RA on grant right now.

[sanchosforhire]

Grant asked RA if he would stress defense more this year than he has in past years. He said no.

Expect more of the same kings fans. At least from the defensive side of the ball.

 

[BJax24]

Grant asked RA if he would stress defense more this year than he has in past years. He said no.

Expect more of the same kings fans. At least from the defensive side of the ball.

That is completely unfair. What he was saying is that he can't stress defense anymore than he does already. That is why he said no. Not that he doesn't think D is not important. He did say that the personnel has changed since the Kings were one of the best defensive teams in 2003. To me that puts the onus on Petrie.

 

[Variant]

I'd love to go see first-hand a Kings practice. I have my doubts that defense is really stressed all that much, but how do ya really know unless you can see it for yourself?

 

[sanchosforhire]

So either RA stresses the hell out of defense and the players tune him out or his methods really suck. Either way is bad news for next year. But then again why should I expect that ole dog to change his stripes this late in his coaching career. Shame on me.

 

[BigWaxer]

RA is a lame duck coach this year so that makes it even worse.

 

[funkykingston]

So either RA stresses the hell out of defense and the players tune him out or his methods really suck.

Really, those are the only two alternatives?

How about: The Kings have arguably the WORST defensive starting PG?

Or: The Kings have ZERO post or interior defense?

Or: This team lacks a leader, a franchise player and talent in general.

I'm more than willing to criticize Adelman, but where are the "Fire Petrie" threads?

 

[sanchosforhire]

Don't hold your breath if your hoping to see a fire petrie thread. Id hope kings fans would be a little smarter than that.

 

[piksi]

What he was saying is that he can't stress defense anymore than he does already. That is why he said no.

I suggest that we need to find someone who can and quickly

 

[Bricklayer]

3 years ago this same coach coached an elite defensive squad.

Not sure why people have such a hard time putting two and two together.

Same coach, '02-03 players = top defensive team.

Same coach, '04-05 players = bad defensive team.


But somehow we get out of that that it is the COACH making us a bad defensive team? The coach hasn't changed. The players have. At some point people have to wake up and starting pointing fingers where they belong (if they are to be pointed at all) -- toward a front office who's only defensive player of note it has acquired in 3 years has been the much maligned Greg Ostertag (who I DO think should have played more of course). Our player analysis at this point seems to have been reduced to one silly question -- can he shoot? If the answer is yes, end of inquiry. We never seem to get down to silly irrelevant questions such as size, defense, toughness etc.

 

[funkykingston]

Don't hold your breath if your hoping to see a fire petrie thread.

And why exactly is that?

Unless the Maloofs have told Geoff to trim payroll without regard for team success in anticipation for a move out of Sacramento, I have no idea what he thinks he's doing.

Or are you honestly telling me that you think Petrie's performance over the last year or so was great?

Adelman pulled 50 wins out of a team that saw petulance and in-fighting to start the season, a trade of their SG, a trade of their PF and star, a broken leg by their starting center and practically another lost season by their sixth man.

Between Adelman and Petrie I think RA had a better season. And it wasn't even close.

 

[G_M]

Or are you honestly telling me that you think Petrie's performance over the last year or so was great?

Petrie traded away two high priced, aging, and injured stars from a team that MAY have gotten out of the first round with no personnel changes.

You can't judge Petrie's moves until the end of next season.

 

[funkykingston]

Petrie traded away two high priced, aging, and injured stars from a team that MAY have gotten out of the first round with no personnel changes. The team was stagnant and needed a change.

I haven't looked at the Kings as contenders since Webber's knee injury in the Dallas series. I wasn't upset that Petrie dealt Christie or Webb, since I didn't think they had any shot this season.

What upsets me is what they were traded for. If Mobley walks, as I'm almost sure he will, then the Kings traded DC for a lower payroll but NO room under the salary cap. The Webber deal gave us an almost equally untradeable piece in Kenny Thomas and two guys who are decent but nothing special in Skinner and Williamson.

It was said that these moves were going to be made for flexibility for making moves in the future. If so, Petrie needs to start making those moves. Right now, all he's done is move two contracts and leave the team with holes at the SG & PF.

 

[AleksandarN]

The problem with Rick is not that he does not teach or preach defense it is he spends more time with offense. He concentrates more on the offensive end then the defensive end this evident when you look at the lack of playing time for Tag. That causes alot of problems on a team especailly one that lack defensive players. In 2001-2003 we had defensive savy players that made up for lack of defensive emphasis

 

[BigWaxer]

3 years ago this same coach coached an elite defensive squad.

Are you kidding?

An "ELITE" defensive team. Sure we lead in the numbers just as the Suns did in the PF/PA cat. That is the most misleading stat around. We still could not get a stop when need. We still could not get a rebound when it counted. We still could not get a steal/block when it counted.

The Spurs / Pistons are an elite defensive team. Are you suggesting we were as good as they were this year? I surely hope not... I doubt anybody in 2002-3 said we had a great defensive team. This is all talking about the past and numbers...

This is truely a case of misleading stats and the numbers don't mean anything when it comes down to crunch time, because bottom line was we still could not get it done.

Why is it that Bibby played okay D in AZ and played okay/decent D with the USA team? Why is it that Pollard (a non-bitterman) said in an interview that in IN all they do is talk about defense and in Sac all they do is practice offense. GRANTED I will stop you now in saying neither has won anything.

We were not a Defensive power in 2002-3, You guys need to get that out of your heads.

 

[whozit]

I haven't looked at the Kings as contenders since Webber's knee injury in the Dallas series. I wasn't upset that Petrie dealt Christie or Webb, since I didn't think they had any shot this season.

What upsets me is what they were traded for. If Mobley walks, as I'm almost sure he will, then the Kings traded DC for a lower payroll but NO room under the salary cap. The Webber deal gave us an almost equally untradeable piece in Kenny Thomas and two guys who are decent but nothing special in Skinner and Williamson.

It was said that these moves were going to be made for flexibility for making moves in the future. If so, Petrie needs to start making those moves. Right now, all he's done is move two contracts and leave the team with holes at the SG & PF.

I agree that Mobley will probably walk and I think your meaning without using a sign and trade. It seems the Maloofs have put a ceiling on what they are going to spend. The team does have a little over 5 million is trade exemptions and the mid-level. By Mobley walking, it may free Petrie to use some of those assetts represented by exemptions. It may not free any cap room as far as the league is concerned but it may free up some under the ceiling the Maloofs may have set.

I am assuming a Maloof cap simply because every indication the last few years was that the team was going to lower payroll and damn the cost to the quality of product on the floor.

 

[natedizzle]

I thought RA's interview was very candid in terms of his assessment of Martin and Evans.

 

[Bricklayer]

We were not a Defensive power in 2002-3, You guys need to get that out of your heads.

This is indeed where the discussion breaks down with one side (obviously yours BTW ) simply attempting to win it by denying reality. Not much to talk about really. We were CLEARLY an elite defensive squad. One of the very best. The numbers make an argument we were THE best. I am already flying in their face by not making that argument. But trying to argue that we were anything but truly exceptional is just revisionist.

People often confuse elite defense and pace. Ooh, look, their opponents did not score much. Yeah, sure. Neither did they because they acheived their defense by walking it up every time. Bottomline, we led the league in OppFg%, led it in Opp3ptFG%, were second in steals, a respectable tied for 10th in blocks, and to whatever degree it is "the" defensive stat, were #2 in the league in Defensive Efficiency Rating at 97.1. Which was BETTER than the Pistons this year at 97.9, but not as good as the Spurs at 95.7 (we would have been second this year as well). You came down the floor against us, and we were as hard to score against as any team in the league. Also featured a Defensive Player of the Year candidate as our defensive captain.

To whatever degree its not just disingenuous, people get confused about that year a) out of tradition, and b) because of our defensive collpase against Dallas. The latter of course because once Webb went down we lost all ability to control the pace of the game and fell into very bad old habits of running up and down in a track meet. Was always Dallas' greatest threat to us -- that they tempt us to be stupid.

 

[whozit]

I thought RA's interview was very candid in terms of his assessment of Martin and Evans.

And that assessment was?

 

[natedizzle]

And that assessment was?

I don't remember every detail, but in terms of Mo he said that he needed to improve defensively in that he tends to get caught on picks.

In terms of Martin, he stated that he was a good on the ball defender but needed to earn how to harness his athleticism.

Feel free anyone to fill in the details.

 

[G_M]

I don't remember every detail, but in terms of Mo he said that he needed to improve defensively in that he tends to get caught on picks.

In terms of Martin, he stated that he was a good on the ball defender but needed to earn how to harness his athleticism.

Feel free anyone to fill in the details.

Also, Martin has been at the practice facility almost everyday since the season ended.

RA also called out Bibby. RA said that he noticed Bibby came out stong as the self proclaimed team "leader" and that his defense must improve if he is to assume a leadership role.

 

[Bricklayer]

Where is Reina when you need her? Yo transcript girl! Get on the ball here!

 

[BigWaxer]

We will agree to disagree Brick. I just think the numbers lied. I can point time and time again over the past years where they did. Such as the Mav's last year. Nobody considered them an elite "D" team but the numbers said otherwise.

Fact of the matter was even in that year we were not a lockdown defense. We got great stats, We got rebounds from jacking up 3's all day and long rebounds.

I just don't agree since our elite defense gave up such a large lead in game 7 AT home. That is not elite.

And I would say since we are all just normal fans. Take a poll who thinks our defense was comparable to Detriot or the Spurs this year?

 

[AleksandarN]

I still think we need a coach who has a defensive mentality if we are to go anywhere in the next couple of year and we ofcourse need more defensive role players to go along with our offensive options.

 

[captain bill]

2002-2003 Opponent Stats:
42% FG
32% 3PT
14 OFF REBS/31.9 DEF/45.8 TOT
21.5 AST
15.4 TO
95.2 PPG

2004-2005 OPP STATS
45.9% FG
35.7% 3PT
13.4 OFF REB/30.9 DEF/44.3 TOT
21.5 AST
14.2 TO
101.6 PTS

The Kings scored 2 pts less per game in 02-03 as opposed to 04-05 (101.7 to 103.7) but shot better (46.4% to 45.9%), meaning the Kings were taking less shots and better shots. The team played defense, as the stats show. Certainly they weren't elite, but combined with an elite efficiently run offense, a good defense can look elite. Basically, our offense can't be run successfully without a defense that can make stops. In 03, we had that defense. If you'll remember, that season was lost not on poor defense but on a combination of bad luck, bad breaks and bad free throw shooting. In 05, we went down in flames because we couldn't play defense. The Kings are not going to be an elite defensive team. They just don't have to be a terrible one. Adelman isn't going to build an elite defensive team, but he will build an elite offensive team that can play defense, which can be just as good. Were it not for the misfortune of playing against two of the greatest teams in history (Jordan's Bulls and Shaq and Kobe's Lakers), he would easily have a collection of rings that would silence any critics. Petrie can't be blamed either, he built a contender that came close to winning it all and 3 of the key players in that dynasty have aged so that it has to be rebuilt. Having a few down years (if you can call 50-win seasons that) is not enough to call for his head. Adelman and Petire work well together, as Petrie is from Princeton and has been critical in building the pieces for Adelman to run his team with. You can't have one without the other. Right now the Kings are at their lowest point in years, but they will build back. Just be patient.

 

[Bricklayer]

Fact of the matter was even in that year we were not a lockdown defense. We got great stats, We got rebounds from jacking up 3's all day and long rebounds.

There is no fact of the matter to that. The numbers do not lie -- you crossed halfcourt looking to score against us in '03 and your chance of doing so was LESS than against any other team in the NBA that season. Perhaps it was just a down year and there were no lockdown teams? Unlikely, given that the numbers stack up equally as well as teams we want to call lockdown today.

But even a great defensive team can be tempted into not being great. The mighty Spurs this season experienced EXACTLY the same thing in their series against Phoenix as we did three years ago against Dallas. Its their defense's Achilles' heel, just as it was ours -- they like to run now. So Phoenix ran, the Spurs ran, and end result is the Spurs, the SPURS, give up an average of 104.0ppg and allow their opponents in a WCF to shoot nearly 50% as a team for the series (.496), which is pretty much unheard of. It happens. And if Duncan had blown out his knee in the second game of that series I suspose we would all be sitting around here talking about how the Spurs collapsed defensively and really weren't an elite defensive team? Nope.

P.S. And no, the numbers did NOT say that Dallas was an elite defensive team this year. Not at the level we once were. They did however say they had become a good one, and that is for the most part true, albeit still shaky and not there every night for them. More like where we were in '01 when we first started to emerge as a good defensive team.

 

[SacTownKid]

Really, those are the only two alternatives?

How about: The Kings have arguably the WORST defensive starting PG?

Or: The Kings have ZERO post or interior defense?

Or: This team lacks a leader, a franchise player and talent in general.

I'm more than willing to criticize Adelman, but where are the "Fire Petrie" threads?

Petrie may get the ax but I can garuntee you that RA will be gone long before that. If the Kings are a .500 team after the first 25 games RA will be SYL.

 

[SacTownKid]

Are you kidding?

An "ELITE" defensive team. Sure we lead in the numbers just as the Suns did in the PF/PA cat. That is the most misleading stat around. We still could not get a stop when need. We still could not get a rebound when it counted. We still could not get a steal/block when it counted.

The Spurs / Pistons are an elite defensive team. Are you suggesting we were as good as they were this year? I surely hope not... I doubt anybody in 2002-3 said we had a great defensive team. This is all talking about the past and numbers...

This is truely a case of misleading stats and the numbers don't mean anything when it comes down to crunch time, because bottom line was we still could not get it done.

Why is it that Bibby played okay D in AZ and played okay/decent D with the USA team? Why is it that Pollard (a non-bitterman) said in an interview that in IN all they do is talk about defense and in Sac all they do is practice offense. GRANTED I will stop you now in saying neither has won anything.

We were not a Defensive power in 2002-3, You guys need to get that out of your heads.

RIGHT!!! I saw the same flaws. We were a better defensive team then but IN NO WAY an elite defensive squad. No way....

 

[BigWaxer]

There is no fact of the matter to that. The numbers do not lie -- you crossed halfcourt looking to score against us in '03 and your chance of doing so was LESS than against any other team in the NBA that season. Perhaps it was just a down year and there were no lockdown teams? Unlikely, given that the numbers stack up equally as well as teams we want to call lockdown today.

But even a great defensive team can be tempted into not being great. The mighty Spurs this season experienced EXACTLY the same thing in their series against Phoenix as we did three years ago against Dallas. Its their defense's Achilles' heel, just as it was ours -- they like to run now. So Phoenix ran, the Spurs ran, and end result is the Spurs, the SPURS, give up an average of 104.0ppg and allow their opponents in a WCF to shoot nearly 50% as a team for the series (.496), which is pretty much unheard of. It happens. And if Duncan had blown out his knee in the second game of that series I suspose we would all be sitting around here talking about how the Spurs collapsed defensively and really weren't an elite defensive team? Nope.

P.S. And no, the numbers did NOT say that Dallas was an elite defensive team this year. Not at the level we once were. They did however say they had become a good one, and that is for the most part true, albeit still shaky and not there every night for them. More like where we were in '01 when we first started to emerge as a good defensive team.

I actually said last year as they were a decent rebounding team. Not this year of course. They also had a decent PF/PA stat...

Besides that I do agree with what you said.

If we had, which I will argue hands down the best “O” then couple that with the “ELITE” “D” Then how did we not get a ring? I agree luck has some factor in it ( I play Poker, I know about luck... ). Add in that crappy ref called game. Not to mention I figure we were playing against the two best players in the game at that time.

I agree Brick with most of what you’re saying. I would say we had a decent, mid/upper level D.

Some of the main reasons/players for our great D stats decided to go in hiding playoff time which was our downfall that year.


That all said I dont think RA makes "D" a priority (based on interviews I have heard), I also don't think there is a coach that can replace RA and return the same results... Catch 22..

 

[4cwebb]

3 years ago this same coach coached an elite defensive squad.

Not sure why people have such a hard time putting two and two together.

Same coach, '02-03 players = top defensive team.

Same coach, '04-05 players = bad defensive team.


But somehow we get out of that that it is the COACH making us a bad defensive team? The coach hasn't changed. The players have. At some point people have to wake up and starting pointing fingers where they belong (if they are to be pointed at all) -- toward a front office who's only defensive player of note it has acquired in 3 years has been the much maligned Greg Ostertag (who I DO think should have played more of course). Our player analysis at this point seems to have been reduced to one silly question -- can he shoot? If the answer is yes, end of inquiry. We never seem to get down to silly irrelevant questions such as size, defense, toughness etc.

Damn, was Keon Clark acquired longer than 3 years ago? I guess the glory days happened longer ago than I realized...

 

[zeke04]

haven't former players said that the team spends 90% of the time on offense durning practice? Spend more time on defense and even these "non defensive" players would play better defense.