the pro-al crowd just used these two arguments, almost back-to-back:
1) our offense became a great offense because we revolved everything around al.
2) al isn't a ballhog because his usage was so low compared to other teams' stars.
so which was it? al was our staple on every play? or he...
this. mo/marvin/foye might feel like big acquisitions to us, but remember that this is a year when some big names changed teams.
plus, the clips got odom, an underrated piece of two title teams.
all true, but i still wouldn't solve it by planning on 6 minutes of paul-at-SF per half. teams will see that coming and put a small, quick SF out there that paul can't keep up with. and before you say, "well then paul will have a mouse in the house on the other end and we'll take advantage...
probably doesn't mean much. "walking through the offense" just means slowing down every motion and cut for demonstration purposes. if you're going to do that, you're probably doing it for the benefit of younger guys so they can visualize the "right" thing to do on every play -- so it makes sense...
i was just using al as an example. (although a guy can hope, can't he?)
my point is just that nobody is guaranteed anything on a deep-as-hell team with no all-stars. every guy is going to have to earn every minute... and that's not a bad thing.
i'm not granting anybody a 30-minute...
83 is the number barney stinson always uses when he's creating a fake statistic on how i met your mother. that's the algorithm.
really, all i meant to say is that i'm not COMPLETELY sure (which is why saying 99% would have been an exaggeration) but i'm also a lot more sure than 50/50. i think...
i don't like the approach of backing into minutes by making assumptions like, "jeff should and will play around 30" or whatever. nobody should be guaranteed anything on october 4th. competition is good for everybody, and particularly on a team with uber-depth, nobody's minutes are holy and the...
mo, you're solution to the big man rotation is to slide everybody down a spot until we have non-point guards playing point guards. not sure how that makes us better when:
a) paul played so few minutes at the 3 last season that it's impossible to know if it is going to work long term.
b) foye...
haha... there are as many exceptions/explanations in your thing as there are examples of your irrevocable truth.
besides, on a team lacking a real all-star, i think we fit in the denver model more than we fit anywhere else. when there is very little difference in quality 1 through 9, those...
players above 28 mpg by team
ATL - 4
BOS - 4
CHA - 1
CHI - 3
CLE - 2
DAL - 3
DEN - 2
DET - 4
GS - 2 (and that includes monta, who was traded midseason)
HOU - 3
IND - 5
LAC - 3
LAL - 3
MEM - 3
MIA - 3
MIL - 2 (again, includes monta)
MIN - 2
NJ - 4 (includes gerald wallace...
i voted with the majority... the caveat is that if burks really is THAT much improved across the board, i could see hayward-burks as the starting wings and marvin comes off the bench in a staggered rotation.
and yes, that approach means that al/derrick/paul/kanter will be in a bit of a tug-o-war for minutes... which is why i've been very much on the trade al bandwagon. in the meantime, that's a probably any other NBA team would love to have.
i've done the arithmetic, and i think you're overestimating how many guys will play 28+ minutes. last year we had 3 guys above that level: al, paul and gordon. that's pretty standard for most teams.
the reality is that teams will have a big man rotation with two guys getting 30ish, a third...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.