RealGM

http://nba.si.com/2013/07/24/denver-nuggets-offseason-javale-mcgee-ty-lawson/


Adding to what it says, whatever the flaws the Nuggets had last year: poor halfcourt offense, poor FT shooting - even though they made 26 FTPG - and mediocre 3 point shooting, they are currently worse in more important ways.

Although the incoming Foye and Robinson are much better FT shooters than the departing Iggy and Brewer, they get to the line less and the odds are that even though the team FT% may improve, the number of FTMPG will likely drop.

Much more importantly, defense across the board, - which new coach Shaw pointed out as a particular priority in improving and as the article clearly details - is much worse than at the end of the season. The team as a whole has lost height, length, speed and defensive skill.

The one area virtually certain to improve is 3 point shooting but attacking the basket in a half court offense suffers a significant loss with Iggy gone.

One thing this article as well as anything else I've read DOES NOT touch on is the question of what is going on with Brian Shaw? While George Karl was a very accessible and candid coach in dealing with the media, Shaw has virtually disappeared since his introductory press conference in terms of talking to the media.

Once again in an article today by Denver Post's bball writer Benjamin Hochman, Kroenke's new mouthpiece/GM Tim Connelly is the only one being quoted on player questions, saying about the team's depth " "It's going to be a challenge, but what I like is it promotes healthy competition" and that Andre Miller is ABSOLUTELY going to be on the team this year.

If that is the case, this team will be filled with unhappy campers dissatisfied with lack of PT, at the PG, SG and PF positions.

ujirifan wrote:http://nba.si.com/2013/07/24/denver-nuggets-offseason-javale-mcgee-ty-lawson/


Adding to what it says, whatever the flaws the Nuggets had last year: poor halfcourt offense, poor FT shooting - even though they made 26 FTPG - and mediocre 3 point shooting, they are currently worse in more important ways.

Wow talk about assumptions, the article is based around a system that is no longer in place, the fact is that the Nuggets have always struggled on defense with karl as coach, it had much less to do with the personnel and more to do with the system that Karl insisted on running a system focused on switching and collapsing on the paint. Often leaving guys like Lawson on a 7 footer, and Faried or Koufos trying to guard the Chris Pauls of the world. Igoudala is a great defender, but the system change going to a coach that wants the team to play defense should make up for that loss, especially when the offense benefits from having a better offensive player in the mix.

Also to say they are worse at free throw shooting and 3 point shooting is a joke.

ujirifan wrote:Although the incoming Foye and Robinson are much better FT shooters than the departing Iggy and Brewer, they get to the line less and the odds are that even though the team FT% may improve, the number of FTMPG will likely drop.

So your argument is that playing in a different system Foye and Robinson get to the line less then Iggy and Brewer so FTMG is going down? Based on what? You act as if Robinson and Foye are the ones that automatically get all the touches and the minutes that those 2 got, and you are ignoring a basic truth about the NBA today. What about the whole idea that some of their minutes will go to Fournier who will not be getting the rookie whistle anymore, and the touches will likely go to Gallo and Lawson, both of whom draw fouls at a much higher rate and shoot a much better percentage than either of those 2.

ujirifan wrote:Much more importantly, defense across the board, - which new coach Shaw pointed out as a particular priority in improving and as the article clearly details - is much worse than at the end of the season. The team as a whole has lost height, length, speed and defensive skill.

Igoudala is a loss, but you as well as your article are ignoring the fact that many of Koufos's minutes will be going to a better defender in Mozgov. I also love how everybody keeps pointing to how much better the defense was with Igoudala on the court, and then in the line talk about what a good defender Brewer is, who did Brewer usually replace on the court? Not to mention the fact that Igoudala was so good in the plus minus for the team, but ignore the fact that Gallo was actually right there prior to his injury, then after Gallo went out and half of his minutes were taken by Andre Miller and Corey Brewer then the plus shot way up for Iggy.

Also it ignores the fact that Karl used the same system of defense he devised in the 90s, his system is outdated an most teams can figure out how to beat it pretty easily.

ujirifan wrote:The one area virtually certain to improve is 3 point shooting but attacking the basket in a half court offense suffers a significant loss with Iggy gone.

I wonder if you have even watched the Nuggets last year, Iggy was the key to attacking the basket? Since when? Often he was a secondary attacker, you are also ignoring what some of the changes the roster will bring in for the ability to actually score when attacking the rim.

ujirifan wrote:One thing this article as well as anything else I've read DOES NOT touch on is the question of what is going on with Brian Shaw? While George Karl was a very accessible and candid coach in dealing with the media, Shaw has virtually disappeared since his introductory press conference in terms of talking to the media.

It's funny to me how much the media loves and protects Karl, so because Shaw is not in the media constantly doing interviews, and going out for beers all the time, Shaw has a problem? What is he supposed to be out advertising what the teams plans are? Out there bitching about what the front office is doing like Karl loved to do?

ujirifan wrote:Once again in an article today by Denver Post's bball writer Benjamin Hochman, Kroenke's new mouthpiece/GM Tim Connelly is the only one being quoted on player questions, saying about the team's depth " "It's going to be a challenge, but what I like is it promotes healthy competition" and that Andre Miller is ABSOLUTELY going to be on the team this year.

If that is the case, this team will be filled with unhappy campers dissatisfied with lack of PT, at the PG, SG and PF positions.

What leads you to be so sure that the Nuggets are keeping Miller? You think the GM is going to go to the media with their future plans? Did the offseason end today and is the 1st game tomorrow?

You want to talk about unhappy campers as if the roster is set and the Nuggets have no interest in doing a deal right now, which every report I have heard says the exact opposite outside of Nuggets brass saying what they have to say. If they want value they cannot come out and say that Andre Miller or anybody else is going to be traded next week, that is just dumb.

Also the funniest thing about this article and your whole post, is that you are ignoring the benefits of the changes to the roster. Even in the article it mentions the Nuggets have had 2 bigs that cannot shoot on the floor at the same time, leading to teams packing the paint, so the Nuggets go out and get 2 jumpshooting PFs and trade their center with limited jumpshots while having plans to bring back a guy who is better on defense and has a jumpshot as well. So in other words, one of the biggest problems on the roster was not having bigs that could spread the floor and now they solved that problem.

Their actual biggest problems were on the 3 point lines at both ends and guarding the pick and roll. They brought in 2 good outside shooters and lost 2 bad ones, and for all the hype on Iggy and Brewer's defense, the Nuggets were actually terrible against the 3, which has long been the case. Truth is the Nuggets defense was not all that good while Chandler was out, when he came back finally healthy then the team took a large step up, yet he gets no credit for that.

Also for all the hype Koufos and his defense got, he was terrible against the pick and roll, not to mention against stronger bigs, so the Nuggets bring in Arthur, you know a guy who can not only hit jump shots, but also is one of the best pick and roll defenders in the league.

Also as much as people hype up Igoudala the fact of the matter is that Shaw was the associate head coach on a team that just made the Eastern conference finals with a team based around defense, where they had a top 2 defense in the league. Last I checked they did not have Igoudala on that roster there, but their system found a way to work on that end. So why not wait to see what Shaw is going to do, and see what other roster changes are coming, before we all decide that the Nuggets are going back to the depths of hell.

To add to Rebel's post a little bit, the better 3 point shooting and bigs that can hit jump shots will open up driving lanes far more than they were last year with teams not being able to pack the paint anywhere near as much. Also running actual offensive sets should help the offense make up for any playmaking skills that they lost with Iggy.

As for Shaw not being around in the media a lot, where do you expect him to be? Its the off season, I don't recall a whole lot of Karl being around in the media in the off season. I also don't see a problem with this really. What difference does it actually make? I personally am cool with just his summer league interview. Dude doesn't need to be a fixture in the media in the middle of the summer.

Well, I'm certainly not going to waste time contending with you point by point since virtually the total substance of them is that you think Karl's coaching was a big problem and that all the changes are for the better which is at least as silly as my view.

But just as an example of your faulty logic, here are the career FT stats on the 4 players I mentioned. Foye - 2.2 FTA on 9.9 SPG, Nate - 2.3 FTA on 9.8, Iggy 4.8 FTA on 11.6 SG, Brewer 2.4 FTA on 8.7 SPG. That's a combined 4.5 FTA on 19.7 SPG for Foye and Nate compared to 7.2 on 20.3 for Iggy and Brewer.

All I can say is - and, yes this is an assumption - if Mozgov does not re-sign, anyone who thinks that the Nuggets are better, or even as good, defensively at center right now than they were with Koufos as the starter, McGee getting 18 MPG and Mozgov on the bench as insurance is drinking too much Kool-Aid.

Also, even if Miller is traded for who or whatever, the idea of Lawson giving up any of his 34.4 MPG from last year to Nate with Robinson also taking minutes alongside of Ty, inarguably makes for a worse defensive backcourt than Iggy and either Ty or Miller last year.

I'll repeat - inarguably.

Finally, the point about Shaw was simply that his opening press conference stressed improved D as a priority and there is no way that the Nuggets, as currently constituted, have not gone backwards as far as defensive personnel are concerned.

Yes first and foremost I expect the defensive system to change.

Google pack line defense. Remember how teams like Butler and Michigan state defend. A change from Karl to that... is exactly what this franchise needs. How did we ever get along before the one-year Iggy rental? And what did that one year rental do for the club?

I didn't see Evan Fournier's name anywhere in that article. Or that Hamilton had another good summer league. Foye should have a limited role... why are we talking about him?

Karl not only didn't give McGee his time... he also benched Mozgov as well. Hamilton and Mozgov both got screwed.

And we all expect the Nuggets to end up with Mozgov or another back up center. That leaves the PF position really stacked. The JJ signing to me meant that Ken Faried would be available in the right deal.

I see Lawson as locked into the PG spot. I don't see any other locks. I expect the FO to be active... not sure if they can or should get something done. It would really hurt to lose Faried. But the reality is that without a superstar we need two way players up front. That means guys that can either post up or step out and shoot. The article is right about that.

The one area virtually certain to improve is 3 point shooting but attacking the basket in a half court offense suffers a significant loss with Iggy gone.

wait....what? iguodala attacked the basket?

Also, even if Miller is traded for who or whatever, the idea of Lawson giving up any of his 34.4 MPG from last year to Nate with Robinson also taking minutes alongside of Ty, inarguably makes for a worse defensive backcourt than Iggy and either Ty or Miller last year.

I'll repeat - inarguably.

defense is a team & scheme game. it's why the spurs can be dominant every year despite playing guys like gary neal and boris diaw big minutes, and despite tim duncan moving like a sloth at this age. it's why the bulls are elite defensively despite starting a PF that's short, slow footed and has historically played nothing but matador defense, along with an undersized guy like nate robinson.

if you put nba players in positions to succeed and they understand the concepts and rotations, they're all athletic enough to accomplish them...especially when paired with the right motivation. yes....if you put guys like prime KG or iguodala in a legit defensive system they'll also be better. but losing a defensive player and drastically changing a coaching philosophy doesn't necessarily mean you're going to take a leap backward defensively, especially since we're talking about a george karl era.....and going to a guy that was just an assistant on an indiana team was best in the league in defensive rating last year, and top 10 the year before, and has years of experience under a multiple championship caliber coaches.

i'm absolutely positive that stressing the fundamentals of defensive rebounding will immediately make this team better defensively than ever under karl. nuggets were a fantastic offensive rebounding team last year....so the ability to rebound is not in question. they have the personnel to do it effectively, especially with the hickson addition. they were dreadful on the defensive glass though....which gives up easy fg% opportunities to opponents, creates bad matchups on second shot opportunities, creates more paint shooting foul opportunities for the opponent on quick second shots, creates longer defensive possessions which leads to more physical & mental fatigue. if the priority is to no longer just sprint out on opponent FGAs and is changed to being prideful of not only contesting shots but corralling the ball as well....then it can drastically change a teams all-around defensive statistics, despite losing a great wing defender.

and i don't think it's necessarily that karl disliked the notion of playing defense, or didn't talk about it enough. his philosophies are just outdated in todays nba. you can't switch as much as he did and expect to be a good to great defensive team unless you have a roster full of guys like ron artest & kenyon martin....with a strong 6'5 point guard. it creates too many mismatches that get exploited...even if it's not directly obvious. it creates mismatches on the defensive glass. it puts defensive players in positions they're not accustomed to defending (point guards in corners, big men guarding the ball handler on secondary p&r's, SFs being late rotation defenders on drives because they've switched off with the PG who was guarding the PF on the p&r switch...but then the pg switched out to cover the SF's player in the corner while the SF sunk deep to get the opposing PF). it's like a zone....yes it can be effective in certain situations, but in the long term it's a gimmick and is too easily exploited by good teams with good coaches.

you also can't put average to sub-par defensive players (andre miller) on the other teams best player (steph curry)....put your best defender (iguodala) on the other teams second best player (klay thompson) to shut him down....and expect your team to withstand offensive pushes or recover from deficits.

and finally you can't rely on your 7 footers like camby or mcgee or koufos to do all the rebounding while the guards/forwards/shot contesters leak out. defensive rebounding needs to be a 100% team commitment. the game's different today, it's more mathematical, statistical, efficient, strategical, purposefully mis-directed...etc....and less 'spirit of the game', 'just play basketball and have fun' or 'play faster and you'll figure it out'. i don't think karl has adapted, and i don't think he wants to adapt.

But just as an example of your faulty logic, here are the career FT stats on the 4 players I mentioned. Foye - 2.2 FTA on 9.9 SPG, Nate - 2.3 FTA on 9.8, Iggy 4.8 FTA on 11.6 SG, Brewer 2.4 FTA on 8.7 SPG. That's a combined 4.5 FTA on 19.7 SPG for Foye and Nate compared to 7.2 on 20.3 for Iggy and Brewer.

iguodala made 1.9 free throws on 3.4 attempts last year
brewer made 1.8 free throws on 2.6 attempts ......total 3.7 made on 6 attempts in 59 minutes.
robinson 1.6/2.1
foye 1.4/1.8 ........... total 3.0 on 3.9 attempts ....and it's actually higher than that since those numbers are rounded weird and they're both 80% ft shooters. in 52 minutes

so we're effectively losing 0.7 points on 2.1 attempts
by 'downgrading our free throw attempts from the backcourt position'.....we're 'losing' the efficiency of 0.7 points per 1 possession (since 2 free throws typically = 1 possession). for what it's worth, 0.7 points scored on an average nba possession is downright awful. for reference the worst team in the league last year in terms of offensive points per possession were the wizards at 0.98

Still acting like Nate and Foye are replacing Iggy and Brewer when in fact, Hamilton and Fournier will replace those 2 far more than Nate and Foye.

why doesn't everybody appreciate Gallo's defense? !!!!

darivo wrote:why doesn't everybody appreciate Gallo's defense? !!!!

I think, as the expression goes, that you are assuming facts not in evidence. It seems to me that no one believes Gallo is not a good defender, and I think Chandler is also in that category. In my opinion, only Brewer's defense is under-rated on this board.

I suspect you could believe that Danilo is better than Iguodala, who gets all the defensive "press". You would not be alone. I remember months ago someone making that argument using just ONE of Synergy's stats. But most here, even those who are not particularly his fans, and most throughout the NBA, know that Dre is the superior defender.

I'm sure many are also influenced by a prominent newspaper columnist who often writes in half truths. He suggested that Dre was over-rated, primarily because Karl played him on Klay instead of Steph. He overlooked the fact that he controlled Curry when he was on him. He also forgot his play against Wade, Ellis, and most others he guarded. That reporter belittled Thompson's abilities. I was confused by Karl's assignments, but did come up with two sensible (if not necessarily successful) possibilities.

When Karl decided to also go small, it severely affected defense, IMO. Putting Lawson on the much bigger Klay would have allowed the latter to just shoot over him at will. And, in that series, Fournier could not guard a chair. Had he kept the big lineup, Chandler could have guarded Thompson well, Dre could have taken Steph, and only Jack would have been left to hurt us. He was awesome, but he's no Curry.

Everyone talks about that one game when Steph's three (I think) quick threes against Miller broke the game open. But that was about a five minute span. For the rest of the 283 minutes Ty was usually on Steph, with pretty much the same or worse results. I do not mean to imply that he is a horrible defender, just that Steph ate his lunch, and Lawson is infinitely faster than Miller, so it doesn't seem to have been a speed "thing".

In summary, I agree that Gallo is a decent defender. If he and Chandler remain healthy, those who believe Dre will not be missed might be correct. I thought that Denver had as much redundancy as any team in the league last year.

.

Wow.

Great stuff, guys.

I'd rather read a thread like this than an article by a national writer.

.

Okay, corona, I buy some of what you are saying and acknowledge the validity of your point on likely minimal effect on FG points.

Now, I will clarify your comments on the Nuggets defensive rebounding with the actual numbers that show it to be NOT to have been as big a problem for the season as whole as you think.

For the season, the Nuggets were ranked 10th in defensive rebounding but what that actually meant is that they grabbed a mere 2.5 DREBS less than #1 ranked G.S. while at the same time having the exact same +2.5 DRBPG as the Warriors. Also, the Spurs, who were a horrible OREBs team, -3 PG were only a +2.8 DRBPG So, just how big a deal was it?

Also, the way they played run-n-gun does have an effect on the mental and physical aspects of defensive rebounding. I do think that things will be different this year in that category simply because I do not believe that Shaw will really play that much of an up tempo offense, regardless of what he says.

But how about some response on the issues of backcourt and PF logjams?

1.) As of the moment, all you can do is take Connelly's word that he expects Miller to still be on the team this year. If that happens, do you not think that the PG, in particular, but backcourt overall situation is going to be a real issue? And, even if he is traded, do you believe that Nate, with 29 MPG PT, 13 PPG, 4.4 APG, 40% 3PT shooting as well as veteran SG Foye were not given reason to believe that they would get meaningful PT when they signed?

Also, do you really believe that a backcourt tandem of Ty and Nate won't be an even bigger negative defensively than Ty and Miller were last year?

2.) Do you not think that, if Mozgov doesn't re-sign, they will be worse defensively at center unless McGee makes huge improvement in that area?

Is it not pretty dumb, even if you want to give McGee the starter's role and every opportunity to succeed, to trade a very decent 7 footer who could still be a great backup center for a guy - Arthur - if you don't expect him to get meaningful PT? And, doesn't it put a LOT more pressure on McGee, which is likely not a good thing?

3.) Is it your belief that Faried is incapable of developing an effective mid-range J and/or, with the right coaching, become a significantly better man and team defender?

Do you think that Randolph has shown that he is not at all worth consideration as a rotation player?

And how about QMiller?

4.) Have the Nuggets not gone from being one the tallest - and longest - teams to one of the shorter ones?



P.S. As one who has been a Bulls fan as long as they have existed and a Nuggets fan "only" since the mid-'70s, I watched Nate a lot last year and think that, for the right team, he would have been a great pickup. The Nuggets, however, actually would have been much more of that kind of team if Karl was still coaching than they will be under Shaw, i.e., a true run-n-gun team, first and last.

As far as Hamilton and Fournier being more likely to get meaningful PT than Foye and Nate, all I can say is that, if you live here in Denver, I'd like to get together and make a bet on who gets more combined PT this year, especially at guard. I'll take Foye and Nate.

As of this moment, everything I've read indicates that Foye is expected to be the starting SG and I believe that rookie head coach Shaw will be looking to go with experience there.

Hamilton, at least until Gallo returns, almost certainly will get the bulk, if not all, of his minutes at SF behind Chandler.

As I said in a previous post, KK did not okay the signing of Robinson to be a guy who is insurance only for a Lawson injury. He will play at least 20 MPG.

With Mozgov now apparently re-signed that gives the Nugz 15 players under contract.

It also makes the PF logjam even more untenable with Mozgov likely to get most of the center minutes not used by McGee and Hickson having to share the PF spot with Faried, Arthur and Randolph.

At least one of those guys seems likely to be packaged - and I'd say it would be Faried or Randolph - with Miller to get ??????

Anyone think that they might also throw in Chandler to try to get something resembling a legitimate star at PF or SG?

I have no doubt in my mind the Nuggets are stockpiling players to setup a trade for an allstar, they're just waiting for one to become available.

Reports were that we tried to trade Faried for Orlando's number 2. Combine that with Hickson's bargain contract/ability to put up better numbers. I have to believe Faried will be part of any deal.

Kroenke has already proven that he is one of the most patient owners in the league, so I won't expect any deal until close to the deadline.

I would bet one of these players will be a Nugget at some time next year.

Danny Granger (Shaw knows what he can bring and is on the block).
Rudy Gay (if all goes bad as expected in Toronto, Ujiri will be looking for younger talent i.e. Faried).
Pau Gasol (Lakers hopefully won't contend this year and our FO loves Pau, Faried will likely be involved)
Lamarcus Aldridge (Hates the city of Portland and they would love Faried (and probably another starter) in exchange. Don't like trades within the division but if it helps both teams, it'll happen.
Kevin Love (He's one non playoff season away from demanding a trade. If they fall out of playoff contention by the deadline, he'll be on the block. Another trade within the division but another Faried centered trade could get him to Denver.

GREG MONROE. He is a good passing big that can score in a variety of ways. That name should be near the top.

Kroenke has already proven that he is one of the most patient owners in the league, so I won't expect any deal until close to the deadline.


REALLY????????????

Taking a 57 win team with - minus Andre Miller - THE YOUNGEST roster in the NBA, firing the coach, letting the GM, WHO WAS STILL UNDER CONTRACT, - allegedly because they were such good buddies he wouldn't stand in Ujiri's way rather than because he wanted unfettered control of all basketball decisions - leave and being well on his way to a major demolition of the roster.

Yeah. That's shows patience. Sorry, but that simply shows his arrogance.

As for your list of potential trade targets, I'd say that the first three, Granger, Gay and Gasol -the 3 Gs? - would actually be appropriate for the way in which he has so far this off season, been downgrading the team.

Why in the world, with Gallo and Chandler, do you think Granger is any real upgrade? Gasol MAY have a decent year or two left but wouldn't do all that much to make the Nugz a real title contender. And just how happy - and successful - were the Grizz with Prince at SF instead of Gay?. Answer. VERY.

ujirifan wrote:Now, I will clarify your comments on the Nuggets defensive rebounding with the actual numbers that show it to be NOT to have been as big a problem for the season as whole as you think.

For the season, the Nuggets were ranked 10th in defensive rebounding but what that actually meant is that they grabbed a mere 2.5 DREBS less than #1 ranked G.S. while at the same time having the exact same +2.5 DRBPG as the Warriors. Also, the Spurs, who were a horrible OREBs team, -3 PG were only a +2.8 DRBPG So, just how big a deal was it?

nuggets were 27th in the league in defensive rebound rate. they played at a faster pace, thus their opponents got more possessions in every game....thus the nuggets had more opportunities at defensive rebounds. but they were poor, really poor, at rebounding those misses...charlotte, cleveland, phoenix bad. they were #1 in the league in offensive rebound rate. which means despite their pace they were great on the offensive glass.

i don't think that emphasizing defensive rebounding is the only thing that will make the nuggets better, but i do think it's a huge philosophy thing that can change the teams character to help them be significantly better as a team defense.

1.) As of the moment, all you can do is take Connelly's word that he expects Miller to still be on the team this year. If that happens, do you not think that the PG, in particular, but backcourt overall situation is going to be a real issue? And, even if he is traded, do you believe that Nate, with 29 MPG PT, 13 PPG, 4.4 APG, 40% 3PT shooting as well as veteran SG Foye were not given reason to believe that they would get meaningful PT when they signed?

couple points..
-i think connelly's saying that about miller because it's PC. he's not going to say to the media they're going to trade him before the season starts....as it'd lower his value, be bad for team morale, it's bad for luring free agents to be a GM that openly admits to wanting to trade guys that haven't demanded a trade...etc. i still expect him to be traded before 2014 because of the fundamental changes made to the team (more 3 point shooting, more youth), because of how he threw karl under the bus after the playoffs, how he said they'll never win 57 again, how he's been known to whine in the media about PT or not having an all-star, not having a legit chance to win...etc.

-i don't think players in general sign in specific spots because they think they'll get more playing time. otherwise you'd have all sorts of verge-nba-starters flocking to the bad teams because they'd probably play 35mpg. they sign the highest contract given to them at the time unless they're old and have earned enough money, or are old and really really want a ring. they probably all expect some PT similar to what they've gotten previously in their careers and are confident enough in their own abilities to think they'll earn it over other players on the roster....but if they don't, you'd hope they'd respect that decision, try harder in practice, play better when other guys are injured and they get the opportunity. i also think it's generally accepted that average nba players won't get the same minutes on a 50+ win team that they will on a 30 win team. most of foye's playing time through his career has come on mediocre/bad teams. same could be said of robinson. when they've been on better teams...they've haven't gotten as much, but it's also easier to accept since the tradeoff is winning and having better team camaraderie in general. that will be the case here, and if it's a problem with them, they're both on tradeable contracts.

-you also keep mentioning that nate got 29mpg last year. he didn't, just 25 despite being without their starting PG all season.

Also, do you really believe that a backcourt tandem of Ty and Nate won't be an even bigger negative defensively than Ty and Miller were last year?

it's possible...it's certainly a unique dynamic to have two guys that small on the court at the same time....can't think of anyone else who's done it before. the difference is that i expect them to play somewhere between 0 and 8 minutes together per night, typically against opposing 2nd units. not at minimum 10 minutes and as much as 25 per night....and where we're almost always ending games both offensively and defensively with both of them on the court, as with miller/ty.

2.) Do you not think that, if Mozgov doesn't re-sign, they will be worse defensively at center unless McGee makes huge improvement in that area?

Is it not pretty dumb, even if you want to give McGee the starter's role and every opportunity to succeed, to trade a very decent 7 footer who could still be a great backup center for a guy - Arthur - if you don't expect him to get meaningful PT? And, doesn't it put a LOT more pressure on McGee, which is likely not a good thing?

i think they were confident in mozgov re-signing all along. or at worst keeping him for the QO year. maybe in retrospect keeping koufos until after re-signing mozgov would have been safer...but it worked out anyways, and i think the defense will be just fine. maybe tougher, given that koufos is a bit of a softie.

3.) Is it your belief that Faried is incapable of developing an effective mid-range J and/or, with the right coaching, become a significantly better man and team defender?

he's young. i expect him to keep improving in all aspect. i think as a bit undersized PF he could be better at drawing offensive fouls. i think his hands could be better/stronger in the paint defensively. his jumpshot looks shaky, but that doesn't negate the potential of it to be decent from 15-18 feet....it's just repetition and confidence.

Do you think that Randolph has shown that he is not at all worth consideration as a rotation player?

not from what i've seen. low basketball iq and not enough physical talent to overcome that.

And how about QMiller?

can't remember ever having watched him play.

4.) Have the Nuggets not gone from being one the tallest - and longest - teams to one of the shorter ones?

just in the backcourt. they still have a C rotation with two 7 footers. a PF rotation that's around the league average. and a SF rotation that's quite tall/strong. if fournier or hamilton earn the starting sg spot, then they're not really that undersized from last year.

plus the counter point is that by becoming a bit shorter they've theoretically gone from one of the worst and more reluctant 3 point shooting teams in the league to one of the best. with two super-fast PGs and some bigs that can finish well but don't have go-to individual post moves its imperative to spread the court and give those guards room to operate out of p&r sets with legitimate threats on kickouts/swings.

ujirifan wrote:As of this moment, everything I've read indicates that Foye is expected to be the starting SG and I believe that rookie head coach Shaw will be looking to go with experience there.

don't be so sure. kroenke/connelly went into this year thinking it may be a slight step back to build for the future. shaw said in opening presser he's more than willing to play younger guys and let them work through mistakes with an eye towards the future. it was pretty obvious to me in the final month of the season that fournier has all the tools to be a good nba player, and better than randy foye....we'll see if he can build on that.

It also makes the PF logjam even more untenable with Mozgov likely to get most of the center minutes not used by McGee and Hickson having to share the PF spot with Faried, Arthur and Randolph.

i've said this like 6 times but it still keeps coming up for some reason...

randolph is a super-insurance big. arthur is a bench warmer at this point.
they're just not that good, and that's okay.

mcgee/moz will get majority of C minutes with hickson filling in as well. hickson/faried will get most PF minutes.

ujirifan wrote:Taking a 57 win team with - minus Andre Miller - THE YOUNGEST roster in the NBA, firing the coach, letting the GM, WHO WAS STILL UNDER CONTRACT, - allegedly because they were such good buddies he wouldn't stand in Ujiri's way rather than because he wanted unfettered control of all basketball decisions - leave and being well on his way to a major demolition of the roster.

Yeah. That's shows patience. Sorry, but that simply shows his arrogance.

-karl was a playoff failure year after year, he once again proved his style does not win in 7 game series. if he hadn't been fired he would have been a lame duck coach without a 2014-2015 contract and no legitimacy to a young team. if he had been given an extension it would have been a far bigger mistake going forward.

-"demolition of the roster" includes losing iguodala to golden state despite offering him more money per year, and more years. what was he supposed to do? what could masai have done? if you want to go play for another team for religious reasons and leave lots of money on the table....there's not much that could have been done. maybe trade mcgee for the pope? btw, karl's pretty liberal and anti-typical-religion....keeping him wouldn't have made iguodala stay.

the other demolition of the roster you're referring to includes trading koufos for arthur. koufos isn't that good, for one...that's why the best return was darrell arthur, that's why he disappeared in the playoffs. would have probably been a bench player this year with mcgees natural progression to a starting position. and is replaced by an equally good player in mozgov. look back to the start of 2012-2013 season....and the arguments were about who would receive more PT, moz or koufos. i think koufos won it over moz by a bit, partly because he wasn't hurt....and once karl is in a regular season groove he doesn't like to change, at all. all other reports are that he's an extremely hard worker and was great in practice.

so the 'demolition' is blown way out of proportion.

and by the way....we signed guys that fill this teams biggest weaknesses, all on very reasonable contracts.
a couple 40% three point shooters and 80% free throw shooters
and a guy with a faceup post game who can score well in the paint and is a terrific defensive rebounder

As for your list of potential trade targets, I'd say that the first three, Granger, Gay and Gasol -the 3 Gs? - would actually be appropriate for the way in which he has so far this off season, been downgrading the team.

Why in the world, with Gallo and Chandler, do you think Granger is any real upgrade? Gasol MAY have a decent year or two left but wouldn't do all that much to make the Nugz a real title contender. And just how happy - and successful - were the Grizz with Prince at SF instead of Gay?. Answer. VERY.

agreed. don't like any of those names listed.

Kroenke's patience was proven with the Melo trade. Most teams who trade their star player don't get better. He rejected a ton of trades and then made one of the best trades in franchise history.

Karl had to go. Losing in the first round 8 of 9 times with a 21-39 playoff record... Keeping him around even that long is proving how patient he was with George.

I still have a feeling the nuggets are going to get a star who will be on the market this season. As much as they filled some needs, our roster seems a bit odd. 4 natural PGs and 3 natural PFs, it should be interesting.

Working out the Iguodala S&T to get the 10 Mil. Trade Exception/abnormal log jam at PG/PF is a tell of something to come in the next year w/ Faried being the most expendable of our best players.