Terrible Players, Or Terrible Use of our Players?

[Bricklayer]

I would be willing to go out on a limb and say the team wouldn't be any worse than they are now if we didn't have Cousins and Evans on the team anymore. I think we should look at what deals come for the both of them and try to grab ourselves a couple position players.

Code for nice neat players that fit nicely in that Basketball 1001 book you like to analyze from?

Also code for: we'll have no talnet and can be terrible forever. Whatever hope we have for ever getting out of this relies in those two unique talents. Unique talents = GOOD thing. Now if you can swap them for other unique talents, then its possible. But we have badly degraded their value and so no we can't. All we can do is swap them for relative mediocrities, "position players" without the talent to exceed their positions and so without the talent to ever be difference makers. All we will be doing is absolutely guaranteeing the impossibility of us ever being good and we'll have to start all over drafting the talent to replace the nobodies. That's not how its done unless you are advocating for Sacramento to give up and admit its just going to be a farm team from now on content to try to win 35 every year so just enough fans will come out.

[Padrino]

Code for nice neat players that fit nicely in that Basketball 1001 book you like to analyze from?

Also code for: we'll have no talnet and can be terrible forever. Whatever hope we have for ever getting out of this relies in those two unique talents. Unique talents = GOOD thing. Now if you can swap them for other unique talents, then its possible. But we have badly degraded their value and so no we can't. All we can do is swap them for relative mediocrities, "position players" without the talent to exceed their positions and so without the talent to ever be difference makers. All we will be doing is absolutely guaranteeing the impossibility of us ever being good and we'll have to start all over drafting the talent to replace the nobodies. That's not how its done unless you are advocating for Sacramento to give up and admit its just going to be a farm team from now on content to try to win 35 every year so just enough fans will come out.

indeed. many kings fans truly baffle me. it's as if they don't remember how bad things can truly get. i'm baffled further by the fact that fans of a team with this particular history seem so desperately in need of perspective regarding what a culture of losing really looks like...

[Čarolija]

From the beginning I have thought this franchise, as it stands, is doomed because the Maloofs own the team. I agree with Jose and jpsls, therefore.

Uncia03 makes a lot of sense in determining who is at fault, the players or the coach. In some ways that can be determined only by an educated guess. Uncia03 has a more scientific method. Uncia03 states what we all have seen and that is that the defense came out full blast at the beginning of the season yet gradually faded away. That is the reaction of a team of players who are giving up. Now do we need to discuss what is leading to the giving up? It could be a bunch of things as no doubt they are aware of what is happening with the ownership is all the players and staff have a vested interest in where the team plays. Most have purchased homes and some have families here. But most directly, they can point at the coach. These guys are, for the most part, young and unfamiliar with NBA basketball. They need basic teaching and then more advanced stuff like NBA plays.

Smart started off like a high paid social worker by focusing on Cuz and trying create a big family with the whole team. I think that's well and good but his job is to create an NBA team. Winning teams need no special attention such as creating a Smart's vision family if they are winning. It is only a losing team that needs an in house social worker.

Now, people point to Cuz as the guy with the worst attitude. Perhaps he does have the worst attitude but perhaps also, he simply is more expressive in showing his discontent. All these players have been winners and know what it feels like. They can't be happy.

The true test is to have another coach but the Maloofs have stated they are 100% behind Smart. That test may never occur but I think Cuz will explode some day and something will need to happen. Either he is suspended or someone takes a little time and asks him what is aggravating him. In any case, I look for a Boogie explosion soon. It will be a bad thing for his career and that is unfortunate. How this organization reacts will dictate the future for this year and perhaps until we pack their bags and escort them out of town.

BINGO!!!!!!

A high quality post! Could not agree more. Players are like they are for a reason. Cousins is a bee's proverbial from going Sprewell or worst, Artest on someone.

This is a big boys league and if you cannot be a big boys owner, find something else to do. Bottom line is, you get what you pay for and we are shopping at the op shop and picking from a pile of on sale items.

There is a reson why someone like Adelman sets you back about $6 million per season and Smart only $1.5 million. There is also a reason why James Johnson cost you around $2 million and Geral Wallace $10 million.

The core of our problems is owners' pockets. With deep pockets you caget the arena done, you can beef up the front office, you can pay for a good coach and you can pay for players. We cannot do any of this! We are trying to be creative. We are trying to be too smart but are outsmarting ourselves. Bargains are extremely rare, especially in the NBA!

[Gary]

Code for nice neat players that fit nicely in that Basketball 1001 book you like to analyze from?

Also code for: we'll have no talnet and can be terrible forever. Whatever hope we have for ever getting out of this relies in those two unique talents. Unique talents = GOOD thing. Now if you can swap them for other unique talents, then its possible. But we have badly degraded their value and so no we can't. All we can do is swap them for relative mediocrities, "position players" without the talent to exceed their positions and so without the talent to ever be difference makers. All we will be doing is absolutely guaranteeing the impossibility of us ever being good and we'll have to start all over drafting the talent to replace the nobodies. That's not how its done unless you are advocating for Sacramento to give up and admit its just going to be a farm team from now on content to try to win 35 every year so just enough fans will come out.

The problem with "unique" talent in my Basketball book (It's actually Basketball 104) is that it tends to be difficuly to match up players that work with "unique" talents. Nothing we have done with Evans as of yet works, and being that we have more talent than many other teams that are much better then us poses a problem in my basketball book. Yes, coaching sucks, yes, our GM sucks, and yes, for the last 3+ years now we have been talking about trying to get players that work with Evans.

How many more years are you willing to keep trying different players, and how long will you keep blaming it on the coaches or the other players as the reason why it's not working (in regards to the pairing with Reke)?

Our record with Evans being our "main go-to player" is abysmal. He's a primary ball handler that doesn't see the floor well. That does not bode well for the rest of the team.

[Padrino]

The problem with "unique" talent in my Basketball book (It's actually Basketball 104) is that it tends to be difficuly to match up players that work with "unique" talents. Nothing we have done with Evans as of yet works, and being that we have more talent than many other teams that are much better then us poses a problem in my basketball book. Yes, coaching sucks, yes, our GM sucks, and yes, for the last 3+ years now we have been talking about trying to get players that work with Evans.

How many more years are you willing to keep trying different players, and how long will you keep blaming it on the coaches or the other players as the reason why it's not working (in regards to the pairing with Reke)?

Our record with Evans being our "main go-to player" is abysmal. He's a primary ball handler that doesn't see the floor well. That does not bode well for the rest of the team.

question: how much have the kings really "done with evans" these last three seasons? as you've pointed out, he's a primary ball handler. so what did management accomplish at the guard positions after drafting tyreke evans? well, they brought in ball-dominant guards like marcus thornton, jimmer fredette, john salmons, and aaron brooks. and they traded beno udrih, the kind of undemanding guard who can effectively coexist in an offense next to 'reke. not exactly a recipe for success, is it? not exactly the way to maximize the talent of a player like evans, either. that's on management...

now, as for coaching, one need only have a quick look-see at the malaise of the current lakers squad to be granted some perspective. they brought in a head coach who likes to push the tempo and who rarely gives defense a second thought. but his is an old, slow, and creaky roster with little bench support that must succeed on defense to bolster it's offensive successes. as a result, a team featuring kobe bryant, dwight howard, and pau gasol is currently 8-10 and outside of the playoff picture in a brutally tough western conference. the fact that the lakers are so desperate for 39-year-old steve nash to regain his health is a sign that things aren't working over there. now, i fully expect their record to improve enough this season to get themselves into the playoffs, but lakers ownership/management did not set themselves up to succeed by mismatching the parts of their roster, and bringing in a coach who can't glue the pieces together, except when he's relying on an over-the-hill point guard, former mvp though nash may be...

something similar could be said of the kings. they are mismanaged and mis-coached. they need frontcourt defensive help, but every season the team brings in more guards, or guards masquerading as small forwards, instead of shoring up their actual weaknesses. and they consistently hire coaches who are incapable of maximizing the talent on their roster. in an ever-expanding league with deep-seeded parity issues and talent distribution equal to a teaspoon of butter scraped over far too much bread, you always ride your young, all-star potential talent into oblivion just to give yourself a shot at developing into a playoff team, especially if you're in a small, fledgling market like sacramento... unless you're given the opportunity to do as danny ainge did a few years back, and sell all of your young talent high to bring in the kind of all-star, veteran talent that immediately puts you in the playoff picture (but the fact that the aging celtics team of recent vintage found their success in a tremendously weak eastern conference should not go unnoticed). do you think geoff petrie, a notorious conservative, has that kind of nerve, that kind of influence in the nba today? my guess is most gm's would laugh him straight off the phone...

[Gary]

The differece is that we know the Lakers have won with Kobe, and we know that Kobe knows how to see the floor well. He's a very smart player. As for whether Nash and Howard work out it's anyones guess. How long do you think the Lakers would give it before they just cut their losses and break the core of Howard/Nash/Kobe up? (keeping Kobe on the Lakers of course)

We don't have any clue what we have with Evans. Things we do know up to this point though is that the team has never been close to the playoffs, and that every guard combination we have tried have not worked. Putting Evans off the ball at SF/SG didn't work and when Evans was at PG it didn't work either. I don't think it's a matter of getting the "right player" to play well with him. Who even knows if that player exists.

Also, normally when you have a special kind of player like Reke is supposed to be things should be getting better, or at least Reke shoudl be consistent. We aren't getting better and Evans is not consistent.

Personally, I think 3+ years is enough and I would like to move on. I know people like Evans, but I just don't think we can ever find that player that can co-exist with Evans.

[gilly420]

#1 Problem is the Maloof's. They magnify the horrendous state of the team exponentially. They are the head of this franchise and they are an embarassment to all Kings fans.

#2 Problem is Demarcus Cousins. He is a me-first crybaby that has a very cancerous affect on the other players. Its obvious that no one on the roster can stand up to him, including Smart or Petrie. All the talent in the world but the guy is an a-hole. If we could get 80 cents on the dollar talent wise, I would send him packing in a heartbeat. As a fan I can barely stand to watch him as our "lead" player, the face of our franchise on the floor. He needs to get checked in the worst possible way, like a Charles Oakley style beatdown. Too bad Chuck Hayes can't take care of him.

Magoof's + Demarcus = Worst Case Senario for Kings Fans

[Padrino]

The differece is that we know the Lakers have won with Kobe, and we know that Kobe knows how to see the floor well. He's a very smart player. As for whether Nash and Howard work out it's anyones guess. How long do you think the Lakers would give it before they just cut their losses and break the core of Howard/Nash/Kobe up? (keeping Kobe on the Lakers of course)

We don't have any clue what we have with Evans. Things we do know up to this point though is that the team has never been close to the playoffs, and that every guard combination we have tried have not worked. Putting Evans off the ball at SF/SG didn't work and when Evans was at PG it didn't work either. I don't think it's a matter of getting the "right player" to play well with him. Who even knows if that player exists.

Also, normally when you have a special kind of player like Reke is supposed to be things should be getting better, or at least Reke shoudl be consistent. We aren't getting better and Evans is not consistent.

Personally, I think 3+ years is enough and I would like to move on. I know people like Evans, but I just don't think we can ever find that player that can co-exist with Evans.

you're certainly entitled to your opinion, as tragically short-sighted as it is. but i disagree mightily: we know exactly what we have with evans: play him on ball, and he's 20/5/5 on any given night. if his jump shot (or, at the very least his confidence in his jump shot) is truly improving, then you're looking at a potential all-star. his court vision has always been much better than you've ever given him credit for, and there are certainly players that exist you can pair him with. he had success with beno udrih starting alongside him, and there are dozens of players like that in the nba. when he isn't being sabotaged by his own coaching staff, he does his job well, he doesn't complain, and he's the best individual defender on his team by a mile (a fact that really should not be overlooked as often as it is when assessing evans' overall talent)...

edit: and people talk about how "things should be getting better" as if nba players exist in a vacuum where factors outside of themselves don't contribute to their successes and failures. i give you exhibit a: j.j. hickson. he played very well for a lengthy stretch of games in cleveland before being traded to the kings, where he performed horribly, counter to expectation. so we cut him loose, and now he's playing in portland, to the tune of nearly 11 pts per game on 52% shooting, to go with 9.6 rebs per game in only 28.5 minutes per game. he's had great success on either side of his time in sacramento, and that should very loudly and very clearly tell you something: maybe the problem isn't that these very young talents that sacramento brings in are all as undisciplined and disappointing as they seem, but maybe the problem is instead that the kings franchise has done very little to help equip them with the tools necessary to discipline their individual games, to grow them as a team, to develop their chemistry, etc., etc., etc.

[Bricklayer]

Simple Changes #1 (of 3 -- taking three different takes to illustrate my point)

No huge pie in the sky scenarios, but just let me readjust one summer, a single summer, and make the moves during it that many people wanted us to make, and then hire a real coach, a proven coach, and watch what happens:

Summer of 2011, Chnages
Change #1: don't trade Beno
Change #2: resign Dalembert rather than sign Hayes
Change #3: draft Kawhi Leonard rather than Jimmer

k? So right there, just things that many MANY people on this board, a freakin' messageboard, were arguing for. Not pie in the sky. Not impossible. Just simply not being stupid. All of them entirely possible (in fact only Daly was even moderately out of our control), so we're not talking fantasy here. These are the CHOICES that were not made. Now watch what happens.

Yr 1:
C- Dalembert
PF- Cousins
PF/C- Thompson
PF/C- Hickson
SF- Leonard
SF/PF- Donte
SF/SG- Cisco
SG- Thornton
PG- Evans
PG-Beno
PG-IT (we still had the 60th pick)

Now imagine this: Head Coach: Nate McMillan.

K?

So let's go ahead and again stay close to the plot the way it worked out. Summer of 2012. Hickson leaves looking for money/minutes, so he's still gone. not magically making him stay. Now we were better, so we wouldn't be drafting #5, so let's go ahead and push us back in the lottey, and again just stick close and say we ened up taking John Henson later in the lottery, since we did have an interest there. We still elt Donte go for failure to develop. And so we still pick up JJ from Toronto for a 2nd round pick. I don't think we sign Brooks, but you add him there if you want. In any casew, this season we are sitting on:

Bigs: Dalembert, Cousins, Thompson, Henson
Small forwards: Leonard, Johnson, Cisco
Guards: Reke, Thornton, Beno, IT, possibly Brooks
Coach: McMillan

and the crew has largely been together for 2 years. 2 shotblockers. 2 defenders at SF. Deep pretty good sized backcourt. I am not saying we play for the title this year, but that to me is CLEARLY far better than what we have right now, not least because we have a real coach who has proven he can win. So don't tell me that oh, these core guys are so terrible that we just can't win with them. That how many years do we have to try. That's B.S. We haven't tried. We have screwed the pooch. If the core guys look terrible at least a large chunk of that iis because WE have flat been absolutely terrible at building around them. Its chaos.

[Warhawk]

you're certainly entitled to your opinion, as tragically short-sighted as it is. but i disagree mightily: we know exactly what we have with evans: play him on ball, and he's 20/5/5 on any given night. if his jump shot (or, at the very least his confidence in his jump shot) is truly improving, then you're looking at a potential all-star. his court vision has always been much better than you've ever given him credit for, and there are certainly players that exist you can pair him with. he had success with beno udrih starting alongside him, and there are dozens of players like that in the nba. when he isn't being sabotaged by his own coaching staff, he does his job well, he doesn't complain, and he's the best individual defender on his team by a mile (a fact that really should not be overlooked as often as it is when assessing evans' overall talent)...

edit: and people talk about how "things should be getting better" as if nba players exist in a vacuum where factors outside of themselves don't contribute to their successes and failures. i give you exhibit a: j.j. hickson. he played very well for a lengthy stretch of games in cleveland before being traded to the kings, where he performed horribly, counter to expectation. so we cut him loose, and now he's playing in portland, to the tune of nearly 11 pts per game on 52% shooting, to go with 9.6 rebs per game in only 28.5 minutes per game. he's had great success on either side of his time in sacramento, and that should very loudly and very clearly tell you something: maybe the problem isn't that these very young talents that sacramento brings in are all as undisciplined and disappointing as they seem, but maybe the problem is instead that the kings franchise has done very little to help equip them with the tools necessary to discipline their individual games, to grow them as a team, to develop their chemistry, etc., etc., etc.

Exactly.

[Bricklayer]

Simple Changes #2 (of 3)

Okay, so the other way I go minimalist things that asbolutely could/should have been done that change everything. Here I go more pie in sky just to illustrate again:

I ahve been puttering away over in the personnel forum suggeting various youth for vet trades that could add stability here, even at the cost of our youth + possible talent. Reaosn being pretty simple: too much chaos and shot happy guys here.

So let me now just port over three moves that people might scream about and watch what happens again:

Move #1: Trade Marcus Thornton for Tayshaun Prince (and let's say +Austin Daye for balance)
-- what? arrghh!! I like Marcus! potential 20ppg scorer! What are you doing!!?
Move #2: Trade Salmons, Robinson, Jimmer, Outlaw for Pau Gasol
-- what? arrgh!! Pau is in decline! Its the Lakers! Those are our last two lottery picks! And they are such nice guys/hard workers!!
Move #3: Sign Mike Bibby off the scrap heap

K? got all that? Now that looks like I have seriously seriously screwed the pooch. What the hell am I on about? Trading/signing a bunch of 33/34 yr old guys. Well, what I am on about is this:

C- Demarcus Cousins
PF- Pau Gasol
SF- Tayshaun Prince
SG- Tyreke Evans
PG- Aaron Brooks

Bench: Jason Thompson, Chuck Hayes, James Johnson, Isaiah Thomas, Austin Daye, Mike Bibby, Francisco Garcia

Oh yeah, and my real coach again: Head Coach Nate McMillan.

-- wait...wha...?? How'd that happen? Where'd our selfish midget team of young and dumb chuckers go? How'd we suddenly look like a veteran playoff squad working in two new young stars. Wha happened??

So AGAIN, my point being, not that those exact deals or that exact lineup woold result, but damnit, we ain't even TRIED with our core guys. We have done absolutely the worst job possible of surrounding them with supporting talent.

[Bricklayer]

Simple Changes #3 (of 3)

And so for my third of these, let me just go purely to a theoretical exercise. Let's just swap "supporting casts" with a few teams w/ a big scoring guard/big man duo around the league. Who do ytou think would do better, our current team, or:

1) Cousins replaces David West, Reke replaces either George or Granger, your choice. Rest remains the same, inlcuding the coach:

Hibbert, Cousins, Granger, Reke, Hill?
Coach: Vogel

2) how about Reke replaces Rose, Cousins repalces Boozer?

Noah, Cousins, Deng, scrub, Reke?
Coach: Thibodeau

3) what about this one:
Cousins + Reke show up in San Antonio and repalce Duncan and Parker, or Manu. Rest of the team remains the same, Pop remains the same.

The question isn't whether those teams would do as well wiht our kids as they are doing with their vets, but whether those hybrid teams would be good teams or not, FAR better teams than the one we have. And the answer is unequivocably yes. And so once again, don't tell me "oh, we've tried so hard and so long to build around these guys and it just, can't, work!" B.S. We haven't tried at all. We have done absolutely everything wrong, everything possible to interfere with their development and provide thme none of the support pieces considered absolutely industry standard in the competent corners of the league. No experienced coach. No willing roleplayers and defenders who don't need shots. No shotblockers to cover their asses. No anything but a bunch of interfering little chuckers who are in the way.

[HereWeVivek]

^i think the rest of the league would be pooping their pants if any of those situations happened

[mac]

The differece is that we know the Lakers have won with Kobe, and we know that Kobe knows how to see the floor well. He's a very smart player. As for whether Nash and Howard work out it's anyones guess. How long do you think the Lakers would give it before they just cut their losses and break the core of Howard/Nash/Kobe up? (keeping Kobe on the Lakers of course)

We don't have any clue what we have with Evans. Things we do know up to this point though is that the team has never been close to the playoffs, and that every guard combination we have tried have not worked. Putting Evans off the ball at SF/SG didn't work and when Evans was at PG it didn't work either. I don't think it's a matter of getting the "right player" to play well with him. Who even knows if that player exists.

Also, normally when you have a special kind of player like Reke is supposed to be things should be getting better, or at least Reke shoudl be consistent. We aren't getting better and Evans is not consistent.

Personally, I think 3+ years is enough and I would like to move on. I know people like Evans, but I just don't think we can ever find that player that can co-exist with Evans.

Question: how many seasons did we actually try to build around Reke as the main ballhandler? Answer: 1. How many games did we win? 25. The following season Evans was injured, but we still saw hope of a good team that could be built. This was a team with Luther Head and Pooh Jeter as backup PGs mind you. Have we actually improved the talent on our team while still building around Reke as the main ballhandler? Not until about 5-6 games this season.

So how exactly can you say that we've tried building around Evans and it's failed? Seattle/OKC won less than 25 games for 2 years with Durant. According to you they should have blown up the team and traded him before year 3. Funny how the team basically doubled its wins after firing Carlesimo (with a full offseason).

[slugking50]

but the problem is that in that team you had a very high baskeball IQ (Vlade, C-Webb, Peja, B-Jax, Bibby, Christie). Now, we probably have the dumbest team in the league.

This sums it up. There is a huge talent disparity between the 2 teams. This team has the IQ of a turnip, can't shoot and is generally unwilling to pass. 3 things that won't ever improve.

[Bricklayer]

This sums it up. There is a huge talent disparity between the 2 teams. This team has the IQ of a turnip, can't shoot and is generally unwilling to pass. 3 things that won't ever improve.

Er...what? All three of those things have been known to improve.

[Tyndel]

Almost every player in the NBA was a big fish at one point. They were the man on their team they went 1 on 5 for entire games and they all had to make changes as their team mates and opponents got as good or better then them. Few players get into the nba by setting up their non shooting high school team. Few nba players can't play one on one. Guys have to learn to play team ball and it is usually long after they have learned to play by themselves and picked up bad habits. It takes someone teaching them what is needed and it takes them and team mates willing to work together and share which breaks down the defense and makes it easier to score.

There are no teams that just worked at a championship level everyone had to accept roles and work together and everyone had to make changes to their games. If players don't fit they had to change their play to fit or you change to system to take advantage of their aberrant play. So I have long rejected that this team can't work as constructed because we haven't even tried. Its only when we have a real system that takes advantage of our unique talents and role players and one of those players refuses to accept their role that you can say something doesn't fit. And that's when a player is traded. When you pull 5 guys out of a hat and throw them the ball you can't expect them to have a good offense or defensive game plan, just read and react you will be fine....

I like the saying Sometimes incompetence looks like sabotage. The reverse is also true the right system can make a player look smart.

[slugking50]

Er...what? All three of those things have been known to improve.

Not with this makeup.

[Bricklayer]

Almost every player in the NBA was a big fish at one point. They were the man on their team they went 1 on 5 for entire games and they all had to make changes as their team mates and opponents got as good or better then them. Few players get into the nba by setting up their non shooting high school team. Few nba players can't play one on one. Guys have to learn to play team ball and it is usually long after they have learned to play by themselves and picked up bad habits. It takes someone teaching them what is needed and it takes them and team mates willing to work together and share which breaks down the defense and makes it easier to score.

There are no teams that just worked at a championship level everyone had to accept roles and work together and everyone had to make changes to their games. If players don't fit they had to change their play to fit or you change to system to take advantage of their aberrant play. So I have long rejected that this team can't work as constructed because we haven't even tried. Its only when we have a real system that takes advantage of our unique talents and role players and one of those players refuses to accept their role that you can say something doesn't fit. And that's when a player is traded. When you pull 5 guys out of a hat and throw them the ball you can't expect them to have a good offense or defensive game plan, just read and react you will be fine....

I like the saying Sometimes incompetence looks like sabotage. The reverse is also true the right system can make a player look smart.

Yep. This is the thing so many people, including our front office, apparently do not understand.

[Gary]

you're certainly entitled to your opinion, as tragically short-sighted as it is. but i disagree mightily: we know exactly what we have with evans: play him on ball, and he's 20/5/5 on any given night. if his jump shot (or, at the very least his confidence in his jump shot) is truly improving, then you're looking at a potential all-star. his court vision has always been much better than you've ever given him credit for, and there are certainly players that exist you can pair him with.

You are giving him way too much credit for his court vision. It's not very good at all. And who cares if Evans is 20/5/5 if the team still sucks? If every other player has to suffer to get Evans his 20/5/5 then that will never be a recipe for success. Remember when the team was trying to get him the 20-5-5 at the end of his rookie year? The team was just terrible. I don't want to see that happen again.

I agree with you on the Beno thing but no matter how well they played together the team was still terrible. I think that trade was the dumbest thing we could have ever done, and if Petrie and the Maloofs cannot find a player to fit with Reke as well as Beno did after three years then they need to get rid of Evans or the GM.