What's new
By:

Obtaining a floor-spreading big

Hack said:
You are seriously just describing yourself. Every time you hit someone with one of these insult blasts, it's at the worst possible time.

Beantown is spot on with this one.

You aren't very bright.
Click to expand...

Beantown, Numberica insults me all the time. I think he has some mental problems, so just ignore him.
 
QS said during the game that their roster was set so we may be looking at the guys we're going to be looking at come end of September.
 
infection said:
I think the only real priority this off-season is being able to pick up a backup 4/5 that can spread the floor and shoot with range. Stretch fours have become all the rage over recent years but I'm not saying this to have a token stretch four. The way our team is presently constituted, our biggest need is both shooting and having a reliable player to come off the bench that can play 4 or 5 and preferably both (and not some guy who's 6'7" that we pretend is a center). To complement Favors and Gobert, we need someone who's more offensive-minded or who at least is a shooting threat. Defense isn't as important. I really liked the idea of Spencer Hawes but he ended up in Charlotte. During that discussion people talked about drafting Kaminsky, which I thought would have been ideal, but alas. I'm still somewhat disappointed that we exchanged Kanter for a bag of Cheetos. It would have been nice to at least get a decent rotation player for him like Ilyasova who was sent out as a salary dump.

That being said, there may be a few guys out there who may or may not be obtainable. Some of these guys aren't very good, but I believe their value to our team is much increased by being able to help our offense function more efficiently and open up the floor for other players. As we also have a lot of assets, I believe it's time to go into competition mode. If we're going into next season with the only big guys on the bench being Booker, Pleiss, Lyles and Cooley, then we're not looking to compete. We would not be able to survive at any competitive level if Favors or Gobert were out for any period of time.

A number of people I'm not sure what their status is but I'll just mention all possibilities from top to bottom:

I think Ryan Anderson would be ideal. With the new cap jump his contract is probably pretty reasonable so I doubt NO looks to move him. Kelly Olynyk would be an excellent pickup and has good size. Josh McRoberts plays a small role and I believe I've periodically heard rumblings about him being moved. Probably an unpopular choice and may be overpriced, but I'm a little curious about Andrea Bargnani as I haven't heard anything about him this off-season. I don't think he's a guy you build around but I think he could play a pretty solid and important role complementing Favors/Gobert. I've heard reports of Channing Frye and his contract being something needed for a dump, but I'm not sure how that stands after seeing all the deals this summer. Getting further down the list, what's the status of Chris Kaman's corpse? A guy that I actually wished we had played more when he was with us was Steve Novak. Despite his deficiencies elsewhere, the fact that he can shoot threes at an elite level I thought was worthy for a bit more burn on a team that lacks shooting. And, the last one I can think of that I really wouldn't mind signing is Mr. Red Rocket himself, Matt Bonner.

tl;dr we need a backup center/pseudocenter and preferably a floor-spacing one. The guys we have won't cut it.
Click to expand...

Bargnani has always sucked, believe me you do not want him, I saw enough of him here in Toronto! I repeat you do not want Bargnani. He is a bust. I do agree with you, I like Ryan Anderson also, I wanted the jazz to get him for awhile now. I fear however, that we don't have a spot on our roster for him now.
 
The problem with the majority of the guys the OP has mentioned (and who are obtainable) is they can't guard a cardboard cutout on the other end. What good does it do to have a stretch-4 who may hit 40% of his shots, but gives up easy opportunities on the other end? Sorry, it's a myth that Rudy can cover for them. Yes, Gobert (or Favors) slides over to stop the player who has just flown by Novak, Hawes, etc. and leaves his man wide open for a pass and dunk.

The key term is "3 AND D," not "3 and who cares about the D." Great defense means having FIVE players who are good on defense. If there is one weak link, team defense falls apart.
 
Stifle Tower said:
The problem with the majority of the guys the OP has mentioned (and who are obtainable) is they can't guard a cardboard cutout on the other end. What good does it do to have a stretch-4 who may hit 40% of his shots, but gives up easy opportunities on the other end? Sorry, it's a myth that Rudy can cover for them. Yes, Gobert (or Favors) slides over to stop the player who has just flown by Novak, Hawes, etc. and leaves his man wide open for a pass and dunk.

The key term is "3 AND D," not "3 and who cares about the D." Great defense means having FIVE players who are good on defense. If there is one weak link, team defense falls apart.
Click to expand...

I agree.

This desperation for a stretch 4 is stupid.

Why not just have an elite defense like we have, and hold opponents to league lows. Then we don't need to score as much. Bring in the stretch 4, then we aren't as good defensively. Then we really need those points from the stretch 4, which won't always be there. The defense most likely will be.

Besides all that. Favors will be shooting threes. Problem solved.

This conversation is pointless.
 
What it sounds like people are saying is that the minutes a Hawes, McRoberts or Olynyk take from a Pleiss, Booker or Lyles will significantly impair our defense. Is this right?
 
If OKC releases Novak would anyone want him back?
Might take him over Cooley as the #15 guy on roster just cause he is an elite shooter and mentor for other big guys.
 
slc said:
If OKC releases Novak would anyone want him back?
Might take him over Cooley as the #15 guy on roster just cause he is an elite shooter and mentor for other big guys.
Click to expand...
So a guy who didn't play at all last season because he couldn't guard anybody is an upgrade over Cooley? How may times down the court is he going to be that "elite" shooter. Maybe 1 in 3 times he gets am open shot and makes it 40% of the time, right?

Now, how many times does he have to defend on the other end? Every time! And his opponent easily beats him causing everyone to shift and scramble resulting in an open shot - whether that's Novak's original cover or someone else.

I'm not saying we shouldn't bring in a "stretch-4." But that player better be able to play good defense on the other end. Otherwise it's a net liability. Haven't we learned that from guys like Boozer, Big Al and Kanter?
 
Stifle Tower said:
How may times down the court is he going to be that "elite" shooter. Maybe 1 in 3 times he gets am open shot and makes it 40% of the time, right?

Now, how many times does he have to defend on the other end? Every time!
Click to expand...

Not to imply that Novak would be an ideal or someone I'd want to see playing a lot, but for the sake of argument the question you should be asking isn't how many times down the floor he'll be connecting from deep but how many times down the floor will the defender have to follow him out deep. In this sense, one's value isn't necessarily directly proportional to the amount of points they're scoring off of threes.
 
infection said:
Not to imply that Novak would be an ideal or someone I'd want to see playing a lot, but for the sake of argument the question you should be asking isn't how many times down the floor he'll be connecting from deep but how many times down the floor will the defender have to follow him out deep. In this sense, one's value isn't necessarily directly proportional to the amount of points they're scoring off of threes.
Click to expand...
And how many times down the floor is he a complete liability on defense? 100%!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top