If not Rubio then what?

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I never said anything about that, and you still gave me the same flippant immature response.

What you're saying is not that hard to understand. I just disagree that Mitchell can't be that guy, or that Rubio, or someone of his style, would be a better fit for maximizing Mitchell's/other players' ability on the floor. There are many examples in the NBA of offensive minded, drive-and-dish, type of players who ran the offense for successful teams.

I never said they couldn't be offensive minded or drive/dish types. George Hill was an offensive minded PG who worked out very well here and you could tell he was an extension of what Quin wanted (for the most part, I think Hill played at a slower pace than Quin wanted).

It just shouldn't be Mitchell because you arent going to maximize his abilities that way, or rather you will maximize his weaknesses in the process. The idea that since Mitchell is our best player then we should max out his usage is just wrong IMO.

Stats:
Last year: Mitchell was a +3.5 in offensive rating with Rubio on the court
This year: Mitchell is a +10 in offensive rating with Rubio on the court

If you play him at PG, his usage goes through the rough and you have a less physically talented Westbrook on your hands. Right now Mitchell is a volume shooter who doesnt shoot well and doesnt draw fouls at a high rate. He needs to have some of his natural tendencies reigned in a bit.

 

[Alfalfa]

I never said they couldn't be offensive minded or drive/dish types. George Hill was an offensive minded PG who worked out very well here and you could tell he was an extension of what Quin wanted (for the most part, I think Hill played at a slower pace than Quin wanted).

It just shouldn't be Mitchell because you arent going to maximize his abilities that way, or rather you will maximize his weaknesses in the process. The idea that since Mitchell is our best player then we should max out his usage is just wrong IMO.

Stats:
Last year: Mitchell was a +3.5 in offensive rating with Rubio on the court
This year: Mitchell is a +10 in offensive rating with Rubio on the court

Mitchell is our best offensive player. What are his weaknesses? I saw you mention his inability to shoot off the dribble. But that can be improved with time. Mitchell is a good passer, and he draws a ton of defensive attention, allowing him to create good opportunities for others. That is one of his biggest strengths. What weaknesses would be magnified if he played the point? What strengths would be diminished.

 

[Jazz]

Mitchell is our best offensive player. What are his weaknesses? I saw you mention his inability to shoot off the dribble. But that can be improved with time. Mitchell is a good passer, and he draws a ton of defensive attention, allowing him to create good opportunities for others. That is one of his biggest strengths. What weaknesses would be magnified if he played the point? What strengths would be diminished.

Ingles is our best offensive player

 

[Alfalfa]

If DM was at the point, then he'd draw more fouls (higher usage), maximizing one of his abilities. I don't think Mitchell is best used as a volume shooter. Let's see him at PG for like a year.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Mitchell is our best offensive player. What are his weaknesses? I saw you mention his inability to shoot off the dribble. But that can be improved with time. Mitchell is a good passer, and he draws a ton of defensive attention, allowing him to create good opportunities for others. That is one of his biggest strengths. What weaknesses would be magnified if he played the point? What strengths would be diminished.

1. He doesnt draw fouls at a high rate, or even a medium rate.
2. He doesnt shoot well off the dribble (or off the catch currently, but I think that's more sample size)
3. He is an incredible passer, at times, but he also gets tunnel vision and goes for the spectacular play when a better simple play is available
4. His natural instinct is scoring/shoot first. If you give him the ball more he is going to shoot more, then he is going to overthink if he is shooting too much and not getting others involved. The minutia of the position will likely interfere with his best traits as a player.
5. More responsibility = more fatigue, both physical and mental, when we have to rely on him in crunch time for self-creation isnt ideal.

 

[David Stern]

Has a Thabo+Burks for Hill trade been discussed on here? I think that would make some sense for both teams.

 

[Alfalfa]

1. He doesnt draw fouls at a high rate, or even a medium rate.
2. He doesnt shoot well off the dribble (or off the catch currently, but I think that's more sample size)
3. He is an incredible passer, at times, but he also gets tunnel vision and goes for the spectacular play when a better simple play is available
4. His natural instinct is scoring/shoot first. If you give him the ball more he is going to shoot more, then he is going to overthink if he is shooting too much and not getting others involved. The minutia of the position will likely interfere with his best traits as a player.
5. More responsibility = more fatigue, both physical and mental, when we have to rely on him in crunch time for self-creation isnt ideal.

How would it diminish his ability to get to the line? He's getting to the line 4.4 times a game. Which feels like an okay rate given he's a second year player. He'd draw more fouls if he was PG.

And his vision would also improve with experience. He'll never be John Stockton, but that's not what we need him to be.

The fourth point is speculative, I think. I believe he can adapt to the position and use his gravity to create better opportunities for himself. We would need another good scorer next to him, but I don't think it would worsen his shot selection.

Ya, I guess it would be a more exhausting position. I think that's a downside.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

1.How would it diminish his ability to get to the line? He's getting to the line 4.4 times a game. Which feels like an okay rate given he's a second year player. He'd draw more fouls if he was PG.

2. And his vision would also improve with experience. He'll never be John Stockton, but that's not what we need him to be.

3. The fourth point is speculative, I think. I believe he can adapt to the position and use his gravity to create better opportunities for himself. We would need another good scorer next to him, but I don't think it would worsen his shot selection.

Ya, I guess it would be a more exhausting position. I think that's a downside.

1. Ignore how many times he gets to the line and focus on the free throw rate. That's what's important. I don't see how he is going to improve that with more to do. He will just get more fatigued, probably take worse shots, and hurt his free throw rate. He doesnt know how to draw fouls consistently, so I don't think him having the ball more is going to improve that. He gets the ball a lot as is, he has enough reps to learn these things in the flow of the game.

2. His vision is already really good, but his natural instincts arent a passer, it's scoring. Putting him in the consistent position of balancing the two isnt good for his best ability: scoring. Let him be a scorer who playmakes on the side.

3. I've showed the stats that he has been a less efficient player without Rubio next to him. It's not as speculative as you seem to believe.

 

[Alfalfa]

1. Ignore how many times he gets to the line and focus on the free throw rate. That's what's important. I don't see how he is going to improve that with more to do. He will just get more fatigued, probably take worse shots, and hurt his free throw rate. He doesnt know how to draw fouls consistently, so I don't think him having the ball more is going to improve that. He gets the ball a lot as is, he has enough reps to learn these things in the flow of the game.

2. His vision is already really good, but his natural instincts arent a passer, it's scoring. Putting him in the consistent position of balancing the two isnt good for his best ability: scoring. Let him be a scorer who playmakes on the side.

3. I've showed the stats that he has been a less efficient player without Rubio next to him. It's not as speculative as you seem to believe.

I think some of that is due to his inexperience and his never having played the position. He can learn to conserve his energy, and how to better draw fouls. I don't think there is anything fundamental that would prevent him from excelling at the point. Harden wasn't thought of as a PG until a few years ago. Now, even with Paul on the team, he handles most of that responsibility.

But, I'm not married to the idea. Maybe it would be better to have another "floor general" beside him. One who can shoot. I can see how that'd be good.

 

[NUMBERICA]

This isn’t really the thread for this, but I’d much rather allocate the cap we’re spending on Exum to keep Burks.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I think some of that is due to his inexperience and his never having played the position. He can learn to conserve his energy, and how to better draw fouls. I don't think there is anything fundamental that would prevent him from excelling at the point. Harden wasn't thought of as a PG until a few years ago. Now, even with Paul on the team, he handles most of that responsibility.

But, I'm not married to the idea. Maybe it would be better to have another "floor general" beside him. One who can shoot. I can see how that'd be good.

Why do you want him to have to learn how to conserve energy rather than just focus on what he does at a high level and be elite at that? You really want him to start playing 0 defense like Westbrook cuz he is too tired?

 

[NUMBERICA]

Also, Mitchell would be well-served to round out his playing style by being tasked with distributing. Quin’s already started making that a point.

I also don’t think that removing a traditional point guard means that Mitchell has to initiate and/or create on every play.