I'm a big believer in points margin as a team-level indicator because, well, it works. Wins and losses obviously tell you a lot the quality of teams. But you can trick the W-L ledger -- with some lucky close wins, a mediocre team can look decent; with some unlucky bad losses, a good team can look average. Using margin, we pump the differentiation. And as I said, it's a great indicator. Boston blew everyone out of the water with its 2007-08 points margin.

It's not a hard concept, either: It's your points minus your opponent's points. (Understand why is an effective tool yet?) If we were to take the Kings points margin after 20 games and compare it other Kings teams of the past 15 years, we'd find it's the second worst mark behind 1996-97. The Kings have been outscored by 147 points this year, which means the average Kings performance to date has been a 7.35-point loss. (Only two teams are worse this year: OKC at -10.95 and LAC at -8.17.)

But this gross glimpse is just, well, gross. I think visually, so I compared the rolling points margin for each of the past 15 Kings teams to see how bad this is going to get.

The wrinkle here: each line represents a team's season points margin after each game. If you win, the line heads north briefly. If you lose, it's south. String together some wins, and you end up like the 2000-2005 teams. Pull off a losing streak and its 1996-97, 1997-98 or ... 2008-09. We're in the red line right now, just outpacing the awful '96-97 year in which Garry St. Jean met his maker and Eddie Jordan finished 6-9 to earn himself a year at the helm. That year with Eddie? Good ol' '97-98, the worst Kings season in the past 15 years.

If you'll remember, Jordan's season got out of hand quickly in the second half (verified by the chart). It was bad all year -- offensively bad. But it was a complete, complete disaster the last few months. Really inconceivably terrible. That summer, Jordan got the quick ax. And the team began its upward swing.

Is this team that bad? Mitch Richmond, Corliss Williamson, Anthony Johnson and Yogi Stewart, with some Olden Polynice, Terry Dehere and Lawrence Funderburke thrown in. Heck, a 33-year-old Otis Thorpe started 20 games for that team! I get sick thinking about watching that squad on KMAX-31. I had mono the last month of the season. I had nothing to do but watch that team. I hated it.

Obviously, I don't feel that way today, not with Kevin Martin, Spencer Hawes, Jason Thompson and Donté Greene hitting the court. The team looks to be every bit as bad -- possibly worse, as this version is on track for 20 wins; the '97-98 squad won 27. But that'd involve things remaining this bleak all season. That'd involve the team giving up.

Whatever our qualms with Theus and the players in the rotation, they don't give up. They make mistakes, defend horribly, and make mistakes, and defend horribly. But they don't give up.

Ailene Voisin has the magic bullet:

Reggie Theus hasn't asked, but if he does, this is what I would suggest: Give management and its fan base what it wants. Play the kids and spare the rod. Tell the older veterans to give their knees, elbows and attitudes a rest. Simplify the offense. Introduce a defense.

But the biggest change? The one that might save Reggie's job? Walk down the hall, knock on the door and lure Monarchs general manager John Whisenant out of coaching retirement. Call him an assistant or a consultant. Call him a golfing buddy helping another golfing buddy. Whatever.

Call him Big Brother. Call him the noose hanging around a coach's neck. Call him the hired assassin, granted wholesale permission to work from the inside. Whatever.

***

If the Kings front office or ownership hires Whisenant to do anything related to the Kings before the end of the season, Theus should start packing immediately. Voisin tries to get fans on her side by comparing the idea to Geoff Petrie adding Pete Carril to the Garry St. Jean's staff. The difference, of course: Carril never had designs on St. Jean's job. Whisenant campaigned hard for the Kings job two years ago ... and he would have had it if not for Petrie's interference. If the job is vacant this summer (as we expect it will be), Whisenant will make himself a candidate. By every reported indication, he wants Reggie's job.

Voisin argues a Whisenant addition could save Theus' job. Are you frickin' kidding me? Let's go through the hypothetical best-case situation.

* The Kings, 10 or so games under .500, hire Whisenant as a "defensive buddy" for Theus.

* Team's defense improves by leaps and bounds.

* Team makes a charge, and gets to 35 or so wins.

In said situation, do you think Theus keeps his job? Or do you think the Maloofs push hard for Whisenant to take over? Hmm, tough guess. Tough guess.

What about a hypothetical worst-case scenario if Voisin's advice is heeded?

* The Kings, 10 or so games under .500, hire Whisenant as a "defensive buddy" for Theus.

* Team continues to tread water/suck.

* Maloofs fire Theus in February, give Whisenant an audition.

No good can come to Theus by adding Whisenant to the staff. Bringing Whiz in effectively kills Theus' (already troubled) Sacramento career.

***

That said, Theus seems to be perfectly safe right now. We have been over Joe Maloof's feelings on Chuck Person -- he doesn't think very highly of the Rifleman's defensive chops. Kenny Natt, the only other experienced assistant on Theus' staff, has been in and out of the hospital this year with a bad illness and some vision problems. He'd be an acceptable interim on paper, but his situation makes the possibility bleak.

Randy Brown was selling real estate 18 months ago and has basically been portrayed as the Oakley to Theus' MJ. Shareef Abdur-Rahim is less involved in Theus' huddles than Kenny Thomas (which says a lot). Jason Hamm, I think, has the respect of the front office and the key players. But he's in his third season as an NBA assistant coach. Rex Kalamian is a mystery -- he's young with lots of coaching experience, but he's not exactly on the tip of everyone's tongue.

As Melody Gutierrez reported this morning, Petrie is ill -- bed-ridden. There's no better stretch for a coaching change than this week, with no games until Saturday. Something tells me the Maloofs aren't going to be sitting in Petrie's living room putting together a pink slip with no succession plan apparently in place. (For the curious, Jason Levien doesn't start until later this month.)

Realistically, the front office is in a complete bind if it wants to can Theus. By luck of the situation, it seems near impossible to sack the coach and maintain a shred of respect. (And shreds are all that's left.) Which brings us to Whisenant.

Petrie does not want Whisenant on the sidelines. I feel like we say this time after time, but since the columnist ignores it time after time ... Petrie pushed Eric Musselman to foil Whisenant's candidacy! This has been reported. By the same newspaper which employs Voisin.

Clearly, Petrie wanted Terry Porter in '06. Porter was still in the playoffs, and it looked like the Maloofs would refuse any old Adelman acolyte regardless. (Exhibit A: the Maloofs failed to interview Porter in '07, despite media reports of impending interviews. The Maloofs did not attend the Elston Turner interview.) Whisenant, if you'll remember, became the overwhelming favorite for the job. Petrie's "choice" of Muss was clearly, clearly meant as a compromise. Remember the PowerPoint? The hurrahs of defense? Muss said exactly what the Maloofs wanted to hear. I'm not saying Petrie hated Muss and chose the lesser of two evils -- he bought into the noise, as well. But given hiring autonomy (which Petrie has never had under the Maloofs when it comes to the coach), Petrie would not have chosen Musselman.

And let's not forget that Theus is a Maloof hire. Sure, the Maloofs could hire 20 straight failed coaches and keep righteous autonomy -- so burned they feel by the Adelman relationship. But in no way can the Theus choice be used by the Maloofs in advocating within for Whisenant. If Petrie remains opposed to Whiz (which seems likely, as the Levien hire hints at), then the Maloofs risk losing Petrie over it. I'd venture they seem unwilling to do so.

***

This is all to say Voisin's column is blind, foolish and completely dumbed down to the point where only "fans" who casually follow the Kings could believe it possible. And let's be honest: that sort of fan certainly isn't paying attention to the Kings or columns written about the Kings right now.

I can't imagine Voisin is so dulled within the organization she can't see the full situation as laid out here. If it was all just basketball -- no politics, no jobs at stake, no egos, no preconceived notions -- it might work. But in the real world, it's not a remotely tenable situation.

As such, the column can only really be seen as a ploy by an ardent, long-time Whiz supporter (Voisin) to build support for a Whiz ascension.

Not working on us, Ailene. Not. Working.

Any way you slice it, the Quincy Douby substitution (he came with 4 minutes left after having played zero minutes to that point) was bizarre. Whatever justification you offer can be dismissed fairly easily by the phrase, "But Quincy Douby?" Strangely, Bobby Jackson seemed to be the person most offended by the decision to insert Q over a "tired" BoJax.

"I was fine, man," he said. "I wasn't gassing. You aren't going to shoot the ball the way you want every night, but defensively those are moments I play for. I like challenges like that."

To be sure, Jackson played awful. But he's been here before. He's done it ... this season. Douby has had two chances to claim victory, and neither chance came close to success. Maybe we're all simpletons for assuming his end before the first month concluded. But I think the case for his end has been made pretty well. He's in a crisis of confidence, and I daresay the Kings stood a better chance with anyone but Q this time.

In the last four minutes of this game, the Kings were not put in a position to win. Kevin Martin made the right plays, Beno Udrih made the right plays (if a little slow on one pass that could've have gotten Martin wide open), Spencer Hawes made the right plays. Brad Miller had a really awful attempt, but whatever -- he had a great game.

Hell, Quincy Douby made the right plays. If he's in a crisis of confidence, it isn't stopping him from firing away. Good on him. That's what he has to do.

But again, this team was not placed in a position to win.

Suddenly I stop
But I know it's too late
I'm lost in a forest
All alone

The girl was never there
It's always the same
I'm running towards nothing
again and again and again

- The Cure, A Forest 

JAZZ, WHO ARE YOU?

The Jazz lack Carlos Boozer and Andrei Kirilenko, according to early reports. Utah has the 4th best offense in the league and the 15th ranked defense. The team plays super slow, so the people inside your TV never acknowledge that Utah, at its current state, has a great offense and a mediocre defense. Also, in the common mindset of the TV people, fouling a lot means you care about defense. But fouling a lot just means you foul a lot, and it's actually bad for your defense. Utah fouls a lot, and it's bad for its defense.

Deron Williams will bust your ass on the pick-and-roll all day and all night. Little-known fact: Mehmet Okur hates shooting, and became Turkey's greatest 7-foot jump shooter begrudgingly. He really wants to stand under the rim and dunk all day, like Dwight Howard or Jarron Collins. Paul Millsap is what they* call a load.

* They=Jerry Reynolds.

YOUR SACRAMENTO KINGS

John Salmons and Kevin Martin are game-time decisions. I don't think Martin will shoot us in the heart. He knows half of us only woke up today on the chance he'd play. (The other half loves tacos, and it is Taco Tuesday suckers!) Spencer Hawes will start at power forward alongside Brad Miller. Francisco Garcia is still alive.

BOLD WAGER

See the poll below. If a majority of StR voters guess incorrectly, Kenny Thomas gets nacho cheese all over the suit.

THE TIP

In a pinch, vodka makes for an excellent hand sanitizer.

THE REAL TIP

The game is set for 7PM PST. Let's go Kings.

In our discourse on the benching of Mikki Moore (pre- and post-decision), defense has been a common topic. To me, it's obvious that Moore is a better team defender than Brad Miller, Spencer Hawes or Jason Thompson. He makes rotations quicker, guards much tighter on the perimeter and communicates well.

But clearly, Moore isn't the difference between the league's worst defense and a passable version. Hell, to this point Moore hasn't been the difference between the league's worst defense and the league's second worst defense. Yeah, laugh at the Warriors and their "giving up 135 points to the Knicks" all you want, because adjusted for pace Sacramento has the worst defense in the league.

Scott Howard-Cooper discusses Hawes' defense in a morning blog post. Scoop's gist is that we once thought Hawes would be an awful defender, and now it looks like he'll be at least a passable defender and possibly a good defender. And Scoop is absolutely correct in the sense that Hawes is destroying all expectations on that side of the ball. The blocks are the visual/visceral sign of life, but the rebounding numbers (a stable 15% rebound rate) and a few key vignettes (including his sequential abuse of Pau Gasol) have given us some hope on this thread.

But is good enough in the future?

Thompson's rebounding is about even with Hawes', except that Shock gets a bigger chunk on the offensive end, whereas Hawes has been skewed to the defensive glass this year. Are two 15-16% rebound rate bigs enough to be at least average on the glass? Remember, last year the Kings had a 15% Reb center (Miller) and a 12% Reb power forward (Moore). The team was 27th in defensive rebounding and 22nd in offensive rebounding.

Houston is third in defensive rebounding this year. Its starting center and PF (Yao Ming and Luis Scola) have near matching rebound rates of 15%. But every other starter -- Ron Artest, Tracy McGrady and Rafer Alston -- is banging the boards better than their positional average, and all the bench bigs are good 15%ish rebounders as well.

Kevin Martin has been a slight plus at the two in rebounding in his career. John Salmons is a small minus at the small forward. Beno Udrih is a slight plus. Basically -- assuming the prospective bench rebounds well; Francisco Garcia is good for a two-guard but poor at the three -- this team, with Shock and Hawes as the Big Future, can be a good-to-very good rebounding team. It just requires great improvement from either Hawes (unlikely) or Thompson (plausible if unlikely) or an upgrade at the three.

This is where I note that despite his overall struggles, young Donté Greene has been a great rebounder at small forward.