What Can Kings Fans Expect from Tyrone Corbin This Year?

Can Tyrone Corbin right the ship for this Sacramento Kings team? Management seems to hope so, as they have signed him for the remainder of the year.

So it's official. Tyrone Corbin is going to be the head coach for the remainder of the season. While that is not ruling out the possibility of George Karl or Chris Mullin taking over the team at the end of the year, management has made it clear that they are going to be sticking with the former Kings assistant and Utah Jazz head man for the near future. Considering how much outrage the firing of Mike Malone generated in the Kings community, this isn't the most inspiring hire, especially with the Kings struggling to a 2-5 record, and seemingly falling apart at the seams on the court and in the locker roomer (allegedly).

So what can Kings fans expect from Corbin? Now that we know he is going to be the solution for this year at least, can Kings fans have any hope, or is this pretty much Kenny Natt and Keith Smart 2.0? Let's take a whole look at Corbin's profile and what he brings to the Kings organization as the head coach.


Coaching Experience

A 16-year veteran as a player in the NBA, Corbin first broke into the coaching ranks in the early NBA D-League working as a player mentor with the Charleston Lowgators after he retired. In 2003-2004, Corbin was hired by former New York Knicks GM Scott Layden as Knicks manager of player development for the 2003-2004 season, working under Layden as well as head coach Don Chaney (who was fired later that year). In 2004, the Jazz, a team he experienced his most success with as a player, hired him as an assistant under Jerry Sloan, and he worked as an assistant from 2004-2011 before taking over as the head man following Sloan's retirement. Considering his status as a player with the Jazz and experience under Sloan, many Jazz fans at the time felt it was a good, though unspectacular hire.

After struggling in the 28 games to finish the 2011 season for Sloan (they finished 8-20), Corbin surprised in his first full year as head man in a lockout shortened season. Corbin built his team around his two solid offensive post players (Paul Millsap and Al Jefferson, who was acquired that off-season) and complemented them with young talent (Derrick Favors, Gordon Hayward, Enes Kanter and CJ Miles) as well as a cast of hungry role players who had been cast off from other teams (Demare Carroll, Devin Harris, Raja Bell and Josh Howard). The Jazz finished the year 36-30, with a SRS of 0.92 and captured the 8th seed in the Western Conference. Even though they were swept in the first round by San Antonio, the solid first year, especially in the wake of Deron Williams and Carlos Boozer leaving less than gracefully the previous year (Williams was widely credited as driving Sloan to retirement) seemed to be a good sign of the franchise under Corbin going forward.

With the same Jefferson and Millsap combo, the Jazz competed for a playoff the whole season in 2012-2013, actually holding the 8th spot in the west for a while until eventually conceding it to Houston in the final month of play. The Jazz finished 43-39 with a SRS of 0.30 and seemed to overachieve with Corbin, as they're Pythagorean W-L actually was 41-41 (so they two games better than they should have been). Jefferson and Millsap continued to be solid (20.9 and 19.8 PER, respectively) and the young trio of Favors, Kanter and Hayward seemed to be progressing and showing hope for the future.

But, in the 2013-2014 season, the Jazz decided to go with an identity change, letting Jefferson and Millsap go in favor of building around their young core of Favors, Kanter and Hayward. By losing their two mainstays, the Jazz went into rebuilding mode, which Corbin seemed to struggle with. After being above .500 in his first two years as head coach, the much younger Jazz plummeted to a 25-57 record with a SRS of minus-6.26, third-worst in the league. Corbin failed to generate much on either end of the ball (25th in offensive rating and 29th in defensive rating that year), and it was obvious that he wasn't reaching the young talent on the roster. Feeling that a new direction was needed, Corbin was let go at the end of the 2013-2014 season.


What Corbin Does Well

Corbin has a solid record of utilizing his post men in the offense as his starting big men have usually led the team in usage rate in his tenure as coach (meaning the offense runs through his post players). While this paid off for him with Jefferson and Millsap, it paid less dividends with Favors and Kanter (though they were younger and it was their first season with major minutes, while Jefferson and Millsap already had lots of experience with major minutes when Corbin took over as head coach). This is comforting for those fearing that the Kings are going to get away from feeding their best player (Cousins) in the post. If history shows anything, Corbin's gameplan will continue to utilize Cousins' talent and strengths in the low block.

Also, one of the reasons Pete and Vivek hired Corbin as an assistant before this season is that he showed some aptitude coaching the offensive side of the ball early in his career with Utah. Though his last year was a blood bath offensively, they were actually pretty good his first two seasons. In the 2011-2012 season, the Jazz scored 106.8 points per 100 possessions, 6th best in the league and in 2012-2013, they scored 106.7 points per 100 possessions, 10th best in the league. On paper, there is a lot to like about Corbin fitting in with this roster: he has success utilizing the talents of his big men and he has had a history of finding offensive success with his teams, something management was unsatisfied with incumbent Mike Malone.

Lastly, Corbin is a cool-headed personality that should be good amid this period of chaos with fans and even some players dissatisfied with the firing of Malone. Corbin is not a big media guy, he's not going to be outspoken in his interviews, and he's the kind of coach that keeps things in house. It was one of the reasons Jazz management hired him, simply due to the fact they were looking for a much calmer personality after experiencing so many years with the much fierier Sloan. Considering Malone was deemed a "player's coach", Corbin should fit in nicely considering he's not the kind of volatile personality that has rubbed Kings players wrong in the past (like Smart, Westphal, Theus and Musselman...basically every Kings coach after Adelman unfortunately).


What is worrisome about Corbin

The Kings biggest issues seem to be on defense as of late, and unfortunately things don't seem to look to get better under Corbin. The defensive ratings for Corbin's Jazz teams went from 12th to 21st to 29th in his three seasons. While Corbin has proved to flash some success with his scheme offensively in his time in Utah, he really hasn't been able to do that in Utah. His teams give up a lot of points, and have struggled in terms of communication and being able to switch and defend shots properly (the Jazz were 30th in the league in FG% allowed and 28th in 3FG% allowed his last season). And unfortunately for Kings fans, the Kings are showing a lot of the same unfortunate signs that plagued Corbin's squads last seasons (lack of communication, getting back in transition defense, contesting shots).

While Corbin has gotten the most out of his post players, perimeter players haven't really developed as much under his tutelage. Despite his high draft pick status, Hayward seemed to underwhelm in Corbin's system (and after the big contract they gave him, this was probably a reason why Corbin was let go: he was unable to reach their franchise player). While Jefferson and Millsap stood out for Corbin's teams (and to a lesser degree, Favors and Kanter), it's hard to categorize any perimeter players that had a major impact outside of Hayward (whose impact still was underwhelming). This is a concern for Rudy Gay, who is obviously the vice president to Cousins when it comes to Franchise players. Gay has looked better in his time in Sacramento from his previous destinations (Toronto and Memphis), and he really seemed to gel well with Malone and his system, especially to start this season. How Corbin is able to reach and utilize Gay will be a big thing to pay attention to. If Corbin can keep utilizing Gay as an important part of his offense, then that will bode well for this team as well as Corbin if he has any hopes of keeping this job (though to be honest, I doubt it considering his history...but like I said, I feel more confident that he's going to keep Cousins as the centerpiece due to his work with Jefferson and Millsap before).

Another reasons Malone was let go was due to the desire of management to play a more up-tempo pace. Though the Kings played a decent tempo last season (94.4 possessions per game last year and 93.6 possessions per game this year; rated 14th and 15th respectively), Vivek seemed to want even more up-tempo, more akin to what the Warriors are doing south in the Bay (not surprising considering Vivek used to be a board member for the Warriors ownership group). The head scratching thing is that Corbin has never showed a propensity to ever be an up-tempo kind of coach. His Utah Jazz teams put up a pace of 91.4, 90.9 and 91.4, good for 12th, 21st and 26th in the league those seasons, respectively. And if you look at what Corbin has done offensively, and the blueprint of his teams (building around his post players), it doesn't scream to anyone as characteristic of a George Karl, Mike D'Antoni or other "up-tempo" coaches. Thus, I think not only are the Kings going through a learning curve playing more up-tempo, but I think Corbin is as well, which can explain their ups and downs on the offensive end during this seven game stretch. Though there is still a long way to go this season, it isn't a good sign when your coach is about as green with up-tempo basketball as his players, especially considering that seems to be the style pushed for by management.


Outlook for Corbin

I think Corbin will have a better effect on Cousins than people think. Corbin has a good reputation utilizing the talents of his bigs, and no one can say that he didn't utilize his talented posts in Utah in his three full seasons there. His work on the perimeter and how he will grow as a teacher of up-tempo basketball is a little bit more up in the air. He certainly has potential since he's been on staff since training camp and coached a lot of them in Summer League, but I think Corbin trying to teach up-tempo basketball is like putting white stripes on a donkey and calling it a Zebra.

However, the biggest pitfall I think for Corbin going forward will be defense. Corbin is certainly not as seasoned and creative a defensive mind as Malone, and it has showed not only in his history in Utah, but early in his tenure in Sacramento. This Kings team struggles to communicate, struggles in transition and struggles to consistently contest shots, and I don't think Corbin is equipped or masterful enough as a coach to change those deficiencies in a major way for the remainder of the season. While the offense may get better, I don't think Kings will develop enough defensively to make Corbin's tenure last anything longer than this season.

Again, it's a long season and while some things look bleak, you never know. If Corbin can adjust and learn from his pitfalls defensively in Utah and in the past seven games, then Corbin may have a chance to turn this team around. But, in all frankness, the odds really are against him, especially considering where the team is attitude-wise following Malone's firing.

Comparing Darren Collison and Isaiah Thomas 30 Games In

Last year, Thomas (right) seemed to fit the Kings roster better than Collison (red, left). That hasn't been the case with Collison a King and Thomas a Sun.

One of the biggest debates this off-season among Kings fans was the decision to not only let Isaiah Thomas sign in free agency with the Phoenix Suns (through a sign and trade), but to replace him with Darren Collison, previously of the Pacers, Mavs and Clippers. Thomas was coming of a 20 ppg season where he looked to be the clear third option and a bargain for a second round pick, while Collison was coming off an underwhelming Clippers campaign where he looked unable to match up on the better point guards in the league. To many, signing Collison rather than anteing up for Thomas looked to be a head scratching move by management, especially considering many felt the Kings could have drafted Elfrid Payton and gotten something similar to Collison's skill set for a whole lot less money.

Despite the pessimistic predictions from fans, Collison has been a pleasant surprise. Not only is he averaging a career high 16.3 ppg, 6.0 apg, 3.2 rpg and 1.8 spg, but he has been an instrumental factor in the Kings' 13-17 start as well as a key building block for their up-tempo plan going forward. As for Thomas, he primarily comes off the bench, unable to get starting minutes with Goran Dragic and Eric Bledsoe ahead of him. Despite his reserve status though, he has still been a potent force off the bench, scoring 15.3 ppg and averaging 4.0 apg in only 24.3 mpg (a downgrade from the 34.7 minutes he averaged last season in Sacramento), and his 36 minute numbers (22.3 ppg per 36 minutes) actually compare very favorably to his last season in Sacramento.

So did the Kings make the right call on this? Is Darren Collison a better fit for Sacramento or is Thomas simply being overshadowed by a crowded back court in Phoenix? Let's take a look at the two this season.


Where Collison has Been Better

One of the main reasons Pete D'Alessandro parted ways with Thomas is due to the fact he underwhelms defensively and is unable to match up with the better and bigger point guards of the league. Last year, Thomas posted a minus-2.0 Defensive Box Plus/Minus and posted a defensive rating of 111 (points per 100 possessions). Now, point guards are always vulnerable to lackluster defensive advanced numbers (simply due to the fact that defending NBA point guards is pretty damn hard to do). But at 5'7, Thomas simply didn't match up well physically, and he always seemed more inclined on the offensive end as evidenced by his advanced numbers as well as his defensive play on the court.

Collison came from Los Angeles with a better defensive reputation though he struggled to find consistency with the Clippers. He posted a minus-0.3 DPBM and a defensive rating of 107, both considerable upgrades over Thomas' numbers. Furthermore, at 6-feet, 160 pounds and with excellent speed, Collison physically showcased all the tools to help the Kings on the defensive end, which had been mediocre in 2013-2014.

This year, both guys have regressed a bit defensively, but Collison remains the better player on the defensive end by far.  Collison is better than Thomas in points per possession (1.04 to 1.06), DPBM (minus-0.6 to minus-2.6) and effective field goal percentage allowed (46.8 to 49.1 percent). So in that regard, Collison has satisfied what management wanted when they made the decision to go with Collison over Thomas.

One of the most surprising aspects though of Collison has been his offensive efficiency this season as well as his ability to fit into the more up-tempo style that the Kings want. Not expected to have much of an impact offensively, the point guard out of UCLA has been a pleasant surprise, with an 18.9 PER, 56.2 TS percentage and a 2.9 OBPM (Offensive Box Plus/Minus). Thomas has posted better numbers than Collison this season in those categories (20.6 PER, 57.6 TS percentage, 3.9 OBPM), but it isn't significantly better and any offensive upgrades Thomas could have presented to the Kings have been negated by his defensive inefficiencies. Thus, Collison has been a much better overall value than Thomas this year for the Kings (further evidenced by Collison's 2.8 VORP, value over replacement player, to Thomas' 1.2).

Furthermore, while Thomas' is fitting in Jeff Hornacek's up-tempo style in Phoenix, he also plays in an offensive system that is very liberal when it comes to distributing the ball and without true "go-to" guys. And because of Thomas' "alpha dog" nature, he is able to fit into their system nicely, willing and able to be assertive and take control when necessary. In Sacramento, that is not needed, as the Kings have two clear alpha dogs in Demarcus Cousins and Rudy Gay. What the Kings need from their point, especially in an up-tempo style which they want to go to, is a clear sense of role and responsibility (all the positions need this in the up-tempo style, but point especially), and it's obvious that Collison understands his role: to distribute and create offense for his teammates. This season, Collison is besting Thomas in assist percentage (28.6 to 25.8), assists per 48 minutes (8.6 to 7.9) and passing rating (11.3 to 9.4). Thomas fits on a roster where there is equal opportunity, but on a team that is trying to play faster while still keeping their top two scorers a priority, Collison fits in much better as a distributor and third-scoring option.


Where Thomas Has Been Better

While you could argue the validity of "clutch" stats, the numbers point that Thomas has been the better crunch-time scorer this season and beyond. In "clutch" situations (4th quarter or OT, less than 5 minutes, neither team up by more than 5), Thomas gives the Suns an offensive rating of 135.2, a defensive rating of 88.2, and a net48 of 47. Per 48 clutch-time minutes, Thomas is averaging 35.3 points and posting an eFG percentage of 55 percent. And lastly,when Thomas has been on the floor in the clutch (he has earned 35 percent of total clutch time minutes), the Suns have been plus-27 in net points and are 5-1.

The numbers don't favor Collison as much in "clutch" situations. When he is on the floor in clutch-time situations, the offensive rating and defensive rating are both lackluster at 84.8 and 107.3 and the net48 hasn't been good at minus-22.6. Hence, it makes sense why the Kings have a point differential of minus-29 and are 5-9 in clutch situations when Collison is on the floor. This isn't to say Collison isn't clutch or he is the sole reason they struggle in clutch situations, but it is obvious that he doesn't have the kind of impact that Thomas has had this season in Phoenix.

Why is this important? Well, with Cousins and Gay both battling ailments at various times this season, the Kings have had to rely on Collison in these important situations with neither go-to guys at a 100 percent or even in the lineup at times. It is in these scenarios (with Cousins and Gay hurt or ailing) that having Thomas would be an upgrade over Collison, as Thomas has that alpha dog mentality in these crunch time situations that Collison doesn't have or seem to have developed yet on this Kings squad.


The Final Verdict?

Thomas is missed and he deserved the standing ovation he got in Sacramento last Friday. But, the Kings are better without Thomas this year. As good and proficient a scorer as he is, Thomas simply was one Alpha Dog too many on roster that already has two. Collison plays a better complimentary role offensively, plays a more natural point guard, pushes the tempo a lot better thanks to his better passing than Thomas, and is a significant defensive upgrade over Thomas.

As sad as it was to see Thomas go, this is one situation where you can say D'Alessandro made the right call in choosing Collison over Thomas...or at least thus far this year (we still got 52 games to go after all).

Clearing up Tempo: Trying to Figure out Vivek and Pete D's Plan

Mike Malone (left) and his rotation and defensive style didn't mesh into the up-tempo style that Vivek Ranadive (right) and GM Pete D'Alessandro want to install. Can they replicate the model of the successful up-tempo NBA team?

(From a FanPost I originally wrote on Sactown Royalty; you can check out the original post here)

I am new to this blog, but it is obvious that this is a great community and I just want to be able to add in any way possible. This is my first fanpost here, and I'm just trying to bring some perspective in terms of what I think Vivek and Pete D are trying to do. I will make a couple of primers first before I write this post:

1. I didn't agree with the Malone firing. I think they should have just rode it out for this year and if they really wanted to make a style change, just do it after the year, whether Malone was successful or not. A coaching change is always messy, and to do it during the season is asinine. Imagine if theWarriors fired Jackson mid-year last season? In the end, it looked like the right decision for the Warriors, but there is always going to be initial kick-back from fans. At least in the off-season, it doesn't affect play since there are no games. Doing it mid-year is always lose-lose because their is an adjustment, people are going to be upset with the change (both players and fans) in some way (less so when they fired Reggie Theus). It was going to be lose-lose regardless and I'm surprised Vivek and Pete didn't really think about that more in their decision.
2. I think it's WAYYYYY too early to say Vivek is a poor owner by any stretch of the imagination. All new owners make boner moves. That has especially been the case with so many new owner coming into the fold, especially owners who were known for being entrepreneurs. Mark Cuban famously let Steve Nash walk. Robert Pera let Lionel Hollins go after he led them to the Western Conference Finals for a coach had never been an NBA coach before. Joe Lacob fired Mark Jackson even after Stephen Curry publicly vouched for him and the media was doing everything in their power to keep him employed. New owners get carried away. They do dumb signings, make rash decisions and so on, but eventually they get a handle of it and figure out what works and what doesn't. I haven't agreed with the Malone firing, but to say Vivek has failed or let us down as Kings fans as an owner or to compare him to the Maloofs is ridiculous and simply looking in the temporary.

Okay, now that those two things are out of the way, I am going to try to look more into what Vivek and Pete D are doing, and I think one of the main issues of contention is the misinterpretation of tempo. It is obvious that Vivek wants to be an up-tempo team (I just say Vivek because I think Pete may be fine either/or. It was obvious that his one want in the draft was Embiid. After watching nearly every Kansas game last year due to living in Kansas City, I don't think Embiid would have fit in that style because he is a true post player, much like Cousins, and have those two towers in there would have definitely killed that Vivek dream. I think Pete just wants to make the best team possible with the resources they have and worry about style after they assemble the roster; this is just my own opinion). The common theme though is that most people think "up-tempo" means all offense, which is not necessarily the case. Again, a lot of this stems from the backlash from the "7 seconds or less" Suns and the failed "Run and Gun" Westhead Nuggets teams of the 90's. But just because you are up-tempo doesn't mean you're automatically lousy defensively. All it means is that by playing a higher tempo you're adding more possessions to the game with the hope that by extending the game you're giving yourself more shot opportunities while also wrecking on the depth of the other team who is not used to playing that style. That is really the goal of being "up-tempo", and how teams approach being up-tempo varies from team to team. For example, people know Nolan Richardson's Arkansas teams and Shaka Smart's team for their defense (40 minutes of hell and HAVOC, respectively). But they also played the fastest tempos in college basketball in their time. They were "run and gun" but people didn't think of their offense, but their defense. So, it just goes to show you that being a "fast-paced" basketball team doesn't marry you to one side of the ball; it just means you want to extend the game with more possessions.

At the NBA level, whether people realize it or not, up-tempo has been successful as of late. The Spurs had the 10th highest tempo last year, and yet they rated as the 3rd best team according to defensive rating. The Warriors this season are playing the fastest pace this year and they not only have the best defensive rating in the league, but also one of the best records as well. You can win while being up-tempo in the NBA. Heck, even the D'Antoni Suns, despite ranking in the bottom of the league in points per game, were always around league average when it came to defensive rating, and that is a big reason why they won between 50-60 games a year and made a habit of going deep in the playoffs, even if didn't result in a title. 

So what makes up-tempo teams good? A complementing defensive system and depth. The defensive system of a fastbreak team can't be similar to what a slower-paced team does. You can't combine D'Antoni's offensive system with Tom Thibodeau's system defensively for example. It doesn't work and what happens is one suffers greatly or both offense and defense becomes mediocre because they don't mesh with each other. That is one of the big problems with the Kings now. Their faster paced offensive system right now being pushed is not meshing with the old defensive system of Malone, which requires a lot of effort on hedges, switches and help. It's just demanding too much of our guys, and that is a big reason why teams are getting so many open looks. Guys get freaking tired and understandably so, and when a player is tired, the effect is more evident on defense. 

In addition to complementing system, up-tempo teams need that depth because of the demands of that style of play. Because our offense and defense are not meshed together yet, that has meant depth is even more important because of the effort required on both sides. But there is such a drop-off in talent from the first to the second and that is a big reason this team has struggled as of late, especially with the faster paced games. The depth just isn't there yet and either needs to be developed or replaced in order to make this team more effective.

And I think that is why Vivek and even Pete felt the need to make a change because of those two reasons. I'm guessing they felt Malone's defensive system just wasn't going to fit in what they wanted to do. Malone wants to be Thibs, and Vivek wants D'Antoni or Pop. And piggybacking on that, Malone relied more on his first unit (another Thibs quality) and didn't seem to trust his bench as heavily as a more up-tempo coach would (like Pop or D'Antoni). So they made the change, knowing those two factors were going to constantly clash and put the team in that "middle ground" which ultimately would lead them nowhere. 

I think the Kings can be an up-tempo team and still win games and be effective defensively. First off, we are only 6 games into this whole change, and there is naturally going to be growing pains. it sucks that the Kings didn't beat the Knicks by 40, but hey, some ups and downs are going to happen with change. It is obvious in the Kings' struggles in early defense and their fatigue showing when defending the pick and roll and drives to the basket. And the funny thing is, all these fans and players pining for Malone's old system don't realize it's there, it's just being played a lot less effectively because games are being played at a higher pace. And because it's being played at a higher pace, the flaws are showing more because there are more possessions (while more possessions can help some teams, it can also expose bad teams because the better team will usually prevail over the longer course of time; a reason why you see less upsets in the NBA playoffs than the NCAA Tournament). And, its also good to remember that even though we like to think differently, this defense wasn't lighting the world by any means even before Malone got fired (24th in defensive rating this year; 23rd last year). So while there was progress, the close wins early may have been a product of getting "lucky" rather than actually being effective, especially on defense and the true colors are just showing now. 

Though some may not want to admit it, there are a lot of teams doing up-tempo well now (Warriors, Mavs, Rockets and Blazers all rank in Top-10 in tempo) and have done it well before, including championship teams. Not everyone has to be the Larry Brown Detroit Pistons to be competitive. The great thing about basketball is that you can accomplish success in a myriad of different ways, and there isn't one style or method to winning. For every slug it out Pistons team there is a Spurs team using their depth and fast-paced style to win an NBA title. I think the Kings can fall in that latter category in due time, but not with this current defensive system, coach and a roster that relies heavily on the first unit.

But I am hopeful Vivek and Pete are figuring it out, and I think much like the Warriors a few years ago, the pieces are being put together to finally re-build the franchise to what it was back in the early 2000's and perhaps even greater. At the very least, this team is competitive, fun to watch (infuriating at times but still enjoyable) and still garners hope, and that's a hell of a lot better than what is going on in some franchises that are tanking for draft picks like Philly and Detroit.

If TL;DR: Up-tempo correlates to possessions not necessarily offense or defense; Malone's rotation and defensive system doesn't fit into the successful up-tempo team mold; Spurs are up-tempo and GOOD at defense; Vivek and Pete need to find that coach that can utilize depth and a complementing defensive system to the up-tempo offense.