Tyreke is NOT happy
- Thread starter kingjatt
- Start date
Gary
All-Star
Thank you. Logical and without any statistics.
I totally agree with him too! If we found a way that works then I am all for it, but everyone is a mechanic when something is broken. Who's right? Time will tell, but I am pretty sure some of the people that will be wrong won't admit it
I totally agree with him too! If we found a way that works then I am all for it, but everyone is a mechanic when something is broken. Who's right? Time will tell, but I am pretty sure some of the people that will be wrong won't admit it
Wait. What??? You can't agree with him. I agreed with him first. And statistically, since I have more posts than you - or anyone else on the board - I have to win!!!
I totally agree with him too! If we found a way that works then I am all for it, but everyone is a mechanic when something is broken. Who's right? Time will tell, but I am pretty sure some of the people that will be wrong won't admit it
I'll be protected because I highly doubt we're ever going to see Keith Smart play Tyreke full-time at PG again. Can't prove that I was wrong if it never happens
Absolutely not. It's like the wins vs. San Antonio and OKC didn't happen. Good, solid wins. Not flukey ****.
It's not about low bball IQ. It's a lack of coaching. A lack of bball IQ means that they wouldn't be able to play a half court game. They can. All their mistakes are mistakes of youth. Using the canard of low bbIQ is the lazy argument. Let me know when these kids have failed to respond to coaching. Evans at Memphis, Cousins at Kentucky. Both under good coaches. Both have shown the ability to take a game over. Both need coaching.
The only lack of bbIQ exists with management, ownership, and the coach.
Until they get the coaching they need, we should end the low bball IQ bull****.
Section 101
All-Star
Once again you portray an inaccrute picture.
Armstrong, Dorsey, Jackson, Pooh and Temple all signed in other leagues early last year because of the lockout. I guess Brooks s out of the league too.
Oh, and putting Mason on the list after playing what 5 games?
I think Wright has a pretty good reason being murdered and all.
Kevin's Good Feet
G-League
At this point I see no reason to keep giving Evans the ball or keep running plays to get it to him, just for the sake of giving him the ball. His game hasn't expanded at all in the three years he's been in the league and until he fixes his jumper we are just going to see the same thing over and over again. The only reason to keep feeding him the ball is to keep him happy, and maybe a little wake-up call is what he needs. Certainly the Evans we see now isn't going to take us anywhere significant.
I still really like Evans and still really want him to succeed, but he hasn't made any kind of case of himself. Maybe next season with an actual SF or playing next to Williams things can change for him, but he has to bring something to the table himself as well.
I still really like Evans and still really want him to succeed, but he hasn't made any kind of case of himself. Maybe next season with an actual SF or playing next to Williams things can change for him, but he has to bring something to the table himself as well.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Not wrong at all, although this isn't updated the last one or two games.
Our 3 guard lineup
(IT/MT/Reke)
Games started together: 25
Record with all three starting:7-18
Opponents PPG in those games:109.3
Comparative winning %
3 Guard Lineup: (.280)
10-11 Season: (.293)
09-10 Season: (.305)
Don't be an idiot.
Murdered? So I take it you feel that we should have continued to sign Armstrong, Dorsey, Jackson, Pooh and Temple because they were such good players .... I doubt there would be much of a difference in the impact and point of Brick's post even if they were still in the league. Prob average like 0.5min a game or something.
But you think we should feed Travis Outlaw the ball? Yes we are going to see the same thing from him - 15+ppg on layups. But no, apparently you'd rather we give Travis Outlaw, Donte Greene, Chuck Hayes the shots right? Because that's what we're doing btw. You don't stop running plays for a guy just because he hasn't improved. You don't stop giving a ball-dominant guy the ball, unless your intention is to say you've given up on him and don't see him as part of the future of the team.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Reke as a starting PG under Smart
FG%-41.0%
PPG-18.3
APG-5.9
RPG-5.6
But given the new offense,new system under a new coach, and the "honeymoon" period Gary made up, let's be fair and discount the first 12 games, and look at the last 10 at PG under Smart, as things usually improve as players adjust.
Last 10
FG%-42.5%
PPG-20.0
APG-6.3
RPG-5.6
So everything improved aside from rebs, which stayed the same. And according to you, these numbers are terrible for an NBA PG. Foolish. IT can't put up those numbers as a PG, nor can the large majority of PG's who've played in this league.
Then, we have the ast rate improving.
Taken from http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2012/...-guard-development-sacramento-kings#storyjump which I posted a while back.
The idea as it's been repeated a number of times, that Reke did not improve as a PG under Smart as he learned the system is a fallacy, as is the idea IT somehow is this god of a PG and Reke can't hold his jock.
Edit: Fixed broken link.
Last edited:
Big Cuz 15
All-Star
pop would be a good coach to put some structure in for this team. he knows how to utilize players strengths and put them in positions to succeed. there was one memorable moment when parker was in his first or second year. it was the playoffs and tony came up and jacked up a quick shot. pop immediately called a time out, pulled him out of the game, promptly chewed him out, refocused him on the game plan. they ended up winning the game. this team has alot of talent that isn't being utilized properly. jimmer for instance needs to have picks set for him. reke needs some shooters around him for him to space and drive to the bucket. cousins needs players to give him the damn ball!
Section 101
All-Star
No, I'm saying those first players made a financial decsions to play overseas during the lockout. They aren't out of the league necessarily due to not being offered contracts. Opps, was thinking of the other Wright that played for the Kings, Lorenzen Wright. It's getting harder to keep track of all the names after 27 years.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Indeed, quite the inaccurate picture, given that I listed each and every teammate he has had. Oh, the deception and unfairness of it all.
Here, let me add a bonus kick in the teeth: every single player Tyreke has ever played with averaged more points with him as their PG than they do today. All of them.
Oh, and here, let me help you with your confusion -- the REASON some of the scrubs were able to sign overseas is because, you guessed it, they are scrubs, had no guaranteed deals, and if they had come back would have been working on minimum contracts as 12th men, if they were lucky. Be even better for my argument.
kingsnation
All-Star
Are you seriously defending that list? Are you saying Reke has had All stars by his side these last 3 years? Oh my word.
Section 101
All-Star
They averaged more because they got more playtime. so your saying can be a great PG on a bad team, but put some better players around him and he cant.
This is the first reading a thread give me headaches.
I am having a hard time figuring out if Gary is serious.
I have huge problem people debating IT vs Reke, seriously? I bet not a single GM in NBA will pick IT over Reke, and I repeat what I've said many weeks ago. With IT starting, this team isn't going to win any playoff series.
Fact is that the team's winning % is not improving under IT, I don't care what the stat say you can't argue the number of win.
I may need to PM spike to help me find a bottle of Stranahan, I need it.
I am having a hard time figuring out if Gary is serious.
I have huge problem people debating IT vs Reke, seriously? I bet not a single GM in NBA will pick IT over Reke, and I repeat what I've said many weeks ago. With IT starting, this team isn't going to win any playoff series.
Fact is that the team's winning % is not improving under IT, I don't care what the stat say you can't argue the number of win.
I may need to PM spike to help me find a bottle of Stranahan, I need it.
Section 101
All-Star
Read the post above. Just saying that putting out of the league is not really true. They are overseas due to the lockout.
Section 101
All-Star
You're looking at the stats as if they're the only thing that matters. And then when we try to put those stats in proper context we get accused of making excuses for Tyreke.
I'll tell you what I see from watching the games -- In the head-to-head comparison, Tyreke is the better rebounder, scorer, and defender. Isaiah is a better shooter. Looking at their entire body of work (including all three seasons for Tyreke) the playmaking is probably about equal. Thomas' assist to turnover ratio is better, but not by a lot. And he's not facing the same caliber of individual defenders and double-teams that Evans is. Tyreke draws the best defender on the other team every game, whatever position he plays.
Paul Westphal had an offensive playbook that looked like this:
(1) Inbound ball (2) Good luck!
I think it's pretty amazing that Tyreke managed to average as many assists as he did in that lack of a system. In addition to ostrasizing Cousins, the reason Westphal got fired is that his "everyone is a playmaker" approach to the offense wasn't helping anybody. At the start of this season we had Thornton, Salmons, and Evans taking turns attacking the basket or pitching the ball out to shooters who couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. Remember what Salmons' and Outlaw's outside shooting percentages were after the first month? I looked it up: Salmons was 12 for 55 on three pointers by the end of January and Outlaw was 3 for 21. That's 20% on 76 shots between the two of them. I watched most of those games, I'm sorry to say, and Tyreke was the only reason the score was as close as it was.
You keep criticizing Tyreke's lack of development but where in your comments do you account for the fact that Tyreke was already very good to begin with? Yes I'm disappointed as well that his development curve hasn't mimicked that of Westbrook or Rose but he's got an entirely different set of teammates and a different coach to contend with. The head coach isn't the only factor in player development, but they do dole out the minutes, assign roles, and devise the offense. Remember how good Westbrook and Durant were with PJ Carlesimo in charge? Is it coincidence that both of them got a lot better once Scott Brooks took over? The sad thing is that Tyreke was playing as well as he's ever played just before Smart moved him to SF and stopped giving him the ball.
Excellent point. I find it almost amusing that some people point to Evans' rookie year and complain that he hasn't improved enough.
kingsnation
All-Star
Right on point.
Section 101
All-Star
You mean they got better when Brooks started playing Durant at SF instead of shooting guard where PJ was misplaying him.
ParniValjak
All-Star
Well if you are going to come up with a smart *** comment then it would be a good idea to have the claim double checked!
Last time I checks, Antoine Wright is alive and kicking and playing some basketball with Reno Bighorns!
As for the rest of the guys you have mentioned, they all have one thing in common...they have been in and out of the league for a while now. Its not like they have been regular on NBA rosters outside of maybe Armstrong.
I mean they got better when they had a coach who understood that you build an offense around the players that you have, you don't force players into roles they are ill-suited for and then yell at them when they can't make it work. With Durant that meant moving him to SF. With Tyreke that means moving him back to either guard position and giving him the ball a lot more than he's getting it now.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
See, I left that strawman argument open because I KNEW you would jump on it thinking woohoo!, predicatable as always.
And predicatably not see that you just made my argument for me -- those players aren't good enough to play the minutes they did on Reke's teams. He had nobody to make. Two third of them weren't even NBA caliber. The ones that are left were platoon quality. He and Kevin are the only guaranteed NBA starters he ever played with until a vastly immature 19yr old Cuz hit town (Cuz would not have been starting around the league eitehr as a rook), and Thornton arried to play 10 games with him at the end of last year.
Gary
All-Star
I am not debating IT vs. Reke.. I am saying I don't want either of them as a starting PG, but I think if we had to go with one or the other I would take IT. Every single offensive team stat has gone up since IT took over. Defense is still dead last but it was with Evans too.
What do you want, and then we will see if I think you are being serious or not.
Section 101
All-Star
So now Dalembert is not a legit starter? Beno played like a starter the 2 years with Evans. We all agree now that Westfail was a major problem, but during his rookie year the majority of the board thought he was the right coach. Just maybe those of us that saw Westfail for what he is also see Evans for what he is.
kingsfan101
Starter
Late to the thread, and haven't followed all the posts. Likely repeating what's been said multiple times, but in my opinion, it's criminal to take the ball out of Reke's hands, and move him to the 3.
While the move is bad in itself, for us, it's worse, since we roll out an extremely midget starting 1-2-3 positions. This, when we can potentially roll out a huge lineup. No wonder we are having defensive issues.
Hopefully, this shall all end next season; this season was lost long back, and the organization probably felt that hyping IT, and tanking for draft position was more important. Once those objectives are achieved, we can return to sanity.
And while this belongs to another discussion, I think we need to think about moving MT.
This is not hating on MT. I feel he is a bad fit for us, particularly with IT's emergence, and with him and Jimmer potentially providing some scoring off the bench.
We have three small guards in the lineup, all of whom are seeing minutes. While MT is the best of them, he's also the one likely to get something valuable. I realize that moving a potential 20PPG scorer, and one of our few reliable outside threats is a bad idea. However, we just can't (or shouldn't) find minutes for 3 small guys. MT, with the greatest value, is likely to get back something substantial. On a personal note, I've felt that MT is probably the most selfish player on the team. Might not be a character thing, but that's the way he plays. Plus, he's extremely undisciplined on defense, more often going for a steal than keeping position. He is a good offensive rebounder, but that's the only non-scoring aspect of his game that I like.
Moving one of these guys becomes even more critical if we draft MKG or Barnes. Then Cisco/Salmons can slide over at 2, and provide us size/role playing that we need.
One suggestion; Bulls are looking for a 2, and I think MT is ideal for them. He can play alongside the big PG Rose; plus TT shall insist he plays defense, and provide the necessary structure. He can't be the selfish gunner he is here, and can provide the scoring that can take them to the promised land.
Bulls also have some defensive minded bigs we can use. The big prize is obviously Noah, but the Bulls won't trade him, unless we are able to sweeten the deal somehow. However, a deal centered around Gibson/Asik might be had if we were to try.
While the move is bad in itself, for us, it's worse, since we roll out an extremely midget starting 1-2-3 positions. This, when we can potentially roll out a huge lineup. No wonder we are having defensive issues.
Hopefully, this shall all end next season; this season was lost long back, and the organization probably felt that hyping IT, and tanking for draft position was more important. Once those objectives are achieved, we can return to sanity.
And while this belongs to another discussion, I think we need to think about moving MT.
This is not hating on MT. I feel he is a bad fit for us, particularly with IT's emergence, and with him and Jimmer potentially providing some scoring off the bench.
We have three small guards in the lineup, all of whom are seeing minutes. While MT is the best of them, he's also the one likely to get something valuable. I realize that moving a potential 20PPG scorer, and one of our few reliable outside threats is a bad idea. However, we just can't (or shouldn't) find minutes for 3 small guys. MT, with the greatest value, is likely to get back something substantial. On a personal note, I've felt that MT is probably the most selfish player on the team. Might not be a character thing, but that's the way he plays. Plus, he's extremely undisciplined on defense, more often going for a steal than keeping position. He is a good offensive rebounder, but that's the only non-scoring aspect of his game that I like.
Moving one of these guys becomes even more critical if we draft MKG or Barnes. Then Cisco/Salmons can slide over at 2, and provide us size/role playing that we need.
One suggestion; Bulls are looking for a 2, and I think MT is ideal for them. He can play alongside the big PG Rose; plus TT shall insist he plays defense, and provide the necessary structure. He can't be the selfish gunner he is here, and can provide the scoring that can take them to the promised land.
Bulls also have some defensive minded bigs we can use. The big prize is obviously Noah, but the Bulls won't trade him, unless we are able to sweeten the deal somehow. However, a deal centered around Gibson/Asik might be had if we were to try.
vikinginferno
Starter
Let me start by saying that I never said those stats were the be all end all. I actually have said that stats do not at all tell the whole story, but they are better than throwing out that the winning % with Tyreke at PG is slightly better than with IT at PG. Also, for your point that I don't give Tyreke credit for how good he was to begin with? I have stated numerous times now that I think he is a very good player. What else do you want me to say? He had a very good rookie season and he deservedly had high expectations. His season wasn't AS good as his stats told, but he still had an amazing rookie season, there is no doubting that. The last two seasons he has definitely played worse as other teams have figured him out. How much longer would you be willing to simply throw the whole team around Tyreke without improvement before you realize maybe he isn't going to be a superstar in the NBA? 1 year? 2 years?
There's no question Reke is the better rebounder.
Although Tyreke definitely has better defensive tools, IT actually plays better defense on PGs. Tyreke should be the better defender, but he just isn't. I don't know if it is effort, basketball IQ, or that he just isn't being taught how to play good defense.
I don't think Tyreke is the better scorer. IT has a much more diverse offensive game that is able to flow within the offense and simply plays much smarter. He attacks with much more care and it shows when he averages 48% vs. Tyreke's 41.5% at PG. Tyreke is very strong at getting to the rim, but he only has a right hand. Even when he goes to the left side, he tries to finish with his right hand. As we all know, he basically has no shot. Let it be known that I do believe Tyreke is already a very strong offensive player, but until he develops more of an offensive repertoire (how has he not even developed a floater?), he isn't going to become a player that is good enough to focus your whole team around. Simple as that.
For playmaking, it really depends how you define it. IT easily has better court vision, but when going to the rim he isn't able to attract as many defenders to switch onto him so he can't set people up in that way as well as Tyreke. IT turns the ball over less as well.
No, it is not amazing that he averaged that many assists. He had the ball in his hands the majority of the time and it is extremely hard not to rack up some assists that way. He is still a decent passer, but he doesn't do a whole lot besides the drive and kick (which isn't necessarily a knock on him as guys like Rose rely on the same thing to set up teammates).
I rely heavily on what I see to judge players. Tyreke doesn't have incredible athletic talent like Lebron, Rose, Westbrook, etc. nor does he have the smooth, refined game of guys like Manu, Roy (man, I miss that dude), Harden, etc. To me, that puts a limit to how good of a player he can be. No doubt he can still be a very solid player in this league, but I just don't think he is someone you place above the rest of the team.
Last edited:
