Ryan Anderson
- Thread starter annihilator_33
- Start date
Everybody keeps crying "our offense wasn't the problem, our defense was!". Well, here's the problem: a PF isn't going to solve the problem of 3 point shooters from going off on the Kings's defense. If you rely on your PF to do that, there's more the worry about (scheme, switching, rotations, backcourt play, etc). The idea that Ryan isn't a great defensive 4 is irrelevant. He does actually rebound and bang when he plays inside, he's just rarely asked to go inside. He's a poor man's Kevin Love in that respect. What he does bring outweighs his limitations, which is spread the floor for Boogie inside.
"But why can't we play Omri or Rudy then and accomplish the same thing?" Well, for one I'm not sure either will be on the roster, but let's assume they are. This totally depends on play style. If they want to go small, they certainly can use those smaller lineups. I'm in favor of a slower-paced, bigger lineup to reduce the impact of poor defense, which I don't think is going to just be solved by a new coach and some MLE type additions. Closing the gap with the rest of the league from deep and slowing the pace reduces the impact of a bad defensive team with a 3 pt deficiency.
I like Ryan. He's a character guy. He's local. He's in his prime right now. He can help this team by giving Boogie room down low and punishing teams when they double down. He's a smart guy too who doesn't try to do too much.
Yes, it doesn't address the backcourt, but this being a good deal depends on those other moves. I could see the Kings packaging Gay with Kofus for Butler. I wouldn't mind a team that looks like:
DC/Curry/(Jeremy Lin?)
Butler/Mac
Omri/prospects
Ryan/prospects
Boogie/WCS
"But why can't we play Omri or Rudy then and accomplish the same thing?" Well, for one I'm not sure either will be on the roster, but let's assume they are. This totally depends on play style. If they want to go small, they certainly can use those smaller lineups. I'm in favor of a slower-paced, bigger lineup to reduce the impact of poor defense, which I don't think is going to just be solved by a new coach and some MLE type additions. Closing the gap with the rest of the league from deep and slowing the pace reduces the impact of a bad defensive team with a 3 pt deficiency.
I like Ryan. He's a character guy. He's local. He's in his prime right now. He can help this team by giving Boogie room down low and punishing teams when they double down. He's a smart guy too who doesn't try to do too much.
Yes, it doesn't address the backcourt, but this being a good deal depends on those other moves. I could see the Kings packaging Gay with Kofus for Butler. I wouldn't mind a team that looks like:
DC/Curry/(Jeremy Lin?)
Butler/Mac
Omri/prospects
Ryan/prospects
Boogie/WCS
I disagree, that a PF isn't going to solve the problem of 3pt shooters going off. I mean how many threes are taken in a 1vs1 scenario? How many are taken out of pick&rolls scenarios, out of drive and kicks and in transition?
Pick&roll: Now I'm not an expert, when it comes to NBA defense, but defending it requires at least two players. When you field a PF that is too slow to come out high on pick&rolls, you are in trouble. When you field a PF, who is too slow to switch on a guard, you are in trouble. From there on it's "pick your poison"-time. You will give up a wide open 3, an easy floater/mid range shot or a layup. Teams did that with Cousins all season long. With Cousins and Koufos on the floor at the same time things got even worse.
So from my point of view, limiting the number of potential pick&roll targets (slower, bigger guys) for the opposing team is not a bad thing.
Of course there might be strategies to defend the 3 and the pick&roll even with slower guys involved, but it might speak for itself, that the teams, that advanced to the conference finals all prefered very mobile lineups.
Drive and kick: now this one isn't all that complicated. With a fully stretched floor ( guarding a stretch 4) you need a PF, that is able to help on the drive, force the kickout and still be mobile enough to at least attempt a contest on the corner 3. Willie can do that. Ryan not so much.
Transition: early 3's out of turnovers and long rebounds. We all know it well, because the Warriors buried us time and time again with that. I would guess a quicker PF might help a bit. Especially because our center isn't always the first guy back and isn't from the Mason Plumlee, Steven Adams or Bismack Biyombo breed.
So yes you can set up a good defense around two slower bigs. Memphis has proven that. San Antonio tried it this season. But ultimately both teams fell short, when matched with more athletic, quicker teams. And that's with elite perimeter defenders like Allen, Conley, Leonard and Green.
Ryan Anderson can help the Kings on offense, but does his offensive output mask his defensive shortcomings? I certainly wouldn't count on that.
And if Anderson fails here, you look at an immoveable contract, because the stakes for slower bigs, that can't play as a lone big are not exactly high at the moment.
At least I would expect that, with the way Love struggled in the Finals.
Pick&roll: Now I'm not an expert, when it comes to NBA defense, but defending it requires at least two players. When you field a PF that is too slow to come out high on pick&rolls, you are in trouble. When you field a PF, who is too slow to switch on a guard, you are in trouble. From there on it's "pick your poison"-time. You will give up a wide open 3, an easy floater/mid range shot or a layup. Teams did that with Cousins all season long. With Cousins and Koufos on the floor at the same time things got even worse.
So from my point of view, limiting the number of potential pick&roll targets (slower, bigger guys) for the opposing team is not a bad thing.
Of course there might be strategies to defend the 3 and the pick&roll even with slower guys involved, but it might speak for itself, that the teams, that advanced to the conference finals all prefered very mobile lineups.
Drive and kick: now this one isn't all that complicated. With a fully stretched floor ( guarding a stretch 4) you need a PF, that is able to help on the drive, force the kickout and still be mobile enough to at least attempt a contest on the corner 3. Willie can do that. Ryan not so much.
Transition: early 3's out of turnovers and long rebounds. We all know it well, because the Warriors buried us time and time again with that. I would guess a quicker PF might help a bit. Especially because our center isn't always the first guy back and isn't from the Mason Plumlee, Steven Adams or Bismack Biyombo breed.
So yes you can set up a good defense around two slower bigs. Memphis has proven that. San Antonio tried it this season. But ultimately both teams fell short, when matched with more athletic, quicker teams. And that's with elite perimeter defenders like Allen, Conley, Leonard and Green.
Ryan Anderson can help the Kings on offense, but does his offensive output mask his defensive shortcomings? I certainly wouldn't count on that.
And if Anderson fails here, you look at an immoveable contract, because the stakes for slower bigs, that can't play as a lone big are not exactly high at the moment.
At least I would expect that, with the way Love struggled in the Finals.
You can't compare a guy like Cousins that 3's are a small part of his offense (15.6% out of his FGA) and shoots mostly when he is unguarded to a guy like Anderson who shoots at a much higher volume (3's are 38.6% of his FGA) and takes harder shoots as a part of it.
When wide open (no defender within 6 ft) Cousins shoot 33.6% from 3.
When wide open Anderson Shoot 46% from 3- which is insanely effective and in case you think it was a one year thing in 2013/14 he shoot 45.6% from 3 when wide open (last year was bad for him).
So when he is wide open he is VERY effective, bare in mind the 46% on 3 is the equivalent of 69% on 2's, no one with more than 2 attempts a game other than Teague and Curry is there and he is ahead of Klay in that respect.
You get him open looks and he will deliver.
The question we need to ask is about his defense and his cost- but I wouldn't consider him a bad choice and offensively you can build a great lineup with him and Cousins (he will provide Cousins space cause opponents won't leave it open, and if they will help they'll have to give him an open 3 attempt).
When wide open (no defender within 6 ft) Cousins shoot 33.6% from 3.
When wide open Anderson Shoot 46% from 3- which is insanely effective and in case you think it was a one year thing in 2013/14 he shoot 45.6% from 3 when wide open (last year was bad for him).
So when he is wide open he is VERY effective, bare in mind the 46% on 3 is the equivalent of 69% on 2's, no one with more than 2 attempts a game other than Teague and Curry is there and he is ahead of Klay in that respect.
You get him open looks and he will deliver.
The question we need to ask is about his defense and his cost- but I wouldn't consider him a bad choice and offensively you can build a great lineup with him and Cousins (he will provide Cousins space cause opponents won't leave it open, and if they will help they'll have to give him an open 3 attempt).
I wouldn't mind Ryan Anderson off the bench, but wouldn't be better off spending our FA money on guards. We don't have a quality starter at either guard position at this point. He seems a bit like a luxury at this point. To be fair though I really like that we're showing interest though as that probably means we are exploring improving our other needs via trades and given the FA market that's probably where the most talent is.
Anderson's numbers are irrelevant, which a lot of people seem to be missing. Anderson on the floor takes a big away from the paint, which creates an easier path to the rim for Cousins. He's exactly the kind of player who enhances Cousins game, rather than detracts from it. Same goes for WCS as well in which we create an effective 3 bigs rotation that all play really well together.
Well since I pointed out how good he is when he is open (to make the point opponents can't leave him open and that he is a good shooter) and my post contained this:
I have no idea why you are disagreeing with me or saying the numbers are irrelevant since they are clearly working in your favor
I have no idea why you are disagreeing with me or saying the numbers are irrelevant since they are clearly working in your favor
Exactly, James Anderson just signed with the Turkish club Coach Blatt is going to coach. So he could not be a part of the proposed sign and trade--> http://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/ba...rson-signs-long-term-deal-with-turkish-squad/
Not really comparing Cousins to Anderson in an apple to apple sense. My point was Boogie is not a 3 pt shooter and has not been shooting it his entire career like RA but has a decent percentage. I don't doubt that RA has better % in wide open situation because he is supposed to since he is the "shooter". The fact that he is good when wide open is great and all, but we all know that realistically, no one is going to be wide open all the time. His overall 3Pt percentage is .366 so that also tells you he is not very good when guarded or closed out on properly.
At the end of the day, RA offensively is mostly a one dimension player and we can't pay big money for him. I don't mind signing him, but not for the crazy money that players and agents want right now.
I go back and forth on the value of signing Anderson too. It's similar to whether or not to re-sign Rondo. In a vacuum neither seem like great ideas, but considering that the Kings seem to always struggle to get ANYONE of value to sign as a FA the option can't be overlooked. It's fine to say the Kings should sign Crabbe or Bazemore or Conley instead but that's assuming they'd sign (or sign an offer sheet) with the Kings at all. And for the first two it depends on whether or not their current teams would match the offer.
As for Anderson's shooting, the fact that he isn't always wide open is really the point. He isn't wide open because teams won't double or sag off of him due to his ability to knock down open shots. Here's a small sample, but look how open Cousins is when he shoots threes:
Teams will live with him bombing away from outside instead of beating them up inside, or driving when they close out on him. Pretty much all of Boogie's threes were wide open shots. What a good three point shooter provides isn't just the scoring from 3's but the spacing created by guys forced to play them tight.
As for Anderson's shooting, the fact that he isn't always wide open is really the point. He isn't wide open because teams won't double or sag off of him due to his ability to knock down open shots. Here's a small sample, but look how open Cousins is when he shoots threes:
Teams will live with him bombing away from outside instead of beating them up inside, or driving when they close out on him. Pretty much all of Boogie's threes were wide open shots. What a good three point shooter provides isn't just the scoring from 3's but the spacing created by guys forced to play them tight.
Again, was not comparing Boogie to RA directly as a 3pt shooter. But just stating Boogie got to be decent seemingly overnight, he never shot 3s much before really. I wonder if he can be good enough to be consider to have the ability of a "shooter" with more practice.
I thought about RA's value of creating space also. But again, your offense won't always end up in a dream scenario situation where the other team doubles Boogie and he kicks the ball to RA for an open 3. Many times, RA will have to shoot that shot with someone on him and that percentage isn't great. Teams are more and more athletic now and can rotate and close up very well.
My point is I see the value in signing him for some situations and don't mind if we do. But he is just not worth big money to me.
The owners are going to have push hard in the next CBA to have contracts given out on the basis of a percentage of the salary cap rather than raw dollars. The funny thing is that this would probably be best for both parties. The owners would have a much better ability to plan for the future because salary cap issues would not be tied to possible changes in BRI. They also wouldn't find themselves in the situation where they are forced to spew out ridiculous amounts of money for mediocre players to meet salary floors in years when the BRI jumps, then of course lose the ability to attract major free agents in years when the BRI is stagnant. The players (at least those who are under multi-year contracts) would also be able to benefit from BRI changes - everybody under a multi-year contract this year would have gotten a big raise. The only winners in the whole situation are the middling players who happen to be free agents in years that the BRI spikes.
Well, haven't seen Kings mentioned as his destination since midnight, so "hurray!!!"
Edit: damn you, Sam, for mentioning Ryno, but then again, why blame the messenger. Waiters is likely a bigger problem. Hopefully it just drags the price up for someone else, then Kings have to settle for Solo Hill.
Edit: damn you, Sam, for mentioning Ryno, but then again, why blame the messenger. Waiters is likely a bigger problem. Hopefully it just drags the price up for someone else, then Kings have to settle for Solo Hill.
Last edited:
