What do you think of the new starting lineup?

[K F Jay]

IT/MT/Tyreke/JT/Cousins

 

[Bricklayer]

IT/MT/Tyreke/JT/Cousins

I don't think there is any choice but to press forward with it as long as IT wannts to put triple doubles.

On the other hand, its setting us up to get destroyed in our very next game -- we're going to go 5'9"/6'4"/6'5" against Chalmers/Wade/LeBron? Mommy.

Overall small ball like this won't consistently work in the longterm, and I have concerns if this is the best use of personnel. I think Isiah is SO ball dominant, so involved on every play, that it has a tendency to suppress our best guys, not to mention Reke matching up with a 6'10" guy the first game, a 6'9" guy the second game, and now a 6'8" 250lb guy in Miami. And anybody who thinks we are going to win anything down the line in an Isiah centric world needs to contact me about the bridge I am sellling. Isiah though is really putting forth an argument. Maybe premature on starting -- both games were against rookie guards on bad teams, he's small and will have a tendeency to get worn down, and as teams have a chance to gameplan for the 5'9" guy it could become an adventure. But regardless of all that, he damn near threw up a triple double. That Bobby Jackson role of undersized high energy bench scrapper is very much waiting to be filled, and the gulf between IT's demeanor/energy and Salmons' could not be wider.

What we probably need is Geoff to look at this development, annoint IT the third guard in a 3-guard Reke/Thornton/IT rotation (which of course is not good for Jimmer), and get us a SF upgrade, somehow/someway, so we don't have to play those three guys together except against good matchups. right now its pretty much just our best 5 guys in the starting lineup, and hard to argue that. But its unbalanced and small.

 

[UK_King]

I like it, simply because it means Salmons is not on the floor.

Like others have mentioned we had 3 or 4 occasions last night where we threatened to pull away, and it always coincided with a Salmons miss.

I know it's a dumb point because everyone missed buckets but if Salmons gives us 1 three we win. Having said that Thornton went 1-6 from three, he tends to jack up even with someone in his face, even if there's a pass on. I still don't think the whole "team ball" philosophy has sunk in, I'm not sure it ever will.

I.T definitely dominated the ball coming up the court, but he's an incredibly willing passer, 11 assists and only 2 TO basically having the ball the whole night seems pretty good to me.

I might be seeing things but M.T's body language seems a bit low since Thomas has come in, maybe he thinks he's taking his touches or something.

Smart always bangs on about matchups, so maybe we don't see I.T starting against Miami, lets face it, whether he starts or not we are going to struggle. But it's about giving us the best chance to win.

 

[lwc]

I like the fact that Salmons is not in it, however, I have shouted from the rooftops that Thornton and Evans cannot be on the floor at the same time. Both are basically the same player, they need the ball in their hands to be productive. I.T. has proven that he can be an effective point guard when given the chance, so he stays at the 1 for now.

I would start Evans and bring Thornton off the bench, but with significant minutes.

 

[kingsfan101]

What we probably need is Geoff to look at this development, annoint IT the third guard in a 3-guard Reke/Thornton/IT rotation (which of course is not good for Jimmer), and get us a SF upgrade, somehow/someway, so we don't have to play those three guys together except against good matchups. right now its pretty much just our best 5 guys in the starting lineup, and hard to argue that. But its unbalanced and small.

If Smart looks hard down his bench, he might see Donte. Look for him Smart. At 6'10'', he's kind of hard to miss. He's been playing well, matches up well on defense at the SF position, runs the floor, and can hit the three. While his game might not be the most consistent, he's young, has been a good teammate, and should improve with consistent role and time. More than anything, look at the people who have been taking his minutes. I mean, he can't really do worse now, can he?

 

[Bricklayer]

If Smart looks hard down his bench, he might see Donte. Look for him Smart. At 6'10'', he's kind of hard to miss. He's been playing well, matches up well on defense at the SF position, runs the floor, and can hit the three. While his game might not be the most consistent, he's young, has been a good teammate, and should improve with consistent role and time. More than anything, look at the people who have been taking his minutes. I mean, he can't really do worse now, can he?

the Donte move should have been made a long time ago. Its perfectly obvious. Its also getting obvious at this point Smart won't do it becuase Donte is too tall, and hence a PF in his eyes. Its one of the Achilles' of this coach.

 

[Nighthawk1]

If Smart looks hard down his bench, he might see Donte. Look for him Smart. At 6'10'', he's kind of hard to miss. He's been playing well, matches up well on defense at the SF position, runs the floor, and can hit the three. While his game might not be the most consistent, he's young, has been a good teammate, and should improve with consistent role and time. More than anything, look at the people who have been taking his minutes. I mean, he can't really do worse now, can he?

I agree. Too much Don Nelson in Smarts life and can't handle having a real NBA lineup on the floor? If they won't play DG because he's too good of a roleplayer and won't throw up 20pts, then this team needs to trade for one. Bench MT and slide Tyreke to his real position SG.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'm not a big fan of it simply because it is a three-guard lineup. In stretches when your opponent goes small it's the kind of thing you can do, but opponents never go small to start the game. We've almost gotten away with it the last two games simply because we've been playing some bad teams - Cleveland, who just doesn't have a scoring threat at the 3 (what happened to Omri? You want to talk about a player who has gotten worse since his rookie year...) and Detroit, where Prince burned whoever was guarding him once he got a few bricks out of his system. Put Tyreke on LeBron and Thornton on Wade, and I see disaster.

With the way IT is playing, it's going to be hard to keep him out of the lineup, even the starting lineup. Well, that means MT23 should move down to 6th man. And that's your guard rotation with Jimmer picking up a little slack when necessary. The SF is the problem, but honestly I'd rather see John out there than a full-time three-guard lineup. Better yet? Donte. And against LeBron, well if Donte can't stop him I don't know if anybody else on our team can.

 

[kingsfan101]

I'm not a big fan of it simply because it is a three-guard lineup. In stretches when your opponent goes small it's the kind of thing you can do, but opponents never go small to start the game. We've almost gotten away with it the last two games simply because we've been playing some bad teams - Cleveland, who just doesn't have a scoring threat at the 3 (what happened to Omri? You want to talk about a player who has gotten worse since his rookie year...) and Detroit, where Prince burned whoever was guarding him once he got a few bricks out of his system. Put Tyreke on LeBron and Thornton on Wade, and I see disaster.

With the way IT is playing, it's going to be hard to keep him out of the lineup, even the starting lineup. Well, that means MT23 should move down to 6th man. And that's your guard rotation with Jimmer picking up a little slack when necessary. The SF is the problem, but honestly I'd rather see John out there than a full-time three-guard lineup. Better yet? Donte. And against LeBron, well if Donte can't stop him I don't know if anybody else on our team can.

Agree completely. For all talk of Reke not being a true PG, I like him at that position. Haven't checked the stats, but he seems to be picking more assists this year (particularly recently). If we get out of our shooting slump a bit, not only will his assists go up, he shall see less traffic in the middle. As one of our two best players, and the best perimeter player, the ball should be in his hands as much as possible. IT should have a role more like Barea played last year for Mavs. Change of pace guard off the bench, a pesky little irritant, who gets under the skin of the opposition.

Other issues we face are that our starting SG is also small, who believes more in steals, instead of solid positional defense. So, instead of potential rolling out a huge team (Reke/Salmons or Cisco/Greene/Cousins/JT) as our starting line up, we are throwing out midgets. I realize that I have put Salmons/Cisco at 2, instead of MT. Was just to highlight the long lineup we can potentially roll out. For all their bad play this year, I feel Salmons/Cisco can be a decent at SG, given a consistent role. However, MT is obviously the guy who shall play that position.

 

[kingsnation]

As others have stated, Reke at the 3 and playing this type of smallball is only going to take you so far. The change I want to see is Marcus coming off the bench and Donte starting at the 3. Marcus' minutes DO NOT have to decrease, he will simply be coming off the bench instead to provide a MUCH NEEDED spark and scoring. If Coach Smart is unwilling to do this, then I'd honestly rather see Honeycutt starting at the 3 then this lineup because honestly we're going to be looking for a more capable 3 in the offseason anyways. Might as well see what we have in Honeycutt.

 

[origkds]

I don't think there is any choice but to press forward with it as long as IT wannts to put triple doubles.

On the other hand, its setting us up to get destroyed in our very next game -- we're going to go 5'9"/6'4"/6'5" against Chalmers/Wade/LeBron? Mommy.

Overall small ball like this won't consistently work in the longterm, and I have concerns if this is the best use of personnel. I think Isiah is SO ball dominant, so involved on every play, that it has a tendency to suppress our best guys, not to mention Reke matching up with a 6'10" guy the first game, a 6'9" guy the second game, and now a 6'8" 250lb guy in Miami. And anybody who thinks we are going to win anything down the line in an Isiah centric world needs to contact me about the bridge I am sellling. Isiah though is really putting forth an argument. Maybe premature on starting -- both games were against rookie guards on bad teams, he's small and will have a tendeency to get worn down, and as teams have a chance to gameplan for the 5'9" guy it could become an adventure. But regardless of all that, he damn near threw up a triple double. That Bobby Jackson role of undersized high energy bench scrapper is very much waiting to be filled, and the gulf between IT's demeanor/energy and Salmons' could not be wider.

What we probably need is Geoff to look at this development, annoint IT the third guard in a 3-guard Reke/Thornton/IT rotation (which of course is not good for Jimmer), and get us a SF upgrade, somehow/someway, so we don't have to play those three guys together except against good matchups. right now its pretty much just our best 5 guys in the starting lineup, and hard to argue that. But its unbalanced and small.

This and LOL.

 

[Warhawk]

I'm not a big fan of it simply because it is a three-guard lineup. In stretches when your opponent goes small it's the kind of thing you can do, but opponents never go small to start the game. We've almost gotten away with it the last two games simply because we've been playing some bad teams - Cleveland, who just doesn't have a scoring threat at the 3 (what happened to Omri? You want to talk about a player who has gotten worse since his rookie year...) and Detroit, where Prince burned whoever was guarding him once he got a few bricks out of his system. Put Tyreke on LeBron and Thornton on Wade, and I see disaster.

With the way IT is playing, it's going to be hard to keep him out of the lineup, even the starting lineup. Well, that means MT23 should move down to 6th man. And that's your guard rotation with Jimmer picking up a little slack when necessary. The SF is the problem, but honestly I'd rather see John out there than a full-time three-guard lineup. Better yet? Donte. And against LeBron, well if Donte can't stop him I don't know if anybody else on our team can.

I also agree completely.

 

[bajaden]

I have to agree with the Capt and Bricky. Hard to deny the success that IT has had in the last two games, and there's no doubt that the team is playing better with him in the lineup. But Tyreke at the 3 just isn't going to work longterm. So if we agree that the best case scenario is having IT as the starting PG, then something has to be resolved at the SG position. Thornton needs to be the 6th man on the team. He has a very aggressive nature, which fits well with being the 6th man.

That doesn't resolve the SF issue though. Personally I'd start Donte, let Salmons fill in where and when necessary, and hopefully find a way to trade him before seasons end. I don't want to be premature, but our hopes of making the playoffs is becoming less likely game by game. This coming home stand could seal the deal one way or the other. But assuming were not, then I'd try to inject Honeycutt into the lineup when possible to see what we have with him.

Ditto Whiteside! Sometimes its a disastor, but its also a wakeup call for the player. You can sit on the bench thinking you've done everything you need to do to play in the NBA, but you don't really know until your out there getting your head handed to you. At that point, you either realize you have a lot of work to do, or your out of the league and playing in europe or the DBL.

 

[pshn80]

I agree. Too much Don Nelson in Smarts life and can't handle having a real NBA lineup on the floor? If they won't play DG because he's too good of a roleplayer and won't throw up 20pts, then this team needs to trade for one. Bench MT and slide Tyreke to his real position SG.

I agree this is definitely worth giving a good try. It will twist Thornton's nose and ego but, frankly, that would be OK with me. If Thornton got his mind into it, he would be great off the bench. Agree with Brick, Tyreke at the three is not a good option especially when the one and two are 5-9 and 6-4.

I don't know if matter of not starting Donte at the three is because Smart is a confirmed small ball advocate or whether it is Donte's history of under performance. Let's try it starting tonight for seven games.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I'm willing to stick with IT/MT/Evans as long as Salmons starting is the only other option coach Smart thinks he has.

It's a tough choice, but Salmons has been so bad .. so, so bad that we just cannot continue to trot him out. If your giving me the option to start Donte, or even throw Honeycutt into the fire, then yea, I'd take that over the 3 guard lineup .. but Keith Smart has RARELY actually played Donte at SF (I think he did against Durant, Beasley, and maybe Wallace?) and Honeycutt has been wearing a suit the past few games.

The thing is .. does Thomas and Evans work when our '3' can't shoot? Donte has been a 3pt shooter his whole career .. emphasis on 'shooter' .. he doesn't actually make a whole lot of them. Salmons can't shoot. Honeycutt is the wild card. Now, Thomas and Thornton starting with Donte and moving Reke to the bench might work in terms of giving you more shooting and a more balanced offensive lineup (that allows you to use Cousins a whole lot more) ... but that's absurd right? Tyreke needs to start. I just don't know if we can live with Isaiah Thomas as our best 3 point shooter in our starting lineup. Cisco is also an option, but his size isn't great either.

The other problem is .. And this is pretty sad, but it sure looks like Isaiah Thomas is our best point guard. At least when it comes to doing what Keith Smart wants us to do. He's always pushing the pace, always looking up on the break (while MT and Evans will try and take it themselves on the break, Thomas looks for the guy closest to the basket) .. He looks for Cuz more than either guy. What do you make of that? It has to be worth something. I fully understand that the sample size is small, but in his second career start he gave us 11 assists and it didn't even look difficult. He just did it.

Our defense is also terrible. Last in the league last time I checked. This cannot be ignored. I still can't get past the fact that I think this is in large part due to lack of effort, which just sucks. If our defense gets respectable than we will win more games.

Which brings me to my last point... what are we doing with Chuck Hayes? JT's production has tailed off a bit lately, and it might be time to put Chuck back in the starting lineup. I have always felt that having Chuck Hayes as a bench big is rather worthless. He is a terrible offensive player, and his defense is only worth a damn if he's guarding the other teams best post player .. who is always starting.

JT can help the bench more than Hayes, and Hayes may be able to help the starting lineup more than JT at this point. I actually think JT has shown a better post game this season, which may be able to jump start the bench. Rebounding has also been an issue with the Hayes/Hickson pairing .. JT can help solidify that.

 

[pshn80]

Agree completely. For all talk of Reke not being a true PG, I like him at that position. Haven't checked the stats, but he seems to be picking more assists this year (particularly recently). If we get out of our shooting slump a bit, not only will his assists go up, he shall see less traffic in the middle. As one of our two best players, and the best perimeter player, the ball should be in his hands as much as possible. IT should have a role more like Barea played last year for Mavs. Change of pace guard off the bench, a pesky little irritant, who gets under the skin of the opposition.

Other issues we face are that our starting SG is also small, who believes more in steals, instead of solid positional defense. So, instead of potential rolling out a huge team (Reke/Salmons or Cisco/Greene/Cousins/JT) as our starting line up, we are throwing out midgets. I realize that I have put Salmons/Cisco at 2, instead of MT. Was just to highlight the long lineup we can potentially roll out. For all their bad play this year, I feel Salmons/Cisco can be a decent at SG, given a consistent role. However, MT is obviously the guy who shall play that position.

Whichever option, please get the ball out of Evans' hands as the principal bringer upper and distributor. Please.

 

[pshn80]

Also, the reason I would be happy if Salmons wasn't the 3 with IT and Evans is that he is not tall enough when beside a 5-9 PG. If you start IT you don't play Salmons or Evans at the 3. Play Greene until he fails on defense. And then feed Honeycutt and try him (long shot now).

 

[Glenn]

Sheeeesh, I just read a whole bunch of great notes analyzing the present state of the Kings and now have a headache. That's what comes of actually trying to think of a solution. I'm afraid that the solution is in GP's hands. There are too many major problems yet at the same time, there seems to be enough good players to give hope for the future. I wonder how this team would have been without Salmons and Outlaw replaced by AK47. Seems like many of our problems are a ripple effect starting at the SF position.

 

[IfAt1st]

Whichever option, please get the ball out of Evans' hands as the principal bringer upper and distributor. Please.

This.

156 times this.

The 2+ season long experiment with Tyreke as the primary ballhandler is OVER.
Stick a fork in it.
It's done.

Time to give the keys of the offense to someone else and see if the Kings can improve under someone else's hands.
Let Tyreke get the ball off of plays/passes where there's movement and transitional defenses - can't let him have the ball anymore in the halfcourt.
Tyreke's shown he can back-cut and get the easy layup if he doesn't have the ball.

That's my vote.

 

[Fear the Putin]

Also, the reason I would be happy if Salmons wasn't the 3 with IT and Evans is that he is not tall enough when beside a 5-9 PG. If you start IT you don't play Salmons or Evans at the 3. Play Greene until he fails on defense. And then feed Honeycutt and try him (long shot now).

It baffles me really.
You aren't gonna make the playoffs playing the way we play right now. Our current SF's that have been playing are so bad that the coach decides to go with a 3 guard starting lineup.

IF you're doing that, why not explore what Honeycutt has to offer.


I like the demeanor Smart brings to the table, but his lineups are odd to say the least. Would really explore and test the Jerry Sloan interest in the summer.

 

[The_Jamal]

This.

156 times this.

The 2+ season long experiment with Tyreke as the primary ballhandler is OVER.
Stick a fork in it.
It's done.

Time to give the keys of the offense to someone else and see if the Kings can improve under someone else's hands.
Let Tyreke get the ball off of plays/passes where there's movement and transitional defenses - can't let him have the ball anymore in the halfcourt.
Tyreke's shown he can back-cut and get the easy layup if he doesn't have the ball.

That's my vote.

I actually agree. Tyreke is our best cutter and he's shown a willingness to do so. The problem is Tyreke tends to get lost in the flow of the game when he's playing off the ball. That simply can't happen with our best player. I'm all for giving IT the keys and seeing how he does, but it can't be at the risk of making Reke into a non-factor

 

[The_Jamal]

It baffles me really.
You aren't gonna make the playoffs playing the way we play right now. Our current SF's that have been playing are so bad that the coach decides to go with a 3 guard starting lineup.

IF you're doing that, why not explore what Honeycutt has to offer.


I like the demeanor Smart brings to the table, but his lineups are odd to say the least. Would really explore and test the Jerry Sloan interest in the summer.

Bringing in a SLoan or Brown type would be a mistake for this team. The guys respond to Smart as they can relate to him; I'm not so sure they would be able to do the same with a Sloan. Plus, finding 2-year coaching options aren't the answer in the NBA. If you look at every successful team in the past 30 years, there's been a a top 5 coach who's been with that team for 5+ years behind it. Pop, Phil, Carlilse, Rivers, etc all have an established identity

 

[TTown Kings]

I like it, simply because it means Salmons is not on the floor.

This X 1,000,000

 

[rainmaker]

Something which bothers me, is that Smart seems oblivious to the defensive side of the court. This 3 guard lineup will get us pummeled both on defense and on the glass. It also takes one of our best players, and sticks him in the corner on offense, almost negating the positive impact of IT, while also making our bench less potent.

I just don't get it. Bringing IT in and benching Salmons solves one problem while creating others.

When did this become all about IT and not about our team. IT played great, and I like him at point, but running Thornton/Reke out there next to him hurts Thornton and Reke on both sides of the ball. Not enough shots or time with the ball to get into a rhythm, while Thornton now has no choice but to guard the opposing sg, whereas when paired with Reke, Reke could guard the sg, and Reke is now matched up with sf's, which negates and size advantage, and really he's not a sf to begin with.

Then there's our bench. IT was our punch coming off. Now we don't have one. IMO, we need the punch from either IT or Thornton coming off the bench. Now we have no bench.

While having IT set up the offense and go into Cousins more often is definitely a positive, does that positive outweigh the undersized and worse defensive lineup, the negative effect on 2 of our top 3 scorers, and the now effectively neutered bench which has zero fire power?

No. And I think that'll be quite obvious tomorrow in Mia. If Smart runs out a three guard lineup tomorrow, it's damn obvious he doesn't give two s****'s about defense. How could this work, and elevate the team as a whole?

Run out an IT/Reke backcourt, with Donte at the sf. Thornton off the bench. That keeps IT out there to run the offense, while not giving up so much on defense. We actually have an NBA size sf that way, we have enough shots to go around in the starting lineup so Reke/Cousins can get into more of a rhythm, and we strengthen our bench with Thornton coming off aggressively, not having to share shots with others.

Basically, I think there's a way to start IT, while helping the team in other important areas, and there's a way to start him while hurting us in multiple other areas. The latter is what I see right now. Just because we're starting IT doesn't mean we need him to dominate the ball to the point Reke/Thornton don't get into a rhythm, we get killed on defense, and lose any scoring punch from our bench.

Play him next to Reke, having Reke running the 2, and not only is Reke going to be much more effective there, but we won't get killed on defense and on the glass. That is dependent however on running out an NBA size sf. Not sure Smart knows what that means. But having IT/Reke/Donte helps us on both ends of the floor, while strengthening the bench.

 

[Fear the Putin]

Bringing in a SLoan or Brown type would be a mistake for this team. The guys respond to Smart as they can relate to him; I'm not so sure they would be able to do the same with a Sloan. Plus, finding 2-year coaching options aren't the answer in the NBA. If you look at every successful team in the past 30 years, there's been a a top 5 coach who's been with that team for 5+ years behind it. Pop, Phil, Carlilse, Rivers, etc all have an established identity

I understand that and I think that it is imperative that the players have a bond with a coach. But, beyond having a social bond and tight interpersonal knit, you need the coach to understand what it takes to get better. What works and what fails. It took him way too long to place Salmons on the bench and the defense is still horrid.

Maybe it is the personnel that the front office assembled for the team which is causing problems, maybe not.

Also, Larry Brown would definitely not be on my list. Sloan on the other hand is a players coach. Tough, but is a player's coach.
It also helps that he is intrigued by our young talent and loves coaching in small markets.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

I really like this lineup, I might want to start Donte at SF and put Thornton as our 6th man...but lets see how this works.

 

[The_Jamal]

I understand that and I think that it is imperative that the players have a bond with a coach. But, beyond having a social bond and tight interpersonal knit, you need the coach to understand what it takes to get better. What works and what fails. It took him way too long to place Salmons on the bench and the defense is still horrid.

Maybe it is the personnel that the front office assembled for the team which is causing problems, maybe not.

Also, Larry Brown would definitely not be on my list. Sloan on the other hand is a players coach. Tough, but is a player's coach.
It also helps that he is intrigued by our young talent and loves coaching in small markets.

How long would he want to coach though? I couldn't see him being here more than a couple years. As a team, you want to find a coach you can keep long-term so you have an established system that you can just feed guys into and come out polished products of your system (I.E, San Antonio, Dallas, Boston)

 

[pshn80]

How do you like the new starting lineup?

Leave it the way it is and hire a new coach, sometime. Not my suggestion and not on this thread.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

I'd take our smallball and better ball movement over ANY lineup that has John Salmons in it ANYDAY!

 

[UK_King]

I seem to remember the Warriors giving up a lot of points last season as well.

I think Smart is more a we'll score more than you coach, or at least it's been that way with the players hes had at his disposal.