Who do you consider to be part of our core moving forward?

[Glenn]

Give Reke a jumper, he's clearly better than MT with a jumper, as he already stuffs the stat sheet without. When MT isn't hitting his jumpers, Reke is considerably better, as Reke impacts games in a number of ways without the jumper. Now MT hitting his jumper vs Reke not having one= kingsfans arguing to no end.

We should put a time limit on it. I think it's been two months and about a month before anything new has been added to the argument. We already have a budding mega star and it's being selfish to want two. Hmmm, or maybe not.

 

[Lockehead]

Give Reke a jumper, he's clearly better than MT with a jumper, as he already stuffs the stat sheet without. When MT isn't hitting his jumpers, Reke is considerably better, as Reke impacts games in a number of ways without the jumper. Now MT hitting his jumper vs Reke not having one= kingsfans arguing to no end.

I think that's where development comes into play...

How would Thornton be with another year in his game... And how would Reke be? Provided we play him the "right" way..

Again i want Reke.. He's got those special abilities that not a lot have in the game... Development is the key..

Thornton gives us incredible shots.. I would love for him to be the guard after Reke.

 

[rainmaker]

We should put a time limit on it. I think it's been two months and about a month before anything new has been added to the argument. We already have a budding mega star and it's being selfish to want two. Hmmm, or maybe not.

Do have two, Reke and Cuz. Well, if the jumper comes around.

Lockhead, potential is key here. If Reke adds one element, a midrange jumper, he all the sudden becomes one of the best all around players in the league, and possibly unguardable. Reke with a jumper is close to Westbrook/Rose type level.

How much can MT add? Probably consistency. Guys don't improve ball handling that much in their 20's. Doesn't have the tools to be a great defender. can be a better passer but I doubt ever a creator. I think ideally Cuz is the 1st option, Reke the 2nd(especially w/ jumper) and MT 3rd, getting 17-20 per in a role tbd.

 

[Anthony1]

The only way Tyreke is going to truly be successful, is if the ball is constantly in his hands. Which means, he needs to go back to playing point guard, even though he isn't a legitimate facilitator. We all know that Tyreke isn't a "true" point guard, but I think it's even more obvious that he's not a " SHOOTING " guard. Shooting guards need to know how to shoot, it's kinda implied by the moniker, lol. We've also learned in recent weeks that playing Tyreke at SF doesn't make a ton of sense either. So what position does Tyreke really play? Well, I guess you can say he's an "off guard" or a combo guard sans jumper.

Normally, you wouldn't want to play your "off guard" or "combo guard" at the point, but in the case of Tyreke, if you want to utilize his best ability (driving to the hole), you pretty much need to play him at the point. His game is proportionally effective to the amount of time he has the ball in his hands. What all the Tyreke supporters should really be doing then, is to try to plea to the Kings management to put Reke back at the point, and bring Thomas off the bench. Even though I'm not a Tyreke supporter, I will agree that we should do this. For me, the ideal scenario for Tyreke is to trade him for something that will truly fit our team concept, but his value has been deflated this season with Smart's experiments. We can't get decent return on him, right now. We NEED to put him back at the point, so that at least his numbers will shoot back up, and his "perceived" value around the league will increase. Then, maybe this off season, we could deal him for equal value (well, at least 80 percent value....)


Also, as much of a supporter of Marcus Thornton as I am, I think when we move Tyreke back to the point, I'd actually prefer that Jimmer Fredette be his running mate. I think it will be the perfect complement. Jimmer can learn to play without the ball, and always hover near the 3 point line, for a Tyreke kick back. Thornton would be wasted next to Reke, with Reke needing the ball so much. Isaiah and Thornton would be great off the bench for us. (this isn't an ideal long-term strategy, as I don't think we can really win that many games with Tyreke being "the man", but again, my biggest hope is that we can pump up his trade value a bit before sending him away this summer)

 

[Gary]

No.

The statement that describes Evans as a "solid player" is still ridiculous, even after your "assessment".

Evans was just ranked 47th best in the league. There are around 400 players in the NBA. These ratings also placed Kevin Martin above him, which is wrong. A more accurate rating system would put Evans at around 40. Top 10-12%.

Saying he's "probably" top 25 % exposes a serious inability to objectively judge Evans current talent level, let alone assess his overall value given the context of his young career and likelyhood of correcting a very fixable fundamental skill.

That being the case, your statements about Evans should not be taken seriously.

I was just going by top 10 on each team.. He would be 2nd or 3rd on most teams that play 10 people (never mind the 5 that don't play/dress). I should have been more clear. Evans is a talent, he just doesn't make anyone around him better yet. Usually players will get that with age and knowing what their teammates do before they do it.

But yes, I was wrong. If he's about 47th or so in a league of 500 or so player that would put him a lot higher than I had him at. I don't know if I would put him that high, but I am not going through the trouble of ranking every player in the league.. How does his PER rank?

 

[mac]

The only way Tyreke is going to truly be successful, is if the ball is constantly in his hands. Which means, he needs to go back to playing point guard, even though he isn't a legitimate facilitator. We all know that Tyreke isn't a "true" point guard, but I think it's even more obvious that he's not a " SHOOTING " guard. Shooting guards need to know how to shoot, it's kinda implied by the moniker, lol. We've also learned in recent weeks that playing Tyreke at SF doesn't make a ton of sense either. So what position does Tyreke really play? Well, I guess you can say he's an "off guard" or a combo guard sans jumper.

Normally, you wouldn't want to play your "off guard" or "combo guard" at the point, but in the case of Tyreke, if you want to utilize his best ability (driving to the hole), you pretty much need to play him at the point. His game is proportionally effective to the amount of time he has the ball in his hands. What all the Tyreke supporters should really be doing then, is to try to plea to the Kings management to put Reke back at the point, and bring Thomas off the bench. Even though I'm not a Tyreke supporter, I will agree that we should do this. For me, the ideal scenario for Tyreke is to trade him for something that will truly fit our team concept, but his value has been deflated this season with Smart's experiments. We can't get decent return on him, right now. We NEED to put him back at the point, so that at least his numbers will shoot back up, and his "perceived" value around the league will increase. Then, maybe this off season, we could deal him for equal value (well, at least 80 percent value....)


Also, as much of a supporter of Marcus Thornton as I am, I think when we move Tyreke back to the point, I'd actually prefer that Jimmer Fredette be his running mate. I think it will be the perfect complement. Jimmer can learn to play without the ball, and always hover near the 3 point line, for a Tyreke kick back. Thornton would be wasted next to Reke, with Reke needing the ball so much. Isaiah and Thornton would be great off the bench for us. (this isn't an ideal long-term strategy, as I don't think we can really win that many games with Tyreke being "the man", but again, my biggest hope is that we can pump up his trade value a bit before sending him away this summer)

I'm just going to have to disagree with you on the value of Tyreke.

 

[The Hammer]

I was just going by top 10 on each team.. He would be 2nd or 3rd on most teams that play 10 people (never mind the 5 that don't play/dress). I should have been more clear. Evans is a talent, he just doesn't make anyone around him better yet. Usually players will get that with age and knowing what their teammates do before they do it.

But yes, I was wrong. If he's about 47th or so in a league of 500 or so player that would put him a lot higher than I had him at. I don't know if I would put him that high, but I am not going through the trouble of ranking every player in the league.. How does his PER rank?

Yeah don't know about PER and frankly not too concerned.

I agree with you... a lot of a players talent etc. depends on how well he plays with his teammates, and that simply takes time (with his teammates) and maturity. I think that Reke is still figuring out who he can be, and needs to be, in this league. Where his talent level shakes out, and who ends up around him long term will help him determine what style he'll be required to play. A jumpshot, though, is a requisite no matter what.

I think sometimes people jump to conclusions about talent level and possibilities without realizing that for the first couple years, especially if there has been a lot of uncertainty with coaches and personnel, a player is really just getting his bearings re: the league.

Reke came in and was freakishly successful at one thing (getting to the basket). He had to figure out how sustainable that was, as defenses adjusted, and based on who else was around him. He really was pretty much the best rookie at getting to the basket this league has probably ever seen. If you have a talent like that, and you know it, it's only right that you focus on that until you discover it's natural limitation, before focusing on rounding out your game.

There's a process here, and I haven't seen much that tells me Reke is either unaware of that process, or unwilling to go along with it. Even now, that it means it is finally time to hunker down and get that jumpshot taken care of.

 

[mac]

Yeah don't know about PER and frankly not too concerned.

I agree with you... a lot of a players talent etc. depends on how well he plays with his teammates, and that simply takes time (with his teammates) and maturity. I think that Reke is still figuring out who he can be, and needs to be, in this league. Where his talent level shakes out, and who ends up around him long term will help him determine what style he'll be required to play. A jumpshot, though, is a requisite no matter what.

I think sometimes people jump to conclusions about talent level and possibilities without realizing that for the first couple years, especially if there has been a lot of uncertainty with coaches and personnel, a player is really just getting his bearings re: the league.

Reke came in and was freakishly successful at one thing (getting to the basket). He had to figure out how sustainable that was, as defenses adjusted, and based on who else was around him. He really was pretty much the best rookie at getting to the basket this league has probably ever seen. If you have a talent like that, and you know it, it's only right that you focus on that until you discover it's natural limitation, before focusing on rounding out your game.

There's a process here, and I haven't seen much that tells me Reke is either unaware of that process, or unwilling to go along with it. Even now, that it means it is finally time to hunker down and get that jumpshot taken care of.

And what I can't stand is that people around here act like he's only addressing that issue now, when he really has been doing it since his first offseason. His jumper looked much improved at the start of this season, but sadly his form regressed and now everyone's like "HE SUCKS COS HE ONLY REALISED HIS JUMPER SUCKED A WEEK AGO". As long as he puts in the work, which it sounds like he's doing, he's going to have results to show for it - we need only to be patient. If he doesn't put in the work, then he's his biggest limitation and cannot be considered a star player for us moving forward.

 

[The_Jamal]

Do have two, Reke and Cuz. Well, if the jumper comes around.

Lockhead, potential is key here. If Reke adds one element, a midrange jumper, he all the sudden becomes one of the best all around players in the league, and possibly unguardable. Reke with a jumper is close to Westbrook/Rose type level.

How much can MT add? Probably consistency. Guys don't improve ball handling that much in their 20's. Doesn't have the tools to be a great defender. can be a better passer but I doubt ever a creator. I think ideally Cuz is the 1st option, Reke the 2nd(especially w/ jumper) and MT 3rd, getting 17-20 per in a role tbd.

The problem with MT is that he is a vastly different player and can't be effective in a Harden/Manu role. He's a selfish player who needs to put up shots to be effective; not that it's a bad thing but it doesn't work when we're trying to develop our 2 potential star players. Manu/Harden are unselfish, fantastic defenders, fantastic ball-handlers, and are willing to defer to the star players when needed. Even the Jason Terry role doesn't fit either, as he's still easily the 2nd option on that Mavs team and sometimes even precedes Dirk on the offensive end. MT has the mentality of "I'm going to put up 15 shots a game and I don't care how I get those shots", isn't a strong defender, and a below-average ball handler.

I hope we shop him in the offseason and start building up this core around Reke and Cousins

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Normally, you wouldn't want to play your "off guard" or "combo guard" at the point, but in the case of Tyreke, if you want to utilize his best ability (driving to the hole), you pretty much need to play him at the point. His game is proportionally effective to the amount of time he has the ball in his hands. What all the Tyreke supporters should really be doing then, is to try to plea to the Kings management to put Reke back at the point, and bring Thomas off the bench. Even though I'm not a Tyreke supporter, I will agree that we should do this. For me, the ideal scenario for Tyreke is to trade him for something that will truly fit our team concept, but his value has been deflated this season with Smart's experiments. We can't get decent return on him, right now. We NEED to put him back at the point, so that at least his numbers will shoot back up, and his "perceived" value around the league will increase. Then, maybe this off season, we could deal him for equal value (well, at least 80 percent value....)

The point is that we don't have a team concept. Not one worth dumping talented players to preserve, at any rate. And, whatever it is that we do have, is absolutely not so valuable that it's more important that we keep it than it is that we implement a system that best utilizes all three of our best players.

To borrow from Bricklayer, "If the "system you're running" does not have room for your most talented players, then your system is the problem." The notion that any choice between this "system," in particular, and our second best player is insane on the face of it. It's not like we've got Gregg Popovich at the helm; we've got Keith F. Smart. There's a short list of coaches in this league for whom you say, system over player, and Smart ain't on it.

 

[Anthony1]

The point is that we don't have a team concept. Not one worth dumping talented players to preserve, at any rate. And, whatever it is that we do have, is absolutely not so valuable that it's more important that we keep it than it is that we implement a system that best utilizes all three of our best players.

To borrow from Bricklayer, "If the "system you're running" does not have room for your most talented players, then your system is the problem." The notion that any choice between this "system," in particular, and our second best player is insane on the face of it. It's not like we've got Gregg Popovich at the helm; we've got Keith F. Smart. There's a short list of coaches in this league for whom you say, system over player, and Smart ain't on it.

Ok, I'm going to say something right now, that will probably anger a bunch of people on these boards, and the hardcore Tyreke supporters will surely hate me going forward, but I guess I should stop beating around the bush and just come out with it:


Tyreke will never be the guy that his supporters think he's capable of being. His supporters seem to think that if he only gets a jumper, he will be Derrick Rose part deux. I don't think Tyreke will EVER have a consistent jumper. He might be able to improve his jumper just enough not to be a joke (when shooting from the outside), but it will never get to the point that his supporters think it will. Now, he can still do one thing very well. He can drive to the hole, and contort his body in various ways, and scoop up a layup. This is what won him the rookie of the year. Unfortunately, the league has realized what he can do, and they have adjusted their defense to crowd the paint, and force him to take a jumper or kick it out to somebody else. I just don't think anything is ever going to change in this regard. You can start him at the point, and put the ball in his hands, and he will have some pretty decent numbers. He will probably average about 21.8 points per game, along with about 6.3 assists, and maybe 3.5 rebounds. All of that looks great when you are looking at the stat sheet, but it's not going to result in many victories. In fact, I think it will result in the exact opposite. Good numbers for Tyreke = bad numbers for everybody else and losses.

If we finally do trade him, or he ends up going to another team in FA, I'm certain that the other team is going to find out the same thing that we found out. He's a one trick pony, and your entire offensive philosophy has to be aligned to the concept of Tyreke always having the ball in his hands. Again, I think the guy can put up some nice numbers, but I just don't think he will ever be the star player on a winning team. Stephon Marbury comes to mind. Not that Tyreke's game is similar to Marbury's (it's not), but I think those two players are similar in the fact that both can put up some great numbers, but they will never be the star player on a winning team. They are players that NEED the ball in their hands, and their success means everyone else on the team suffers, and the win-loss ratio suffers as well. There are teams that will take a chance on Tyreke, but like Marbury, I think Tyreke's NBA days will be numbered, once enough teams take a chance on him, and discover the hard way that ultimately the team is better when he's not playing.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Ok, I'm going to say something right now, that will probably anger a bunch of people on these boards, and the hardcore Tyreke supporters will surely hate me going forward, but I guess I should stop beating around the bush and just come out with it:


Tyreke will never be the guy that his supporters think he's capable of being. His supporters seem to think that if he only gets a jumper, he will be Derrick Rose part deux. I don't think Tyreke will EVER have a consistent jumper. He might be able to improve his jumper just enough not to be a joke (when shooting from the outside), but it will never get to the point that his supporters think it will. Now, he can still do one thing very well. He can drive to the hole, and contort his body in various ways, and scoop up a layup. This is what won him the rookie of the year. Unfortunately, the league has realized what he can do, and they have adjusted their defense to crowd the paint, and force him to take a jumper or kick it out to somebody else. I just don't think anything is ever going to change in this regard. You can start him at the point, and put the ball in his hands, and he will have some pretty decent numbers. He will probably average about 21.8 points per game, along with about 6.3 assists, and maybe 3.5 rebounds. All of that looks great when you are looking at the stat sheet, but it's not going to result in many victories. In fact, I think it will result in the exact opposite. Good numbers for Tyreke = bad numbers for everybody else and losses.

If we finally do trade him, or he ends up going to another team in FA, I'm certain that the other team is going to find out the same thing that we found out. He's a one trick pony, and your entire offensive philosophy has to be aligned to the concept of Tyreke always having the ball in his hands. Again, I think the guy can put up some nice numbers, but I just don't think he will ever be the star player on a winning team. Stephon Marbury comes to mind. Not that Tyreke's game is similar to Marbury's (it's not), but I think those two players are similar in the fact that both can put up some great numbers, but they will never be the star player on a winning team. They are players that NEED the ball in their hands, and their success means everyone else on the team suffers, and the win-loss ratio suffers as well. There are teams that will take a chance on Tyreke, but like Marbury, I think Tyreke's NBA days will be numbered, once enough teams take a chance on him, and discover the hard way that ultimately the team is better when he's not playing.

If anything, Evans is closer to Iverson than FSM, around whom you absolutely can build a winning team, if perhaps not a championship team. But, the point stands that you make an effort to find or develop a system that utilizes Cousins and Evans and Thornton, before you start talking about who you have to get rid of.

Keith Smart is not good enough, let me repeat that, Keith Smart is not good enough, to justify continuing to go with his system over keeping Evans, if it comes to that. He doesn't have the cache, the credentials, the résumé, the anything, to justify that kind of confidence. Either get someone who has, or keep trying to tweak the system until it works.

 

[Anthony1]

+ Keith Smart is not good enough, to justify continuing to go with his system over keeping Evans, if it comes to that. He doesn't have the cache, the credentials, the résumé, the anything, to justify that kind of confidence. Either get someone who has, or keep trying to tweak the system until it works.[/COLOR]

It's not about Keith Smart's system. It's about ANY system. Tyreke is a guy who can drive to the hole, get some assists here and there, grab a few rebounds, but ultimately, a free flowing offense that utilizes all of our players, just won't work with him dominating the ball. He needs to dominate the ball to be a valuable player. Yeah, kinda like Iverson I guess.

The system doesn't matter. Tyreke won't fit into any system, unless the system dictates that he has the ball in his hands 90 percent of the time. At that point, you're either winning or losing based 100 percent on whether or not Reke can get to the hole at will. With every other team in the NBA knowing exactly what your plan is, of course they will crowd the paint and dare Reke to hit an outside shot. And it isn't even about the whole outside shot thing. Yes, with an outside shot, Tyreke would be significantly more dangerous, but it would still be the Tyreke Evan's show. I just don't think that the other guys on our team would have a chance to shine. We would be living and dying with Evans, and dying more times than not.

Has nothing to do with Smart's system or Westphal's system or any other system.

 

[Bricklayer]

It's not about Keith Smart's system. It's about ANY system. Tyreke is a guy who can drive to the hole, get some assists here and there, grab a few rebounds, but ultimately, a free flowing offense that utilizes all of our players, just won't work with him dominating the ball. He needs to dominate the ball to be a valuable player. Yeah, kinda like Iverson I guess.

The system doesn't matter. Tyreke won't fit into any system, unless the system dictates that he has the ball in his hands 90 percent of the time. At that point, you're either winning or losing based 100 percent on whether or not Reke can get to the hole at will. With every other team in the NBA knowing exactly what your plan is, of course they will crowd the paint and dare Reke to hit an outside shot. And it isn't even about the whole outside shot thing. Yes, with an outside shot, Tyreke would be significantly more dangerous, but it would still be the Tyreke Evan's show. I just don't think that the other guys on our team would have a chance to shine. We would be living and dying with Evans, and dying more times than not.

Has nothing to do with Smart's system or Westphal's system or any other system.

Of course one of the real problems is the giant stupid pill that the Sacto fanbase took about 10 years ago. "Free flowiing ball utilizing all of our players on offense" wins a championship oh, about every....well, depending on your definition, never basically.

Great teams aren't democratic. They aren't about making sure everybody touches the ball. They are about making sure the RIGHT players touch the ball. That team the Kings had a decade ago was very unique. And it in the end did not get it done once it lost its main guy anyway. The problem here is that the entire GOAL of Sacto fans is off. So of course the realization of it becomes counterproductive.

Allow me to introduce you to the three teams most likely to win a title this year:

Miami FGA/gm:
Lebron 18.6
Wade 17.4
Bosh 14.3
nobody else above 7.5

OKC FGA/gm:
Durant 19.5
Westbrook 19.1
Harden 10.4
nobody else above 7.1

Chicago FGA/gm:
Rose 18.1
Deng 13.8
Boozer 13.0
nobody else above 7.6

Was Dallas a democracy last year with its Dirk centric offense? The Kobe/Gasol Lakers? How about Kobe/Shaq Lakers? There's a reason the Big Three in Boston and San Antonio were so called etc.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

The system doesn't matter. Tyreke won't fit into any system, unless the system dictates that he has the ball in his hands 90 percent of the time. At that point, you're either winning or losing based 100 percent on whether or not Reke can get to the hole at will. With every other team in the NBA knowing exactly what your plan is, of course they will crowd the paint and dare Reke to hit an outside shot. And it isn't even about the whole outside shot thing. Yes, with an outside shot, Tyreke would be significantly more dangerous, but it would still be the Tyreke Evan's show. I just don't think that the other guys on our team would have a chance to shine. We would be living and dying with Evans, and dying more times than not.

Has nothing to do with Smart's system or Westphal's system or any other system.

This is pure speculation. We don't know that Evans can't fit into a system. What we know is that we've tried with one average coach, and one below average coach, and it hasn't worked. And, that's all we know.

We've also seen a coach who led a team to the Finals with a system built around a ball-dominant guard, and then get back to the Finals, twice, with a team that was completely different. We've seen a coach win 6 championships with a dominant guard, and then tweak that system to win 3 championships with a dominant big, and then tweak that system again to win 2 championship with a great guard and two great bigs. Good coaches adapt systems to fit their personnel, not the other way around.

 

[Glenn]

This is pure speculation. We don't know that Evans can't fit into a system. What we know is that we've tried with one average coach, and one below average coach, and it hasn't worked. And, that's all we know.

We've also seen a coach who led a team to the Finals with a system built around a ball-dominant guard, and then get back to the Finals, twice, with a team that was completely different. We've seen a coach win 6 championships with a dominant guard, and then tweak that system to win 3 championships with a dominant big, and then tweak that system again to win 2 championship with a great guard and two great bigs. Good coaches adapt systems to fit their personnel, not the other way around.

I've said this over and over. The fact that there happens to be proof of the truth of this is inconvenient to those who want a scapegoat.

 

[Anthony1]

I've said this over and over. The fact that there happens to be proof of the truth of this is inconvenient to those who want a scapegoat.

Ball-dominant guard is not a dirty word. There are ball dominant guards that can still flourish with a team oriented concept. Tyreke = ball dominant guard and ball dominant guards can win championships? WTF ? If Tyreke's only problem was that he was ball dominant, then that would be a whole different story.

 

[Kingster]

This is pure speculation. We don't know that Evans can't fit into a system. What we know is that we've tried with one average coach, and one below average coach, and it hasn't worked. And, that's all we know.

We've also seen a coach who led a team to the Finals with a system built around a ball-dominant guard, and then get back to the Finals, twice, with a team that was completely different. We've seen a coach win 6 championships with a dominant guard, and then tweak that system to win 3 championships with a dominant big, and then tweak that system again to win 2 championship with a great guard and two great bigs. Good coaches adapt systems to fit their personnel, not the other way around.

This is much too vague. Who are the ball dominant guards? Are they good ball dominant guards? Bad ball dominant guards? Vesatile ball dominant guards? Shooting ball dominant guards? Care to share some specifics? Then we can talk.

 

[ppine]

The Sacramento Kings franchise has a long history of trading people that become very good players somewhere else. Or coaches in the case of Rick Adelman. It takes time to make a team work. The only two players this forum seems to really support for the future are Cousins and Evans. I think that is a huge mistake. Winning basketball teams in the NBA have a culture that requires time to create. Everytime 5 guys leave and 5 come in the clock starts over.

The Kings will contine to get some good draft choices for awhile. They need to focus on adding the new pieces carefully and have some patience (through the draft and trades). The last 2 games should give Kings' fans some hope. It should also make them realize that the team has sleep walked through a lot of games this season and needs to wake up.

 

[mac]

Ball-dominant guard is not a dirty word. There are ball dominant guards that can still flourish with a team oriented concept. Tyreke = ball dominant guard and ball dominant guards can win championships? WTF ? If Tyreke's only problem was that he was ball dominant, then that would be a whole different story.

So what is his problem, do tell?