CB Draft '09 Mock Press Conference: Northwest Division

[Edgar]

If you subsituted this yr's Redd or Manu for 2007/2008 Pierce and this yr's Shaq for 2007/2008 KG, do the Celtics win the title?

It doesn't work quite like that, because we'd have two centers, and no power forwards.  Also, of course, it's hard to discount intangibles like three stars who never had any real playoff success coming together to make a run.

That being said, though, I think that any of the players on our team could be a great fit on a title contender.

against proven champs like manu and shaq

[johnnyrondo]

If you subsituted this yr's Redd or Manu for 2007/2008 Pierce and this yr's Shaq for 2007/2008 KG, do the Celtics win the title?

It doesn't work quite like that, because we'd have two centers, and no power forwards.  Also, of course, it's hard to discount intangibles like three stars who never had any real playoff success coming together to make a run.

That being said, though, I think that any of the players on our team could be a great fit on a title contender.

I meant leading the team like KG or Pierce, not just a supporting role. Obviously when you say any of your players you're not saying Ross would lead a team to a title?

OK last question. Have to go to bed. This is actually inspired by Roy, who asked a very similar question last week:

Question for all five GMs:

Who is your biggest Western Conference rival, and why won't they make it to the Finals?

[Roy Hobbs]

Who is your biggest Western Conference rival, and why won't they make it to the Finals?

This is a hard question to answer at this point in the press conferences, as only two teams have posted their rosters.  I'd like to see what the other 13 put up, before making any definitive conclusions.

Right now, I think there are 5 or 6 truly excellent teams in our Conference.  Buffalo, Seattle, Phoenix, Utah, Golden State and Dallas are all legitimate contenders, (in no particular order) I think.

Our biggest rival, in terms of the media sense, is Phoenix, and I think two of their biggest roadblocks will be experience and chemistry.  Also, I think that until Rondo develops a jump shot, he's not a great fit for two post bigs.

As for who we have ranked as the best team in the Conference, we're not sure yet.  However, the reason why none of them will make the Finals is because they have to go through Portland.

[indeedproceed]

Mike Bibby has been defending elite point guards his entire career, and has always shined during crunch time.  That being said, if he's struggling, we have absolutely no problem bringing in Delonte.

Well yes Bibby has been defending elite PG's his entire career, but has he been defending them well? I think that's a crucial difference. I do however think bringing in Delonte is a strong move, considering the other talent in you back court.

Rashard Lewis is an elite athlete; he's not a lumbering "power 3".  What makes Rashard Lewis an elite player is that he can play both the three and the four equally well.  He played predominantly at the 3 in Seattle, earning himself a max contract.  In Orlando, he plays the 4.  He's created mismatches at both positions.

I'm not saying Rashard isn't an elite athlete, I mean look at his pharmaceutical regimen for one (HA! Yeah, I know over the counter not a big deal...).

What I'm saying is that Rashard will lose some of his top level potential if playing SF, because between Shaq and JO, he'll be out on the perimeter against a guy who can keep up with him on the dribble for most of the time.

He's def a good player, I just think he's more effective as a 4 than a 3.

If you remember his games against the Celtics, neither small forwards *not* power forwards could guard him; the only answer the Celts had was KG, and there's only one KG.

We don't think Rashard will have any problem getting touches.  Shaq will command a double-team in the post, meaning that Rashard or another one of our players is going to have a lot of room to move.

I also remember Rashard being hesitant to really commit to being an offensive force, and taking advantage of his mismatch.

Also, who was guarding him if not KG? I think a decent athletic PF could do an alright job against Rashard, it just so happened ours was KG. If a player had the size to keep him honest and the footspeed to not get beat, I don't think he's some kind of offensive guru (although you're not claiming he is either).

The following players on our roster can play SG / SF:  Rashard (SF only), Redd (both), Manu (both), Delonte (SG), Gomes (SF), Jones (both), Dudley (both), Ross (both).  I don't think depth at the position is an issue at all.

But beyond your big 3 on the wing, your other guys range from average to below average. Gomes is a problem because as a true tweener, quicker SF's will beat him. Ross is extremely limited offensively, although a decent defender. Dudley has never played a minute of SG in his life, but I think he's an ok player for the bench. Maybe I'm underselling him, but like you said I wouldn't want him as a starter. Delonte is a capable SG, I will admit that.

Jones is a competent player.  I wouldn't call him "good", but he did start 21 games last season and played very efficiently. 

Fred Jones cannot play both the SG and SF, he's 6-2. He's not a bad bench option, but he's not a particularly good one either. He can't start for a downed Redd, and would be better fit playing the 1 for you.

Can you explain your reasoning?  I don't see it the same way you do.  We feel that we've got the deepest team in the league, so if any one player is injured, we can absorb that loss.  We have 10 players who are capable NBA starters.

For instance, if Jermaine O'Neal gets injured, we'll move Rashard Lewis into the starting lineup, and Turiaf steps in as his backup.  If Manu goes down, a combination of Delonte, Ross, and Jones can cover the position adequately.

In the "real" NBA, most teams get by with 8 or 9 man rotations, so it's not like you need a full-time backup at every position.  That being said, it's exactly what we have.

So am I wrong in thinking your rotation would work something like

Redd(25 mins), Manu (15 mins), Delonte (8 mins (with the rest, probably around 15-20 at pg))
Rashard (20 mins), Manu (10-15 mins), J Dudley (10 mins), Ross (5-8 mins)

My point about the clock is that this all works if injuries are not a concern. It works out to be one of the best perimeter rotations in the league. However, injuries have to be a concern, they're almost a certainty for you considering your players history and age. And if Manu or Redd have a serious injury, your rotation goes out the window. If Redd gets hurt then either Manu or Delonte's minutes shoot up at the SG position. Then, either Fred Jones or J Dudley will need to pick up Manu or Delonte's slack. You end up playing medicore players for major mins.

On top of that if Manu was hurt, then Rashard and Delonte would need to pickup the slack, and Rashard's mins at the 4 would be limited.

I guess the way this train is going is that you have the hard line to toe of limiting Manu, Redd, JO and Shaq's minutes to absolutely less than 30 per game. If one of your guys goes down, you're going to have to lean on a guy who probably can't take 34-37 minutes per anymore. If you don't you'll need to play a guy who is significantly worse, which hurts your talent advantage.

[indeedproceed]

Our biggest rival, in terms of the media sense, is Phoenix, and I think two of their biggest roadblocks will be experience and chemistry.  Also, I think that until Rondo develops a jump shot, he's not a great fit for two post bigs.

We can talk about chemistry on wednesday, but just to hijack your presser for a minute, do you think Rondo can develop a reliable jumper in the next year? He still managed to improve both his overall FG% and 3pt% each year he's been in the league.

[Roy Hobbs]

The following players on our roster can play SG / SF:  Rashard (SF only), Redd (both), Manu (both), Delonte (SG), Gomes (SF), Jones (both), Dudley (both), Ross (both).  I don't think depth at the position is an issue at all.

But beyond your big 3 on the wing, your other guys range from average to below average. Gomes is a problem because as a true tweener, quicker SF's will beat him. Ross is extremely limited offensively, although a decent defender. Dudley has never played a minute of SG in his life, but I think he's an ok player for the bench. Maybe I'm underselling him, but like you said I wouldn't want him as a starter. Delonte is a capable SG, I will admit that.

The "both" for Dudley was a typo.

As for your concern, we have three all-star talents to fill two positions.  We have an above-average player in Delonte, and, at worst, competent players in Gomes, Dudley, Ross, etc.  Honestly:  is there a *deeper* team at the 2/3 in our league?

Jones is a competent player.  I wouldn't call him "good", but he did start 21 games last season and played very efficiently. 

Fred Jones cannot play both the SG and SF, he's 6-2. He's not a bad bench option, but he's not a particularly good one either. He can't start for a downed Redd, and would be better fit playing the 1 for you.

Ross is listed at 6'4", and he played both the 2 and the 3 last season.  We see him as a deep backup for the 1,2, and 3, if necessary.  We don't plan on him starting for Redd, but if he had to, he'd be an adequate stop-gap.  However, I think you're concentrating too much on the 13th - 15th man on our roster.

Can you explain your reasoning?  I don't see it the same way you do.  We feel that we've got the deepest team in the league, so if any one player is injured, we can absorb that loss.  We have 10 players who are capable NBA starters.

For instance, if Jermaine O'Neal gets injured, we'll move Rashard Lewis into the starting lineup, and Turiaf steps in as his backup.  If Manu goes down, a combination of Delonte, Ross, and Jones can cover the position adequately.

In the "real" NBA, most teams get by with 8 or 9 man rotations, so it's not like you need a full-time backup at every position.  That being said, it's exactly what we have.

So am I wrong in thinking your rotation would work something like

Redd(25 mins), Manu (15 mins), Delonte (8 mins (with the rest, probably around 15-20 at pg))
Rashard (20 mins), Manu (10-15 mins), J Dudley (10 mins), Ross (5-8 mins)[/quote]

That's not really how we'd structure our rotation.  You're forgetting Gomes -- who is a power 3, and has really played small forward well in Minnesota -- and I doubt Dudley / Ross see regular rotation minutes.

My point about the clock is that this all works if injuries are not a concern. It works out to be one of the best perimeter rotations in the league. However, injuries have to be a concern, they're almost a certainty for you considering your players history and age. And if Manu or Redd have a serious injury, your rotation goes out the window. If Redd gets hurt then either Manu or Delonte's minutes shoot up at the SG position. Then, either Fred Jones or J Dudley will need to pick up Manu or Delonte's slack. You end up playing medicore players for major mins.

If Manu gets hurt, Redd's and Delonte's minutes go up.  We're not going to have to rely on Fred Jones to carry our team no matter what.  Also, of course, we fully intend on Carlos Delfino coming over and taking his rightful spot on the team at some point this season.

As I mentioned above, teams don't have to go 15 deep.  You don't need four players to back up every position.  The key is, we have competent backups to our starters.

The funny part of this argument, of course, is you're essentially arguing: "If you lose one of your top three players, you might not be deep enough to compete".  Portland is perhaps the only team in our league where you could use the word "might" in that sentence.  For just about everyone else, it's "you wouldn't be deep enough to compete, period".

[Roy Hobbs]

Our biggest rival, in terms of the media sense, is Phoenix, and I think two of their biggest roadblocks will be experience and chemistry.  Also, I think that until Rondo develops a jump shot, he's not a great fit for two post bigs.

We can talk about chemistry on wednesday, but just to hijack your presser for a minute, do you think Rondo can develop a reliable jumper in the next year? He still managed to improve both his overall FG% and 3pt% each year he's been in the league.

Can he?  As a Celtics fan, I'd like to think so.  Will he?  Err...  His eFG% on jump shots actually went down this year, meaning he got worse (despite the better three point shooting).  So, my answer for now is, "time will tell".

[indeedproceed]

The funny part of this argument, of course, is you're essentially arguing: "If you lose one of your top three players, you might not be deep enough to compete".  Portland is perhaps the only team in our league where you could use the word "might" in that sentence.  For just about everyone else, it's "you wouldn't be deep enough to compete, period".

I guess the reason I'm making the case is because of who your top three players are. If your top 3 players are Lamar Kobe and Gasol, that's an acceptable risk, because those guys have been fairly consistent in recent years, and don't seem to be carrying a huge baggage of injuries.

Redd, Manu, Shaq, JO are all guys that have suffered either chronic or severe recent injuries. You don't heckle lakers fans with "if your guys can stay healthy (beyond Btnum), but Lakers fans heckle Boston fans with it because KG had injury problems last year.

Your team is very tough 1-5 and deep with one elite bench player in manu, and some very strong bench players in Delonte, and Miller, and some decent players in Gomes and Dudley (now who is underselling Dudley?), but beyond Manu, none of these guys are good enough to get you a chip if they have to take a very central role in your rotation, and my thought is that one of them will have to, unless everything goes just right.

I'm not saying your team isn't one of the best in the league 'if healthy', but what I'm saying is that while a lot of teams can say 'meh, injuries happen' and move on, you can't because your eggs are all in very tenuous baskets. Its an all or nothing gamble, and it puts you in a place to really cash in, but I don't think its good enough to just say Portland is the best team out there, because health and durability for your team is a huge concern.

[indeedproceed]

Also add Turiaf to the list of decent bench players.

[Roy Hobbs]

The funny part of this argument, of course, is you're essentially arguing: "If you lose one of your top three players, you might not be deep enough to compete".  Portland is perhaps the only team in our league where you could use the word "might" in that sentence.  For just about everyone else, it's "you wouldn't be deep enough to compete, period".

I guess the reason I'm making the case is because of who your top three players are. If your top 3 players are Lamar Kobe and Gasol, that's an acceptable risk, because those guys have been fairly consistent in recent years, and don't seem to be carrying a huge baggage of injuries.

Redd, Manu, Shaq, JO are all guys that have suffered either chronic or severe recent injuries. You don't heckle lakers fans with "if your guys can stay healthy (beyond Btnum), but Lakers fans heckle Boston fans with it because KG had injury problems last year.

Your team is very tough 1-5 and deep with one elite bench player in manu, and some very strong bench players in Delonte, and Miller, and some decent players in Gomes and Dudley (now who is underselling Dudley?), but beyond Manu, none of these guys are good enough to get you a chip if they have to take a very central role in your rotation, and my thought is that one of them will have to, unless everything goes just right.

I'm not saying your team isn't one of the best in the league 'if healthy', but what I'm saying is that while a lot of teams can say 'meh, injuries happen' and move on, you can't because your eggs are all in very tenuous baskets. Its an all or nothing gamble, and it puts you in a place to really cash in, but I don't think its good enough to just say Portland is the best team out there, because health and durability for your team is a huge concern.

See, we don't see it that way.  Our perspective is, "If one injury happens, we've got it covered enough to still be a contender".  Obviously, if we lose two of our top six players, we're in trouble.  If Bibby goes down for the playoffs, and we have to rely upon Delonte and Jrue Holiday as our points, that's not ideal (although Delonte and Holiday are probably collectively better than the combo of second year Rondo and Eddie House / Sam Cassell that won us a championship.

Injuries hurt, and they'd hurt anyone.  We recognize this, and to mitigate against it, we brought in competent backups at literally every position.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Redd goes down, and is lost for the entire season (something I'm not predicting, by the way).  Is this team not a contender?

Shaq / Miller
Jermaine / Turiaf / (Rashard)
Rashard / Gomes
Manu / (Delonte) /  Ross
Bibby / Delonte

To me, that team is a contender.  It's not as good as our current team, obviously, but it's definitely a playoff team, and it's probably good enough to earn a home playoff date in the first round.

[indeedproceed]

I'd say its somewhere between a 3rd and 4th seed.

That's the beauty and the flaw in your team, and it kind of all boils down to the versatility that Manu and Rashard give you.

If both players are healthy, and have players solid enough to start for a decent team at their respective swing positions (2,3 and 3,4), then there isn't a really a team you can't matchup with on at least a comparable position player by player, with Rashard and Manu getting the balance as better mismatches>

If you take away that versatility your team becomes significantly more pedestrian.

[indeedproceed]

Good defense of your team though. Its a pity only you and I were awake to read all that.

It is a very good team. Well done to both you and Edgar

[Roy Hobbs]

Good defense of your team though. Its a pity only you and I were awake to read all that.

It is a very good team. Well done to both you and Edgar

Thanks.  On that note, I'm going to sleep.  I'm sure there will be plenty of more critiques in the morning.

[nickagneta]

These question are for the General Manger of the Portland CrotoNats and his Executive Assistant in charge of Propaganda.

How worried are you that Shaq's renaissance is over and that he will progress right back into his ever declining self as the 3/12 years before he declined from 22.9/10.4 to14.2/7.8? He is after all a 7-1, 350 pound, 37 year old man.

How concerned are you that he is going to be away from what many believe is the best training and rehabilitation team in the league in Phoenix?

How concerned are you that he is already looking past his life in basketball and into his life as a reality television star and how concerned are you that these competitions he is going to have could cause him to get hurt?

[nickagneta]

This question is for the king of the Portland Hype Machine.

Have you considered that your constant joking and scrolling texts and and posting of probably at least 75% of the useless hype posts within the Draft Thread will have a harmful counter effect on your team as people may just feel you went overboard and not vote for your team after having it force fed to them over the last couple weeks?