Author Topic: Options at backup PF?  (Read 4237 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #30 on: August 04, 2021, 11:25:37 PM »

Offline Surferdad

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11922
  • Tommy Points: 801
  • "He fiddles...and diddles..."
I'm in the camp that wants to see what Jabari has left in the tank. I thought he gave the C's some good, physical minutes last year even though he was out of shape and everything was in disarray. If he shows up in shape and gets a chance to know his teammates and the playbook I think he could be a terrific spark off the bench.
In that camp too, former #2 pick only 8 years ago.  Understand heís injury-free at this point so he has a chance to go hard.  Would be nice if he could at least stay in front of his man on defense, plus we know he can knock down shots.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #31 on: August 04, 2021, 11:40:58 PM »

Online radiohead

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1677
  • Tommy Points: 102
I'm in the camp that wants to see what Jabari has left in the tank. I thought he gave the C's some good, physical minutes last year even though he was out of shape and everything was in disarray. If he shows up in shape and gets a chance to know his teammates and the playbook I think he could be a terrific spark off the bench.
In that camp too, former #2 pick only 8 years ago.  Understand heís injury-free at this point so he has a chance to go hard.  Would be nice if he could at least stay in front of his man on defense, plus we know he can knock down shots.

Count me in as well. The talent is there for sure.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2021, 11:43:15 PM »

Online gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22687
  • Tommy Points: 1215
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
I'm in the camp that wants to see what Jabari has left in the tank. I thought he gave the C's some good, physical minutes last year even though he was out of shape and everything was in disarray. If he shows up in shape and gets a chance to know his teammates and the playbook I think he could be a terrific spark off the bench.
In that camp too, former #2 pick only 8 years ago.  Understand heís injury-free at this point so he has a chance to go hard.  Would be nice if he could at least stay in front of his man on defense, plus we know he can knock down shots.

Count me in as well. The talent is there for sure.
If he can recapture that 2018-2020 form he'd be huge for us off the bench. Would turn the backup 4 spot from a relative weakness into a potential strength. Of course, a lot relies upon his health and conditioning...
2021 Minnesota Timberwolves:
PG: Trae Young / Jamal Murray / Jordan Clarkson
SG: Bradley Beal / Terry Rozier
SF: Bogdan Bogdanovic / Will Barton / Saddiq Bey
PF: Harrison Barnes / Aaron Gordon
C: Joel Embiid / John Collins / Mason Plumlee

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2021, 11:45:38 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18237
  • Tommy Points: 1760
I'm in the camp that wants to see what Jabari has left in the tank. I thought he gave the C's some good, physical minutes last year even though he was out of shape and everything was in disarray. If he shows up in shape and gets a chance to know his teammates and the playbook I think he could be a terrific spark off the bench.
In that camp too, former #2 pick only 8 years ago.  Understand heís injury-free at this point so he has a chance to go hard.  Would be nice if he could at least stay in front of his man on defense, plus we know he can knock down shots.

Count me in as well. The talent is there for sure.
If he can recapture that 2018-2020 form he'd be huge for us off the bench. Would turn the backup 4 spot from a relative weakness into a potential strength. Of course, a lot relies upon his health and conditioning...

I mean, he played well for us in the playoffs. I'm satisfied if he can bring what he showed there (though less efficient would be expected), but if he gives us more it'll be bonus as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2021, 11:57:05 PM »

Offline No Nickname

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 521
  • Tommy Points: 60
He needs to work on his lateral quickness. Thatís whatís holding him back. He canít defend a paper sack blowing in the wind.

Itís probably because of his knees, but he can work on that with the right trainer.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #35 on: August 05, 2021, 12:37:45 AM »

Online hwangjini_1

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16391
  • Tommy Points: 2289
  • bammokja
does anyone know whether udoka follows the traditional pg, sg, sf, pf, c linup or not? i know CBS did not, which rendered threads such as this rather meaningless.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy ó not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #36 on: August 05, 2021, 01:49:43 AM »

Offline ozgod

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10596
  • Tommy Points: 763
does anyone know whether udoka follows the traditional pg, sg, sf, pf, c linup or not? i know CBS did not, which rendered threads such as this rather meaningless.

I don't think many coaches do these days. It's ball handlers, wings and bigs. It's just that sometimes coaches will play a two-big lineup as depending on their team's strengths. Or you have teams that will play a ball handler and 4 wings, if one of the wings is big enough.
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #37 on: August 05, 2021, 02:37:06 AM »

Online radiohead

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1677
  • Tommy Points: 102
He needs to work on his lateral quickness. Thatís whatís holding him back. He canít defend a paper sack blowing in the wind.

Itís probably because of his knees, but he can work on that with the right trainer.

He did have a couple of nice defensive efforts vs KD during the Nets series. I think he can improve on his overall defense with the proper guidance.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #38 on: August 05, 2021, 07:05:16 AM »

Offline michigan adam

  • Aaron Nesmith
  • Posts: 98
  • Tommy Points: 4
Back Up PF?  Back up for who?  What we need is a starting PF.  We already have enough back ups (Parker, Williams, Kantor) and please don't tell me that Tatum is a PF.  Our need is for a starting caliber PF.  We don't need any more back up PFs.

Tatum is the starting PF. Heís prototypical, modern day power forward. 6í9Ē and he can shoot the 3. Thatís what the position is now.

Well, agree to disagree.  Tatum is a starter but he is not a power forward.  He is a wing, one of the best wings in the entire NBA.  We are forced to play one of the best wings in the NBA in the PF slot because we don't have an actual starting quality PF to play the PF slot.  And he isn't 6'-9", he is listed at 6'-8", not that this is all that important.

Do people really think that we would play Tatum at PF if we actually had a starting PF to play PF?  Most of last year, we started Daniel Theis at PF and he barely at best has starting level talent.  I wouldn't (play Tatum at PF).  I would prefer to never play Tatum at PF, to always play him at wing.

So if we play say Smart, Richardson, Brown, Tatum, and Horford, is Tatum playing PF?  Why not Brown?  Why not Smart?  The answer is that we are playing without a PF.  We are playing a PG, 3 wings, and a Big.  Nothing wrong with that in certain situations but we would not play that as our core unit if we had a legit starting PF to put out there.

What many disagree with is the "compliment" of players on the court.  In the past few years, the C's have played a PG, 3 wings, and a big.  Of that Tatum is the largest wing.  Call that a PF if you must, but what the C's are trying to do in the past is pretty common in the league unless you have an AD, KAT, KD, etc where you have such talent in the 2nd big spot to not hurt yourself on either D or O with a big player who can guard inside and out and shoot inside and out.  There are few of those players currently. 

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #39 on: August 05, 2021, 07:27:52 AM »

Offline todd_days_41

  • Kemba Walker
  • Posts: 473
  • Tommy Points: 12
Sign Cheick Diallo to a minimum deal with a team option for Year 2. Iíd far rather have him over Grant Williams.
Why? He hasn't played in the NBA since mid-2020
I donít follow. Because he plays in Europe heís not capable of playing in the NBA, or might have potential beyond a current NBA player? Cmon.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #40 on: August 05, 2021, 08:21:07 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6279
  • Tommy Points: 507
Back Up PF?  Back up for who?  What we need is a starting PF.  We already have enough back ups (Parker, Williams, Kantor) and please don't tell me that Tatum is a PF.  Our need is for a starting caliber PF.  We don't need any more back up PFs.

Tatum is the starting PF. Heís prototypical, modern day power forward. 6í9Ē and he can shoot the 3. Thatís what the position is now.

Well, agree to disagree.  Tatum is a starter but he is not a power forward.  He is a wing, one of the best wings in the entire NBA.  We are forced to play one of the best wings in the NBA in the PF slot because we don't have an actual starting quality PF to play the PF slot.  And he isn't 6'-9", he is listed at 6'-8", not that this is all that important.

Do people really think that we would play Tatum at PF if we actually had a starting PF to play PF?  Most of last year, we started Daniel Theis at PF and he barely at best has starting level talent.  I wouldn't (play Tatum at PF).  I would prefer to never play Tatum at PF, to always play him at wing.

So if we play say Smart, Richardson, Brown, Tatum, and Horford, is Tatum playing PF?  Why not Brown?  Why not Smart?  The answer is that we are playing without a PF.  We are playing a PG, 3 wings, and a Big.  Nothing wrong with that in certain situations but we would not play that as our core unit if we had a legit starting PF to put out there.

What many disagree with is the "compliment" of players on the court.  In the past few years, the C's have played a PG, 3 wings, and a big.  Of that Tatum is the largest wing.  Call that a PF if you must, but what the C's are trying to do in the past is pretty common in the league unless you have an AD, KAT, KD, etc where you have such talent in the 2nd big spot to not hurt yourself on either D or O with a big player who can guard inside and out and shoot inside and out.  There are few of those players currently.

Only when we had no option.  Last season our starters were Theis and Thompson until we traded Theis.  Before that, we played with Horford and Morris a lot (Morris is more of a swing which is fine).  We default to the 3 wing line up when we need to.

I have no problem with any of these line ups; 2 bigs, 1 big/1 swing, 1 big depending on the situation but people seem to gloss over the fact that we do not have a starting caliber PF or second big or more wing-like big or whatever modern term you want to use and the team would be better for it if we did.

I would love to get a true PF.  You expect that to mean a mobile player that can shoot but whose natural position or role is a big.  I would also be fine with a true swing type player; a hybrid wing/big but more of a natural big than wing.  Tatum is neither of these things.

Tatum is a natural wing, one of the best in the league.  He is not a big, or even a modern big.  Statements by Stevens and even by Ainge earlier indicate to me that they feel this way too.  No roster is perfect.  Every roster has some hole.  Our current hole is a true staring PF.

Just to add, the last 5 years, this is who we started as bigs:

2016-17    Amir Johnson / Horford
2017-18    Horford / Baynes (mostly), Morris (some)
2018-19    Horford / Morris (mostly), Baynes (some)
2019-20    Theis  / 3-wings (primary line up 1 big)
2020-21    Thompson / Theis (until we traded Theis)

So that is about 1.5 seasons with 1 big line ups and 3.5 seasons with 2 big.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2021, 10:02:28 AM by Vermont Green »

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #41 on: August 05, 2021, 08:49:20 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19133
  • Tommy Points: 1278
I wish we would sign Oubre to a one year deal.  I doubt it would happen given the owner's mandates but he is a lot better than Grant as a backup PF

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #42 on: August 05, 2021, 08:54:39 AM »

Online gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22687
  • Tommy Points: 1215
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
Sign Cheick Diallo to a minimum deal with a team option for Year 2. Iíd far rather have him over Grant Williams.
Why? He hasn't played in the NBA since mid-2020
I donít follow. Because he plays in Europe heís not capable of playing in the NBA, or might have potential beyond a current NBA player? Cmon.
No, because the last time he was in the NBA he was worse than Grant Williams. He's also a 5
2021 Minnesota Timberwolves:
PG: Trae Young / Jamal Murray / Jordan Clarkson
SG: Bradley Beal / Terry Rozier
SF: Bogdan Bogdanovic / Will Barton / Saddiq Bey
PF: Harrison Barnes / Aaron Gordon
C: Joel Embiid / John Collins / Mason Plumlee

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #43 on: August 05, 2021, 11:05:05 AM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4113
  • Tommy Points: 420
My issue with the way the team is built right now is you are putting A TON of pressure on Tatum and Brown to defend larger wing/power forward offensive weapons. Guys like Butler, Siakam, Middleton, Harris, Lebron, Randle, Zion ect ect ect. That's a tough ask given that they will also have to carry an immense offensive load. So sure, you can have Tatum play PF ( although it will be Brown mostly defending PF), but that's not the best way of building your team. Ideally you have another 6'8 wing forward to guard bigger guys (at least during the regular season). Instead we have a bunch of 6'4 to 6'6 2/3 guys in Langford, Richardson, Nesmith meaning Brown and Tatum become your forwards. It makes your team small and srresses your stars.

Re: Options at backup PF?
« Reply #44 on: August 05, 2021, 11:44:21 AM »

Offline michigan adam

  • Aaron Nesmith
  • Posts: 98
  • Tommy Points: 4
Back Up PF?  Back up for who?  What we need is a starting PF.  We already have enough back ups (Parker, Williams, Kantor) and please don't tell me that Tatum is a PF.  Our need is for a starting caliber PF.  We don't need any more back up PFs.

Tatum is the starting PF. Heís prototypical, modern day power forward. 6í9Ē and he can shoot the 3. Thatís what the position is now.

Well, agree to disagree.  Tatum is a starter but he is not a power forward.  He is a wing, one of the best wings in the entire NBA.  We are forced to play one of the best wings in the NBA in the PF slot because we don't have an actual starting quality PF to play the PF slot.  And he isn't 6'-9", he is listed at 6'-8", not that this is all that important.

Do people really think that we would play Tatum at PF if we actually had a starting PF to play PF?  Most of last year, we started Daniel Theis at PF and he barely at best has starting level talent.  I wouldn't (play Tatum at PF).  I would prefer to never play Tatum at PF, to always play him at wing.

So if we play say Smart, Richardson, Brown, Tatum, and Horford, is Tatum playing PF?  Why not Brown?  Why not Smart?  The answer is that we are playing without a PF.  We are playing a PG, 3 wings, and a Big.  Nothing wrong with that in certain situations but we would not play that as our core unit if we had a legit starting PF to put out there.

What many disagree with is the "compliment" of players on the court.  In the past few years, the C's have played a PG, 3 wings, and a big.  Of that Tatum is the largest wing.  Call that a PF if you must, but what the C's are trying to do in the past is pretty common in the league unless you have an AD, KAT, KD, etc where you have such talent in the 2nd big spot to not hurt yourself on either D or O with a big player who can guard inside and out and shoot inside and out.  There are few of those players currently.

Only when we had no option.  Last season our starters were Theis and Thompson until we traded Theis.  Before that, we played with Horford and Morris a lot (Morris is more of a swing which is fine).  We default to the 3 wing line up when we need to.

I have no problem with any of these line ups; 2 bigs, 1 big/1 swing, 1 big depending on the situation but people seem to gloss over the fact that we do not have a starting caliber PF or second big or more wing-like big or whatever modern term you want to use and the team would be better for it if we did.

I would love to get a true PF.  You expect that to mean a mobile player that can shoot but whose natural position or role is a big.  I would also be fine with a true swing type player; a hybrid wing/big but more of a natural big than wing.  Tatum is neither of these things.

Tatum is a natural wing, one of the best in the league.  He is not a big, or even a modern big.  Statements by Stevens and even by Ainge earlier indicate to me that they feel this way too.  No roster is perfect.  Every roster has some hole.  Our current hole is a true staring PF.

Just to add, the last 5 years, this is who we started as bigs:

2016-17    Amir Johnson / Horford
2017-18    Horford / Baynes (mostly), Morris (some)
2018-19    Horford / Morris (mostly), Baynes (some)
2019-20    Theis  / 3-wings (primary line up 1 big)
2020-21    Thompson / Theis (until we traded Theis)

So that is about 1.5 seasons with 1 big line ups and 3.5 seasons with 2 big.

There is also starting vs finishing vs most minutes played.  I'm not going to begin to know how to or want to do the research to have facts, but I would think, last year even , we started with 2 bigs alot, but played more minutes with 1 big, and most often finished with 1 big.