Reke & IT, Do They Mesh?

[rainmaker]

There's been some talk recently about a Reke/IT backcourt and whether or not it works. We all have our opinions about who we would prefer to have the ball, how much we want Reke or IT involved, and whether or not an IT/Reke backcourt is the best pairing in the backcourt for this team. Some prefer Reke/Brooks after their promising chemistry before Reke's injury. Some prefer IT/Reke. A growing segment is campaigning for a Jimmer/Reke backcourt. What we haven't seen is someone actually breaking down the numbers and take a closer look at how these players perform next to one another and what the actual numbers say as to who compliments who.

This is all per 36 mins.


Reke/IT Backcourt

Reke w/ IT On Court
PTS-14.2
FGA-11.8
FG%-47
AST-3.1
+/- (-8.0)

Reke w/ IT Off Court
PTS-20.1
FGA-15.3
FG%-47
AST-3.9
+/- (-2.8)

IT w/ Reke On Court
PTS-16.3
FGA-13.4
FG%-46
AST-4.4
+/- (-8.0)

IT w/ Reke Off Court
PTS-18.2
FGA-13.9
FG%-43%
AST-4.8
+/- (1.3)

The first statistic which really sticks out is that they're a +/-(-8.0) when out there on the floor together per 36. Yeah we've had people saying playing them together is like mixing oil and water, but that is extremely poor. The numbers lend themselves to the point of view that they don't mesh together.

Second, Reke averages 6 pts less per 36 with IT out there with him which is a significant number(20.1 vs 14.2) while getting up roughly three less shots per 36. But that isn't all. We regularly hear IT is a willing passer and doesn't take away from Reke. Well, not only is Reke scoring 6 pts less per 36 with IT out there and getting up three fewer shots per 36, but IT is taking more shots than Reke when they play together as well as averaging more points(16.3 vs 14.2). The idea IT doesn't negate Reke's effectiveness or impact on the game if a fallacy.

When paired together, IT is taking 13.4 FGA's per 36 to Reke's 11.8.

Reke/Brooks Backcourt

Reke w/Brooks On Court
PTS-23.0
FGA-16.5
FG%-50%
AST-3.5
+/- (-.6)

Reke w/ Brooks Off Court
PTS-14.0
FGA-12.1
FG%-44%
AST-3.6
+/- (-7.9)

Brooks w/ Reke On Court
PTS-13.8
FGA-10.2
FG%-47%
AST-2.4
+/- (-.6)

A few of us commonly talk about Brooks being willing to play off Reke, yet it's brushed aside. Yet this is a pretty surprising difference.
Reke w/ IT= 14.2 pts per 36
Reke w/ Brooks= 23.0 pts per 36

9 pts per 36 less difference between Reke playing with IT vs Brooks

it isn't just points though
Reke FG% w/ IT= 47%
Reke FG% w/ Brooks= 50%

and why is Reke better when he's getting more touches and more involved, and what prevents that from happening at times?
IT FGA's w/ Reke= 13.4
Brooks FGA's w/ Reke= 10.2

then we get into comparative (+/-)
Reke w/ Brooks= (-.6)
Reke w/ IT= (-8.0)

It's pretty obvious who the better pairing is, if your thought process is more concerned with surrounding your 2nd best player with complementary talent rather than handing the team over to your 4th, 5th or 6th best talent while considerably negating the effect/impact on the game your 2nd best player has. This isn't about adding IT to Reke as that clearly isn't happening. They don't compliment one another. Brooks did, was willing to play more off both Reke and Cuz and we saw success before Reke's injury.

I do think Jimmer/Reke is an intriguing option, but the sample size is small and I'm not a fan of switching lineups around too often, although I'd entertain the though and wouldn't be dead set against it. Jimmer would have to show more consistency, but at the same time he can't when his idiot coach won't play him. But it wouldn't be tough to say, both a Brooks/Reke backcourt and a Jimmer/Reke backcourt would fit better and complement each other better than a IT/Reke backcourt.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

The reason Brooks 'works' better is because he simply gets out of the way. I think it just makes sense that Evans will have better numbers, and the team will play less selfish overall if you insert a more passive player into the starting guard spot.

Our starting lineup right now has two 'passive' players. JT and Salmons. It's a minor miracle that Salmons has turned into a 'glue' guy, but here we are. The problem is that the 1,2,3 most ball dominant players in our starting unit all look to score. The weird thing with Brooks is that he IS a shoot first guard, but for whatever reason when he is on the court with Evans he will defer. It's not really explainable.

The other side of this coin is that (and I have no numbers to back this up) I'm fairy certain Cousins numbers with IT on the court are better than they are with Brooks. That's no small deal. Since Cousins suspension (and the move to put IT back into the starting unit) Cousins has been playing at an All Star level. He wasn't doing that before. So we have to be careful here. The players like Thomas, they respect Thomas. And this is a bit of speculation here, but I don't think Cousins likes Brooks, or likes playing with Brooks. Off camera we've heard him yelling things at Brooks quite a bit, including a very loud 'Pass the ****ing ball' a few weeks ago. Body language says a lot, too.

I say all this to say that Jimmer might be the guy here. I think Cousins and Jimmer like each other. I think Jimmer looks for Cousins and vice versa. I think Evans and Jimmer, on paper, compliment each other well. I think Jimmer will defer a lot of ball handling to Salmons and Evans, which is a win for everyone. I also think that while Thomas is not a bad 3PT shooter, his 3P% has completely fallen off a cliff. It's currently lower than Evans. Jimmer is a full .100 higher in 3P%, and is a legit 'spread the floor' guy.

According to 82games.com, Evans - Jimmer - Salmons - JT - Cousins isn't in our top 20 used lineups this season. I cannot confirm if it's been used once all year. Considering all the lame lineup combinations we've seen this season, THAT is upsetting. I want to see it.

 

[Kingster]

So do this thought experiment: How would Tyreke's production being affected by playing with a guard that stands in the corner. Literally. This hypothetical guard would only stand in the corner, and he would shoot the ball whenever someone passes him the ball. Tyreke would then be able to totally dominate the ball from the guard position. The only time he wouldn't be able to dominate the ball would be from his own volition. Would Tyreke's production go up?

Certainly. But that's not really the question is it. The assumption is that with Tyreke's production going up that the team's winning percentage will go up. This is where I part ways with the crowd that wants Tyreke to dominate the ball, Tyreke as point guard, Tyreke basically running the show. I don't think Tyreke helps this team when he is running the show. He doesn't have the skills or the BB IQ to do so. This is a guy that still doesn't know how to run a fast break. How in the world can you have a guy run the team that can't even run a fast break? And then there's the issue of dribble, dribble, dribble in the half court.

But instead of focusing on what Tyreke can't do, which in my view is run the team's offense, I'd rather focus on what he can do extremely well: He's very effective in the post, which for him can be at least up to 15 feet out, he's very effective moving without the basketball and getting the ball on the move when he's close to the basket. When he's two dribbles (max of three) away from the basket he's very formidable. See the Cavs game, especially the first half. He was fantastic. Then for the Tyreke as game manager, see the second half. Not so formidable. Then what was the key offensive play at the end of the Bobcats game that helped the Kings win? A Tyreke post up. It was the ONLY post up he did the entire game. Easy peezy. Why they didn't do it a lot more in the game, only Smart knows.

So the bottom line with Tyreke's offense is getting the ball to him in the right spots. Not just having him dribble up the court and being "creative" as a point guard or floor general or whatever you want to call it.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I don't consider it to be a binary proposition: taking Thomas out of the starting lineup does not mandate that Evans dominate the ball. To the extent that the offense is important at all, run it through Cousins.

 

[Section 101]

Where are the stats for IT/MT and Brooks/MT?

 

[gunks]

IT is a 'lil ballhog.

It was cool in all that he had a great "Mr. Irrelevant" season, but this year he's been doing nothing but freezing out superior players. As much as I hate Brooks, he's a better option next to Reke (which says a lot about this messy roster GP pooped out).

Now that Reke's shot is getting better and he can play more minutes at SG, it should be easier to find a backcourt partner for him, a more pass first partner would be ideal....But we all know GP isnt doing jack *** this year considering he is hanging it up (which is something he should have done years ago).


OTOH, IT works pretty well with DMC. So ho hum, what to do indeed?

 

[pshn80]

Good work and very interesting. Although it is not conclusive for me.

The Jimmer/Evans combo is intriguing but impossible for me to consider sas a regular starting lineup because Jimmer would be a major liability against too many teams for his " speed" on both offense and defense. Trying it would be fun when it works but ......

IT helps the whole team more than Brooks and is my pick. I want Evans to start at SG.

 

[Chupacabra]

The reason Brooks 'works' better is because he simply gets out of the way. I think it just makes sense that Evans will have better numbers, and the team will play less selfish overall if you insert a more passive player into the starting guard spot.

Our starting lineup right now has two 'passive' players. JT and Salmons. It's a minor miracle that Salmons has turned into a 'glue' guy, but here we are. The problem is that the 1,2,3 most ball dominant players in our starting unit all look to score. The weird thing with Brooks is that he IS a shoot first guard, but for whatever reason when he is on the court with Evans he will defer. It's not really explainable.

The other side of this coin is that (and I have no numbers to back this up) I'm fairy certain Cousins numbers with IT on the court are better than they are with Brooks. That's no small deal. Since Cousins suspension (and the move to put IT back into the starting unit) Cousins has been playing at an All Star level. He wasn't doing that before. So we have to be careful here. The players like Thomas, they respect Thomas. And this is a bit of speculation here, but I don't think Cousins likes Brooks, or likes playing with Brooks. Off camera we've heard him yelling things at Brooks quite a bit, including a very loud 'Pass the ****ing ball' a few weeks ago. Body language says a lot, too.

I say all this to say that Jimmer might be the guy here. I think Cousins and Jimmer like each other. I think Jimmer looks for Cousins and vice versa. I think Evans and Jimmer, on paper, compliment each other well. I think Jimmer will defer a lot of ball handling to Salmons and Evans, which is a win for everyone. I also think that while Thomas is not a bad 3PT shooter, his 3P% has completely fallen off a cliff. It's currently lower than Evans. Jimmer is a full .100 higher in 3P%, and is a legit 'spread the floor' guy.

According to 82games.com, Evans - Jimmer - Salmons - JT - Cousins isn't in our top 20 used lineups this season. I cannot confirm if it's been used once all year. Considering all the lame lineup combinations we've seen this season, THAT is upsetting. I want to see it.

Im with you on this. Ive been wanting to see the utilization of this lineup for awhile now. Specifically the combo of Evans/Jimmer/Salmons. Evans and Jimmer seem to be perfectly complimentary to eachother, at least on paper. Jimmer is now able to fill this role with his new found defensive ability to stay in front of his man. Salmons is needed as he is the only player that we have that can be a primary ball handler, shoot the 3, and play effective defense against most small forwards. When Jimmer is in the lineup its especially important to be able to relieve him of all primary ball handler duties. When Tyreke is in the lineup its important that there are two players on the floor with him that can shoot the 3 as to allow Evans the space that he needs to drive the ball to the hoop and play to his strengths. This is the only perimeter combination that suffices to do all of these things. If it werent for our broke owners that cant afford to pay a coach that knows what hes doing, we would probably see alot more of this lineup.

 

[Glenn]

It is interesting that people are considering a starting line up that consists of both Jimmer and Salmons yet last year people were ready to tar and feather Petrie for the stupid trade down that got us both. Patience, folks, patience. One year proves nothing.

I am very conflicted about who I would want to start next to Evans. As Evans has been a PG, I am not so concerned about Jimmer and secretly, that's the lineup I want. However, IT and Brooks bring something also. One or two of them need trading but that's a good thing.

 

[bajaden]

So do this thought experiment: How would Tyreke's production being affected by playing with a guard that stands in the corner. Literally. This hypothetical guard would only stand in the corner, and he would shoot the ball whenever someone passes him the ball. Tyreke would then be able to totally dominate the ball from the guard position. The only time he wouldn't be able to dominate the ball would be from his own volition. Would Tyreke's production go up?

Certainly. But that's not really the question is it. The assumption is that with Tyreke's production going up that the team's winning percentage will go up. This is where I part ways with the crowd that wants Tyreke to dominate the ball, Tyreke as point guard, Tyreke basically running the show. I don't think Tyreke helps this team when he is running the show. He doesn't have the skills or the BB IQ to do so. This is a guy that still doesn't know how to run a fast break. How in the world can you have a guy run the team that can't even run a fast break? And then there's the issue of dribble, dribble, dribble in the half court.

But instead of focusing on what Tyreke can't do, which in my view is run the team's offense, I'd rather focus on what he can do extremely well: He's very effective in the post, which for him can be at least up to 15 feet out, he's very effective moving without the basketball and getting the ball on the move when he's close to the basket. When he's two dribbles (max of three) away from the basket he's very formidable. See the Cavs game, especially the first half. He was fantastic. Then for the Tyreke as game manager, see the second half. Not so formidable. Then what was the key offensive play at the end of the Bobcats game that helped the Kings win? A Tyreke post up. It was the ONLY post up he did the entire game. Easy peezy. Why they didn't do it a lot more in the game, only Smart knows.

So the bottom line with Tyreke's offense is getting the ball to him in the right spots. Not just having him dribble up the court and being "creative" as a point guard or floor general or whatever you want to call it.

Way too much of an over simplification. For one thing, Jimmer can do a lot more than just stand in the corner. He moves well without the ball, and is capable of running the pick and roll very effeciently with either Cousins or Tyreke. In the game where he came in at around 2 minutes in the second half, and played amost the entire half, he played very well with Tyreke. They shared the ball well, as did the combo of Jimmer and Cousins. So from an offensive aspect, I think it could be something that could work well.

The problem could come on the defensive side of the ball, when Jimmer has to guard the Wall's and Williams of the world. His defense is improving, so never say never, but there's no doubt that there would have to be some defensive compensations made.

 

[HereWeBoogie]

No. IT dominates the ball too much and shoots too much

 

[jcwkings]

I don't really care about the stats, the only thing I notice is that our ball movement and offense has much better flow when IT is the primary ball handler. By nature Tyreke handling the ball brings ball movement to a halt because he is an isolation player, also he's not effective in the pick and roll. IT also brings the ball up and sets up the offense much quicker than Tyreke. He is also clearly a better vocal leader, which you definetly want out of your pg. the issue Han becomes that Tyreke is more effective with the ball in his hands to the detriment of ball movement. Tyreke is clearly the more talented player overall, but not in the areas needed from your primary ball handler.

 

[Bricklayer]

Here is the essential difficulty: IT thinks he IS Reke.

Per 36 numbers this year:

Reke
17.8pts (.470 .343 .789) on 13.8FGA 5.9reb 3.7ast 1.5stl 0.7blk 2.6TO
Thomas
17.6pts (.436 .326 .850) on 13.7FGA 2.7reb 4.8ast 1.0stl 0.0blk 2.6TO

That doesn't work. And its not Reke, its IT.

Compare those numebrs to the numbers of various other guys who have understood their role to a mcuh greater degree:

Aaron Brooks (this year):
13.7pts (.461 .383 .767) on 11.3FGA 3.0reb 4.2ast 1.0stl 0.2blk 2.2TO
Mario Chalmers (this year)
10.8pts (.414 .398 .706) on 9.1FGA 3.2reb 4.8ast 2.2stl 0.2blk 2.2TO
Derek Fisher (2010-11 -- last full Lakers year)
8.7pts (.389 .396 .806) on 8.3FGA 2.4reb 3.5ast 1.6stl 0.1blk 1.1TO
Beno Udrih (2010-11 -- last year with Kings)
14.3pts (.500 .357 .864) on 10.9FGA 3.5reb 5.1ast 1.2stl 0.1blk 1.9TO

There is a place for a guy with IT's game, but its not next to a ball dominant star type SG. He's an active suppressant of superior talent in that role.

 

[Mojo]

It is interesting that people are considering a starting line up that consists of both Jimmer and Salmons yet last year people were ready to tar and feather Petrie for the stupid trade down that got us both. Patience, folks, patience. One year proves nothing.

Most would probably still consider the trade down to be a bad move. Inserting Jimmer and Salmons into the starting lineup is more of a 'working with what you got' situation than anything.

 

[mac]

I don't really care about the stats, the only thing I notice is that our ball movement and offense has much better flow when IT is the primary ball handler. By nature Tyreke handling the ball brings ball movement to a halt because he is an isolation player, also he's not effective in the pick and roll. IT also brings the ball up and sets up the offense much quicker than Tyreke. He is also clearly a better vocal leader, which you definetly want out of your pg. the issue Han becomes that Tyreke is more effective with the ball in his hands to the detriment of ball movement. Tyreke is clearly the more talented player overall, but not in the areas needed from your primary ball handler.

Disagree on that part. Evans runs the pick and roll setting Cuz up far more than IT ever does.

 

[UK_King]

It's why the notion of Jimmer next to Tyreke is intriguing. Giving Reke and Cuz the space to run P&R. It would be hard to double off Jimmer/Salmons but with Reke's driving ability they'd have little choice.

I've always said i want to see Reke at the "point" the only thing where IT bests him IMO is the way he pushes the tempo, reke walking up the court does stunt the offense, especially considering the way this team struggles in the half court. If you give this team 12/13 seconds to make something happen it's likely going to be something very poor.

IT generally pushes the ball up the court and then hits cuz fairly quickly.

 

[Kingster]

Way too much of an over simplification. For one thing, Jimmer can do a lot more than just stand in the corner. He moves well without the ball, and is capable of running the pick and roll very effeciently with either Cousins or Tyreke. In the game where he came in at around 2 minutes in the second half, and played amost the entire half, he played very well with Tyreke. They shared the ball well, as did the combo of Jimmer and Cousins. So from an offensive aspect, I think it could be something that could work well.

The problem could come on the defensive side of the ball, when Jimmer has to guard the Wall's and Williams of the world. His defense is improving, so never say never, but there's no doubt that there would have to be some defensive compensations made.

My little abstract isn't about Jimmer. It's about Tyreke. The problem ultimately is who is the primary ballhandler. I don't think Jimmer's defense is the primary issue (though it is important), I think the combo of Tyreke's and Jimmer's ballhandling is the primary issue. It slows the offense down consideraly having either one of them bringing the ball up the floor. Jimmer still has considerable problems with quick guards. (Just look at how many times he has to turn his back to guards when coming up the floor). Tyreke slows everything down when he's running the show.

Back to Jimmer. The last game he played in was 0 points, 0 assists, 3 turnovers. My recollection is that he wasn't running off of screens. Just like you intimated, they need to go back to basics with him (like Robinson) and have him do what he does best: move without the ball, get the ball of screens, and shoot. Just like Tyreke, he can be extremely effective with the dribble when he comes off screens, but bringing the ball up the floor and starting the offense from the 3 point line does not play to his strength.

 

[Hadlowe]

Jimmer is now able to fill this role with his new found defensive ability to stay in front of his man.

FWIW, Jimmer was an above average isolation defender last year. His defense falls apart when he gets picked, but so do our other guards as defending against the pick requires an entire team to rotate effectively and our team defense is at the bottom of the league.

I like the concept of Jimmer and Tyreke on the court together and have since the draft, but I worry about the ball getting in to Cousins enough with that combo out there. If we could run plays through Cousins consistently that involve bringing Jimmer off picks at the top of the key while Tyreke dives and Salmons stands in the corner (see the second half of the Washington game, for example) it would work pretty well. If we get into the trap of trying to run plays for Jimmer as a primary scorer, we'd be in trouble. He needs to be a threat, but still only shoot about 10 shots per game.

 

[Prince_XY]

Tell me when was the last time you see a midget PG start and dominate the ball in a very good winning team?

Only in Sacramento Kings.

That is because the coach is dumb and some low basketball IQ fans loves to watch circus rather than win.

 

[Section 101]

Tell me when was the last time you see a midget PG start and dominate the ball in a very good winning team?

Only in Sacramento Kings.

That is because the coach is dumb and some low basketball IQ fans loves to watch circus rather than win.

Barea in the finals.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Tell me when was the last time you see a midget PG start and dominate the ball in a very good winning team?

Only in Sacramento Kings.

That is because the coach is dumb and some low basketball IQ fans loves to watch circus rather than win.

Barea in the finals.

Was Jason Kidd not on that team? Or is it, in your mind, that the shortest guy on the court is always the point guard, no matter what?

 

[UK_King]

How tall is Chris Paul?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I think he's billed at 6', probably closer to my height, which is 5'10.5". Still taller than Thomas, FWIW.

 

[UK_King]

What height do we stop calling people "midgets?"

 

[HereWeBoogie]

Was Jason Kidd not on that team? Or is it, in your mind, that the shortest guy on the court is always the point guard, no matter what?

lol

also point out that Barrea is much more effective then any midget PG on our team. recall what he did to us when we played Minn this year

 

[Section 101]

Was Jason Kidd not on that team? Or is it, in your mind, that the shortest guy on the court is always the point guard, no matter what?

They both handled the ball when Barea started the last 3 games.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

What height do we stop calling people "midgets?"

I think that "midgets" is relative. If you take professional athletes out of the equation, the average height for males is probably between 5'9" and 6', so Isaiah Thomas would not be considered a "midget," relative to regular people. But, Isaiah Thomas is not regular people, and should not be evaluated on those criteria. Relative to his peers, Isaiah Thomas is a "midget."

It's all relative: it's like how when posters talk about how players on the team stink. Of course they're not comparing them to regular people. There's not a person on this message board who could beat Francisco Garcia in a game of one-on-one. Not one. If any of us played a game of 21 against Garcia, he could probably spot us 17 points, and still win, 21-19. Hell, I'd bet my first-born that at least half the people on this board could be spotted 19.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

They both handled the ball when Barea started the last 3 games.

The same could have been said about Allen Iverson and Eric Snow, and few people would have called Iverson the point guard.

 

[UK_King]

So Chris Paul is a midget then.

so there's a midget PG who dominates the ball and is on a very good team.

and no I'm not comparing Chris Paul to IT before anyone says that, outside of the fact they're both apparently "midgets"

 

[The_Jamal]

What is the context for these numbers? Are these solely with IT/Reke at PG and SG? How is Cousins (who we really should be concerned about) fit into this picture? What are the actual amount of minutes these guys are on the floor together at PG/SG? Is it large enough sample size to even care about it?

It's very easy to throw a few stats together to make it fit a point your trying to make. P/36 is sketchy enough as it is and in the way you're trying to use it, makes it very biased towards your "analysis". I'm also curious where you gathered the data from

Also, what is the difference in our total team offensive numbers? Does Reke with no IT=better offense? or vice versa?