What do you think of the new starting lineup?

[ppine]

The new line-up adds 5 seconds to the amount of time the Kings have on offense. IT brings the ball in a hurry and tends to move it pretty well. Evans has not lost any effectiveness. Thornton is a little lost at times, but moves without the ball well. They will all adjust and get better. If the offense worked against Miami, it can work against any NBA team. When IT shoots 3s, he believes they are going in. That can be contagious for the worst shooting team in the league. Team defense is the concept that will allow the Kings to start winning more. The 3 guard set adds a lot quickness. It will work most of the time. When it doesn't bring, in some fresh legs and play more straight up defense. Besides defense, the issues with this team IMO are level of effort every night in a compressed season and all the mental stuff- confidence, caring about teammates, desire, hustle, and selflessness. More confidence alone could have won 5-6 more games this year. It is tough to get and easy to lose against the unbelievable talent in the NBA.

 

[Spike]

Ultimately the goal is to win games. You'll win a lot more of them in the long term if you focus on defense instead of offense, and I have yet to see this translate into wins. Does it look prettier? I guess.

 

[Kingster]

I just can't imagine Evans as a small forward, a position he's never played. Smart is going to have to prove to me that this will work well. Small ball. Ugh.

I haven't had time to read all of this article in the Sac Bee today, but t's about Evans at the SF position and Smart's thinking.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/21/4278323/kings-evans-adjusts-to-new-role.html

That's fine, but we know that the Tyreke at pg doesn't work. Time to try something else.

 

[bluntsnbball]

The problem is Reke loses every advantage he has in basketball by playing the SF. His entire game is being stronger, bigger, and quicker than other guards and simply overpowering them to the basket. Well, force him to defend LeBron, Gay, Melo, Durant and vice versa and al lof a sudden you have an undersized SF who can't shoot and struggles to play off the ball

Totally agree with this. I dont know if tyreke has a natural position quite frankly, but if i had to choose one, its probably a sg. And thats the position that we are not apparently interested in playing him at. As of now, i like IT as the starting pg, but i think thornton needs to come off the bench. We have had a lot of trouble guarding opposing teams guards lately and IT and Thornton just aint gonna get it done. Donte is still the offensively retarded sf that he was as a rookie, but based on his D, i think he's the best option at starting SF. IT, Reke, Greene, Cousins, Thompson, should be the starting lineup IMO.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Totally agree with this. I dont know if tyreke has a natural position quite frankly, but if i had to choose one, its probably a sg. And thats the position that we are not apparently interested in playing him at. As of now, i like IT as the starting pg, but i think thornton needs to come off the bench.

Well, to be honest, if you think of Tyreke as a "floatable" player then SG is the one position where we have an obvious answer (MT23). I think part of this comes from our black hole at the 3. Salmons not getting it done. Outlaw not getting it done. Honeycutt a raw rook. Garcia not a better/bigger option than Tyreke. So either you start Donte and cross your fingers, or you move Tyreke to the 3, start IT, and cross your fingers. IT has been hot, so that's where we're going right now.

Sure, I'd rather see Thornton come off the bench with a Tyreke/IT/MT23 guard rotation using the vast majority of the backcourt minutes, but that doesn't change the disaster that is our SF position. Until we address that (and no, Evans is not the answer) I don't think it will much matter what else we do.

 

[pshn80]

I don't post on the forum a whole bunch but I do read a lot... I'm absolutely not worried about anyone cutting into anyone else's scoring so no inconsistencies there. The Heat have three guys who are better scorers than our best scorer and they're doing just fine. Not sure that without a 20ppg scorer on our roster that we can afford to give up too much offense at any position... at least I could see the coaching staff looking at things that way.

I'm all for a big lineup with Greene at SF. I'm all for a small lineup with Reke at SF and IT starting. I'm pretty much ok with mixing it up and seeing if something works.

Well said. I agree that 'small ball' doesn't bother me and 'big ball' doesn't bother me. Let's mix it up and keep trying. We haven't a winner yet. Fun though.

 

[pshn80]

The new line-up adds 5 seconds to the amount of time the Kings have on offense. IT brings the ball in a hurry and tends to move it pretty well.

Good point and I think we already have profited from that fact.

 

[pshn80]

Ultimately the goal is to win games. You'll win a lot more of them in the long term if you focus on defense instead of offense, and I have yet to see this translate into wins. Does it look prettier? I guess.

After watching 'ugly' 'prettier' is my choice. Let's learn to win while being prettier.

 

[Kingsguy881]

The problem is Reke loses every advantage he has in basketball by playing the SF. His entire game is being stronger, bigger, and quicker than other guards and simply overpowering them to the basket. Well, force him to defend LeBron, Gay, Melo, Durant and vice versa and al lof a sudden you have an undersized SF who can't shoot and struggles to play off the ball

LeBron didn't necessarily light Evans up yesterday. And you mentioned quickness as being one of his advantages. So I guess you think that means Reke isn't quicker than SFs?

 

[ppine]

Evans new position is shooting guard? The only problem with that is he can't shoot. Evans is still a raw talent with some great attributes, but no left hand and crashing into the teeth of the opposing defense will not go away no matter what position he plays.

 

[Spike]

After watching 'ugly' 'prettier' is my choice. Let's learn to win while being prettier.

That doesn't make any sense to me. Was it ugly when we beat OKC? (As well as PDX, GS, and NO?) It's all lipstick on a pig at this point. There was direction, players had roles, they were fitting into the roles and progress was being made. IT has certainly played his way to more minutes, but not so much that it changes the fundamental structure of what was being built long term.

Again, to clarifywe are losing games, not winning. Given the progress we were making prior to small ball, I figured we would have rolled all over Washington. Now, I'm not so sure. We may win because we're still a better team, but we're giving up our great advantage by playing Evans at the SF.

I will give Smart kudos in recognizing that Salmons was a problem, but I take it away with the way he's trying to fix it. A better long-term solution would be to run Greene/Honeycutt at the 3.

 

[Bricklayer]

What would be interesting, and what needs to be done, is for Petrie to somehow pull a real SF in in trade in the next few weeks. I consider all our assets compromised, so who knows if that is possible. Maybe for a real talent we can burn Jimmer if a team still beleives. Otherwise I would consider our top 5 off limits, and everybody else not terribly attractive in the ttrade market. But anyway, that's what needs to happen. Give Smart a SF option he can't ignore, then see how he reacts. If he stays smallball, then if I was the owner I'd unemploy him in two months. If he plays fullsized given the personnel to do so, and makes IT or Thornton the 6th man, then I can accept his reasoning.

BTW, of COURSE passing and ball movment is up. Its not because IT is Nash, its becasue IT replaced John freakin Salmons. Basically we jsut took a step back toward the Reke & Beno dynamic. Reke will never be Nash or Paul. He can never be the only passing hub (if you pay attention you wil notice that teams wiht those guys rarely have more assits than teams without, its just more concentrated). Before the seaosn I am distrubringly sure that the front office thought John freaki'n Salmons was going to help with the ballhandling and distributing. John Salmons! And maybe they were going to have Cousins and Hayes pass from the frontcourt. Noen of that worked out. So we needed somebody else to help out. Hell, even Ricky Rubio starts next to Ridnour. but noen of the above is the same thing as starting a three guard lineup, with all three guys undersized for their positions. We're 0-3 and getting killed on the glass evry night now. Ite Golden State syndrome, and it can't continue. I am still sick that we were the #2 rebounding team in the league last year starting two 6'11" centers, and now we're this. Fortunately its probably Tyreke's fault somehow, which gives me comfort by keeping my world safe and simple.

 

[Kingster]

That doesn't make any sense to me. Was it ugly when we beat OKC? (As well as PDX, GS, and NO?) It's all lipstick on a pig at this point. There was direction, players had roles, they were fitting into the roles and progress was being made. IT has certainly played his way to more minutes, but not so much that it changes the fundamental structure of what was being built long term.

Again, to clarifywe are losing games, not winning. Given the progress we were making prior to small ball, I figured we would have rolled all over Washington. Now, I'm not so sure. We may win because we're still a better team, but we're giving up our great advantage by playing Evans at the SF.

I will give Smart kudos in recognizing that Salmons was a problem, but I take it away with the way he's trying to fix it. A better long-term solution would be to run Greene/Honeycutt at the 3.

Actually, the lineup of Tyreke, Thornton and Salmons was gawdawful. Just pitiful on offense. That's why Smart had to make a change. That, and the fact that IT was playing so well.

 

[Kingster]

What would be interesting, and what needs to be done, is for Petrie to somehow pull a real SF in in trade in the next few weeks. I consider all our assets compromised, so who knows if that is possible. Maybe for a real talent we can burn Jimmer if a team still beleives. Otherwise I would consider our top 5 off limits, and everybody else not terribly attractive in the ttrade market. But anyway, that's what needs to happen. Give Smart a SF option he can't ignore, then see how he reacts. If he stays smallball, then if I was the owner I'd unemploy him in two months. If he plays fullsized given the personnel to do so, and makes IT or Thornton the 6th man, then I can accept his reasoning.

BTW, of COURSE passing and ball movment is up. Its not because IT is Nash, its becasue IT replaced John freakin Salmons. Basically we jsut took a step back toward the Reke & Beno dynamic. Reke will never be Nash or Paul. He can never be the only passing hub (if you pay attention you wil notice that teams wiht those guys rarely have more assits than teams without, its just more concentrated). Before the seaosn I am distrubringly sure that the front office thought John freaki'n Salmons was going to help with the ballhandling and distributing. John Salmons! And maybe they were going to have Cousins and Hayes pass from the frontcourt. Noen of that worked out. So we needed somebody else to help out. Hell, even Ricky Rubio starts next to Ridnour. but noen of the above is the same thing as starting a three guard lineup, with all three guys undersized for their positions. We're 0-3 and getting killed on the glass evry night now. Ite Golden State syndrome, and it can't continue. I am still sick that we were the #2 rebounding team in the league last year starting two 6'11" centers, and now we're this. Fortunately its probably Tyreke's fault somehow, which gives me comfort by keeping my world safe and simple.

I'm with you that Salmons was a black hole from the get go. I said after that trade that I had major concerns about the aggregate ballhandling of Tyreke, Thornton, and Salmons. But I think you're overstating the case that it wasn't IT, it was just the absence of Salmons that has caused the improved ballhandling. I didn't notice the change when Greene was in there in place of Salmons. Or Garcia. When you add IT, you had a TON of ballhandling to the picture. And because the combination of Tyreke and Thornton in aggregate is not sufficient ballhandling for winning basketball, you need a TON of ballhandling to make the offense go. I don't think adding an average ballhandling sf with average shooting ability to the lineup of Tyreke and Thornton is sufficient. I think that's where we may differ. Now if Thornton was an above average ballhandling 2-guard, then yes, I think you could get away with your average ballhandling NBA small forward at that position. But because he's below average in ballhandling, you need somebody with very high ballhandling ability in your lineup, and that's IT.

 

[IfAt1st]

If this team didn't have MT, and had a real SF, would Tyreke undoubtedly play SG?

If so, doesn't that open things up to be able to trade MT to get something this team needs more if we have 2 ball-dominant SG's on the roster?

 

[Kingster]

If this team didn't have MT, and had a real SF, would Tyreke undoubtedly play SG?

If so, doesn't that open things up to be able to trade MT to get something this team needs more if we have 2 ball-dominant SG's on the roster?

Maybe. But like others have said, can you have a SG that can't shoot? His lack of outside shooting ties up the flexibility of this team like a Gordian knot.
Frankly, I don't know the answer to the Gordian riddle. I haven't paid enough attention around the league to 2-guards who couldn't shoot from the outside and how they fit with their team. It would make life a lot easier if Tyreke could just develop a consistent 15 - 18 foot range and then we wouldn't be going around in circles (like I'm sure Smart has been doing).

 

[swisshh]

Ultimately, you'd want to keep Thornton as punch off the bench and acquire your SF another way. Bench production has already fallen off pretty noticeably since IT became a starter.

 

[Bricklayer]

Maybe. But like others have said, can you have a SG that can't shoot? His lack of outside shooting ties up the flexibility of this team like a Gordian knot.
Frankly, I don't know the answer to the Gordian riddle. I haven't paid enough attention around the league to 2-guards who couldn't shoot from the outside and how they fit with their team. It would make life a lot easier if Tyreke could just develop a consistent 15 - 18 foot range and then we wouldn't be going around in circles (like I'm sure Smart has been doing).

Shooting is highly overated amongst stars. Even amongst "shooting" guards, many fo the true greats did not come in as shooters. That includes Kobe, Wade, Drexler etc. Its physical dominance and ability to get to the rim that makes you special. You learn to shoot acceptably later. The true shooters on most great teams are jsut the roleplayers you fill in around the edges.

 

[Bricklayer]

Ultimately, you'd want to keep Thornton as punch off the bench and acquire your SF another way. Bench production has already fallen off pretty noticeably since IT became a starter.

This should be the way of it eventually. Either IT or Thornton becomes 6th man, an acceptable small forward is found to start. And we will have virtually every shot on the team already accounted for. From there on out its defensive roleplayers and spot shooters. What IT has done if he can maintain, is allowed us to recover from the Beno blunder at least and get the three guard rotation back that we should have had from the beginning.

 

[pshn80]

That doesn't make any sense to me. Was it ugly when we beat OKC? (As well as PDX, GS, and NO?) It's all lipstick on a pig at this point. There was direction, players had roles, they were fitting into the roles and progress was being made. IT has certainly played his way to more minutes, but not so much that it changes the fundamental structure of what was being built long term.

Again, to clarifywe are losing games, not winning. Given the progress we were making prior to small ball, I figured we would have rolled all over Washington. Now, I'm not so sure. We may win because we're still a better team, but we're giving up our great advantage by playing Evans at the SF.

I will give Smart kudos in recognizing that Salmons was a problem, but I take it away with the way he's trying to fix it. A better long-term solution would be to run Greene/Honeycutt at the 3.

When Evans was bringing up the ball everytime it was ugly even when the outcome was good. Ugly. I was simply saying that it is a lot prettier the last few games. We have lost but done well. Give it some time. When I say "it" I mean starting Thomas at PG. Let the coach figure out whether it's better with Thornton or Greene or Garcia. Thomas is a huge downpayment on "pretty" and turning the losses around.

And let me clarify, we were and we are losing games. Progress has been made in starting Thomas. Let the coach keep working and it will continue to get better.

 

[Spike]

We'll just agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Gary]

Didn't Smart say all over 3 weeks ago that "Reke is a pg. Reke was born the with ball in his hands and that's what he needs. He can be a very good pg in this league and I'm teaching how to map the floor and where his teammates will be". Paraphrasing of course.

But god damnit, 3 weeks later he's a sf? WTF is this? Smart said a lot to the media his first few weeks, and now he's saying the direct opposite, and not only related to Reke either. He's either a liar, and hypocrite, or scared of a few egos in the locker room, with me thinking Salmons and Thornton. I'm beginning to think he's scared of both.

It's because Reke isn't a PG. Luckily it only took him three weeks to figure out what the other coach couldn't in over two years.

 

[IfAt1st]

Agreed.

 

[Kingster]

It's because Reke isn't a PG. Luckily it only took him three weeks to figure out what the other coach couldn't in over two years.

Nice.

 

[ParniValjak]

This should be the way of it eventually. Either IT or Thornton becomes 6th man, an acceptable small forward is found to start. And we will have virtually every shot on the team already accounted for. From there on out its defensive roleplayers and spot shooters. What IT has done if he can maintain, is allowed us to recover from the Beno blunder at least and get the three guard rotation back that we should have had from the beginning.

Is Nicolas Batum acceptable?!

I think he would be a great SF for us going forward. He would bring defence and some much needed shooting to the team. The problem is, it would be really difficult to pinch him away from Portland.