Game Charting: Do Kevin Martin and Jason Thompson Need a Point Guard?

by Ziller on Mar 28, 2009 9:26 AM PDT in Numbers Comment 61 comments

Shot creation is a funny thing. That term -- "shot creation" implies something positive. Shots are the only way to score in basketball (whether from the field or the line), and the idea that they are "created" is one that would seem to boost the perceived value of the creators. This would be shooters/scorers and assist men.

The Kings do not have any assist men, per se. Beno Udrih, the top assister, ranks No. 36 in the league in per-minute assists. Udrih (as we told you before he arrived) is a shooting point guard. He's a minor (and not nearly as good) Bibby -- not the pass-first cat Petrie and the local media made him out to be. I think the last two seasons of games have beared that out.

Also, the team traded Brad Miller, the best passing big man and a fulcrum of the offense, at midseason. Spencer Hawes has been kneaded into the Next Brad, but he's not there. He averages roughly half the assists Miller did, even in a down-assist, down-minute season for Miller.

This team, much as Natt and Carril and Sactown Royalty and Reynolds hates it, is a poor passing team.

So shot creation comes down to the shooters, the scorers. The assumption would be that this hurts the team's offense -- that more and better passing would result in easier shots and higher efficiency levels. So I watched the Memphis game with a pen and a pad, and I charted each shot attempt with a mind on assists and potential assists.

An assist, as we all know, is a pass that leads directly to a basket. There are two inherent problems with the assist as a statistic ... beyond alleged home cookin' by loosy goosy statisticians. The first problem: passes that directly lead to free throws aren't registered as assists. This deflates the assist totals for passers on high-FT teams. (For what it's worth, Sacramento is a high FT team.) This could be fixed easily, if the league would just add 0.5 assists for a pass resulting in one made FT and 1 assist for a pass resulting in two made FTs.

The second problem: what about those would-be assists in which the resulting shot is missed? This is a trickier problem, but would help settle questions of whether certain point guards rack up easy assists because they have a team of great shooters or whether others are penalized statistically because of bad shooters around them. Frankly, counting potential assists on a leaguewide basis would solve a ton of problems in how we see and deal with assists.

Without leaguwide data, counting up Beno's potential assists isn't terribly helpful -- there'd be no reference. But on a team basis there is value at looking at all shots coming off a potential assist and those created entirely by the shooter. So that's what I did this morning.

You'll find below a chart detailed what lead to each of the team's shot attempts, broken down by player. Again, in the case of the potential assists, I didn't break down who offered the pass -- just the shooter. Even with just one game of data, I think it shows us something interesting about our team. (Note: when someone goes two-for-two from the line, it counts as 1/1 [just like a made FG] here. If someone goes 1/2 from the line, it's 0.5/1. Miss both and it's 0/1 [just like a missed FG]. There are no signifiers for three-pointers and I left technical free throws out.)

PLAYER	ASSISTED	NOT ASSISTED
Thompson	6/6	2/4
Martin	2/3	12.5/21
Garcia	2/4	2/3
Hawes	2/4	2/5
Booth	0.5/2	0.5/1
Jackson	0/3	0/0
Nocioni	2/3	4/6
McCants	1/3	0.5/2
Greene	0/1	2/4
Udrih	0/1	3/5
TOTAL	15.5/30 52%	28/49 57%

Of the Kings' roughly 79 shot attempts (FGAs and "act-of-shooting" trips to the line), 49 were created by the shooter and 30 were created by a pass. In this game, the shooter-created attempts were more efficient than the passer-created attempts. That is owed almost completely to Kevin Martin, who relied almost exclusively on ... himself. Twenty-four shot attempts ... and only three of them came off a pass. That tells me that a) the Kings do not pass well and b) Martin is not doing enough to get into scoring position when he doesn't have the ball. No one tweak fixes this -- it's a hydra of a problem.

That said, Martin does well creating on his own. The 12.5/21 figure is 60% ... and one of the makes was a three. (Creating a three off the dribble is a notoriously inefficient shot, something I want to delve into at some point.) Thompson, on the other hand, he really excelled when set up. We know he has had trouble creating cleanly; nearly all his turnovers come on broken spin moves, whether in the form of offensive fouls or travels. But set him up and HOLY! LORD! he can finish. Six-of-six off potential assists.

Hawes didn't take enough shots to judge; his game really got thrown out of whack thanks to foul trouble. But I think we've seen a glimpse that indicates Thompson can get off gloriously if someone delivers the ball to him in scoring position, and we see that Martin can be really effective creating his own shots. I'll keep an eye on stuff like this, and I really hope to do more charting the last 11 games of the season.

1 recs | Comment 61 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Note

I charted the game at 4 AM. There might be an error or two.

Note #2: I counted Hawes’ putback as an unassisted make. The refs could very well have earned an assist on that play, since the ball was indeed well inside the virtual cylinder.

by Ziller on Mar 28, 2009 9:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

4AM?

do you not sleep? lol.

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by what_the_crap on Mar 28, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You can...

… sleep when you’re dead.

by Ziller on Mar 28, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

by what_the_crap on Mar 28, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This small sample

seems to back up my anecdotal thoughts. I really think Jason Thompson would benefit from long outlet passes since he runs the floor so well. A good point guard would really help him in particular.

by mayfieldcol on Mar 28, 2009 10:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It would help settle the offense in general

This team is always scattered in part because it doesn’t have a leader. It’s one reason I’ve been skeptical about Blake Griffin, but that’s me. (I don’t want to have this particular argument again either. Plenty of time for that.)

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting food for thought.

One statement that you made kind of sticks out to me:

a) the Kings do not pass well and b) Martin is not doing enough to get into scoring position when he doesn’t have the ball. No one tweak fixes this — it’s a hydra of a problem.

This problem that you speak of is also part and parcel of the offense that Natt is throwing out there. Memphis did a very good job last night of drawing out the dribble to a point where the screen coming from Hawes/JT was totally ineffective and left the Kings rebounders standing 25’ from the basket…not exactly prime rebound territory. Natt seems to only have one or two offensive play sets right now and they don’t include screens away from the ball to set up Martin for open set shots/assisted baskets. I actually think this will do the Kings and Martin some good in the future because he is really developing an off the dribble game right now but I believe it skews the stats slightly.

I agree with you that it is a hydra of a problem but I’m not sure that a lot of the issues at hand aren’t more about scheme than they are about players (the players are partially to blame also). Natt reserves corner three balls for Garcia and Nocioni, something I believe Martin would also excel at (he did hit one last night). What I see as a substantial issue is the inability of the distributors to make quality entry passes to the post players and those players not doing enough to establish post position early in a set which is where your point about the Kings passing skills being an issue really comes in.

Hawes has mad post skills, but he does not get enough touches and he does not get deep enough into the box, causing him to make too many moves to get to the point on the floor that he should have already established. Thompson on the other hand lacks multiple moves, believes that he is quick enough to take on anyone and carries the ball too low in the pivot. I believe that both Hawes and Thompson’s issues are issues of youth and will be rectified over the next season or so.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Mar 28, 2009 10:13 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Well said JJ

But I think it probably comes down to this, and these 3 problems.

1) Lack of a leader/shot creator 2) Natt’s offensive system, or the lack thereof 3) the players in roles they’ve never done before, and they haven’t adjusted yet

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, a hydra

I’m not sure why we’re focusing on offense, but

a substantial issue is the inability of the distributors to make quality entry passes to the post players and those players not doing enough to establish post position early in a set

Thats seems to be the heart of it right there. The passers don’t get it into the post players because they don’t establish deep enough and the post players don’t get (enough) easy baskets because they don’t get the ball. One thing relys on the other which relys on the other.

That does seem ultimately fixable though.

Now the defense? (shudder!) Truly truly truly Wretched (an underused word)
- no where in the neighborhood – no light at the end of the tunnel – the rabbit died

yuck

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand the point about defense and no one denies this horrible D

but I think that’s all you see sometimes because of your liking for Thabeet. I think, at the same time, a lot of people only see the turnovers and our players need for easier looks because they want Rubio (include me in that group). I’m not saying either is wrong, but the problem is that no matter what’s happening with this team all you want to point out is interior defense, period. Not a knock, just reality.

I think the defensive problems no doubt comes down to personnel. At the same time, if you saw from a couple of the Grizz’s 24 second violatons yesterday it could also come down to something as simple as the e word: effort. Maybe we need more defensive minded players but even when we had Artest (a great defensive player… who’s crazy though) this team was not THAT much better. How would a rookie improve this teams overall D if an established defensive player was not able to help? Are we all of a sudden going to start drafting and signing defensive players?? The answer is a no. We gotta find a way of improving the D with what we have (which is not much).

To me, a below average defensive team could still be SOMEHOW effective on that end of the court by playing team D and giving all of their effort, both things we are not seeing now For that we need IMO a new coach and yes, maybe a couple more players a little more interested in playing defense, but that at the same time complement the Martins, and JTs.

My last point on this thing is about the young players. Maybe Shock and Hawes are not going to become that force we need in the middle on D, but they have the chance of becoming a solid pair on the defensive end of the court with some work and experience. It’s not like we are contending right now anyways. If our rookie PF and our 20-year-old sophmore C don’t give you a little bit of hope, I don’t know what to say.

I didn’t really want to make comparisons but I think it may work when it comes to this point of defense and the glory team of the past. I remember reading that Hawes has a chance of becoming an on the court Vlade. Doesn’t that mean we just need a DC and we are cool?? I mean, Peja and Bibby were never great defenders, but that team played good team D and great individual defensive players were not necessary. As has been discussed before, if this team is going to be build like those Kings teams we are on our way somehow, right?

I’m not going to talk about Rubio and how he improves this team because I’ve done it too many times before but I’m more than willing to do it if it becomes necessary. Also, this was in no way a knock on Thabeet as I believe he has a lot of potential but more of a response to your statements. Noticed I didn’t mention Griffin either cause that’s another story

"Let's stop arguing and get together and agree on who really is the problem: PEACHES" - HighTops

by eduardo_m7 on Mar 28, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

This group as a whole is made up of average defenders

Overall Shock is quite a good defender, except for his foul trouble. Spencer is way better than we thought he was. Kevin has shown flashes of being a good defender. Cisco is fairly pesky. Beno, on the other hand… i won’t even get into it. He’s one more reason I want Rubio, who is a good perimeter defender, even if he does take a lot of risks going for steals. However, he’s still good at making those steals. No one complains when Chris Paul takes those risks because of how many steals he comes up with.

I think you nailed the problem on the head with the word “effort.” Some of these guys just don’t try. JT never stops. The guy would try to stop the whole other team if he were asked. He’s just young and makes silly mistakes and gets into foul trouble. But the rest of the team gets down when they start losing. You can see it in the way they play, and the effort they make. They get the “fuck its” on defense and slack off.

Another issue with defense that I see when I actually watch a Kings game is that I don’t think these guys have been taught how to play good defense. They are completely late on their rotations if they don’t miss them all together. We all have a soft spot in our hearts for the Princeton Offense, right? A team playing it reads eachother and passes the ball around. They know where their teamates are going to be so that they can give it to the right person for the most effective shot. In basketball, this sort of play does not come naturally and it must be taught. This same thing applies to defense. These guys must be taught to play it properly. They need to learn to read the other team’s offense. They need to know where to be at all times and know who is left open when the double team a player.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You have it backwards on my opinion

Because of our horrific D – I’m interested in defensive prospects, Inside and out.

Look below, I asked: Of the potential PGs for our second pick (dispite my admiration of Thabeet’s D I still think Griffin is a no-brainer if we get the #1) – which of them is the best defender?

On that old Kings team we had a defensive stopper in Doug Christie and Vlade was very underrated. I’d remind you that neither, both starters, scored more than 12 pts a game or so on a very high scoring team.

As I pointed out, our offensive efficiency last night wasn’t too bad, it was the lack of chances due to poor rebounding and allowing the worst, repeat, the worst offensive team in the West to shoot 53/54%, frominside and out.

If D is your biggest problem, I think you address it with your draft pick – within reason (you don’t pass up on Griffin for instance). It IS a fundamental of the game. Good D also gives you more easy offensive chances.

Look, I’m not in love with Beno either – I just don’t agree that he’s the biggest problem. Assuming we keep KM (!), you have to add a player who is a defender first either at the SF, PG (?) or inside. We can do that either in the draft or by FA, (Trevor Ariza comes to mind as an example).

But we must add at least one defensive minded player sooooon.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Or a defesive minded coach. We are not going to win many more games but just improving our offense.

Coming to you live from the land of interim coaches.

by LeaguePassAddict on Mar 28, 2009 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never would have noticed a defensive specialist

except watching all those lay-ups by other teams started making me ill sometime in December

I know its not a sexy idea..

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

When you're 25 in efficiency on offense LPA

And 30th in efficiency on defense, you’re got a long ways to go on both ends of the ball.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Point Guard + Coach that knows what he's doing

Thats what we need. Just my opinion though. If you’ve noticed, we’ve played very well when our point guard has played well, whether it be Beno or Bobby. When either one of those two are off, or Will Solomon enters the game, we start to fall apart. The point guard helps settle the offense down. Its also the natural leadership position of the team.

by Aykis16 on Mar 28, 2009 10:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

95 points on 47% shooting

pretty good actually considering how few shots we took compared to Memphis due to the rebound disparity. They took 8 more shots, directly corresponding to rebounds – and hit them at what? 53%?

Like I said, I don’t know why we think offense fixes anything right now.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A decent rebounding /defensive team would win a LOT of games at 47%, 18/11 ast/to

Just a decent one.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm gonna disagree

I don’t know why we think offense fixes anything right now

I acknowledge the point you’re making, and I agree that the defense has to be improved upon. However, this team is averaging 19.7 assists for the year as well as 15 turnovers a game; you have to acknowledge the fact that taking care of the ball and getting the most out of the team’s possessions through solid offensive execution is seriously lacking on this team.

Just think about the times you’ve watched this team go through dry spells where they can’t even score the ball, or they turn the ball over after getting a stop. The personnel on this team has shown they cannot recover from huge deficits through their defense, and cannot consistently get stops, so they need to improve upon maximizing their offensive possessions to give themselves a better chance at winning, even if it’s only a little bit.

by kingsfan300 on Mar 28, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

Offensive efficiency we’re 25th in the league, Defensive efficiency we’re last.

We need help on both ends.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 28, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I believe gooddefense adds to easier offensive chances.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is true

but good offense also helps defense. It’s much harder to defend a fast break off a missed shot or a TO than it is to defend off a made shot.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 28, 2009 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no doubt

everythings related. Its also easier to win if you limit the opponents offensive chances with rebounding, make them take tough shots and turn your argument around with the opponent defending the fast break ala Princeton.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

and limiting our TOs would go a long way to limiting the other team’s offensive chances too. Notice you left that one out.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 28, 2009 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The key is point differential

Jerry touched on it last night.

You can have a great offense and a good defense and be a very good team. You can have a great defense and a good offense and be a very good team.

If you have a great offense and a bad defense or a great defense and a bad offense you’re likely to be mediocre.

If like our current team you have a bad defense and a bad offense and thus a league worst point differential of -8.6, you’re going to be really bad.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 28, 2009 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I love it when people argue offense vs defense

when, in reality, we need both, badly. Our offense can score but tend to be very ineffecient. There’s not enough assists and way too many turnovers. We score a lot, but it’s ugly.

Our defense on the other hand… let’s just say we’re scored on more than Jenna Jameson

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This team could really play uptempo...

which is why I see both Rubio and Griffin as equals of sorts in this years draft. An uptempo guard like Darren Collison or Patty Mills can be had late in this draft to compliment Udrih while a three big rotation of Hawes, Thompson and Griffin could be deadly. Rubio can get to spots that Udrih just can’t. His court vision and savvy (for an 18 year old) might be the what Martin, JT and Hawes need to get to the next level and a big man rotation player might be available with the Houston pick.

Either way, this team should run, run, run and work on making stops when it matters.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Mar 28, 2009 11:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

We just gave up 113 pts to the worst offensive team in the West

(on our own court)
IF we pick a PG with the Houston pick – who is the best defender of those guys?

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah JJ

I think thats where I’m at with this team.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

3 Things we need

1) to draft Ricky Rubio. Despite many flaws (most of which can be worked on) just imagine pick n roll situations with him and JT… try not to drool on your keyboard

2) a defensive head coach. There’s this guy named Tom who works in Boston. He’s pretty good at this.

3) a whole season of Yoda revamping the offense

What it comes down to is this: When our offense is running smoothly and the ball is moving we can score a ton (Coachie). Our offense runs smoothly when our point guard plays well and gets the ball moving (Rubio). Even when we score at will the other team does the same because we can’t stop them (Thibodeau).

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 11:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Mike Budenholzer is quite the defensive coach too apparently

He also seems to understand x&o’s real well too.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not remotely against him

like I’ve said before, there’s a reason Popovich has him

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 29, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hydra seeking manifold = pg = yoda revamping the offense

"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley

by Bluejohn on Mar 28, 2009 12:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Felton

I think drafting a point guard is going to take 3-4 years before he can be fully developed. Unless of course the guy is named Rose or Westbrook. But because there is limited talent in this years draft the Kings should look for an established point guard in free agency. I would like to see Nate Robinson, Ramon Sessions or Felton fill this void. All three have the potential to effeciently run an offense and play with energy. Drafting and starting a rookie point guard will have its fair share of headaches as they rarely come prepared to run an NBA team.

Member of play JT and Donte Greene 40 mins a game club.

by Sac King on Mar 28, 2009 12:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Sessions would be okay

Nate as our starting PG? That’s a bad idea. If you think the defense is bad now it’ll get worse. Plus, he won’t be a distributor or shot creator, just a scorer. We need somebody that can look for Martin or JT as well as the other guys. He looks good now because of the system he plays in and he’ll make big money because of it but I really hope its not with us.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sessions would be great!

Milwa has to decide whether to keep him or Villaneva.

Tough choice, but they’ve been up front that they can’t keep both (assuming nothing changes)

We’d be better overnight.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd take Sessions in a heartbeat

As a starter: 15.4ppg, 7apg/2.4 TO, 3.9rpg

That’s very solid. With a faster paced offense it’ll probably be even better.

Can we just give him Beno’s contract?

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes

the only thing is that giving him the full mid-level doesn’t take Beno’s away.

Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'

by iashwash on Mar 28, 2009 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you mistook what I said

I want Petrie to take Beno’s contract and I want him to cross out every “Beno Udrih” he finds in there. Then above it I want him to write “Ramon Sessions”

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no I got it, I was just trying to make a joke that didn’t come through.

Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'

by iashwash on Mar 28, 2009 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understood it

But I’m a sick puppy, and you should never forget that. :P

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I will say this: SESSIONS CANNOT PLAY DEFENSE

I like Ramon Sessions as much as the next guy, but he can’t play defense according to what I’ve seen him do on the court.. How else has Luke Ridnour been getting time over him (with Redd on the team), who by the way, isn’t too good defensively either?

Felton would be cool, he’s great in transition, but before Larry Brown took the reigns he wasn’t very good defensively. I’ll have to watch some more videos of him as I don’t know his game too well.

The question is: do we need defense at the point guard position? If we do not go for defense on the perimeter, we’ll at least need it in the paint. I dunno what to go for.

"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas

by submison on Mar 28, 2009 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

On the other hand

I believe Sessions is an upgrade defensively over Beno.

"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas

by submison on Mar 28, 2009 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

An open door would be a defensive upgrade at this point

I don’t think Sessions is a great defender, but I don’t think he’s terrible.

I really think the defensive mindset of this team needs to come from our coach. We need someone to teach these guys how to play proper defense and hold them accountable.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I believe defense, at least team defense, can be taught by the right person. Defense is mainly effort, and that too can be taught.

"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas

by submison on Mar 28, 2009 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting post and thread

Good stuff.

One thing that I would add is that I feel that the draft and our current needs are sometimes two separate things. I mean, neither Griffin or Rubio are going to make us better defensively next year. But that does not mean that you pass on either one of them if they are available. And as far as the Houston pick is concerned, we will be fortunate to grab a level of talent (level, not type) similar to Donté Greene, and with that we will probably see production similar to Greene’s first year. Look at Martin and Garcia’s first years.

The first key to improved defense will have to come via coaching, working with the current assets. After that, the next improvement will come via a trading of our assets or adding more assets in 2010, as I do not see the free agents or cap space for next year that will really move this team forward.

It took Portland a number of down years and draft picks to make their way back. For all of the talk about OKC, it has taken them a couple of years and multiple draft picks to get to a point of promise (in spite of their 20-52 record).

There is no silver bullet out there for this team. We are at the lowest point of the rebuilding process, and progress will have to be measured in inches, not feet.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 28, 2009 2:51 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Rubio or Griffin will help on D more than we think

Rubio is a much better defender than Beno, period. That doesn’t say much, but I don’t think we’ll see as many opposing PGs blowing right past him with little to no opposition. Griffin will help dramatically with our rebounding. This means less offensive boards for opposing teams and less second chance points. Of course, neither will provide the dramatic change that comes with the team taking a more defensive approach to the game, but they will help

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Going back to the original reason for this thread,

Which was NOT about Defense. TZ seems to be pointing out that our primary scorer does NOT need a passing pg to be effective. While JT would be totally ineffective without assists. In fact, Martin, Garcia, Noc, & Beno shoot better than 60% unassisted.

Although TZ’s work was commendable and insightful, the lack of a difinitive conclusion leaves us some what lost. (maybe because of the late hr) Some commentors have chosen to ignore the original purpose, which was to investigate Assisted vs. Unassisted Offensive baskets, and went off on a tangent involving Defense.

Here’s my take on the data (limited as it is). Hawes & JT will be the biggest beneficiaries of having a starting PG who can drive the lane and pass the ball into the post.

Any other conclusions, would be based on the data and my own observations, and therefore I’ll keep them to mayself, to keep from diluting this thread. But, the data does seem to open up other areas of conjecture. Do the Kings need a True PG? Are the Kings following Natt’s offensive scheme?

I’ll pass on the 1st question, it’s more than I wish to take on at this time.. On the second, Natt continually expounds on the fact that the Kings need to be passing at least 3 or 4 times per possession. But, 62% of the Kings shots are unassisted. So, are the players playing their own way and ignoring Natt?

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 28, 2009 2:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The answer is the question. (reverse that)

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 28, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The data provided is very limited

it’d be interesting to see this data over the course of a season. Kevin doesn’t need a passing PG to help create shots, but it’d be nice. Kevin is great at those back door cuts and getting open without the ball. He is also great at creating shots and drawing fouls with the ball. He can score either way, which means he should get the chance to do both. He and Brad would work wonders with Brad passing to him from the high post. Adding a true PG that can make those passes, along with Spencer’s improvement as a passer, means that Kevin will always be a threat no matter where he is. Also, I’d love to see a great passing PG run pick and rolls with JT. He’s super quick with great hands. But for whatever reason anytime someone sets a pick for Beno he runs the opposite way. Maybe I don’t watch enough, but I have only seen him drive his defender into the screen a few times.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 28, 2009 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good point.

The offensive strategy we utilize in the future should determine our needs at the PG position. We ran the Princeton effectively with Bibby however our big men Vlade and Webber were great assist leaders at their prospective positions as well. Actually between 1999-2005 Bibby ranked 8th overall in assists followed by Webber at 37th and Vlade at 47th.

While Hawe’s has shown some glimmer of hope with respect to his passing ability, Thompson is no Chris Webber with respect to assists.

I think due to our lack of true talent as compared to the rest of the league, a true quality point guard followed buy a well taught Princeton offense may put us in the position of being competitive.

2010 may be the year we are in a position to pick up a Tyson Chandlier type guy that promotes “D” in the low post.

by nothingbutnet on Mar 28, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

& Doug Christie 27th

by nothingbutnet on Mar 28, 2009 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the charting supports the need for a playmaker

It could be the point guard, but as others have pointed out above – a passing center, power forward or small forward or shooting guard (sorry, not you Shaddy) also helps. The lack of cohesive team play is evident.

As for next year – it isn’t mentioned enough but is alluded to in this post and the comments – the Kings need more talent. Assists go up when shooting percentages go up. Assists go up when a play is run and good shot taking is the result. Kevin Martin creates on his own because he often has to – this season. He is far and away the #1 option on offense. I know it, you know it, his teammates (sorry Shaddy, not you) know it, the other team knows it and Kevin himself knows it as well.

The Kings are young and play with inexperience and unfamiliarity with teammates, the Princeton-oid offense, heck even the league (in the case of young’uns Hawes, JT and Greene). Rebounding is very poor, breakaways near non existent, running plays seems more accidental than purposeful – point guard play is erratic (Beno 1st half vs. Beno 3rd Quarter). So, yes, I, StR own self proclaimed Mr.Obvious, agree that the Sacramento Kings need a capable point guard.

One last thing, in regards to the Princeton-oid offense – doesn’t this post support more consideration to a pick and roll offense with JT?

by betweentheeyes on Mar 28, 2009 10:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes bte

But many of us have been saying that for quite some time as well.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

With regards to JT in a pick & roll situation

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 28, 2009 11:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

indeed, you and others have

I don’t think Coach Natt will let it happen – JSloan disciple or not – as with Coachie in house the choice of what type of offense to play is not a decision for him to make.

by betweentheeyes on Mar 28, 2009 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Natt decided a long time ago to take the ball out of Beno's hands.

Martin has run pick & rolls from the wing with Hawes & JT. But, I wouldn’t expect to see any run from the top of the key with Beno.

I have alway thought that having your only legit 7footer in the high post was a mistake, without having a Dominant rebounder at your other big position. It leads to too few offensive rebounds and too many fast break points against you. But, having a big in the high post who can pass, shoot, or pick & roll, is a 3 pronged attack that require teams to do unnatural things to defend.

It’s undoubtedly a valuable piece that should have always been a part of the offense and probably will again once we have the right personel.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Mar 29, 2009 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's funny

I hardly see JT in a pick & roll. And I’ve been looking for it as I think that’s a great weapon for him (and by extension his teammates) to use in looking to create a quality scoring opportunity.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 29, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know how many times I've mentioned a pick and roll with JT

but it sure seems like a lot. He’s perfect for it. He can get to the rim quickly, he’s got the hands to make the catch and the strength to finish at the rim. It makes no sense that they don’t do it more, especially seeing as how Natt is a “Sloan Disciple.” Isn’t the pick and roll the reason John Stockton and Karl Malone are first ballot hall of famers? Yet somehow Kenny Natt missed “Pick and Roll Day” while working for Sloan and has never used it.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Mar 29, 2009 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs