Up-tempo worked for us tonight

[bajaden]

The defense last night was satisfactory. Lets face it, OKC just missed a ton of wide open looks. If people think we went back to Malone style defense, that wasn't the case. It was a fluke game.

When the other team misses a ton of jump shots and has a bunch of turnovers, naturally the offensive pace of the other team is going to be higher.

I don't disagree that the Thunder missed quite a few open shots. So did we in fact. However, when you're playing tough aggressive defense, which I believe we were last night, one of the by products of that, is the other team starts to rush their shots, and that can lead to players missing open shots. You don't attack the basket on the Thunder without having Ibaka on you mind, and as a result, you start missing point blank layups. We defended the pick and roll pretty well last night. Our big's finally did their part, instead of just being spectators.

 

[206Fan]

Russell Westbrook has only had seven games in his career where he took 10 or more shots and had a lower shooting percentage than he did last night. In all but two of them he had greater assists numbers than last night (the other two he had 3 and 4 assists) And in none of those did he have more than 4 turnovers, let alone the 7 he had last night. I think you could easily argue it was one of the very worst games of his career - top 5 at least.



The Kings definitely played defense. That's one thing I think the vast majority of people here are in agreement with. The Kings returned to giving much better effort on defense AND the Thunder shot horribly. The issue in this particular thread is whether or not the Kings playing at a higher pace is why they won. I'd argue it isn't.



Well, the simplest argument is that OKC played at the same pace and lost by 21 despite having more fastbreak points and being more effective in transition. Are we to believe that only the Kings benefit from a higher pace? After all, the Kings played at nearly the same pace in Detroit and got blown out.

In general I've never seen a strong correlation between pace and wins in the NBA and so far with the Kings increasing the pace (with an admittedly small sample size) has not yielded consistently positive results.

3-19, 10 points, 7 turnovers. 4 assists. He's averaging 26.

It's definitively his worst game of the season. Lowest points, worst shooting, most turnovers, tied for fewest assists. Previous low for points was 18.

It's certainly among his worst games. I'm nOt going to check beyond this season.

Edit: thanks funky. I was pretty confident my statement would hold up. The turnovers make it stand out more than the awful shooting.

12/28 vs dallas 6-23 20pts 9asts 5 tos

12/2 vs NO 6-20 21pts 6asts 7tos

4/26/14 vs Mem 6-24 15pts 7asts 7tos

4/13/14 vs IND 7-23 21pts 7asts 5tos

12/15/13 7-22 20pts 6asts 5tos

12/27/13 2-16 6pts 8asts 2tos

11/10/13 4-16 13pts 4asts 5tos


11/8/13 5-19 20pts 0asts 4to

1/23/13 3-16 10pts 4asts 6tos

1/13 5-21 18pts 9asts 3tos


11/1/12 6-21 18pts 5asts 6tos

4/22/12 3-22 14pts 10asts 3tos

12/28/11 0-13 4pts 6asts 4tos


Can we credit the King's defense for forcing Westbrook into a bad shooting night? Westbrook has had a lot of terrible games. I bet if you look beyond the seasons I looked at, his stats might be even worse than these.

 

[bajaden]

I have no idea who is pulling what strings in the Kings front office or who actually made the decision to fire Malone or why.

But I will say this. Of the crap Ric Bucher spews I believe a virtually none of it and this is no exception.

Bingo! Crap is the proper word to describe what Bucher writes.

 

[Chupacabra]

Why would playing at a faster pace help your defense? Are those on the side of the faster pace scheme insinuating that we ran the Thunder out of the gym? What exactly is the argument that people are using to link a supposed faster pace, which I didnt notice, to better defense? I really feel like this is the ultimate troll thread. How on earth could one come away from this game with the opinion that we were successful due to our "fast pace"? Lets not be dense.

 

[Chubbs]

12/28 vs dallas 6-23 20pts 9asts 5 tos

12/2 vs NO 6-20 21pts 6asts 7tos

4/26/14 vs Mem 6-24 15pts 7asts 7tos

4/13/14 vs IND 7-23 21pts 7asts 5tos

12/15/13 7-22 20pts 6asts 5tos

12/27/13 2-16 6pts 8asts 2tos

11/10/13 4-16 13pts 4asts 5tos


11/8/13 5-19 20pts 0asts 4to

1/23/13 3-16 10pts 4asts 6tos

1/13 5-21 18pts 9asts 3tos


11/1/12 6-21 18pts 5asts 6tos

4/22/12 3-22 14pts 10asts 3tos

12/28/11 0-13 4pts 6asts 4tos


Can we credit the King's defense for forcing Westbrook into a bad shooting night? Westbrook has had a lot of terrible games. I bet if you look beyond the seasons I looked at, his stats might be even worse than these.

Not sure where you're going with this. You're proving that last night was indeed one of his worst all time games.

The 12/28/11 game is worse. And the 1/23/13 game is similar but he had more turnovers and shot worse last night.

So only his second worst game since 2011?

We'd need to see who won those games to really say.

 

[206Fan]

Not sure where you're going with this. You're proving that last night was indeed one of his worst all time games.

The 12/28/11 game is worse. And the 1/23/13 game is similar but he had more turnovers and shot worse last night.

So only his second worst game since 2011?

We'd need to see who won those games to really say.

I was trying to prove that Westbrook has these terrible games often. I wouldn't say it's one of his worst games of all time.. because he's had a lot of terrible games. Last night's game will just add onto his pile.

 

[Uncia03]

Why can't we just admit that pace was a factor in this win? It may have only been 1/10 games, but it was a factor. The only reason why our fg% was terrible is because of Cousins. Big guy went like 6-23.......

Let's all just be perfectly honest here.

If Malone had never been fired, and if we had never heard a peep from the FO about torpedoing the season due to a lack of speed, the word 'Pace' would never, ever, ever been used as a reason for our win against OKC last night night.

In fact, just for fun...I went and looked and lo-and-behold in our win against the Nuggets on November 3rd we had a pace above 100.

That game thread had over 1000 responses...and the word Pace was just mentioned a single time...and it had nothing to do with playing at a fast pace.
Here is the quote:

The half was played at the pace we wanted, our best guys didn't have to do much and should be as fresh as possible to try and take this one. Just keep playing good defense and one of Cuz or Rudy is bound to heat up.

The next game against Denver our Pace was at 99, and yet again Pace was not mentioned at all.

So yeah...to say that Pace played a factor in the win against OKC...no-one who watched the game would ever think about pointing to that as the reason for the victory.

 

[206Fan]

Let's all just be perfectly honest here.

If Malone had never been fired, and if we had never heard a peep from the FO about torpedoing the season due to a lack of speed, the word 'Pace' would never, ever, ever been used as a reason for our win against OKC last night night.

In fact, just for fun...I went and looked and lo-and-behold in our win against the Nuggets on November 3rd we had a pace above 100.

That game thread had over 1000 responses...and the word Pace was just mentioned a single time...and it had nothing to do with playing at a fast pace.
Here is the quote:



The next game against Denver our Pace was at 99, and yet again Pace was not mentioned at all.

So yeah...to say that Pace played a factor in the win against OKC...no-one who watched the game would ever think about pointing to that as the reason for the victory.

I don't believe anyone here is saying Pace is the reason why we won, but it may have been a factor in this win. The pace we played on defense was amazing. I think the entire game was based on pace... if the thunder had made at least 45% of their shots, this would've been a high scoring game and everyone would say it's because of our pace... we played a good pace on both ends of the floor.

 

[Glenn]

I don't believe anyone here is saying Pace is the reason why we won, but it may have been a factor in this win. The pace we played on defense was amazing. I think the entire game was based on pace... if the thunder had made at least 45% of their shots, this would've been a high scoring game and everyone would say it's because of our pace... we played a good pace on both ends of the floor.

I would be very happy to never hear the word again ....................... especially when referring to defense. I don't understand defensive pace but I suspect someone has a stat that measures it.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I was trying to prove that Westbrook has these terrible games often. I wouldn't say it's one of his worst games of all time.. because he's had a lot of terrible games. Last night's game will just add onto his pile.

But your premise is faulty: just because Westbrook has had a number of games that you would classify as 'terrible', that doesn't mean that he hasn't also had a game that could be objectively considered the 'worst'.

You're trying to argue that last night was not one of the worst games of Westbrook's career, because he's had other bad games, which is wrong and, frankly, flawed logic. Chubbs and funkykingston said that it was one of the worst games of his career, and they're right, by any objective standard. Now, whether either of them are giving the Kings' defense the proper amount of credit for Westbrook having such a bad game is an entirely different question.

 

[jcwkings]

Our defense/ their bad play led to transition opportunities for us. Thats the crux of the game, good defense should lead to bad shots, which leads to transition opportunities, that is natural and we saw it under Malone too. What we have seen in the previous games is us artificially picking up the pace for the sake of it, which leads to poor or ill-advised shots, bad transition defense and not being able to set up a good half court defense. Increased pace off of your own defense is good, increasing pace just for the sake of doing is bad(and mostly what we have seen since Malone was fired).

 

[VF21]

Have any of you considered that we are now like parrots, echoing the word "pace" at every turn just because the front office used it in their attempt to rationalize their abysmal treatment of Mike Malone?

It's a stupid word and it's a stupid theory.

Our defense/ their bad play led to transition opportunities for us. Thats the crux of the game, good defense should lead to bad shots, which leads to transition opportunities, that is natural and we saw it under Malone too.

EXCELLENT assessment and he didn't use the word "pace" to do it. (At least not in that part of his post...)

 

[Glenn]

Have any of you considered that we are now like parrots, echoing the word "pace" at every turn just because the front office used it in their attempt to rationalize their abysmal treatment of Mike Malone?

It's a stupid word and it's a stupid theory.

PACE!!!!!!!!

 

[funkykingston]

Have any of you considered that we are now like parrots, echoing the word "pace" at every turn just because the front office used it in their attempt to rationalize their abysmal treatment of Mike Malone?

This thread does have a whole lot of pace.

 

[mdme]

My 3 most hated words

Viral
Meningitis
Pace

Style comes in at 4th.

 

[KingMilz]

It had zero to do with pace, we for the first time in like 10 games we had our defensive anchor actually play like one and everyone else followed. It's not complicated if you defend and pass the ball you can play at any pace and you can beat anyone.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

NEW YORK CITY?!?

...get a rope...

 

[GQ_Gabriel]

I hate to be the one to say this, but...

We held on to the lead from start to finish tonight. Say all you want about OKC playing poorly, but we never saw that under Coach Malone. Just sayin'.

I'd like to add one more thing. When Landry is in there getting buckets, he gives this team a MUCH better chance to win. He is a scoring option on a very limited bench. He's going to be key for us in a lot of these games.

 

[funkykingston]

I'd like to add one more thing. When Landry is in there getting buckets, he gives this team a MUCH better chance to win. He is a scoring option on a very limited bench. He's going to be key for us in a lot of these games.

True, but only because this bench has been terrible, especially without Omri. Evans provides boards but not much else (especially under Corbin who hasn't really been playing him), Williams is inconsistent, Omri has been key when healthy but missed a lot of games lately and anything Hollins gives is a surprise/bonus. But the reserve guards have been the big issue. Sessions has been terrible and Stauskas has looked overwhelmed and shaky. McCallum still looks to me like an ideal "steady but unimpressive" 3rd PG.

I didn't expect Nik or Ramon to struggle this much and didn't ever think the team would have to rely on Ray as a bench scorer, a role he's not a that suited for. This team needs a reliable bench guard who can come in and put points on the board.

 

[GQ_Gabriel]

True, but only because this bench has been terrible, especially without Omri. Evans provides boards but not much else (especially under Corbin who hasn't really been playing him), Williams is inconsistent, Omri has been key when healthy but missed a lot of games lately and anything Hollins gives is a surprise/bonus. But the reserve guards have been the big issue. Sessions has been terrible and Stauskas has looked overwhelmed and shaky. McCallum still looks to me like an ideal "steady but unimpressive" 3rd PG.

I didn't expect Nik or Ramon to struggle this much and didn't ever think the team would have to rely on Ray as a bench scorer, a role he's not a that suited for. This team needs a reliable bench guard who can come in and put points on the board.

Even when healthy, our bench needs MAJOR improvement. Out of the entire 2nd unit, Carl Landry is the one guy who can consistently produce. I am very pleased that Corbin has diminished Evans' minutes.

 

[Gilles]

I think you and everyone else saying last night was a throw back to Malone is wrong.
Malone-ball consists of getting a 20+ point lead and finding a way to pee the game down your leg. LOL

I hate to be the one to say this, but...

We held on to the lead from start to finish tonight. Say all you want about OKC playing poorly, but we never saw that under Coach Malone. Just sayin'.

I'd like to add one more thing. When Landry is in there getting buckets, he gives this team a MUCH better chance to win. He is a scoring option on a very limited bench. He's going to be key for us in a lot of these games.

That was actually Ramon's ball. Didn't see him on the floor this time.
And Landry's scoring has pretty simple roots - get him on the floor along with a real center.

 

[ESP47]

I don't disagree that the Thunder missed quite a few open shots. So did we in fact. However, when you're playing tough aggressive defense, which I believe we were last night, one of the by products of that, is the other team starts to rush their shots, and that can lead to players missing open shots. You don't attack the basket on the Thunder without having Ibaka on you mind, and as a result, you start missing point blank layups. We defended the pick and roll pretty well last night. Our big's finally did their part, instead of just being spectators.

I agree with what you're saying but I'll continue to say the defense was satisfactory. If OKC hits their normal shots, they make a game of it. I'd say the defense was great if we finished with the same score while OKC hit their normal shots.

I don't even blame the team for not playing defense most nights because they aren't held accountable. Malone would call a timeout after a single defensive lapse to wrangle the guys back in and get them refocused on stopping the other team. This team doesn't get a timeout called until they give up 10 points in a minute and a half. At that point your shot at winning the game has gone down drastically.

 

[John Galt]

I hate to be the one to say this, but...

We held on to the lead from start to finish tonight. Say all you want about OKC playing poorly, but we never saw that under Coach Malone. Just sayin'.

I'd like to add one more thing. When Landry is in there getting buckets, he gives this team a MUCH better chance to win. He is a scoring option on a very limited bench. He's going to be key for us in a lot of these games.

come on, nobody hates saying I told you so...

I don't remember if you were the guy saying "if a coach costs us even one win, he should be upgraded to a coach who will never cost us a win" or something like that.

But yes, under Coach Malone, the team lost a few big leads late in games and had a few bad late game possessions out of timeouts. Granted. Don't think that establishes Ty Corbin as an upgrade though.

 

[Padrino]

I hate to be the one to say this, but...

We held on to the lead from start to finish tonight. Say all you want about OKC playing poorly, but we never saw that under Coach Malone. Just sayin'.

I'd like to add one more thing. When Landry is in there getting buckets, he gives this team a MUCH better chance to win. He is a scoring option on a very limited bench. He's going to be key for us in a lot of these games.

i love when kings fans talk about mike malone like he was here as long as rick adelman. yeah, we never saw that under coach malone... in the scant 24 games he coached this season before he was fired, or rather, in the scant 15 games in which he had demarcus cousins available and healthy this season. malone's first year with the kings was a lost cause, as roster turnover was so exceedingly high that nobody could have expected continuity or chemistry to develop. and his second year with the kings was cut short before we could even find out just how good this team could be with malone on the sideline, though there were plenty of signs that were pointing in a positive and upward trajectory. "i told you so"s seem more than a bit presumptuous after one good win, particularly given the fact that tyrone corbin's resume isn't exactly sparkling with authority and victory...

 

[GQ_Gabriel]

come on, nobody hates saying I told you so...

I don't remember if you were the guy saying "if a coach costs us even one win, he should be upgraded to a coach who will never cost us a win" or something like that.

But yes, under Coach Malone, the team lost a few big leads late in games and had a few bad late game possessions out of timeouts. Granted. Don't think that establishes Ty Corbin as an upgrade though.

Yeah, I was that guy.

I never said "If a coach costs us ONE win." The thing is, it wasn't just ONE game with Malone. His in-game decisions and rotations were repeatedly costing us and putting the team in bad positions, literally. (See Memphis Thread)

I loved the fact that we maintained a lead throughout the game and managed to avoid a collapse as we have become so accustomed to. I caught myself waiting for a letdown that never came. That was refreshing to me.

By the way, I'm not bashing Malone, I'm just pointing out his shortcomings that I wasn't so fond of. Right now, too many people are making Malone sound like a god. I loved the fact that he connected with our players, DMC especially, and had them playing hard, and I agree that he might have gotten canned prematurely, I'm just trying to stay as positive as possible.

 

[lawlman91]

True, but only because this bench has been terrible, especially without Omri. Evans provides boards but not much else (especially under Corbin who hasn't really been playing him), Williams is inconsistent, Omri has been key when healthy but missed a lot of games lately and anything Hollins gives is a surprise/bonus. But the reserve guards have been the big issue. Sessions has been terrible and Stauskas has looked overwhelmed and shaky. McCallum still looks to me like an ideal "steady but unimpressive" 3rd PG.

I didn't expect Nik or Ramon to struggle this much and didn't ever think the team would have to rely on Ray as a bench scorer, a role he's not a that suited for. This team needs a reliable bench guard who can come in and put points on the board.

ISO FOR RAY

 

[Chubbs]

I hate to be the one to say this, but...

We held on to the lead from start to finish tonight. Say all you want about OKC playing poorly, but we never saw that under Coach Malone. Just sayin'.

I'd like to add one more thing. When Landry is in there getting buckets, he gives this team a MUCH better chance to win. He is a scoring option on a very limited bench. He's going to be key for us in a lot of these games.

Never?

Kings 131-nuggets 109. Kings led 40-19 after 1.

 

[GQ_Gabriel]

Never?

Kings 131-nuggets 109. Kings led 40-19 after 1.

I forgot about that one game. Lol. I stand corrected.

 

[kupman]

I do not know if this is an issue of pace, but I do think that while it was a great win, we actually could of done significantly better on the offensive end. We did not shoot a great percentage and I remember alot of easy shots being missed. If we make those shots and consequently raised our shooting percentage we may have scored 120 on those guys. At that point, Westbrook could have played well and we still would have kicked their arse.

 

[Chubbs]

I forgot about that one game. Lol. I stand corrected.

And you know what, we were 4-1 at that time. How did Corbin's first five games go? I forget.

When Corbin wins 4 of 5 then maybe it's time for I told you so's. Until then...