Your thoughts on the Kings rebuild...

[Asaf]

It's amazing how the teams of the past like the old Lakers and Celtics were able to even compete because the didn't have a PG. They just had guys defined the way Westphal defines it. They had two guards.

Oh you mean Dennis Johnson and Magic Johnson (the guy who defined the PG position for the modern basketball era)? Yea, those two weren't point guards...

 

[Bricklayer]

Oh you mean Dennis Johnson and Magic Johnson (the guy who defined the PG position for the modern basketball era)? Yea, those two weren't point guards...

Dennis Johnson was a former All Star SG who they moved to "PG" in Boston. But even there he was just one of three primary ballhandlers along with Ainge and Bird. He was a PG in the same way Joe Dumars was later used sometimes, or Ron Harper.

And as I have detailed numerous times before, in the NBA the pure PGs have NOT won many titles really since Magic was in the league. In fact on many of the title teams since the "PG" has been just about the weakest link. And even when not, he is just as often a scorer. The key isn't that nobody creates. The key is simply that as the game grew more sophisticated, the creating was diversified, and more players began to be used in that role. Pippen was the Bulls creater, not John Paxson or BJ Armstrong or Harper etc. Wade was the creater, not JWill on that title team. Fisher certainly is not the creater on the Lakers. Etc. You can still win with a major PG, but its certainly not necessary. You just need SOMEBODY to fill that role. On the old Kings teams Mike Bibby was not the main creative force. He was solid, could play the pick and role, and could spot shoot. But Vlade and Webber were the offensive engines, and Christie dropped in as many nifty dimes as Bibby. This is just a funy franchise to have fans arguing that you need to build an offense around a pure PG who creates for everybody.

 

[bajaden]

In regard to Jimmer, I didn't say he can't be a conventional PG in the NBA, I said that from what I read it doesn't sound like he can be an elite PG, or in other words he can't be the Kings' long term answer as the starting PG if they want to become a contender some day. I may be wrong, but that's what I got from what I read, including your posts.

As for the whole PG issue, I agree that we will have to agree to disagree... I believe the PG position was created for a reason, and unless you are playing a very specific style of basketball (and running it successfully) there is still a huge need for a great player in that position in modern basketball. It is still widely accepted in the NBA that PG and Center are the two toughest positions to fill successfully. Center, because you need to find someone tall and big enough to fill that position, which is rare enough, and on top of that he needs to have NBA level basketball skills. PGs, you can find a ton of players with the right size, but their skills have to be special, both physically and intellectually (for lack of a better word). Bringing the ball up the court and passing it, anyone can do that, but I'm sure you'll agree with me that Chris Paul, Rajon Rondo, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, etc. can do a lot more than that, and that's why they are considered elite PGs, as opposed to Derek Fisher, who can bring up the ball and pass it just fine.

One of the posters here (Lockehead, if I'm not mistaken), said in a thread that this whole "just a guard" theory is a copout, and I completely agree. Being able to play more than one position is a good thing, but you have to be a complete player in at least one position. Westphal telling Tyreke that the position definition is not important actually hindered Tyreke's development, because he was never required to master any position. He does not have the fascilitating skills of a conventional PG, and does not have an off-the-ball game of a SG. If he doesn't develop at least one of those skills, the team will hurt, and this is one of my main beefs with Westphal. He is not pushing Tyreke to define his game in a way that the team can thrive around. Tyreke can do special things, but his incompleteness is hurting the team and will continue to hurt it until he gets proper coaching. Until that happens, I cannot see him as the long term answer at the PG position either.

Whatever you want to call it, PG or guard, the primary fascilitator is the engine of every good team. Currently, the Kings have no engine.

OK, we seem to agree at least that Fredette is a PG.. I think he's a very talented PG. I'm not going to sit here and say that he'll be an elite PG, because one never knows how a player will turn out. But I think he has all the tools to be a very good PG if not an elite one. Only time will tell. How the Kings will work the rotations is unknown. But I do believe that when Jimmer is on the floor he'll do most of the ballhandlinig and initiating of the offense. Its obvious to me that the Kings were trying to run a highpost motion offense with Cousins as the facilitor most of the time. I think Jimmer fits into that scheme very well. He's very good at moving without the ball. Tyreke is another matter. He'll need to do some adjusting in that type of offense, since it requires more passing of the ball than dribbling of the ball. Will he? I guess we'll have to wait an see.

When I described the requirements for a PG, I didn't go into detail on the qualifications. Obviously he needs to be talented and above average in as many areas as possible. I'm talking to you the same way I would talk to a friend. I'm not going to explain the obvious because I assume you already know that. I'm also not going to defend Westphal. I spent enough time last season criticizing him, so I'll leave it at that for now. In short, he's not my favorite choice for a very young team. This team needs a coach that can inspire, teach, and hold each player to the same set of standards.

 

[Asaf]

Dennis Johnson was a former All Star SG who they moved to "PG" in Boston. But even there he was just one of three primary ballhandlers along with Ainge and Bird. He was a PG in the same way Joe Dumars was later used sometimes, or Ron Harper.

And as I have detailed numerous times before, in the NBA the pure PGs have NOT won many titles really since Magic was in the league. In fact on many of the title teams since the "PG" has been just about the weakest link. And even when not, he is just as often a scorer. The key isn't that nobody creates. The key is simply that as the game grew more sophisticated, the creating was diversified, and more players began to be used in that role. Pippen was the Bulls creater, not John Paxson or BJ Armstrong or Harper etc. Wade was the creater, not JWill on that title team. Fisher certainly is not the creater on the Lakers. Etc. You can still win with a major PG, but its certainly not necessary. You just need SOMEBODY to fill that role. On the old Kings teams Mike Bibby was not the main creative force. He was solid, could play the pick and role, and could spot shoot. But Vlade and Webber were the offensive engines, and Christie dropped in as many nifty dimes as Bibby. This is just a funy franchise to have fans arguing that you need to build an offense around a pure PG who creates for everybody.

I agree, and what I'm saying is that imo the Kings currently have no one to fill that role.

Also, there is too much citing of Phil Jackson's Lakers and Bulls in this conversation. Unless we are getting PJ as a coach, which obviously we are not, these teams are just irrelevant to this conversation because they played a brand of basketball that no team not coached by PJ was ever able to run successfully.

 

[Asaf]

OK, we seem to agree at least that Fredette is a PG.. I think he's a very talented PG. I'm not going to sit here and say that he'll be an elite PG, because one never knows how a player will turn out. But I think he has all the tools to be a very good PG if not an elite one. Only time will tell. How the Kings will work the rotations is unknown. But I do believe that when Jimmer is on the floor he'll do most of the ballhandlinig and initiating of the offense. Its obvious to me that the Kings were trying to run a highpost motion offense with Cousins as the facilitor most of the time. I think Jimmer fits into that scheme very well. He's very good at moving without the ball. Tyreke is another matter. He'll need to do some adjusting in that type of offense, since it requires more passing of the ball than dribbling of the ball. Will he? I guess we'll have to wait an see.

When I described the requirements for a PG, I didn't go into detail on the qualifications. Obviously he needs to be talented and above average in as many areas as possible. I'm talking to you the same way I would talk to a friend. I'm not going to explain the obvious because I assume you already know that. I'm also not going to defend Westphal. I spent enough time last season criticizing him, so I'll leave it at that for now. In short, he's not my favorite choice for a very young team. This team needs a coach that can inspire, teach, and hold each player to the same set of standards.

Agreed, and that's exactly my problem with the whole concept behind this rebuild. The Kings are getting young and talented players and providing them with zero coaching. A lot of the questions regarding Tyreke would've been answered by now, had he gotten adequate guidance. I can't be optimistic about the Kings' future until they get a real coach that starts unveiling the real potential of the future core by pushing them to be complete NBA players, instead of getting caught up in empty stat padding and meaningless awards, as the young players develop bad habits that will likely haunt them and the team in the future.

 

[Kingster]

OK, we seem to agree at least that Fredette is a PG.. I think he's a very talented PG. I'm not going to sit here and say that he'll be an elite PG, because one never knows how a player will turn out. But I think he has all the tools to be a very good PG if not an elite one. Only time will tell. How the Kings will work the rotations is unknown. But I do believe that when Jimmer is on the floor he'll do most of the ballhandlinig and initiating of the offense. Its obvious to me that the Kings were trying to run a highpost motion offense with Cousins as the facilitor most of the time. I think Jimmer fits into that scheme very well. He's very good at moving without the ball. Tyreke is another matter. He'll need to do some adjusting in that type of offense, since it requires more passing of the ball than dribbling of the ball. Will he? I guess we'll have to wait an see. When I described the requirements for a PG, I didn't go into detail on the qualifications. Obviously he needs to be talented and above average in as many areas as possible. I'm talking to you the same way I would talk to a friend. I'm not going to explain the obvious because I assume you already know that. I'm also not going to defend Westphal. I spent enough time last season criticizing him, so I'll leave it at that for now. In short, he's not my favorite choice for a very young team. This team needs a coach that can inspire, teach, and hold each player to the same set of standards.

It's very interesting to me how there appears to be a huge divide on this board between those who are fairly sanguine about the ballhandling on this team (e.g. you) and those are more pessimistic (e.g. me). Like you imply above, Jimmer, Tyreke, and Cousins will handle the ball most of the time. You believe that when Jimmer is on the floor, whether with Tyreke or Thornton, he will be the primary ballhandler. Yet, as we've discussed, he's untested in that role in the NBA. I need more evidence that he can handle that responsibility. You don't. But let's go one step further: Who does Jimmer initiate the offense to? Cousins, presumably. And what was Cousins assist to TO for last season? - 0.76. That's 83rd out of 83 players espn tracks. Then when Jimmer isn't on the floor, that leaves Tyreke to be the primary ballhandler. His assists/TO for last year - 1.73. That's 63rd out of 83 players tracked. If you want a little bit better ballhandling you can go to Salmons - 1.84, or 56th out of 83 players. One group of posters is willing to "bet on the come" with Jimmer and Tyreke and Cousins. Another group is more reluctant to do so, given there is no NBA history with Jimmer and the recent history with Tyreke and Cousins isn't compelling. It's going to be interesting to see how much progress occurs with Tyreke and Cousins, and to see whether Jimmer can have a relatively seamless jump to the NBA. We'll have to check back around this time next year to see how much progress was made in the asst/TO area.


http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/turnovers/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/count/81

 

[hrdboild]

I don't really see what the PG conundrum is. If anything we have too many PGs right now. With Tyreke, Thornton, and now Jimmer and Salmons we have at least four guys who can quite capably handle the ball. None of them has elite court vision, but there's only a handful of those guys in the league anyway. My issues with Jimmer don't extend to the offensive side of the game. I think he's a better PG than he typically gets credit for because his team needed him to be a scorer last year (same with Kemba Walker for that matter). With his ridiculous range keeping defenders honest, it's going to be that much easier for him to get where he wants. And part of the reason I don't see Salmons being a good fit is that he's at his best offensively with the ball in his hands. There are far better options out there for spot-up shooters.

The bigger issue is going to be getting everybody on the same page offensively so everyone understands where they need to be and how the ball handler, whoever that is at the time, is planning to create a high percentage shot. A lot of responsibility is going to fall on the coach here to get all four of those guys to find a balance between looking for their own shot and looking to set up others. Yes that is the coach's responsibility. And if there's a cause for concern with this group of players, that's it. I expect Westphal is going to have to do a complete 180 from his past coaching tendencies to make this work and that seems unlikely. But he got the guys he wanted so if he can't make it work next year than he's sealed his own fate.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm not sure why its become popular of late for peeps to say Thornton has PG skills, but he doesn't. He passes well for a SG, which is a real asset. But he is very clearly a SG, with an emphasis on the S, with very little PG in him.

As for the colection of guys who can handle, I don't think that's by accident. I think that's in direct response to th same thing that has the "we need a pure PG!!!! REALLY!!!!!!" folks in such a tizzy. Recognizing that Reke is going to have the ball a lot, Petrie has been collecting pieces who CAN handle the ball a bit, who can pass a bit, but who don't have to and can contribute wihtout it. So you give Reke ballhandling and passing support without taking the ball out of his hands on most plays. Throw in running a lot of offense through Cousins, and its assist by committee, which given the way the old Portland teams were contructed, and our golden era Kings were constructed, I think lies a lot closer to Petrie's heart than a Nash-like single distributor.

 

[rainmaker]

Thank god the EPL starts up in 3 weeks. I need something to take my attention off this Jimmer is/isn't a pg nonsense, which it appears will drag on just as long, if not longer than it has for Reke.

People who watched Jimmer have an opinion based on what he did in college. People who didn't watch him much, base their opinions on what other writers have written. The problem I have, is that NONE of us can prove it one way or another until the damn ball goes up, which could either be 3 months from now, or 15.

But this conversation has gotten rediculous. Same with hammering Petrie for not spending cap space, when free agency hasn't even started! Yes, the EPL sounds quite good right now, otherwise this conversation will lead me to join Baja's suicide party.

 

[rainmaker]

Well, you and I have a major disagreement on that one. I think he'd play 30+ minutes a game, and Jimmer would be the 4th man.

Yeah, we definitely disagree. No way in my mind would Barea get 30+ a night in a Reke/Jimmer/Thornton backcourt. Maybe half that, which is why he'd sign elsewhere. He'd also be looking at less minutes down the road, as those 3 mature.

 

[est.1999]

Barea's game is gimmicky and is glamorized when playing for a contender. He's not even in the same category as Thornton and Jimmer(even without NBA experience). You put jimmer on Dallas coming off the bench and it's over.

 

[Kingster]

I'm not sure why its become popular of late for peeps to say Thornton has PG skills, but he doesn't. He passes well for a SG, which is a real asset. But he is very clearly a SG, with an emphasis on the S, with very little PG in him.

As for the colection of guys who can handle, I don't think that's by accident. I think that's in direct response to th same thing that has the "we need a pure PG!!!! REALLY!!!!!!" folks in such a tizzy. Recognizing that Reke is going to have the ball a lot, Petrie has been collecting pieces who CAN handle the ball a bit, who can pass a bit, but who don't have to and can contribute wihtout it. So you give Reke ballhandling and passing support without taking the ball out of his hands on most plays. Throw in running a lot of offense through Cousins, and its assist by committee, which given the way the old Portland teams were contructed, and our golden era Kings were constructed, I think lies a lot closer to Petrie's heart than a Nash-like single distributor.

I saw more pg plays out of Thornton last year than I did Tyreke. I don't think there's a clear demarcation like you imply. He's a blend or a hybrid, whatever you want to call it. Which is a good thing. If he just was a guy who didn't make plays for others he wouldn't be as good as he is. If you think I'm wrong, compare Kevin Martin's game to Thornton's. With Kevin Martin you do have a clear demarcation. He's as close to being a "pure" 2 guard as you can get. His ballhandling isn't very good, but he moves without the ball and stands outside and waits for others to create for him. He barely knows what an assist is.

 

[Bricklayer]

I saw more pg plays out of Thornton last year than I did Tyreke. I don't think there's a clear demarcation like you imply. He's a blend or a hybrid, whatever you want to call it. Which is a good thing. If he just was a guy who didn't make plays for others he wouldn't be as good as he is. If you think I'm wrong, compare Kevin Martin's game to Thornton's. With Kevin Martin you do have a clear demarcation. He's as close to being a "pure" 2 guard as you can get. His ballhandling isn't very good, but he moves without the ball and stands outside and waits for others to create for him. He barely knows what an assist is.

Yes. But being able to pass DOES NOT MAKE YOU A PG. This pure this pure that stuff is almost comical. Its basketball for dummies. At the point you get that tight about it, there are maybe 5 "pure" guys for each positon in the NBA. Thornton makes no plays at all like a PG. What he does is pass sometimes, and pass very well on the break -- I would say half his assists came in that situation. But he does not drive and kick. He might be able to run some pick and roll but we rarely run that play. And he certainly never directs the offense -- quite to the contrary the offense is normally directed for him, to get him the scoring opportunity. He also never had to bring the ball up to initiate things against opposing PG pressure. He's just not a PG. Nor a combo guard. Don't know his history, but doubt he's ever even played one at lower levels. What he is is a nice versatile SG, and there's nothing wrong with that. Versatility is valuable. But it doesn't suddenly change your position. He's a pure SG. Can bring it up occasionally to help with pressure., But he can't run the show. And the downside of being undersized is he can't swing to SF either.

As for Reke he can and does bring the ball up against pressure. And while its too obviously conscious with him, the drive and kick is part of his game. The rest of PGing not so much. But he's got definite PG traits because of the superior ballhandling andits reflected in their respective assist totals. 3-4 is a good passing SG. 5-6 is a poor passing PG (or at least one who isn't spending all his time setting people up -- Bibby was 5-6apg too for us).

 

[Kingster]

Yes. But being able to pass DOES NOT MAKE YOU A PG. This pure this pure that stuff is almost comical. Its basketball for dummies. At the point you get that tight about it, there are maybe 5 "pure" guys for each positon in the NBA. Thornton makes no plays at all like a PG. What he does is pass sometimes, and pass very well on the break -- I would say half his assists came in that situation. But he does not drive and kick. He might be able to run some pick and roll but we rarely run that play. And he certainly never directs the offense -- quite to the contrary the offense is normally directed for him, to get him the scoring opportunity. He also never had to bring the ball up to initiate things against opposing PG pressure. He's just not a PG. Nor a combo guard. Don't know his history, but doubt he's ever even played one at lower levels. What he is is a nice versatile SG, and there's nothing wrong with that. Versatility is valuable. But it doesn't suddenly change your position. He's a pure SG. Can bring it up occasionally to help with pressure., But he can't run the show. And the downside of being undersized is he can't swing to SF either.

As for Reke he can and does bring the ball up against pressure. And while its too obviously conscious with him, the drive and kick is part of his game. The rest of PGing not so much. But he's got definite PG traits because of the superior ballhandling andits reflected in their respective assist totals. 3-4 is a good passing SG. 5-6 is a poor passing PG (or at least one who isn't spending all his time setting people up -- Bibby was 5-6apg too for us).

I think the "pure" stuff is silly, too. But at the end of the day, you're left with terms like you use - "PG traits", which implies that some have more PG traits than others, which implies that at the far end of the continuum in the idealized version there is a "pure" point guard (at least in our mind's eye). I agree that Tyreke has PG traits, but I guess we disagree about Thornton because I also PG traits in him. I saw some excellent drive and dish plays by him last year, which I would classify as a PG trait. If you have any old film I'd recommend reviewing it; his ability to pass was surprising (and I think that's why I remember it). I agree with you, though, that I wouldn't want him running the show. But at this point I'm not all that convinced that I want Tyreke to run the show either.

 

[Superman]

I like Barea, as long as he's not on my team. He's fun and exciting to watch, especially when he's wreaking havoc against the Lakers, but he comes with just as many liabilities, if not more, as he does assets. He's not a consistent shooter and he's a weakness on defense. I'd much rather have Thornton in that role.

 

[bajaden]

It's very interesting to me how there appears to be a huge divide on this board between those who are fairly sanguine about the ballhandling on this team (e.g. you) and those are more pessimistic (e.g. me). Like you imply above, Jimmer, Tyreke, and Cousins will handle the ball most of the time. You believe that when Jimmer is on the floor, whether with Tyreke or Thornton, he will be the primary ballhandler. Yet, as we've discussed, he's untested in that role in the NBA. I need more evidence that he can handle that responsibility. You don't. But let's go one step further: Who does Jimmer initiate the offense to? Cousins, presumably. And what was Cousins assist to TO for last season? - 0.76. That's 83rd out of 83 players espn tracks. Then when Jimmer isn't on the floor, that leaves Tyreke to be the primary ballhandler. His assists/TO for last year - 1.73. That's 63rd out of 83 players tracked. If you want a little bit better ballhandling you can go to Salmons - 1.84, or 56th out of 83 players. One group of posters is willing to "bet on the come" with Jimmer and Tyreke and Cousins. Another group is more reluctant to do so, given there is no NBA history with Jimmer and the recent history with Tyreke and Cousins isn't compelling. It's going to be interesting to see how much progress occurs with Tyreke and Cousins, and to see whether Jimmer can have a relatively seamless jump to the NBA. We'll have to check back around this time next year to see how much progress was made in the asst/TO area.


http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/turnovers/sort/assistTurnoverRatio/count/81

Most of my comments have been about Jimmer and how he'll be used, and his capabilities. This last post by you is sort of all over the place. Jimmer isn't responsible for what Cousins or Tyreke does once he gets the ball into them. They are, and Westphal is. You make good points about Jimmer being untested. True, but obvious. All rookies are untested, and there are no guarantees. All I'm doing is giving my best subjective opinion. Doesn't make me right or wrong. We just have to wait and see. I'm confident and your not. I saw him play a hell of lot more than you did, so thats understandable.

Cousins decision making in the high post left a lot to be desired. At least from a stat point of view. Thats the downside. At the same time, we saw tremendous potential from him. Lest we forget, we were watching a 19 year old kid, one year removed from highschool, doing things that some veteran centers with 4 or 5 years in the league, couldn't do. So now its just a matter of him refining his skills, and limiting the mistakes. I felt that one of the problems, was his lack of options once he got the ball. Another problem was that the sometimes got the ball too late in the shotclock. I felt the addition of Thornton helped in some of those areas. Which is part of the reason the Kings started to play better, and more successful basketball. I think the addition of Fredette will also help take some of the pressure off Cousins.

I gave Tyreke a pass last season. You don't have to if you don't want to. But I do know that you and I were two of the first to want the Kings to draft Evans, so I know your a fan of his. Because Evans past season was overshadowed with injuries, its difficult to analyze the results. So, as I said, I just gave him a pass and hope he comes in this next season healthy, and well prepared.

I do find it hard to believe that anyone would think that the combination of Tyreke and Cousins isn't compelling. How can it not be? When you look at the potential of those two, and see where it could lead, its has to be at the very least compelling. It isn't as though both players came in and did nothing to wet the appetite. Lest we forget, Tyreke did win rookie of the year. Cousins would have certainly been one of the top contenders for ROY, if not for Griffin having it locked up. Whats not compelling about that? We're not talking about Quincy Douby here.

Do I think Fredette's transition to the NBA will be seemless? Of course not! He's going to have his bumps in the road. Every rookie does. But he's more prepared than just about any other PG the Kings could have drafted not named Kemba. I've said it before. Jimmer and Kemba were the two best prepared PG's to come in and play right away. I leaned toward Jimmer because of his shooting ability, but one could have made a reasonable argument for Walker as the choice. I think Jimmer will be more than fine in his first year. But there are never any guarantees

The biggest question mark for me is how Salmons fits into what the Kings are trying to do. He has the abilities to help the Kings take a big step in the right direction. He also has the ability to screw everything up. I guess we'll just have to hold judgement until we have some evidence to work with.

 

[bajaden]

Thank god the EPL starts up in 3 weeks. I need something to take my attention off this Jimmer is/isn't a pg nonsense, which it appears will drag on just as long, if not longer than it has for Reke.

People who watched Jimmer have an opinion based on what he did in college. People who didn't watch him much, base their opinions on what other writers have written. The problem I have, is that NONE of us can prove it one way or another until the damn ball goes up, which could either be 3 months from now, or 15.

But this conversation has gotten rediculous. Same with hammering Petrie for not spending cap space, when free agency hasn't even started! Yes, the EPL sounds quite good right now, otherwise this conversation will lead me to join Baja's suicide party.

All right! Another member.. The way were going, we'll have a cult fairly soon. I may have to buy some property in Costa Rica and build new facilities.. Things are looking up!

 

[Glenn]

I just lost a 6 paragraph note through my own clumsiness but will try to recreate it.

I see bajaden added another note during my writing so I can eliminate a few thoughts from my novelette. My plaintive wail of a few days ago had to do with solutions. It is one thing to complain and debate but it is another thing to have solutions. If we are missing something, what should we do to correct the problem? I personally am thrilled with the three rotation guards we have. These are high level and very young athletes. Typically high level athletes have a capacity to learn that is better than the average athlete and youngsters certainly have not peaked in their ability to expand and change their game.

That being said, I doubt if the major qualities of our three guards will change dramatically nor do they need to be changed dramatically. The focus of complaint is on Reke, our ROY. At the beginning of last year, he was the Reke of old and perhaps that was to be expected and maybe even desired. At that point, we were not sure of what we had in Cuz nor even how many minutes he would be on the court. A ball pounding Tyreke wasn't the biggest crime as who else was the best guy to have the ball? Yes, he should have gotten the offense going quicker but that assumes that there was an offense. I believe a bigger problem was our coach and as he was a guard, I would think he would know best what to do with Reke. Of course, we all know the folly in such a thought.

Now we have a different team. Cuz gradually began to survive for more minutes and showed an ability to distribute the ball in a Webber/Vlade way. Certainly in the midst of a season, a major change in the offense to take optimum advantage of our troubled point PF/center couldn't be worked into the offense as that is a major change. The fact is, he gradually DID become more of a distributor and a bigger force. I heard no complaints that he wasn't a pure PF/center as we all are used to bigs with skills similar and know how it can work especially with Coachie still contributing his wisdom.

Then we added Thornton. Thornton is an all purpose guard - call him what you wish. He can shoot, he can distribute, he can attack the rim, and he showed some signs of a defensive ability. He seems adjustable to whoever is on the court.

Then we got Jimmer. There are question marks on him but probably more because he hasn't played an NBA minute AND the fact that people don't know his game than anything else. We'll see how he fits.

Sooo, we have a guard with a unique and somewhat undefensable skill and his name is Reke. He requires a defense to adjust to him and near the end of last season, defenses seemed better in their approach to him ignoring the effect his multiple injuries may have had. Jimmer has a special talent and defenses will now need to pay attention to him. How do you stop a guy who can shoot from 25 feet with ease and even farther out? And if you concentrate on stopping him, what do you do with Tyreke? Or Cuz? And if you stop Jimmer or Thornton, how do you also stop Reke and Cuz?

If I was a coach with offense on the mind, I would be salivating. I'm not sure what we have as a coach.

At least two of our guards have a trait not yet discussed and this trait is not one that is expected of any particular position but simply it is a desireable trait. Both Thornton and Tyreke seem eager to have the ball in their hands at the end of the game. Some players shy away from that. During the season I think most of us wanted the ball in Reke's hands with the game on the line and he came through several times. Great! Then we discovered Thornton was great with the game on the line. In fact, I got to the point, rightly or wrongly, that I wanted Thornton to have the ball rather than Reke. In any case, we have two guards who function well with the game on the line.

Then there is Jimmer. I suspect that he will be another who should be feared with the game on the line as that has always been his role but we need to wait to see.

Possibly we have three guards who have no fear at the ends of games. I personally think we have the three guards that can serve us well for the next decade. This should allow adequate time for everyone involved to adjust, evolve, and polish their games. It is now a coaching problem AND a problem that three skilled athletes need to work out.

 

[bajaden]

I think the "pure" stuff is silly, too. But at the end of the day, you're left with terms like you use - "PG traits", which implies that some have more PG traits than others, which implies that at the far end of the continuum in the idealized version there is a "pure" point guard (at least in our mind's eye). I agree that Tyreke has PG traits, but I guess we disagree about Thornton because I also PG traits in him. I saw some excellent drive and dish plays by him last year, which I would classify as a PG trait. If you have any old film I'd recommend reviewing it; his ability to pass was surprising (and I think that's why I remember it). I agree with you, though, that I wouldn't want him running the show. But at this point I'm not all that convinced that I want Tyreke to run the show either.

I guess if were just using PG traits to begin defining what a PG is, we could throw Cousins into the mix. He has PG traits. Of course the idea is ridiculous. I just wanted to make a point thats there's a lot more that defines what a PG is, than being able to handle and pass the ball. We could all argue into infinity over the definition, but to me the PG is like a QB on a football team. He see's the field better than anyone else on the team. He see's plays developing in his mind before they happen. He has the ability to read defenses, see weaknesses, and make instant decisions. And, he has to have the skill level that compliments everything thats happening between his ears.

Whether he's a shoot first or pass first PG is many times decided by his teammates or by his headcoach. Its hard for a lot of head coaches to stiffle the scoring ability of a good scoring PG. Of course some PG's are more pliable than others. Bibby was a guy that could play either role. But he was never going to be an elite PG regardless of the role. Proof that you don't need an elite PG to win, if you have all the right pieces around him.

The jury is out on Fredette, and hopefully we'll have a season with which to make some judgements. But remember, a lot of PG's that ended up being elite, wern't drafted that high, and came into the league with less than great expectations. A lot of teams passed on Rondo who wasn't picked untile the 21st pick in the draft. After Qincy Douby for gods sake. Everyone wants to point to Adam Morrison as an example of a high scoring player coming from a smaller conference. Well why not then point to John Stockton from the same school. Stockton wasn't drafted until the 16th pick in the draft. Nash was picked 15th, and came from Santa Clara. White guy, that handled the ball well and was a good scorer in a smaller conference but wasn't very athletic.

Point is, you just never know until the proof is on the table. But thats the fun part. At least for me..

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Find me a championship team with a pure PG and I can give you about 5 without one.

But even THAT doesnt matter. Every team is different. There is no one constant way to build a team that always wins, or everyone would be doing it. Now, you can say you dont like how this team is being built, you can say we need this or we need that, but that is all just how you personally would build a team. Sure, If I were GM I'd never do that Salmons trade, but it happened, and we are no further from a championship after the trade then we were before.

The talent on this team still has a long way to go when it comes to player development, but the big pieces for a championship contending team are already here. Teams built like this have won before. These are the cards we have right now .. and I think overall Petrie has done a pretty good job surrounding the core (Cousins/Evans) with the right kind of pieces. Now its on those guys to become great.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Thank god the EPL starts up in 3 weeks. I need something to take my attention off this Jimmer is/isn't a pg nonsense, which it appears will drag on just as long, if not longer than it has for Reke.

People who watched Jimmer have an opinion based on what he did in college. People who didn't watch him much, base their opinions on what other writers have written. The problem I have, is that NONE of us can prove it one way or another until the damn ball goes up, which could either be 3 months from now, or 15.

But this conversation has gotten rediculous. Same with hammering Petrie for not spending cap space, when free agency hasn't even started! Yes, the EPL sounds quite good right now, otherwise this conversation will lead me to join Baja's suicide party.

Amen to that. Who are you a fan of?

 

[Kingster]

Most of my comments have been about Jimmer and how he'll be used, and his capabilities. This last post by you is sort of all over the place. Jimmer isn't responsible for what Cousins or Tyreke does once he gets the ball into them. They are, and Westphal is. You make good points about Jimmer being untested. True, but obvious. All rookies are untested, and there are no guarantees. All I'm doing is giving my best subjective opinion. Doesn't make me right or wrong. We just have to wait and see. I'm confident and your not. I saw him play a hell of lot more than you did, so thats understandable.

Cousins decision making in the high post left a lot to be desired. At least from a stat point of view. Thats the downside. At the same time, we saw tremendous potential from him. Lest we forget, we were watching a 19 year old kid, one year removed from highschool, doing things that some veteran centers with 4 or 5 years in the league, couldn't do. So now its just a matter of him refining his skills, and limiting the mistakes. I felt that one of the problems, was his lack of options once he got the ball. Another problem was that the sometimes got the ball too late in the shotclock. I felt the addition of Thornton helped in some of those areas. Which is part of the reason the Kings started to play better, and more successful basketball. I think the addition of Fredette will also help take some of the pressure off Cousins.

I gave Tyreke a pass last season. You don't have to if you don't want to. But I do know that you and I were two of the first to want the Kings to draft Evans, so I know your a fan of his. Because Evans past season was overshadowed with injuries, its difficult to analyze the results. So, as I said, I just gave him a pass and hope he comes in this next season healthy, and well prepared.

I do find it hard to believe that anyone would think that the combination of Tyreke and Cousins isn't compelling. How can it not be? When you look at the potential of those two, and see where it could lead, its has to be at the very least compelling. It isn't as though both players came in and did nothing to wet the appetite. Lest we forget, Tyreke did win rookie of the year. Cousins would have certainly been one of the top contenders for ROY, if not for Griffin having it locked up. Whats not compelling about that? We're not talking about Quincy Douby here.

Do I think Fredette's transition to the NBA will be seemless? Of course not! He's going to have his bumps in the road. Every rookie does. But he's more prepared than just about any other PG the Kings could have drafted not named Kemba. I've said it before. Jimmer and Kemba were the two best prepared PG's to come in and play right away. I leaned toward Jimmer because of his shooting ability, but one could have made a reasonable argument for Walker as the choice. I think Jimmer will be more than fine in his first year. But there are never any guarantees

The biggest question mark for me is how Salmons fits into what the Kings are trying to do. He has the abilities to help the Kings take a big step in the right direction. He also has the ability to screw everything up. I guess we'll just have to hold judgement until we have some evidence to work with.

Keep in mind that I'm only talking here about assists/TOs for next year. I like Tyreke's and Cousins' high ceiling; I'm just not more than 50% certain that they are going to be demonstrably better in the assist/TO category than last year. Maybe they'll make a quantum jump. We'll see.

I agree about Salmons being a key. If this team was a solid veteran team (like the Spurs to use an extreme example), then I'd be much more OK with Salmons. I don't think he could screw that situation up. He'd have to conform. But this team is still too young and unformed to have a rock-solid identity, and to insert a Salmons into that mixture isn't what I would do.

 

[bajaden]

Find me a championship team with a pure PG and I can give you about 5 without one.

But even THAT doesnt matter. Every team is different. There is no one constant way to build a team that always wins, or everyone would be doing it. Now, you can say you dont like how this team is being built, you can say we need this or we need that, but that is all just how you personally would build a team. Sure, If I were GM I'd never do that Salmons trade, but it happened, and we are no further from a championship after the trade then we were before.

The talent on this team still has a long way to go when it comes to player development, but the big pieces for a championship contending team are already here. Teams built like this have won before. These are the cards we have right now .. and I think overall Petrie has done a pretty good job surrounding the core (Cousins/Evans) with the right kind of pieces. Now its on those guys to become great.

You have struck at the core of what the future holds. If both Evans and Cousins live up to expectations, then this team will be a contender in the near future. Those are big if's. But those If's seem more plausable based on those two guys, than lookiing at JT as the player leading us to the promised land. Thats not a knock on JT, its just a comparison in ability. So your right! If those two guys progress as expected, and the right pieces are put around them, then the Kings are back in the hunt. And who knows? We may stumble upon another star along the way.

 

[rainmaker]

Amen to that. Who are you a fan of?

Fulham and Bolton. Like Villa to. Hate the large clubs. Despise them. Given I didn't grow up there, I don't have or need a hardcore allegiance to a club. I just enjoy good futbol, and it appears we'll have plenty of time to watch. Will be intersting to see the NYRB in the Emirates Cup in a couple weeks. First time an MLS club has been over there to compete.

 

[William Blake]

Fulham and Bolton. Like Villa to. Hate the large clubs. Despise them. Given I didn't grow up there, I don't have or need a hardcore allegiance to a club. I just enjoy good futbol, and it appears we'll have plenty of time to watch. Will be intersting to see the NYRB in the Emirates Cup in a couple weeks. First time an MLS club has been over there to compete.

If you like good football then it's a good thing you don't have to watch Serie A.