What's new
By:

Following potential 2014 draftees

Sheep Rug.
That's a curious name for a player. I take it he got his nickname because he's kind of soft and tends to just lay down instead of playing big in important games. So late 2nd or maybe undrafted?
 
The more I think about it.. Randle could be ideal. Neither Kanter nor Favors is the ideal PF.. and even if one becomes one, we're thin there.
(I know we're not likely to pick #3.. I'm just addressing those that have said he's not a need.)

We'll all be watching the PG position closely.
We're set at SG, atm.
We're not as bad off at SF as it seems (but another position to certainly watch)
We need depth at PF, imo.
Good at Center.
 
PKM said:
The more I think about it.. Randle could be ideal. Neither Kanter nor Favors is the ideal PF.. and even if one becomes one, we're thin there.
(I know we're not likely to pick #3.. I'm just addressing those that have said he's not a need.)

We'll all be watching the PG position closely.
We're set at SG, atm.
We're not as bad off at SF as it seems (but another position to certainly watch)
We need depth at PF, imo.
Good at Center.
Click to expand...

We'll know better at the end of the season if PF depth is a need.
 
PKM said:
The more I think about it.. Randle could be ideal. Neither Kanter nor Favors is the ideal PF.. and even if one becomes one, we're thin there.
(I know we're not likely to pick #3.. I'm just addressing those that have said he's not a need.)

We'll all be watching the PG position closely.
We're set at SG, atm.
We're not as bad off at SF as it seems (but another position to certainly watch)
We need depth at PF, imo.
Good at Center.
Click to expand...

Randle at SF is interesting to me. He has the handles, shot, and athleticism to pull it off I think. On defense, to guard the elite NBA SFs (Lebron, Melo, George) you need power just as much as lateral quickness, and these guys couldn't bully Randle at all. Against small ball teams like the Warriors, Corbin could always adjust the lineup and move Randle to PF and Hayward to SF. This bumps either Kanter or Favors to the bench though, so theoretically one of them does still become expendable in this scenario.
 
PKM said:
The more I think about it.. Randle could be ideal. Neither Kanter nor Favors is the ideal PF.. and even if one becomes one, we're thin there.
(I know we're not likely to pick #3.. I'm just addressing those that have said he's not a need.)

We'll all be watching the PG position closely.
We're set at SG, atm.
We're not as bad off at SF as it seems (but another position to certainly watch)
We need depth at PF, imo.
Good at Center.
Click to expand...

Hey, just remember I was the one that brought this up some 30 pages ago. It would work for year 1, as I'm sure Randle would be ok coming off the bench as a rookie. My concern would be going forward. I don't think any of the three would be content as backups. But maybe I'm wrong.

C - Kanter (33); Favors (15)
PF - Favors (18); Randle (30)

Note there aren't any minutes for Gobert. I'd count on him getting some burn if Derrick gets into foul trouble and can't move over to the 5. The other possibility is to slide Randle over to SF to play against big 3's. He certainly has the shooting range. My real concern is Corbin. I just don't think he has the IQ to see "outside the box" and utilize players in creative ways. Some coaches have the intelligence to design offenses around players strengths. Up to now, Corbin has either stuck to Sloan's "one-size-fits-all" approach or reverted to the "who-cares-just-throw-it-to-Al" solution. Could he effectively shuffle Randle to SF at times and use that size and strength advantage?
 
Jazz4ever said:
Randle at SF is interesting to me. He has the handles, shot, and athleticism to pull it off I think. On defense, to guard the elite NBA SFs (Lebron, Melo, George) you need power just as much as lateral quickness, and these guys couldn't bully Randle at all. Against small ball teams like the Warriors, Corbin could always adjust the lineup and move Randle to PF and Hayward to SF. This bumps either Kanter or Favors to the bench though, so theoretically one of them does still become expendable in this scenario.
Click to expand...

Randle is an average to slightly above average (at best) as a SF. He is above average to possibly elite as a PF. Huge mismatch at PF. I hate the idea of putting him at the SF slot.
 
Hantlers said:
Randle is an average to slightly above average (at best) as a SF. He is above average to possibly elite as a PF. Huge mismatch at PF. I hate the idea of putting him at the SF slot.
Click to expand...

I feel the exact same way. Sure, there will instances where he may guard the opposing team's "SF".. but it's more the exception.
 
Btw, the eligibility thing for Young and Harrison's has nothing at all to do with grades. Their schools let out for the year after the NCAA finished their first round of clearinghouse. Now the NCAA is working on fall sports (fb) before coming back around to the winter sports.

This happens every year.. but there will be changes that take effect next year to avoid the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top