Preview and Chat: Lakers vs. Kings

Ryan Cole —  February 28, 2014

The Lakers have lost three games in a row, and seven of their last 10. It’s been pretty tough to say the least, and with guys on the roster unhealthy for extended periods of time, games have been difficult to win. For some players, frustrations are at an all-time high.

Earlier this week, Pau Gasol wasn’t bashful in voicing his critics of head coach Mike D’Antoni, as he has become displeased with the consistent losing and lack of chemistry that this team has on the court.

Tonight, the Lakers are looking to get back on the winning track, as the face the Sacramento Kings. Both teams are in the heart of the “tank” sweepstakes, respectively holding the worst records in the western conference. The Kings will be without their leader, and captain, Demarcus Cousins, as he has been suspended for getting into an altercation with Patrick Beverley in a game against the Houston Rockets.

One bright spot for the Lakers has been the late the play of new addition Kent Bazemore. In his four games with the Lakers he’s averaged 17.3 points, three assists, and two steals, on 45 percent shooting from the field and 35 percent shooting from behind the arc.

More than anything, Bazemore’s effort has been a pleasant sight for fans to see amidst this tough and grueling season, and we should expect him to continue playing with passion and energy tonight.

Keys To Lakers Victory:
Limit Turnovers: The Lakers are going to need to make a consistent effort to take care of the ball. Trading Steve Blake to the Warriors has placed this team in an unfortunate position, as they now only have two active point guards.

We should expect the Kings to try to pressure the Lakers ball handlers. Doing this will allow them to get out in transition and run.

Offensive Efficiency: The Kings allow their opponents to shoot 37.5% from behind the arc and the Lakers will have to capitalize on this if they want to win tonight. The Lakers have shot consistently from the three-point line this season, and this is simply a result of the small-ball system that Mike D’Antoni runs.

The Kings are far from a good defensive team, so it’s important that the Lakers exploit this. Attack them inside, whether it be via penetration or isolating the big men on the block. On a night like this it’s also key that guys like Jordan Hill and Chris Kaman get minutes. With no Demarcus Cousins, the Lakers will have a decided advantage in the front court, and should give the bigs consistent touches.

Defense: The Lakers will have their hands full tonight despite the fact that Demarcus Cousins will not be suiting up. Even without the skilled big, the Kings still boast one of the more athletic and talented young rosters in the NBA.

It will be a tough night defending the point guard and small forward position, as both Isaiah Thomas and Rudy Gay have proven to be very efficient scorers this season. In all likelihood, Kent Bazemore will be matched up against Gay. He’ll have to make it his duty to force Gay to take tough shots. If he can’t, it’ll be a long night for the Lakers defense.

This is the game that the Lakers can use to get on the winning track. With players and fans frustrated, this team is dire need of a win, and they should have a good chance getting it tonight.

Where you can watch: 7:30 pm start time out west on TWC Sportsnet. Also listen at ESPN Radio 710AM.

Ryan Cole


66 responses to Preview and Chat: Lakers vs. Kings

  1. With Cousins out it will be interesting to see how MDA attacks. If he utilizes the Laker bigs it will be an indication he can adjust to a situation where we have an advantage down low. If he stays with Johnson at the 4 and refuses minutes for Kaman and Hill, then all the naysayers will be proven correct.

    Let’s watch a game where the Laker bigs should have an advantage and see how the game plays out.

  2. If I had to name one single reason, why I liked Kobe more than Shaq, it would be because Kobe cared about the game so much more than Shaq did. Kobe wanted to be the absolute greatest that he could be and he worked at his craft tirelessly. Shaq, on the other hand, always seemed like a guy that tried just hard enough… Apparently Phil thinks so too.

    @Craig W. I would be completely blown away if MDA tries to go big tonight.

  3. MDA won’t go big; won’t stress defense or rebounding BUT…..

    MDA will find a way to lose tonight 🙁

  4. Glad to see Mike is going with the same lineup as the last 2 losses.

    No sense changing what’s unsuccessfully.

  5. Dunno what you guys are saying. Why go big? The identity that this team is trying to achieve is to be good in small ball. Going big is not the team’s identity, our bigs are not at par with other teams post play system. Our strenght is the speed and athleticism. Why go into the other teams strategy of going big and posting up? You try to establish your identity by doing your principle and applying it pver and pver again.As we all know that the leagueh has changed a lot and small ball is the name of the game today and MDA as we all know innovates it and the league has embraced it.
    Let him do hos job and before we judge his coaching, let him have more talented players through FA and draft to his liking then let him work with it, then if he do fail then maybe we can have this fiscussions.

  6. Of course D’Antoni’s not going to change. He even singled Wes out as playing well the last two games, and in no way blames the losses on his smaller lineup. If he’s the coach, then play his game. The offense is okay. However, the defense and rebounding has been embarrassing all year, and it’s not all the injuries. Even with everyone healthy, it’s stretching things to imagine a really good team over the long haul of a season. I think it’s still a bad match for this coach and this roster.

  7. I rather see the team commit to this small line up than the ever ending starting lineups changes from before. this is a game we actually have a shot of winning and w/o Demarcus? Why change the lineup? The Lakers getting bumped from tv and the Knicks getting National back2 back attention just to see them getting blown out back2 back warms my heart, well im sure if Kobe was playing they would not be bumped and the Knicks despite being awful have Melo. It is just me or the new Comish is an odd looking fellow. In a Star Wars reference i considered Stern Emperor Palpatine specially after the VETO, does this mean that Adam Silver is Darth Vader? But he looks too wimpy to be a Dark Lord of the Sith,help im confused or is my friend Johnny Walker playing tricks on me? That Johny, such a rascal…

  8. The biggest story for me on this game is Farmar remark about going thru Pau win or lose wich was as a “were doing our own thing” sign as big as a billboard , it should give us a glimpse of how much sway MDA hold on this team or not.

  9. Where has D’Antoni ever said he doesn’t want to go through Pau? If he doesn’t like what Farmar’s doing, he just takes him out of the game.

  10. Kendall Jenner plays better defense.

  11. Nice fast break that ends with the Pau Gasol slam dunk.

  12. Rfen, going thru Pau means going thru the post, anathema to MDA he will always have the power to take Farmar out of the game but it would show how much Pau and Farmar the only true Lakers and leaders of this team have tune him out doesnt matter if its sucesful or not.

  13. Boy this team looks good.

    For the 1st pre-season game of the year.

    Who has 19 wins in the wine pool?

  14. Like i said Farmar-Gasol tandem working it ” screw the coach” on full effect and is working

  15. Farmer is the future of this team. On fire!

  16. Gasol to a cutting Meeks for the slam dunk.

  17. Every minute Marshall is on the court is negative. 12 quarters in a row without a basket and just a joke on defense.

    Enough is enough.

  18. Pau’s not an ornament on offense. The PG is running D’antoni’s offense.

    The offense doesn’t mean much. They’re just so bad defensively. Marshall’s being evaluated, and it’s not looking good.

  19. Please release Marshall so MD can’t play him. Now he can’t even pass the ball.

  20. Hard to believe that Marshall has such a weak offensive game. His 3 pt. attempts are from way behind the arc. Why is he starting ahead of Farmar??

  21. Well coached team.

  22. Are Kaman and Hill hurt?

  23. Kenny

    Yes hurt by the coach!

  24. If this is Rambis’ defense, he needs to be fired too.

  25. Kaman and Hill played a few minutes, and D’Antoni obviously didn’t like what he saw. Those two are on very short leashes… Or maybe they’re hurt.

  26. Lakers are 68.2% (15-22) from three point range and trailing. Defense and turnovers are the reason.

  27. It’s time for Jimmy Buss to take a stand and confront the media and fans, He needs to tell everyone that MDA is the coach for the foreseeable future. This is the style he wants and MDA is the guy to do it; Buss should be hammering that point down.

    He should also remind everyone that the family has given LA a superior product for over thirty years, so the media and fans should cut the organization some slack. Bear with us and stay with us; it will get better. Support MDA instead of tearing him down. the lakers will win and be exciting.

    Pretty good, huh. I just wrote Jimmy Buss’ speech to finally stand on his two feet. Because, as consumers of this product, bad as it is, fans should be asking why they should spend their time and money on this product. Buss needs to give them a reason,other than ” We’re the Lakers!”. If he doesn’t care, why should we? We have no reason to believe anything will get better soon.

  28. Lakers are shooting 72% on 3s, Farmar is having a career night…and they are fighting for a win at home against a Sacto team playing without DeMarcus Cousins.

  29. Meanwhile,MDA needs to clearly explain what is going on here and why the fans should support his team. We don’t know what’s going on; small ball, why? Why is it OK to have Wesley Johnson to guard PF, or why give Kendall Marshall so much time even though he can’t play D or shoot consistently?

    Why no D? Because they don’t run the offense correctly??? Why no rebounding? Because they should shoot the ball better? Spacing the floor for players that can’t enough, that’s cool??? Why keep the bigs you have, when you don’t play them??

    Instead he stews at the fans, he did it once and he would love to do it again.

  30. 1998 was the last time the Lakers had four 20+ point scorers in a game. Eddie Jones, Kobe Bryant, Nick Van Exel and Shaquille O’Neal.

  31. Sometimes offense is enough. Brooks has some skills.

  32. Oops, the Lakers won. I take everything back !!!

  33. This is the win that loses me the case of wine.

  34. Strange game.

    Marshall, Hill and Kamen zero points.

    Meeks, Jordan and Brooks can’t miss.

    This is MDs dream game . Sadly it only happens a couple of times per year.

  35. This win is pyrite. #teamtank

  36. Just a win. Nothing resembling gold. Bad team beats another bad team by shooting lights out. Lakers get feisty when they hit shots, and they’re able to control the floor better and get some stops. Not a recipe for success, but good showcase for some individual Laker skills.

  37. Ken

    I don’t think so. I only see 5 or 6 wins the test of the way.

    I just got in a new line of Michael Andretti wines that are fast and good!

  38. Glad the team got a win…. But the defense was horrible. They showed some grit down the stretch and got some stops as the interior tightened up a bit. It’s hard for me to believe that this team wouldn’t be a lot better with a coach who stressed defense more.

  39. That was fun, at least for the night. Marshon has some skills, reminded me at times of a certain young number 8 (Blasphemy!) I like his game better than Nick Young’s-have seen enough fall away jumpers for this year. Wesley is getting better, my man Kendall getting worse. As long as Lakers get record number of 3’s they are in good shape.

    Kings are proof the NBA lottery is no guarantee to success…

  40. Rfen – I’m well aware that the Lakers live by the 3 and die by the 3; my point is that any win decreases draft top 3 chances and is thus fool’s gold. Especially against the Kings who are close competition for the 3rd worst record.

  41. I think everybody understands how the lottery works. The Lakers choose to fight for wins because that’s who they are. I wouldn’t want it any other way.

  42. @Spitfire – exactly mate

  43. I personally want to see Hill and Kaman get minutes but the team has a grand vision and need to stay true to it. At this crucial moment it’s not about what any of us want. Give MDA a break ..what is the Knicks record again? ..they’ve got a superstar and a rim protector but they are not doing any better compared to our injury-ravaged team. Yeah MDA is stubborn and is not the most likeable person but cmon you think Tibbs or Doc or whoever will be winning with this team?? Just give him a break

  44. Yes I do think Tibs would be winning. Look at the Bulls lineup. There is less talent there but they rebound and play defense and do it with a 6″9″ center and 2nd team guards.

  45. @KO
    I thought 5 or 6 wins (before tonight) the rest of the way too, but I picked 24 wins. :/

  46. Its a closest to the pin game. Next lowest was 27 I think.

  47. In conclusion

    If the Lakers shoot 70% from 3 point line

    Mike D system works

    If not, they lose 70% of their games.

  48. I personally want to see Hill and Kaman get minutes but the team has a grand vision and need to stay true to it.
    I don’t think it’s a matter of grand visions as much as that the current roster is stacked with wing players who need to be evaluated. The main reason for switching Johnson to the 4 is to make room for Brooks and Bazemore to see what they can do. And I’m sure the FO is fine with that.

    The main problem with this approach on a more general level is that we just don’t have a good stretch 4. Our best player at that position was Williams and he is playing D-League ball now. Kelly has been struggling lately. While he was good on offense earlier on he’s not a particularly good defender and is surely one of the worst rebounders in the NBA at his position. Johnson is not a natural stretch 4, and giving up 20+ pounds to opponents like West on a regular basis might take an undue toll on his body.

    As long as we hit 70% of our 3s that approach can even lead to wins but in the long run we’d probably be more successful with consistent minutes for Hill and Kaman.

    As for the grand vision, IMO MDA’s track record is not convincing enough to allow him to put together a roster of hand-picked players (if that was even possible during the next offseason). If things don’t work out with him we might be stuck with a wildly unbalanced roster even after letting him go.

  49. Statistics also show we suck so bad when we go big …and it’s not even close. Chicago has lesser talent?? What is the difference between Mclemore and Ryan Kelly? Just draft positions cos judging from their play you cant tell Ben was a lottery pick. If Kelly had been a lottery pick people would have been patient with him and happy MDA plays him. The kid is a rook but really smart. He should be developed. I say we go with small ball. I so want Adreain Payne for this team but we dont have multiple picks.

  50. Statistics also show we suck so bad when we go big …and it’s not even close.
    One thing that shouldn’t be overlooked when it comes to statistics is that they can be really hard to interpret properly. Putting a lineup on the floor says very little about the circumstances (such as how the players in that lineup were utilized, what offensive and defensive schemes were used etc). At the end of the day you need to get wins.

    I think MDA had plenty of patience with Kelly, and the FO may consider him a keeper. That doesn’t mean he should be relied on heavily, though. Developing players successfully includes putting them in a context where they can win and learn the things that are necessary to win (one of the reasons why I’m not a big fan of organizational tanking).

  51. At the beginning of the season (when everyone other than Kobe was healthy) we were getting very inconsistent results with Williams and Johnson at the 4. Things got a little more consistent when Johnson was moved to the 3 and Hill was inserted into the starting lineup (in other words, when we went to a more traditional lineup). Unfortunately things were shaken up again when all those injuries occurred. And as soon as Hill had a bad game or two he wasn’t getting consistent minutes anymore.

  52. Warren Wee Lim March 1, 2014 at 6:09 am

    Man this game was fun to watch. I had to watch it. My boy Farmar.

  53. Agree, it’s great to see Farmar back to top form. If he can avoid the injury bug I believe he can be a solid fixture for the Laker’s future.

    Fun win against a lesser opponent.
    When the team breaks records for 3-pointers we have a chance.
    Our overall record reflects how often that happens. Rarely.

    Unfortunately, IMO a win like this fuels hope for a flawed system and actually hurts us in the long run.
    8 minutes between Hill and Kaman?
    If you were those two guys, would you re-sign here?

    On a positive note it is fun to watch guys like Brooks and Bazemore emerging.

    Dantoni is a quirky coach that seems best suited to coach an AAU club team.

  54. Nobody really knows what the Lakers would do under Thibs. How do the players buy in to what he wants them to do? The Bulls have a lot of tough guys who really battle. Is it the mindset the players have naturally? Is there the needed leadership on the floor? Does the coach preach, teach, stress, and give minutes to players who earn it with the right effort? Does the coach play a style and pace that gives them the best chance to win? Does he favor match ups that make sense defensively? Has the FO chosen tougher, better defensive players because of the coach they chose? It’s a philosophy they embrace. Thibs has gotten a lot out of what he has in Chicago.

    The Lakers have a different mindset, play a different way. It centers around D’Antoni. Of course, he doesn’t have the healthy talent he needs. That’s crippled the team because they haven’t been able to rely on the sound fundamentals that great coaches demand. They can score, and there’s a lot of energy on the offensive end, so it’s not as unhappy a team as you’d expect from a bottom dweller. I don’t know how Thibs would do here, but FWIW, I’d be more encouraged about the Lakers’ future.

  55. There seems to have arisen some controversy recently, fueled in part by Mike Truedell of, that the Lakers are simply better with a small lineup: Mike D’Antoni, not surprisingly, sited this study and defended his system 3 days ago.

    Unfortunately, this study misses the point entirely. What Truedell’s article states (Truedell’s views, BTW, were strongly opposed by others on the radio broadcast last night) is, simply, that a small ball lineup is going to excel in a small-ball system, i.e., D’Antoni’s system. The problem, of course, is that not all of the Lakers’ players are designed for a small-ball offense where the floor is spread and all the players, excluding the center, roam around the 3-point line and pass the ball very quickly until one of them is open and shoots. Some, as many of us have noted, such as Jordan Hill and Chris Kaman, are simply not suited for that kind of spread offense.

    So…what does one do? Should the coach jettison 2 or 3 otherwise capable players? Should the coach stick to his guns and only play those who fit in with his philosophy? Or should the coach abandon his philosophy altogether and choose another system?

    The answer, I think, lies in the 2007-08 season. During that season, the Lakers had two very different halves of their squad–a traditional, low-post offense with great size (Bynum + Gasol + Odom) who would pound the opposition and wear them down. And they had a bench, Farmar, Vujacic, et. al., who would fly down the court like banshees and simply out-run their opponents at break-neck speed. In his wisdom, Phil Jackson, allowed both offenses to flourish. In other words, he adapted himself to the talent at hand. Yes, the Lakers still ran a triangle offense but the two squads did so at very different speeds and in very different ways. The result was magical.

    D’Antoni had a similar opportunity with this squad (although, admittedly, the players are less talented than the 2007-08 squad). He was presented with two different types of players and could have employed two contrasting offenses (and defenses), thus keeping the opponent guessing throughout the game. But he refused to adapt.

    The issue, then, as I see it with MDA’s coaching is not whether the Lakers are better as a Small-Ball Team (Mike Truedell’s apparent view) but whether or not D’Antoni has been adaptable and flexible, thus being wise enough to capitalize on ALL the talent on the team.

    Clearly he has not adapted. And, it appears, he never will. It is on this basis–not wins and losses–that MDA’s continued tenure with the Lakers should be debated. The issue has nothing to do with the validity of a Small-Ball System or whether or not this is the trend in the NBA or not. These are academic matters. The question is: has the coach adapted himself to the talent at hand?

    If the answer is Yes, then he should be applauded. If the answer is No, then a decision should be made.

  56. Ok, I started out this thread talking about seeing how MDA would play against a team without bigs. Well, I guess I found out. We were out-rebounded 15-2 on the offensive boards – while we didn’t miss much, neither did the Kings, and that is downright embarrassing. I am officially off the MDA bandwagon, despite the good comments above about why we should continue to practice our small-ball type of play.

    I close my comments on this thread with this link to Siver-Screen-and-Roll:

  57. Small Ball: Ironically – last night’s win demonstrated the issue more than the losses did. All you need to do is hit a franchise record from the 3 line and you can barely beat one of the worst in the league at home : ) Obviously the NBA has progressed beyond grinding it into the big man every time, but this system goes too far and is not appropriate for our roster with Kobe or a big man from the draft. “Small ball” necessitates having a whole floor full of people who can shoot. This in many ways requires more talent than isolation type ball. In the isolation game you only need one or two scorers and it can work. Obviously you need talent either way, but the MD system is clearly not the system for an old line up, like last year, it is not the system for Kobe, and it is not a system for most bigs. It might be an OK system for a bunch of rag tag 2nd teamers and D leaguers, but hopefully that is an irrelevant point when considering our future.

  58. Renato Afonso March 1, 2014 at 9:44 am

    Al4Christ, why should we give MDA a break? Because the roster had injuries? I’m not going to list all the complaints we have because that would be, well, a waste of time. Plenty of posts and comments cover it perfectly.

    The truth is that this is NOT his first year with the team. I was not against him when he was hired and I even supported choosing him over Phil. His start was terrible but later in the season the players turned it up a notch and managed to get a good record after the All Star break. The thing is that it was more on the players than any adjustments he made. Jamison actually complained about not making a single adjustment through an entire playoff series.

    But even then I was ok with MDA as coach for this season. I also believed that this roster, if healthy, could actually be in the 6-8th range in the West and be a tough out. But this dude just makes bad decisions after bad decisions without any logical explanation and the team doesn’t improve. I don’t care about our record, I care about improvements and we simply don’t have those. We don’t rebound better, we don’t play better defense, we don’t decrease the number of TO’s, etc. So, why should I, or any fan, give MDA a break? I don’t give a break to those who prove, over time, that they’re incompetent at their job.

    We won because Farmar shot lights out and our 3pt% was through the roof. That happened because we played a terrible team, without their best player, and our players caught fire. There were no adjustments made and we can chalk this one up to luck (or bad luck if you prefer a higher draft pick).

  59. WADR, Robert is overstating the point, IMO. Again, talent league: As I said back in December, 7SOL rocked with a nucleus of prime Nash, Marion, Stoudemire, and Joe Johnson. At that time,it was a shrewd adaptation to the talent on hand. Rather than getting a traditional 5, MDA moved everybody up a slot, spread the floor, and pushed the pace. And it worked.

    One thing I think people miss about those teams is how unique and key Marion was. He was 3P threat and a disruptive defender who could guard spots 2-5.

    But as I have said many times, citing pace and 3PA, it didn’t work that well with last year’s team and it is questionable for this year’s group.

    And yes, as I have detailed before, Kobe in his dotage does not really fit this system.

  60. “There seems to have arisen some controversy recently, fueled in part by Mike Truedell of, that the Lakers are simply better with a small lineup:”

    “Simply” would seem to be the operative word. The Lakers are better at what they prepare for and aspire to.

    Statistics have become, for many, a way to understand the complexity of team sports. I think that might describe Jim Buss and his approach. Stats can reveal trends that might otherwise be missed, but unfortunately, it’s a limited picture and often leads to a lack of understanding. One has to use their eyes, not on a computer screen, but on the game, to see what’s happening. Numbers make much better sense if they’re looked at in the context of the entire approach and the results produced in winning and losing.

  61. Renato: I obviously agree with you. However some people feel that we must like/root for Jim, because we are stuck with him. And we must root for and like Mike cause we are stuck with him until Jim says we aren’t. I do not agree with this thinking but I understand it : )
    rr: I just read our posts and not sure where we differ : ) The Suns had a balanced talented team and did OK with the system (no conf titles). It can also work OK with a bad balanced team like us now. We will have neither next year (hopefully). People like to cite that Miami and others use principals that came from MD’s style. Maybe so, but if I had LeBron and 4 scrubs, I would not run this system. Add KB and the Lakers are pretty close to that (a notch down in both cases). Add a big man from college and the system is even worse. In fact – triangle would be perfect for Kobe and a young big. All: Don’t worry the triangle is probably going to ironically die off entirely as an offense. Word has it that the NBA is considering a new 5 point play – that is when you shoot from beyond half court with more than 20 seconds left on the shot clock.

  62. Robert, how messed up is that? An offense that led to 11 titles in the modern age is going to die off… Something’s wrong with that.

  63. Robert,

    What you miss, I think, is:

    1. How good those teams were. Yes, you are a “results” guy, but context matters, too. And, of course, the 2007 WCF was affected profoundly by a very questionable league policy. And he beat two Phil Jackson teams in the playoffs.
    2. That what MDA did with those teams was not, at the time, obvious and was in some ways groundbreaking. There are good reasons that he is part of USA Basketball, etc.

    So, 7SOL is not some junk system/clown show that is not for serious, “championship” organizations, as you often seem to imply. Like almost any system, it is as good as its players. The Triangle won 0 championships. The championships were won by Jordan, Pippen, Kobe, Shaq, Pau, et al. Phil himself has said the key to his career was the talent that he had to work with.

    That said, I think it is clear at this point that MDA is stubborn about the system, that his teams in PHX were OK defensively mostly due to personnel, as opposed to coaching, that he has communication issues with his players, and that he has issues working with bigs.

    He is great at getting the most offensively out of points and some wings–Meeks, Henry, Farmar, Brooks, Blake, Marshall, Bazemore, Kobe had a big year for him last year…but he seems to have many weaknesses as a coach.

  64. “…but he seems to have many weaknesses as a coach.”
    Which is why I’ve advocated that he become an offensive coach for a team (not the Lakers) rather than the head coach. He has too many holes in his leadership abilities.

  65. Renato and Robert. The point is what is the use playing Hill and Kaman when the team including Mitch n Jim want us to play small ball? Maybe they’ve decided not to bring them back for that matter.
    Defence is about 70% chemistry and 30% effort. We have a lot of players playing together for the first time so cut him some slack. MDA is really stubborn, yes, and that’s because he knows with better talent and continuity this team will be way better. Why should he adjust to Hill and Kaman when the FO might not even bring them back this offseason. Dont get me wrong cos I love both players. MDA’s main problem is he not factoring the egos and personalities of players. He just doesnt seem to get why some players wont even give the system a chance first eg. Howard before they decide ditch it. If the FO sack him, I’m cool with it. All that I want to say is becareful what you wish for.

  66. The Lakers shot 60% from the field overall and 70% from the 3 and only won by 4 points. MiD’s system is a freaking joke. His perfect storm barely gets us by Sac w/o Cousins.