Our Guards Since the New Year

[Agent23]

As it turns out, win% is the only stat that ultimately matters. Yes, it is controlled by many factors (it is not vague at all however). But then again, what stat is not controlled by many factors.

If the team has a winning percentage of about 35% with or without variable "a", I will tend to conclude that variable "a" does not have a strong impact upon wins or losses - no matter how many ways I am told that variable "a" is really awesome. And variable "a" might be really awesome, but who really cares if it does not influence win % much at all.

Carmelo Anthony with the Nuggets might be a decent comparison (although Tyreke has not shown himself to be anywhere as good as Carmelo). Carmelo is a great player, but it never translated into many wins at Denver. It was not him. It was not Denver. It just didn't work. He gets traded to NY and both he and Denver are better for it.

Honestly, I don't care if Tyreke avearges 40 points a game. Until it translates into wins I am not impressed.

So can we say the same for Demarcus Cousins, Isaiah Thomas, Marcus Thornton and whoever else is on this team as well?

 

[kupman]

So can we say the same for Demarcus Cousins, Isaiah Thomas, Marcus Thornton and whoever else is on this team as well?

yes.

 

[rainmaker]

yes.

David Lee: All Star under Marc Jackson
David Lee: Not an All Star under Keith Smart

Roster pretty much the same as Bogut has been injured basically since arrival. But Lee is somehow a different player?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

David Lee: All Star under Marc Jackson
David Lee: Not an All Star under Keith Smart

Roster pretty much the same as Bogut has been injured basically since arrival. But Lee is somehow a different player?

Not to hijack the thread, but I never knew, until a minute ago, that Stephen is Curry's middle name: he's got that whole Mayce Edward Christopher Webber III thing happening.

 

[Glenn]

Not to hijack the thread, but I never knew, until a minute ago, that Stephen is Curry's middle name: he's got that whole Mayce Edward Christopher Webber III thing happening.

Don't worry about hijacking the thread. The subject isn't that interesting.

 

[Gilles]

What do you know? 42 minutes and the end result still looks decent.

 

[Kingster]

Instead of acknowledging any of the stats presented in this thread, you hi-jack it, start talking about something different, and my guess is it's because IT is a considerable part of the problem. How unexpected it's you of all people doing this.

What is something which lends itself to transition points against? Quick shooting jumpers and an undisciplined running style/offense. Who does that normally fall on recently? Well, IT is definitely a part of it. Not only jacking up quick jumpers himself, but as the PG and charged with setting up the offense, he's instead looking to quickly set up a quick shot before getting our offense set. It isn't about 2 on 1 of 3 on 2 fastbreaks, you attack those, it's the slower transition opportunities where a layup isn't there that you pull it out and set it up. We take a remarkable amount of quick shots in those scenarios simply because a guy has an open look, even if 18, 16, 14 on the shotclock. As a PG, you don't have to pass to a guy in those situations, but a coach also doesn't have to insist on a everyone be aggressive, take the first look you see, everyone's a shooter/scorer offense. Funny, you campaign for a run and gun style more than anyone else, and a direct byproduct of that is transition points against.

Second part of it is how often do we have a mini chucker or two getting back trying to stop a fast break? Twice, three times a game? IT, Jimmer, Brooks and MT are practically worthless getting back and stopping a break, so when you play them you have to be damn sure the shots you're taking are good shots, which goes back to our PG and Smart.

The problem is not minutes. The problem is our lack of a system, our small ball lineups, undisciplined team as a whole which usually is a mark of a poorly managed team and quick shooting/poor shots which many times come as a result of our terrible PG play.

The whole IT thing is moronic. Has he been playing well of late? No. Yes, he has been taking ill-advised shots. Is he the raison detre of the Kings demise? No. It's up to the coach to guide his young pg and point out the error of his ways. Apparently, you have such high regard for IT's acumen that you think he's ready to be a coach on the floor after a year and a half in the league. IT is a scapegoat for the simple minded. Go sell crazy someplace else.

 

[mac]

The whole IT thing is moronic. Has he been playing well of late? No. Yes, he has been taking ill-advised shots. Is he the raison detre of the Kings demise? No. It's up to the coach to guide his young pg and point out the error of his ways. Apparently, you have such high regard for IT's acumen that you think he's ready to be a coach on the floor after a year and a half in the league. IT is a scapegoat for the simple minded. Go sell crazy someplace else.

I find this funny because you basically didn't give a sh*t when Evans was the scapegoat under pretty much the very same conditions. With you, everything that IT does is excusable. Been shooting poorly? Not a sign of him being a poor shooter, despite his college averages saying so - it's just a shooting slump. Not making plays? Not a sign of him not being a natural playmaker - it's Smart's fault for not pointing out his errors. Note that I'm not even bashing IT here, I just think you sir, are one huge hypocrite in saying that IT is a scapegoat for the simple minded.

 

[Spike]

The whole IT thing is moronic. Has he been playing well of late? No. Yes, he has been taking ill-advised shots. Is he the raison detre of the Kings demise? No. It's up to the coach to guide his young pg and point out the error of his ways. Apparently, you have such high regard for IT's acumen that you think he's ready to be a coach on the floor after a year and a half in the league. IT is a scapegoat for the simple minded. Go sell crazy someplace else.

How is this any different than those who were doing the same thing to Evans when he was (briefly) the PG? It's not. Then, as is now, the problem, among others, remains coaching.

 

[UK_King]

I don't have a problem with getting on IT for the things he actually does do poorly, but i do take umbrage with the notion he's the only thing holding this team back from being .500

I would take umbrage with people saying that about any of the players because barring a 1-40 shooting performance with 48 turnovers you're not likely to lose a game on your own.

 

[ppine]

Brick,
This is one of your best and most thoughtful posts.

 

[Hadlowe]

I don't have a problem with getting on IT for the things he actually does do poorly, but i do take umbrage with the notion he's the only thing holding this team back from being .500

I would take umbrage with people saying that about any of the players because barring a 1-40 shooting performance with 48 turnovers you're not likely to lose a game on your own.

I'm not sure who is saying that IT is the only problem. He is a much better player than a 60th pick. I'll give you that. The main problem is that he doesn't play well with Tyreke and has done a lousy job of setting up the offense when on the court and defending against opposing guards. That's on the coach and on Cousins for insisting that IT be the pg.

I'm still waiting for coach to try the Jimmer/Tyreke backcourt experiment, see if Jimmer can do what he was drafted to do instead of running him with the bench mob of no offensive potential.

Barring that happening, play MT and Tyreke together. MT doesn't need the ball to be effective.

 

[The_Jamal]

Again, it all comes back to establishing roles. You think IT/Jimmer/Brooks/Thornton would be allowed to do what they do now on OKC or Miami? I think IT can be a valuable #3 option for us if he's reigned into a proper role. I.E diverting to Cousins and Reke before looking for his own offense.

 

[Spike]

I don't know that IT or Brooks would see time on Miami. Jimmer may get spot/developing minutes. But, I agree with your overall point. It's a free-for-all. Hell, even James Johnson was given the green light prior to the start of the year - one bad idea among many.

 

[The_Jamal]

Exactly. While Reke and Cousins clearly aren't the level of players on those elite teams, it's still how you establish a pecking order on offense. Shane Battier, Mario Chalmers, and Mike Miller know exactly who they are and how they fit with Miami. You never see them attempting to outshoot/score LeBron/Wade/Bosh.

We simply will not be a successful offensive team when we have 5 guards all shooting at essentially the same rate. Tyreke absolutely forces shots, but he's a player who's still valuable even if he isn't scoring the ball. IT/Thornton/Jimmer/Brooks's only real value comes from putting the ball in the hoop.

I'm still not ready to give up on IT as I think he's suffering more from a lack of guidance problem than lack of talent problem.

 

[Glenn]

I wouldn't give up on IT for the same reason I wouldn't give up on anyone who is only in his 2nd year of play. Besides he has some qualities that would fit on most teams, probably off the bench, if they didn't already have Brooks. We'll see how he evolves as time passes and also how he evolves under a competent coach. He has too many natural skills and leadership qualities to toss away quickly.

This team can be straightened out with moneyed owners who don't mind losing money on basketball and a competent GM and coach. Add those changes and we'd be fighting for a playoff spot. I can guess as well as anyone. How we ended up with so may guards is beyond me.

Tune in next year because one way or another, there will be significant changes and they will be in a positive direction.

 

[bajaden]

That is pretty amazing stuff. I could imagine Kobe putting up with Keith Smart for all of about 5 minutes.

If Smart was coaching the Lakers, he'd be trying to figure out who the go to guy is on the team!

 

[HereWeBoogie]

If Smart was coaching the Lakers, he's be trying to figure out who the go to guy is on the team!

he'd probably be giving kobe 25mpg due to his age and at some point in the game he'd use a lineup with steve blake, steve nash, jodie meeks, Kobe, Jamison or some other midget lineup

 

[UK_King]

one of the reasons he often gives for his "rotations" is "we don't have any superstars on this team"

So i suppose it depends on whether he considers Kobe a superstar

 

[HereWeBoogie]

oh ya i forgot his philosophy. everyone coming off the bench is just as good as the starter they come in for

 

[beb0p]

Dude, guys, stop. Just stop. Let's just stick to the facts. There is no need to twist and spin the numbers just to make Smart look bad.

This entire premise is just one big slight of hand, a fudging of the numbers. Fact: Tyreke's mins is skewed because the Kings had blow-out losses after blow-out losses where the coach emptied the bench early.

If you exclude the lob-sided losses and only focus on close or relatively close games, Tyreke is averaging roughly 35 mins a game since the new year. Thing is, if the Kings are competitive and manage to stay in games going forward, you can expect Reke to get about the same amount of mins that Wade is getting (about 35 mins/game).

That's not to say that Smart is a good coach (he isn't) but there's no need to use this Fox News style attack, especially on a coach who is already vulnerableto facts.

 

[bajaden]

Again, it all comes back to establishing roles. You think IT/Jimmer/Brooks/Thornton would be allowed to do what they do now on OKC or Miami? I think IT can be a valuable #3 option for us if he's reigned into a proper role. I.E diverting to Cousins and Reke before looking for his own offense.

Here's part of the problem with this scenario. And I actually like the original post. All the guards are being lumped in as the problem. It implies that Tyreke isn't getting his shots, because of IT, Thornton, Jimmer, Brooks etc. The fact is, Jimmer has played the fewest minutes of any player on the team with Tyreke. So few that I couldn't even find accurate data on it. The best 82 games could come up with is a total of 18 minutes for the entire year. That just doesn't seem right to me, but unless someone can come up with a better number, I'll go with it. Regardless, neither Jimmer or Thornton has spent a lot of time this season on the floor at the same time with Evans. Therefore, in real playing time, the blame goes somewhere else. Mainly I. Thomas, and in some games, Cisco and Salmons.

I thought that when Brooks was starting, he deferred to both Evans and Cousins. Since he's not starting, its a different picture, and his minutes with either of them, especially Evans have been reduced dramaticly. Evans is averaging 30.5 MPG and 11.7 APG, while averaging 15.1 PPG. Doug Christie, in his hayday with the Kings averaged around 9 attempts per game, only 2.7 less than Tyreke, and I think we can all agree that Evans is a better offensive player than Christie was.

Thomas, who is the worse three point shooter amongst the guards, has taken more three point shots than anyone, except Thornton, who I might add is currently the second worse three point shooter amongst the guards. IT has taken 161 shots from beyond the arc while shooting a dismal 30.6%. Evans has taken only 46 three point attempts while shooting a very respectable 38. 3%. Only Brooks and Jimmer are shooting a better percentage than Tyreke. My point is, its hard to blame Jimmer, Brooks and Thornton for taking shots away from Tyreke in real time, when neither of them are on the floor with Tyreke very much.

Now if you want to question their minutes, thats fine, but thats not their fault, its the coaches fault. When Thornton comes on the floor with the second unit, its his job to score. I'll admit that he hasn't done a good job of it lately, but to be honest, he spends large amounts of time on the floor without touching the ball, while players like Outlaw, JJ, and Brooks dominate the ball. Even T. Robb gets a bug up his butt at times. Right now, Evans, Thornton, and Cousins are attempting to sacrifice their games, so guys less talented can get shots. Instead of running plays to get Cousins and Evans easy shots, we're using them to get other players easy shots. And many times, the players that are getting wide open shots, are the poorest shooters on the team.

 

[bajaden]

Exactly. While Reke and Cousins clearly aren't the level of players on those elite teams, it's still how you establish a pecking order on offense. Shane Battier, Mario Chalmers, and Mike Miller know exactly who they are and how they fit with Miami. You never see them attempting to outshoot/score LeBron/Wade/Bosh.

We simply will not be a successful offensive team when we have 5 guards all shooting at essentially the same rate. Tyreke absolutely forces shots, but he's a player who's still valuable even if he isn't scoring the ball. IT/Thornton/Jimmer/Brooks's only real value comes from putting the ball in the hoop.

I'm still not ready to give up on IT as I think he's suffering more from a lack of guidance problem than lack of talent problem.

I think IT would be a great guard off the bench, but I don't see him as a starting PG on any team in the league except the Kings, and he shouldn't be the starting PG on this team either. Now you can argue that he's better than any alternative we have, but thats a different argument. I watched IT play 3 years at Washington, and I don't see a tinkers damm bit of difference between then an now. He's exactly that same player. He's always played with a chip on his shoulder, which can be a good thing, or a bad thing. In his case, many times its a bad thing. I've watched him ignore Cuz and JT under the basket. In the last game, at least three times he had an easy entry pass available to Cuz, and just went on his merry way to take a shot of his own.

 

[bajaden]

Dude, guys, stop. Just stop. Let's just stick to the facts. There is no need to twist and spin the numbers just to make Smart look bad.

This entire premise is just one big slight of hand, a fudging of the numbers. Fact: Tyreke's mins is skewed because the Kings had blow-out losses after blow-out losses where the coach emptied the bench early.

If you exclude the lob-sided losses and only focus on close or relatively close games, Tyreke is averaging roughly 35 mins a game since the new year. Thing is, if the Kings are competitive and manage to stay in games going forward, you can expect Reke to get about the same amount of mins that Wade is getting (about 35 mins/game).

That's not to say that Smart is a good coach (he isn't) but there's no need to use this Fox News style attack, especially on a coach who is already vulnerableto facts.

Number one, I happen to like fox news, and maybe you meant MSNBC news. Number two, I'll attack Smart if I think he deserves it, and he does! Since he became head coach, just about every player on this team is playing worse than they were before. Not a surprise. The Maloofs like smooth talkers. And Smart is a smooth talker. So was just about every coach they've hired since Adelman. And why didn't they like Adelman? Because he wasn't a very social or PR guy. He didn't like the limelight. They would have fired Albert Einstein for his poor public speaking.

 

[bajaden]

Dude, guys, stop. Just stop. Let's just stick to the facts. There is no need to twist and spin the numbers just to make Smart look bad.

This entire premise is just one big slight of hand, a fudging of the numbers. Fact: Tyreke's mins is skewed because the Kings had blow-out losses after blow-out losses where the coach emptied the bench early.

If you exclude the lob-sided losses and only focus on close or relatively close games, Tyreke is averaging roughly 35 mins a game since the new year. Thing is, if the Kings are competitive and manage to stay in games going forward, you can expect Reke to get about the same amount of mins that Wade is getting (about 35 mins/game).

That's not to say that Smart is a good coach (he isn't) but there's no need to use this Fox News style attack, especially on a coach who is already vulnerableto facts.

I think you mean't MSNBC news.