What's new

If we get a superstar in the 2014 draft...

You don't think that Hayward and Rush on the perimeter would stretch the floor? Or is a third shooter, while always welcome, needed?

The lineup, iirc, was Rondo, Wiggins, Hayward, Favors, and Gobert.

Rondo has no shot.
Wiggins, at this point, is not a real 3pt threat, so that leaves only Hayward to guard to the perimeter.
 
We can't lose either Kanter or Favors. Favors is the defensive stopper, Kanter the rebounding offensive force. They work well together, and unless they prove different we should stick with both.

Again why lose Burks? He looks like a perfect 6th man leader off the bench. We don't have enough talent to let two of the core go, and expect to compete for a title.
 
We can't lose either Kanter or Favors. Favors is the defensive stopper, Kanter the rebounding offensive force. They work well together, and unless they prove different we should stick with both.

Again why lose Burks? He looks like a perfect 6th man leader off the bench. We don't have enough talent to let two of the core go, and expect to compete for a title.
I agree with the bigs. I'd rather let Burks or Hayward go if we HAD to as they're more easily replaceable.
A lot will have to do with this draft and our two picks. If we got Embiid (i.e.) we don't need Favors. Burks, imo, is the most easily replaceable.. but as I've said a million times now, this year is about evaluation. We'll solve our deficiencies through the draft and FA. I am certain.
 
The lineup, iirc, was Rondo, Wiggins, Hayward, Favors, and Gobert.

Rondo has no shot.
Wiggins, at this point, is not a real 3pt threat, so that leaves only Hayward to guard to the perimeter.

Rush is listed as a back up. But you are right that the normally would not be playing together. So I guess another shooter is needed.
 
I can't wait to see this lineup this year;

Burke
Rush
Hayward
Kanter
Favors

That's a good lineup.
 
^
A facilitator. (actually all 3 backcourt guys can facilitate)
Three perimeter threats.
Kanter that can also stretch the floor.
DEFENSE
Rebounding
 
^
A facilitator. (actually all 3 backcourt guys can facilitate)
Three perimeter threats.
Kanter that can also stretch the floor.
DEFENSE
Rebounding


champagneGif.gif
 
I would rather not have Rondo, like a bunch of people are mentioning on here. My reasoning behind not wanting Rondo is that I think for him to be on a successful team, they have to be like top 3 defensively to win, because their offense will be ok, but never great. The great offensive teams usually have a point guard that has to be guarded on the perimeter.

Anyway, if we get a superstar next year, I see no problem keeping the lineup we have now for a while, and making some awesome trades in the next few years. We can afford to pay about $40-50 mil per year for the older guys (Burks, Hayward, Favors, Kanter) and decide what if we need to trade any when the next young guy is up for an extension. Rookie contracts are super cheap, and we might as well keep the player if they are any good for the duration of their rookie contract/extension.
 
If we get Wiggins don't we need to put a shooter next to him? That is why we need to keep Hayward. In this case Burks needs to go. Don't Wiggins and Burks have basically the same strengths? Slashers, and guys that get to the line except that Wiggins is way better, and Hayward can do everything Burks can do. Yes, Burks is better a better slasher then Hayward, but Hayward is a better passer shooter, and gets to the line very well. At one point last year while Hayward was coming off the bench, he got to the ft line the third most out of all bench players in the league. Think Hayward compliments Wiggins better then Burks, and since Burke is a scoring pg wouldn't it be better to have Hayward with this unit.

As much as I hate to say it, if Gobert can develop his defense, then we probably need to let Favors go. Wiggins to me has potential as a perimeter defender, Hayward can defend, which makes the need for Favors less important unless he finds his offensive game.

I don't think they can pay Favors, add #1 pick salary, trade for Rondo, sign a top tier free agent and afford to sign Hayward.

It's all one big *** hypothetical that starts with trading for Rondo and then getting the #1 overall pick. If that happened, I might try to trade Kanter and Favors off for the #2 pick and screw this entire scheming all up.
 
I don't think they can pay Favors, add #1 pick salary, trade for Rondo, sign a top tier free agent and afford to sign Hayward.

It's all one big *** hypothetical that starts with trading for Rondo and then getting the #1 overall pick. If that happened, I might try to trade Kanter and Favors off for the #2 pick and screw this entire scheming all up.

Even if we did sign Haywrd, Favors, Rondo, a #1 pick and a top teir FA we would have trouble signing Kanter and Burks next year. So some decisions will come in the next year or two.
 
We can't lose either Kanter or Favors. Favors is the defensive stopper, Kanter the rebounding offensive force. They work well together, and unless they prove different we should stick with both.

Did you notice how bad they were at guarding the four last game? If they can't hurt the other team with their size on offense where they're being hurt for it on defense then they'll be a bad pairing.

It's too early to say much, just a pre-season observation.
 
I don't think they can pay Favors, add #1 pick salary, trade for Rondo, sign a top tier free agent and afford to sign Hayward.

It's all one big *** hypothetical that starts with trading for Rondo and then getting the #1 overall pick. If that happened, I might try to trade Kanter and Favors off for the #2 pick and screw this entire scheming all up.

Never said anything about trading for Rondo. Not willing to trade for Rondo to sacrifice Hayward. Also the way I see it is that Hayward is way better then Burks, and won't make that much more then Burks. I'm not dropping Hayward over Burks.
 
Never said anything about trading for Rondo. Not willing to trade for Rondo to sacrifice Hayward. Also the way I see it is that Hayward is way better then Burks, and won't make that much more then Burks. I'm not dropping Hayward over Burks.

As of now maybe. But Burks really hasn't gotten the opportunities as Hayward has. Let's just watch this year.
 
This is a load of crap. Hayward played his way into minutes Burke hasn't. He's had opportunities to do so.

You mean Burks? And he really hasn't. Last year the only reason he got minutes was because our pgs went down. Burks isn't even a pg.
 
This is a load of crap. Hayward played his way into minutes Burke hasn't. He's had opportunities to do so.

Zero starts.....lots of dnp's says otherwise.

Without injuries burks would have had no chance to show what he could do
 
Top