What's new
By:

Competing while allowing Dante Exum to develop

Quin also has lauded Exum's P&R defense. He's extremely advanced on that end of the floor for a player so young/raw. Length, quickness, and effort just do wonders.

Honestly, Exum looks just fine in my eyes. He's not dominating offensively, that's very clear, but he doesn't need to. He's handling the ball well, knocking down open shots, and playing great defense. His #'s will come up over the next few seasons.

Forget stats, if you told me Dante would be our starting PG the last 1/3 of the season, playing solid, and we'd be winning, I would have been thrilled. I'm excited about the kid.
 
mrob said:
We should do nothing to impede the development of Exum into our premier point guard. Anything that Burks could do to help can and should happen with him playing WITH Exum, not instead of Exum.

The bigger question is why we offered such a big contract to Burks when he's not even the type of SG we want for our starting lineup. I guess we can't really afford to lose him though and the salary won't seem that bad come 2016, but it still concerns me. As I mentioned before, we need an upgrade at SG so that we can keep Alex Burks in the sixth man role. Better suits our needs and his talents.
Click to expand...

I think you hit the nail on the head - the cap bonanza in 2016 makes his deal more tolerable. With how young our team is (especially at the time he was extended), it's hard to predict exactly how things were going to unfold at the time he was extended. I think DL saw the chance to extend a good young player at a reasonable price and pulled the trigger. I like Burks at this price tag - no issue with it. And he's still so young. Different players/skill sets, but look at the leap Hayward made this year.

If two years from now it's clear that Exum and Hood are going to be stars and better fits than AB, we'll move him then. Otherwise, pairing Exum, Burks, and Hayward in the backcourt with Burke and Hood off the bench sounds just fine to me.
 
Original post was admittedly over the top, just trying to make my point (prob too emphatically). Please refer to my most recent post on page 5 to clarify my true stance on this subject.
 
Last edited:
Triangle Man said:
1 - he was not fired
2- Defense was probably 60% of why he was not renewed, not because he tried Burks at PG.
3- So...yea.
Click to expand...

Argh. Seriously? Let me spell it out very simply. We tried Burks at PG. He is a subpar PG. He is a solid to above average to maybe better than that SG. It would be stupid to play him at PG when he is so much better as a SG.

We already tried him at PG. It failed. Why try it again? Isn't that the definition of insanity?
 
green said:
Argh. Seriously? Let me spell it out very simply. We tried Burks at PG. He is a subpar PG. He is a solid to above average to maybe better than that SG. It would be stupid to play him at PG when he is so much better as a SG.

We already tried him at PG. It failed. Why try it again? Isn't that the definition of insanity?
Click to expand...

It was Corbin's system. Imagine him in Exum's role. He will hit 3s and he will have his open lanes. He just needs to kick it out sometimes. Something he was improving on.
 
No thanks on Burks as a PG. We have Exum and Burke. We have zero SG's. It makes no sense to have him play SG. We need SG's and he is better as a SG.

Keep it simple. We need a SG. He is a better SG than PG. Play him at SG. Don't get too cute.
 
green said:
Argh. Seriously? Let me spell it out very simply. We tried Burks at PG. He is a subpar PG. He is a solid to above average to maybe better than that SG. It would be stupid to play him at PG when he is so much better as a SG.

We already tried him at PG. It failed. Why try it again? Isn't that the definition of insanity?
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with you. However I don't think Corbin's system uses a PG anywhere near the same as Quin's system. In our current system the PG is not anywhere near as ball dependent as Corbin's and is not really used to set up the offense as much. I worry about Burks' ability to guard PG's more than his ability to be a PG in this system.
.
Furthermore I really don't like Burke as our PG and would prefer to try Alec there than keep doing what is not really working that well anyway. So Alec as a backup PG could work in our new system. Though I prefer to just go get a real backup PG somewhere this off season.
 
Hekate said:
It was Corbin's system. Imagine him in Exum's role. He will hit 3s and he will have his open lanes. He just needs to kick it out sometimes. Something he was improving on.
Click to expand...

He would fail just as bad in this system.

1) He's a shoot first player. Great for a sixth man off the bench. Not good at all for a PG with the likes of Hayward and Favors on the floor.

2) He doesn't hit 3's that often.

3) He doesn't need to be PG to get his open lanes. He can just play his normal position for that. The real PG can feed him for those too.
 
mrob said:
1) He's a shoot first player.
Click to expand...
That took less shots per game than hayward, trey, and kanter even though he played more minutes than trey and kanter? (Only played less than a minute less than Hayward)

He was passing as much as any player on the team in quins system and shooting less than than any starter except Hayward.
mrob said:
2) He doesn't hit 3's that often.
Click to expand...

He was shooting the best 3 point percentage of anyone on the entire team this year when he was playing and attempting a career high per game from 3.

I agree that he should play shooting guard though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top