Jedzz wrote:TheZachAttack wrote:Jedzz wrote:
That's not in contention. I would agree. What is would be how a group of people studying analytics wouldn't foresee any issues caused by having all these guards that need minutes. A number of them might have problems playing less minutes or at least find it harder to play their best. Lot's of players have this issue not being warmed up in games, standing or sitting around waiting and then getting back in for a couple minutes here and there. Get the workout cycles on the bench and keep them ready! For me this hints at the possibility Rubio was unplanned and just happened to become available so they grabbed him. Possibly both for his talents and for his long held following since he left.
I don't think they have any issue with playing with tons of 6'4/6'5 players with 6'9+ wingspans on the floor.
Rubio is 6'4 with a 6'9 wingspan. D Lo is 6'5 with a 6'10 wingspan. Edwards is 6'6 with a 6'11 wingspan. Beasley is 6'5 with a 6'7 wingspan. Okogie is 6'4 with a 7 foot wingspan. Culver is 6'6 with a 6'10 wingspan. We've heard Ryan's comments about effective height and wanting to play Okogie at the 4. I don't think they have any problem with getting all of these guys minutes and switching up and down positions on defense. It's clear they target guys whose effective height is bigger than their measured height.
This isn't a bunch of Jordan McLaughlins. I do think it's likely, as Rosas has said he's not done...not even close, that either Culver or Okogie gets moved at some point but the minutes breakdown is an 100% non-issue to me.
For the underlined, this is probably my last post to you. You are right they aren't JMac.
Neither Okogie/Culver can be trusted to shoot and they sure don't finish as well as JMac so they are offensive liabilities. Neither of them are stopping great SG/SF/PF from dropping 30 pts on them, even if Okogie can get a good stop now and then. Culver isn't some great defender already like some want to claim. So you can take your size/length love and pitch it to track and field teams, not me. They both have so much to prove yet whereas someone little like JMac already proved game IQ so much higher that he disrupts just as many opponent possessions.
You think it's fine to give Culver and Okogie minutes at the 3 and 4 over someone like Laymam who actually does cause opponents to score less per possession. This will be a problem. Layman is a better player right now at the 3. He's going to be forced to backup 4 minutes? There is 100% going to be a numbers crunch. It will 100% impact a few of these players and keep them from being fully into some of these games. Only some of them will play their high level off the bench when they get their chances. That's just reality.
I think it's fine that they have depth and especially for this season. But how successful they are with it will be whether they play the right players enough. If they were to listen to some of you they would limit the peak of this team severely in my opinion. We aren't likely to agree on any of this. So let's leave it there.
This is fair and I agree on both points, though I would argue that Okogie (and likely Culver too) is less of a liability offensively at the 4--so if we're talking about maximizing assets, given those players limitations, playing the 4 would or should help them. I don't think there is a major difference between the 3 and the 4 in the Rosas system. On defense, no matter the 3 or the 4 they are going to be switching around the perimeter and on offense they will be operating from one of the corners. I don't really see a distinction and I'm not really sure why it matters if Layman is at the 3 or the 4.
In addition, I acknowledged that long-term there will be additional moves that take place. I personally don't see a role for Culver in this rotation, I would rather play Layman. The reason that I focused on size and length was because of your concern about guards playing on the floor together. The reason I mentioned McLaughlin is about size defensively. I am arguably the biggest J Mac proponent here (I think he's potentially a slightly worse version of Fred Van Fleet), but again my post was about size and playing multiple players together defensively. If Beasley, Edwards, Rubio, Culver, Okogie, etc. were all 5'11 or 6'0 and 170 pounds... it would be much more of a concern than it is now.
Again, I even agree that the roster additions this offseason push Culver out of the rotation, though they may play him early in the season to try and drive up his trade value, but the real reason Culver is pushed out of the rotation (and the Wolves added multiple guards/wings) is that Culver is not a good basketball player.
I'm not really concerned at all about the minutes breakdown. I mean here's just a quick example of something that I see as 100% reasonable roles given talent levels:
1: Rubio (30 minutes) - D Lo (18 minutes)
2: D Lo (14 minutes) - Beasley (18 minutes) - Edwards (16 minutes)
3: Beasley (12 minutes) - Edwards (9 minutes) - Okogie (12 minutes) - Culver (15 minutes)
4: Jauncho (20 minutes) - Layman (20 minutes) - Okogie (8 minutes)
5: Towns (34 minutes) - Davis (14 minutes)
Rotation:
Towns (34 minutes)
D Lo (32 minutes)
Rubio (30 minutes)
Beasley (30 minutes)
Edwards (25 minutes)
Jauncho (20 minutes)
Layman (20 minutes)
Okogie (20 minutes)
Culver (15 minutes)
Davis (14 minutes)
Now would I much rather have Culver's minutes be Jmac? 100/10 times. Do rotation moves to push Culver out of rotation matter to me. Not at all. Ideally, Jauncho/Layman/Okogie/Edwards get Culver's 15 minutes at some point down the line.
