Rudy Gay to Sacramento!!!
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
indeed, absolutely agreed, and that's all well and good... but it's also a bit of a shortsighted view to take. i don't believe the kings will actually "look a lot better" with the addition of rudy gay. i expect ball movement to stagnate often with this reconfigured starting lineup, and while i'm appreciative of the obvious talent upgrade, i'm one of the few who actually sees this trade making the team worse in the short-term, provided there isn't an immediate follow-up trade. i'm completely fine with that, of course, because i've been looking towards the 2014 draft since tyreke evans was traded, and i'm hardly convinced that gay is actually going to impede the road to a high draft pick just because he has name recognition. high volume chuckers that require nearly 19 shots per game to come away with 19 points per game simply do not lead to wins (for the record, demarcus cousins is averaging 22 points on about 17 shots per game, and isaiah thomas is averaging 18 points on about 13 shots per game)...
there's the rehab angle, of course, that a change of scenery and a hard-nosed [rookie] head coach will do some good for rudy gay. perhaps i'm just not so optimistic. i mean, if people thought "fit" was a serious problem with cousins/evans/thomas sharing a starting lineup, well, then mike malone will have to be a magician of the highest order to make cousins/gay/thomas work. you may know what rudy gay represents as a player, but it seems like a great many kings fans don't have a clue. "black hole" has been a term thrown around to describe carl landry since he arrived for a second stint in sacramento. rudy gay makes landry look like steve nash out there. kings fans were clamoring for a "pass-first PG" for years. they got one in greivis vasquez. now he's gone, and people expect the offense to improve? with three ball-dominant players in the starting line-up? and that's before we even cross the bridge of this team's defensive deficiencies, which haven't been cured with the addition of gay as a "stretch 4" or the reinsertion of the diminutive thomas into the starting lineup...
gay's only 27 years old, so i suppose all hope isn't lost that he can be reformed into a productive player who knows when to pick his spots. but it's unlikely; bad habits are hard to eradicate from a pro in his eighth year. he's had a couple seasons of solid efficiency from the field, but mostly he's been a chucker who the defense can very easily force into a bad shot. again, it doesn't bother me, because i expect the losses to keep piling up, i expect a high draft pick, and i expect the kings' front office to either flip the asset of gay's enormous expiring contract for better-fitting pieces next season, or allow it to expire so they can become major players in the '15 free agent class. i just see a lotta kings fans attempting to rationalize gay into a player he is not. an inefficient chucker doesn't cease to be an inefficient chucker just because he puts on a kings uni. purple-colored glasses, and all that...
there's the rehab angle, of course, that a change of scenery and a hard-nosed [rookie] head coach will do some good for rudy gay. perhaps i'm just not so optimistic. i mean, if people thought "fit" was a serious problem with cousins/evans/thomas sharing a starting lineup, well, then mike malone will have to be a magician of the highest order to make cousins/gay/thomas work. you may know what rudy gay represents as a player, but it seems like a great many kings fans don't have a clue. "black hole" has been a term thrown around to describe carl landry since he arrived for a second stint in sacramento. rudy gay makes landry look like steve nash out there. kings fans were clamoring for a "pass-first PG" for years. they got one in greivis vasquez. now he's gone, and people expect the offense to improve? with three ball-dominant players in the starting line-up? and that's before we even cross the bridge of this team's defensive deficiencies, which haven't been cured with the addition of gay as a "stretch 4" or the reinsertion of the diminutive thomas into the starting lineup...
gay's only 27 years old, so i suppose all hope isn't lost that he can be reformed into a productive player who knows when to pick his spots. but it's unlikely; bad habits are hard to eradicate from a pro in his eighth year. he's had a couple seasons of solid efficiency from the field, but mostly he's been a chucker who the defense can very easily force into a bad shot. again, it doesn't bother me, because i expect the losses to keep piling up, i expect a high draft pick, and i expect the kings' front office to either flip the asset of gay's enormous expiring contract for better-fitting pieces next season, or allow it to expire so they can become major players in the '15 free agent class. i just see a lotta kings fans attempting to rationalize gay into a player he is not. an inefficient chucker doesn't cease to be an inefficient chucker just because he puts on a kings uni. purple-colored glasses, and all that...
Last edited:
I took my time to think about this trade, and at the end I have to say I really like it. First of all, as many have said, it's an upgrade in terms of talent. Gay might have some question marks, but there's no doubt he is a much better player than Patterson, Vasquez, Salmons and Hayes. Finally we got a real SF, a legit one who is a borderline all star. Then, he is still young and he's entering the prime of his career.
All of this, sending out bad contracts (Hayes),useless players (Salmons), and players who didn't fit here (Patterson, Vasquez). None of these players was a long term solution for us, so there's really nothing wrong here.
Right now it's pretty clear to me what PDA is trying to do. He is trying to turn our scrubs into better players, more talented guys and assets. I don't think he is trying to get the right pieces now. He is just trying to get assets in order to be able to get the right players in the future, maybe next year. Of course Gay has a very bad contract, but who cares? He will be an expiring next year, and there is also a chance he opts out this summer.
I'm not even worried about him and Cuz playing together. Gay and Randolph played pretty well together in the 2 full seasons they were in Memphis (I'm not counting 11/12 because Randolph only played 28 games). Shots shouldn't be a problem. We sent out around 25 shots per game, so there's room for Gay and his 15/16 shots. Actually we need someone able to score, I believe it will be easier for DMC to score inside if the defense has to guard Gay, McLemore and Thomas.
I'm happy to see an active FO. These are the deals a team like us needs. I don't care if some big experts are giving us a D for this trade. I'm pretty sure most of the people here know more about the Kings than those "experts". I'm a happy fan today, we have a better team and we got rid of some dead weights. I just hope this doesn't mean we will win too many game this year, I still want to land a top 5 pick.
So, what's next on the list? JT, Thornton and Jimmer I guess. Be ready, it should be your turn now...
All of this, sending out bad contracts (Hayes),useless players (Salmons), and players who didn't fit here (Patterson, Vasquez). None of these players was a long term solution for us, so there's really nothing wrong here.
Right now it's pretty clear to me what PDA is trying to do. He is trying to turn our scrubs into better players, more talented guys and assets. I don't think he is trying to get the right pieces now. He is just trying to get assets in order to be able to get the right players in the future, maybe next year. Of course Gay has a very bad contract, but who cares? He will be an expiring next year, and there is also a chance he opts out this summer.
I'm not even worried about him and Cuz playing together. Gay and Randolph played pretty well together in the 2 full seasons they were in Memphis (I'm not counting 11/12 because Randolph only played 28 games). Shots shouldn't be a problem. We sent out around 25 shots per game, so there's room for Gay and his 15/16 shots. Actually we need someone able to score, I believe it will be easier for DMC to score inside if the defense has to guard Gay, McLemore and Thomas.
I'm happy to see an active FO. These are the deals a team like us needs. I don't care if some big experts are giving us a D for this trade. I'm pretty sure most of the people here know more about the Kings than those "experts". I'm a happy fan today, we have a better team and we got rid of some dead weights. I just hope this doesn't mean we will win too many game this year, I still want to land a top 5 pick.
So, what's next on the list? JT, Thornton and Jimmer I guess. Be ready, it should be your turn now...
There is one hell of a passing point guard who is playing in the Dleague right now. He played last night and came 1 rebound away from a triple double his dleague debut.
Kendall Marshall, who I really liked at UNC. If you are absolutely crazy, here is the video of his last game:
He is your prototypical passing point guard. Never really had an opportunity to play in his one year on the Suns. In fact, he's only started 3 games in his career, and in those games he notched 14, 13, and 10 assists.
With the addition of Gray, Gay, and Acy ... I think the Kings should have enough size to let Ndiaye go and pick up Marshall, or just pick up Marshall anyway with our open roster spot.
Kendall Marshall, who I really liked at UNC. If you are absolutely crazy, here is the video of his last game:
He is your prototypical passing point guard. Never really had an opportunity to play in his one year on the Suns. In fact, he's only started 3 games in his career, and in those games he notched 14, 13, and 10 assists.
With the addition of Gray, Gay, and Acy ... I think the Kings should have enough size to let Ndiaye go and pick up Marshall, or just pick up Marshall anyway with our open roster spot.
There's a lot about this trade that I don't know. One thing I do know is we got rid of four mediocre vets. That's a plus. We get one mediocre vet (Gray) back in return, and then we get a younger guy with some potential (Acie). That's a net minus of three mediocre vets for the Kings. That's a plus. Then we get a guy in Gay who could be a good player for the Kings. None of the guys we just shipped out have that as a possibility. Net-Net, this a good trade.
The Kings now have athleticism in four players with IT, McLemore, Williams and Gay. (I also think Cousins is fairly athetic in terms of quickness, just not jumping ability). That's a fairly big upgrade from where this team was a couple of weeks ago. Athleticism has a multiplier effect on your team. If you have one guy, it's almost meaningless. With two guys you can make a simple melody (a la McLemore and Williams), with three guys you add some harmony, and with four guys you get a symphony. Defense starts with athleticism. You can take all the Vasquez's out there and give them coaching by the masters of defensive coaching and they are still going to be poor defensive players. At least with athletic guys you have a shot at eventually becoming a better defensive team. Also, without seeing these guys on the court, I'm betting that our rebounding just got better, if only because the worst rebounding three in the league (Salmons) is gone.
The Kings now have athleticism in four players with IT, McLemore, Williams and Gay. (I also think Cousins is fairly athetic in terms of quickness, just not jumping ability). That's a fairly big upgrade from where this team was a couple of weeks ago. Athleticism has a multiplier effect on your team. If you have one guy, it's almost meaningless. With two guys you can make a simple melody (a la McLemore and Williams), with three guys you add some harmony, and with four guys you get a symphony. Defense starts with athleticism. You can take all the Vasquez's out there and give them coaching by the masters of defensive coaching and they are still going to be poor defensive players. At least with athletic guys you have a shot at eventually becoming a better defensive team. Also, without seeing these guys on the court, I'm betting that our rebounding just got better, if only because the worst rebounding three in the league (Salmons) is gone.
Padrino, I'm not the one being short sighted here. You are assuming IT is the starting Pg of the future or that it makes us better short term and that's what I meant by better than the sorry 4. No, a better asset is what I mean. And yes, it does potentially make us worse. It's short sighted to think that's a bad thing. I don't think it improves the team at all except fixing an enormous hole at sf, that with better play with gay and bringing in other pieces could fit. It's a work in progress, but now you have more talent to work with and an enormous expiring next season. It's a piece that seemingly doesn't fit that well. But my god it's a talent upgrade. It MIGHT work. No one thought Ellis would work in Dallas either, and look at that. What we had never was going to work. Never.
I don't think I've said anything about this improving the offense. It makes it an utter mess and leaves us with no bench. But they got an asset for 4 piles of manure,off our roster, forever and ever. It's a goddamn miracle! You've gotta move forward at some point and not just sit on your hands.
This is a gamble, like Williams. They both expire next season. I just see little downside here, and we get entertaining. Who cares if the team still sucks? They suck now. They sucked 5 years ago. If you're a kings fan and losing bothers you that much, I suggest another team or just following players around the league. But it might work with a pg. That's what they need.
This isn't about fit. They know it doesn't fit, a casual fan can see that. I don't even like Gay as a player. I'm counting on him not making us better, and for IT to be crying cause he can't get shots. I'm kinda looking forward to that. A new kind of dysfunction is a welcome sight than the blah we had.
And then we unload him next season or suddenly have a 19 million roster spot available at the end of the year.
I don't think I've said anything about this improving the offense. It makes it an utter mess and leaves us with no bench. But they got an asset for 4 piles of manure,off our roster, forever and ever. It's a goddamn miracle! You've gotta move forward at some point and not just sit on your hands.
This is a gamble, like Williams. They both expire next season. I just see little downside here, and we get entertaining. Who cares if the team still sucks? They suck now. They sucked 5 years ago. If you're a kings fan and losing bothers you that much, I suggest another team or just following players around the league. But it might work with a pg. That's what they need.
This isn't about fit. They know it doesn't fit, a casual fan can see that. I don't even like Gay as a player. I'm counting on him not making us better, and for IT to be crying cause he can't get shots. I'm kinda looking forward to that. A new kind of dysfunction is a welcome sight than the blah we had.
And then we unload him next season or suddenly have a 19 million roster spot available at the end of the year.
That is accurate, although word is he's been working hard on that jump shot. Never really had an opportunity to show improvement on it, however. I also have to believe he is at least slightly better defensively than Vasquez, but that is based on assumption and nothing more. It's so hard to evaluate these guys who come into the league and never get an opportunity to play.
On that note - Vasquez would theoretically work more NOW on this team than he did before the Gay trade. Facilitation is more important now that it was before, but facilitation isn't something I would take if it was accompanied by horrendous defense.
As a flier, though, Marshall is an interesting name to me.
On that note - Vasquez would theoretically work more NOW on this team than he did before the Gay trade. Facilitation is more important now that it was before, but facilitation isn't something I would take if it was accompanied by horrendous defense.
As a flier, though, Marshall is an interesting name to me.
You have to understand that I'm saying that Ray is a better fit with our potential new line-up and not necessarily the better player. If you've got a clear #1 scorer in Cousins, and a clear #2 scorer in Gay, and a catch-and-shoot player who should give you 12-15 in Ben then what you need at the PG position is two things: facilitation to the scorers and defense.
I actually don't know if Ray will be as good a facilitator as IT, but I do know that he's far more likely to defer to Cousins/Gay and give Ben his scoring opportunities. And Ray absolutely proved that he's the best defending guard on the team.
If we want Gay to work on this team then it has to be him working as the #2 guy along-side Cousins, and that is going to be a whole lot easier to do if you have a PG who doesn't have the mindset that he has to 'get his' to continue to prove his worth on the court. IT has a chip on his shoulder and he plays that way and the absolute best thing for him is to have as big of a green light as possible when he's on the court, and that mentality is not the best one to have when you have Cousins/Gay in front of you as well as a high draft pick who requires your help to do what he does best, which is catch-and-shoot.
I don't know how anyone could have watched IT for all this time and think that he's more likely to defer to Cousins/Gay than Ray who would be happy just to play. Now if Ray comes out and defers to Cousins/Gay and just is terrible then you abandon the plan. But so far this year we've had two things working: Cousins getting his touches and being a monster, and IT having the green light as a spark-plug scorer. My preference, and this is just my preference, would be to leave the two things which have been working alone.
I actually don't know if Ray will be as good a facilitator as IT, but I do know that he's far more likely to defer to Cousins/Gay and give Ben his scoring opportunities. And Ray absolutely proved that he's the best defending guard on the team.
If we want Gay to work on this team then it has to be him working as the #2 guy along-side Cousins, and that is going to be a whole lot easier to do if you have a PG who doesn't have the mindset that he has to 'get his' to continue to prove his worth on the court. IT has a chip on his shoulder and he plays that way and the absolute best thing for him is to have as big of a green light as possible when he's on the court, and that mentality is not the best one to have when you have Cousins/Gay in front of you as well as a high draft pick who requires your help to do what he does best, which is catch-and-shoot.
I don't know how anyone could have watched IT for all this time and think that he's more likely to defer to Cousins/Gay than Ray who would be happy just to play. Now if Ray comes out and defers to Cousins/Gay and just is terrible then you abandon the plan. But so far this year we've had two things working: Cousins getting his touches and being a monster, and IT having the green light as a spark-plug scorer. My preference, and this is just my preference, would be to leave the two things which have been working alone.
The "intangible" that I like in Gay, is that he has the closer mindset and ability. He wants the ball at the end of games and has the ability to create his own shot against good defenders. No matter what a guy's stats currently are or were before, there's only a few guys around who have the ability to be an elite closer. IMO, he is one of them, which is a huge value
One thing that's been clear is that Thomas wants to start. So if having him be the starter is not the long term plan for the rest of the season, we'd probably be best to not start him at all. Otherwise, he may start to feel like he's getting 'yanked' around too much and not getting rewarded with the spot that he feels he deserves. Although if anyone can handle it, it's probably him. I just don't think it's the way to go
In total agreement with you, although I am hesitant to put McCallum out there in the starting five. Defensively, I think he has the potential to be a good defender, but you are asking him to defend the most difficult position to defend well against starters without having logged a single minute of meaningful NBA playtime. I'd love to see him as a backup for a while, and then move him into the starting five.
The other major problem is his outside shot. We really don't know how his shot is, but I would suspect from watching summer league and preseason that he is a 33% outside shooter at best. The form is reasonably consistent, so that should improve, but it wasn't there in the summer and I would be shocked if it had improved much to this point.
If you are starting McCallum, McLemore, Gay, Thompson and Cousins, that means you have one and a half floor spacers (Gay is good at corner threes, but much weaker at elbow and top of the key shots.) Isaiah doesn't hit the three very well off the bounce, but he is a great spot-up shooter given enough space.
Fredette is the guy I would start, warts and all. He doesn't need shots to be effective on offense by making sure that his man can't double Cousins or Gay. He has shown he can be deferential to the big dogs on offense. His defense is roughly as bad as Isaiah's this year, and he has a big, ball-handling wing to help him in Gay.
The other major problem is his outside shot. We really don't know how his shot is, but I would suspect from watching summer league and preseason that he is a 33% outside shooter at best. The form is reasonably consistent, so that should improve, but it wasn't there in the summer and I would be shocked if it had improved much to this point.
If you are starting McCallum, McLemore, Gay, Thompson and Cousins, that means you have one and a half floor spacers (Gay is good at corner threes, but much weaker at elbow and top of the key shots.) Isaiah doesn't hit the three very well off the bounce, but he is a great spot-up shooter given enough space.
Fredette is the guy I would start, warts and all. He doesn't need shots to be effective on offense by making sure that his man can't double Cousins or Gay. He has shown he can be deferential to the big dogs on offense. His defense is roughly as bad as Isaiah's this year, and he has a big, ball-handling wing to help him in Gay.
Love the trade. I don't see any downside to it.
I prefer IT at his current role as an energy guy off the bench. Like MassKingsFan mentioned, Kendal Marshall would be a plug-and-play addition for Vasquez. Marshall would have a lot of toys to play with...that said, he is in the D-League and still in the DL, so...
And now it's easy to imagine Exum or Smart plugged into the PG position next season.
I prefer IT at his current role as an energy guy off the bench. Like MassKingsFan mentioned, Kendal Marshall would be a plug-and-play addition for Vasquez. Marshall would have a lot of toys to play with...that said, he is in the D-League and still in the DL, so...
And now it's easy to imagine Exum or Smart plugged into the PG position next season.
I loved trades in Petrie's time and I'm surer I'll love this one. I'll miss these guys that are gone and enjoy getting to know these new guys. The team will be different but I have no idea in what ways or up or down. Be fun to see Ray play tonight. I guess I'm hoping it won't be Jimmer at PG. Hopefully they'll play balls out tonight - nothing to lose as it will never be the same. Interesting and amazing to read all your posts and the analysis they contain - everything from soup to nuts - almost sounds like a circus coming to town with amazing good and bad acts. Flip a coin and enjoy.
One of the things that I like most about Jimmer is that he's always shown a willingness to get others involved if he's the primary ball handler on the court. His biggest issues have always been that he struggles if a team blitzes him while he's handling the ball, and he also struggles on the defensive end.
He is absolutely the better shooter than Ray and I'm not completely sold that Ray is the vastly superior ball-handler/passer at this time.
But Ray is PDA's guy so you have to figure that they will want to see him play.
Given that we're not fighting for a play-off spot I don't have any real concerns about losing games if Ray starts and does poorly.
I think this is one of those situations where you have the 'throw-them-in-the-fire' crowd vs. the 'give-them-time-to-acclimate' crowd.
And my feeling has always leaned towards the 'throw-them-in-the-fire' mentality.
However, we've seen from how Malone handled Ben that he probably prefers to acclimate a guy a bit more slowly, which would be the primary reason that Ray wouldn't start immediately even if the FO felt that ultimately he'd be the best fit. So ultimately if they wanted to keep IT as the dynamic scoring punch off the bench I could see them starting Jimmer while working Ray off the bench to see him get acclimated to playing. We'll see how it plays out.
He is absolutely the better shooter than Ray and I'm not completely sold that Ray is the vastly superior ball-handler/passer at this time.
But Ray is PDA's guy so you have to figure that they will want to see him play.
Given that we're not fighting for a play-off spot I don't have any real concerns about losing games if Ray starts and does poorly.
I think this is one of those situations where you have the 'throw-them-in-the-fire' crowd vs. the 'give-them-time-to-acclimate' crowd.
And my feeling has always leaned towards the 'throw-them-in-the-fire' mentality.
However, we've seen from how Malone handled Ben that he probably prefers to acclimate a guy a bit more slowly, which would be the primary reason that Ray wouldn't start immediately even if the FO felt that ultimately he'd be the best fit. So ultimately if they wanted to keep IT as the dynamic scoring punch off the bench I could see them starting Jimmer while working Ray off the bench to see him get acclimated to playing. We'll see how it plays out.
I am 90% sure that IT will start for the foreseeable future. Maybe there is a point guard trade in the works somewhere else, but I can't see the team shipping out Thomas unless we were going to get a surefire starting point guard back in return. I would suggest Phoenix since Bledsoe is obviously their guy moving forward, and although Dragic is doing well at the 2, they may want to move him to ensure more losses and a better pick this year. Thornton would match salary-wise and give them more losses.
Here is an excellent breakdown of the trade....
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports...dy_Gay_traded_again__A_tale_of_two_deals.html
(also look for the cool article on IT linked there)
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports...dy_Gay_traded_again__A_tale_of_two_deals.html
(also look for the cool article on IT linked there)
I definitely agree with you on those bolded statements (LOL). I don't agree about IT crying about not getting enough shots; there is no evidence to support such behavior. Just the contrary in fact. Malone had to tell him to be more agressive (i.e. shoot the damned ball!) a few games ago when IT was going through an identity crisis of sorts. While I'm in agreement that there isn't a perfect fit, I'm on the fence on how much of a non-fit there is. Sometimes a good coach can make the pieces fit better than you think.
Again, your blind spot for IT rears its ugly head. He is currently 13th in the NBA in Ast% at 33%. His Assist Opportunties per game is currently 25th in the NBA, despite playing significantly less minutes than everyone ahead of him. He also has one of the worst conversion rates of assists on the guys in the top 25. Basically, a product of having to play with Ppat, Salmons and Thornton for a majority of his minutes. This misguided notion that he's not a good passer and ball-distributor is exactly that... a misguided notion. APG are purely a product of who you get your minutes with. Throw Danny Green, Boris Diaw, and Manu Ginobli as IT's bench mates, and his APG is probably in the 6.5-7 APG range.
However, if IT-Gay-Cousins is to work, then he will have to dial back his shooting. In an ideal world where you can exactly dictate everyone's shots/game, you want Cousins around 17-20, (#1 option) Gay around 14-16 (#2 option), and IT around 10-12 (#3 option). And everyone else fills in around that. That also begs the question of what happens with McLemore? He has a much higher ceiling than becoming a Danny Green like spot-up shooter/defensive guy. So do we leave IT on the bench and let Ben fall smoothly into the #3 role with the starters?
Needless to say, it's going to be exciting to watch. There's so many directions this team can now go and I see many of which can and should result in a positive direction
However, if IT-Gay-Cousins is to work, then he will have to dial back his shooting. In an ideal world where you can exactly dictate everyone's shots/game, you want Cousins around 17-20, (#1 option) Gay around 14-16 (#2 option), and IT around 10-12 (#3 option). And everyone else fills in around that. That also begs the question of what happens with McLemore? He has a much higher ceiling than becoming a Danny Green like spot-up shooter/defensive guy. So do we leave IT on the bench and let Ben fall smoothly into the #3 role with the starters?
Needless to say, it's going to be exciting to watch. There's so many directions this team can now go and I see many of which can and should result in a positive direction
Last edited:
This is where the stats fall apart. It doesn't matter nearly as much how many assist opportunity passes IT makes as where he makes them and who he makes them to. When you are talking great assist point guards, guys like Stockton, Nash, Kidd, Magic, you have to look closely at who they passed to and where their recipient got the ball. The really great passing point guards got the vast majority of their assists off of passes from mid-range to big men standing underneath the rim. That gets you very high conversion rates from your recipient, 50-70%.
The kind of passes IT makes, the ones that lead to his high assist opportunity numbers are drive and kick passes. That means passes to the high post and guys along the perimeter. Why? Because IT is already under the basket. Those passes will result in assists 40% of the time with the best shooters on the planet on your team.
Mostly I'm okay with how IT plays. He is a very good scoring point guard. He is a phenomenal sparkplug/sixth man. He is not a good, natural fit with Cousins. Slotting him into the starting lineup messes up the two good things this team has going so far this year: 1) Cousins is THE man in the starting unit; and 2) Thomas can freelance as much as he likes when he's in off the bench.
The kind of passes IT makes, the ones that lead to his high assist opportunity numbers are drive and kick passes. That means passes to the high post and guys along the perimeter. Why? Because IT is already under the basket. Those passes will result in assists 40% of the time with the best shooters on the planet on your team.
Mostly I'm okay with how IT plays. He is a very good scoring point guard. He is a phenomenal sparkplug/sixth man. He is not a good, natural fit with Cousins. Slotting him into the starting lineup messes up the two good things this team has going so far this year: 1) Cousins is THE man in the starting unit; and 2) Thomas can freelance as much as he likes when he's in off the bench.