ImageImageImageImageImage

Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11)

Moderators: KF10, City of Trees, codydaze

User avatar
Kings2013
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,829
And1: 932
Joined: Jul 18, 2013
Location: The beautiful capital of California

Re: Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11) 

Post#41 » by Kings2013 » Tue Jan 20, 2015 7:52 pm

Another moment of realization for me that a subpar coach is on the bench: Remember that play where Cuz held the ball mid range with like 6 seconds for the 24 second violation? Under Malone never would have happened, he would have realized and yelled to Cousins
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11) 

Post#42 » by SacKingZZZ » Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:55 pm

KF10 wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
KF10 wrote:The turnovers & the inability to finish is frustrating.

Those things are very hard to correct. To correct this, they have to fundamentally change the playing style of a player or trade for players that are good in those aspects.

Creating a structure/stability environment will minimize mistakes but it starts first from the players. They have to look at themselves in the mirror and say "what can I do to to sacrifice my game for the betterment of the team?"



I know people are on the bash the crap out of the front office band wagon, but what Pete has said they want to do is the thing that will correct it. If he's serious about implementing more of a motion offense then he's on the right track. With that said, yes, he will have to make trades. He has to bring more players willing to move and cut. This team has two of those on it and they don't play that much or play at a position that has a full time starter at it already. More shooters, more finishers, more cutters.


I don't think a motion offense will work with the personnel here, imo. Like you said in your post, there is only about 2 or 3 players that are willing to move and cut. Setting good (useful) back/flare screens isn't synonymous for this team. There is a reason why the Kings are at the bottom (or close to it) in assist per game, assist opportunities, hockey assist etc We don't have players that are willing to do these things or are not doing them at a high/consistent level. At heart, this is a low assist/high turnover group. Not a great recipe of success.



It doesn't matter what works for anyone but Cousins and Gay. It's not hard to find role players to fit around them and that's why Pete D'alessandro needs to start picking up the right kind of players and not the best value. DC was a good signing, he needs to start going that route rather than the route of pure bang for buck. Teams like the Spurs, Lakers, etc. have done that for years.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11) 

Post#43 » by SacKingZZZ » Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:02 am

Wolfay wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
Wolfay wrote:
Unload a two year, $4 million deal, from a team whose first move was to give a malcontent a max deal, and traded for Rudy Gay?



I have no idea what kind of justification you're even going for with that, but I can see the leanings towards starting to bomb away on Cousins again. :lol:

Look, going back to the original argument, we are going to have a hard time finding solid footing with one another considering your insistence on using +/- numbers as the backbone of your argument. You might as well not even watch the games if that's the route you want to take. It's the same type of mistake people make that come to the conclusion that JJ Hickson just "sucks", or Rudy Gay just "sucks". Without circumstance or situation you have empty numerical data.


My point was that the ownership is anything but cheap. Your argument would've held water if the Maloofs were still running the show.

I've been giving you more than stats, but even if I didn't, it's more than I get from you. Coach's son! Instincts! Dat awareness! Blah blah blah. Somebody with "awareness" doesn't let the shot clock tick down to single digits before you pass it to your main guys, or let Steve Blake take uncontested three pointers. If being a coach's son is all it takes, then Austin Rivers must be the most unfairly criticized player in the world.

And JJ Hickson does suck. Not as bad as McCallum though. They've even been trying Ray at SG, and he was so bad from there they had to play Casspi out of position. While Ben has made tremendous progress from last season, Ray has actually regressed.



That's not what I was even remotely referring to. That's a much needed chunk of cap space this summer. Being as close to the limit as they are 2 million could be the different between a Carl Landry level player or a Paul Millsap one. It's literally that tight. No Landry the summer before, no Sessions and you're talking max money space this summer. Oops.

You're judging McCallum the same as you did Cousins. Whey they do well, you disappear, when they make a mistake you're there to cast the light of shame. This kid doesn't even have a full seasons worth of games under his belt, all things considered if you can't see the potential there as a solid role player for this team then you need to watch a little closer and not let circumstance get in the way. Like I said, put him in there with Cousins or Gay for 36 mpg and how much you want to bet those +/- numbers do a flip?
User avatar
Wolfay
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 7,656
And1: 649
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
       

Re: Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11) 

Post#44 » by Wolfay » Wed Jan 21, 2015 4:31 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:
Wolfay wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:

I have no idea what kind of justification you're even going for with that, but I can see the leanings towards starting to bomb away on Cousins again. :lol:

Look, going back to the original argument, we are going to have a hard time finding solid footing with one another considering your insistence on using +/- numbers as the backbone of your argument. You might as well not even watch the games if that's the route you want to take. It's the same type of mistake people make that come to the conclusion that JJ Hickson just "sucks", or Rudy Gay just "sucks". Without circumstance or situation you have empty numerical data.


My point was that the ownership is anything but cheap. Your argument would've held water if the Maloofs were still running the show.

I've been giving you more than stats, but even if I didn't, it's more than I get from you. Coach's son! Instincts! Dat awareness! Blah blah blah. Somebody with "awareness" doesn't let the shot clock tick down to single digits before you pass it to your main guys, or let Steve Blake take uncontested three pointers. If being a coach's son is all it takes, then Austin Rivers must be the most unfairly criticized player in the world.

And JJ Hickson does suck. Not as bad as McCallum though. They've even been trying Ray at SG, and he was so bad from there they had to play Casspi out of position. While Ben has made tremendous progress from last season, Ray has actually regressed.



That's not what I was even remotely referring to. That's a much needed chunk of cap space this summer. Being as close to the limit as they are 2 million could be the different between a Carl Landry level player or a Paul Millsap one. It's literally that tight. No Landry the summer before, no Sessions and you're talking max money space this summer. Oops.

You're judging McCallum the same as you did Cousins. Whey they do well, you disappear, when they make a mistake you're there to cast the light of shame. This kid doesn't even have a full seasons worth of games under his belt, all things considered if you can't see the potential there as a solid role player for this team then you need to watch a little closer and not let circumstance get in the way. Like I said, put him in there with Cousins or Gay for 36 mpg and how much you want to bet those +/- numbers do a flip?


I just don't want to be an annoying drone bringing up Ray at every possible chance, and I don't know how you interpret regression as potential. Cousins showed improvement as a season went along, and I've said as much. Ben was looking more comfortable as the season was coming to a close last year, so Ray should be as well. He's played with Gay Cousins, and even Collison too, all at the same time. Ray has been given an incredible opportunity with Sessions' injury and with Stauskas' disappointment, and he's failed in every way to establish himself as a legitimate backup to either guard position night in and night out. No team can be successful with the primary guard off the bench lighting up the board with zeros every single night, and surprise(!) our record is reflecting that.

The cap is going to skyrocket in the coming years. Sessions' small and short contract is barely a fraction of the payroll as it is now, and will be even less so by the time his contract is up in less than two years. Nik Stauskas' rookie contract is larger than Sessions'!
Image
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,079
And1: 1,082
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

Re: Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11) 

Post#45 » by SacKingZZZ » Wed Jan 21, 2015 5:25 am

Wolfay wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:
Wolfay wrote:
My point was that the ownership is anything but cheap. Your argument would've held water if the Maloofs were still running the show.

I've been giving you more than stats, but even if I didn't, it's more than I get from you. Coach's son! Instincts! Dat awareness! Blah blah blah. Somebody with "awareness" doesn't let the shot clock tick down to single digits before you pass it to your main guys, or let Steve Blake take uncontested three pointers. If being a coach's son is all it takes, then Austin Rivers must be the most unfairly criticized player in the world.

And JJ Hickson does suck. Not as bad as McCallum though. They've even been trying Ray at SG, and he was so bad from there they had to play Casspi out of position. While Ben has made tremendous progress from last season, Ray has actually regressed.



That's not what I was even remotely referring to. That's a much needed chunk of cap space this summer. Being as close to the limit as they are 2 million could be the different between a Carl Landry level player or a Paul Millsap one. It's literally that tight. No Landry the summer before, no Sessions and you're talking max money space this summer. Oops.

You're judging McCallum the same as you did Cousins. Whey they do well, you disappear, when they make a mistake you're there to cast the light of shame. This kid doesn't even have a full seasons worth of games under his belt, all things considered if you can't see the potential there as a solid role player for this team then you need to watch a little closer and not let circumstance get in the way. Like I said, put him in there with Cousins or Gay for 36 mpg and how much you want to bet those +/- numbers do a flip?


I just don't want to be an annoying drone bringing up Ray at every possible chance, and I don't know how you interpret regression as potential. Cousins showed improvement as a season went along, and I've said as much. Ben was looking more comfortable as the season was coming to a close last year, so Ray should be as well. He's played with Gay Cousins, and even Collison too, all at the same time. Ray has been given an incredible opportunity with Sessions' injury and with Stauskas' disappointment, and he's failed in every way to establish himself as a legitimate backup to either guard position night in and night out. No team can be successful with the primary guard off the bench lighting up the board with zeros every single night, and surprise(!) our record is reflecting that.

The cap is going to skyrocket in the coming years. Sessions' small and short contract is barely a fraction of the payroll as it is now, and will be even less so by the time his contract is up in less than two years. Nik Stauskas' rookie contract is larger than Sessions'!



Probably for the same reasons they didn't interpret Ben that way last year. I see a role player who last night had a hand in holding Lillard to a 6-19 shooting night. I see a player that mostly plays with a crop of fairly incapable finishers in a largely unbalanced unit. I vividly remember two perfect set ups at the rim for baskets that McCallum gift wrapped only to watch that player fumble it away for bang it off the rim. No one ever said he's a great player now, or that he will ever be, but I can truly see the potential for him to have that kind of Derek Fisher like role player career. This team also didn't do him favors and pretty much squashed any momentum the kid had coming out of summer league. The fact that he fought through and plays the right way for this team, by getting the ball where it needs to go, getting out of the way when he needs to, and making something happen when he has to are all great role player qualities. It would be a mistake for this team not to be the one that gives him the shot to stick.

Speaking of regression, over the last 10 games McCallum has found his shot to the tune of shooting nearly 45% from 3 in January and putting up about 12 points per 36. Perhaps it's a question of usage if you're looking for statistical output.

Sessions' small contract is a fraction of the cap, but as I said, THIS SUMMER is going to be crucial because the Kings aren't going to survive another treadmill year. This summer that 2 million could be all the difference in the world, hopefully not but I don't think anyone can't say that as things sit this team wouldn't be better off with 10 million in space this summer rather than 7-8.
User avatar
Wolfay
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 7,656
And1: 649
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
Location: Sacramento, CA
       

Re: Kings (16-24) @ Blazers (30-11) 

Post#46 » by Wolfay » Wed Jan 21, 2015 6:17 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:
Wolfay wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:

That's not what I was even remotely referring to. That's a much needed chunk of cap space this summer. Being as close to the limit as they are 2 million could be the different between a Carl Landry level player or a Paul Millsap one. It's literally that tight. No Landry the summer before, no Sessions and you're talking max money space this summer. Oops.

You're judging McCallum the same as you did Cousins. Whey they do well, you disappear, when they make a mistake you're there to cast the light of shame. This kid doesn't even have a full seasons worth of games under his belt, all things considered if you can't see the potential there as a solid role player for this team then you need to watch a little closer and not let circumstance get in the way. Like I said, put him in there with Cousins or Gay for 36 mpg and how much you want to bet those +/- numbers do a flip?


I just don't want to be an annoying drone bringing up Ray at every possible chance, and I don't know how you interpret regression as potential. Cousins showed improvement as a season went along, and I've said as much. Ben was looking more comfortable as the season was coming to a close last year, so Ray should be as well. He's played with Gay Cousins, and even Collison too, all at the same time. Ray has been given an incredible opportunity with Sessions' injury and with Stauskas' disappointment, and he's failed in every way to establish himself as a legitimate backup to either guard position night in and night out. No team can be successful with the primary guard off the bench lighting up the board with zeros every single night, and surprise(!) our record is reflecting that.

The cap is going to skyrocket in the coming years. Sessions' small and short contract is barely a fraction of the payroll as it is now, and will be even less so by the time his contract is up in less than two years. Nik Stauskas' rookie contract is larger than Sessions'!



Probably for the same reasons they didn't interpret Ben that way last year. I see a role player who last night had a hand in holding Lillard to a 6-19 shooting night. I see a player that mostly plays with a crop of fairly incapable finishers in a largely unbalanced unit. I vividly remember two perfect set ups at the rim for baskets that McCallum gift wrapped only to watch that player fumble it away for bang it off the rim. No one ever said he's a great player now, or that he will ever be, but I can truly see the potential for him to have that kind of Derek Fisher like role player career. This team also didn't do him favors and pretty much squashed any momentum the kid had coming out of summer league. The fact that he fought through and plays the right way for this team, by getting the ball where it needs to go, getting out of the way when he needs to, and making something happen when he has to are all great role player qualities. It would be a mistake for this team not to be the one that gives him the shot to stick.

Speaking of regression, over the last 10 games McCallum has found his shot to the tune of shooting nearly 45% from 3 in January and putting up about 12 points per 36. Perhaps it's a question of usage if you're looking for statistical output.

Sessions' small contract is a fraction of the cap, but as I said, THIS SUMMER is going to be crucial because the Kings aren't going to survive another treadmill year. This summer that 2 million could be all the difference in the world, hopefully not but I don't think anyone can't say that as things sit this team wouldn't be better off with 10 million in space this summer rather than 7-8.


You must have Collison and McCallum confused. I saw Collison playing the right way and getting the ball where it needs to go, and defending Lillard. To refresh your memory, McCallum spent most of his time defending 12th man Will Barton (who had pretty much his best game ever) and Steve Blake, and routinely let the shot clock tick down to 7 seconds before he finally got it to Gay Cousins. Its like Isaiah Thomas all over again, minus the talent.

He's a nice kid and works hard, but that doesn't make a good basketball player.

Edit: It seems the folks at StR agree with me.

Ray McCallum: D

28 GP, 14.5 MPG, 4.2 PPG, .407 FG%, .273 3P%, .643 FT%, 1.8 RPG, 1.5 AST, 0.4 STL, 0.1 BLK, 0.9 TOV

I don't know if I'm more disappointed in any player on the Kings than Ray McCallum. Expectations weren't sky-high for Ray, but there was reason to believe that this year he could improve upon his rookie season and perhaps claim the backup PG spot for himself. While Ramon Sessions has been out with injury, Ray hasn't done much to engender confidence that he's going to be a good PG in this league. In fact, it's looking more and more like Ray is more of an undersized Shooting Guard. He's assisting less than last year, turning the ball over more, and hitting less of his long-range shots. Ray takes forever to get his team into the offense, spending a majority of the shot clock dribbling around instead of making a quick decision. Defensively, Ray tries hard but hasn't been very effective, as opponents are shooting 2.3% better than average when Ray is guarding them. Hopefully the second half of the season goes a little better for Ray.


http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2015/1/20 ... eport-card
Image

Return to Sacramento Kings