is guaranteed.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
This should take the sting out of the criticism. Tall guys get paid big bucks. It's just the way it works. JT makes very little for a guy with his experience. Perhaps he makes what he should be making. His problem, and I'll say the same about Salmons, is I think we are expecting more from them than they can possible give. JT would be a well priced big coming off the bench. It is not his fault that after all these years we have not found an adequate player to replace him in the starting lineup. He is what he is. Salmons is a SG asked to be a SF yet we howl in indignation when we find that he has trouble as a SF. I found it interesting in the game thread last night that when we needed someone to defend Crawford, people were asking for Salmons. Let him match up against SGs and we might feel better.
Sometimes people get criticized for being put in a position where they are likely to fail and that is on the FO and not the player. JT should not be a starter nor should Salmons be a SF. Salmons' problem is being fixed.
Some people are worth criticism although I doubt that there is a very high percentage of players that aren't doing the best they can. If their best isn't good enough, they need to be replaced but criticizing is going to get us nowhere. Of course that assumes that anything we say here accomplishes anything in the real world.
Similar threads
