Who's the real starter?

[spudfan]

That, in a nutshell, pretty much says exactly how I feel. Nice post.

Thanks I think we can pull it off in the end, in large thanks to Vivek. There are way too many owners out there who are willing to fire their coach for not getting lots of wins. Vivek seems to realize that winning right now isn't the most important part so Malone should feel comfortable doing his thing without fear of losing his job. If we didn't have a brand new owner right, after signing a player to a franchise level contract, a head coach would be all about winning right away instead of building the team up from the studs.

PS. YOUR GOING DOWN THIS WEEK IN FANTASY!!!!

 

[Section 101]

I don't know. I disagree. What you are describing is certainly possible. It makes sense on paper, but it isn't necessarily happening on the court right now. A few points.

-Thomas is averaging more assists than Vasquez despite playing 'in a lineup that can't score'
-Thomas is outplaying Vasquez by such a massive margin that your points do not matter. Thomas is playing THAT much better.
-Vasquez has been a train wreck defensively.
-Is it not conceivable that Cousins could get BETTER looks because there is another scoring threat on the floor? Right now he is the only guy who can score. The only guy.
-Thomas has a selfish reputation which I do believe he has earned, but if Malone's offense calls for Cousins getting the ball in the post, he should get the ball in the post regardless of who is delivering the ball to him
-If Vasquez is a better passer than Thomas, but worse at just about every conceivable basketball skill... then just how important is his passing?
-I believe that adding Outlaw + McLemore + Thompson into the starting lineup and subtracting Salmons + Thornton + Patterson leaves enough shots for Isaiah and DeMarcus. Salmons shoots more than Outlaw, Patterson shoots more than Thompson, and Thornton shoots more than McLemore. IT shoots more than GV, but it should even out.

Just some stuff to consider. I don't know the right answer, and I cannot know the right answer until Malone actually makes the move and we get a chance to see it. Remember, Thomas has never been given the opportunity to start under a competent coach either.

Being a better passer doesn't mean you will get an assist every time. GV is getting the ball to Cuz in the post. He won't get an assist if Cuz is posting up.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

Its certainly too early to be talking about lineup changes. That being said, in maybe 5 games if we continue to see zero production from the 3 and 4 spots, its time to make a change.

The PG rotation has been fine. No need to mess with it, its working.

Thornton stays as a starter at SG. Ben is still feeling his way into the league. Plus I do think Thornton will come around.

Salmons has been garbage. If he keeps playing like this he's most likely to be benched. Considering how bad he was last year, I don't have much faith in a renaissance. Outlaw has been shooting and defending better. He offers less playmaking and shot creation ability, but given how terrible Salmons has been, those opportunities are likely better off given to the PGs or Cousins with Outlaw spotting up.

Patterson has been terrible. The only reason he's out there is for his shooting ability. Otherwise, JT is the better defender, rebounder, and post scorer. There were whispers last year about Patterson's outside shooting being a fluke. If that was indeed the case, he's likely to be benched as well and may just fall out of the rotation when Landry returns.

So, I can see a case for changing up the 3 and 4 spots. Don't foresee changes at the 1 or 2.

 

[ESP47]

It's tough because there aren't many complete players on this team that can play offense and defense.

I'd run GV, Thornton, Outlaw, Thompson and Cousins for now.

Outlaw's shooting has been spot on since preseason. His defense is also pretty good. He doesn't seem to be forcing a ton of shots either when the games are close.

Thompson is doing everything better than Patterson right now. PPat and Salmons are killing us by bricking nearly everything they throw up. We aren't going to win many games by shooting in the 30% range.

IT is playing better than GV but it's best that he comes off the bench so our 2nd best scorer doesn't have to share the ball with our best scorer right now. Especially since they don't compliment each other. I've never thought of IT as a defensive stopper but he looks like Chris Paul defensively compared to GV.

If Thornton keeps playing like this, I think McLemore will be starting later on in the year but he's going to have to fix that defense. People were talking about him as if he was a good defender coming out of college but he looks like Jimmer out there trying to defend guys. Hopefully he just needs some time under his belt to improve on that side of the ball.

 

[cuad]

I'll be happy if Salmons disappears. Here's one way Malone can do it.
9-man rotation with only 1 change to the starting lineup. There are a bunch of tweaks you can make to this to give your favorite player (PPat, GV, MT) more minutes.

JT        Cousins   JT
Cousins   Luc       Luc
PPat      Outlaw    Outlaw
GV        Ben       Ben
MT        IT        IT

I don't think it's as good as my 8-man, but it's still better than any rotation with Salmons in it.

 

[Cold]

Whether he was on board with the move or not, Malone was in Golden State when they shipped out Monta Ellis for Bogut. Yes, it gave the W's a legit big man at a discount (remember Bogut was injured at the time) but just as importantly or possibly more important was that it shifted Steph Curry from SG to PG and Klay Thompson from SF to SG.

It was that move away from small ball and to a bigger, more traditional lineup that changed the Warriors fortunes. I can't see Malone trying the opposite tactic with much hope of success.

Excellent post

 

[Cold]

starting at the 3 spot?

ideally no. i dont want ppat at 3. but we badly needed a 3pt shooter for spacing. not many shooters to choose from.

 

[Bricklayer]

ideally no. i dont want ppat at 3. but we badly needed a 3pt shooter for spacing. not many shooters to choose from.

 

[KingMilz]

Whether he was on board with the move or not, Malone was in Golden State when they shipped out Monta Ellis for Bogut. Yes, it gave the W's a legit big man at a discount (remember Bogut was injured at the time) but just as importantly or possibly more important was that it shifted Steph Curry from SG to PG and Klay Thompson from SF to SG.

It was that move away from small ball and to a bigger, more traditional lineup that changed the Warriors fortunes. I can't see Malone trying the opposite tactic with much hope of success.

They still played small line ups even with Bogut for nearly the whole year and in the playoffs where they had Jack @PG, Steph@ SG and Klay @ SF with great success for long periods so they still played small ball.........They looked at there best in the playoffs when Lee went down and put Barnes @ PF which allowed them to blow past Denver who were favourites in that series. They shipped Ellis cause he was holding both Curry and Klay back much like Thornton will be doing to #M16. I don't see why we can't do the same with Thomas @ SG (defends PG's), Vasquez @PG and Ben Mac @ SF.

Malone if anything had a lot of success with small ball in GS, I'm not saying we should start this line up but we should give it a bit more of a go and play it when our SF's and Thornton are giving us nothing.

 

[Chubbs]

Because of that whole "player development" thing. Ben McLemore is a SG in the purest sense of the term. We want him learning how to play the position. To get some exposure defending SG's around the league. To improve his ball-handling against quicker defenders at the SG.

Agreed. The lack of talent on the team should never affect Mclemores development. He's a two guard. He's the prototype. Let him be that. It's not his fault the sf position is dreadful. I was in favor of starting outlaw. That's not saying anything great about outlaw, but salmons is so bad. How he continues to get 25-30 mpg is one of life's great mysteries. And multiple coaches have used him despite the clear drop off. This may speak to just how bad outlaw is more than anything.

 

[ppine]

Problem is we only have 2 real starters (GV & Cuz) and the rest of the players don't belong in the starting lineup of any NBA team. with McLemore being the only one with a pass because of his youth and inexperience

At first I had an emotional reaction to this quote, but then realized it is closer to the truth than most of us would like to admit.
I resent all of the rationalizations people have as to why Isaiah Thomas is not that good. How many 5' 9" guys do you know that can take over an NBA game playing against guys like Chris Paul and Stephan Curry?

 

[HndsmCelt]

At first I had an emotional reaction to this quote, but then realized it is closer to the truth than most of us would like to admit.
I resent all of the rationalizations people have as to why Isaiah Thomas is not that good. How many 5' 9" guys do you know that can take over an NBA game playing against guys like Chris Paul and Stephan Curry?

I love me some IT. He is making a strong case for 6th man of the year, but too many starting PG can just shoot over him and although greatly improvedon hisassists, he is and forever SHOULD be a shoot first or scoring PG... that is the greatness he brings from the bench. But with DMC out there and defensive mindset for the team GV although far from optimal is a better choice to START... not necessarily finish. I really think that at this point we are better off with a role-playing average starting PG backed up by a top notch 6th man.

 

[Hadlowe]

At first I had an emotional reaction to this quote, but then realized it is closer to the truth than most of us would like to admit.
I resent all of the rationalizations people have as to why Isaiah Thomas is not that good. How many 5' 9" guys do you know that can take over an NBA game playing against guys like Chris Paul and Stephan Curry?

The IT thing is a bit of a non-sequitur. I don't know that anyone is saying IT isn't good. He is a prototype sixth-man. You want your sixth man to take on the scoring load, but also bring a change of pace to the offense. You don't want that from your starting point guard unless he can take over a game at the level of Westbrook or Rose. Those guys are nearly impossible to defend. IT is not.

IT is starting caliber, but is best suited to the sixth-man position.

 

[cuad]

heheh, the two biggest nba heart throbs grabbing each other in one pic.

 

[pshn80]

At first I had an emotional reaction to this quote, but then realized it is closer to the truth than most of us would like to admit.
I resent all of the rationalizations people have as to why Isaiah Thomas is not that good. How many 5' 9" guys do you know that can take over an NBA game playing against guys like Chris Paul and Stephan Curry?

Isaiah, just get us a win. You have the ball. Do it!

 

[Cold]

They still played small line ups even with Bogut for nearly the whole year and in the playoffs where they had Jack @PG, Steph@ SG and Klay @ SF with great success for long periods so they still played small ball.........They looked at there best in the playoffs when Lee went down and put Barnes @ PF which allowed them to blow past Denver who were favourites in that series. They shipped Ellis cause he was holding both Curry and Klay back much like Thornton will be doing to #M16. I don't see why we can't do the same with Thomas @ SG (defends PG's), Vasquez @PG and Ben Mac @ SF.

Malone if anything had a lot of success with small ball in GS, I'm not saying we should start this line up but we should give it a bit more of a go and play it when our SF's and Thornton are giving us nothing.

This is not true. I've a been a Warriors fan since the 80s. I watched every Warriors game last year. Jack and Curry together was horrific on defense everytime. That duo together lost as many games as they won. I can easily provide statastics to back this up. Curry/Klay was 100x better on both ends of the floor. Small ball worked vs Denver because Denver was running Chandler at 4, Faried was hobbling, and Karl himself fell in love with small ball.

Jack/Curry/Klay at 1/2/3 made us Warriors fans yank our hair out every minute they were on the floor together. It made Curry a midget defender at 2, and Klay an ordinary defender at 3 (whereas he was really good defensively at 1/2). Defensively it was a disaster. Offensively it was nothing special. Jack had the clutch DNA (the ONLY reason why he was on the floor in crunch time), but team wise, ball movement stopped, nothing but hero ball, just ugly basketball.

Another thing is Cousins, as gifted offensively as he is, is not the defensive anchor that Bogut is at this moment. You could run 4 wings out there for stretches with a Bogut, Dwight, Hibbert, etc. in the middle. Not with Cousin. He's just not a small ball defensive anchor. At least not yet.

 

[Kingster]

Thomas has been effective mostly BECAUSE he's often playing with a lineup that can't score so he's allowed and needed to basically look almost exclusively for his own shot. GV starts because ideally his job is to help feed Cousins and like it or not, our other "best" complimentary offensive players. Starting Thomas potentially robs Cuz of his best looks and mostly wastes whatever value GV brings to the team while also depriving IT of his best ability to create his own offense.

No, Thomas has been effective because he's good. There are a ton of players in this league that would do zip in the same lineup because they aren't good. If by some strange phenomena in the universe Thomas was surrounded by some finishers you'd see his assist totals go waaaay up. As it is now, his game is constricted, not expanded, constricted by the poor shooters around him.

 

[sdballer]

No, Thomas has been effective because he's good. There are a ton of players in this league that would do zip in the same lineup because they aren't good. If by some strange phenomena in the universe Thomas was surrounded by some finishers you'd see his assist totals go waaaay up. As it is now, his game is constricted, not expanded, constricted by the poor shooters around him.

As usual your IT crush blinds you to what someone was saying. I'm not suggesting IT isn't good. I'm suggesting his style of play lends itself best to being a scorer first and passer second. On the bench where he can be a primary scorer, it fits better with his strengths and weaknesses. If there were better scorers on the court with him, his game would benefit more (from less defensive attention) than the players he plays with.

He started last year with Reke and Cousins yet he didn't have massive assist totals. Partly that was due to Smarts non-existent system but it was mostly due to the way he plays. It's really not a criticism as I think he's great at what he does and that it can have a big role for this team.

Why can't there ever be "grey" with you when it comes to IT?

 

[Hadlowe]

No, Thomas has been effective because he's good. There are a ton of players in this league that would do zip in the same lineup because they aren't good. If by some strange phenomena in the universe Thomas was surrounded by some finishers you'd see his assist totals go waaaay up. As it is now, his game is constricted, not expanded, constricted by the poor shooters around him.

Poor shooters like McLemore? Sorry, but you're just wrong here. IT is a good player, but he has looked pretty good the first three games because he has been allowed to take 20 shots while he is on the floor. IT is a scorer, first and foremost. Floor leadership has never been his strong suit. Passing is the backup plan when the lane closes up and he doesn't have space to get off a jumper.

 

[Bricklayer]

I resent all of the rationalizations people have as to why Isaiah Thomas is not that good. How many 5' 9" guys do you know that can take over an NBA game playing against guys like Chris Paul and Stephan Curry?

If only the NBA would do away with this stupid teammates concept and just convert itself to a 1 on 1 tournament!

IT has found a home as bench gunner. Its a home I foresaw for him for two years of Smart dumbness. At a certain point you have to start locking in to what works/what roles you have filled in the future. Cousins and IT fill their current roles pretty well, although ideally IT would be biger and able to swing through a couple of positions for flexibility as 6th man. Vasquez and McLemore MIGHT fill their projected roles. Don't know yet. I think JT could be a 3rd big and fill that role if we had a shotblocker there next to Cuz as a starter, but with all the pointless small PF clutter we've introduced, who knows. Everything else is a big pile of poo.

 

[SacTownKid]

Could be a solid bench developing but on paper that starting unit has a much better chance to work together and for Cousins. Going to take time. Also, the last game skewed those stats pretty heavily considering the amount of pure garbage time/lack of pressure in that Warriors game.

Also off the bench players like JT and IT have free reign to be what they are: production players, and off the bench they can do things you just don't want them doing next to Cousins. If I see JT every post up while Cousins looks on or IT go solo while everyone stands by again I'll barf. Don't mind it when they are playing against the other teams bench and Cousins is already settled into the game but other than that, no thanks. Look like a great bench combo though.

 

[SacTownKid]

Is it time to maybe see if the Bucks are regretting signing Larry Sanders to that big deal yet?

 

[Bricklayer]

Is it time to maybe see if the Bucks are regretting signing Larry Sanders to that big deal yet?

See how? I hope you don't mean by us ending up as the team regretting having him on that deal?

I get the idea, and we are indeed the beggars who can barely be choosers, but at $12mil per...he'd damn well not be the limited bencher he's been at all points except Jan-April of last year.

 

[Glenn]

No, Thomas has been effective because he's good. There are a ton of players in this league that would do zip in the same lineup because they aren't good. If by some strange phenomena in the universe Thomas was surrounded by some finishers you'd see his assist totals go waaaay up. As it is now, his game is constricted, not expanded, constricted by the poor shooters around him.

You both are right. Not sure why this is an argument. Not sure if his assists would go up but if he tosses the ball to McLemore, it will be a good start.

 

[Bricklayer]

Could be a solid bench developing but on paper that starting unit has a much better chance to work together and for Cousins. Going to take time. Also, the last game skewed those stats pretty heavily considering the amount of pure garbage time/lack of pressure in that Warriors game.

Also off the bench players like JT and IT have free reign to be what they are: production players, and off the bench they can do things you just don't want them doing next to Cousins. If I see JT every post up while Cousins looks on or IT go solo while everyone stands by again I'll barf. Don't mind it when they are playing against the other teams bench and Cousins is already settled into the game but other than that, no thanks. Look like a great bench combo though.

JT and IT are wildly different examples. JT is a true roleplayer. He'd never post up for his ego's sake with Cuz out there. He plays a good complimentary game until he's the only big on the floor.

 

[Kingster]

As usual your IT crush blinds you to what someone was saying. I'm not suggesting IT isn't good. I'm suggesting his style of play lends itself best to being a scorer first and passer second. On the bench where he can be a primary scorer, it fits better with his strengths and weaknesses. If there were better scorers on the court with him, his game would benefit more (from less defensive attention) than the players he plays with.

He started last year with Reke and Cousins yet he didn't have massive assist totals. Partly that was due to Smarts non-existent system but it was mostly due to the way he plays. It's really not a criticism as I think he's great at what he does and that it can have a big role for this team.

Why can't there ever be "grey" with you when it comes to IT?

No, I'm just reading your language as you state it; not mind reading like you are. Now that you've expanded your comments, it makes some sense; before it didn't. And sorry, Tyreke wasn't much of a finisher. Yeah, he might start and finish his own play from beginning to end, but finisher in the sense that he finishes somebody else's pass? Not so much. A guy like Griffin is a great finisher. You can throw him a lob, he'll rise above everybody else, and finish. A guy like Allen is a different kind of finisher. Throw it to him for an outside shot and you'll get the assist. Not Tyreke's strength. Tyreke's strength is his penetration skill, not finishing skill. McLemore has much more of an opportunity to be a finisher than Tyreke ever will.

 

[sdballer]

No, I'm just reading your language as you state it; not mind reading like you are. Now that you've expanded your comments, it makes some sense; before it didn't. And sorry, Tyreke wasn't much of a finisher. Yeah, he might start and finish his own play from beginning to end, but finisher in the sense that he finishes somebody else's pass? Not so much. A guy like Griffin is a great finisher. You can throw him a lob, he'll rise above everybody else, and finish. A guy like Allen is a different kind of finisher. Throw it to him for an outside shot and you'll get the assist. Not Tyreke's strength. Tyreke's strength is his penetration skill, not finishing skill. McLemore has much more of an opportunity to be a finisher than Tyreke ever will.

Thanks. Mind reading is more of a hobby but I enjoy it.

Don't know that I disagree that Reke is better at creating his own offense than finishing passes right now but that might also have something to do with the fact that his pg rarely passed him the ball. Just like Cousins "finished" a shockingly low number of plays last year and mostly had to create for himself.

But you are right, if the only finishes we are discussing are ones that the great almighty IT initiates than yes, he needs more finishers. After all, I think we get an extra half point for any play he's involved in.

Or at least, that's what I imagine goes through your brain as you frantically search online for opportunities to defend him.

 

[Hadlowe]

No, I'm just reading your language as you state it; not mind reading like you are. Now that you've expanded your comments, it makes some sense; before it didn't. And sorry, Tyreke wasn't much of a finisher. Yeah, he might start and finish his own play from beginning to end, but finisher in the sense that he finishes somebody else's pass? Not so much. A guy like Griffin is a great finisher. You can throw him a lob, he'll rise above everybody else, and finish. A guy like Allen is a different kind of finisher. Throw it to him for an outside shot and you'll get the assist. Not Tyreke's strength. Tyreke's strength is his penetration skill, not finishing skill. McLemore has much more of an opportunity to be a finisher than Tyreke ever will.

I would argue with you but I am watching Tyreke fail to finish right now.

That Anthony Davis kid, though, he might stick around the league for a while.

 

[ppine]

The only thing really wrong with the Kings is that the franchise player is no longer a secret weapon. Even teams like Atlanta have figured out that if you take away what Cousins likes to do by collapsing on him, and frustrating him the Kings' supporting cast is not that good most nights. There are some bright spots with Ben, and IT but the 3 and 4 positions have been liabilities in every game so far.

I think it is Steven Smith that talks about the difference between great NBA players and average ones. The great players have productive nights 4 games out of 5, or even 4.5 nights out of 5. The average players, 2-3 nights out of 5. The crummy players more like 1 night out of 5.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I feel like a lot of people are over analyzing this.

I see a lot of nitpicking going on in regards to Isaiah Thomas. "He shouldn't start because people can shoot over him" "He shouldn't start because he shoots to much" "He shouldn't start because he's playing SO well off the bench"

Those points are all fine and dandy. All valid, aside from the 'he shouldn't start' part.

I agree with Brick and others, he is destined for a 6th man role on a contending team. That is where he will likely find his home, either here or somewhere else.

All of that being said, Vasquez is playing like someone who doesn't even deserve a rotation spot. He's worse than Beno or Bibby on defense, and he can't shoot. He does one thing better than Isaiah Thomas, and that one thing he does better isn't helping us in any way. It hasn't been on display in any tangible manner.

And the inconvenient truth is that Isaiah Thomas should be shooting the ball for this years Kings team. If you put him in the starting lineup without making any other changes (I WOULD make other changes) I want Thomas shooting more than Salmons, Patterson, and Thornton with the way those guys are going.

It's ludicrous that Thomas is scoring 20 PPG as a bench guard. He is averaging more minutes and assists than Vasquez as well. He's playing starter minutes, he's on the floor at the end of games, he is doing everything a starter does aside from starting.

So with Malone playing Thomas like a starter anyway, I don't see why he wouldn't, or shouldn't just start Isaiah and maybe we can avoid playing from 10+ down in the second quarter every night.

For the record, if Vasquez was playing well I wouldn't be calling for Isaiah even if Isaiah was playing better. Right now it's not a matter of 'better' ... it's a matter of competent vs. Horrendous.