Small Ball versus Traditional Bigs

[Chupacabra]

After defeating the Pelicans the Warriors didnt face any healthy teams in the playoffs. They got to play against Cleveland without Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love. Arguing that Cleveland is stupid for signing them is just making noise.

 

[Kingster]

What Vlade keeps saying in his interviews is that he wants another PG and a defensive SF. Those who keep suggesting we get another SG are completely missing this.

Vlade has also said that Karl wants to use a 2 PG lineup at times. There is a definite style they want to be able to play with. But it sounds like that 2nd PG would need to be tall. I'm thinking MCW, who I think was rumored to be on the trading block. Or Rondo (please no).

Traditional:
Collison
McLemore
Gay
WCS
DMC

Small ball lineup:
Collison
MCW
Chandler
Gay
DMC

I believe Vlade has said he also wants more outside shooting; I've got to believe the 2-guard is also in play.

 

[Sac.Kings]

In terms of small ball or traditional big man, I would have to say it all depends on how your team is constructed. We would be stupid to play small ball primarily because of Cousins and now WCS. It wouldn't make any sense. We need to play at the pace that best suits the team. We don't have to be a walk it up the court team ala Memphis, but Cousins should be touching the ball four out of every five positions. We need to play an inside/outside game. For that, we need shooters.

 

[HndsmCelt]

The truth is that a good small ball team will beat a bad big team 9 times out of 10... big shock. The entire rise of small ball came about due to the dearth of quality bigs in the league from time time (like the post Shaq era) Finding a mobile big man who can work both ends of the court is hard, and for the slow footed, quicker guys like Landry are death even if the full sized 4-5 can back him down on the other end thanks to swarming defense. BUT if a team fan field a 7 footer who can keep up and patrol the paint then you better have shooters like the Warriors have. I'll take quality big men over quality shooters every time. Small ball IS the adaptation, big play is the immoveable force teams try to adapt to BECAUSE they don't have the size.

 

[Kingster]

This premise is flawed, for reasons I believe I outlined in Post #5. I sincerely hope that Divac and Ranadive don't fall into the trap of trying to become a cheap mimeograph of someone else's team.

I liked your previous post, but it doesn't show that the league is not going to small ball; just that GSW winning doesn't prove that small ball is necessarily the way to go. These are two independent things. I think a cursory check around the league generally indicates the league is going (and in many cases already gone) to small ball. Whether that means the Kings should go to small ball because the league is going to small ball is an entirely different question.

 

[Kingster]

For purposes of this discussion, is small ball defined as Rudy Gay playing PF? If so, does that mean playing offensive PF, defensive PF, or both? It seems to me that with the addition of WCS, Karl would switch the defensive assignment that works out worst for Gay between the opposing teams' SF and PF. If Gay can't handle the SF defensively, WCS plays defense on the SF. If Gay can't handle the PF defensively, WCS plays defense on the PF. The net inches on the court doesn't change; the defensive assignments change. And those defensive assignments have no bearing on the offensive assignments. So if small ball is defined as Gay playing defensive PF under the above arrangement, I don't see how it would be a bad thing; the alternative is Gay playing defensive SF when he would be better off playing defensively against a PF.

 

[Gilles]

You should temper your expectations of rookie WCS. First, he's a rookie. Second, Wisconsin showed, that Willie lacks awareness and footwork to go through screens/bumps to pursue SFs effectively right now.
Kings are not getting well adjusted 4-year veteran - WCS will have to learn a lot of things, and even though he will have much easier time adjusting to the speed of pro game than SGs from previous drafts, there will be bumps on the road, and if Kings rely on him as 20-25 minutes contributor right from the start, team performance will suffer for a couple of months at least.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I liked your previous post, but it doesn't show that the league is not going to small ball; just that GSW winning doesn't prove that small ball is necessarily the way to go. These are two independent things...

You're right, it doesn't show that; it was never meant to show that. My point has always been that it doesn't matter if, or that, the rest of the league is going to small ball, because we are not compelled to do what the rest of the league is doing. Think back to that "If everybody else jumped off a bridge..." lecture you used to get from your moms, and apply it to this topic.

Of course they are two independent things, that's what I've been saying from the very beginning. My post, however, was created to address the second thing, because I find the first thing to be unimportant: maybe the Warriors winning was a fluke, and maybe it was a paradigm shift. AFAIC, it doesn't matter. We have DeMarcus Cousins, and they don't. We don't have to do what those other busters are doing, because we've got him; we can get away with doing our own thing. If that style works with Cousins, fine. If it doesn't, then **** that style. Even if the other twenty-eight teams all start biting the Warriors' ****, as long as we can defend it, we still don't have to.

 

[Livinthedream]

I believe Vlade has said he also wants more outside shooting; I've got to believe the 2-guard is also in play.

Yes, you can believe that, but it's never been stated. Where PG and SF has. The only thing I've heard Vlade say about the SG position is that Ben needs to be more consistent. I also get the sense that Karl likes Ben and has referred to him as a veteran.

It doesn't mean we're not looking for another SG, but it doesn't seem like the highest priority from what I can gather by what the FO/coach has said. I think this board pushes the idea of needed a new SG so much that we take it as a fact that our FO thinks the same.

 

[Kingster]

You should temper your expectations of rookie WCS. First, he's a rookie. Second, Wisconsin showed, that Willie lacks awareness and footwork to go through screens/bumps to pursue SFs effectively right now.
Kings are not getting well adjusted 4-year veteran - WCS will have to learn a lot of things, and even though he will have much easier time adjusting to the speed of pro game than SGs from previous drafts, there will be bumps on the road, and if Kings rely on him as 20-25 minutes contributor right from the start, team performance will suffer for a couple of months at least.

I have no illusions about WCS playing like a vet from Day 1. 20-25 minutes seems about right. I'm coming from the point of view of the team that drafted him at the #6 slot. If they draft a defensive specialist that high they obviously have some major expectations for the guy. As some have said, if he's not on the All Defense team for years to come, it's not a value pick. And I agree with the Wisconsin example.

 

[bajaden]

I have no illusions about WCS playing like a vet from Day 1. 20-25 minutes seems about right. I'm coming from the point of view of the team that drafted him at the #6 slot. If they draft a defensive specialist that high they obviously have some major expectations for the guy. As some have said, if he's not on the All Defense team for years to come, it's not a value pick. And I agree with the Wisconsin example.

I think it would be fool hardy to think that any rookie won't have his ups and downs. However I also think one shouldn't make too big a judgement on one game. Wisconsin was a very good team with a couple of veteran players. I predicted a couple of weeks before the tournament that the one team I thought had a chance to beat Kentucky, because of how they matched up, was Wisconsin. One thing that WCS shouldn't have to struggle with is the offense, since the Kings run a very similar offense to Kentucky. It should be interesting to see how Karl uses WCS.

 

[Kingster]

I think it would be fool hardy to think that any rookie won't have his ups and downs. However I also think one shouldn't make too big a judgement on one game. Wisconsin was a very good team with a couple of veteran players. I predicted a couple of weeks before the tournament that the one team I thought had a chance to beat Kentucky, because of how they matched up, was Wisconsin. One thing that WCS shouldn't have to struggle with is the offense, since the Kings run a very similar offense to Kentucky. It should be interesting to see how Karl uses WCS.

At least in one role, I think he's going to use him like I said - have him guard the player that Gay can defend the least.

 

[CruzDude]

Mr.Slim hits it on the nose. If your great on defense and have a good offense it doesn't matter if you have bigs or five midgets. Defense wins when you also can put the ball in the hole from everywhere.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Mr.Slim hits it on the nose. If your great on defense and have a good offense it doesn't matter if you have bigs or five midgets. Defense wins when you also can put the ball in the hole from everywhere.

Sounds like San Antonio Spurs multiple championships theory. Not to mention during past couple seasons Coach Pop routinely rested several of his top veterans yet still most often won.

 

[lawlman91]

http://www.denverstiffs.com/2015/6/19/8807483/michael-malones-playbook-post-ups-denver-nuggets