stevetaebo
Bench
/me wonders when big nasty will ever play.
c'mon coach, expand ur bench pleeaze
c'mon coach, expand ur bench pleeaze
W
West_Gunslinger16
Guest
Aye. But some teams make their starters play for 40 mins. like Detroit, Cleveland
and Boston Celtics.
and Boston Celtics.
West_Gunslinger16 said:Aye. But some teams make their starters play for 40 mins. like Detroit, Cleveland
and Boston Celtics.
Ironically, Adelman has been condemned MANY times for not playing a deep enough bench, for playing the starters too many minutes, etc.
We may have a lot of problems right now, but not giving the starters more time on the court isn't one of them. If ANY of them go down, we are doomed with a capital D.
W
West_Gunslinger16
Guest
Hmmmm.....
I have to agree with you guys but our bench is kinda...... damn I can't find the word! So I think we really need to extend just a bit more of the starters' playing time. Plus Adelman lets the bench players play at 2nd Quarter which is a very crucial quarter. That's why we lost at Seattle.
I have to agree with you guys but our bench is kinda...... damn I can't find the word! So I think we really need to extend just a bit more of the starters' playing time. Plus Adelman lets the bench players play at 2nd Quarter which is a very crucial quarter. That's why we lost at Seattle.
S
Smart_guy3
Guest
West_Gunslinger16 said:
Actually if you guys really see our bench there is alot of depth but it's not being used propertly in terms of giving these guys there confidence to build upon.
Give them atleast the all-star break to see were we are
^The pace of the game was VERY fast tonight. Adelman had to give the starters a breather.
The second quarter is no more crucial than the any other quarter. In fact, it could actually be argued it is NOT as important as the first - setting a good tone from the start; the third - starting off the second half with momentum; OR the fourth - making sure you don't fade in the stretch.
We lost in Seattle because our bench was ineffective, we missed some crucial free throws and we didn't rebound at the end. In addition, we couldn't stop Ray Allen AND we were hampered by Peja's injury and subsequent lack of offensive production.
We didn't lose in Seattle because Adelman didn't play the starters long enough in the second quarter.
The second quarter is no more crucial than the any other quarter. In fact, it could actually be argued it is NOT as important as the first - setting a good tone from the start; the third - starting off the second half with momentum; OR the fourth - making sure you don't fade in the stretch.
We lost in Seattle because our bench was ineffective, we missed some crucial free throws and we didn't rebound at the end. In addition, we couldn't stop Ray Allen AND we were hampered by Peja's injury and subsequent lack of offensive production.
We didn't lose in Seattle because Adelman didn't play the starters long enough in the second quarter.
W
West_Gunslinger16
Guest
Right.
You're right. Especially Ronnie Price. But I wanna see how Sampson plays.
Do you guys have the picture where Price dunks in the Kings-Bucks game?
Smart_guy3 said:Actually if you guys really see our bench there is alot of depth but it's not being used propertly in terms of giving these guys there confidence to build upon.
Give them atleast the all-star break to see were we are
You're right. Especially Ronnie Price. But I wanna see how Sampson plays.
Do you guys have the picture where Price dunks in the Kings-Bucks game?
West_Gunslinger16 said:I have to agree with you guys but our bench is kinda...... damn I can't find the word! So I think we really need to extend just a bit more of the starters' playing time. Plus Adelman lets the bench players play at 2nd Quarter which is a very crucial quarter. That's why we lost at Seattle.
^The pace of the game was VERY fast tonight. Adelman had to give the starters a breather. Playing them longer in the second quarter would only have delayed the inevitable.
The second quarter is no more crucial than any other quarter. In fact, it could actually be argued it is NOT as important as the first - setting a good tone from the start; the third - starting off the second half with momentum; OR the fourth - making sure you don't fade in the stretch.
We lost in Seattle because our bench was ineffective, we missed some crucial free throws and we didn't rebound at the end. In addition, we couldn't stop Ray Allen AND we were hampered by Peja's injury and subsequent lack of offensive production.
We didn't lose in Seattle because Adelman didn't play the starters long enough in the second quarter.
BTW? The word you can't find to describe the bench? Try ineffective... or nonsubstantial... or sucky.
W
West_Gunslinger16
Guest
VF21 said:
Right! Finally found it! Hehe!
Stojakovic
Bench
I haven't had an input in this thread yet, but I am glad to see that this will be the one and "ONLY" fire Adelman thread.
Adelman had no fault in our loss tonight.
Adelman had no fault in our loss tonight.
S
Smart_guy3
Guest
Padrino said:
If we're close to the 8th seed or 7th seed then we can make a good push for the playoffs and possibly for the pacific divison.
Padrino
All-Star
Smart_guy3 said:
???
i dont get it. if we're at .500 or sub-.500, or even slightly above .500 by the all star break, whattya think's gonna happen? we're all of a sudden gonna become a winning ball club in the toughest stretch of the season? no, if we "wait til the all star break" to see where this basketball team is at, and it's not above .500, then i don't think we should expect any sort of push for the pacific division title. the kings have got to get above .500 within the next few weeks to have any sort of shot at winning the pacific.
S
Smart_guy3
Guest
Sometimes teams need time to find there confidence things start changing for alot of teams during the 2nd half teams start playing together alot better there more confident and so on... Come on look at the Rockets '3-7' for a team who was considered a "Title contender"? again this has nothing to do with the Rockets but sometimes even the teams who are considered "Good" need time together.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Smart_guy3 said:
I totally agree, but if the current struggles that this team faces (which are fairly clear) are still existent that far into the season...I just don't think that things will be allowed to go that far. I mean the Maloofs have already said they be down with making moves so that kind of tells me that they are not that patient.
BigWaxer
Starter
Smart_guy3 said:Actually if you guys really see our bench there is alot of depth but it's not being used propertly in terms of giving these guys there confidence to build upon.
Give them atleast the all-star break to see were we are
Our bench has a lot of Depth? Please explain were?
Our bench is horrible, lacks depth, lacks scoring and lacks talented players.
Martin, Garcia are players we hope will be better. My theory on Thomas is that he is struggling because of the players he is in with. Of course this is killing his trade value if he had any with the size of his contract. When he is in with the starters he plays much better.
I actually see no depth on the bench at all. Thomas is our only scoring option off the bench. I think we all see now how much bjax is missed.
S
Smart_guy3
Guest
There is no explaination. I already said it in my previous post that sometimes the depth in the bench is not used propertly and thats the problem with the Kings right now; they have a pretty good bench but right now it's being overlooked because the bench is playing poorly but you guys didn't give any good arguements that possibly the bench is not being used propertly and Adelman could be the problem.
Smart_guy3 said:
Come on dude. We have a horrible bench. Two tweaner forwards, a 6-10 center who is completely unfit for our offense, two rookies and one second year player who is grossly overrated. Did I miss anyone? Oh yeah, a playmaker who can't make plays for anyone, not even himself.
4cwebb
Starter
If ever there was a time for Adelman to heavily rely on his starters, that time is now. In the past, there were players who we, as fans, were confident that could make plays or develop into legitimate, contributing NBA players if only given consistent opportunities (Hedo, Gerald Wallace, etc.), but those players were caught in a minutes crunch because the starters and one or two other guys on the bench (BJax, JJax, etc.) seemed to deserve the minutes more for their performances than those younger, less-experienced players.
But this bench is just so inconsistent to this point. Martin plays like a solid NBA backup SG some games, and others he just can't seem to find his place on the floor. Hart hasn't been the same since his injury. Thomas seems to be in a funk over coming off the bench. Skinner has trouble doing the only things you'd expect him to do in some games, if he even gets in the game.
But at this point the team just needs more time, and they need more time with the coach that has been with them through this training camp. The offense, on most nights recently, is seemingly coming together. Defense leaves something to be desired, but that's really nothing new with the Kings. But to change the coach now, and thereby change the system, or philosophy, would upset whatever small progresses have been made. And with the bench lacking any true quality players that should be getting development time over the starters, there's no reason to scrap this season by firing Adelman at this point.
But this bench is just so inconsistent to this point. Martin plays like a solid NBA backup SG some games, and others he just can't seem to find his place on the floor. Hart hasn't been the same since his injury. Thomas seems to be in a funk over coming off the bench. Skinner has trouble doing the only things you'd expect him to do in some games, if he even gets in the game.
But at this point the team just needs more time, and they need more time with the coach that has been with them through this training camp. The offense, on most nights recently, is seemingly coming together. Defense leaves something to be desired, but that's really nothing new with the Kings. But to change the coach now, and thereby change the system, or philosophy, would upset whatever small progresses have been made. And with the bench lacking any true quality players that should be getting development time over the starters, there's no reason to scrap this season by firing Adelman at this point.
W
West_Gunslinger16
Guest
Did you see how B. Skinner plays? Man he's so good that I'd do this position!
5 - Skinner
4 - Miller/Rahim
3 - Stojakovic
2 - Wells
1 - Bibby
Sorry to Miller Fans but I think Skinner is better than Miller. Skinner plays like a real center and somehow I'll compare him to Ben Wallace for his D and Athleticism. And Miller, he plays like he's in SG position, mid-range jumpers, 3's and doesn't rebound (or just Rahim and Wells rebound better?). He's just standing there! Again sorry to Miller's fans hope y'all understand.
Hey Am I in the right thread?
5 - Skinner
4 - Miller/Rahim
3 - Stojakovic
2 - Wells
1 - Bibby
Sorry to Miller Fans but I think Skinner is better than Miller. Skinner plays like a real center and somehow I'll compare him to Ben Wallace for his D and Athleticism. And Miller, he plays like he's in SG position, mid-range jumpers, 3's and doesn't rebound (or just Rahim and Wells rebound better?). He's just standing there! Again sorry to Miller's fans hope y'all understand.
Hey Am I in the right thread?
6th
Homer Fan Since 1985
4cwebb said:
The highlighted part above says very well what I believe...not to mention that there are just no better coaches out there who are available.
I have always been an Adelman supporter. Since he is our coach, I will continue to be an Adelman supporter. However, I fully expect that this is Adelman's final year. When he leaves at the end of this season (or earlier if the Maloof's go into a panic) it will truly be an end of an era. Almost all the guys that came to the Kings when CWebb and Vlade came and started something new are now gone. Maybe when Adelman's contract expires, it is time for him to be leaving, as well. Actually, I think that Adelman himself is ready to leave. So, even if he is offered another contract with the Kings, he will respectfully decline.
You can't be "overrated" unless you've been "highly rated." Martin has not. He's a second-year player who's getting the first real playing time of his career (having played very little his rookie year). And, more to the point, he's playing on an average-to-good team that still thinks it can get to the playoffs (and probably should), but is lacking in leadership and depth, and therefore has play it's top players for as long as they can. Which means little-to-no margin for error for players like Martin and Garcia. Which, in turn, means no learning curve.frankie said:
The biggest disadvantage to Martin and Garcia right now, and the thing that amplifies their mistakes more than anything else, would be the shortcomings of the rest of this team. Unlike previous incarnations of the Kings, this Kings team is not good enough to absorb newbie mistakes. Gone are the years when we had the luxury of a Bobby Jackson or a Jon Barry, or even a Jim Jackson; veteran players that could keep your offense stabilized coming off the bench. Gone are the days when the Kings played good enough defense (not necessarily good, mind you, but good enough) to absorb some bad play by young players. It's not that the kids aren't any good, so much as the veterans around them aren't good enough to carry them through bad games.
Two and three years ago, we could send Turkoglu or Wallace or Songaila out there, and even if they had a bad night, we could still win, because we had Webber and Divac and Christie (with Bibby and Stojakovic supporting) to right the ship. Now, that old leadership is gone, and the players that are left behind aren't good enough to carry the team through rookie mistakes. We've gone from having the ability to win in spite of a bad bench performance to being a team that will most likely lose if the bench has an off night and, contrary to popular opinion, that is NOT entirely the fault of the bench itself... Given the fact that these kids have a short learning curve, and virtually no margin for error, I think that they're developing about as fast as a reasonable person should expect.
It's sad, really: on an elite team, the core of the team is so good that they can absorb rookie/sophomore mistakes. On a truly bad team, management can afford to say, "Eff it, give the kids a chance; let's see what they can do." But, on a borderline good team like the Kings, you need everybody to contribute in order to win. There's no margin for error whatsoever; you can't afford to have young players learning on the job. And that's why Martin and Garcia's mistakes look worse than they actually are.
To say that Martin is "grossly overrated" would suggest that he is "highly rated" by somebody. I therefore challenge you to support this statement with a coherent argument.
P
playmaker0017
Guest
Mr. S£im Citrus said:
I think what he is saying is that Martin is "overvalued" and "overrated" by Kings fans.
You also CAN be overrated and not be highly rated. If you are expected to perform up to a certain standard, and you don't ... then you were overrated. You were rated to perform at one level and you performed under it - thus overrated.
Overvalued? In what regard? And what standard has Martin failed to perform to?
P
playmaker0017
Guest
Mr. S£im Citrus said:
Hey, I'm just defending what he said.
I don't think Martin is overvalued or undervalued - I think he's pretty much playing exactly where I expected him to .... at an NBDL level.
Your argument isn't with me on this one.
