Kings at Utah

murray · Post #1 » by **murray** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 2:02 am

We looked good last night, but that had alot to do with LAC. Tough game tonight.

thebiggesthomer · Post #2 » by **thebiggesthomer** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 2:41 am

a loss of less than 30 i consider a win.

SacTown Kings · Post #3 » by **SacTown Kings** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 2:50 am

Am I the only one who hates Harpring? To be honest I am not too sure why. I just can't stand the guy.

Cants doing some scoring.

Vega06 · Post #4 » by **Vega06** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 2:52 am

Shaddy is tearin it up for you guys. Hopefully he keeps it up I want to see him do well.

murray · Post #5 » by **murray** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 3:33 am

I think if Bobby Jackson and Deron Williams raced across the court, Williams would win by at least half the court.

But seriously, I'm suprised that this game is so close.

humboldtkingsfan · Post #6 » by **humboldtkingsfan** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 3:58 am

After blowing out the Clips I was worried about a big letdown as points don't come nearly as easy as they did one game prior. Instead it looks like we have stepped it up and have actually, dare I say, turned a corner this season towards competing in most games? Hope so. 20 boards from Shock and Hawes thus far. Nice.

humboldtkingsfan · Post #7 » by **humboldtkingsfan** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 4:01 am

Also, Murray, would you really have Griffin starting as a rookie over JT at the 4 with a year's experience? I wouldn't but I think its an interesting thought with Brandon playing point, but Marco doesn't make sense to me....Kmart, Cisco, Mccants(maybe), and Noci have that swing position under control.

10B10 · Post #8 » by **10B10** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 4:14 am

I don't know if anyone is actually watching this game. But the defense over the last couple of minutes has been completely absent. They've had like 5-6 dunks/lay-ups in a row!
Most of that is due to the fact that Utah has been grabbing the long rebounds and then they are off to the races. A bit sickening...but I guess this is the kind of defense we have come to expect.

Post #9 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 4:16 am

Well...I knew we couldn't play this well the whole game. Well, at least it will look worse in the scoreboard than it really was.

Cruel_Ruin · Post #10 » by **Cruel_Ruin** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 4:48 am

17 assists 18 turnovers. That is what will happen when you rely on guys like Martin and Garcia to be your primary playmakers. BJax doesn't have that much left in the tank, and all hail King Solomon, lord of all scrubs. Getting Beno back might help, but then our defense suffers. I'm really thinking we should be looking at Point Guard in the coming draft, hope Rubio declares.

On the other hand there are a lot of positives to take from this game. Nocioni continues to give it all on every play and has infected the rest of the squad with a new defensive energy. Like it or not, he's here for the long term with that atrocious contract. McCants is absolutely nasty, I love his swagger on the court and his gunner mentality. Hawes and Thompson cleaned the glass well tonight (we outrebounded an opponent!!!!!!

), but really need to be involved in more of the offense. Too many guard-dominated sets. They also anchored a pretty solid defense until the fourth quarter, but alas, that is the curse of youth. I can't wait to see what this duo looks like when they are veterans.

By the way, what's up with that Mehmet Okur shaped blind spot the Kings have? It seems like he's always open.

Post #11 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 5:28 am

Cruel_Ruin wrote:17 assists 18 turnovers. That is what will happen when you rely on guys like Martin and Garcia to be your primary playmakers. BJax doesn't have that much left in the tank, and all hail King Solomon, lord of all scrubs. Getting Beno back might help, but then our defense suffers. I'm really thinking we should be looking at Point Guard in the coming draft, hope Rubio declares.

On the other hand there are a lot of positives to take from this game. Nocioni continues to give it all on every play and has infected the rest of the squad with a new defensive energy. Like it or not, he's here for the long term with that atrocious contract. McCants is absolutely nasty, I love his swagger on the court and his gunner mentality. Hawes and Thompson cleaned the glass well tonight (we outrebounded an opponent!!!!!! ), but really need to be involved in more of the offense. Too many guard-dominated sets. They also anchored a pretty solid defense until the fourth quarter, but alas, that is the curse of youth. I can't wait to see what this duo looks like when they are veterans.

By the way, what's up with that Mehmet Okur shaped blind spot the Kings have? It seems like he's always open.

His contract is far from "atrocious".

Cruel_Ruin · Post #12 » by **Cruel_Ruin** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 5:37 am

mitchweber wrote:
His contract is far from "atrocious".

Getting 10 points, 4 rebounds and an assist on 41% from the field for a salary of $8 million per over 5 years isn't my idea of a bargain.

Post #13 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 7:34 am

Cruel_Ruin wrote:
mitchweber wrote:
His contract is far from "atrocious".

Getting 10 points, 4 rebounds and an assist on 41% from the field for a salary of $8 million per over 5 years isn't my idea of a bargain.

Come on--A) we all know that what Noc brings extends far beyond the stat sheet, B) his stats with the Bulls this year aren't really indicative of what he is capable of, and C) He's only making $8mil this year (which is pretty irrelevant to us, and after that, we only have 3 more years of his salary, which averages out to about $7mil.

And of course, I'm not saying it's a bargain. It's not. But it's not some albatross contract either.

MrSparkle · Post #14 » by **MrSparkle** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 7:38 am

And to be fair, Noc's salary descends, so I believe you'll be paying him in the ball-park range of $6-7 million annually after this year.. I think with a full season to recover (he's been playing every summer with Argentina), and with a more defined role (Bulls roster was a freaking mess), he'll come back strong.

Just a hardcore Bulls fan's two cents.

murray · Post #15 » by **murray** » Sun Mar 1, 2009 9:10 am

humboldtkingsfan wrote:Also, Murray, would you really have Griffin starting as a rookie over JT at the 4 with a year's experience? I wouldn't but I think its an interesting thought with Brandon playing point, but Marco doesn't make sense to me....Kmart, Cisco, Mccants(maybe), and Noci have that swing position under control.

McCants gone in a few months. Marco is a matching salary, who is unhappy about current situation, but still has plenty of potential. I would take just about any salary, but for a starting point, and a good value- Marco. Griffin is a better player this second than JT and years younger. No offense to JT, but Griffin is a once a year big man, and JT is a 12th pick (given a stacked draft). JT will be a good player, but Griffin is a franchise changing player, that we absolutely need right now. And if we get teague or Jennings too, I would consider us a watchable, entertaining, strong team, heading into the future. Griffin is the star this franchise needs. And point gaurd needs to be addressed as well. The idea makes sense on so many levels for this franchise. Drunkee signing off.

Website · Post #16 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Mon Mar 2, 2009 1:32 am

murray wrote:
humboldtkingsfan wrote:Also, Murray, would you really have Griffin starting as a rookie over JT at the 4 with a year's experience? I wouldn't but I think its an interesting thought with Brandon playing point, but Marco doesn't make sense to me....Kmart, Cisco, Mccants(maybe), and Noci have that swing position under control.

McCants gone in a few months. Marco is a matching salary, who is unhappy about current situation, but still has plenty of potential. I would take just about any salary, but for a starting point, and a good value- Marco. Griffin is a better player this second than JT and years younger. No offense to JT, but Griffin is a once a year big man, and JT is a 12th pick (given a stacked draft). JT will be a good player, but Griffin is a franchise changing player, that we absolutely need right now. And if we get teague or Jennings too, I would consider us a watchable, entertaining, strong team, heading into the future. Griffin is the star this franchise needs. And point gaurd needs to be addressed as well. The idea makes sense on so many levels for this franchise. Drunkee signing off.

And how the HELL do you know that? Griffin is beating up on college kids, JT is going up against the best athletes in the world. There is NO evidence Griffin is a franchise player.

murray · Post #17 » by **murray** » Mon Mar 2, 2009 2:50 am

Nicky Nix Nook wrote:
murray wrote:
humboldtkingsfan wrote:Also, Murray, would you really have Griffin starting as a rookie over JT at the 4 with a year's experience? I wouldn't but I think its an interesting thought with Brandon playing point, but Marco doesn't make sense to me....Kmart, Cisco, Mccants(maybe), and Noci have that swing position under control.

McCants gone in a few months. Marco is a matching salary, who is unhappy about current situation, but still has plenty of potential. I would take just about any salary, but for a starting point, and a good value- Marco. Griffin is a better player this second than JT and years younger. No offense to JT, but Griffin is a once a year big man, and JT is a 12th pick (given a stacked draft). JT will be a good player, but Griffin is a franchise changing player, that we absolutely need right now. And if we get teague or Jennings too, I would consider us a watchable, entertaining, strong team, heading into the future. Griffin is the star this franchise needs. And point gaurd needs to be addressed as well. The idea makes sense on so many levels for this franchise. Drunkee signing off.

And how the HELL do you know that? Griffin is beating up on college kids, JT is going up against the best athletes in the world. There is NO evidence Griffin is a franchise player.

Really? Have you seen Griffin play? He is so far out of those college guys league. Look at JTs stats as a sophmore and compare them to Griffins. Or even JT as a senior. Remember playing for Rider gets different competition than playing for Oklahoma. I love JT, but I'm realistic on my evaluations of talent of the two.

Website · Post #18 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Mon Mar 2, 2009 2:58 am

Thompson also went from playing PG, to SF, and within the last 3-4 years has started to play PF/C. That shows his ability to learn and get better. You cannot state Griffin is better than Thompson like it's a fact, when Griffin plays against college kids. Also, no one knows if this kid is a franchise PF, just look at Shelden Williams.

I'm high on Griffin, but I'm more realistic in his evaluation than you are.

SacKingZZZ · Post #19 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Mon Mar 2, 2009 3:30 am

I know what you're saying Nicky but comparing Shelden and Griffin is like comparing apples and oranges. Shelden had significant questions about his athletic ability combined with his lack of size coming out of school. He has the double whammy going against him and both have obviously limited him at the NBA level. Griffin, if he does prove to be a little on the short side, still has just about the most superior athleticism coming from a power player since Dwight Howard, and you make up for lack of size with either athleticism or skill, and Blake may indeed have both of those to fall back on.

Jason probably has some of the same tools and positives to fall back on (and likely more size), but even if it's "just" college, Griffin clearly has more poise and control of his skillset than Jason does after 4 years of college and 3/4's of a year in the NBA.

murray · Post #20 » by **murray** » Mon Mar 2, 2009 6:43 am

Nicky Nix Nook wrote:Thompson also went from playing PG, to SF, and within the last 3-4 years has started to play PF/C. That shows his ability to learn and get better. You cannot state Griffin is better than Thompson like it's a fact, when Griffin plays against college kids. Also, no one knows if this kid is a franchise PF, just look at Shelden Williams.

I'm high on Griffin, but I'm more realistic in his evaluation than you are.

Sheldon had alot of critics coming out of college. Griffin has no one doubting he will be the top pick. I doubt anyone would argue that Okafor should have been taken over Dwight Howard now. Griffin is a freak athlete with good instincts for the game. JT is a role player (not star) who at best will turn into Lamarcus Aldrich currently. I think JT tops out 17/9, while Griffin could be that his first year. Griffin could have 25+/14 in his better years.

I'm a big JT fan, but if Blake Griffin is on the board, you do not let that slip through your fingers.