Kings @ Warriors Gameday Thread

[Glenn]

What question? You didn't even have your figures right. This isn't about right or wrong. It's just a matter of a difference of opinion. I'm sorry that you're all a bunch of babies who can't handle someone having a different opinion.

How many posters? Give me a number.

Have you ever heard of the psychiatric term "projection?" Look it up.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

C'mon, you just called me out personally, and said it wasn't me specifically in the same post.

I get it now, though. You're welcome to come on here and argue about whatever it is you want, but if someone disagrees, they need to chill. Your second sentence is a complete fabrication. I never hinted at you needing to shut up or suggest defeat.

Dude, I said, not you specifically. I never said anything about people disagreeing being the reason they needed to chill. THAT's a complete fabrication.

 

[rainmaker]

Dude, I said, not you specifically. I never said anything about people disagreeing being the reason they needed to chill. THAT's a complete fabrication.

No, that would be an assumption. I assumed you'd want us to chill, because of the disagreement. What the hell else would it be?

This is getting old. I'm done.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

How many posters? Give me a number.

Have you ever heard of the psychiatric term "projection?" Look it up.

How many posters disagreeing would it take for me to think my opinion is wrong? There is no amount because, opinions cannot be wrong. You need to look up projection because you obviously have no clue what it means. While you're at it, look up argumentum ad populum.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

No, that would be an assumption. I assumed you'd want us to chill, because of the disagreement. What the hell else would it be?

This is getting old. I'm done.

Chill on the "you're wrong" crap because it's just lame. State your case, support your opinion, etc. but stop writing off other opinions as wrong just because they don't jive with the local consensus. I'm not saying any of you are wrong in thinking he's worth 10$ million, I just don't agree.

 

[bajaden]

It's not ignorance, but rather evaluation. I know what these players can do, and don't have to watch 60+ games in order to understand how they will work together. I would agree with you had I never seen any of these guys play, but I have, know what they can and can't do, and therefore can draw conclusions about the roster. I'm not making a judgement based on one game, but rather showing how this example enforces an opinion I had before this game was even played.

Pure nonsense! While I agree with you on some of your points on individual players, I don't agree on your overall outlook. You have no idea how good or bad Cousins is going to be this year. You have no idea how much much having Salmons at the SF position will improve or not improve the team this year. You have no idea how good Fredette might be this year. You have no idea how much Hayes might help the team in overall team play on both sides of the ball. You know how I know that? Because I have no idea, and I watch as much, if not more basketball on a daily basis than you do. Not an attack on you, I just have more time.

I try to watch every player that worth drafting in college as many times as I can. I've already watched Kentucky play 8 times this season. Why? So I can make the best possible judgement. Thats totally impossible to do in one or two games. I could catch that player on one of his worse, or best nights. But if I watch 20 games, then I have a pretty good idea. And even then, I get fooled at times.

If I'm talking about a team made up solely of veterans, then I can make a fair judgement on how that team will perform. You pretty much know what you have. But with a team made up of one, two and three year players, its a crapshoot. And that can be either good, or bad, or both in some cases. To make the judgement that Fredette will be a terrible defender for his entire career based on what you saw last night (and I know you didn't say that) is like saying he'll shoot 50 plus percent from the three based on what you saw last night. Both those thngs could end up being true, but there's simply no way to know that until were three years down the road of his career.

And by the way, I didn't create a strawman argument. You made the statement that Dalembert was a proven top rebounder in the league. And I have no argument with that statement. He is! But you totally discarded Cousins as being relevant in that area. I simply pointed out that Cousins actually pulled down more rebounds per game than Dalembert did last season. I personally think that Cousins has just scratched the surface in rebounding. In college he put up rebounding numbers that were the best per 40 numbers of any big man to come out of college in 15 years. One thing that almost always translates to the NBA, especially if the player comes from a major conference, is rebounding.

Look, everything your saying could end up being true. I doubt it, but if it is, I'll be the first to say you were right. I'll also be the first to say your wrong!

 

[Showtime]

I think the problem here is that you guys think I'm saying Dalembert is worthless just because I don't think he's worth 10$ million. I think he's worth 8$ million, just not 10$ million.

Considering Salmons is making more, I don't have a problem giving Dalembert 10 for 2 with a team option for a third.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Considering Salmons is making more, I don't have a problem giving Dalembert 10 for 2 with a team option for a third.

I might do that as a last resort but I wouldn't just do it at his convenience and I wouldn't do it period as long as there's a possibility of using that money on a better player. This is all speculative though because we don't know how many years he wanted, or even if he would have accepted an offer of 10$. It was pretty clear to me that he had his eyes on greener pastures and probably saw Sacramento as someplace he could get paid if he didn't get signed by a playoff team.

 

[Showtime]

Pure nonsense!

I guess knowing wtf I'm talking about = nonsense.

While I agree with you on some of your points on individual players, I don't agree on your overall outlook. You have no idea how good or bad Cousins is going to be this year.

I DO have an idea of what kind of player he is, and what his limits are on defense. There is no way you can possibly conclude that he is an above the rim player who can quickly react off the weakside just because he hasn't disproven that this season. He has to prove that first before you dismiss the fact that he isn't. I really don't know where you get off calling me out for drawing conclusions on what Cousins has already showed, and then telling me I'm wrong based on a "wait and see" argument. You have no basis to refute my opinion of Cousins's defensive limitations at center.

You have no idea how much much having Salmons at the SF position will improve or not improve the team this year.

Irrelevant to my point.

You have no idea how good Fredette might be this year.

Irrelevant to my point.

You have no idea how much Hayes might help the team in overall team play on both sides of the ball.

I do, because I've seen him in Houston, and know that, once again, he's not going to provide rim defense or rebounding advantages over last year's late lineup. I have evidence, and you do not. Not only have I watched him play, but the numbers support my point. Hayes has inferior offensive, defensive, and total rebounding % compared to Dalembert. I wouldn't mind having Hayes, as long as Dally was at C. I do take issue with the Kings downsizing instead.

You know how I know that? Because I have no idea, and I watch as much, if not more basketball on a daily basis than you do. Not an attack on you, I just have more time.

So, you want me to concede because you can't analyze and draw conclusions that others can?

And I have no argument with that statement. He is! But you totally discarded Cousins as being relevant in that area.

I didn't say Cousins is irrelevant regarding rebounding, I said his impact (if he were present last night) was irrelevant in the team being out-rebounded. He alone wasn't going to reverse those numbers. You didn't comprehend my point which I clarified in my previous posts. I don't know how to spell it out any clearer than I already have:

Cousins/PF + Dally/C > X/PF + Cousins/C

I simply pointed out that Cousins actually pulled down more rebounds per game than Dalembert did last season.

Which is fine, when Cousins had a huge physical advantage over most other PF's he faced, and now he's going to be moved to C to replace Dally and lose that advantage, which was my point all along.

I personally think that Cousins has just scratched the surface in rebounding. In college he put up rebounding numbers that were the best per 40 numbers of any big man to come out of college in 15 years. One thing that almost always translates to the NBA, especially if the player comes from a major conference, is rebounding.

He will always be limited as long as he's a below the rim player, which he is. Body positioning is great for rebounds (see: Kevin Love), but he will never be able to quickly react from the weakside and explode to prevent a basket which would otherwise be made like a guy like Dalembert could.

Look, everything your saying could end up being true. I doubt it, but if it is, I'll be the first to say you were right. I'll also be the first to say your wrong!

This isn't a Cousins v Dalembert debate, which is what it seems like you are making. I'm saying that the current kings frontline without Dalembert is worse off than if he were on the roster. There really is no debate to that statement, because there's nothing but a "wait and see" response to it. They got smaller, they got less talented, and they aren't going to have an easier time rebounding and defending this season.

 

[ParniValjak]

The Clippers had to give 7$ million Brown to reach minimum salary. Noah and Bynum are far better than Dalembert. He doesn't even warrant a comparison to them.

Err Brown signed with GS but Clippers were more than willing to give $10 million for Jordan. But while were as on Kwame, even wondered why someone that is supposedly so **** has earned in excess of $50 million during his career?!

Oh and on his $7million deal with the GSW, its less than $2million more than he has averaged since coming off a rookie contract so its not like he is widely over payed. I would rather over pay my shot blocking big by $2-3 million than spend it on average swingman who can't shoot or defend very well (*cough* Travis Outlaw *cough*)!

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Err Brown signed with GS but Clippers were more than willing to give $10 million for Jordan. But while were as on Kwame, even wondered why someone that is supposedly so **** has earned in excess of $50 million during his career?!

Oh and on his $7million deal with the GSW, its less than $2million more than he has averaged since coming off a rookie contract so its not like he is widely over payed. I would rather over pay my shot blocking big by $2-3 million than spend it on average swingman who can't shoot or defend very well (*cough* Travis Outlaw *cough*)!

This is one of the great mysteries of the universe.

 

[iowamcnabb]

(*cough* Travis Outlaw *cough*)!

lozenge?

 

[bajaden]

I guess knowing wtf I'm talking about = nonsense.



I DO have an idea of what kind of player he is, and what his limits are on defense. There is no way you can possibly conclude that he is an above the rim player who can quickly react off the weakside just because he hasn't disproven that this season. He has to prove that first before you dismiss the fact that he isn't. I really don't know where you get off calling me out for drawing conclusions on what Cousins has already showed, and then telling me I'm wrong based on a "wait and see" argument. You have no basis to refute my opinion of Cousins's defensive limitations at center.



Irrelevant to my point.



Irrelevant to my point.



I do, because I've seen him in Houston, and know that, once again, he's not going to provide rim defense or rebounding advantages over last year's late lineup. I have evidence, and you do not. Not only have I watched him play, but the numbers support my point. Hayes has inferior offensive, defensive, and total rebounding % compared to Dalembert. I wouldn't mind having Hayes, as long as Dally was at C. I do take issue with the Kings downsizing instead.



So, you want me to concede because you can't analyze and draw conclusions that others can?



I didn't say Cousins is irrelevant regarding rebounding, I said his impact (if he were present last night) was irrelevant in the team being out-rebounded. He alone wasn't going to reverse those numbers. You didn't comprehend my point which I clarified in my previous posts. I don't know how to spell it out any clearer than I already have:

Cousins/PF + Dally/C > X/PF + Cousins/C



Which is fine, when Cousins had a huge physical advantage over most other PF's he faced, and now he's going to be moved to C to replace Dally and lose that advantage, which was my point all along.



He will always be limited as long as he's a below the rim player, which he is. Body positioning is great for rebounds (see: Kevin Love), but he will never be able to quickly react from the weakside and explode to prevent a basket which would otherwise be made like a guy like Dalembert could.



This isn't a Cousins v Dalembert debate, which is what it seems like you are making. I'm saying that the current kings frontline without Dalembert is worse off than if he were on the roster. There really is no debate to that statement, because there's nothing but a "wait and see" response to it. They got smaller, they got less talented, and they aren't going to have an easier time rebounding and defending this season.

I'm not calling you out period. I'm disagreeing with you. If I was calling you out we'd be meeting in a alley somewhere. I have no problem with you commenting on what Cousins did or didn't do well last season. But I have a problem when you use the word limit. That means no matter how hard he trains or practices, he'll never improve because or his limits. You say he'll never be a great rebounder because he's a below the rim player, and then you use Love, another below the rim player as an example of how positioning etc. can make you a good rebounder. There are plenty of below the rim players that are good rebounders. And there are plenty of below the rim players that are good defensive players.

I've never said that Cousins will be an elite shotblocker. But there's no reason he can't be a good defender overall. If you think shotblockiing is the be all end all, then there's not much else I can say. I've already agreed that I would love to have Dalembert on the team. But it may not be as bad as you think. Cousins has very good lateral movement for a big man. Also, I'm talking about what a players potential is, not what they accomplished in their rookie year. If your content to draw all your conclusions based on just the rookie year of a player then we probably have nothing to talk about. Especially when were talking about centers and PG's. And by the way, I consider Cousins a center, not a PF. Maybe the Kings are looking at him the same way, and simply don't want a conflict at that position by having Dalembert there. I have no idea, but something just smells to me. I hope I'm wrong about that.

Now, finally! Yes, my argument with you was over the statement you made about Cousins being irrelevant. I wasn't saying we would have won the rebounding battle if Cousins had been there. But I'm damm sure it would have been closer. I counted five rebounds that Whiteside had in his hands and couldn't hold. That would have been five more rebounds if it were Cousins there instead. Cousins is excellent at blockinig out, which is how you get rebounds, along with anticipation and good hands. Many times, if Cousins doesn't get the rebound, one of his teammates will, simply because of his blocking out. Something both Thompson and Hickson forgot to do last night. I got sick and tired of seeing Lee, another plays below the rim good rebounder, walk in between the two of them and come down with the rebound. By the way, rebounding has nothing to do with what position your playing. When the ball is up for grabs, its anyone's ball. Also, last season when both Cousins and Dalembert were on the floor, they were pretty much interchangable, and rotated between the two positions. It all depended on who the oppostion was. People get too caught up in these labels.

 

[SacTownKid]

Yeah, he did, when paired with bigger PFs at his side. Dalebmert was always helping a lot and chasing blocks (often leading to goaltending calls and leaving his man open), because the early Cousins and Landry were often beaten by their man, along with penetration. Dally did provide help defense a lot for perimeter penetrators throughout the season. At the end of the season, Cousins's defense improved and Landry was gone, leaving a bigger frontline pair, and Dalebmert didn't have to worry as much about frontline players, and was even more effective because of the overall size of the frontline.



There is no way for me to find points in the paint for only part of a season. Your stats don't make your point. One shot blocker isn't going to prevent a red carpet lane, he's going to help lessen the damage of one. But, when you pair that shot blocker with big bodies and decent defenders up front, his impact will be significantly higher, which is what we are missing now. My point is more regarding the entire frontline with him (size, PF/C combinations, etc) than without him. I'm not just talking about what he alone does, but how he fits into the mix, and how that overall mix is vastly better with him in it than without it. It is about the team, and how they look as a whole with the aspects of the game he provides.



You don't know what I mean by smaller? Ok: it's about last season's PF's becoming our C's, and playing thinner, shorter players at PF instead. It's a total shift. Cousins and JT played spot minutes at C (mostly Cousins in place of Dalembert with JT at PF), and now they are moving over to C to make room for Hayes and JJ at PF. JT will probably be the backup 5 now. That's a big downgrade in overall size. And because nobody on the frontline is a shot blocker, and they don't have a size advantage, they are going to get abused even more by the frontline opposition. They will get out rebounded, they will lose second chance opportunities, and they will not be able to defend the rim once somebody gets beaten.



Offense was never the issue. This team has even more weapons this season than last, and putting the ball in the hoop is not a concern. Once they got Thornton, they averaged 111 PPG last season.



As if Hayes will ever have an offense run through his hands. Have you ever even seen the guy play? Have you seen the kings play? They have enough trouble getting it to an open offensive weapon, let alone Hayes. But that's beside the point. Offensive production is irrelevant, as I have already pointed out. Frontline defense and rebounding is the point.



You are totally missing the point. It's not just about Dalembert, but what the whole group looks like with and without him. With him, this seasons centers become PF's, leading to a size advantage, a clogged paint, better rebounding, and gives the team shot blocking capabilities. Without him, PF's move to C, the team runs a smaller lineup, most of the work has to be done on the floor, they lose their size advantage, they can't clog the paint with monster bodies, they lose rebounding opportunities and second chance points.

A frontline with Cousins and JT at PF, with Dally at C and Hayes rotating in at PF and Cousins or JT playing spot minutes at C is a much, much better rotation than Cousins/JT at the 5, with Hayes/JJ at the 4.

The stats absolutely disagree. The Kings ran one of the worst most inefficient offenses in all of the NBA. The Kings had "weapons" last year too and there was no reason for it to be that way.

Yes, I've seen Hayes play, why do you think Adelman wanted him in Minnesota? He ran their offense through him quite a bit last year and he did a very good job in the same system Westphal is trying to instill with this team. That plus his defense, his ability to set a solid screen, his presence, and so on were the reasons the Kings went after him.

I'm not denying Dalemberts importance to this team in certain aspects of the game, but there is no way that I am going to deny his pitfalls in the process.

 

[SacTownKid]

If I'm the GM I know that I will inevitably give somebody $10mil or $12 mil to do those things because that is what players who can do them cost, if you can even get them. And if you want to somepte at the highest levels you are almost inevitably going to need players who do those sorts of things.

And short answer btw = yes.

Don't disagree with the notion but I certainly don't think the timing is right. I say keep things flexible and once you know what you have for sure, make that move. Like I said, look at the market for Dalembert and that might give you and indication of how easy it would be to make a transaction in the future should you need it. Locking yourself into a monster contract in a player with potentially little trade value associated to it could lock you into a situation you can't change. You want to bring up that argument of keeping your stars happy, well look at Cleveland and Orlando, they were locked in and it cost Cleveland their star, going to cost Orlando theirs as well. With the new CBA you can't lock in based on pure need right now without determining your escape valve. Look at the Kings the last half decade, same deal.