Meet Derrick Williams

Uncia03 said:
If the plan is to play Williams major minutes at the SF spot then you'd expect he and Outlaw to take most of the SF minutes. Which would suggest that Salmons would play most of his minutes at the SG spot. (The position I'd prefer him to play)
I don't know if Jimmer is going to end up with a lot of minutes, especially consistently, unless one of the following happens:
A: He's able to beat out Salmons for the spot
B: He's left to play a lot by Malone with the idea of getting show-cased
C: Salmon's gets traded and a viable SG isn't brought back in the deal

Personally I'd like to see Jimmer play a lot of minutes so that way we can determine what we have once and for all. If he plays well and can fit with this team then great, perhaps we can pick him up cheap on his 2nd contract. If he plays well and someone is willing to offer back a nice asset then even better. And if he struggles badly then we can see him walk at the end of the year with no regrets while watching our win-total possibly suffer a bit due to the poor play.

The only downside that I can see for playing Jimmer a lot of minutes is if it prevents either Salmons or Thornton the time to showcase what they might have for a potential trade. Right now Thornton is our biggest problem due to his contract and the best thing that could happen would be for him to get minutes again and produce so that we can trade him for something that can in some way help this team.
Click to expand...

Bravo!

I think Thornton's situation is unsolvable and I wouldn't waste much time on him. We know where he stands and so does the rest of the league assuming they have been paying attention.

As for Jimmer being a spark plug off the bench (if I caught the meaning correctly) it seems very unlikely. At this point I am not against paying IT more than we would normally pay a guy coming off the bench as he provides a lot. This assumes he continues to share the ball a little more and I suspect Malone will drill that into his brain. We are then in the unenviable position of having two relatively high priced bench players in IT and Landry but as a group, meaning us and the FO, we are going to have to pay money wisely and not be so darn cheap and just skim over the lower salary cap level. Just don't get us into luxury tax level. Aren't we supposed to get some revenue sharing to help in this endeavor?
 
Last edited:
Bricklayer said:
There is no hindsight about it. College is for kids, the pros are for grown men. When you've watched the NBA long enough, seen the size and physical abilities of the players in it, when you see a college All Star who doesn't measure up physicaly, who's small for his positon, who is between NBA positions/sizes...you better take a looong hard squinty eyed look at him, and you better be real sure. Real sure. 1/2 tweener. 3/4 tweener. Three quarters of those type players fail before they even reach the league just on physical inability alone.
Click to expand...

Yeah Brick, I probably should have said that better because I'm sure a lot of posters were against that pick from the beginning for those reasons, and I know you probably were. I hate tweeners myself, particularly 1/2, which is why I was against CJ McCollum this last draft. Obviously I don't like slow footed unathletic kids in the backcourt, and I usually hold seniors ages against them coming out.. Jimmer wasn't my draft choice. with that being said, kid was prolific in college. Leading scorer, national player of the year, if you saw some of those BYU games you understand why kid is still a legend in that state. Sometimes talent can supersede standard limitations.. Who knows what they were thinking.. Maybe they thought they had a better distributing, more dynamic version of J.J. redick that could interchange with Reke in the backcourt at the time. In any event what I was saying is though I didn't like the pick, I understood the emotion behind it particularly if they weren't sold on any of the other candidates
 
Glenn said:
Bravo!

I think Thornton's situation is unsolvable and I wouldn't waste much time on him. We know where he stands and so does the rest of the league assuming they have been paying attention.

As for Jimmer being a spark plug off the bench (if I caught the meaning correctly) it seems very unlikely. At this point I am not against paying IT more than we would normally pay a guy coming off the bench as he provides a lot. This assumes he continues to share the ball a little more and I suspect Malone will drill that into his brain. We are then in the unenviable position of having two relatively high priced bench players in IT and Landry but as a group, meaning us and the FO, we are going to have to pay money wisely and not be so darn cheap and just skim over the lower salary cap level. Just don't get us into luxury tax level. Aren't we supposed to get some revenue sharing to help in this endeavor?
Click to expand...

I believe our owners stated they would not take revenue sharing if they acquired the team. It was a move to counter the argument that the wannabe Seattle buyers used stating they would be spenders and pay into the system while if the team would remain in Sacramento they would be takers by collecting from revenue sharing.
 
So we are obligated to pay him $4.6 mil this year and $6.3 mil next year. OK. 2 second rounders wouldn't cost this much so I assume (why?) that they are sure he will be a success here.

Another way of looking at this is once they are over they salary cap, they are not terribly concerned by the "how much" unless they jump over the luxury tax level. If that is true I will be happy as money doesn't seem to be a hinderance. Perhaps we are truly into another era. That's as positive as I can get and I may be wrong as to the luxury tax and salary cap.
 
At least this shows PDA isn't COMPLETELY about analytics when looking to add new pieces/scouting. He's traded for him despite his fairly poor numbers thus far, so he must have some faith in him to become productive for this team.
 
Basically giving the dude a tryout and if he can't cut it go back to option 1 which was to package him anyway for something better.
 
He is a SF regardless if he can shoot or not, athletically he proved it I mean was there anyone on the floor with a faster first step other than Collison maybe? The playmaking really surprised me the touch and timing/court awareness on some of the passes was crazy, will he struggle a bit more in the half court sure but he's a open court player. His handle while not amazing looked more than acceptable for someone his size and athletic ability as long as he is not turnover prone while dribbling that's fine.

If I'm an opposing SF I can tell you one thing I'm not looking forward to banging with D-Will or trying to keep him off the glass dude is a physical beast at the SF spot. D Will is a guy who will exhaust you banging you around on both ends of the floor which is a lot more tiring than a one way player. He had a couple great defensive rebounds clearing the glass as well that performance from a impact point of view was better than anything anyone else no named Cousins/Thomas has done this season for us.
 
D will is definitely a tweener. Looks like he can handle well enough to start at sf as long as he keeps the weight off. A less polished jamison looks right.
 
Bricklayer said:
Every once in a while, but we've already got somebody down in the paint.
Click to expand...
I actually think that if we are able to play Williams at the SF then he has the ability to play a bit in the post with the express purpose of giving Cousins a breather if he's in the game but just needs to take 1-2 offensive plays off. Cousins can 'relax' by spreading the floor and we can run some plays where Williams moves (perhaps coming off a screen) into good post position to receive a quick entry pass. We've got some options of that type now that Malone can work with.
 
Bricklayer said:
Every once in a while, but we've already got somebody down in the paint.
Click to expand...

If Williams creates the kind of mismatch at the 3, that it certainly looked like he had against a player like Dudley,..we need to explore that in detail.

It will help open everything else up, including Ben outside the arc and get a player like Patterson some better looks as well
 
ShastaKingsFan said:
If Williams creates the kind of mismatch at the 3, that it certainly looked like he had against a player like Dudley,..we need to explore that in detail.

It will help open everything else up, including Ben outside the arc and get a player like Patterson some better looks as well
Click to expand...

Williams missed both his post attempts yesterday, and I think has missed almost every post attempt he's made since turning pro. I DO like the idea of a postup callable three. I like the idea of mismatching with it. I like the idea of using it if Cuz is not in the game. I DON'T like the idea of trying to jury rig a lineup to use it for a player who has never been that effective with it at this level at the expense of one of the most dominant interior players in the game. Whatever we do with Williams has to be something that makes Cousins' life easier, not displaces him. That's Keith Smartian.
 
I think my favorite play was the two parter where Vasquez sent an ally oop to Williams and he delivered a nice facial. Unfortunately a foul occurred before the dunk. Then Cousins delivers another pass to Williams and smoosh! another dunk. Williams basically did the same thing both times in getting free. He and McLemore are major athletes. At least a loss can be fun to see.

Now let's see what we can do with the dead wood on the team. We certainly have figured out what the team is looking for. I'm sure they will be willing to trade any of about 6 players. Wonder if N'daiye could handle an ally oop. I kinda doubt it. He's got Causwell's stone hands.

Does anyone remember Phi Slamma Jamma? Add any one of a few guys from next year's draft class and you have a chance for some major dunk fests.

As an addendum, I saw a few nice passes from Vasquez so I haven't given up on him yet. We'll see how the draft goes. I think we could go into next year with neither of our present pgs but having the two we have won't cripple us. It just won't be ideal and I'm in the mood for having an ideal team today and not tomorrow. Greedy SOB, right?!?
 
Last edited:
Bricklayer said:
Williams missed both his post attempts yesterday, and I think has missed almost every post attempt he's made since turning pro. I DO like the idea of a postup callable three. I like the idea of mismatching with it. I like the idea of using it if Cuz is not in the game. I DON'T like the idea of trying to jury rig a lineup to use it for a player who has never been that effective with it at this level at the expense of one of the most dominant interior players in the game. Whatever we do with Williams has to be something that makes Cousins' life easier, not displaces him. That's Keith Smartian.
Click to expand...

"Smartian"? LOL You get a like just for that word :D
 
Glenn said:
Does anyone remember Phi Slamma Jamma? Add any one of a few guys from next year's draft class and you have a chance for some major dunk fests.
Click to expand...
Don't forget JT as well can catch the lob when you throw it up to him as well.

Also first big test for D Will against one Harrison Barnes, Barnes likes to post up but I think he will probably look to take D Will off the bounce I'm not sure tryng to post up a beast like D-Will is a good idea.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pshn80 said:
Don't agree. If the Kings look to that all the time, our opponents will do the same. But I agree that the threat of the lob is a very good offensive tool.
Click to expand...

Agreed. We don't want to try force games into dunk contests or try to become "NorCal Lob City" ;)

Let getting to rim come within the flow of the game. When it presents itself, by all means, Hammer away
 
Last edited:
If you don't look for it all the time, you can never find it when it presents itself. I like Brick's logic.

Some players make a living running the floor and moving without the ball. The Kings like to stand around in the half court offense at times. Their "bad" quarters are often plagued by this problem. They have made great strides compared to last year when it was epidemic.

DWil has a pretty big motor. Barnes seem to give him some trouble last night.
 
ppine said:
If you don't look for it all the time, you can never find it when it presents itself. I like Brick's logic.

Some players make a living running the floor and moving without the ball. The Kings like to stand around in the half court offense at times. Their "bad" quarters are often plagued by this problem. They have made great strides compared to last year when it was epidemic.

DWil has a pretty big motor. Barnes seem to give him some trouble last night.
Click to expand...

I thought he was competing very well against Barnes and certainly looked to have the physical advantage. What I don't like is pulling Williams out for long stretches, to give Salmons more time. What does this accomplish?

Whatever happened to giving a player a quick 'break' and then getting him back in the game, while he still has a flow going?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GWD
Open Letter to Coach Christie
Replies
23
Views
2K
Caccia
Caccia
Y
[Rumor] Warriors could acquire $36 million Kings forward via win-now Jonathan Kuminga swap
Replies
3
Views
231
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
sactowndog
An at-length discussion about... um, length (split from the [Game] thread)
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
dude12
D
Tetsujin
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
[Game] Kings vs. Timberwolves 10/24/2024 7pm Pacific 10pm Eastern
18 19 20
Replies
574
Views
15K
joemama
J
Caccia
Monk, DeRozan, Sabonis
Replies
19
Views
2K
Caccia
Caccia
Back
Top