Nugs waive Stokes, sign Gee

skywalker33 · Post #1 » by **skywalker33** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 12:49 am

Nuggets have waived Jarnell Stokes and are finalizing a contract with Alonzo Gee. Like Gee, seems like a defensive wing for Malone, especially with Harris injured again.

Stokes is a good guy but this seems like were still thin at the C position, leaving too much on Faried or Arthur IMO.

Post #2 » by **NuggetsWY** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:37 am

and if Nurkic or Jokic gets injured, it's OK because we have Faried?

Post #3 » by **NuggetsWY** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:57 am

I just looked Gee's stats. This guy couldn't make the Pelicans lineup. He's 6'6" and the last two years shot below 30% from 3 pt range and he's going to fill the slot for Harris? Is that really the intention? It seems apparent. We drafted three 3pt shooters and we still have Barton (soon), Murray, and Beasley at SG. Why do we need Gee? If Malone's rotations don't make sense, is the front office trying to follow suit? Losing Stokes isn't bad except he was insurance at center. Then again, Malone prefers to not have his centers on the court for major parts of the game, so I don't know.

skywalker33 · Post #4 » by **skywalker33** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:23 am

NuggetsWY wrote:and if Nurkic or Jokic gets injured, it's OK because we have Faried?

Not my words, hopes or dreams...perhaps a nightmare of mine :banghead:

NuggetsWY wrote:I just looked Gee's stats. This guy couldn't make the Pelicans lineup. He's 6'6" and the last two years shot below 30% from 3 pt range and he's going to fill the slot for Harris? Is that really the intention? It seems apparent. We drafted three 3pt shooters and we still have Barton (soon), Murray, and Beasley at SG. Why do we need Gee? If Malone's rotations don't make sense, is the front office trying to follow suit? Losing Stokes isn't bad except he was insurance at center. Then again, Malone prefers to not have his centers on the court for major parts of the game, so I don't know.

Gee did have a very successful stint with the Nugs a few years ago, I liked the on-ball presence he gave. He does bring some veteran leadership in the absence of Harris. Don't see it long-term, just wonder if we'll bring in a different backup C/PF or bring Stokes back... :dontknow:

SoCalNuggsFan · Post #5 » by **SoCalNuggsFan** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:51 am

I liked Gee in spot minutes with us.

Post #6 » by **NuggetsWY** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:07 am

I thought Toupane was pretty good last year. Isn't he in the D-league now? Two 10 day contracts and then decide to sign him for the year or cut him lost. Maybe Harris will be close to ready by then. He usually heals fast.

SoCalNuggsFan · Post #7 » by **SoCalNuggsFan** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:35 am

NuggetsWY wrote:I thought Toupane was pretty good last year. Isn't he in the D-league now? Two 10 day contracts and then decide to sign him for the year or cut him lost. Maybe Harris will be close to ready by then. He usually heals fast.

I assumed that's who we were going for when the news came out that stokes was cut. The FO just can't seem to make up their mind on an end of the bench wing. Gee, Kilpatrick, Toupane, Dude from the sixers whose name I already forgot, Gee again.

Powder Blue · Post #8 » by **Powder Blue** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 3:41 pm

NuggetsWY wrote:I thought Toupane was pretty good last year. Isn't he in the D-league now? Two 10 day contracts and then decide to sign him for the year or cut him lost. Maybe Harris will be close to ready by then. He usually heals fast.

Can't sign guys to 10 day contracts until Jan. Move doesn't make sense considering they have 2 rookie SG's..

Post #9 » by **NuggetsWY** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:00 pm

Powder Blue wrote:
NuggetsWY wrote:I thought Toupane was pretty good last year. Isn't he in the D-league now? Two 10 day contracts and then decide to sign him for the year or cut him lost. Maybe Harris will be close to ready by then. He usually heals fast.

Can't sign guys to 10 day contracts until Jan. Move doesn't make sense considering they have 2 rookie SG's..

I didn't realize the Jan rule. But I do agree either Toupane or Gee, doesn't make sense. It's just proof they don't want to play Murray any more than they have to and Beasley only in mop-up minutes.

Powder Blue · Post #10 » by **Powder Blue** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:24 pm

What's the point in having all these rookies and all these future draft picks if they're never going to play the kids? This half youth-half vet thing isn't working. I'd prefer the kids get all the minutes and you win 30 games vs deadend vets playing over the youth and we get 37 wins.

That just leaves us entering next season with more young inexperienced players, which would be less attractive to prime free agents so we just end up signing filler players....who get the majority of the minutes and we repeat the process again....

I feel like you have a better chance filling some seats playing the young guys compared to Nelson, Arthur, Gee etc...

MidMountain · Post #11 » by **MidMountain** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:50 pm

The end of bench players will not see much, if any, game time. I'm guess Gee was brought in to provide perimeter D during practice since Harris is out.

RRFB · Post #12 » by **RRFB** » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:16 pm

We knew injuries would happen, but **** that was quick. Pretty sad that we're already in sign-a-random-dleaguer mode this early in the season.

SoCalNuggsFan wrote:The FO just can't seem to make up their mind on an end of the bench wing. Gee, Kilpatrick, Toupane, Dude from the sixers whose name I already forgot, Gee again.

That's the point though. Having flexibility with that final roster spot is far more valuable than having a fringe D-leaguer locked up on a multi-year deal.