What's new

Name the 5 starters and

Normal Starters:

PG - Exum
SG - Hoob
SF - Hayward
PF - Favors
C - Gobert

Bench:

PG - Burke
6th Man - SG - Burks (can either replace Hood or slide Hood to the 3 with Burks at the 2...now that is some firepower)
SF - ?/Jingles
PF - ?/Booker
C - ?

The biggest holes are wing and big man depth really. I am a fan of going after Demarre. I don't think we need a homerun player. I think we need serviceable guys that understand and will run with our defensive philosophy. Follow the Gobert and you cannot go wrong.
 
I love NAOS' escalation;

NAOS: GUIs, I think we will see Burks get a lot of burn at PG.

Board: Um,no. Burks isn't a PG.

NAOS: no, you dummies, I'm not saying he's a PG, I'm just saying you will see Burks, Hood, and Hayward on the floor together a ton.

Board: ohhhh, no. At least not at the 1, 2, 3.

NAOS: ok, whatever GUIs. You've just proven once again how stupid you are.
 
He made a much more compelling argument in the version that I saw. Here's how it read to me:
I love NAOS' escalation;

NAOS: This poster is on your ignore list.

Board: Um,no. Burks isn't a PG.

NAOS: This poster is on your ignore list.

Board: ohhhh, no. At least not at the 1, 2, 3.

NAOS: This poster is on your ignore list.
 
You'll see a lot of Burks, Hood, and Hayward on the floor together at the "1", "2", and "3".
 
Yeah, I agree with you guys. Burke should only be getting 15-20 mins a night.

I'd be surprised if Burke isn't worth a second rounder and some cash. I'd take that option (and there may be better ones out there) before I consign that asset to a 20-minute per night role that could be filled as adequately or more adequately by Cotton.
 
I'd be surprised if Burke isn't worth a second rounder and some cash. I'd take that option (and there may be better ones out there) before I consign that asset to a 20-minute per night role that could be filled as adequately or more adequately by Cotton.

Burke + Burks + 2nd rounder for a mid 1st.. this year or '17.
 
I disagree, but respect you having such a strong opinion that bucks popular opinion. Mean that.

I've been asking for a sensible contradiction to my argument. I'm not escalating (@green I disagree with you, but thanks for putting that together), I'm just asking for an argument.

In the Burks/Hay/Hood combo, Burks can play entirely off-ball. He may or may not guard the PG, who's probably gonna a run a PnR, and we're gonna switch in that lineup anyway. Regardless, if Burks is on the PG, it'll be backup PG (since I'm not suggesting this as a starting lineup), and it isn't as if he'd be replacing a defensive juggernaut.

We could sign a veteran wing. If so, then this combo is less likely.

We could draft a wing. If so, this may be less likely, pending the development of the rookie.

Those are fairly big IFs, so I'll go with the odds of this combo.
 
Back
Top