[NBA] Comments that don't warrant a thread (DEC)

#1
In terms of basketball strength/physicality is there anyone that comes close to Sabonis I mean the guy just throws around fully grown C's like it's nothing, he's got a solid build but by looking it him you would not expect him to be able to easily move guys much bigger.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#7
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/...ng-atlanta-hawks-second-version-team-building


I feel like Trae's great numbers are somehow hiding the fact that the Hawks have somehow gotten worse than they were last year despite upgrading a lot of their roster (kinda).
And, by "somehow," two of their three best players are either injured (Mekaneck) or suspended (Collins). They won their first two, then they took Philly to the limit, then they had a tough home/at-home with Miami, which is a Top 5 team in the league, by record. Then Collins popped positive, and everything went to **** after that.

That being said, the Hawks had no chance to be any good, without those guys, but I still didn't expect them to be this bad.
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#8
And, by "somehow," two of their three best players are either injured (Mekaneck) or suspended (Collins). They won their first two, then they took Philly to the limit, then they had a tough home/at-home with Miami, which is a Top 5 team in the league, by record. Then Collins popped positive, and everything went to **** after that.

That being said, the Hawks had no chance to be any good, without those guys, but I still didn't expect them to be this bad.
I mean, I'm fine with their record being what it is (they probably are to, draft pick considered) but they've been getting blown out by fifty points more often than should probably be happening. Part of it is them losing all of their good defenders over the offseason but the other part is a lot harder to put my finger on.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#9
This forum as adamant that he couldn't play in the NBA. Stauskas?
As I pointed out in last month's CTDWAT, McLemore has the same number of 20+ point games that he had in his last season in Sacramento (or, actually, any one of his seasons in Sacramento, aside from his second one), but is somehow averaging fewer points. That means that he's just swinging from decent to terrible, with no stops in-between.

I tell you what though, he does appear to definitely benefit from playing with two ball-dominant guys, who are going to do all his thinking for him. Also, the fact that Gordon is injured means that there is no legitimate challenger for his spot, so he's not looking over his shoulder all the time. He gets to play free and loose in Houston; anything they get out of him offensively is "found money," so he doesn't have the burden of 'needing' to score X amount of points for his team to win, any more.

In Houston, if McLemore scores 20, they're going to win by 30, and if he scores zero, they're still going to win by 10. In Sacramento, when McLemore scored zero, the Kings usually lost by 10.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#10
I mean, I'm fine with their record being what it is (they probably are to, draft pick considered) but they've been getting blown out by fifty points more often than should probably be happening. Part of it is them losing all of their good defenders over the offseason but the other part is a lot harder to put my finger on.
It's not as simple as they lost all they're good defenders: they still have plenty of good defenders, but:
  1. Many of them (Huerter, Bembry, Hunter, Crabbe) play the same position, and
  2. Much of their playing time has been sacrificed for Vince Carter's farewell tour.
Also, Collins is a pretty good defender, and you can't make up his loss with Jabari Parker. While Parker is having something of a comeback season offensively, he's still as much of a sieve as he ever was on defense. Atlanta signed him to be a super-sub, and now they're relying on him to be a go-to guy, and it's not working.
 
#11
As I pointed out in last month's CTDWAT, McLemore has the same number of 20+ point games that he had in his last season in Sacramento (or, actually, any one of his seasons in Sacramento, aside from his second one), but is somehow averaging fewer points. That means that he's just swinging from decent to terrible, with no stops in-between.

I tell you what though, he does appear to definitely benefit from playing with two ball-dominant guys, who are going to do all his thinking for him. Also, the fact that Gordon is injured means that there is no legitimate challenger for his spot, so he's not looking over his shoulder all the time. He gets to play free and loose in Houston; anything they get out of him offensively is "found money," so he doesn't have the burden of 'needing' to score X amount of points for his team to win, any more.

In Houston, if McLemore scores 20, they're going to win by 30, and if he scores zero, they're still going to win by 10. In Sacramento, when McLemore scored zero, the Kings usually lost by 10.
True. My argument for McLemore was always that he had a role in the NBA. It was evident by the fact that no matter who the team brought in or drafted, they couldn't outplay McLemore. It doesn't matter if the Kings drafted poorly or couldn't get top free agents. There was not another NBA guy the Kings could get to supplant him. Houston doesn't ask anything out of him except to play defense and space the floor. Which is a good role for him.

The issue in Sacramento, which is the issue with every Sacramento Kings draft pick, is the fans want an immediate superstar. Any top draft pick that doesn't appear ready to take the team to the promise land out the gate is crucified. We love our late round role players though.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#12
True. My argument for McLemore was always that he had a role in the NBA. It was evident by the fact that no matter who the team brought in or drafted, they couldn't outplay McLemore. It doesn't matter if the Kings drafted poorly or couldn't get top free agents. There was not another NBA guy the Kings could get to supplant him.
I mean, agreed, with a minor caveat, and you could say the same thing about Jason Thompson: something between 90-95 percent of all the dudes who ever get drafted are good enough to play in the NBA but, and this is especially true for the players on the margins, you can be made or broken by getting drafted by the wrong team. And, who knows? It looked like Malone had him on his way: if he doesn't get fired by the Gerbil, maybe McLemore is Danny Green v2.0 by now?

When I see kids with potential either flounder around until they either luck themselves into a good situation, or wash out of the league entirely, it increases my frustration with analytics I know that coaches and management have to have access to this information, they have to. I can't be convinced that analytics can't be used to figure out how to get value out of most of these players, but most coaches and GMs can't be bothered to do the work.


The issue in Sacramento, which is the issue with every Sacramento Kings draft pick, is the fans want an immediate superstar. Any top draft pick that doesn't appear ready to take the team to the promise land out the gate is crucified.
He was never allowed to live down his draft status, as if it was his fault that the Kings took him that high.
 
#19
True. My argument for McLemore was always that he had a role in the NBA. It was evident by the fact that no matter who the team brought in or drafted, they couldn't outplay McLemore. It doesn't matter if the Kings drafted poorly or couldn't get top free agents. There was not another NBA guy the Kings could get to supplant him. Houston doesn't ask anything out of him except to play defense and space the floor. Which is a good role for him.

The issue in Sacramento, which is the issue with every Sacramento Kings draft pick, is the fans want an immediate superstar. Any top draft pick that doesn't appear ready to take the team to the promise land out the gate is crucified. We love our late round role players though.
BMac played 4 1/2 seasons here. You're acting as if we didn't give him time to develop and now all the sudden he's budding into the player we all thought he could be coming out of Kansas.

Go look at his stats. Despite having a good game, his shooting percentages are the worst they've ever been in his entire career despite getting more open looks than he's ever had. He's also still a sieve on defense.
 
#20
BMac played 4 1/2 seasons here. You're acting as if we didn't give him time to develop and now all the sudden he's budding into the player we all thought he could be coming out of Kansas.

Go look at his stats. Despite having a good game, his shooting percentages are the worst they've ever been in his entire career despite getting more open looks than he's ever had. He's also still a sieve on defense.
Sheesh.

Read the post again. There are no claims about sudden stardom. Only a role. No claims about development, which the Kings are notoriously bad at.
 
Last edited:

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#21
Sheesh.

Read the post again. There are no claims about sudden stardom. Only a role. No claims about development, which the Kings were notoriously bad at.
fixed.
Under the Vlade regime, the Kings have actually seemed to gotten their act together on that front with Bobby/Rico Hines(/and now apparently Stacey Augmon) all serving as player development coaches almost independently of the actual coaching staff.
 
#22
Sheesh.

Read the post again. There are no claims about sudden stardom. Only a role. No claims about development, which the Kings are notoriously bad at.
I mean I guess he has a role if you count a role being a guy who is only playing because other players are injured and only on the team because the team has all it's money wrapped up in a few players and is desperate to find players on the minimum that can shoot.