.
I'm with playmaker on this one. KG is great, but Duncan is just on another level. His game is effortless. He didn't even bother trying to score last night except when he needed to. Kings going on a run? Boom, he drops 6 points. Spurs struggling a bit on offense? Boom, banks home a jumper. Other than that he focuses on making sure everyone else is involved in the offense.
I hate him.
I hate him.
P
I doubly hate him.
He was supposed to go to Vancouver that year. Vancouver got the #1 pick, but under the stupid NBA rule ... expansion teams couldn't get the #1 pick. (Does that make ANY sense?)
Anyhow --- lineup:
PG - Bibby
SG - Who cares
SF - Reef
PF - Duncan
C - Big Country
That could have been REAL nasty.
He was supposed to go to Vancouver that year. Vancouver got the #1 pick, but under the stupid NBA rule ... expansion teams couldn't get the #1 pick. (Does that make ANY sense?)
Anyhow --- lineup:
PG - Bibby
SG - Who cares
SF - Reef
PF - Duncan
C - Big Country
That could have been REAL nasty.
Well apparently the team you see out on the court consists of players that Rick Adelman had a big part in choosing. Rick was the guy who wanted to bring in Shareef so he must see something you don't.
Reef actually seems to be doing very well in the system, he also gets his share of touches in the post as well. I doubt the Kings would trade Shareef, simply because of talent and the small amount of his contract. He is an incredible bargain.
Reef actually seems to be doing very well in the system, he also gets his share of touches in the post as well. I doubt the Kings would trade Shareef, simply because of talent and the small amount of his contract. He is an incredible bargain.
Reef's averaging 14.9pts and 7.5rebs and is taking fewer than 11 shots a game. Those are non-impact numbers (and career low offensive numbers), and the fact is that KT could average that in this system. I am not calling for Reef's head because I don't think as currently constructed we can make Reef into an impact player without taking away from somebody else's game. Just not enough shots and any suggestion to get Reef more involved invariably ends up involving making one of the other starters less involved -- stealing from Peter to feed Paul. But regardless at this point Reef is pretty much a support player, and he's not really built for it. Over his career he's pretty much a 20pt scorer, and once got 23ppg. But its all he does really well. If you're only going to give him 14-15pts and 11 shots its kind of like only getting Peja 11 shots and 14pts -- what's the point? You'd be considerably better off with a defensive minded 12pt 10reb 2blk sort of tough guy PF who was getting all the shots he needed or wanted.
I expect Reef to come out and have a strong game against New Jersey just on revenge motivation, and until something is done about the logjam of players that is about all we can hope for-- against teams with a weak defensive frontline he'll be more of a factor and hopefully we can get him a few more shots.
I expect Reef to come out and have a strong game against New Jersey just on revenge motivation, and until something is done about the logjam of players that is about all we can hope for-- against teams with a weak defensive frontline he'll be more of a factor and hopefully we can get him a few more shots.
Last edited:
Okay, I'm late to voice my opinion on this topic, but here's my little theory.
Why SAR should come off the bench.
A: Kenny now starts...He is happy...Happy Kenny = Made jumpers...He'd be our 4/5 option with the ball, but he wouldn't care...He'd be a starter.
B: SAR coming off the bench instantly makes our bench much better...The bench now has an identity, and a leader. Plus, when he's playing with the likes of Hart/Martin/Garcia/Skinner he is instantly the best offensive player, so he would get more than his fair share of shots...Given the bench could adjust to not having a C/PF not out at the elbow.
Just my .02 cents
Why SAR should come off the bench.
A: Kenny now starts...He is happy...Happy Kenny = Made jumpers...He'd be our 4/5 option with the ball, but he wouldn't care...He'd be a starter.
B: SAR coming off the bench instantly makes our bench much better...The bench now has an identity, and a leader. Plus, when he's playing with the likes of Hart/Martin/Garcia/Skinner he is instantly the best offensive player, so he would get more than his fair share of shots...Given the bench could adjust to not having a C/PF not out at the elbow.
Just my .02 cents
P
First, this is NOT a "I love Reef" fest type of post. This is a condemnation of why he can't/shouldn't come from the bench.
If you watch, Reef isn't a ... high intensity player. He isn't a spark plug. He's a flow player. Coming from the bench he'll just be slower and less into the game.
He won't "improve" the bench, he'll bring what Kenny brought, but with a lot less "oomph".
Guys like Garnett can come off the bench and shove it down your throat. Guys like Reef come off the bench, sit out at the elbow or the 3 point line and wait for his number to be called.
It's a difference in electricity and "oomph". There is no question Reef is just as talented a scorer as KG (if not just a marginal amount behind) ... the difference is KG is of the mindset that he WILL dominate you ... while Reef is just a blue-collar worker.
If you watch, Reef isn't a ... high intensity player. He isn't a spark plug. He's a flow player. Coming from the bench he'll just be slower and less into the game.
He won't "improve" the bench, he'll bring what Kenny brought, but with a lot less "oomph".
Guys like Garnett can come off the bench and shove it down your throat. Guys like Reef come off the bench, sit out at the elbow or the 3 point line and wait for his number to be called.
It's a difference in electricity and "oomph". There is no question Reef is just as talented a scorer as KG (if not just a marginal amount behind) ... the difference is KG is of the mindset that he WILL dominate you ... while Reef is just a blue-collar worker.
I don't necessarily disagree with your point, just the use of KG in your example. If the Kings were choosing b/w KG and KT, there's no choice, and no one is suggesting that KG come off the bench, if for no other reason than he brings defense and rebounding consistently to the table, two things which Reef and KT don't (or can't) consistently bring.
As for the thought that KT should start just b/c it would make him a happier, more productive player than he is coming off the bench, that doesn't seem to me to be a good reason to "demote" one player in favor of the other. Reef is the better PF. Period. He should be starting at PF for the Kings, regardless of whether or not he would better anchor the second unit than KT is currently.
As for the thought that KT should start just b/c it would make him a happier, more productive player than he is coming off the bench, that doesn't seem to me to be a good reason to "demote" one player in favor of the other. Reef is the better PF. Period. He should be starting at PF for the Kings, regardless of whether or not he would better anchor the second unit than KT is currently.
Rick Adelman is not going to bring two of his starters off the bench. He is especially not going to bring Bonzi off the bench. The guy is a warrior from the first tick of the clock until the final buzzer.
You can try those kinds of line-ups in video games, but you are NOT going to see a coach like Rick Adelman start messing with the team dynamics, especially after the past couple of games where things are finally starting to gel.
It just isn't going to happen.
You can try those kinds of line-ups in video games, but you are NOT going to see a coach like Rick Adelman start messing with the team dynamics, especially after the past couple of games where things are finally starting to gel.
It just isn't going to happen.
I agree about one thing. Reef's ability is being wasted on Adelman's system. Why he sticks by his system even though the two major key components were traded away last year, I would never know. This is a new team, and in need of a new system.
I am not saying he should abandon the Princeton offense, just modify it better so the current players can fit better in it. I don't know about you, but if you have one of the premiere point guards in the league yet he is not leading the team in assist, there is definitely something wrong with your system. That is especially true if your center is the assist leader in your team. It essentially means that your center is away from the basket and away from the possible offensive rebound.
Many praises Detroit's defence, but their offence doesn't take backseat to no one either. As we nba fans have seen clearly over the years, once your offence comes alive, the defense follows. Basketball is essentially a scrong game. You have to score MORE than your opponent, not make your opponent score less. Sadly, many coaches in the past have fallen to the media and the front office's pressure to "improve team by focusing on defense." At this level, there is really so far you can go with defense. The league is filled with world-class SCORERS! No matter how perfect your defense is, somebody each night will score through it. As long as your team does the fundamental defense, you just have to improve the scoring to win. Detroit has not developed some super defense method to stop everybody. They just do the fundamentals by the book, and that is all there is to it in defense.
Now that said, Adelman should just coach the team to do the fundamentals(box out, always on your man's face, etc) with defense, and focus more on developing a new offense system. Yes, I think it should start down low, and yes, I think the best post player in this team is Reef. If he wants to stick by the Princeton offense, at least give the players more freedom. Often I see the players stuck in the play, and they have no idea what to do. The difference with the winners and good teams is that when the play is stopped, the winners have a designated player(like, you know, guys like MJ, or a pair, like Stockton and Malone) to be creative. Unfortunately for Kings, I don't see that. Not due to lack of talents, but because of the lack of freedom.
In the end, I just hope Adelman makes some changes, before the front office decides make some of their own first.
I am not saying he should abandon the Princeton offense, just modify it better so the current players can fit better in it. I don't know about you, but if you have one of the premiere point guards in the league yet he is not leading the team in assist, there is definitely something wrong with your system. That is especially true if your center is the assist leader in your team. It essentially means that your center is away from the basket and away from the possible offensive rebound.
Many praises Detroit's defence, but their offence doesn't take backseat to no one either. As we nba fans have seen clearly over the years, once your offence comes alive, the defense follows. Basketball is essentially a scrong game. You have to score MORE than your opponent, not make your opponent score less. Sadly, many coaches in the past have fallen to the media and the front office's pressure to "improve team by focusing on defense." At this level, there is really so far you can go with defense. The league is filled with world-class SCORERS! No matter how perfect your defense is, somebody each night will score through it. As long as your team does the fundamental defense, you just have to improve the scoring to win. Detroit has not developed some super defense method to stop everybody. They just do the fundamentals by the book, and that is all there is to it in defense.
Now that said, Adelman should just coach the team to do the fundamentals(box out, always on your man's face, etc) with defense, and focus more on developing a new offense system. Yes, I think it should start down low, and yes, I think the best post player in this team is Reef. If he wants to stick by the Princeton offense, at least give the players more freedom. Often I see the players stuck in the play, and they have no idea what to do. The difference with the winners and good teams is that when the play is stopped, the winners have a designated player(like, you know, guys like MJ, or a pair, like Stockton and Malone) to be creative. Unfortunately for Kings, I don't see that. Not due to lack of talents, but because of the lack of freedom.
In the end, I just hope Adelman makes some changes, before the front office decides make some of their own first.
Change the system?
I don't know about that, but I still see Shareef getting touches down low. But I have also noticed that he gets double teamed right away 90% of the time. I do think he should be more aggressive and at times in the New Jersey game it looked like they were completely avoiding him on offense, but I think Reef's recent play has been in large part his own doing.
He isn't being a selfish player, maybe to a fault. But I see things starting to build as far as chemistry, and court style with this team. Things will evolve on their own. Another thing is right now, just about every player on the team is trying to find their place. Sure we could give the ball to Reef down low every time, but that wouldn't help in the development of every other players part in the system.
I don't know about that, but I still see Shareef getting touches down low. But I have also noticed that he gets double teamed right away 90% of the time. I do think he should be more aggressive and at times in the New Jersey game it looked like they were completely avoiding him on offense, but I think Reef's recent play has been in large part his own doing.
He isn't being a selfish player, maybe to a fault. But I see things starting to build as far as chemistry, and court style with this team. Things will evolve on their own. Another thing is right now, just about every player on the team is trying to find their place. Sure we could give the ball to Reef down low every time, but that wouldn't help in the development of every other players part in the system.
The only problem I have with that statement is that Princeton offense worked and worked well when we had Vlade and Webber as our leading assist men, and we had Mike Bibby back then too. Ofcourse Brad is not Vlade and Reef ain't no Webb, but I think Petrie specifically went out of his way to aquire these guys because of their great (yet untapped) passing abilities and in order to somewhat emulate the offense we had in the past.
1) That last statement is a worst case scenario problem -- means you are just stuck trying to create a cheap rip off of your former teams ratehr than moving forward and maximizing what we've got.
2) The Princeton as we've run it as been the BEST offense in the league for the last half decade. It, and we, have to apologize to nobody for the inverse inside/out stuff because frankly we've been shoving it down the throats of offensive basketball traditionalists since 1999 and making them look silly.
3) Now that said, if the Princeton people do have something to think about and "apologize" for its possibly the lack of recognition of the changing of the times. It never was the ideal system to try to win a championship with -- its never won one before, and its perfect institution comes with very specialized personnel who are nonetheless still LESS talented than their opponents. You are trying to make up for the talent/power gap between Shaq and Webb and Peja/Kobe. If you had Shaq and Kobe and were wasting your time with the Princeton, you're being dumb. If you don't have Shaq and Kobe and instead have Webb and Vlade and you DON'T consider using it, you are equally dumb. The question today isn't whwther it WAS good -- it was very very good for our particular team, but whether if you have Reef and Bonzi et al the Princeton is still the way to go. My suspicion is that so long as you still have the remnants of the specialized personnel (Brad, Mike, Peja) around the answer is probably yes. A guy like Reef is clearly suffering and sliding into a support role because of it, but so be it if its what's needed for the rest of the team and the offense is otherwise clicking well (which it has been over the last half dozen games or so).
P.S. -- as an aside this "Basketball is essentially a scrong game. You have to score MORE than your opponent, not make your opponent score less" is not, and HAS not been how you get it done. You PRECISELY stop the other guy from scoring first, and THEN add in any offense you can muster. NBA champions can basically be split into two groups: the truly great ones that scored AND defended, and the lesser ones that merely defended. There are none who only scored. As in every sport, defense wins champsionships. If your opponent never scores, you can never lose.
2) The Princeton as we've run it as been the BEST offense in the league for the last half decade. It, and we, have to apologize to nobody for the inverse inside/out stuff because frankly we've been shoving it down the throats of offensive basketball traditionalists since 1999 and making them look silly.
3) Now that said, if the Princeton people do have something to think about and "apologize" for its possibly the lack of recognition of the changing of the times. It never was the ideal system to try to win a championship with -- its never won one before, and its perfect institution comes with very specialized personnel who are nonetheless still LESS talented than their opponents. You are trying to make up for the talent/power gap between Shaq and Webb and Peja/Kobe. If you had Shaq and Kobe and were wasting your time with the Princeton, you're being dumb. If you don't have Shaq and Kobe and instead have Webb and Vlade and you DON'T consider using it, you are equally dumb. The question today isn't whwther it WAS good -- it was very very good for our particular team, but whether if you have Reef and Bonzi et al the Princeton is still the way to go. My suspicion is that so long as you still have the remnants of the specialized personnel (Brad, Mike, Peja) around the answer is probably yes. A guy like Reef is clearly suffering and sliding into a support role because of it, but so be it if its what's needed for the rest of the team and the offense is otherwise clicking well (which it has been over the last half dozen games or so).
P.S. -- as an aside this "Basketball is essentially a scrong game. You have to score MORE than your opponent, not make your opponent score less" is not, and HAS not been how you get it done. You PRECISELY stop the other guy from scoring first, and THEN add in any offense you can muster. NBA champions can basically be split into two groups: the truly great ones that scored AND defended, and the lesser ones that merely defended. There are none who only scored. As in every sport, defense wins champsionships. If your opponent never scores, you can never lose.
I am not saying Princeton offense is a bad one. I am saying it needs to adjust for the changing time. Besides, who have ever won a championship with Princeton offense in this league?
About the power forward and the center passing out in the high post, it is a good way to disrupt the defense once in a while, but a system relying on them also has some serious problems. Without any rebounding presence inside, your team takes a serious risk. Bulls could pull it off back in the early 90's thanks to Denis Rodman, not to mention it was either MJ or Pippen taking shots most of the time. I am all for passing big men, but a player of caliber like Bibby should have more than 4.4 assists.
Also, I am not saying defense should take backseat to offense. My point is that there is only so much you can do with defense. As long as you get the fundamentals right, that is all you need. Like I said in the previous post, Detroit's strong defense didn't come from some miraculous defense system. The players are just doing the fundamentals right. Beside, a good defense might make sure you don't lose, but it's a good offense that really wins the game. There is no point in stopping one possession if you cannot score in yours. Let's be honest. When in offense, Detroit is one of the deadliest, too.
The problem I have with Adelman's system is that it doesn't utilize the players' abilities. Adelman's system is sacrficing their ability for the system. Bibby is a good passer, not a scrorer like Iverson. Peja is a shooter, not a slasher. Shareef is a post player, not a point forward. A good coach builds a good system to win games. A great coach is willing to change his system to utilize the players' ability to the max. After all, no system ever won a championship. Players did.
About the power forward and the center passing out in the high post, it is a good way to disrupt the defense once in a while, but a system relying on them also has some serious problems. Without any rebounding presence inside, your team takes a serious risk. Bulls could pull it off back in the early 90's thanks to Denis Rodman, not to mention it was either MJ or Pippen taking shots most of the time. I am all for passing big men, but a player of caliber like Bibby should have more than 4.4 assists.
Also, I am not saying defense should take backseat to offense. My point is that there is only so much you can do with defense. As long as you get the fundamentals right, that is all you need. Like I said in the previous post, Detroit's strong defense didn't come from some miraculous defense system. The players are just doing the fundamentals right. Beside, a good defense might make sure you don't lose, but it's a good offense that really wins the game. There is no point in stopping one possession if you cannot score in yours. Let's be honest. When in offense, Detroit is one of the deadliest, too.
The problem I have with Adelman's system is that it doesn't utilize the players' abilities. Adelman's system is sacrficing their ability for the system. Bibby is a good passer, not a scrorer like Iverson. Peja is a shooter, not a slasher. Shareef is a post player, not a point forward. A good coach builds a good system to win games. A great coach is willing to change his system to utilize the players' ability to the max. After all, no system ever won a championship. Players did.
Reef is doing exatcly what we need. JUST his threat of a post game is drawing double teams every time he is in the post. That is why he is getting assist. Has anybody noticed how wide open Brad, Peja, and Bibby are on there shots not involving a pick. It is a great and when our shooters start to burn them and they don't double team guys who goes to the basket strong. Leave it like it is Rick.