Who Goes? Who Stays?

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#91
I don't know that we need a new coach. I personally think Malone did a very very poor job this season, but I'm not going to call for his head just for underperforming for one season. I'm just not sure that he can ever get a team without defensive players to become an elite team, because his strength is on coaching the defensive end. I'm just upset that a whole bunch of other teams who IMO weren't any better than we were this time last season made huge strides this year while we essentially stayed put.
I'm not sold on Malone and he has to step his game up next year but do have some confidence in him. He misused a number of players this year, our defensive system was below average and our offensive sets had little imagination, however, we also had a number of players coming and going and he wasn't handed great personnel either. Next year will tell us much more.

PDA is the one I'm more worried about. He's either going to trend towards a tough, defensive oriented team this summer, built for the playoffs and surround Cuz with defenders and guys who can spread the floor, or he's going to go Den 2.0 on us and turn this thing into a bunch of soft, non-defensive, running and gunning pansies. We'll find out soon enough.
 
#92
IT should stay because he is a talented piece that you don't have to build your roster around and you know he will live up to his contract. Whether he starts or comes off the bench, you know he will bring it ever night. Maybe he starts next season and eventually moves to 6th man down the line when we are a better team with a set identity that calls for IT to come off the bench and be the X- factor. Regardless you know he is a player that can adapt to either role and brings leadership and other intagibles.

I think this is what separates the Tyreke situation from last year and IT this year. Not only were you going to have to commit 11 million a year to Tyreke, but you have to commit to him being "the guy" as he needs the ball in his hand and you need specific type of players around him for him to be most effective. IT on the other hand is an adaptable piece that plays well on the ball, off the ball, as a starter, off the bench. Thats my view at least, and this is assuming no team comes with a ridiculous number for IT($7-$8 per is fair imo).
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#93
IT should stay because he is a talented piece that you don't have to build your roster around and you know he will live up to his contract. Whether he starts or comes off the bench, you know he will bring it ever night. Maybe he starts next season and eventually moves to 6th man down the line when we are a better team with a set identity that calls for IT to come off the bench and be the X- factor. Regardless you know he is a player that can adapt to either role and brings leadership and other intagibles.

I think this is what separates the Tyreke situation from last year and IT this year. Not only were you going to have to commit 11 million a year to Tyreke, but you have to commit to him being "the guy" as he needs the ball in his hand and you need specific type of players around him for him to be most effective. IT on the other hand is an adaptable piece that plays well on the ball, off the ball, as a starter, off the bench. Thats my view at least, and this is assuming no team comes with a ridiculous number for IT($7-$8 per is fair imo).

If IT is willing to accept an 8$ contract, hell I'll even throw in a twenskie, sign him up ASAP
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#95
IT should stay because he is a talented piece that you don't have to build your roster around and you know he will live up to his contract. Whether he starts or comes off the bench, you know he will bring it ever night. Maybe he starts next season and eventually moves to 6th man down the line when we are a better team with a set identity that calls for IT to come off the bench and be the X- factor. Regardless you know he is a player that can adapt to either role and brings leadership and other intagibles.

I think this is what separates the Tyreke situation from last year and IT this year. Not only were you going to have to commit 11 million a year to Tyreke, but you have to commit to him being "the guy" as he needs the ball in his hand and you need specific type of players around him for him to be most effective. IT on the other hand is an adaptable piece that plays well on the ball, off the ball, as a starter, off the bench. Thats my view at least, and this is assuming no team comes with a ridiculous number for IT($7-$8 per is fair imo).
I totally agree with this. Thomas is highly versatile. He won't sulk coming off the bench. He can go stand in the corner if you want and hit a three, though that's an underutilization of his talent, or he can run the show. He's also very consistent, with a very high shooting efficiency. We've seen plenty of players in Sacto that just can't adapt to the team; they need to have the team adapt to to them. This ability by Thomas to adapt to the coach's demands makes him a highly desirable commodity in my view.
 
#96
If I were to peer into the mind of PDA, I would expect that he wants to see the IT/Gay/Cousins trio for a full year following a training camp. The biggest issues offensively aren't actually fit; from what I saw, it was mostly a matter of execution and familiarity. He'll want to look at the SG and PF spots carefully; need elite defense and basketball IQ from both, plus 3 point shooting from the SG spot. McLemore obviously has potential as a shooter and defender, but its largely unrealized at this point. PDA is probably thinking to bring in a veteran at the SG spot in case McLemore isn't ready and either trade the lottery pick for an elite defensive PF or draft a PF to mold into one.

Of course this goes by the wayside if Rudy opts out and signs elsewhere, or if Isaiah gets an exorbitant offer from somewhere else. I would expect Rudy to opt-in however, and I do expect Isaiah to be retained for a reasonable $7-$8 million per year price.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#97
I totally agree with this. Thomas is highly versatile. He won't sulk coming off the bench. He can go stand in the corner if you want and hit a three, though that's an underutilization of his talent, or he can run the show. He's also very consistent, with a very high shooting efficiency. We've seen plenty of players in Sacto that just can't adapt to the team; they need to have the team adapt to to them. This ability by Thomas to adapt to the coach's demands makes him a highly desirable commodity in my view.
There are two sides of the ball. And for obvious reasons IT is one of the least versatile defensive pieces in the league.

He is well suited to a 6th man role however. The difficulty there is jut how you afford him in that role while also paying for somebody good enough to start ahead of him.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#98
There are two sides of the ball. And for obvious reasons IT is one of the least versatile defensive pieces in the league.

He is well suited to a 6th man role however. The difficulty there is jut how you afford him in that role while also paying for somebody good enough to start ahead of him.
The difficulty is finding somebody better than him, period. Forget about the $ issues; just finding somebody better than him is the challenge. Vasquez certainly wasn't. Brooks wasn't. Tyreke wasn't. McCallum isn't. The challenge for next year may end up to be: How can they find somebody to replace IT who comes close to approximating his ability on the court? The only guy I see in this draft who could do that eventually is Exum, and he's probably long gone by the time the Kings draft. The Kings may end up replacing IT with another mediocre vet; we've seen that story before and it usually doesn't turn out very well.
 
#99
The difficulty is finding somebody better than him, period. Forget about the $ issues; just finding somebody better than him is the challenge. Vasquez certainly wasn't. Brooks wasn't. Tyreke wasn't. McCallum isn't. The challenge for next year may end up to be: How can they find somebody to replace IT who comes close to approximating his ability on the court? The only guy I see in this draft who could do that eventually is Exum, and he's probably long gone by the time the Kings draft. The Kings may end up replacing IT with another mediocre vet; we've seen that story before and it usually doesn't turn out very well.
Yeah, he's so much better than all the guys we had before him yet we matched last year's win total.

You know what I find funny? The Sacramento Kings touted their lovely 3 20-point scorers BS and finished the season as a 28 win team. The Spurs had NOBODY on their team averaging above 20 points, and more than doubled our win total.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
Yeah, he's so much better than all the guys we had before him yet we matched last year's win total.

You know what I find funny? The Sacramento Kings touted their lovely 3 20-point scorers BS and finished the season as a 28 win team. The Spurs had NOBODY on their team averaging above 20 points, and more than doubled our win total.
That's just a dumb argument, mac. According to that line of thinking, the Kings should get rid of Cousins. After all, he's the leader of this sorry bunch. He should go because they haven't been winning with him and obviously he's not very good because if he were very good the Kings would be in the playoffs now.
 
That's just a dumb argument, mac. According to that line of thinking, the Kings should get rid of Cousins. After all, he's the leader of this sorry bunch. He should go because they haven't been winning with him and obviously he's not very good because if he were very good the Kings would be in the playoffs now.
Something to think about.
 

Spike

Subsidiary Intermediary
Staff member
The difficulty is finding somebody better than him, period. Forget about the $ issues; just finding somebody better than him is the challenge. Vasquez certainly wasn't. Brooks wasn't. Tyreke wasn't. McCallum isn't. The challenge for next year may end up to be: How can they find somebody to replace IT who comes close to approximating his ability on the court? The only guy I see in this draft who could do that eventually is Exum, and he's probably long gone by the time the Kings draft. The Kings may end up replacing IT with another mediocre vet; we've seen that story before and it usually doesn't turn out very well.
Whoah, whoah, whoah there...
 
To me at least the Kings dogged (tanked) this season just in a less blatant way than other teams did. To have any kind of high expectations record wise of this past season is unreasonable. Once again this is just my opinion but I think the front office gave IT enough rope to hang himself this year especially post Vasquez and might even hope Rudy ops out to clean the books. The truth is nobody knows outside of management what their true intentions are.
 
Yeah, he's so much better than all the guys we had before him yet we matched last year's win total.
. The Spurs had NOBODY on their team averaging above 20 points, and more than doubled our win total.
Well I'm sure if San Antonio and the sacramento were to change coaches then the winning will go up for one and down for the other.. Bottom line is we need a coach.. Look At Memphis, Chicago, Charlotte ..we have just as much talents as these team but far behind in wins.. Don't care what anyone have to say.. Malone is a sorry coach.. He doesn't even use his timeouts correctly, our defensive spread is just horrible and it's up to the coach to correct that... I don't expect any improvements next year unless he makes a drastic change at his defensive approach.. I'm tired of guys ball watching on ISO plays and the help defense that's always late. If we can get our guys to constantly move around and not hang there heads we may go somewhere till then..enjoy another year of losing. No one player especially a rookie in the draft can turn this team into a championship team unless they have the name Bryant, Wade, James, Jordan etc on there jersey's... Guys like those only come once every 10 years...
 
Well I'm sure if San Antonio and the sacramento were to change coaches then the winning will go up for one and down for the other.. Bottom line is we need a coach.. Look At Memphis, Chicago, Charlotte ..we have just as much talents as these team but far behind in wins.. Don't care what anyone have to say.. Malone is a sorry coach.. He doesn't even use his timeouts correctly, our defensive spread is just horrible and it's up to the coach to correct that... I don't expect any improvements next year unless he makes a drastic change at his defensive approach.. I'm tired of guys ball watching on ISO plays and the help defense that's always late. If we can get our guys to constantly move around and not hang there heads we may go somewhere till then..enjoy another year of losing. No one player especially a rookie in the draft can turn this team into a championship team unless they have the name Bryant, Wade, James, Jordan etc on there jersey's... Guys like those only come once every 10 years...

Pretty sure you need to be better at evaluating talent.
 
Well I'm sure if San Antonio and the sacramento were to change coaches then the winning will go up for one and down for the other.. Bottom line is we need a coach.. Look At Memphis, *Chicago, *Charlotte ..we have just as much talents as these team but far behind in wins.. Don't care what anyone have to say.. Malone is a sorry coach.. He doesn't even use his timeouts correctly, our defensive spread is just horrible and it's up to the coach to correct that... I don't expect any improvements next year unless he makes a drastic change at his defensive approach.. I'm tired of guys ball watching on ISO plays and the help defense that's always late. If we can get our guys to constantly move around and not hang there heads we may go somewhere till then..enjoy another year of losing. No one player especially a rookie in the draft can turn this team into a championship team unless they have the name Bryant, Wade, James, Jordan etc on there jersey's... Guys like those only come once every 10 years...
*Eastern conference

Hold on… what? LOL get outa here plus Chicago has the Jimmer LOL.
 
With all due respect, I have, and I'm also good with numbers. And I have given a thought, many times, and each time I decide against it. But it's worth a thought.
The numbers mean nothing before you first evaluate the talent, use of players, system, foundational piece vs support players, etc, and once you do that, you again arrive at the point where the numbers mean nothing.

You're implying that our three 20pt scorers are basically equal legs of a table and you can remove any one of them and be left with a similar result. That simply won't happen and isn't reality. Removing the leg which is Cuz is far different than removing the leg which is IT. They don't equally effect our success and win/loss totals. It's really not even close.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
I'll tell you one of the problems with the Kings. Stability!!!!! They haven't had any, and if what I'm hearing on this thread has any validity, a lot of you don't want any. Some of you are actually calling for a new coach. Really! I would think that by now you'd be tired of watching one coach after another go in one door and out the other. Watching players go in one door and out the other. As long as we keep doing that, this team will never be any good. Yeah, the Spurs doubled our win total! Guess what, the core of that team has been together for 10 years, and they've had the same coach for the last 10 years. There's a reason the Spurs are good that goes beyond talent.

There aren't any quick fixes. Look at the Knicks and all the money they spend. They keep signing one star after another, but the team never stays together long enough to develop any chemistry. All the Kings have proven this year is that having three 20 point scorers in your lineup isn't necessarily a formula for success. It takes more than that. It takes a team! And right now, we don't have one. We just have parts of one. The rest of the pieces are just spare parts. It's easy to be critical of Malone for poor defense, but last time I looked, I didn't see him out on the floor. Truth is, he can scream and yell all he wants, but if the players don't perform, there's not much he can do.

Oh, he could replace IT with McCallum, and that would improve the defense, but then you'd have Kingster and other IT supporters (you'll note I didn't call them lovers) screaming to high heaven. So apparently they don't regard defense as highly as others among you. Malone doesn't have a lot of options. You don't like the way Gay plays defense, then what, you replace him with Outlaw? After Thornton left, who do you replace McLemore with defensively? Oh, I forgot, we have as much talent as the Bulls and Charlotte. Right! So there must be someone on the team that just bristles with defense.

Good defense is a team effort. But if you don't have players with the ability and the desire to play defense, nothing else matters. All you can do is replace those players. One way is to draft young players and develop them. But that takes time, and there doesn't seem to be much patience around here. Obviously the other way is to sign a freeagent, or make a trade. Of course the moment you get into trading, everything gets more complicated. You need two willing partners and they may not be willing to part with what you want. Point being, that its not as simple as just saying we should do this or do that. I for one, am going to wait and see what PDA gets done in the draft and during the rest of the summer. While I was willing to give him a pass last year since he didn't take over the team until two weeks before the draft, there are no excuses this time around.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
The numbers mean nothing before you first evaluate the talent, use of players, system, foundational piece vs support players, etc, and once you do that, you again arrive at the point where the numbers mean nothing.

You're implying that our three 20pt scorers are basically equal legs of a table and you can remove any one of them and be left with a similar result. That simply won't happen and isn't reality. Removing the leg which is Cuz is far different than removing the leg which is IT. They don't equally effect our success and win/loss totals. It's really not even close.
The old saying is, " If you have to choose between a good big man, and a good little man, you always take the big man." The idea that anyone would consider getting rid of Cousins instead of IT is beyond the pale and almost leaves me speechless. Which my wife would love by the way...:p
 
Well I'm sure if San Antonio and the sacramento were to change coaches then the winning will go up for one and down for the other.. Bottom line is we need a coach.. Look At Memphis, Chicago, Charlotte ..we have just as much talents as these team but far behind in wins.. Don't care what anyone have to say.. Malone is a sorry coach.. He doesn't even use his timeouts correctly, our defensive spread is just horrible and it's up to the coach to correct that... I don't expect any improvements next year unless he makes a drastic change at his defensive approach.. I'm tired of guys ball watching on ISO plays and the help defense that's always late. If we can get our guys to constantly move around and not hang there heads we may go somewhere till then..enjoy another year of losing. No one player especially a rookie in the draft can turn this team into a championship team unless they have the name Bryant, Wade, James, Jordan etc on there jersey's... Guys like those only come once every 10 years...
Again, I think Malone did a poor job, but one season on it's own is no indication of a coach's ability, especially a first-year head coach. Now going back to before the season started I personally wished we went with someone more established, but what's done is done. Given the amount of turnover the roster faced I'm willing to give Malone a pass for this season. It doesn't mean that he did a good job, it just means that at the end of the day I say, "it's one season, he did poorly - so what?". The Knicks last year were a pretty good team - this year Woodson gets fired. I highly doubt that he just magically lost his ability to coach a team.

I'd rather look at guys who have been here for a while... If a player/coach has been here every losing season and still remains after the process of elimination (coach,GM,players) then I believe it's very fair to be ... "suspicious" of said player/coach's value to the team. Unfortunately for me, that argument (as Kingster has rightly pointed out) also casts a spotlight on Cousins as one of such players. However ... I think any person who actually understands the game and watches the team can use their brain to discern whether Cousins would lead us to more wins or losses in the long run.
 
I'll tell you one of the problems with the Kings. Stability!!!!! They haven't had any, and if what I'm hearing on this thread has any validity, a lot of you don't want any. Some of you are actually calling for a new coach. Really! I would think that by now you'd be tired of watching one coach after another go in one door and out the other. Watching players go in one door and out the other. As long as we keep doing that, this team will never be any good. Yeah, the Spurs doubled our win total! Guess what, the core of that team has been together for 10 years, and they've had the same coach for the last 10 years. There's a reason the Spurs are good that goes beyond talent.

There aren't any quick fixes. Look at the Knicks and all the money they spend. They keep signing one star after another, but the team never stays together long enough to develop any chemistry. All the Kings have proven this year is that having three 20 point scorers in your lineup isn't necessarily a formula for success. It takes more than that. It takes a team! And right now, we don't have one. We just have parts of one. The rest of the pieces are just spare parts. It's easy to be critical of Malone for poor defense, but last time I looked, I didn't see him out on the floor. Truth is, he can scream and yell all he wants, but if the players don't perform, there's not much he can do.

Oh, he could replace IT with McCallum, and that would improve the defense, but then you'd have Kingster and other IT supporters (you'll note I didn't call them lovers) screaming to high heaven. So apparently they don't regard defense as highly as others among you. Malone doesn't have a lot of options. You don't like the way Gay plays defense, then what, you replace him with Outlaw? After Thornton left, who do you replace McLemore with defensively? Oh, I forgot, we have as much talent as the Bulls and Charlotte. Right! So there must be someone on the team that just bristles with defense.

Good defense is a team effort. But if you don't have players with the ability and the desire to play defense, nothing else matters. All you can do is replace those players. One way is to draft young players and develop them. But that takes time, and there doesn't seem to be much patience around here. Obviously the other way is to sign a freeagent, or make a trade. Of course the moment you get into trading, everything gets more complicated. You need two willing partners and they may not be willing to part with what you want. Point being, that its not as simple as just saying we should do this or do that. I for one, am going to wait and see what PDA gets done in the draft and during the rest of the summer. While I was willing to give him a pass last year since he didn't take over the team until two weeks before the draft, there are no excuses this time around.
I'm looking forward to that :)
 

hrdboild

Moloch in whom I dream Angels!
Staff member
I'll tell you one of the problems with the Kings. Stability!!!!! They haven't had any, and if what I'm hearing on this thread has any validity, a lot of you don't want any. Some of you are actually calling for a new coach. Really! I would think that by now you'd be tired of watching one coach after another go in one door and out the other. Watching players go in one door and out the other. As long as we keep doing that, this team will never be any good. Yeah, the Spurs doubled our win total! Guess what, the core of that team has been together for 10 years, and they've had the same coach for the last 10 years. There's a reason the Spurs are good that goes beyond talent.

There aren't any quick fixes. Look at the Knicks and all the money they spend. They keep signing one star after another, but the team never stays together long enough to develop any chemistry. All the Kings have proven this year is that having three 20 point scorers in your lineup isn't necessarily a formula for success. It takes more than that. It takes a team! And right now, we don't have one. We just have parts of one. The rest of the pieces are just spare parts. It's easy to be critical of Malone for poor defense, but last time I looked, I didn't see him out on the floor. Truth is, he can scream and yell all he wants, but if the players don't perform, there's not much he can do.

Oh, he could replace IT with McCallum, and that would improve the defense, but then you'd have Kingster and other IT supporters (you'll note I didn't call them lovers) screaming to high heaven. So apparently they don't regard defense as highly as others among you. Malone doesn't have a lot of options. You don't like the way Gay plays defense, then what, you replace him with Outlaw? After Thornton left, who do you replace McLemore with defensively? Oh, I forgot, we have as much talent as the Bulls and Charlotte. Right! So there must be someone on the team that just bristles with defense.

Good defense is a team effort. But if you don't have players with the ability and the desire to play defense, nothing else matters. All you can do is replace those players. One way is to draft young players and develop them. But that takes time, and there doesn't seem to be much patience around here. Obviously the other way is to sign a freeagent, or make a trade. Of course the moment you get into trading, everything gets more complicated. You need two willing partners and they may not be willing to part with what you want. Point being, that its not as simple as just saying we should do this or do that. I for one, am going to wait and see what PDA gets done in the draft and during the rest of the summer. While I was willing to give him a pass last year since he didn't take over the team until two weeks before the draft, there are no excuses this time around.
I would like this twice if I could. :) Bravo!
 
The numbers mean nothing before you first evaluate the talent, use of players, system, foundational piece vs support players, etc, and once you do that, you again arrive at the point where the numbers mean nothing.

You're implying that our three 20pt scorers are basically equal legs of a table and you can remove any one of them and be left with a similar result. That simply won't happen and isn't reality. Removing the leg which is Cuz is far different than removing the leg which is IT. They don't equally effect our success and win/loss totals. It's really not even close.
I was speaking of Cuz, no one else. The numbers I had in mind are only wins and losses. Until our W and L's reflect an improvement, what we do with Cuz in all it's possibilities is worth a thought.
 
I'll tell you one of the problems with the Kings. Stability!!!!! They haven't had any, and if what I'm hearing on this thread has any validity, a lot of you don't want any. Some of you are actually calling for a new coach. Really! I would think that by now you'd be tired of watching one coach after another go in one door and out the other. Watching players go in one door and out the other. As long as we keep doing that, this team will never be any good. Yeah, the Spurs doubled our win total! Guess what, the core of that team has been together for 10 years, and they've had the same coach for the last 10 years. There's a reason the Spurs are good that goes beyond talent.
Stability is important, but for us I'm of the opinion it comes at a later point. Could be as soon as next year but that requires a pretty damn good summer. If you have a bunch of non-fitting pieces and guys who can't or won't play defense, I see little point in campaigning for stability as then you'd be left with stability, but still that roster full of non-fitting pieces who don't play defense.

Stability comes into play after you've gotten your pieces and build a balanced roster. We're nowhere close to that. With the coaching staff I agree stability is needed but can't agree on this roster. Outside of Boogie, we have no idea what our core is going to be next year and even if we bring back IT/Rudy/Cuz as our core, I'd argue that core has a low ceiling, so I wouldn't want stability built around that core. I'd build around Rudy/Cuz with fitting pieces which play to their strengths and looking at our roster I barely see anything which accomplishes that. But re-sign Rudy, get a PG and PF which are defensive minded and don't eat up shots, hope Ben takes a few steps forward, get a couple 3&D guys, then I think stability comes into play. Need your group to build with first. SA has no stability without Tony/Manu/Duncan being their first. We have our Duncan, everything else is up in the air.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
To me at least the Kings dogged (tanked) this season just in a less blatant way than other teams did. To have any kind of high expectations record wise of this past season is unreasonable. Once again this is just my opinion but I think the front office gave IT enough rope to hang himself this year especially post Vasquez and might even hope Rudy ops out to clean the books. The truth is nobody knows outside of management what their true intentions are.
I agree with the last part.

One of the things that was interesting to me, though, was when IT was out with injury, the team was ISO crazy, as much or more than when he was playing. This goes against conventional wisdom and gives some food for thought.
 
I agree with the last part.

One of the things that was interesting to me, though, was when IT was out with injury, the team was ISO crazy, as much or more than when he was playing. This goes against conventional wisdom and gives some food for thought.
Was it? Well even if it was I wouldn't be surprised. Despite my disdain for IT, the fact is that he is a talented scorer, and certainly far far more of an offensive threat than McCallum. Well I'm no expert, but I do think that when you don't have spacing (poor shooters), already don't have a motion offense with your regular unit, and then take away your second/third biggest scoring threat you would end up with an inefficient offense that isn't getting guys open looks. Because then the defense doesn't need to rotate at all, they can just focus on whoever has the ball because that's likely the biggest scoring threat. And I have personally maintained that I don't think Malone has the offensive creativity to get a bunch of "scrubs" playing beautiful basketball .. definitely not with the current roster.