Grades v. Blazers 12/8/2012

[King Baller]

Great game! Petrie's guys got the job done and Smart's rotations worked. Its sweet to see the Kings win three in a row. First win on the road and it came on a second game of a back to back!

The team defense was very good most of the game. Lilliard and Aldridge were a combined 10 for 27.

Cuz and all the starters were solid. Magic Salmons looked great Smart played Outlaw in the 4th to counter Stotts move of Babbit at the stretch 4 and Outlaw D'ed him, hustled for the loose balls, hit some shots and rattled the rim with a DUNK!

Game ball to John Salmons.

KB

[pshn80]

It's good to see our guys play well, win, and have fun. Also it's great to see tre players make the team, coach, and GM look good. Great and timely win.

[ppine]

At a wonderful time like this, having won 3 straight I am reminded of the old adage about NBA players. They all have some talent or they wouldn't be here. Good players have good games less than half the time. Great players have good games about 90 percent of the time. Truly exceptional players rarely have anything but good games.

The Kings have shown the ability to win games without much from Cousins or Evans. It is a team sport after all and the important thing is playing like a team.

[jaysoonii]

If they win 5 in a row ****s getting serious in sacto

[CruzDude]

Outlaw is the enigma or better the mystery man on bench. Good for him but it was against his old team, always a stimulant. If, a its a giant IF, he could do that type of work off bench on a regular basis then he can help at the PF spot and help team another notch. Same comment applies to Salmons, really directing team with 11 assists and no TO! Nothing the three shooting PGs have ever done on KIngs, much less at an away game.

But it is one road game. I want wins in 2 of next 3 road games and at least no significant regressions, then I'll get on the Kings "turning the corner" wagon.

Listening to Gary Jerrold down here at latitude 18 north was quite a treat as see all games home on Direct Tv or live. Boy is he good!

[bajaden]

At a wonderful time like this, having won 3 straight I am reminded of the old adage about NBA players. They all have some talent or they wouldn't be here. Good players have good games less than half the time. Great players have good games about 90 percent of the time. Truly exceptional players rarely have anything but good games.

The Kings have shown the ability to win games without much from Cousins or Evans. It is a team sport after all and the important thing is playing like a team.

Just curious, when did 19 and 12 become not much?

[pshn80]

Just curious, when did 19 and 12 become not much?

Have you changed crabs or is it just my declining vision?

[Padrino]

i have to admit, while i've been extremely critical of keith smart's defensive strategy (ie: 1-5 has green light to reach in with the hope of forcing turnovers), it is working surprisingly well for this team of late. they are managing to avoid racking up high foul totals while incessantly poking and swatting at the ball. demarcus, in particular, has played more solidly on defense while not committing too many fouls, and keeping his cool when he does commit fouls. it is mighty refreshing, and i wouldn't mind if the kings were able to keep it up...

[Glenn]

i have to admit, while i've been extremely critical of keith smart's defensive strategy (ie: 1-5 has green light to reach in with the hope of forcing turnovers), it is working surprisingly well for this team of late. they are managing to avoid racking up high foul totals while incessantly poking and swatting at the ball. demarcus, in particular, has played more solidly on defense while not committing too many fouls, and keeping his cool when he does commit fouls. it is mighty refreshing, and i wouldn't mind if the kings were able to keep it up...

I agree, wholeheartedly as you well know. I also notice a little method to the madness as there is a lot of double teaming by one big and the guard out near the three poijnt line. It is like a show except held longer. I didn't watch it close enough so it may have been someone else and I don't know how they covered the unguarded guy but it was disruptive. Now if we could get some organization in the offense but maybe that's in the end half of the year as if Smart does it the way he did last year, he builds by steps. Not great steps but by steps. Now for Christmas I want at least Gortat and better yet, Ibaka. That would be fun.

[HereWeVivek]

i think Cousins is the biggest part of this win streak. staying out of foul trouble has a big part in our success in these 3 games.

ive also noticed that his attitude towards officials has gotten much better after that last ejection. he has been raising his hand and accepting fouls called on him. ive never seen that in his career untill now

[The_Jamal]

DeMarcus the last 3 games:

20 PPG, 13 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.0 block, 45% FG, 80% FT, and 7 FTA/game

Funny enough, when DeMarcus plays great basketball, the team goes on a 3 game winning streak. Just got to keep hoping he understands that he cannot take nights off from being the man and giving us this sort of production on a nightly basis

[Kingster]

Again, fast pace caused by turnovers. Once the Blazers stopped turning the ball over our offense struggled because we weren't getting easy baskets in transition. That said, its good to see the team capitalising on such turnovers. That is certainly very important, my point is just that we can't rely on these baskets alone to win games.

Our scrubs led the way to this blowout. Garcia, Salmons and Outlaw all played very well. Keith Smart pulled another Keith Smart in benching Jimmer ... so much for settling on one guy eh? Like others have said, we've played much better the last few games when Cousins has been playing with energy and also not getting into foul trouble.

What difference does it make? It's a fast break caused by a team that is committed to run. I don't think it makes a difference whether it's precipitated by turnovers or defensive rebounds; the running was started by both and they should run off of defensive rebounds and turnovers. The point is - we need to run the ball in order to win. The last three games showed that. Obviously, that doesn't mean we're going to win every night when we run the ball. But we have a heckuvalot better chance of winning when we run that when we don't.

[mac]

What difference does it make? It's a fast break caused by a team that is committed to run. I don't think it makes a difference whether it's precipitated by turnovers or defensive rebounds; the running was started by both and they should run off of defensive rebounds and turnovers. The point is - we need to run the ball in order to win. The last three games showed that. Obviously, that doesn't mean we're going to win every night when we run the ball. But we have a heckuvalot better chance of winning when we run that when we don't.

The difference is we were able to be successful because they were off of turnovers. If it was off normal shots the other team would be back in transition, and we can try and run all we want but we wouldn't be able to score many points off of it. You can't just run and push the pace on every single possession and throw half court offense out the window. I don't know about you but I haven't seen a single team ever do that successfully. I'm perfectly fine with us running the ball; just not as our main offensive strategy.

I'll agree with you on one thing - which is that our best shot at winning NOW is by running. Thing is, I'm thinking more long-term and more concerned with us executing in the half court. You don't need to teach a young team how to run very much off of turnovers. As long as they space the floor correctly while running they'll end up with an easy basket 80% of the time.

All I'm saying is don't simply equate running to winning. Once we play a good team that doesn't turn the ball over or gets the benefits of calls we won't get as many easy opportunities, and at the end of that I don't want to see you say something like "the team didn't win because they didn't play at a fast pace". The difference between just running and playing a slower tempo is that you can orchestrate a slow halfcourt offense unless you play a really superb defensive team. By setting screens and running plays you can get guys free for shots every single game. Running on the other hand, is very dependent on creating turnovers and opponents having poor offensive balance which affects their transition D.

[MizzouKing]

Finally able to see a Kings game, I was pretty impressed with the defensive effort! They're starting to buy in, but they're also getting better at it. Also really impressed at how they got back to team ball after squandering the 2nd quarter with a bunch of solo acts. More buy-in and hopefully lessons being learned.

I was aghast at Thornton's inability to pass the ball whenever his ticket was called...he seems to think every shot is a great shot when the ball's in his hands, never looking to get it to a teammate with a better shot. Finally, why does this team seem to think they have to make a move very early in the shot clock on every possession?

Overall I see progress for sure...a good night for Kings fans!
MK

[bajaden]

The difference is we were able to be successful because they were off of turnovers. If it was off normal shots the other team would be back in transition, and we can try and run all we want but we wouldn't be able to score many points off of it. You can't just run and push the pace on every single possession and throw half court offense out the window. I don't know about you but I haven't seen a single team ever do that successfully. I'm perfectly fine with us running the ball; just not as our main offensive strategy.

I'll agree with you on one thing - which is that our best shot at winning NOW is by running. Thing is, I'm thinking more long-term and more concerned with us executing in the half court. You don't need to teach a young team how to run very much off of turnovers. As long as they space the floor correctly while running they'll end up with an easy basket 80% of the time.

All I'm saying is don't simply equate running to winning. Once we play a good team that doesn't turn the ball over or gets the benefits of calls we won't get as many easy opportunities, and at the end of that I don't want to see you say something like "the team didn't win because they didn't play at a fast pace". The difference between just running and playing a slower tempo is that you can orchestrate a slow halfcourt offense unless you play a really superb defensive team. By setting screens and running plays you can get guys free for shots every single game. Running on the other hand, is very dependent on creating turnovers and opponents having poor offensive balance which affects their transition D.

Mac, what your saying is that we were able to make a cake because we had flour. Of course we were successful because we ran off turnovers. Thats what running teams do. And the turnovers hopefully come from good defense. Now you can argrue it anyway you want. You can say we were lucky that they were missing shots, or you can say our defense caused them to miss shots. Thats up to you. Personally, I think its a little bit of both. Good defense, and some good luck thrown in.

I'll give you this, its harder to run off made shots. Not impossible, if your going against a bad defensive team, but extremely hard if you are. The point is, the Portland announcers said before the game that the teams game plan was to get the Kings into a halfcourt game. So its not like they weren't trying. We ran, and we won, so kudo's to the Kings for at least one nignt. If we hadn't hit our outside shot, we probably wouldn't have won either. Some nights it just bounces your way.

[Kingster]

The difference is we were able to be successful because they were off of turnovers. If it was off normal shots the other team would be back in transition, and we can try and run all we want but we wouldn't be able to score many points off of it. You can't just run and push the pace on every single possession and throw half court offense out the window. I don't know about you but I haven't seen a single team ever do that successfully. I'm perfectly fine with us running the ball; just not as our main offensive strategy.

I'll agree with you on one thing - which is that our best shot at winning NOW is by running. Thing is, I'm thinking more long-term and more concerned with us executing in the half court. You don't need to teach a young team how to run very much off of turnovers. As long as they space the floor correctly while running they'll end up with an easy basket 80% of the time.

All I'm saying is don't simply equate running to winning. Once we play a good team that doesn't turn the ball over or gets the benefits of calls we won't get as many easy opportunities, and at the end of that I don't want to see you say something like "the team didn't win because they didn't play at a fast pace". The difference between just running and playing a slower tempo is that you can orchestrate a slow halfcourt offense unless you play a really superb defensive team. By setting screens and running plays you can get guys free for shots every single game. Running on the other hand, is very dependent on creating turnovers and opponents having poor offensive balance which affects their transition D.

Then we don't disagree. The Kings absolutely, positively must run NOW in order to have a chance of winning. That doesn't guarantee them victory, but it definitely gives them a better chance than if they walk the ball up the floor. Walking the ball up the floor is a virtal guarantee of losing for this team. I don't think I've ever advocated running off made baskets, and I've never seen it this year on this team. They must run off of turnovers AND defensive rebounds.

Longer term, yes, they must incorporate a more precise half-court offense into the overall scheme. But they've got to crawl before they can run. Smashing their face into the halfcourt wall of dribble, dribble, force/turnover, will do nothing longer term for the success of this team. It will just destroy morale. They need to experience some winning and fun with the running game to gain the morale and motivation to slowly but surely learn the precision of a half court offense. What could easily happen is that the Kings could become a pretty good running team and approximate that .500 record, but then hit a wall at around .500 because they're not great at running a half-court offense. That's fine. At that point they can fully commit to get better on the half-court offense. In the meantime, it serves no purpose to destroy the morale and overall esprit de corps of this team to belabor a half court offense.

[Tyndel]

Then we don't disagree. The Kings absolutely, positively must run NOW in order to have a chance of winning. That doesn't guarantee them victory, but it definitely gives them a better chance than if they walk the ball up the floor. Walking the ball up the floor is a virtal guarantee of losing for this team. I don't think I've ever advocated running off made baskets, and I've never seen it this year on this team. They must run off of turnovers AND defensive rebounds.

Longer term, yes, they must incorporate a more precise half-court offense into the overall scheme. But they've got to crawl before they can run. Smashing their face into the halfcourt wall of dribble, dribble, force/turnover, will do nothing longer term for the success of this team. It will just destroy morale. They need to experience some winning and fun with the running game to gain the morale and motivation to slowly but surely learn the precision of a half court offense. What could easily happen is that the Kings could become a pretty good running team and approximate that .500 record, but then hit a wall at around .500 because they're not great at running a half-court offense. That's fine. At that point they can fully commit to get better on the half-court offense. In the meantime, it serves no purpose to destroy the morale and overall esprit de corps of this team to belabor a half court offense.

Isn't that what we did last year with basically the exact same players?

I am amazed at how easy people think it is for a leopard to change its spots. If you are going to do something do it right from the start. That doesn't mean we can't run but running is a matter of being in physical shape and not being too worn out and can be done at any time you don't make it the central theme of your offense its secondary and resultant of good defense. Remember we ran without good defense last year and it worked amazingly well.... When it matters the game will be won or lost in the 1/2 court.

[Padrino]

Isn't that what we did last year with basically the exact same players?

I am amazed at how easy people think it is for a leopard to change its spots. If you are going to do something do it right from the start. That doesn't mean we can't run but running is a matter of being in physical shape and not being too worn out and can be done at any time you don't make it the central theme of your offense its secondary and resultant of good defense. Remember we ran without good defense last year and it worked amazingly well.... When it matters the game will be won or lost in the 1/2 court.

indeed. it must supplement offensive/defensive discipline and focus...

[mac]

Mac, what your saying is that we were able to make a cake because we had flour. Of course we were successful because we ran off turnovers. Thats what running teams do. And the turnovers hopefully come from good defense. Now you can argrue it anyway you want. You can say we were lucky that they were missing shots, or you can say our defense caused them to miss shots. Thats up to you. Personally, I think its a little bit of both. Good defense, and some good luck thrown in.

I'll give you this, its harder to run off made shots. Not impossible, if your going against a bad defensive team, but extremely hard if you are. The point is, the Portland announcers said before the game that the teams game plan was to get the Kings into a halfcourt game. So its not like they weren't trying. We ran, and we won, so kudo's to the Kings for at least one nignt. If we hadn't hit our outside shot, we probably wouldn't have won either. Some nights it just bounces your way.

Well this Dallas game going on is an example of what I was trying to get at. We're ****ed the minute the other team doesn't turn the ball over or is shooting well, because we can't get out and run. You can't force getting easy baskets by running, or can only do so to limited effectiveness - it's very dependent on the opponent's offense. Even if you play good D the majority of the time you'll simply force a bad shot and get a defensive rebound. again making it hard to run. The emphasis on our team should be on learning to execute a halfcourt offense, not just running all the time as some fans seem to think.

[rainmaker]

There's a difference between running when you have the opportunity, and just coming down quickly and jacking up the first shot you see. We're more the latter than the former. Works when shots are falling, but generally they're poor shots to begin with, and when they aren't falling we really suffer as a result.

We take a lot of poor shots, a lot of quick shots and a lot of selfish shots. Sometimes we make them and no one mentions it. But as soon as we start missing our lack of an offense becomes quite clear. Running and gunning as a philosophy is fools gold. Using it to cover up teaching a half court system and drilling it into the minds of our young players is a horrible mistake.