Can Blake Griifin Be an NBA Small Forward?

[deeney0]

Love is probably the one to keep - he compliments Griffin or Jefferson, who duplicate each other quite a bit.

[Biff Cooper]

This is asinine. So we post one player up and put two in the high post? Have you ever played a pick up game with all post players? It's a clusterf*%k man. Not too mention a 3-4-5 of Griffin/Love/Jefferson is still below the average height of most NBA front courts. We should just trade Love. Fans shouldn't treat our draftees like they're v-card taking girlfriends.

Here's more of what I was thinking. If a team runs their normal lineup out there, either Griffin or Love will be guarded by a SF. If a team puts a backup PF or backup C our there, either Griffin or Love will be guarded by a backup. Either way someone is always going to have a favorable matchup. One of our bigs will have to iso themselves out of the middle and we high-low attack the favorable matchup. Love's offensive game probably won't be developed enough next year to take advantage of him getting a bad matchup, but it already is developed enough for him to kill a bad matchup on the offensive glass. When Love gets the bad matchup, either the guards get to shoot or Jefferson/Griffin get to post up a less favorable matchup with Love hammering the boards.

I'm also not against trading one of them, but I disagree that having Jefferson, Griffin, Love out there simultaneously couldn't strengthen our strengths.

[Worm Guts]

This is asinine. So we post one player up and put two in the high post? Have you ever played a pick up game with all post players? It's a clusterf*%k man. Not too mention a 3-4-5 of Griffin/Love/Jefferson is still below the average height of most NBA front courts. We should just trade Love. Fans shouldn't treat our draftees like they're v-card taking girlfriends.

Here's more of what I was thinking. If a team runs their normal lineup out there, either Griffin or Love will be guarded by a SF. If a team puts a backup PF or backup C our there, either Griffin or Love will be guarded by a backup. Either way someone is always going to have a favorable matchup. One of our bigs will have to iso themselves out of the middle and we high-low attack the favorable matchup. Love's offensive game probably won't be developed enough next year to take advantage of him getting a bad matchup, but it already is developed enough for him to kill a bad matchup on the offensive glass. When Love gets the bad matchup, either the guards get to shoot or Jefferson/Griffin get to post up a less favorable matchup with Love hammering the boards.

I'm also not against trading one of them, but I disagree that having Jefferson, Griffin, Love out there simultaneously couldn't strengthen our strengths.

Matchup's wouldn't mean much, since the opposing team would just zone up and clog the middle. None of Griffin, Love, or Jefferson are good enough jump shooters to draw the defense outside.

[Krapinsky]

This is asinine. So we post one player up and put two in the high post? Have you ever played a pick up game with all post players? It's a clusterf*%k man. Not too mention a 3-4-5 of Griffin/Love/Jefferson is still below the average height of most NBA front courts. We should just trade Love. Fans shouldn't treat our draftees like they're v-card taking girlfriends.

Here's more of what I was thinking. If a team runs their normal lineup out there, either Griffin or Love will be guarded by a SF. If a team puts a backup PF or backup C our there, either Griffin or Love will be guarded by a backup. Either way someone is always going to have a favorable matchup. One of our bigs will have to iso themselves out of the middle and we high-low attack the favorable matchup. Love's offensive game probably won't be developed enough next year to take advantage of him getting a bad matchup, but it already is developed enough for him to kill a bad matchup on the offensive glass. When Love gets the bad matchup, either the guards get to shoot or Jefferson/Griffin get to post up a less favorable matchup with Love hammering the boards.

I'm also not against trading one of them, but I disagree that having Jefferson, Griffin, Love out there simultaneously couldn't strengthen our strengths.

Matchup's wouldn't mean much, since the opposing team would just zone up and clog the middle. None of Griffin, Love, or Jefferson are good enough jump shooters to draw the defense outside.

EXACTLY.

[Biff Cooper]

As I was writing my last post, I figured somebody mentioning zone defense would be coming shortly. I don't have an especially intellible answer for this one, so I left it out of my last post. However, everyone knows that it is much tougher to defensive rebound out of a zone and all three of them are good to great offensive rebounders. Maybe the solution is as simple as having Bassy / other break down the defense and toss up shots at a 35% clip with some combination of Love, Jefferson, and Griffin crashing the offensive glass, and some combination getting back on defense. As simple as this offense sounds I could see it scoring on 50% of our possessions.

[john2jer]

BRILLIANT!

Draft:
1st Round
1 - Blake Griffin
17 - Stephen Curry
27 - DaJuan Summers

2nd Round
Jodie Meeks

Trade:
Wolves give: Brian Cardinal, Craig Smith, Corey Brewer, Mark Madsen
Wolves get: Raja Bell, Kirk Hinrich, future 1st

5 - Jefferson/Gomes
4 - Love/Summers
3 - Griffin/Miller
2 - Foye/Meeks
1 - Hinrich/Curry

Then we just go with the lane triangle offense of either two low posts and a high post or two high posts and a low post, then just run out some combination of Foye, Hinrich, Curry, Meeks, Miller, and Gomes/Summers when one of the big 3 sit, to chuck up 3 pointers all game long. They're all around 40% shooters, plus every offensive rebound would be ours. Figure the Wolves currently shoot 3 free throws for every 10 shots they take, since we're shooting more threes in the offense, let's drop it to 25%.

I have no clue how I got to this number, but I guarantee you my math is accurate, in this offense we'd score 117pts/game. That's 1st in the league. And since we concentrated on guards who can shoot the 3 and play solid defense, we'd hold teams to under 100. This is revolutionary stuff! We've changed the game of basketball.

[Biff Cooper]

BRILLIANT!

Draft:
1st Round
1 - Blake Griffin
17 - Stephen Curry
27 - DaJuan Summers

2nd Round
Jodie Meeks

Trade:
Wolves give: Brian Cardinal, Craig Smith, Corey Brewer, Mark Madsen
Wolves get: Raja Bell, Kirk Hinrich, future 1st

5 - Jefferson/Gomes
4 - Love/Summers
3 - Griffin/Miller
2 - Foye/Meeks
1 - Hinrich/Curry

Then we just go with the lane triangle offense of either two low posts and a high post or two high posts and a low post, then just run out some combination of Foye, Hinrich, Curry, Meeks, Miller, and Gomes/Summers when one of the big 3 sit, to chuck up 3 pointers all game long. They're all around 40% shooters, plus every offensive rebound would be ours. Figure the Wolves currently shoot 3 free throws for every 10 shots they take, since we're shooting more threes in the offense, let's drop it to 25%.

I have no clue how I got to this number, but I guarantee you my math is accurate, in this offense we'd score 117pts/game. That's 1st in the league. And since we concentrated on guards who can shoot the 3 and play solid defense, we'd hold teams to under 100. This is revolutionary stuff! We've changed the game of basketball.

Lets take this game into the 21st century!! We could be the leaders of the new revolution.
I think you forgot to carry the zero. It's really 142 pts/game if we get every rebound. 127 if we only get 85% of the rebounds which is more realistic.

[Jonathan Watters]

The answer is that there is absolutely no chance of Blake Griffin ever being a small forward. Right now he can't shoot, and he turns the ball over like its on fire. Even without those two issues, it would be taking him away from all the things he does well. Not ever gonna happen. Ever.

[john2jer]

The answer is that there is absolutely no chance of Blake Griffin ever being a small forward. Right now he can't shoot, and he turns the ball over like its on fire. Even without those two issues, it would be taking him away from all the things he does well. Not ever gonna happen. Ever.

Here you go again. Griffin's your boy!!!

Also, you're such a fun-hater.

[Krapinsky]

BRILLIANT!

Draft:
1st Round
1 - Blake Griffin
17 - Stephen Curry
27 - DaJuan Summers

2nd Round
Jodie Meeks

Trade:
Wolves give: Brian Cardinal, Craig Smith, Corey Brewer, Mark Madsen
Wolves get: Raja Bell, Kirk Hinrich, future 1st

5 - Jefferson/Gomes
4 - Love/Summers
3 - Griffin/Miller
2 - Foye/Meeks
1 - Hinrich/Curry

Then we just go with the lane triangle offense of either two low posts and a high post or two high posts and a low post, then just run out some combination of Foye, Hinrich, Curry, Meeks, Miller, and Gomes/Summers when one of the big 3 sit, to chuck up 3 pointers all game long. They're all around 40% shooters, plus every offensive rebound would be ours. Figure the Wolves currently shoot 3 free throws for every 10 shots they take, since we're shooting more threes in the offense, let's drop it to 25%.

I have no clue how I got to this number, but I guarantee you my math is accurate, in this offense we'd score 117pts/game. That's 1st in the league. And since we concentrated on guards who can shoot the 3 and play solid defense, we'd hold teams to under 100. This is revolutionary stuff! We've changed the game of basketball.

Lets take this game into the 21st century!! We could be the leaders of the new revolution.
I think you forgot to carry the zero. It's really 142 pts/game if we get every rebound. 127 if we only get 85% of the rebounds which is more realistic.

Here's the real question-- Can Griffin play SG? And if so, can Blair play SF? I already know Smith has "point foraward skills" as someone on here pointed out, so we already got our point guard.

Smith
Griffin
Blair
Love
Jefferson

How many points per game there?

[john2jer]

Here's the real question-- Can Griffin play SG? And if so, can Blair play SF? I already know Smith has "point foraward skills" as someone on here pointed out, so we already got our point guard.

Smith
Griffin
Blair
Love
Jefferson

How many points per game there?

You mock me, by I actually got a pencil, paper, and a calulator and I figured that stuff out. I got to use some algebra. I figured the average number of posessions the Wolves get per game, figured in 40% from 3, figured we'd get the offensive rebounds due to Love, Jefferson, Griffin, and Miller, then figured in FTs per FGA, and reduced that by 20% due to the increase of threes. My number might actually be low.

But to answer your question, we have a boat load of guys who can rebound, none can shoot from the outside, but Love, Smith, and Griffin can put it on the floor and drive, but only Love can pass. So I think you can easily just take my number divide by (3*.40) and multiply by (2*.55) and get 107pts a game. That's like 3rd in the league, right? Very respectable. I like it. Unfortunately our perimeter defense takes a hit, unlike in my scenario.

[Krapinsky]

Here's the real question-- Can Griffin play SG? And if so, can Blair play SF? I already know Smith has "point foraward skills" as someone on here pointed out, so we already got our point guard.

Smith
Griffin
Blair
Love
Jefferson

How many points per game there?

You mock me, by I actually got a pencil, paper, and a calulator and I figured that stuff out. I got to use some algebra. I figured the average number of posessions the Wolves get per game, figured in 40% from 3, figured we'd get the offensive rebounds due to Love, Jefferson, Griffin, and Miller, then figured in FTs per FGA, and reduced that by 20% due to the increase of threes. My number might actually be low.

But to answer your question, we have a boat load of guys who can rebound, none can shoot from the outside, but Love, Smith, and Griffin can put it on the floor and drive, but only Love can pass. So I think you can easily just take my number divide by (3*.40) and multiply by (2*.55) and get 107pts a game. That's like 3rd in the league, right? Very respectable. I like it. Unfortunately our perimeter defense takes a hit, unlike in my scenario.

The Dr. says that sounds like some fuzzy math. Are you adjusting for pace?

[Devilzsidewalk]

if you ever want to play somebody out of position, its a position up for a speed advantage. Rarely are guys played down a position, because speed, or lack thereof, kills

its all about the speed

think about it, greatest movie ever? Speed. Greatest drug ever? Speed. Obstacle most critical to overcome for accomplishing meaningful interstellar travel? Speed.

[john2jer]

So was Speed 2 twice as good or squared as good?

Fuzzy math is what will get us out of this economy. Trust in it.