[Game] Warriors @ Kings
- Thread starter rainmaker
- Start date
Beginning of the year? If you can't even acknowledge a coaching change 7 games in, the effect that would have, and aren't even aware of the positive direction we were heading in Feb, I don't have a reason to continue this conversation.
And for the record, some on here are intelligent enough to separate this crap roster from coaching decisions. Two entirely different things.
To your above post, of course the roster is a huge problem. So is Smarts decision making. For some reason you can talk about one and not the other? Yeah, ok dude.
And for the record, some on here are intelligent enough to separate this crap roster from coaching decisions. Two entirely different things.
To your above post, of course the roster is a huge problem. So is Smarts decision making. For some reason you can talk about one and not the other? Yeah, ok dude.
The players get a ton of **** on here. A ton.
The thing that frustrates me is that the coach is supposed to be the one stable piece. The players are young, you can't fast forward through life and predict how good or bad, dumb or smart they will be 2-3 years from now. So the coach's job is to make it as easy as possible for these guys to reach their potential.
When you play a lineup that doesn't work... Undersized, too selfish, too offense heavy, too defense heavy .. whatever it may be, your automatically lowering the potential of your team before you even step on the court.
If you go small, you will get out rebounded and mismatched. On a team like ours that needs to maximize EVERY ounce of 'goodness' available to us .. tacking on the downsides of going small to all of our other issues is not the right move. We are handing our opponents advantages every night .. we can't afford to give those things up.
Right now we are going small, rotating our starters in a way that doesn't make sense, playing all of our offensive guys in the starting unit, and including no defense presence in our starting unit.
That is 4 advantages we are giving our opponents every night. Again, these are things that do not have to be this way. What would I do?
Evans/Thomas
Thornton/Jimmer
Garcia/Salmons/Donte
Hayes/JT/Donte
Cousins/JT/Donte
Add two role players ( and our two veterans ) to the starting crew. Both guys are passive players on offense. Hayes is strictly a passer and offensive rebounder who won't steal shots from anyone. Cisco is a spot up shooter.
Have the bench feature IT/Salmons/JT.
It's not perfect, but I think it is the best we can do with this roster.
For those who would rather place Donte in the starting unit over Cisco .. I wouldn't feel comfortable with the lack of 3pt shooting in that lineup, with Thornton being the only guy who can hit 3's at over .300 3p%.
The thing that frustrates me is that the coach is supposed to be the one stable piece. The players are young, you can't fast forward through life and predict how good or bad, dumb or smart they will be 2-3 years from now. So the coach's job is to make it as easy as possible for these guys to reach their potential.
When you play a lineup that doesn't work... Undersized, too selfish, too offense heavy, too defense heavy .. whatever it may be, your automatically lowering the potential of your team before you even step on the court.
If you go small, you will get out rebounded and mismatched. On a team like ours that needs to maximize EVERY ounce of 'goodness' available to us .. tacking on the downsides of going small to all of our other issues is not the right move. We are handing our opponents advantages every night .. we can't afford to give those things up.
Right now we are going small, rotating our starters in a way that doesn't make sense, playing all of our offensive guys in the starting unit, and including no defense presence in our starting unit.
That is 4 advantages we are giving our opponents every night. Again, these are things that do not have to be this way. What would I do?
Evans/Thomas
Thornton/Jimmer
Garcia/Salmons/Donte
Hayes/JT/Donte
Cousins/JT/Donte
Add two role players ( and our two veterans ) to the starting crew. Both guys are passive players on offense. Hayes is strictly a passer and offensive rebounder who won't steal shots from anyone. Cisco is a spot up shooter.
Have the bench feature IT/Salmons/JT.
It's not perfect, but I think it is the best we can do with this roster.
For those who would rather place Donte in the starting unit over Cisco .. I wouldn't feel comfortable with the lack of 3pt shooting in that lineup, with Thornton being the only guy who can hit 3's at over .300 3p%.
Really? I'm the one who's being one-sided?
I've never once said "Smart=GOAT" or anything of that nature. Not once. He has problems with using too deep of a bench and misplaying guys like Chuck Hayes. So instead of calling me one-sided, why don't you think about your own bias against Smart and understand where the problems with this team lie. Lack of role players, young franchise cornerstones, pieces that don't fit together, lack of a defensive mentality, and yes, Smart's misue of the current team he has.
I've never once said "Smart=GOAT" or anything of that nature. Not once. He has problems with using too deep of a bench and misplaying guys like Chuck Hayes. So instead of calling me one-sided, why don't you think about your own bias against Smart and understand where the problems with this team lie. Lack of role players, young franchise cornerstones, pieces that don't fit together, lack of a defensive mentality, and yes, Smart's misue of the current team he has.
It's just so hard to say this really changes much....you then have a 180 lb fragile SF who would get manhandled by most 3's and who just stands in the corner and chucks....and then a 6"6 who cant jump over a credit card playing PF. This team like everyone has talked about in here just isn't constructed that well. I think JJ just being a complete flop has puzzled everyone, I mean this is the same guy that they wouldnt trade for Amare (in his prime) and likely would've kept Lebron in Cleveland
I'd say 3rd qtr. They had a chance to establish the paint and work through Cousins, and they tried to get in a shootout. I didn't understand all the helping the Kings were trying to do on D, then just got torched repeatedly from the arc. It was puzzling watching Dorell and Rush just shoot wide open 3's
That's been a big problem all season long. We give up numerous open 3s every game because we choose to have our perimeter players help every single time the ball is thrown inside, even against a non-threat. Sometimes we have guys helping when they shouldn't, resulting in us triple teaming a post player. Smart clearly has chosen this defensive scheme, in a sense daring teams to beat us fmo the outside rather than inside. Problem is it doesn't really work ... I think teams also know they can attack our frontline on the defensive end, because once Cousins picks up some quick fouls our chance of winning the game is significantly lower. Hayes is a good defender but not against the likes of LM Aldridge and other quick, long players. I mean, when you end up putting Garcia on Dirk Nowitzki you know something is wrong with your interior D.
If Smart doesn't start playing the guys properly I want him out of here. Thanks for the work coach, you did pretty well till the end. Petrie is to be blamed as well.
If Smart doesn't start playing the guys properly I want him out of here. Thanks for the work coach, you did pretty well till the end. Petrie is to be blamed as well.
Correct.
Precisely, the last 30 seconds of the 3rd quarter.
Here's the sequence of events that happened (no judgments, just the events):
* Warriors were defended VERY well, and they made a contested 3 pt shot as the clock was running out. Kings Down 7.
* Tyreke walks the ball up the floor, and proceeds to pound it like we've all seen him do a hundred times.
DMC floats out past the 3 pt line and they miss on their weak-sauce "pick-n-roll" attempt.
Tyreke doesn't get past anyone, and passes it to IT curling around the 3 pt line with 6 seconds left on the shotclock.
IT desperately tries to create, loses the handle, Warriors get a fastbreak.
Tyreke tries to catch up and smacks the layup shooter HARD right on the head. Flagrant foul.
Warriors inbound the ball, with Tyreke standing next to DMC's man at the top of the key with 4 seconds left in the 3rd quarter. Tyreke again went braindead for a second and didn't cover his man, leaving the 3 pt shooter open who made the 3. Kings down 11, and come out demoralized in the 4th.
Game over.
Precisely, the last 30 seconds of the 3rd quarter.
Here's the sequence of events that happened (no judgments, just the events):
* Warriors were defended VERY well, and they made a contested 3 pt shot as the clock was running out. Kings Down 7.
* Tyreke walks the ball up the floor, and proceeds to pound it like we've all seen him do a hundred times.
DMC floats out past the 3 pt line and they miss on their weak-sauce "pick-n-roll" attempt.
Tyreke doesn't get past anyone, and passes it to IT curling around the 3 pt line with 6 seconds left on the shotclock.
IT desperately tries to create, loses the handle, Warriors get a fastbreak.
Tyreke tries to catch up and smacks the layup shooter HARD right on the head. Flagrant foul.
Warriors inbound the ball, with Tyreke standing next to DMC's man at the top of the key with 4 seconds left in the 3rd quarter. Tyreke again went braindead for a second and didn't cover his man, leaving the 3 pt shooter open who made the 3. Kings down 11, and come out demoralized in the 4th.
Game over.
Let's try an alternative spin:
Here's the sequence of events that happened (no judgments, just the events):
* Warriors made a contested 3 pt shot as the clock was running out. Kings Down 7.
* Tyreke walks the ball up the floor, and proceeds to run clock as we look to get the final good shot of the quarter
DMC comes out past the 3 pt line for the pick and roll, but the Warriors defend it and nothing develops
Tyreke can't get past his man and passes it to IT curling around the 3 pt line with 6 seconds gleft on the shotclock.
IT tries to create in traffic, loses the handle, Warriors get a fastbreak.
Tyreke races back to try to stop the resulting breakout, and smacks the layup shooter on the head flying in from behind. Refs call it a flagrant foul.
Warriors inbound the ball, with Tyreke standing next to DMC's man at the top of the key with 4 seconds left in the 3rd quarter. Tyreke doesn't react on his man, leaving Rush to hit the three to put the Kings down 11 going into the 4th, and they never recover.
That's cool, too.
Both of them describe what happened.
I'm not gonna say my wording wasn't more negatively descriptive, but it IS what happened, and I think a better description of what actually occurred.
But I really don't care how it's described - I care that it happened.
It CAN'T continue to happen if the Kings want to win games - they simply aren't good enough to throw points down the drain like that as often as they do.
Both of them describe what happened.
I'm not gonna say my wording wasn't more negatively descriptive, but it IS what happened, and I think a better description of what actually occurred.
But I really don't care how it's described - I care that it happened.
It CAN'T continue to happen if the Kings want to win games - they simply aren't good enough to throw points down the drain like that as often as they do.
Dude has sucked at D this entire year. I dont get why he's gotten such a free pass by fans around here. He's a shorter, less efficient, more selfish version of Kevin Martin....And by that I mean he's a short, streaky, selfish, one dimensional player.
I really hope we trade him. He's a bad fit with Reke....And just about all the rest of the roster.
I really hope we trade him. He's a bad fit with Reke....And just about all the rest of the roster.
Last edited:
Thing is, on our roster could we get more bang for our buck by paying another player 8M to fill a hole? I think we might, but that's speculation. Is MT worth 8M in our backcourt, compared to spending that 8M on a starting SF or PG, and moving Reke to SG?
But, on a roster with a more balanced backcourt, who need a pure scorer, MT could be a great deal. Could still be here if we shuffle our pieces correctly. So paying him 8M to take Reke out of the offense, while giving up points in the backcourt next to IT isn't a great deal imo. But if a guy like Reke isn't at SF, and you're not such a crap, small ball defensive team is could be a much better deal.
But, on a roster with a more balanced backcourt, who need a pure scorer, MT could be a great deal. Could still be here if we shuffle our pieces correctly. So paying him 8M to take Reke out of the offense, while giving up points in the backcourt next to IT isn't a great deal imo. But if a guy like Reke isn't at SF, and you're not such a crap, small ball defensive team is could be a much better deal.