I think that you've raised crucial questions that touch on the way the game is being played today and in particular how the Celtics are playing today. I'm going to agree some and disagree some, but there's no question of giving a TP for this thread - good work, PhoSita.
It's not like having too many guards or too many bigs.
We'd better sort out our terms here.
Traditionally, "wings" has meant both 2's and 3's - i.e., shooting GUARDS and small forwards. But for a long time now those two positions are typically interchangeable on the court, hence the more common use of the term "wing".
So that would include Avery Bradley.
Brad Stevens claims to scheme for four positions, not the traditional five: Ballhandlers, Wings, Swings, and Bigs. We ought to give more than lip service to this claim. Notice that there is no mention of "guards" or "forwards". So there are pitfalls in applying the old 1-5 labels to Boston's lineups, since the coach says he's using a different scheme.
Avery is clearly not a Ballhandler.
Danny Ainge, for one, is still using those old labels, saying recently that he thinks Tatum could "eventually play the 4". The old habits die hard, though sometimes the new habits die off first.
Look -- SG, SF, PF. That's three positions on the floor. In small ball lineups, you can add the C position as well.
That's at least 144 minutes between those 3 spots, plus whatever minutes you want to allocate for super small lineups where a 3/4 plays at the 5.
First off, you will struggle to find an example of a "3/4" playing at the 5 for the Celtics. And in fact it's extremely rare in the NBA. Draymond Green comes to mind, perhaps - certainly he has some wing-type skills, and he's famously been the biggest player in the Warriors' vaunted "Lineup of Death". There are plenty of examples of 4's playing 5, of course - Blake Griffin, as an example.
What you do see in Brad Stevens' lineups is predominantly the use of two bigs, two wings, and a ballhandler; or two bigs, one wing, and two ballhandlers - with occasional "small lineups" in which the 6'6" Crowder is the second biggest player. Brad has said that he likes using two bigs at least partly because their "backcourt" is small (old-style 1-5 thinking creeping in?!).
The small lineups had mixed success in the regular season (though better in the playoffs, perhaps saving the Chicago series) - Brad has said that the sample size is small. That cuts both ways, of course: while it tells you that he's interested in the potential, it also tells you that he hasn't used it a whole lot.
Enter Jayson Tatum. At his height and length, he has the potential to be a prototypical Swing. Crowder's role as a Swing is, in my opinion, best as a backup, due to his height and length. You need a backup, of course.
Let's say you have 5 guys who all could play 20+ mpg. For example -- Hayward, George, Crowder, Brown, and Tatum.
You could play them 32, 32, 28, 28, and 24 minutes per game.
I love your provocative point here, love that you see a role for Crowder, who is the perfect complementary player. You NEED complementary players, especially guys who can shoot and spread the floor like Jae. According to Zach Lowe's recent article on the Butler trade, the sticking point for Boston was Chicago's insistence on including Crowder in the deal.
And what about Avery Bradley? Or are you trading him away in this scenario? What about Marcus Smart, who is a Ballhandler, but frequently plays with Isaiah, another Ballhandler, thus taking some of the "SG" minutes?
32 or 28 might be a little bit on the low side for some of those guys, but at least during the regular season that's not a bad thing.
Relevant also that Brad Stevens has been a disciple of Gregg Popovich and modern sport science in managing the regular season minutes of his starters. And for what it's worth, Boston had very good health going into the playoffs this year.
So, I don't really understand this preoccupation with the "logjam" the Celts might have on the wing. Especially if they don't sign Hayward or trade for George.
I agree. But I'm skeptical that either of those players is coming to Boston; and I don't think that that would be so terrible, either. Getting both looks like a really disproportionate allocation of salary.
YOU CAN NEVER HAVE ENOUGH VERSATILE, TALENTED WING PLAYERS IN TODAY'S NBA.
Full stop.
Never is a long time, but your point is well taken.
That maxim is right up there with "don't overpay for pure centers" and "the most important kind of player in the NBA to have is an elite pick and roll shot creator."
Shot creators of any kind have been one of the Celtics' greatest needs. As Brown and Tatum mature, this need will be addressed. It appears that Brown is ready to step into a bigger role in this area already - something that will be very clear before Christmas.
The other big need, in my view, is defensive rebounding. I'd advocate signing Blake Griffin to immediately address both those needs.