PF targets

[A_dub06]

I agree.
I feel like the same argument was professed throughout last season; you need 4-5 shooters on the floor at all times, otherwise, NBA offense just doesn't work. I just don't buy that. Sure, more high-percentage shooting helps, but so does good defense, rebounding, free-throw attempts and percentage, roster depth, and the list goes on and on. The team that shot the better 3pt% on equal volume in any given NBA game doesn't necessarily win.

There definitely needs to be a balance between offence and defence but look at this list for 3pt % of the top 15 teams in order (team rankings.com):

MIL
ClE
PHO
MIN
IND
LAC
DEN
BOS
MIA
CHI
MEM
NYK
LAL
OKC
DAL

Then look at the top 15 scoring teams in order:

CLE
MEM
OKC
DEN
ATL
CHI
IND
SAC
BOS
MIL
DET
NYK
DAL
SAN
PHO

And now top 15 scoring efficiency:

CLE
BOS
OKC
DEN
NYK
SAC
MEM
PHO
IND
MIN
MIL
LAL
LAC
DAL
HOU

Looking at these 3 lists you can see many of the teams fall on the same list, and it’s easy to deduce that spacing allows for greater efficiency and thus a better chance at scoring points leading to a higher score. Better 3pt shooting is a very large component to unlocking a better offence and all the teams in the playoffs made at least one of these lists. Sure you need defence to win games too but people freak out about the idea of trading Thompson, which realistically if you can make a trade that’s a net benefit like trading for Murphy you do it.

It's a little misleading posting rankings without percentages. #1 team in 3% efficency got bounced in the first round while #14 won the championship. OKC's big 3 weren't exactly out there shooting it like they were prime Curry and Thompson.

And that’s why I posted the top 15 so it was half the league which makes it less so. I never said it was ONLY 3pt % you needed, in fact I even highlighted that you need more than that but 3pt % will make it easier to score efficiently. Obviously there are stars in the league that don’t shoot well from 3 but do their damage from midrange or at the rim, but having the high 3pt 3% makes it much easier for them to do so.

The fact remains is that all the best teams have two way players, they don’t have a literal zero on offence but good defensive players in positions 1-4 since it’s likely you’re Center isn’t giving you spacing but that’s ok because not many centers do. That’s why I’m all in for Murphy since he is a really good two-way player which is a net positive for us

[DetroitSho]

Not all 5 positions need to have elite shooters at those positions. As long as Cade, Ivey, Levert, Sasser and Duncan there will be plenty of 3's being shot.

I agree.
I feel like the same argument was professed throughout last season; you need 4-5 shooters on the floor at all times, otherwise, NBA offense just doesn't work. I just don't buy that. Sure, more high-percentage shooting helps, but so does good defense, rebounding, free-throw attempts and percentage, roster depth, and the list goes on and on. The team that shot the better 3pt% on equal volume in any given NBA game doesn't necessarily win.

There definitely needs to be a balance between offence and defence but look at this list for 3pt % of the top 15 teams in order (team rankings.com):

MIL
ClE
PHO
MIN
IND
LAC
DEN
BOS
MIA
CHI
MEM
NYK
LAL
OKC
DAL

Then look at the top 15 scoring teams in order:

CLE
MEM
OKC
DEN
ATL
CHI
IND
SAC
BOS
MIL
DET
NYK
DAL
SAN
PHO

And now top 15 scoring efficiency:

CLE
BOS
OKC
DEN
NYK
SAC
MEM
PHO
IND
MIN
MIL
LAL
LAC
DAL
HOU

Looking at these 3 lists you can see many of the teams fall on the same list, and it’s easy to deduce that spacing allows for greater efficiency and thus a better chance at scoring points leading to a higher score. Better 3pt shooting is a very large component to unlocking a better offence and all the teams in the playoffs made at least one of these lists. Sure you need defence to win games too but people freak out about the idea of trading Thompson, which realistically if you can make a trade that’s a net benefit like trading for Murphy you do it.

Maybe it's me, but I kinda feel like this list hurts your argument more than it helps.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[A_dub06]

I agree.
I feel like the same argument was professed throughout last season; you need 4-5 shooters on the floor at all times, otherwise, NBA offense just doesn't work. I just don't buy that. Sure, more high-percentage shooting helps, but so does good defense, rebounding, free-throw attempts and percentage, roster depth, and the list goes on and on. The team that shot the better 3pt% on equal volume in any given NBA game doesn't necessarily win.

There definitely needs to be a balance between offence and defence but look at this list for 3pt % of the top 15 teams in order (team rankings.com):

MIL
ClE
PHO
MIN
IND
LAC
DEN
BOS
MIA
CHI
MEM
NYK
LAL
OKC
DAL

Then look at the top 15 scoring teams in order:

CLE
MEM
OKC
DEN
ATL
CHI
IND
SAC
BOS
MIL
DET
NYK
DAL
SAN
PHO

And now top 15 scoring efficiency:

CLE
BOS
OKC
DEN
NYK
SAC
MEM
PHO
IND
MIN
MIL
LAL
LAC
DAL
HOU

Looking at these 3 lists you can see many of the teams fall on the same list, and it’s easy to deduce that spacing allows for greater efficiency and thus a better chance at scoring points leading to a higher score. Better 3pt shooting is a very large component to unlocking a better offence and all the teams in the playoffs made at least one of these lists. Sure you need defence to win games too but people freak out about the idea of trading Thompson, which realistically if you can make a trade that’s a net benefit like trading for Murphy you do it.

Maybe it's me, but I kinda feel like this list hurts your argument more than it helps.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

Not sure how you come to that conclusion looking at the same lists. There’s only a couple playoff teams missing from each list, and it’s core going back to the very first comment I made was that we should be prioritising Murphy who is a two-way wing over Thompson to have better 3pt shooting and spacing

[Crymson]

I think a Prime Ausar is going to be a top 40 player in the league, I think Ron Holland has as much potential offensively as Ivey and a very high upside defensively.

Both need to shoot.

Duran if Healthy will become arguably a top ten center here over the next five years just out of his current abilities and gaining experience.

Duren might be on his way out of the league in five years if all he's got is his current abilities and more experience. He needs to take a huge leap on defense to come anywhere near the top ten, and he's gone nowhere on that count since his rookie season.

[kierkegaard]

It took DeMar DeRozan 5 years to shoot >=30% on 3's. 1st year: 25%. 2nd year 9.6%. DeRozan was drafted as an athletic, high flying dunker.

While fairly solid near the end of his (long) career, LaMarcus Aldridge shot 3's at a >=30% clip only twice in his first 9 years. As I recall, Aldridge was drafted as an athletic shot blocker and dunker.

Thompson may end up not improving with time. His shot certainly looks broken except when he doesn't have time to think, like on those high elevation jumpers in the paint. His FT's and 3's look quite broken.

But I'm of the view that we should be patient and think the same of Duren. Duren's FT's look too solid to think he doesn't have midrange jumper potential. He just hasn't been asked (or allowed) to take them so far. He never looks for it and yet is very solid at the FT line. That tells me he's not been allowed.

[A_dub06]

It took DeMar DeRozan 5 years to shoot >=30% on 3's. 1st year: 25%. 2nd year 9.6%. DeRozan was drafted as an athletic, high flying dunker.

While fairly solid near the end of his (long) career, LaMarcus Aldridge shot 3's at a >=30% clip only twice in his first 9 years. As I recall, Aldridge was drafted as an athletic shot blocker and dunker.

Thompson may end up not improving with time. His shot certainly looks broken except when he doesn't have time to think, like on those high elevation jumpers in the paint. His FT's and 3's look quite broken.

But I'm of the view that we should be patient and think the same of Duren. Duren's FT's look too solid to think he doesn't have midrange jumper potential. He just has been asked (or allowed) to take them so far. He never looks for it and yet is very solid at the FT line. That tells me he's not been allowed.

You’re leaving out the fact he was also a solid FT and midrange shooter which is easier to build from than not being able to shoot anywhere on the court. Thompsons shot is completely broken and can’t remotely shoot from anywhere.

And in the case of duren he needs to either develop a shot or he needs to become a good defender. He lacks instincts, IQ, awareness not shown glimpses of putting it together. Athletic rebounding dunkers are not in high demand. I’m completely fine waiting to see if Thompson develops unless a home run trade surfaces but Duren should be traded before his value plummets and the league see exactly what he is

[Crymson]

But I'm of the view that we should be patient and think the same of Duren. Duren's FT's look too solid to think he doesn't have midrange jumper potential. He just has been asked (or allowed) to take them so far. He never looks for it and yet is very solid at the FT line. That tells me he's not been allowed.

How many centers do you figure attempt a significant amount of midrange offense? And how many of those do you figure are efficient at it?

The answer in this past season was few to the first and none to the second. It's not only that it's an inefficient shot -- only the guys with offensive leeway really attempt them -- but also that there's a steep opportunity cost to having the center take that sort of bad shot rather than have him around the basket to either finish an immensely higher-percentage opportunity instead, clear out space for teammates, or grab offensive rebounds. So if he hasn't been allowed, it's for good reason.

67% is nothing special in any case -- there are plenty of guys at every position who equal or better that and will never be efficient midrange shooters -- and FT shooting is an applicable indicator only to guys who have an actual history as shooters (and it's by no means perfect even then).

[kierkegaard]

It took DeMar DeRozan 5 years to shoot >=30% on 3's. 1st year: 25%. 2nd year 9.6%. DeRozan was drafted as an athletic, high flying dunker.

While fairly solid near the end of his (long) career, LaMarcus Aldridge shot 3's at a >=30% clip only twice in his first 9 years. As I recall, Aldridge was drafted as an athletic shot blocker and dunker.

Thompson may end up not improving with time. His shot certainly looks broken except when he doesn't have time to think, like on those high elevation jumpers in the paint. His FT's and 3's look quite broken.

But I'm of the view that we should be patient and think the same of Duren. Duren's FT's look too solid to think he doesn't have midrange jumper potential. He just has been asked (or allowed) to take them so far. He never looks for it and yet is very solid at the FT line. That tells me he's not been allowed.

You’re leaving out the fact he was also a solid FT and midrange shooter which is easier to build from than not being able to shoot anywhere on the court. Thompsons shot is completely broken and can’t remotely shoot from anywhere.

And in the case of duren he needs to either develop a shot or he needs to become a good defender. He lacks instincts, IQ, awareness not shown glimpses of putting it together. Athletic rebounding dunkers are not in high demand. I’m completely fine waiting to see if Thompson develops unless a home run trade surfaces but Duren should be traded before his value plummets and the league see exactly what he is

What gives me pause (and hope) re Thompson is simply those jumpers in the paint. They're actually quite graceful and beautiful at times (I know, small sample size), which in my view can't be a fluke. You don't display that form on some shots but not others for no reason. So my best hypothesis is that the core issue for Thompson is mental; he shoots poorly when he has a split second or more to think. Yet the mental aspect is a very real part of performance and is self-reinforcing over time. So if he is never able to overcome that, assuming my hypothesis correct, he'll never become a respectable shooter.

[SuperBad]

He’s 22, so five years from now he’ll be 27 in his prime, about 5 of centers above him will be out of the league or the end of there career. Maybe 5 quality ones come in the draft around the same level. He will still above those guys at that point.

[Piston Pete]

I would gladly trade Sasser to the Bucks for PF Tyler Smith.

Bucks need PG depth and Smith is a skilled PF prospect

[blog_pistons]

The Bucks are over the luxury tax threshold with this trade (sasser x tyelr) and the incoming aggregate salaries exceeded what´s allowed via the 125% plus 100.000$ rule. You should cut 375000$ from the Bucks incoming trade value to make this trade succesful.

[Piston Pete]

The Bucks are over the luxury tax threshold with this trade (sasser x tyelr) and the incoming aggregate salaries exceeded what´s allowed via the 125% plus 100.000$ rule. You should cut 375000$ from the Bucks incoming trade value to make this trade succesful.

Easy, just allow the Bucks to add a contract to the deal and include a 2nd rounder.

Sasser for Smith+salary filler+2nd

[MortSahlfan]

Ausar has a great FT line fade-away jumper. He shoots a great % after turning down a 3 (good thing). He just needs more minutes. He also helped Cade bringing the ball up toward the end of the season.

[MotownMadness]

I would try to sign Boucher to a vet min if all else fails. He’s actually got some pretty decent stats for limited mins and limited mins is what he would get.

[Piston Pete]

One perk of trading for a young guy like Tyler Smith is he can sit behind Tobias for a couple years and has the chance of developing into our PFOTF.

Signing vet guys like Boucher is more of a temporary band aid move

[Crymson]

I would try to sign Boucher to a vet min if all else fails. He’s actually got some pretty decent stats for limited mins and limited mins is what he would get.

If I were him, I'd go to the team that can offer me the biggest role and the best opportunity to rebuild my value.

[Canadafan]

Read on Twitter

?t=23EsSqhlaL31CRXmO9r4TQ&s=19

Maybe we were one of the teams

[GreekAlex]

I would try to sign Boucher to a vet min if all else fails. He’s actually got some pretty decent stats for limited mins and limited mins is what he would get.

If I were him, I'd go to the team that can offer me the biggest role and the best opportunity to rebuild my value.

He’s 32 and probably needs a paycheck.

I don’t see a team that stands out with big PF minutes available.

I can’t imagine that he’d turn down a guaranteed offer at this point.

[chrbal]

I would try to sign Boucher to a vet min if all else fails. He’s actually got some pretty decent stats for limited mins and limited mins is what he would get.

If I were him, I'd go to the team that can offer me the biggest role and the best opportunity to rebuild my value.

He plays about 16 minutes a game, I kind of feel like Detroit is one of the best situations for him.

[DetroitSho]

I would try to sign Boucher to a vet min if all else fails. He’s actually got some pretty decent stats for limited mins and limited mins is what he would get.

If I were him, I'd go to the team that can offer me the biggest role and the best opportunity to rebuild my value.

He’s 32 and probably needs a paycheck.

I don’t see a team that stands out with big PF minutes available.

I can’t imagine that he’d turn down a guaranteed offer at this point.

32? Damn I thought homie was mid 20s. Yeah he better gone and get what he can get at this point.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app