Rudy Gay - start or come off the bench?
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
It's only a topic because some fail to look at or consider reality. You don't trade for Gay, who's a top 2-3 SF in the Western Conference, makes close to 18M and is arguably our most talented SF ever and at the least is right there in the Peja/Artest discussion as one of the top SF's we've ever had, then decide to bring him off the bench when most of our problems lie elsewhere.
The solution isn't to bring him off the bench. What we should do is feature him even more. He doesn't see the ball enough with our sticky-fingered PG. And FGA's aren't part of this. It's getting the ball in his spots, getting touches regularly and being a focal point and decision maker within the offense. Needs to see the ball more, needs to see it more often earlier in games and needs to run the two-man game with Cuz with a live dribble and space. Turning him into a more off the ball, spot up player or someone who just occasionally gets a post iso, often with poor spacing, then turning around and acting the player is more the problem when he's not being used correctly and suggest we should send him to the bench is asinine imo, although I'm not surprised as we've seen it before.
This isn't just a Rudy issue either. Both our SF's, DWill as well have had their roles/touches cut down recently as our PG remains more ball dominant than ever. And again, it's not FGA's, it's allowing Rudy to get the ball early in the shotclock with room and time to operate. Frankly, it doesn't happen nearly enough, then he starts chasing the game and forcing the issue, as would any 2nd option who's not involved enough.
If people disagree, go back and watch his top 2-3 games with us. Start with the Houston game. Look at where Rudy got his touches and how he was used. We're not using him that way anymore. The argument behind starting DWill is that he's a better role player who meshes better with Cuz, but also at the root of it is IT/Cuz would be the ball dominant players and DWill as a role player fits better playing off them. The whole premise is off. IT should not be the 2nd most ball dominant player on this squad nor should a guy like Rudy be reduced to playing off him. Gay/Cuz should be the ball dominant pairing and IT play off them. The idea we hand IT the ball instead of Gay, then send Gay to the bench so we have a more role player type SF to fit next to IT and Cuz is wrong on multiple levels. You don't send Gay to the bench to placate IT's ball dominance. That's backwards.
The solution isn't to bring him off the bench. What we should do is feature him even more. He doesn't see the ball enough with our sticky-fingered PG. And FGA's aren't part of this. It's getting the ball in his spots, getting touches regularly and being a focal point and decision maker within the offense. Needs to see the ball more, needs to see it more often earlier in games and needs to run the two-man game with Cuz with a live dribble and space. Turning him into a more off the ball, spot up player or someone who just occasionally gets a post iso, often with poor spacing, then turning around and acting the player is more the problem when he's not being used correctly and suggest we should send him to the bench is asinine imo, although I'm not surprised as we've seen it before.
This isn't just a Rudy issue either. Both our SF's, DWill as well have had their roles/touches cut down recently as our PG remains more ball dominant than ever. And again, it's not FGA's, it's allowing Rudy to get the ball early in the shotclock with room and time to operate. Frankly, it doesn't happen nearly enough, then he starts chasing the game and forcing the issue, as would any 2nd option who's not involved enough.
If people disagree, go back and watch his top 2-3 games with us. Start with the Houston game. Look at where Rudy got his touches and how he was used. We're not using him that way anymore. The argument behind starting DWill is that he's a better role player who meshes better with Cuz, but also at the root of it is IT/Cuz would be the ball dominant players and DWill as a role player fits better playing off them. The whole premise is off. IT should not be the 2nd most ball dominant player on this squad nor should a guy like Rudy be reduced to playing off him. Gay/Cuz should be the ball dominant pairing and IT play off them. The idea we hand IT the ball instead of Gay, then send Gay to the bench so we have a more role player type SF to fit next to IT and Cuz is wrong on multiple levels. You don't send Gay to the bench to placate IT's ball dominance. That's backwards.
Last edited:
Siranthony
Starter
I would consider Gay coming off the bench for one reason. This is a rebuilding year. We should play our young players more. Our young players should be put in situations where they can learn and develop into the role the team wants them to play in the future. Benching Williams or McLemore makes no sense. Less minutes from Cousins and Gay are acceptable IMO at this point.
I dunno, I may be in the minority in thinking that Gay and Cousins building chemistry might be a little more important than Williams or McLemore getting more minutes as far as our "future" goes.
That said, it isn't an either/or situation. The two kids are getting their minutes.
That said, it isn't an either/or situation. The two kids are getting their minutes.
Not a significant issue now. I think such issues are on hold until the make-up of the trade is determined in the next 3 weeks which will get us either a starting 4 or 1. As we can imagine it is going to make a big difference which one it is. Once that happens other important but lesser issues such as the 3 can be addressed if necessary. If you hadn't heard of this trade it is because I am just now announcing it.
No. Just no.
In his short tenure on the Kings so far we've seen Rudy Gay play very well, and we've seen him play very poorly. It's hard for me to take seriously the idea that we might try to transform him into a sixth man type of player when he's still south of 30, has a long track record as a big-time scorer, and our other option is a relatively unproven 22 year old. That being said, I think there is a basketball related argument to be made that a last place team (which, let's face it, that's what we are this year with this roster) would be better served by catering to their could-be stars than their existing ones. Normally you'd say we should just trade Rudy Gay for a draft pick and expiring contracts and look to the future but that's just not possible with his contract. That trade was a talent grab, a rebuilding team taking advantage of an opportunity to shake things up and make a play at being interesting, if not very good. I still don't think it was a bad move. I was hesitant to call it a good one at the time because I just didn't know what to expect out of Rudy Gay on this team. And I still don't.
So now to point this ramble of semi-coherence toward an actual conclusion, if not an answer to the question at hand, here's where I think our priorities should lie:
(1) DeMarcus Cousins is playing like an All Star this season and by most indications, ought to be in that conversation every year for some time now. We go as far as he takes us in the playoffs so we really do need a second and third option and a defensive scheme which caters to his strengths. If he's unhappy about the effort on defense, and how could he not be, that needs to be addressed ASAP, not in the off-season.
(2) Coach Malone seems like the right type of coach for this team. Why do I say that? Because he has a track record of success in improving team defenses, and because he's got DeMarcus' ear and has been getting him the ball in the right places for him to be effective. Management needs to support Malone by getting him the type of talent he needs to win games.
(3) We have some secondary assets that could become rotation players or could be used to get us rotation players. McLemore and Williams at this point are more assets than players. IT's production this season makes him a player a lot of other teams would like to have. Thornton and JT have some value as proven commodities, with quantifiable strengths and weaknesses. As a rebuilding team we need to make sure that these assets grow in value rather than the opposite and we have a limited amount of time to make that happen with some of them (IT and Williams in particular).
So with those key points in mind, if I'm looking at the mess I saw on the court that last road trip (and honestly, who didn't look at the schedule and see that coming) I wouldn't rule out anything in the short-term as a way to build some confidence into this group and re-establish the direction this franchise needs to be moving. I'd suggested in the grades topic a fairly extreme measure of inserting Ray McCallum and Quincy Acy into the starting lineup at PG and SF respectively in the next game to send a message to the team that coach is serious about defense and serious about taking care of the ball. IT and Rudy Gay have both played their way into an NBA rotation before and I know they can do it again, particularly this rotation. What they need to do is refocus on fundamental basketball rather than trying to win games by themselves.
I don't know that it's the best solution, but it's one idea. A better one might be to keep the lineup the way it is, but start calling plays from the sideline so that the shot distribution doesn't heavily favor two or three (notoriously streaky) players or tough contested jumpers. Run some plays for back-cuts, alley oops for McLemore and Williams, post up Rudy Gay, get role-players who don't often touch the ball more involved with some screen and roll plays. Just anything really to mitigate the amount of time guys are standing around waiting for something to happen.
There was a bit of a stretch early in December when Williams had his big game, McLemore had a couple big games in a row, then Rudy came in and started playing like a star that I'll admit I got a little ahead of myself and started thinking about this team as something better than it is right now. We're still on a long-term plan and most likely it's going to involve a lot more losing this season. That was our hand at the start of the season and while I think we have improved the pieces, there's still a lot more work to be done. Which is fine. The western conference got very tough this season and it's no shame in losing games to teams which have been building toward championships for years while we were managed by idiots. But we can control how we lose games, if nothing else. Keeping everyone involved, playing hard, and working together is still going to result in a lot of fun basketball for the players and for us. DeMarcus had the right idea: don't make excuses, play better. They're all capable of that. That's what needs to change more than any lineup tweaks.
So now to point this ramble of semi-coherence toward an actual conclusion, if not an answer to the question at hand, here's where I think our priorities should lie:
(1) DeMarcus Cousins is playing like an All Star this season and by most indications, ought to be in that conversation every year for some time now. We go as far as he takes us in the playoffs so we really do need a second and third option and a defensive scheme which caters to his strengths. If he's unhappy about the effort on defense, and how could he not be, that needs to be addressed ASAP, not in the off-season.
(2) Coach Malone seems like the right type of coach for this team. Why do I say that? Because he has a track record of success in improving team defenses, and because he's got DeMarcus' ear and has been getting him the ball in the right places for him to be effective. Management needs to support Malone by getting him the type of talent he needs to win games.
(3) We have some secondary assets that could become rotation players or could be used to get us rotation players. McLemore and Williams at this point are more assets than players. IT's production this season makes him a player a lot of other teams would like to have. Thornton and JT have some value as proven commodities, with quantifiable strengths and weaknesses. As a rebuilding team we need to make sure that these assets grow in value rather than the opposite and we have a limited amount of time to make that happen with some of them (IT and Williams in particular).
So with those key points in mind, if I'm looking at the mess I saw on the court that last road trip (and honestly, who didn't look at the schedule and see that coming) I wouldn't rule out anything in the short-term as a way to build some confidence into this group and re-establish the direction this franchise needs to be moving. I'd suggested in the grades topic a fairly extreme measure of inserting Ray McCallum and Quincy Acy into the starting lineup at PG and SF respectively in the next game to send a message to the team that coach is serious about defense and serious about taking care of the ball. IT and Rudy Gay have both played their way into an NBA rotation before and I know they can do it again, particularly this rotation. What they need to do is refocus on fundamental basketball rather than trying to win games by themselves.
I don't know that it's the best solution, but it's one idea. A better one might be to keep the lineup the way it is, but start calling plays from the sideline so that the shot distribution doesn't heavily favor two or three (notoriously streaky) players or tough contested jumpers. Run some plays for back-cuts, alley oops for McLemore and Williams, post up Rudy Gay, get role-players who don't often touch the ball more involved with some screen and roll plays. Just anything really to mitigate the amount of time guys are standing around waiting for something to happen.
There was a bit of a stretch early in December when Williams had his big game, McLemore had a couple big games in a row, then Rudy came in and started playing like a star that I'll admit I got a little ahead of myself and started thinking about this team as something better than it is right now. We're still on a long-term plan and most likely it's going to involve a lot more losing this season. That was our hand at the start of the season and while I think we have improved the pieces, there's still a lot more work to be done. Which is fine. The western conference got very tough this season and it's no shame in losing games to teams which have been building toward championships for years while we were managed by idiots. But we can control how we lose games, if nothing else. Keeping everyone involved, playing hard, and working together is still going to result in a lot of fun basketball for the players and for us. DeMarcus had the right idea: don't make excuses, play better. They're all capable of that. That's what needs to change more than any lineup tweaks.
Entity
Hall of Famer
it is more important. I don't know where this guy gets that Mclemore and Williams are getting benched. both average over 25 min per game since williams arrival
Siranthony
Starter
There have been complaints Williams is not playing enough. There have been complaints McLemore is playing too much. We have all stars on the team yet we continue to lose. What are we trying to accomplish?
Entity
Hall of Famer
trying to put a quality product on the floor. opinions will always be different. they were different when we won 50+ games. nobody cares about certain complaints from certain people with some sort of favorite player agenda.
HndsmCelt
Hall of Famer
Many posters may have already heard my opinion on start vs. bench, but to me it really does not matter. The important thing is PLAYING the guys that are getting it done. If RG is having a tough go I'd put Williams in early and stay with the guy that performs down the stretch, it's not rocket science. But sitting RG will probably only reduce confidence and disrupt team chemistry. Of course if the goal is to get Rudy to leave at the end of the season leaving 19 million on the table this might be a good start.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Should Gay start, or come off the bench? Ahhhh, OK, next question. If I were going to send a player to the bench, it wouldn't be Gay, it would be JT. I'd start J. Will at PF, and let JT be the backup Center. Sorry Aaron! JT is a pretty good man defender in the post, and he's a good man defender away from the basket, when he has to guard players Like Pau Gasol or Nowitzki. However, when it comes to team defense, he's better at rotations from the center position than he is the PF position. As a matter of fact, he's horrible at times from the PF position.
I can't honestly say that Williams will be better, but he's more athletic, and younger, and hopefully more willing to do what the coach wants. He's proven to be a decent rebounder, and like JT, he doesn't demand the ball. I don't think JT has a future with the Kings anyway. Never thought I'd say that, but with the type of team they seem to be trying to build, I don't think JT is a good fit. At least not at PF. Patrick Patterson, undersized and all, was a good rotation guy, and help defender. JT is always a step late, and that's all it takes. That aside, putting a player that makes 17 million dollars a year, and who has been a borderline all star on the bench in favor of a young, as yet unproven player, is one of the most ridiculous notions I've ever heard.
I can't honestly say that Williams will be better, but he's more athletic, and younger, and hopefully more willing to do what the coach wants. He's proven to be a decent rebounder, and like JT, he doesn't demand the ball. I don't think JT has a future with the Kings anyway. Never thought I'd say that, but with the type of team they seem to be trying to build, I don't think JT is a good fit. At least not at PF. Patrick Patterson, undersized and all, was a good rotation guy, and help defender. JT is always a step late, and that's all it takes. That aside, putting a player that makes 17 million dollars a year, and who has been a borderline all star on the bench in favor of a young, as yet unproven player, is one of the most ridiculous notions I've ever heard.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
ockingsfan
Starter
very simple. Rudy Gay needs to start to take double teams off of DMC. Without a legit #2 threat, DMC will get into foul trouble and defenses will just collapse on DMC.
What needs to be done is to put defensive stoppers and rim protectors at the PG, SG and PF positions, with the PG and SG able to hit open the 3.
What needs to be done is to put defensive stoppers and rim protectors at the PG, SG and PF positions, with the PG and SG able to hit open the 3.
DesertFox
Starter
He's the team's 2nd best ball handler, and 3rd place isn't close unless our 2nd round pick suddenly develops. So it makes sense to split him and IT up, not to mention the shot distribution. Gay is not the guy to move to the bench, but it won't be easy to convince one of the (so far) most productive PG's to come off the bench behind Jimmer.
Bosnian Diehard
Starter
Mclemore and Thornton have stepped up[ their games quite a lot lately.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
They get absolutely nuked on defense. Worst SG defenders in the entire NBA. Its killing us in ugly fashion.
That's not me arguing for starting Rudy at SG BTW. Its just me making the point that our SGs have been an absolute disaster for us this year, and if we don't want Malone's head to actually explode we desperately need to put SOMEBODY in their spot who could stop Ruth Bader Ginsburg from crossing them up.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
So other than our PGs, SGs, and that mythical rim protector, we are all right.
Livinthedream
All-Star
All these years we cry for a legit small forward. We finally get one and people want to bench him. Pure comedy.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Obviously.
Centers averaging
5+ APG= 0
4+ APG=0
3+ APG= 4(Cuz is one of them)
SF's averaging
5+ APG= 2
4+ APG= 4
3+ APG= 7
Total Center/SF pairings average 4+ assists each
0
Some standards you've come up with there. Basically, in your mind Cuz has to be far and away the top center in APG(when he's currently tied for 2nd),Gay needs to be a top 4 SF in APG and Gay/Cuz need to be the only Center/SF pairing in the league where each averages 4+ APG. Otherwise, you see this as an issue which needs addressing.
You've said nothing of our PG's ball dominance so I assume you think it isn't an issue and Gay/Cuz need to get 4-5+ APG while IT at least stays above 5 APG. You're suggesting three players average 4-5+ APG on our team.
Total number of teams with 3 players averaging 5+ APG
0
Total number of teams with 3 players averaging 4+ APG
3
(Mia/Por/SA)
Interesting statements you make..
Last edited:
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
This may be the most arbitrary stat benchmark of all time
You're right. I shouldn't have got sucked into Rainmaker's numbers trap when the most important point was that the team needed to pass more.
Last edited:
TheBadGuy
Bench
Anyone knows why did the Shumpert to the Kings rumors stopped?
Chubbs
Starter
He's been quite ineffective lately. I don't know if that is the reason, but it doesn't help.
http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/51617/shumps-frustrating-slump-continues
PS - Rudy should start. His track record is a bit more significant than one bad game or one bad shot. Even 20 bad shots.
Last edited:
TheBadGuy
Bench
If the Kings somehow get Shumpert, he doesn't need to score, all he needs to do is to defend the PG/SG of the opposing team.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll
