Shareef Abdur-Rahim
- Thread starter Wheeler03
- Start date
The overall stats on the season in games won/lost do not say he plays well we lose -- that's not the deal. Its closer to being even either way. Its more that Reef is just a guy who rarely matters to the outcome one way or the other. Win, loss, has no correlation to how Reef plays. He doesn't help you win. But he doesn't make you lose either.
Last edited:
I don't think Bibby even played that well, he made some shots when it mattered, but he also took a lot of ill-advised shots when things were going really bad. To his defense, I think the extended minutes this season are really starting to ware on him. But I don't think anyone- minus Reef- had an exceptional game. I thought Cisco was playing well too and I think I would have liked to see him in at the end of the game instead of Hart. Although, Hart did have one of his BETTER games of the year...
Overall, it was a pretty all around poor effort and I don't know what has happened to this team since the end of the 1st quarter in Indiana but I don't like it one bit..
Overall, it was a pretty all around poor effort and I don't know what has happened to this team since the end of the 1st quarter in Indiana but I don't like it one bit..
Another (less cynical) way of looking of those stats is that when Reef gets time he's very consistent and doesn't take many shots -- so while he doesn't put the team on his back he doesn't kill the team with, ahem, 4-20 or 8-23 nights either. So the numbers end up looking mostly the same win or lose. Don't knock consistency.
I only knock it if we're having an "any questions" thread about a largely irrelevant player (not tonight). Its like having "any questions" about Juwann Howard back in the day.
And frankly Reef desperately needs a good 8-23 game now and again. Several of our so called "efficient" players do. Because that indicates aggression, desire, it makes other teams have to contend with you every time down court for fear you are going to light them up. A long long time ago when people beyond hardcore Reef fans still thought he mattered (W/L raises a question of whether he realy did, but that's another issue), while opposing coaches still cared whether he was on a team or not, Reef did not shoot 52%. He shot 46% or 47%, and he was FAR more potent player for it. "Efficiency" can be the greater part of irrelevance when its just a cover for passivity. Its nice, but incdredibly overrated when you talk about impact on a team. There are only a handful of truly efficient impact players -- people who can shoot 50+% while actually attacking. Shaq, Yao, Duncan. You can even argue (and the argument is made by some) that KG's 50%+ is a bit problematic and indicative of the lack of killer instinct he needs.
P.S. None of the above applies to the player who was oout there last night. That player attacked and mattered, and would have mattered even if he shot 5-12. Unfortunately that player has been seen perhaps half a dozen times total all season long, and may in agreater sense no longer exist.
And frankly Reef desperately needs a good 8-23 game now and again. Several of our so called "efficient" players do. Because that indicates aggression, desire, it makes other teams have to contend with you every time down court for fear you are going to light them up. A long long time ago when people beyond hardcore Reef fans still thought he mattered (W/L raises a question of whether he realy did, but that's another issue), while opposing coaches still cared whether he was on a team or not, Reef did not shoot 52%. He shot 46% or 47%, and he was FAR more potent player for it. "Efficiency" can be the greater part of irrelevance when its just a cover for passivity. Its nice, but incdredibly overrated when you talk about impact on a team. There are only a handful of truly efficient impact players -- people who can shoot 50+% while actually attacking. Shaq, Yao, Duncan. You can even argue (and the argument is made by some) that KG's 50%+ is a bit problematic and indicative of the lack of killer instinct he needs.
P.S. None of the above applies to the player who was oout there last night. That player attacked and mattered, and would have mattered even if he shot 5-12. Unfortunately that player has been seen perhaps half a dozen times total all season long, and may in agreater sense no longer exist.
Here are the two difficulties:
1) rebounding
amongst PFs per48:
KT -- 32nd of 143 (12.9/48)
Reef -- 120th of 143 (9.0/48)
2) shots
as in the beginning of the year we needed that roleplayer in the starting lineup. Putting another primary scorer out there, and another post guy to boot, recreates the awkward struggle we had to start the year where everybody needs the ball.
1) rebounding
amongst PFs per48:
KT -- 32nd of 143 (12.9/48)
Reef -- 120th of 143 (9.0/48)
2) shots
as in the beginning of the year we needed that roleplayer in the starting lineup. Putting another primary scorer out there, and another post guy to boot, recreates the awkward struggle we had to start the year where everybody needs the ball.
Last edited:
I agree that 23 points from Reef isn't something to start a "any questions" thread over, but I disagree with the idea that efficiency is somehow something to be questioned. Reef just doesn't get the ball enough to be the kind of player who can shoot 20 shots. If he were repeatedly fed in the post this criticism would be a bit more relevant, but the team has apparently decided to be content with Reef's 13 shots. When Reef gets the ball he creates shots -- his "usage" rate is third on the team behind Bibby and Artest. So if Reef is going to get criticism for not being aggressive enough it would first be helpful to get him the ball.
Since he doesn't get the ball much it seems harsh to criticize him for NOT having off nights, or to act like his 52% shooting percentage isn't helping the team and freeing up more shots for our chuckers. It's the same way with Kevin Martin -- some nights his 3-6 shooting nights aren't really his fault. He just doesn't get the ball.
Since he doesn't get the ball much it seems harsh to criticize him for NOT having off nights, or to act like his 52% shooting percentage isn't helping the team and freeing up more shots for our chuckers. It's the same way with Kevin Martin -- some nights his 3-6 shooting nights aren't really his fault. He just doesn't get the ball.
He is the better overall player. But just throwing the five "best" players out on the coourt only works in fantasy basketball. Its exactly the error we made early in the year. All top teams have roleplayers who thrive without the ball in their lineup. Its a balance thing. The roleplayer may not be as "good" as player x, but the roleplayer fills holes and helps make hsi teammates far betetr than another star type would do.
I think this is the first time someone has suggested that they want to see a 52% shooter on the Kings get the ball more and shoot a horrible %. How about getting the ball more and still shooting 52%. That's what I'd like to see.... I think it would be more helpful to the teams' goal of winning games as well.
How about getting the ball more and still shooting 52%. That's what I'd like to see.... I think it would be more helpful to the teams' goal of winning games as well.
Warhawk said:
I think this is the first time someone has suggested that they want to see a 52% shooter on the Kings get the ball more and shoot a horrible %. How about getting the ball more and still shooting 52%. That's what I'd like to see.... I think it would be more helpful to the teams' goal of winning games as well.
How about getting the ball more and still shooting 52%. That's what I'd like to see.... I think it would be more helpful to the teams' goal of winning games as well.
Shooting % does not translate well over different PTs. At least amongst good offensive players. You shoot 52% on relatively clean looks, dunks, with the opposing team not paying excessive attention to you. Then you start shooting more, but you've already used up your highest percentage shots, so your percentage dips. And as you get more aggressive, teams start focusing more on you, dropping your percentages even lower, etc.
When Reef took more shots, he was a 46-47% shooter. And you know what? That was fine. A 46% attacker is far better than a 52% afterthought. But he left his desire to impose his will on the game somewhere way back there. Now he's just a talented 6th man working on a midlevel contract.
Yes, I have a question.....mods, could you please prohibit all "any questions" threads? It is like a spike to the head.
On a lighter and more positive note. SAR is great to have on the team....really brings a lot of good things to the floor....a great guy.....K-9 still starts because we need SAR's offensive power from the bench to provide an occassional spark - just like he did so well last night.
On a lighter and more positive note. SAR is great to have on the team....really brings a lot of good things to the floor....a great guy.....K-9 still starts because we need SAR's offensive power from the bench to provide an occassional spark - just like he did so well last night.