Kings Fall to Nets 106-100
(I haven't been able to watch the game due to unforeseen events, so I'll defer to James Ham's recap for the full game action.)
The Kings fell in New Jersey 106-100 to move to 1-1 on the season. The Kings won the rebound battle (with 10 offensive rebounds in 48 opportunities versus 5 in 26 for the Nets) and dominated in the turnover count (only 12 versus New Jersey's 26), but got smoked from the field (NJ shot .525 from the floor and .545 from long-range) and gave up way, way too many free throws (45).
Who drew all those fouls? By my count from the play-by-play, Brook Lopez drew 13 fouls, including five on DeMarcus Cousins, who fouled out with 3-1/2 minutes left in the game after just 21 minutes of play. Lopez also drew two fouls on Carl Landry, and one each on Beno Udrih, Jason Thompson, Francisco Garcia, Tyreke Evans, Darnell Jackson and Luther Head. Clearly, the Kings could not guard Lopez without fouling him, and he made them pay, with 13 made free throws and by getting the Nets into the bonus. (And when the Kings didn't foul? Lopez shot 8-16 from the floor.)
After the game, Paul Westphal talked about playing big men who don't foul so much being a solution to what happened in Newark. Well, he isn't going to play Cousins less -- Samuel Dalembert, who only played 6-1/2 minutes, is behind on learning the offense, and Thompson is as much a foul problem as Cousins. The same applies to Landry, who had five in the box score but only four, really -- one came in the final 30-seconds as the Kings intentionally fouled to try to catch up. Who do you replace him with? Thompson, who had five legit fouls. There's no easy fix until Hassan Whiteside and/or Dalembert are ready to enter major play.
The bigger problems, I think, revolve around the team's inability to defend shots effectively. If not for all those extra Nets turnovers (only seven of which were Kings steals), New Jersey might have hung 120 on Sacramento, a game after Minnesota (Minnesota!) hung 116. Not a great start on defense.
Donte Greene barely played for some reason. Westphal explained the switch as being due to Head scoring well off the bench and Garcia returning to the reserve crew; as such, the team didn't need Casspi as a spark off the bench. Garcia ended up playing a good portion of the small forward minutes, and did have a nice game (18 points on 7-12 shooting).
22 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Rebounding
The Kings won the rebound battle (with 10 offensive rebounds in 48 opportunities versus 5 in 26 for the Nets)
The Kings actually got killed on the boards. (43-31)
by Devastation Co. MMA on Oct 30, 2010 8:18 AM PDT reply actions
I was gonna say the same thing
Umm... I thought we were officially referring to Voison as the Chick Replacing Amick at the Paper? or CRAP, for short.
by sac_faithful on Oct 30, 2010 8:29 AM PDT up reply actions
That is a deceptive number
Due to the huge number of Nets turnovers and their high FG%, there were far fewer defensive rebounds available to the Kings than there were for the Nets (the Kings missed 25 more shots than the Nets).
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
And also FTs
They had so many possessions end in FTA instead of shots, and FTs are a lot easier to make than contested jumpers, thus leading to less rebounds for us if they make them, which they were. This goes back to bad defense.
Author of the Pick and Scroll. Follow me on Twitter here.
Right
Now, I’m not saying that the Kings were dominant on the boards, or even that they won the battle. But the disparity in the numbers is very deceptive. Rebounding (or the lack of it) is not why they lost this game. A defense that allowed 66% true shooting and an offense that produced 48% true shooting are the most likely culprits in this 6 point game.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
And yes -
I used your calculator to come up with the percentages.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
214 and Aykis got it
Raw rebound numbers tell you nothing, and this game is a perfect example of why. The Kings rebounded a greater share of their rebound opportunities at both ends than the Nets did. The Nets just happened to have a ton more defensive rebound opportunities because of the Kings’ misses, the Nets’ free throws, the Nets’ good shooting, the Kings’ lack of turnovers and the Nets’ turnovers.
That is a very long list of combinations I might add.
EvilCowtownInc: Screwin Suckaz over since 1985...... On Twitter
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. 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.....
Guarding Lopez
Why did it take that many fouls and late in the game to double him. They finally had either Tyreke or Garcia doubling him and that finally put a cap on his scoring. I really think they should have understood just how much of a problem he would be and had him doubled from the beginning of the game.
I didn't major in Common F-cking Sense, but ...
He started turnig the ball over once the double team came over, too.
Umm... I thought we were officially referring to Voison as the Chick Replacing Amick at the Paper? or CRAP, for short.
by sac_faithful on Oct 30, 2010 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes, good point
Why did it take him scoring 25 points before they double teamed him?
I didn't major in Common F-cking Sense, but ...
Not sure what you mean.
He scored on everybody and nobody seemed to be able to stop him. Sammy had a few good blocks, but until doubled he dominated.
I didn't major in Common F-cking Sense, but ...
It was nice
to see Dalembert stuff a couple Lopez shots back in the limited time he was on the floor. The Kings were also succesful on a couple plays when Tyreke came over to help.
In the last two games, our perimeter defense is seriously lacking
More than half of the fouls on Lopez
didn’t happen. It was obvious that the refs wanted to push Nets’ star.
Same thing for the countless inexistent offensive fouls for both teams. Very bad refereeing.
by ZenBaller on Oct 30, 2010 11:01 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
illegal screens
Teams have to get smarter with screens if refs are going to keep calling them that close. You arent gaining much of an advantage and its being called all over the league. Throwing away 4-8 possessions a game with “illegal” screens is the difference in a close game.
I wonder if refs will keep calling them and teams will adjust or they will eventually back off calling them this close
First they take hand check away,
they do everything they can to facilitate a better offensive game and at the same time they become more “strict” with pointless details which make the game uglier.
I only got to see the last quarter in a late replay
but JT has been being called for and setting illegal screens since he came into the league. He was called for one late in the game.
Even though I have only been able to watch part of the first two games replays it has been great to JT swallow his whines and not run back on d crying to the refs the whole time.
"I make love to pressure" - Stephen Jackson
If I remember correctly he got T'd up because of his whining
Umm... I thought we were officially referring to Voison as the Chick Replacing Amick at the Paper? or CRAP, for short.
by sac_faithful on Oct 30, 2010 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions

by 


















