Petrie has something in works in next couple of days

Almost the entire league is waiting for the Dwight Howardgate to resolve as so many teams and players could be involved. If that goes or dies then the rest of the league will get back to business of trading and signing FA's. Suspect many will wait until training camp for the last 1 or 2 slots. Kings have 14 contracts now, so a trade needs to happen to sign a FA as I don't think Maloofs will carry 15 contracts. Now that they don't own the Reno D-League team don't know where they can "stash" a player to get experience.
 
Reke 13 Havoc said:
well if thats the case why not just let Reke adapt to the SF and have shooters at PG/SG instead. IT, Brooks, MT
Click to expand...

Why not let Cousins adapt to PG? There's no point in keeping a player if you don't intend to use his strengths. Also, our defense would continue to be horrible.
 
Reke 13 Havoc said:
well if thats the case why not just let Reke adapt to the SF and have shooters at PG/SG instead. IT, Brooks, MT
Click to expand...

Because then we're much the same defensively as we were last year, worst defensive team in the league by about 3-4 pts per game, which is a huge margin. Can't have any combo of IT/Brooks/MT on the floor at the same time if you give a F about defense. Not with who we have up front.
 
rainmaker said:
Because then we're much the same defensively as we were last year, worst defensive team in the league by about 3-4 pts per game, which is a huge margin.
Click to expand...

Well, it was 3.2 PPG, but that's a bit misleading because we also played the single-highest pace in the league. When you look at points allowed per 100 possessions, we were still bad - 29th in fact - but we weren't the worst, much less the worst by 3 points. We were in a pretty tight #26-#30 clump, so we were among the worst in the league but it's not the case that we were the absolute worst by a historic margin on a per-possession basis, which is what matters.
 
Reke 13 Havoc said:
well if thats the case why not just let Reke adapt to the SF and have shooters at PG/SG instead. IT, Brooks, MT
Click to expand...
Offensively, that can work. But defensively, it did not work as had been shown last season with Smart's fetish for smallball.

Evans is not as big and strong as Lebron (who can play both as SF and an undersized PF). Defensively, Evans is a midget at SF compared to the elite SFs in the NBA. We already saw that last season. The same problem happened with Salmons when Petrie thought he was the answer at our SF need. Both failed. Both are not big and strong enough to match the elite SFs. So, if you at least want some improvement you don't want to repeat the same obvious mistake again of playing them at SF.

Also, any combination of our midget guards (MT, IT, and Brooks) at the back court will obviously be a huge problem again defensively. The combination of back court midgets playing with a midget Evans/Salmons at SF will almost assure disaster for the Kings. Compound this problem with the problem of having to play the midget Hayes (at PF and C) and the midget T-Rob (at PF) and you can almost smell the scent of lottery again next year.
 
Last edited:
rainmaker said:
Because then we're much the same defensively as we were last year, worst defensive team in the league by about 3-4 pts per game, which is a huge margin. Can't have any combo of IT/Brooks/MT on the floor at the same time if you give a F about defense
Click to expand...

i do kind of agree with all you guys about not wanting to put Reke at the 3. and if no trade happens i get the feeling MT is gonna have to be 6th man next year. but i NEVER said i wanna see IT/Brooks/MT on the court at the same time. if that happens ill wanna run down to the court and smack Smart on the head
 
Reke 13 Havoc said:
i do kind of agree with all you guys about not wanting to put Reke at the 3. and if no trade happens i get the feeling MT is gonna have to be 6th man next year. but i NEVER said i wanna see IT/Brooks/MT on the court at the same time. if that happens ill wanna run down to the court and smack Smart on the head
Click to expand...

Combo of = any 2 of IT/Brooks/MT.
 
I highly suspect that baring another trade, James Johnson will be our starting SF at the beginning of the season. So I really doubt we'll see much of Tyreke at the SF position. Not sure how they're going to resolve the Tyreke/Thornton issue at SG, but most likely Thornton will come off the bench, or be traded. I believe they'll want to give it a trial run before making any trades, unless a no brainer comes along. So as of now, the starting lineup I see is:

D. Cousins: Center
J. Thompson: PF
J. Johnson: SF
T. Evans: SG
I. Thomas/A. Brooks: PG ?

Not sure how the PG situation will unfold, but it'll probably resolve itself during training camp and pre-season. From purely a defensive point of view, I think we're a better defensive team with IT in the starting lineup. But thats not my decision to make. Johnson could end up making quite a difference with his weakside shotblocking. He's also a very good rotational player on defense. If Cuz can make some improvements in his man defense, and stop reaching, our defense should be better overall. Of course all of this could change with a trade or two.. My crystal ball is dirty, and I'm out of glass cleaner.
 
Chatting with bajaden this afternoon about the Kings, SF position/Johnson, trades and Petrie and baja made some good sense with the following:

" I think when he (Petrie) made the move to aquire James Johnson, he was done looking to upgrade the SF position. At least until he see's how Johnson works out. That doesn't mean he won't still trade some players, if for no reason, other than to thin out the congestion in the back court, and perhaps add some depth to the front court.

Made such good sense knowing Petie as we do, I can now better deal with TDOS and the 9 weeks until training camp starts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top