Kings (27-33) at L.A. Clippers (19-39)
-
RolloTommasi
- Bench Warmer
- Posts: 1,409
- And1: 194
- Joined: Dec 04, 2004
-
Ballings7
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,075
- And1: 1,952
- Joined: Jan 04, 2006
Saw the game... yet another example of why this team needs to improve significantly defensively, and eventually become a balanced squad. Rebounding and interior defense did us in, once again. Brad made 2 or 3 stupid decisions down the stretch.
Salmons seemingly defended Maggette pretty well.
Al Thornton was tremendous. Continue to love this guy's game. Quite an athletic scorer.
Don't think he would of been the right with us, though. So am more than fine we didn't take him in the draft. I didn't see him being a significant complement to Kevin, because of the question of how good and consistent of a defender he'd be, and then the lacking in ball-handling and passing skill. Is he going to be a guy who has facilitating ability as a noticable point in his game? Questionable if he'd ever be a stand-out two-way player, as defense is mandatory next to Kevin with whoever it is, for obvious reasons, play-making ability would be nice added on with that, along with of course the player having some kind of scoring ability. Not that Kevin's a bad defender, but because of his role, energy expense, and limited size. Because we can't have another offensively-biased player next to Kevin. The compatability isn't going to be there and what it needs to be. Not only at SG/SF, but how that impacts the rest of the starting five.
Going off some past comments on this board (from lately and from back to last summer), in the possibility of having a Thornton/Kevin/Love/Hawes core, we'd have a bunch of offensive-lenient players who don't stand-out defensively. Let alone, having a Love (or another offensively-swaying big man)/Hawes big man pairing for the next bunch of years. Going with a group like above, plus whoever as a PG, just isn't the the type of model to have for a title contending team for the future. You need compatability and balance in the starting five, relating to both sides of the court.
Thornton possibly developing into a good defender obviously wouldn't be enough for the requirement of balance and compatability in a starting five, because of the limitations up front defensively. Not being a strong aspect for either big man, considering their offensive ability (being why they're in the NBA and lottery picks) and their physical attributes being limited, relating to defense. Being physically gifted is not all that matters, but you still need some kind of stability from a player (particularily, up front) with above-average physical attributes as well as the mental factors. Obviously with us, it'd be from a young player, so that kind of balance defensively between physical and mental, would probably take a little bit to develop.
TJ Ford for Ron Artest would be a bad move. Ford's injury prone, and not the right type of PG for this team. Generally he's an above-average PG, but overall just not for us. I'd prefer Beno, and until we get a PG in the draft within the next couple years, probably.
Not a solid situation defensively with Ford, either.
Ford just doesn't make to me for this team.
Salmons seemingly defended Maggette pretty well.
Al Thornton was tremendous. Continue to love this guy's game. Quite an athletic scorer.
Don't think he would of been the right with us, though. So am more than fine we didn't take him in the draft. I didn't see him being a significant complement to Kevin, because of the question of how good and consistent of a defender he'd be, and then the lacking in ball-handling and passing skill. Is he going to be a guy who has facilitating ability as a noticable point in his game? Questionable if he'd ever be a stand-out two-way player, as defense is mandatory next to Kevin with whoever it is, for obvious reasons, play-making ability would be nice added on with that, along with of course the player having some kind of scoring ability. Not that Kevin's a bad defender, but because of his role, energy expense, and limited size. Because we can't have another offensively-biased player next to Kevin. The compatability isn't going to be there and what it needs to be. Not only at SG/SF, but how that impacts the rest of the starting five.
Going off some past comments on this board (from lately and from back to last summer), in the possibility of having a Thornton/Kevin/Love/Hawes core, we'd have a bunch of offensive-lenient players who don't stand-out defensively. Let alone, having a Love (or another offensively-swaying big man)/Hawes big man pairing for the next bunch of years. Going with a group like above, plus whoever as a PG, just isn't the the type of model to have for a title contending team for the future. You need compatability and balance in the starting five, relating to both sides of the court.
Thornton possibly developing into a good defender obviously wouldn't be enough for the requirement of balance and compatability in a starting five, because of the limitations up front defensively. Not being a strong aspect for either big man, considering their offensive ability (being why they're in the NBA and lottery picks) and their physical attributes being limited, relating to defense. Being physically gifted is not all that matters, but you still need some kind of stability from a player (particularily, up front) with above-average physical attributes as well as the mental factors. Obviously with us, it'd be from a young player, so that kind of balance defensively between physical and mental, would probably take a little bit to develop.
TJ Ford for Ron Artest would be a bad move. Ford's injury prone, and not the right type of PG for this team. Generally he's an above-average PG, but overall just not for us. I'd prefer Beno, and until we get a PG in the draft within the next couple years, probably.
Not a solid situation defensively with Ford, either.
Ford just doesn't make to me for this team.
-
SacKingZZZ
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,085
- And1: 1,084
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
backer55 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I've read every post you put on this board this year. You hate the man, said it or not. Giving in to anything, is for losers. Again, you want to lose fans?, rebuild, especially with some of the junkers we got for young guys. Hope you are a Giant's fan as well, you'll enjoy their season.
I'm done for tonight!
.
Stay stuck in the middle and I can promise you we will never get the fans back we have already lost. If you think our young guys are "junkers" than fine, I disagree and you appear to be a fan of Ron Artest. Not the Sacramento Kings.
-
KingInExile
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,416
- And1: 4
- Joined: May 25, 2004
- Location: RIP Wayman Tisdale...You left us way too early.
So the bandwagon fans are leaving? And that's a bad thing?SacKingZZZ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Stay stuck in the middle and I can promise you we will never get the fans back we have already lost. If you think our young guys are "junkers" than fine, I disagree and you appear to be a fan of Ron Artest. Not the Sacramento Kings.
Anyone who can stay a fan of the Kings even through the dark days of the early Sacramento era will remain a fan of the team regardless of what each season holds. Sure we will disagree with some decisions and be disappointed with the losses along the way. But we will remain fans nonetheless. If fans are so impatient that they will stop following the team now that they are not on top, then more than likely they are the fans who jumped on the bandwagon between 1998 and 2002.
This space needs to be filled with a new sig...but I'm too lazy to make one.
-
SacKingZZZ
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,085
- And1: 1,084
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
KingInExile wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
So the bandwagon fans are leaving? And that's a bad thing?
Anyone who can stay a fan of the Kings even through the dark days of the early Sacramento era will remain a fan of the team regardless of what each season holds. Sure we will disagree with some decisions and be disappointed with the losses along the way. But we will remain fans nonetheless. If fans are so impatient that they will stop following the team now that they are not on top, then more than likely they are the fans who jumped on the bandwagon between 1998 and 2002.
I know where you are coming from, but I am sure the Maloofs would rather see a full arena than a half empty one. Bandwagon fans or not, they still pay the bills. The fans that are going to the games now, I feel, will be there even if we go young. One check on the "reasons to go young" list.
-
KingInExile
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,416
- And1: 4
- Joined: May 25, 2004
- Location: RIP Wayman Tisdale...You left us way too early.
SacKingZZZ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I know where you are coming from, but I am sure the Maloofs would rather see a full arena than a half empty one. Bandwagon fans or not, they still pay the bills. The fans that are going to the games now, I feel, will be there even if we go young. One check on the "reasons to go young" list.
If the Maloofs are so worried about keeping Arco full, then they need to take a hard look at the exorbitant cost of going to games. The only teams with higher average ticket prices than the Kings are the Raptors, Nets, Bulls, Heat, Mavs, Celtics, Knicks and Lakers. The Kings' average price of nearly $60/ticket is $11 more than the average price for all NBA teams. The Kings are not in a major metro area with huge fan-bases like the teams above them, and the product they have put on the floor the last couple of years is certainly not worth the price of admission. What kept "hardcore fans" coming to games and filling Arco during the late 80s and early 90s had more to do with the fact that the cost of going to games was more affordable. Right now the Maloofs are trying to charge Lexus prices for a Yugo. Kings fans are not so unsophisticated to be willing to overpay for a bad product.
And that leads right into a counter strike to your "reason for going young". If fans are already not paying the outrageous prices to go to games to see the team the Maloofs have on the floor, it's unlikely they will pay that price to watch a glorified D-league team. In fact you will likely see more empty seats. If people just want to see young guys play they will find a college game to go to (much cheaper) or will even go to more high school games (even cheaper). When you look at the average ticket prices of the teams who have "gone young" and are doing clean-sweep rebuilding, you will see that they are charging 3/4 to 1/2 the price the Maloofs are. The Kings "going young" at the same high price will not attract fans and will likely make more stop going to Arco.
I believe fans not going to Arco has little to do with people losing interest in the team and has a lot more to do with people not wanting to pay outrageous prices for a mediocre product. Now add on top of those high prices the Maloofs demanding that they need public financing to build a new arena, it is natural that fans are going to become more and more apathetic towards them and refuse to buy tickets. If the Maloofs are really so concerned about fans not coming to Arco, then they need to address the real reasons: the price they are charging and their demands for public subsidies for a new arena. Until they wake up to the reality that they have priced themselves out of the market and have alienated people with the way they have handled the arena deals then they will continue to see empty seats in Arco.
This space needs to be filled with a new sig...but I'm too lazy to make one.
-
backer55
- Senior
- Posts: 725
- And1: 1
- Joined: Apr 29, 2007
SacZZZ and KIE,
OK, i kinda agree with both you guys. At least i see your points. My point, i like watching good Basketball. Since i became more interested or "jumped on the bandwagon"sheesh, in this team we have always had a team that had guts and talent. We didn't always win but we always gave them a game.
I'm just not seeing that kind of winning, always in the game, go all out, in your face attitude, and smart court presence BB., from these young guys and only sometimes as with Miller or infrequently from the veterens, other than Artest. I have been a Kings fan these past 10 years or so[without Artest by the way] and will continue to be so but i'm having problems with the possible direction of this team and staying interested in the games. Especially, if they want to trade it's most interesting and talented player. If i'm concerned about this, don't you guys think others are as well?
KIE, ticket prices too high? i'll buy that. Quality of play warrents demand.
.
OK, i kinda agree with both you guys. At least i see your points. My point, i like watching good Basketball. Since i became more interested or "jumped on the bandwagon"sheesh, in this team we have always had a team that had guts and talent. We didn't always win but we always gave them a game.
I'm just not seeing that kind of winning, always in the game, go all out, in your face attitude, and smart court presence BB., from these young guys and only sometimes as with Miller or infrequently from the veterens, other than Artest. I have been a Kings fan these past 10 years or so[without Artest by the way] and will continue to be so but i'm having problems with the possible direction of this team and staying interested in the games. Especially, if they want to trade it's most interesting and talented player. If i'm concerned about this, don't you guys think others are as well?
KIE, ticket prices too high? i'll buy that. Quality of play warrents demand.
.
-
SacKingZZZ
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,085
- And1: 1,084
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
KingInExile wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
If the Maloofs are so worried about keeping Arco full, then they need to take a hard look at the exorbitant cost of going to games. The only teams with higher average ticket prices than the Kings are the Raptors, Nets, Bulls, Heat, Mavs, Celtics, Knicks and Lakers. The Kings' average price of nearly $60/ticket is $11 more than the average price for all NBA teams. The Kings are not in a major metro area with huge fan-bases like the teams above them, and the product they have put on the floor the last couple of years is certainly not worth the price of admission. What kept "hardcore fans" coming to games and filling Arco during the late 80s and early 90s had more to do with the fact that the cost of going to games was more affordable. Right now the Maloofs are trying to charge Lexus prices for a Yugo. Kings fans are not so unsophisticated to be willing to overpay for a bad product.
And that leads right into a counter strike to your "reason for going young". If fans are already not paying the outrageous prices to go to games to see the team the Maloofs have on the floor, it's unlikely they will pay that price to watch a glorified D-league team. In fact you will likely see more empty seats. If people just want to see young guys play they will find a college game to go to (much cheaper) or will even go to more high school games (even cheaper). When you look at the average ticket prices of the teams who have "gone young" and are doing clean-sweep rebuilding, you will see that they are charging 3/4 to 1/2 the price the Maloofs are. The Kings "going young" at the same high price will not attract fans and will likely make more stop going to Arco.
I believe fans not going to Arco has little to do with people losing interest in the team and has a lot more to do with people not wanting to pay outrageous prices for a mediocre product. Now add on top of those high prices the Maloofs demanding that they need public financing to build a new arena, it is natural that fans are going to become more and more apathetic towards them and refuse to buy tickets. If the Maloofs are really so concerned about fans not coming to Arco, then they need to address the real reasons: the price they are charging and their demands for public subsidies for a new arena. Until they wake up to the reality that they have priced themselves out of the market and have alienated people with the way they have handled the arena deals then they will continue to see empty seats in Arco.
Oh, I have no arguments there. But another prohibitive factor in doing so partially lies with the fact that things are so damn expensive in California.
The arena deals are what they are. From what I understand they are merely going by the standard of success that has been laid before them in regards to these issues. Once again, it's California. It's going to cost twice as much to build the same arena here as it would just about anywhere else. The economy is inches from finding it's ass on the pavement so it's completely understandable that the hardworking folks can't afford $250 tickets, or even moreso thousands and thousands for season tickets (which I think is the real factor in keeping ARCO empty). "Going young" is not only an on court focus shift, but a shift that has to reach it's way through the entire organization in terms of how they promote, define, and sell their product. Unless they are OK with keeping things as is, and hoping the diehards stick around.
They have already been putting things in motion, the subtle hints of, "We are going to play hard every night", or "The first step is winning on our home court" are all mantra of a team in transition and one on the brink of a rebuild.
-
SacKingZZZ
- RealGM
- Posts: 24,085
- And1: 1,084
- Joined: Feb 19, 2005
- Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."
backer55 wrote:SacZZZ and KIE,
OK, i kinda agree with both you guys. At least i see your points. My point, i like watching good Basketball. Since i became more interested or "jumped on the bandwagon"sheesh, in this team we have always had a team that had guts and talent. We didn't always win but we always gave them a game.
I'm just not seeing that kind of winning, always in the game, go all out, in your face attitude, and smart court presence BB., from these young guys and only sometimes as with Miller or infrequently from the veterens, other than Artest. I have been a Kings fan these past 10 years or so[without Artest by the way] and will continue to be so but i'm having problems with the possible direction of this team and staying interested in the games. Especially, if they want to trade it's most interesting and talented player. If i'm concerned about this, don't you guys think others are as well?
KIE, ticket prices too high? i'll buy that. Quality of play warrents demand.
.
Artest is deserving of that response. He is a fun player to watch, no question and IMO is one of the 3 most talented players to ever suit up for the Kings in the Sacramento era. But, you sometimes have to sacrifice a battle or two to win the war. I think the young guys we have will excite Kings fans once the reigns are turned over to them. Exciting times could be ahead.