Official Fire Monty Thread

But has anyone seen our defense? Our offense is fine but when youre one of the best offensive teams in the league.... like we are and have a 11-14 record then there is something wrong with the coaching!! guys utah only have 3 less wins then us!!

Yeah, I am finding it very hard to watch games at the moment cause I spend almost all my time watching our help the helper scrambling defense and frankly it is getting depressing. Not saying it's not the right technique but it's the only look we give other offenses and it doesn't seem to work at all well. The amount of dribble penetration or open 3s a combo of Jrue, EG and Aminu give up is very concerning and they are all at least decent defenders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Dell acquired guys knowing they were low IQ at the time. Most 23 year olds are. But Dell and Monty dont see it as 2013-14 or Bust. It seems like some fans do. IQ can be, and almost always is, improved. It takes time. You dont take years of bad habits and fix them overnight. You dont go to Jrue and say "Stop shooting mid-range jumpers." and then he magically stops shooting them. You dont give Tyreke a couple of nuggets about off ball defense, and then it suddenly becomes second nature.

Again, this year seems so important because we are living through it now. But years from now, we will barely remember this year. But the lessons these guys learn this year will show up down the line.

---

yeah Morrow is quite stupid to be on the bench when we needed to make a three. A random ball goes to Tyreke who had to take it but we all know he aint good at it. Tyreke should have known to be on the bench. It really makes me mad that our players have such a low IQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PolishFan

yeah Morrow is quite stupid to be on the bench when we needed to make a three. A random ball goes to Tyreke who had to take it but we all know he aint good at it. Tyreke should have known to be on the bench. It really makes me mad that our players have such a low IQ

---

It seems that you odd that you cherry pick a very specific situation for a very broad statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

It seems that you odd that you cherry pick a very specific situation for a very broad statement.

---

That's what people do when they are trying to win an argument, as opposed to trying to gain knowledge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Dell acquired guys knowing they were low IQ at the time. Most 23 year olds are. But Dell and Monty dont see it as 2013-14 or Bust. It seems like some fans do. IQ can be, and almost always is, improved. It takes time. You dont take years of bad habits and fix them overnight. You dont go to Jrue and say "Stop shooting mid-range jumpers." and then he magically stops shooting them. You dont give Tyreke a couple of nuggets about off ball defense, and then it suddenly becomes second nature.

Again, this year seems so important because we are living through it now. But years from now, we will barely remember this year. But the lessons these guys learn this year will show up down the line.

---

I don't necessarily disagree with this post. However high IQ players usually show themselves off early. If you are 23 with 3 or 4 years of NBA experience I don't think you can just naturally assume that will improve. Guys get better as they get more mature. They even can be coached up to get max value, but I'm not so sure guys IQ levels just gets significantly better with age. Just off hand most of the player whom I would deem low IQ players stayed that way as their careers progressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I don't necessarily disagree with this post. However high IQ players usually show themselves off early. If you are 23 with 3 or 4 years of NBA experience I don't think you can just naturally assume that will improve. Guys get better as they get more mature. They even can be coached up to get max value, but I'm not so sure guys IQ levels just gets significantly better with age. Just off hand most of the player whom I would deem low IQ players stayed that way as their careers progressed.

---

Let's also be careful not to confuse "IQ" with attitude/demeanor either. Case in point is Zach Randolf. Some may say he had an IQ "boost" when he finally pulled everything together after deciding to completely apply himself to basketball, but his skill and game knowledge was always there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I don't necessarily disagree with this post. However high IQ players usually show themselves off early. If you are 23 with 3 or 4 years of NBA experience I don't think you can just naturally assume that will improve. Guys get better as they get more mature. They even can be coached up to get max value, but I'm not so sure guys IQ levels just gets significantly better with age. Just off hand most of the player whom I would deem low IQ players stayed that way as their careers progressed.

---

Gotta agree on this one point.

IQ is an aptitude measurement, and these players aren't going to all of a sudden have more of it. Their low Basketball IQ has been exacerbated by playing on losing teams without good coaching, but changing the latter won't effect the former, even if it does improve their performance.

I guess what I'm saying is, "stupid is, as stupid does."

Our players will improve through repetition (every man, woman, child, and puppy does), but I'd expect plenty of mistakes from this bunch until we raise the overall aptitude level of this team and consider bball IQ an important factor in future acquisitions.

I could go through a large list of low IQ players when they were young that grew leaps and bounds. Heck, Tony Parker was a low IQ player for quite a while. Hence the reason they were always trying to upgrade at PG early on.

I would say IQ, more than anything, can be improved. Even more than a jump shot or strength- the two things that people tend to think are the most improveable.

IQ improves with every dribble, with every film session, etc. Some guys don't want to be coached and in those cases, IQ doesn't improve, but nobody on this team strikes me as a guy who doesn't want to be coached


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I could go through a large list of low IQ players when they were young that grew leaps and bounds. Heck, Tony Parker was a low IQ player for quite a while. Hence the reason they were always trying to upgrade at PG early on.

I would say IQ, more than anything, can be improved. Even more than a jump shot or strength- the two things that people tend to think are the most improveable.

IQ improves with every dribble, with every film session, etc. Some guys don't want to be coached and in those cases, IQ doesn't improve, but nobody on this team strikes me as a guy who doesn't want to be coached


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I think it goes without saying that studying, and doing any one thing of any kind will raise ones IQ for that particular thing.

With that said I don't think D- IQ players consistently becomes B+ IQ players just based on experience and study.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I could go through a large list of low IQ players when they were young that grew leaps and bounds. Heck, Tony Parker was a low IQ player for quite a while. Hence the reason they were always trying to upgrade at PG early on.

I would say IQ, more than anything, can be improved. Even more than a jump shot or strength- the two things that people tend to think are the most improveable.

IQ improves with every dribble, with every film session, etc. Some guys don't want to be coached and in those cases, IQ doesn't improve, but nobody on this team strikes me as a guy who doesn't want to be coached


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I think we disagree in how we're using the term "Basketball IQ".

Some players get concepts very quickly, and it might take them little to no time to adjust from one system to the next. They also might make the right decision more often than not, without much need to be coached over a period of time into making that decision. I would say a player like that has a very high basketball IQ.

If given the same system, another player might take 2 years to grasp it, and might still periodically, though infrequently, make the wrong decisions on the court. Will the end result ultimately be similar, with both players knowing where to be and what to do in most situations? Maybe, but it doesn't mean that the second player's BBall IQ increased, only that he got better at something because of repetition that the first player grasped immediately.

Throw both players into a completely new system for a second time, and the player with the high BBall IQ wouldn't regress much at all. The second player probably would regress significantly. Of course over a career, both players will gain experience and knowledge, but I've never seen a scenario where a guy with a low BBall IQ, like Brandon Jennings, catches up to a guy with a higher BBall IQ like Steph Curry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I think it goes without saying that studying, and doing any one thing of any kind will raise ones IQ for that particular thing.

With that said I don't think D- IQ players consistently becomes B+ IQ players just based on experience and study.

---

I agree. I think the ceiling for someone like Tyreke is a C+, but that would b a significant jump- one big enough to make him a third guy on a title contender


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The goal of the coaching staff at least imho is to assess a player in all phases. In this case basketball IQ and try to increase it as much as it can be increased. Everyone will have different levels that they can increase their specific attributes; once the coach assesses each yeah a players basketball IQ; it's their job to put them in the best position to succeed. The Spurs are always the model for this using guys like Diaw and making him from a talented inefficient player to a good efficient player; same with Belinelli. Sometimes talent or lack there of will handcuff a coach on playing low basket basketball IQ players in a role thats not fitting to their current level of IQ.

What happens when the coach doesn't have a high basketball IQ, let's say preferably on defense?

Defensive Efficiency by year

13-14 108.5 (22nd)
12-13 110 (28th)
11-12 105.1 (15th)
10-11 105.2 (10th)
09-10 110.1 (22nd)

I don't think it's our coach's lack of IQ; I think it's the players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

Defensive Efficiency by year

13-14 108.5 (22nd)
12-13 110 (28th)
11-12 105.1 (15th)
10-11 105.2 (10th)
09-10 110.1 (22nd)

I don't think it's our coach's lack of IQ; I think it's the players.

---

Yep, defense was fine with veteran, high IQ guys like CP3, Ariza, Okafor, and West. I would say there is more raw defensive talent on this team than that one, but it is just that - Raw. Gonna take them a while to figure out the system and each other. CP3 and those guys did it in one training camp. It will take much longer than that for a group of guys who are 20-23 years old.

I think you'll see us jump by year maybe to 17th next year to be average and maybe 2-3 years be in that 8-10 range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Yep, defense was fine with veteran, high IQ guys like CP3, Ariza, Okafor, and West. I would say there is more raw defensive talent on this team than that one, but it is just that - Raw. Gonna take them a while to figure out the system and each other. CP3 and those guys did it in one training camp. It will take much longer than that for a group of guys who are 20-23 years old.

---

Dude, those are all defensive studs.
As for the other post, the fact that our D has left so much to be desired under Williams every year coupled with the fact that the roster has been drastically different every year, all but beyond shadow of doubt proves that it's the coaching. There's no using the new players excuse either, Steve Clifford kills that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kujo_Daggs

Dude, those are all defensive studs.
As for the other post, the fact that our D has left so much to be desired under Williams every year coupled with the fact that the roster has been drastically different every year, all but beyond shadow of doubt proves that it's the coaching. There's no using the new players excuse either, Steve Clifford kills that.

---

So you're saying with defensive studs he can have a good defense and now that we don't have them we don't have a good defense proves it's the coaching... uhhh ok.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kujo_Daggs

Dude, those are all defensive studs.
As for the other post, the fact that our D has left so much to be desired under Williams every year coupled with the fact that the roster has been drastically different every year, all but beyond shadow of doubt proves that it's the coaching. There's no using the new players excuse either, Steve Clifford kills that.

---

David West is a defensive stud???? And how have Emeka's teams fared defensively over his career? He blocked shots occassionally, but he was no stud defender. Ariza was above average, and CP3 got a lot of steals. Individually, those were not great defensive players. Throw in Marco or Willie Green at the 2 along with a thin bench without a plus defender in the bunch. But again, they were high IQ vets who picked up on a system that relies on communication and intelligence.

As for Clifford, his teams' big offseason acquisition was 29, not 23. A guy who had been through multiple playoff series and numerous systems. And besides Kemba, all of their recent picks prior to this year were defensive minded guys - MKG, Biyombo, Henderson. His system is also much simpler to understand.

Again, Monty has a system with a steeper learning curve than most, but a potentially higher ceiling. Not the thing people want to here, because we can only live in the present, but I personally care more about year 2 and 3 of this process than this season, so I am cool with them struggling in the short term.

I remember quite clearly back then people whining, pardon, complaining about mek not being able to guard a guy in the post and not playing the good defense required from a 5, ariza making stupid defensive (well, not only, but also) decisions and getting burnt repeatedly. CPME never was a top defender (but many still think he was because LOTSA STEALS MUST MEAN GOOD DEFENDER!!11!1 and so on) so really, back then people complained (myself included, no doubt) because the team had no offense and was far too predictable, now people complain because the team has no defense...the coach is the same, so is he a good defensive and horrible offensive coach or a good offensive and horrible defensive coach?

But of course, it's always the same argument...he had good defenders so his difense was adequate back then, he has Da Best Offensive Talent in the West now so clearly the team is good offensively.

Basically, if the team had no offense then, it was his fault. However, the team was made of good defenders, so a decent defense was a given and not monty's work.

The team has no defense now, and it's clearly his fault. However, having so many good talented offensive player on the roster, a very good offense would have happened even with Eman coaching, so it's not thanks to monty anyway.

Right?

Ah well it's almost 3 am i'd better go to bed anyway. Have a good debate guys

Makes sense, if something good happens, it's because of the players. If something bad happens, it's because of the coach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

Makes sense, if something good happens, it's because of the players. If something bad happens, it's because of the coach.

---

It will always be that way, for every fan base, for every team. Fans wanna believe that the coach is the problem, because they can be let go without cap ramifications. They are the easiest thing to replace theoretcially. Once in a while, a new coach comes in with roughly the same players and you see a great improvement, but that is the exception, not the norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

It will always be that way, for every fan base, for every team. Fans wanna believe that the coach is the problem, because they can be let go without cap ramifications. They are the easiest thing to replace theoretcially. Once in a while, a new coach comes in with roughly the same players and you see a great improvement, but that is the exception, not the norm.

---

Yeah it's the only asset you can "upgrade" without having to give anything up value-wise (mostly). I think Monty has tons of things to improve on, so I don't want to seem like a Monty apologist at all; but i'll never be a fan who wants to keep swapping things out before making a decision. I think that's why i don't get as frustrated as a lot of the rest of the fan base with particular players and such. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just saying it's something that's grown with me with age. Plus like you've pointed out 50xs now; who are we going to switch Monty out with in the next 2 years that's going to legitimately not at least cause regression in the beginning that will actually come here? Maybe Thibs, but rumors are that he could end up a Knick but next season. Even if the Knicks have a worse roster, it's still New York.

Monty is an *** you play Ryan Anderson a weak defender on Cuz and let him kill the whole game. Then by using all his energy trying to guard Cuz was to worn to play offence instead of the 7'2 guy. Then you see he keeps back you down in the post why dont you double? why because it's good coaching and he doesnt believe in that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

Monty is an *** you play Ryan Anderson a weak defender on Cuz and let him kill the whole game. Then by using all his energy trying to guard Cuz was to worn to play offence instead of the 7'2 guy. Then you see he keeps back you down in the post why dont you double? why because it's good coaching and he doesnt believe in that.

---

I loved the strategy. Notice: Kings only had 4 half court three's tonight.

We dont defend from deep and everyone kills Monty. Now, Monty basically begs Cousins to beat us on his own, while defending the line, and people hate that.

He can't win. Thankfully, I dont think he cares what any of us think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I loved the strategy. Notice: Kings only had 4 half court three's tonight.

We dont defend from deep and everyone kills Monty. Now, Monty basically begs Cousins to beat us on his own, while defending the line, and people hate that.

He can't win. Thankfully, I dont think he cares what any of us think.

---

ehh you may be right with doubling but i still say you don't put Anderson on Cuz. I think lou or Frenchie would have been a better fit to slow him down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

ehh you may be right with doubling but i still say you don't put Anderson on Cuz. I think lou or Frenchie would have been a better fit to slow him down.

---

Okay, but then you significantly downgrade your spacing w/o Ryno on the court and your offense is terrible.

All together, Cousins scored 24 points on 27 possessions. I will take that all day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Okay, but then you significantly downgrade your spacing w/o Ryno on the court and your offense is terrible.

All together, Cousins scored 24 points on 27 possessions. I will take that all day.

---

You know the kings don't play defense right?

You also need to realize it makes cousin defend the perimeter instead of being down low opening up lanes for reke and Gordon who had a field day in the paint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

You also need to realize it makes cousin defend the perimeter instead of being down low opening up lanes for reke and Gordon who had a field day in the paint.

---

No it doesn't. You're not required to defend the guy who defends you.

Kings put Gay and Williams on Ryno.

Malone isn't as dumb as Monty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SilkySlim

No it doesn't. You're not required to defend the guy who defends you.

Kings put Gay and Williams on Ryno.

Malone isn't as dumb as Monty.

---

This.

personally, i liked monty's decision not to double much on cousins..i don't believe in doubling much because that opens up the 3 pt shooting (the more efficient shot)...terry stotts gets praised for not doubling in portland because he doesn't want the 3 pt shooting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SilkySlim

No it doesn't. You're not required to defend the guy who defends you.

Kings put Gay and Williams on Ryno.

Malone isn't as dumb as Monty.

---

Exactly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I loved the strategy. Notice: Kings only had 4 half court three's tonight.

We dont defend from deep and everyone kills Monty. Now, Monty basically begs Cousins to beat us on his own, while defending the line, and people hate that.

He can't win. Thankfully, I dont think he cares what any of us think.

---

Monty can't win here. If we put AD on Cuz then AD gets punished physically. Ryno was stout enough to guard Cuz in the post and the strategy ended up working. Yet Monty is an idiot for doing it. Dude gets destroyed even when we win.

There's no pleasing some folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

Monty can't win here. If we put AD on Cuz then AD gets punished physically. Ryno was stout enough to guard Cuz in the post and the strategy ended up working. Yet Monty is an idiot for doing it. Dude gets destroyed even when we win.

There's no pleasing some folks.

---

No, it's simple Ryno sucks on defense you just don't put a bad defensive player on the opposing team best player in any situation. This is common sense 101.

It's like saying AD is to small to guard Lebron while he is playing the 4 so put Anderson on him. I wouldn't have even had mind if it was Aminu on CUz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

No, it's simple Ryno sucks on defense you just don't put a bad defensive player on the opposing team best player in any situation. This is common sense 101.

---

Not necessarily, if you can't prevent the opposing team best offensive weapon to score, it's better to focus your best defensive player on the other players, that way you act where you could have the biggest impact. And Ryno didn't suck that much on defense, Cousins scored only 24 while he averaged 22.5ppg.

We won a road game by double digits. Monty's gameplan against the Kings worked.

I sorta liked not doubling cousins

I actually hated that Ryno was on Boogie but in retrospect, I liked the move. Ryno was so busy with Boogie on D, he took less shots and I personally think the offense is better when Ryno takes less shots. It allows EG, Reke, and Holiday to be the offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

You know the kings don't play defense right?

---

LOL, that's why you play Anderson. Make them pay as much as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

No, it's simple Ryno sucks on defense you just don't put a bad defensive player on the opposing team best player in any situation. This is common sense 101.

It's like saying AD is to small to guard Lebron while he is playing the 4 so put Anderson on him. I wouldn't have even had mind if it was Aminu on CUz.

---

"Common sense 101" lol. Right. Just because "Ryno sucks on defense" that totally negates the fact that Cuz outweighs AD by a few (bunch) pounds... you would still put AD on him anyway because he's our best defender. If you put AD down there... it would have been AD with the 5 fouls and possibly 6, because Boogie would have "Big Boy'd" AD in the paint.

I get that you hate Monty... you're not alone. But let's think about what you're whining about before you whine. Monty gets killed on this board when we lose, and even when we win the dude gets no props. Its just funny as hell to me.

Monty is far from a "great" coach but he doesn't deserve the punishment he gets here. I've said it a bunch of times... you can cry all you want for a new coach, but the ink just dried on a new contract, and he's not going anywhere... not any time soon anyway. And you act like the dude has had all star talent on his roster. When he had some talent we went to the playoffs... ever since then the dude hasn't had squat to work with but you expect him to work miracles with a bunch of dudes under 25.

Have patience man that's all I'm sayin'. Yeah its hard to watch some games but its not always the coach's fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SilkySlim

No it doesn't. You're not required to defend the guy who defends you.

Kings put Gay and Williams on Ryno.

Malone isn't as dumb as Monty.

---

+1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

"Common sense 101" lol. Right. Just because "Ryno sucks on defense" that totally negates the fact that Cuz outweighs AD by a few (bunch) pounds... you would still put AD on him anyway because he's our best defender. If you put AD down there... it would have been AD with the 5 fouls and possibly 6, because Boogie would have "Big Boy'd" AD in the paint.

I get that you hate Monty... you're not alone. But let's think about what you're whining about before you whine. Monty gets killed on this board when we lose, and even when we win the dude gets no props. Its just funny as hell to me.

Monty is far from a "great" coach but he doesn't deserve the punishment he gets here. I've said it a bunch of times... you can cry all you want for a new coach, but the ink just dried on a new contract, and he's not going anywhere... not any time soon anyway. And you act like the dude has had all star talent on his roster. When he had some talent we went to the playoffs... ever since then the dude hasn't had squat to work with but you expect him to work miracles with a bunch of dudes under 25.

Have patience man that's all I'm sayin'. Yeah its hard to watch some games but its not always the coach's fault.

---

Completely agree. Also it's pretty unbelievable you're doing this after his decision to put Anderson on Boogie and not foul worked very well. 24 points on 27 possession, I'll take that everytime. They only made four threes and we won by 13.

There are times to rail on Monty, even though y'all do it way too often whether it's after a loss or win, but the majority of the team's faults are on the guys that are actually playing out there. It's a pretty terrible excuse to just blame it on the coach. Honestly, I don't know if we're watching the same game, because when we're playing bad it's the terrible decision making and low basketball IQ that hurts us (completely on the players) rather than our coach.

I honestly have no idea if he's a good or bad coach, but no one on this board does either so I think y'all need to give him a chance first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

Monty can't win here. If we put AD on Cuz then AD gets punished physically. Ryno was stout enough to guard Cuz in the post and the strategy ended up working. Yet Monty is an idiot for doing it. Dude gets destroyed even when we win.

There's no pleasing some folks.

---

If I had a few million dollars I might be willing to give a few guys here each a million. Just to see if they can coach their way out of a wet paper bag. Mmmm, nah, I wouldn't waste my money. LMBO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

You know the kings don't play defense right?

---

Also, hasn't Mike Malone been touted as a defensive coach? And yet, his Kings don't play defense? Imagine that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RekeHavoc

Completely agree. Also it's pretty unbelievable you're doing this after his decision to put Anderson on Boogie and not foul worked very well. 24 points on 27 possession, I'll take that everytime. They only made four threes and we won by 13.

SNIP

---

I deleted the game from my DVR, but I'd be interested to see how many of Ryno's fouls were actually on Cuz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyGirl

If I had a few million dollars I might be willing to give a few guys here each a million. Just to see if they can coach their way out of a wet paper bag. Mmmm, nah, I wouldn't waste my money. LMBO.

---

LOL! I was scratching my head last night at people trippin' about RYno guarding Cousins. Cousins is a big dude that likes to use his strength... you put your strongest (physically) player on him... not your "best".

You put AD on Cousins and you've caused 2 problems... 1 you have Cousins mean-muggin AD in the post, and you also have Ryno trying to guards a quicker Jason Thompson.

So Monty decides to do what he thought was best.. and what was the result? Did ANYBODY even remember Jason Thompson playing last night? Hell I don't. And you know why? Because AD shut him down, but no... let's destroy Monty for putting Ryno on Cuz.

LOL I mean sometimes you just have to shake your damm head at some folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

LOL! I was scratching my head last night at people trippin' about RYno guarding Cousins. Cousins is a big dude that likes to use his strength... you put your strongest (physically) player on him... not your "best".

You put AD on Cousins and you've caused 2 problems... 1 you have Cousins mean-muggin AD in the post, and you also have Ryno trying to guards a quicker Jason Thompson.

So Monty decides to do what he thought was best.. and what was the result? Did ANYBODY even remember Jason Thompson playing last night? Hell I don't. And you know why? Because AD shut him down, but no... let's destroy Monty for putting Ryno on Cuz.

LOL I mean sometimes you just have to shake your damm head at some folks.

---

DeMarcus is more than likely to get his. He's a star over there. He might be a headcase sometimes but his game is no slouch.

Only significant issue I have at this point is why in the world no one on this team (ever since trading away Chris Paul) has no awareness of two for one opportunities at the end of quarters. So many times I'm sitting there watching the team dribble the ball from 40 seconds down to 20 rather than try to get a quick shot around the 30-35 second mark.