All things KCP

[Todd3]

are we gonna sit here and act like it didn't take rip hamilton 7+ years to become a consistent average to above average 3-point shooter???

How many 3PAs did Rip avg his first 6 yrs? 1.6 per game (0.9 in '04).

How many has KCP avg the last 2 yrs? 5.1 per game.

End of debate.

The problem with KCPs shooting is three-fold. 1) He's not consistent/efficient enough. 2) He still chucks 5 per game anyways. 3) He has to because he's playing in a system that requires it.

So unlike Rip (who could just not take 3s if he couldn't make them), KCP doesn't have that option. Either he proves he can be consistent/efficient at a 4-5 per game volume, or changes need to be made at his position. Because Stan isn't going to change his system and get new franchise players with different skillsets to accommodate KCP. He will get a new SG who can do the job better first.

5.1 3-point shots per game at 31% = 4.74 pts
5.1 2-point shots per game at 45% = 4.59 pts

End of debate.

*drops mic*

What's your point? Neither is efficient. That's only 0.93 ppp.

[Cowology]

Just as kind of an aside, Bruce Bowen averaged fewer than 3 three-pt attempts per game over his career and everybody in the world knows he wasn't really any sort of force offensively. But teams had to respect the threat and that helped space the floor. Shane Battier at his peak averaged around 4 or 4.5 attempts per game. Raja Bell kidna stands out with 5-6 attempts per game during his peak, but that was the Suns playing 8-seconds-or-less.

My point it this; KCP doesn't *need* to take 5 threes a game to have an impact and stretch the floor. What he does need to be able to do is make them at a decent enough clip that teams have to respect the threat of him making them. Eliminate 1 bad shot a game - just ONE bad shot a game and it changes the dynamic entirely. It's very doable, but it takes discipline.

[Blkbrd671]

This is becoming unrealkcphaters.com

The "modus operandi" is easy. You wait KCP have a couple of bad games, then you create a thread asking for nonsense replacement, you will remain silent the next 5-10 games where Pope performs well, and then it starts over.

welcome to the Detroit Board, where sh* happens. lol

No but seriously, this is on par for our board

[Blkbrd671]

Btw, can we just end this thread with Cow's posts as the addendum in regards to KCP? I honestly think it'll be downhill from here.

I really think that about sums it up, and it honestly is the perfect middle ground bridge between anti-KCP and KCP-rooters.

Who knew you could acknowledge both sides and have actual meaningful dialogue? Acknowledgement and concessions people, that's civics 101.

you can't stop the KCP hate, you can only hope to contain it!

[Blkbrd671]

Just as kind of an aside, Bruce Bowen averaged fewer than 3 three-pt attempts per game over his career and everybody in the world knows he wasn't really any sort of force offensively. But teams had to respect the threat and that helped space the floor. Shane Battier at his peak averaged around 4 or 4.5 attempts per game. Raja Bell kidna stands out with 5-6 attempts per game during his peak, but that was the Suns playing 8-seconds-or-less.

My point it this; KCP doesn't *need* to take 5 threes a game to have an impact and stretch the floor. What he does need to be able to do is make them at a decent enough clip that teams have to respect the threat of him making them. Eliminate 1 bad shot a game - just ONE bad shot a game and it changes the dynamic entirely. It's very doable, but it takes discipline.

i would argue that what also made Bowen "effective" is the timeliness of the shots he made. This maybe purely just my perception but i recall that when i watched the Spurs during their Dynasty period, Bowen would make the shots that mattered. Ironically KCP is almost the same way in that he's pretty clutch or has a knack for it. what he lacks is the ability to "make the defense pay" when he's wide open. KCP literally just needs to make the open 3 point shots he gets and his average would probably be average if not better.

i'd also argue that KCP takes a above average of "throw away shots" this includes shots at end of Qtrs and shot clock expiring. Eye ball test at least.

[Todd3]

Just as kind of an aside, Bruce Bowen averaged fewer than 3 three-pt attempts per game over his career and everybody in the world knows he wasn't really any sort of force offensively. But teams had to respect the threat and that helped space the floor. Shane Battier at his peak averaged around 4 or 4.5 attempts per game. Raja Bell kidna stands out with 5-6 attempts per game during his peak, but that was the Suns playing 8-seconds-or-less.

My point it this; KCP doesn't *need* to take 5 threes a game to have an impact and stretch the floor. What he does need to be able to do is make them at a decent enough clip that teams have to respect the threat of him making them. Eliminate 1 bad shot a game - just ONE bad shot a game and it changes the dynamic entirely. It's very doable, but it takes discipline.

If he just limited them to corner 3s like Bowen, he'd be an efficient 3pt shooter and provide the spacing needed.

However this has been said many times and nothing changes. He continues to take the majority from the arc (257 last year) despite only making 29%, while only taking 78 from the left corner despite making 39%.

It's undisciplined on his part, but ultimately it's Stan allowing it.

Popovich didn't allow Bowen to raise up from the arc whenever he wanted because he wasn't good at it.

By comparison, 77% of Bowen's 3s were from the corner, while 73% of KCPs have been from the arc for his career.

It makes no sense but doesn't appear to be changing anytime soon, as the trend has continued this year with 21 of his 29 preseason 3s coming from the arc again at 29%, with only 8 from the corners at 38%.

It's the Pistons version of "Theo Riddick up the middle", I guess lol.

[Manocad]

How many 3PAs did Rip avg his first 6 yrs? 1.6 per game (0.9 in '04).

How many has KCP avg the last 2 yrs? 5.1 per game.

End of debate.

The problem with KCPs shooting is three-fold. 1) He's not consistent/efficient enough. 2) He still chucks 5 per game anyways. 3) He has to because he's playing in a system that requires it.

So unlike Rip (who could just not take 3s if he couldn't make them), KCP doesn't have that option. Either he proves he can be consistent/efficient at a 4-5 per game volume, or changes need to be made at his position. Because Stan isn't going to change his system and get new franchise players with different skillsets to accommodate KCP. He will get a new SG who can do the job better first.

5.1 3-point shots per game at 31% = 4.74 pts
5.1 2-point shots per game at 45% = 4.59 pts

End of debate.

*drops mic*

What's your point? Neither is efficient. That's only 0.93 ppp.

45% on 2's disregarding FT's isn't efficient? What league average stats are you looking at for a shooting guard?

[pistontr]

if you have 3 hall of famers in your roster, you can live with Bowen. Bowen would looked horrible in an average team.

[Todd3]

5.1 3-point shots per game at 31% = 4.74 pts
5.1 2-point shots per game at 45% = 4.59 pts

End of debate.

*drops mic*

What's your point? Neither is efficient. That's only 0.93 ppp.

45% on 2's disregarding FT's isn't efficient? What league average stats are you looking at for a shooting guard?

It's less than 1 point per possession. Needing 5 shots to score 4.5 pts is not efficient. For the same reason Drummond shooting 10 FTs at 45% is not efficient. Because he's only scoring 4.5 pts on 5 possessions.

If complimented with good FT/3pt shooting, a 45% 2pt shooter can still be efficient overall. But just 45% on 2s by itself is not.

So league average is irrelevant. 45% may be around average for a SG, but the efficient ones are improving their overall efficiency with FTs & 3s.

KCP shot good from 2 (49%) with average FT shooting. If he took 0 three's last year he would've been 10th among SGs in TS%. But with the 3s, he was only 26th. It's the 5 three's at 31% that's making his efficiency bad.

[Blkbrd671]

if you have 3 hall of famers in your roster, you can live with Bowen. Bowen would looked horrible in an average team.

fact , SAS doesn't win all those titles without Bruce Bowen

[pistontr]

if you have 3 hall of famers in your roster, you can live with Bowen. Bowen would looked horrible in an average team.

fact , SAS doesn't win all those titles without Bruce Bowen

please, they have played two more finals after he retired

[jakebernat]

KCP reportedly demanding $20 million a year to sign extension.

Well, that pretty much confirms what we all assumed. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out since, unlike moose, both sides seem to want to get a deal done.

[Han Solo]

That was a click bait headline that just ran with what our beat writers are saying.. Still could be true, but it's not "news", it's gossip.

[Blkbrd671]

if you have 3 hall of famers in your roster, you can live with Bowen. Bowen would looked horrible in an average team.

fact , SAS doesn't win all those titles without Bruce Bowen

please, they have played two more finals after he retired

my bad thought it was 3. they still don't win the first 2 without him. If you ever get a chance to ask any of his team mates or coaches, i'd bet $100 they'd say the same thing. Actually that could be said about any player that has played in a championship season. so its not really a debate but actual fact.

Still just because defensive production is not flashy, doesn't mean it doesn't have value nor that it made a dramatic impact on our team.

[pistontr]

fact , SAS doesn't win all those titles without Bruce Bowen

please, they have played two more finals after he retired

my bad thought it was 3. they still don't win the first 2 without him. If you ever get a chance to ask any of his team mates or coaches, i'd bet $100 they'd say the same thing. Actually that could be said about any player that has played in a championship season. so its not really a debate but actual fact.

Still just because defensive production is not flashy, doesn't mean it doesn't have value nor that it made a dramatic impact on our team.

he was great defender, that's not the point. he was very valuable because he played in a great team. specialist doesn't make bad teams great, but makes great teams all time great.

[hoophabit]

please, they have played two more finals after he retired

my bad thought it was 3. they still don't win the first 2 without him. If you ever get a chance to ask any of his team mates or coaches, i'd bet $100 they'd say the same thing. Actually that could be said about any player that has played in a championship season. so its not really a debate but actual fact.

Still just because defensive production is not flashy, doesn't mean it doesn't have value nor that it made a dramatic impact on our team.

he was great defender, that's not the point. he was very valuable because he played in a great team. specialist doesn't make bad teams great, but makes great teams all time great.

This is well meant, but I don't agree with the last assertion. Specialists don't make great teams all time great. That is only accomplished by assembling teams that have several truly great players. Specialists have more to do with getting bad teams up to good. All good teams have such players, but greatness depends on having 'transcendent' talent.

[Manocad]

What's your point? Neither is efficient. That's only 0.93 ppp.

45% on 2's disregarding FT's isn't efficient? What league average stats are you looking at for a shooting guard?

It's less than 1 point per possession. Needing 5 shots to score 4.5 pts is not efficient. For the same reason Drummond shooting 10 FTs at 45% is not efficient. Because he's only scoring 4.5 pts on 5 possessions.

If complimented with good FT/3pt shooting, a 45% 2pt shooter can still be efficient overall. But just 45% on 2s by itself is not.

So league average is irrelevant. 45% may be around average for a SG, but the efficient ones are improving their overall efficiency with FTs & 3s.

KCP shot good from 2 (49%) with average FT shooting. If he took 0 three's last year he would've been 10th among SGs in TS%. But with the 3s, he was only 26th. It's the 5 three's at 31% that's making his efficiency bad.

Ah, the relative argument. It's like saying the #1 ranked car in the world is great and the 26th ranked car in the world is a complete piece of garbage, but overlooks the fact that #1 has a rating of 100% and #26 has a rating of 93%. But hey, since it's 26th it's a piece of crap.

[Blkbrd671]

please, they have played two more finals after he retired

my bad thought it was 3. they still don't win the first 2 without him. If you ever get a chance to ask any of his team mates or coaches, i'd bet $100 they'd say the same thing. Actually that could be said about any player that has played in a championship season. so its not really a debate but actual fact.

Still just because defensive production is not flashy, doesn't mean it doesn't have value nor that it made a dramatic impact on our team.

he was great defender, that's not the point. he was very valuable because he played in a great team. specialist doesn't make bad teams great, but makes great teams all time great.

the discussion has nothing to do with great or not great, but whether the Spurs win a championship or not with or without that player. If you think Bowen was just a "plug and play player" you obviously didn't watch that era of basketball. He was one of the, if not the best perimeter defenders in the league , and more importantly matched up with the best players on the other team ALL GAME! Literally every single star in the league was complaining about Bowen.

Especially in that Era of basketball where one player could lead teams to a championship this "specialization " is almost priceless. And we haven't even begun to discuss the mental aspect of the game. Bowen literally could change a game with all his smack talk.

I really don't know what your debating at this point, its a fact Bowen was a elite defender and is a large part of why SAS were so good.

[bkseven]

if only the pistons had drafted the guy I asked for, Devin Booker

[Pharaoh]

my bad thought it was 3. they still don't win the first 2 without him. If you ever get a chance to ask any of his team mates or coaches, i'd bet $100 they'd say the same thing. Actually that could be said about any player that has played in a championship season. so its not really a debate but actual fact.

Still just because defensive production is not flashy, doesn't mean it doesn't have value nor that it made a dramatic impact on our team.

he was great defender, that's not the point. he was very valuable because he played in a great team. specialist doesn't make bad teams great, but makes great teams all time great.

the discussion has nothing to do with great or not great, but whether the Spurs win a championship or not with or without that player. If you think Bowen was just a "plug and play player" you obviously didn't watch that era of basketball. He was one of the, if not the best perimeter defenders in the league , and more importantly matched up with the best players on the other team ALL GAME! Literally every single star in the league was complaining about Bowen.

Especially in that Era of basketball where one player could lead teams to a championship this "specialization " is almost priceless. And we haven't even begun to discuss the mental aspect of the game. Bowen literally could change a game with all his smack talk.

I really don't know what your debating at this point, its a fact Bowen was a elite defender and is a large part of why SAS were so good.

I know blkbrd & I have had a few back & forths lately but let us all remember Bruce Bowen nearly beat our boy Ben Wallace for DPOY once or twice.

To marginalize him is poor form and completely ignores the fact he was THE perimeter defender back in the day...

So while the Spurs big 3 did what they did they also had a hell of a "specialist" with them.

Ain't it weird that no one belittles Ben's impact on our team or franchise but Bowen is an afterthought!

Sent from my SM-J110F using RealGM mobile app