3.2.1. Boom! Kemba talk. (From BB thread)

[spectre]

I'll say one thing: after last season it's refreshing to have at least one player it can at least be legitimately argued about. Up til the draft and Kemba's emergence pretty much everyone thought all the players we had would struggle in the D League.

Nice to be optimistic for a change.

[Catch 22]

SWedd523, Maybe you weren't one of the ones praising Sessions playmaking/distributing ability as a reason why he should start over Kemba during training camp but I remember it distinctly being discussed...or maybe that was on RealGM

[Catch 22]

I'm a pro-MKG fan. I don't even know what I'm doing debating this hard for another player in a thread. I guess I just couldn't avoid arguing against such ignorant statements.

[gamecocksmitty4]

See that's the problem. I think Bogg said he might be better suited for a reserve role because/if he doesn't/won't have the distributing talents necessary to be an elite lead guard. And the response seems to be that it means he sucks and should be stuck on the end of the bench. I've even had you "attack" me for making a similar statement in the past. What needs to be understood by those seemingly showering in the Kemba Kool Aid is that it's possible to be an all-star or elite player with a backup role.


I repeat for clarity. Saying Kemba might not become a top 10 starting PG does NOT mean he's "an average or decent bench guy"

Lol. Disagreeing with your opinion is considered "attacking you"? I'll leave that one alone.

My problem is everyone saying Kemba cannot become a "top 10 starting PG". The guy is playing with ZERO offensive weapons around him. Who is the defense trying to stop right now? Hendo/JT? Slightly. MKG? I love the guy, but no. Mullens/Biz? haha. Haywood/Diop? No. Kemba is leading the offense by himself. And when he passes it, if the guy even catches it, it's likely a miss...if it even hits the rim. Heck, look at his game in the rookie/sophomore game last year. With a little bit of talent around him, he led all players with assists. Kemba needs guys around him who can knock down open jumpers and finish at the rim. Right now, we have nobody. Rondo would struggle getting 10 assists on this team.

[Bogg]

Billups (2004)
Parker (2005)
Williams (2006)

If your argument is that teams can be successful with a number of different types of point guards and lineups, tell that to the posters forcing Chris Paul comparisons. I'm the one arguing that Charlotte should develop a roster and lineup that emphasizes the skills that made Kemba a lottery pick in the first place instead of tying to fit a square peg into a round hole

For instance, this thread began in the BB thread because someone said that he is a poor distributor...and you exacerbated the argument (lol).

Go read that post again. I said that if Kemba's going to be an elite player (top five at his position/top twenty in the league) he's going to have to become a better distributor. I never said that he was "poor distributor", or even said he was only average. He's pretty good. He needs to be better to be mentioned with Derrick Rose.

Let's discuss this when we have a PG that can lead the league in assist on our roster.

Again, posters are missing the point. It's not that they need a better point guard to replace Kemba, they need a placeholder to play about 12-15 minutes a night when Kemba isn't in, but should stagger Kemba's minutes in the event that they get two other high-level scorers to keep the offensive tempo high.

I guess I just couldn't avoid arguing against such ignorant statements.

Serious question: What do you think of the coaching job Greg Popovich has done over the last ten years?

My problem is everyone saying Kemba cannot become a "top 10 starting PG".

I never said Kemba couldn't do it. I pointed out what he would need to do in order to do it, which implied that he had areas to improve, which implied that he wasn't perfect, which set off a firestorm.

...which had NOTHING to do with me. I did not project him to be elite nor do I think he needs to be that in order to be our starting guard when we're a contending team.

I outlined what I most definitely wasn't saying, and you argued that I did in fact mean those things in part by saying that Kemba was better at some things than he was at others (which is true of literally every player to play the game). Also, are you really still hung up on the word "starter"? It's a meaningless designation. All that matters are total minutes played and who you have out on the floor to close out the fourth quarter.

Would you feel better if I said "If Charlotte were to have three high-level scorers, Kemba included in that three, they may be best served bringing one of those three, but not necessarily Kemba, off the bench to keep the offense from lapsing when substitutions start happening"?

[fan_of_a_fan]

Rondo would struggle getting 10 assists on this team.

If Rondo was on this team, I would be pissed the fuck off because he can't score. Tomato/tomatoe, potatoe/potato

[fan_of_a_fan]

@ Bogg, since you keep using the Spurs as an example, I guess my question to you would be "why can't Kemba be the Tony Parker (starting PG) in a Popovich-like system? and why does he have to be the bench guy like Manu Ginobili in order to be successful?". Answer that for me in a sensible manner, and then maybe I could respect your stance.

[Bogg]

@ Bogg, since you keep using the Spurs as an example, I guess my question to you would be "why can't Kemba be the Tony Parker (starting PG) in a Popovich-like system? and why does he have to be the bench guy like Manu Ginobili in order to be successful?". Answer that for me in a sensible manner, and then maybe I could respect your stance.

I think that Kemba's biggest advantage is that, on a night-to-night basis, he's usually going to be the quickest guy on the floor, and is able to use that quickness to blow by the defender. If you wait until the six to four (counting down) minute mark to put him in, and then play him the rest of the way like a starter, he should be able to rack up a quick six to eight points just by being able to blow by a winded starter or second-string defender. If a player's best offensive asset is long-range shooting or a great post-up game, that's going to be relatively constant throughout the game, but a quickness advantage can be increased further if Kemba's fresh and his defender isn't.

As far as your question about Manu, he doesn't have to come off the bench to be successful. I never said that. However, because defenders tend to be less quick the longer they've played, it's seems logical (to me, at least) that managing Kemba's minutes in a way to take advantage of his quickness makes sense.

P.S. Thank you for reading what I wrote and responding with a well-thought out question.

EDIT: I forgot to post this, but from following Kemba from his freshman year at Uconn through now, he seems like a guy more concerned with winning than "getting his", which would help when it comes to selling him on taking a slight ego hit for the betterment of the team.

[fan_of_a_fan]

Last time I checked, Tony Parker's strength was his quickness too, and his best offensive assets aren't "long-range shooting or a great post-up game".

[Bogg]

Last time I checked, Tony Parker's strength was his quickness too, and his best offensive assets aren't "long-range shooting or a great post-up game".

Yes, but Manu has a tendency to break down every couple of years and otherwise winds up playing with nagging injuries, even when his minutes per night are limited into the twenties, making him an obvious choice to bring off the bench anyway. Kemba hasn't shown that tendency to break down, so I'm not saying his minutes should be limited, just his first-quarter rest being moved. However, if Cho turns Ben Gordon and pieces into Eric Gordon(or some other injury-prone potential all-star) I'll be the first person here to advocate bringing him off the bench and limiting his minutes.