Minimum number of moves to be good.

[graumet]

I once read Nuraman state that replacing a single player, regardless of the talent upgrade, would have no effect on changing the caliber of this Kings team (I probably made that up about reading it from Nuraman, but I think he said something to that effect and, unfortunately, I don't have the amazing total recall that he does about everything (jealous)).

So here is my mind experiment/question:

Imagine that you had the ability to replace any current King with anyone else in the league that plays a similar position. You can do this as many times as you want, but the point of the question is: What is the minimum number of replacements that you would need to make to make the team 1) a playoff contender and 2) a championship contender? And what would these replacements be?

By Nuraman, the answer should be larger than 1.

[Eze]

Playoff contender? You could probably get away with one move - add a Dwight Howard to replace the PF rotation of Hayes/Thompson/Hickson or replace Evans or Salmons with Rose/Wade/Lebron/Durant and you'd essentially be playoff contender.

Championship contender you'd need a superstar to go along with Cousins and improve the third wheel, all while building a much better bench. The Kings bench is so blah it would take a complete replacement of the bench, really - so a good 6-7 moves I'd say (2-3 in the lineup, 4 deep on the bench).

[nuraman00]

I once read Nuraman state that replacing a single player, regardless of the talent upgrade, would have no effect on changing the caliber of this Kings team (I probably made that up about reading it from Nuraman, but I think he said something to that effect and, unfortunately, I don't have the amazing total recall that he does about everything (jealous)).

So here is my mind experiment/question:

Imagine that you had the ability to replace any current King with anyone else in the league that plays a similar position. You can do this as many times as you want, but the point of the question is: What is the minimum number of replacements that you would need to make to make the team 1) a playoff contender and 2) a championship contender? And what would these replacements be?

By Nuraman, the answer should be larger than 1.

You can use a stat called Wins Produced. They don't have it for this year, but they do have it for prior years.

Superstars usually have 15 +. (You can use WP per 48 minutes since we're not done with the season yet, if this stat were available for this year). They might have the stat on a different site, and I just don't remember where it is.

Put your mouse over "Wins Produced" to see prior years".

The total of the wins produced for all players on a team is within like 2% of how many wins that team actually achieved, so it works very well at a team level.

http://wagesofwins.com/

Looking at last year, and using this year's starting lineup (which is not the best way, since I'm not listing the entire team):

Cousins= -3.08
Tyreke = 1.31
Salmons = 4.57
Thornton = 3.86
Thompson = 2.73

Total: 9.39

The biggest change in this year's numbers would that Cousins would be a positive factor, I think, because of his offense and rebounding. Salmons would be worse, but again, even a decent Salmons is only about 5 WP anyways. You could probably flip Cousins and Salmons numbers from last year anyways and be close to what they would be this year.

Let's say Salmons was .01 this year. (He might be at a negative, but let's assume he's just barely over 0 this year). And you replace him with someone who had a 6 WP last year. (Wesley Matthews, Jodie Meeks, Kevin Martin).

(Beasley was at -2.27 last year, lol.)

The minimum to make the playoffs as of right now is 17 wins. The Kings have 10 wins.

Yes I know I'm using incomplete math, since I'm not listing the WP of the entire team. But since data is unavailable for 2011-2012 anyways, this is all an estimation anyways.

Answers to your questions:

1. Two moves, each assuming they were being replaced by a 6 WP player. Let's say you replaced Salmons .01 with a 6 WP player. And you replace Evans 1.31 with a 6 WP, for a gain of 10.68. That would put the Kings at 20 wins as of now, which would be a solid position for the playoffs, but still easy enough to fall out of too, since its so close at the bottom. Let's say they're the 6th seed, even though 20 wins would put them as the 5th seed.

2. They need to get to 26 wins. I know Chicago leads the league with 25, but I would rather be on the safe side.

Replacing two players produced a gain of 10.68 players.

Let's say now for the 3rd player, the Kings get a 9 WP player. That would be like Nene, Gerald Wallace, Kevin Durant, Serge Ibaka, Russell Westbrook had last year.

Jason Thompson's 2.73 is replaced by Serge Ibaka's 9.49, for a gain of 6.76.

10.68 (first two replacements) + 6.76 = 17.44.

Yup, adding 10 + 17.44 puts the Kings to > 26 wins.

So, here were the moves:

Salmons-->Matthews from last year
Evans-->Ramons Sessions 6.92 from last year
Thompson-->Ibaka from last year.

So, new lineup:

Cousins
Ibaka
Matthews
Thornton (last year, remember)
Sessions

Well, if Sessions is as good as his WP indicated (and I always thought a team should give him the starting job for a year and see if he's really good), then that does look like a top 4 team in the league. And is well rounded.

If you want to bump up the replacement for Evans last year to a 7+ WP player, you can have Jose Calderon or Jrue Holiday, both of whom had good years last year.

I'm still not satisfied though. That lineup still doesn't feel like a contender. Jose doesn't have defense. Holiday, not sure if he's as good of a playmaker as Sessions or Jose.

Let's replace one more player.

Let's replace Thornton with a 9 WP player.

Thornton-->Gerald Wallace's 9.91, for a gain of 6.05

New lineup:

Cousins
Ibaka
Wallace
Matthews
Calderon/Holiday/Sessions

Yup, that should do it. You have two wing players that can give you 12-15 points in Wallace and Matthews, and both were good defensive players last year.

A good PG.

A good frontcourt too, with defensive skills from both spots up front.

[nuraman00]

Playoff contender? You could probably get away with one move - add a Dwight Howard to replace the PF rotation of Hayes/Thompson/Hickson or replace Evans or Salmons with Rose/Wade/Lebron/Durant and you'd essentially be playoff contender.

Championship contender you'd need a superstar to go along with Cousins and improve the third wheel, all while building a much better bench. The Kings bench is so blah it would take a complete replacement of the bench, really - so a good 6-7 moves I'd say (2-3 in the lineup, 4 deep on the bench).

What do you think of my post below? I didn't use superstar replacements, but anywhere from average players to pretty good players, lol.

And I came up with two average replacements and two pretty good player replacements in the starting lineup.

It's really a convoluted and speculative post though, lol.

[Deadenddude]

I honestly think trading Tyreke for Rondo instantly makes this a .500 team at least. It seems like a lot of people are undervaluing the experience Rondon has and the effect a guy like that can have on a team like the Kings. Rondo has proven himself on the biggest stage. He's proven he can play with hall of famers. A guy like that isn't crack under pressure, go M.I.A., or make a bunch of bonehead plays in crunch time. He's poised, confident, knows what he's doing, and will make players around him better.

I often hear the argument that Rondo only puts up such good assist numbers because he’s playing with three hall of famers. That argument holds little water though because Rondo has continued to get better as a PG even as the big 3 decline in production.

This team is closer to contending than many might think, they just need a few tweaks, and adding a PG like Rondo would be the first priority.

Then you go after a SF like Batum or Chandler and you’re ready to contend.

Starters

Cousins C
Thompson PF
Batum/Chandler SF
Thornton SG
Rondo PG

Bench

Jimmer
Salmons
Hayes
Outlaw
Thomas

That’s a pretty solid team. Not championship caliber but probably a 3-6 seed and that’s a heck of a lot better than they are now.

[nuraman00]

I honestly think trading Tyreke for Rondo instantly makes this a .500 team at least. It seems like a lot of people are undervaluing the experience Rondon has and the effect a guy like that can have on a team like the Kings. Rondo has proven himself on the biggest stage. He's proven he can play with hall of famers. A guy like that isn't crack under pressure, go M.I.A., or make a bunch of bonehead plays in crunch time. He's poised, confident, knows what he's doing, and will make players around him better.

I often hear the argument that Rondo only puts up such good assist numbers because he’s playing with three hall of famers. That argument holds little water though because Rondo has continued to get better as a PG even as the big 3 decline in production.

I don't hear that argument.

[Eze]

What do you think of my post below? I didn't use superstar replacements, but anywhere from average players to pretty good players, lol.

And I came up with two average replacements and two pretty good player replacements in the starting lineup.

It's really a convoluted and speculative post though, lol.

I think that team could get to the playoffs (eventually). Lots of solid, good young talent who understands how to play as a team - not a bunch of individuals playing basketball. I think that roster would run into trouble though when it came to getting deep in the playoffs. So, so hard to win without a Batman.

[Deadenddude]

I don't hear that argument.

Sadly, I've heard it a lot. I always roll my eyes when I hear it too. Some people will look for anything they can find to discredit a player.

[nuraman00]

I honestly think trading Tyreke for Rondo instantly makes this a .500 team at least. It seems like a lot of people are undervaluing the experience Rondon has and the effect a guy like that can have on a team like the Kings. Rondo has proven himself on the biggest stage. He's proven he can play with hall of famers. A guy like that isn't crack under pressure, go M.I.A., or make a bunch of bonehead plays in crunch time. He's poised, confident, knows what he's doing, and will make players around him better.

Rondo is great but the rest of the team still stinks on the Kings.

He wouldn't fix the defense entirely. He would probably still be the only guy in the starting lineup who would be a good defender. The frontcourt is not good defensively. Thornton isn't either.

Lastly, this team can't shoot. You would still see a lot of clanks.

They try taking too many 3's, while being a poor 3-point shooting team.

Thornton and Cousins still have low FG%'s.

Thornton and Cousins turn it over a lot too, and that wouldn't be solved just by getting a new PG.

This team is 28th in defense, they need a lot of work.

The bench would still be a poor bench.

22nd best bench on offense:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball...s/12/7/eff/1-1

30th on defense:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball.../7/diffeff/1-1

This team would still still give up more than it scores, from its bench. And they can't shoot that well either.

Hayes, Outlaw have not been good on defense this year. Thomas has his moments but that's it. Fredette tries hard but is not good defensively yet either.

[Eze]

Rondo has two things that seem to make the Kings considerably better - floor vision and speed. We've all seen when Thomas comes in, the improvement of the Kings for those stretches. It makes everybody on the court better.

Unfortunately, as we were all talking about in the other thread - when do you push that button and bail on Tyreke? Given his speed and size, you'd assume that from a potential standpoint, Reke could be better than Rondo as both of their peaks - but then again, potential is a dirty, dirty word - Reke might never even get close to that.

I will say - I miss the ballsy Petrie of yester-year. Taking chances on guys like JWill - drafting essential unknowns like Peja - trading away your star player (in Sacramento, of all places) for a disgruntled Webber.

[nuraman00]

Sadly, I've heard it a lot. I always roll my eyes when I hear it too. Some people will look for anything they can find to discredit a player.

The closest I heard was in a Deron vs. Rondo debate last year. One argument was Rondo was better b/c of the East.

But his split stats were actually better against the West.

And Deron himself did worse against the East (pre-trade).

It's not as easy as just assuming teams put up better stats against the East, IMO. Or even that a team would get more wins in the East. Sometimes, teams just don't match up that well with some of those teams either. And you always have 3-4 teams every year who have better significantly better records against the West than the East, for whatever reason.

Lastly, I've done the math before. Switching conference schedules, in a full season, only changes things by 2 wins, and that's if you have a big disparity in win % in the conferences too. The schedules for each conference aren't as big of a deal, IMO. Every team in the league plays 59/82 of the same games to start with.

And another thing, when you play some of those other teams 3-4 times a year, you're not going to win every game.

[nuraman00]

Rondo has two things that seem to make the Kings considerably better - floor vision and speed. We've all seen when Thomas comes in, the improvement of the Kings for those stretches. It makes everybody on the court better.

Unfortunately, as we were all talking about in the other thread - when do you push that button and bail on Tyreke? Given his speed and size, you'd assume that from a potential standpoint, Reke could be better than Rondo as both of their peaks - but then again, potential is a dirty, dirty word - Reke might never even get close to that.

I will say - I miss the ballsy Petrie of yester-year. Taking chances on guys like JWill - drafting essential unknowns like Peja - trading away your star player (in Sacramento, of all places) for a disgruntled Webber.

He also is an elite defender.

Unfortunately, most of the rest of the team are still lacking in a lot.

One good defender on the team wouldn't change how poorly the rest of the team plays. Maybe they could get to 26th in defense.

[Deadenddude]

Rondo is great but the rest of the team still stinks on the Kings.

He wouldn't fix the defense entirely. He would probably still be the only guy in the starting lineup who would be a good defender. The frontcourt is not good defensively. Thornton isn't either.

Lastly, this team can't shoot. You would still see a lot of clanks.

They try taking too many 3's, while being a poor 3-point shooting team.

Thornton and Cousins still have low FG%'s.

Thornton and Cousins turn it over a lot too, and that wouldn't be solved just by getting a new PG.

This team is 28th in defense, they need a lot of work.

The bench would still be a poor bench.

22nd best bench on offense:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball...s/12/7/eff/1-1

30th on defense:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball.../7/diffeff/1-1

This team would still still give up more than it scores, from its bench. And they can't shoot that well either.

Hayes, Outlaw have not been good on defense this year. Thomas has his moments but that's it. Fredette tries hard but is not good defensively yet either.

Can't argue with what you said about the defense. About the shooting though, sometimes when you put a real PG on a team, suddenly guys start shooting better because the offense is running more smoothly and they're getting the ball in rhythm, at the right spot, etc. A good PG knows how to do that. You look at the Kings roster and it's full of guys who are at least good shooters if you look at their career numbers but inexplicably can't seem to shoot now. I'd bet just about anything that an elite PG would make this team's collective FG% go up. Look at what's happened since Jermey Lin took over the PG spot in New York. Suddenly a guy like Novak is putting up shots he just wasn't making before and putting up numbers he wasn't able to put up before.

[nuraman00]

I mean, I think Rondo adds a lot, but he can't fix the defense of the rest of the team, and I still expect them to turn it over a lot.

I know Rondo is better than Thomas, but just using Thomas as an example:

They get outscored by -7.5 with Thomas in the game, and -8.8 without him.

Still bad either way. You're not going to stop all of the other problems on the team with replacing just one player (in this case Evans).

[Eze]

He also is an elite defender.

Unfortunately, most of the rest of the team are still lacking in a lot.

One good defender on the team wouldn't change how poorly the rest of the team plays. Maybe they could get to 26th in defense.

One plus would be that good defense does start with perimeter defense. Him keeping opposing guards out of the lane consistently (*looks at Evans and Thornton*) would stop some of the sloppy fouls and poor paint rotations we have - or at least reduce them. Certainly would need much more than just Rondo though, as you said.

[Deadenddude]

I mean, I think Rondo adds a lot, but he can't fix the defense of the rest of the team, and I still expect them to turn it over a lot.

I know Rondo is better than Thomas, but just using Thomas as an example:

They get outscored by -7.5 with Thomas in the game, and -8.8 without him.

Still bad either way. You're not going to stop all of the other problems on the team with replacing just one player (in this case Evans).

What do you do about that though? Unfortunately you can't replace the whole roster. They're kind of stuck with a team full of guys who aren't very good defenders. If you can get your offense clicking though, you can make up for a lot of that. Part of why they get outscored so badly is they can't score. When you can't score or stop the other team from scoring, you're in trouble.

[nuraman00]

Can't argue with what you said about the defense. About the shooting though, sometimes when you put a real PG on a team, suddenly guys start shooting better because the offense is running more smoothly and they're getting the ball in rhythm, at the right spot, etc. A good PG knows how to do that. You look at the Kings roster and it's full of guys who are at least good shooters if you look at their career numbers but inexplicably can't seem to shoot now. I'd bet just about anything that an elite PG would make this team's collective FG% go up. Look at what's happened since Jermey Lin took over the PG spot in New York. Suddenly a guy like Novak is putting up shots he just wasn't making before and putting up numbers he wasn't able to put up before.

Novak Season FG%: .443

Novak FG% in last 8 games (he had a DNP in the Nets game) (counting today's): 34-71: .478

A little better, but if you look at his game long, he's been just as inconsistent. If you removed today's game, he would have been .453.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../gamelog/2012/

Yes Lin has helped their team. But there are many factors at play here:

* Weak opposing schedule. Yes, you still have to go out and beat them, but it has been a really easy schedule.

* Some of those games were won on the defensive side of the ball. That's a team effort, not just one player.

* Lin has had a lot of turnovers. In his first 6 starts, he had more turnovers than anyone else since the ABA-NBA merger in their first 6 starts. I actually don't mind the turnovers, because you're going to get them when you make a pass in a pick and roll situation, there's just a brief period of time to pass the ball. And I would rather have Lin run the system and make those passes, then do something he's not as good at doing. I would just trust the system.

* Lin's defense: He admitted that Jose Calderon lit him up in the first 3 Q's. Then when they moved him to Barbosa and Shumpert to Calderon, Shumpert shut down Calderon but Barbosa lit up Lin.

Lin has helped a lot, but there's a lot more that goes into winning games, its an entire team effort.

I think this does a fair analysis:

http://www.82games.com/1112/11NYK3.HTM#onoff

He's helped their offense by +8.5 points per 100 possessions, and their defense is positively impacted by 5.5 points per 100 possessions.

But you're also comparing him to Shumpert and Douglas, two flawed players who wouldn't be starting for any team. And I heard Douglas has some personal issues going on his life right now.

Evans' isn't quite as bad as Shumpert or Douglas.

Lastly, the Kings don't have good defenders like Chandler or Shumpert or Jeffries or Fields. Jeffries is a very good defender. Fields is solid too.

The Knicks have the 6th best defense in the league this year. They only needed help on one side of the ball.

Kings are 26th in offense and 28th in defense.

They improve one of those to a 20th ranking, and they still would have a huge problem at the other end.

[nuraman00]

What do you do about that though? Unfortunately you can't replace the whole roster. They're kind of stuck with a team full of guys who aren't very good defenders. If you can get your offense clicking though, you can make up for a lot of that. Part of why they get outscored so badly is they can't score. When you can't score or stop the other team from scoring, you're in trouble.

You replace the whole roster.

Start with Rondo, but there won't be immediate results until there's at least one more replacement. Hence the discussion in this thread, is probably is two moves at least to get to a playoffs team.

I mentioned in my last post that Kings were 26th in offense and 28th in defense.

Let's say Rondo brings them to 19th in offense and 24th in defense.

Let me see what team fits that profile:

Bucks are 17th and 21st:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2012.html

Suns are 21st and 22nd:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHO/2012.html

I looked at every team in the league, they were the ones that fit the best. Most other teams were a lot better one one side of the ball, while being worse on the other.

Milwaukee is a .400 team. Phoenix is .387.

They are 20th and 23rd in the league.

[nuraman00]

New York went from 22nd in defense to 6th this year. Chandler and Shumpert have helped tremendously. New York's success on offense as been largely Lin, but Chandler has played like an All-Star. Just look at that improvement.

I think Shumpert has helped a bit too, but maybe some of their other wing defenders are solid too.

[Deadenddude]

You replace the whole roster.

Start with Rondo, but there won't be immediate results until there's at least one more replacement. Hence the discussion in this thread, is probably is two moves at least to get to a playoffs team.

I mentioned in my last post that Kings were 26th in offense and 28th in defense.

Let's say Rondo brings them to 19th in offense and 24th in defense.

Let me see what team fits that profile:

Bucks are 17th and 21st:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2012.html

Suns are 21st and 22nd:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHO/2012.html

I looked at every team in the league, they were the ones that fit the best. Most other teams were a lot better one one side of the ball, while being worse on the other.

Milwaukee is a .400 team. Phoenix is .387.

They are 20th and 23rd in the league.

Who would you keep off the current roster? I'd keep Cousins and JT, I think that's a solid front court. I'd keep Hayes because he's a good defender. I'd keep Jimmer because every team could use a great three point shooter. Upgrading the PG and SF spots would do wonders for this team in my opinion. My dream scenario is that they could get Rondo and Pierce. Maybe Tyreke, Hickson, and Thornton would get it done. Then slide Jimmer to the starting SG next to Rondo. Now if you just add another defensive big like they had in Dalembert, I think they'd be at least a decent defensive team.