RealGM

To think we got him for KBD. Nothing against Keita but we won that trade.

winforlose wrote:To think we got him for KBD. Nothing against Keita but we won that trade.

That's definitely part of it. It was mostly Denver trading 3 guys they weren't going to resign for a 1st round pick:

Nuggets have traded Malik Beasley, Juancho Hernangomez, and Jarred Vanderbilt to the Minnesota Timberwolves in exchange for Gerald Green and the Rockets first-round pick along with Keita Bates-Diop, Shabazz Napier, and Noah Vonleh.

BlacJacMac wrote:

winforlose wrote:To think we got him for KBD. Nothing against Keita but we won that trade.

That's definitely part of it. It was mostly Denver trading 3 guys they weren't going to resign for a 1st round pick:

Nuggets have traded Malik Beasley, Juancho Hernangomez, and Jarred Vanderbilt to the Minnesota Timberwolves in exchange for Gerald Green and the Rockets first-round pick along with Keita Bates-Diop, Shabazz Napier, and Noah Vonleh.

Funny story, during the time of the trade it came out that neither Vando nor KBD were part of the discussions. It was a side deal that got thrown in. My understanding is that every other piece of the deal was agreed to and the trade was basically done when Rosas talked them into adding the 2nd round player for 2nd round player.

Is Vanderbilt as bad as his +/- says he is? My eye test says no, but I must be missing something.

Layman is the only player with a worse +/- (Layman has only played 5 minutes total) and none of the other regulars are even close to as bad as Vandy's +/-.

Solves? No. Best option we have currently? Probably.

fattymcgee wrote:Is Vanderbilt as bad as his +/- says he is? My eye test says no, but I must be missing something.

Layman is the only player with a worse +/- (Layman has only played 5 minutes total) and none of the other regulars are even close to as bad as Vandy's +/-.

It's just a small sample size. Vandy didn't play much during the first three victories of the season.

But maybe there is something to the fact that starting him and McDaniels together is killing our offense.

I absolutely love what Vando brings to this team. The OP hit the nail on the head - Vando solves our biggest problem. We have enough shooting on the roster that we can surround Vando with 4 capable shooters and still have adequate spacing.

Also, just a friendly reminder that Vando is a freak athlete. Have you noticed how often he's out leaping guys for rebounds? At the pre-draft combine, he measured 12 feet, 1.5 inches max vertical reach (vertical + standing reach). Basically this means if you give him a few steps, he can touch a spot 2 feet and 1.5 inches above the rim. That's crazy. For reference, anything over 12 feet is elite. Pair that with his never ending motor, and you have a special player. He's also averaging 3.7 stocks per game when prorating his playing time over 36 min.

TheProdigy wrote:I absolutely love what Vando brings to this team. The OP hit the nail on the head - Vando solves our biggest problem. We have enough shooting on the roster that we can surround Vando with 4 capable shooters and still have adequate spacing.

Also, just a friendly reminder that Vando is a freak athlete. Have you noticed how often he's out leaping guys for rebounds? At the pre-draft combine, he measured 12 feet, 1.5 inches max vertical reach (vertical + standing reach). Basically this means if you give him a few steps, he can touch a spot 2 feet and 1.5 inches above the rim. That's crazy. For reference, anything over 12 feet is elite. Pair that with his never ending motor, and you have a special player. He's also averaging 3.7 stocks per game when prorating his playing time over 36 min.

I agree with 90% of what you said, but the other 10 is problematic. The problem with Vando is that he is a compete non threat from outside the paint. Opposing centers are assigned Vando and guard the lane. This takes away the drive from Ant and Dlo. Four shooters is not enough to entirely fix it. The solution is for Vando to develop a mid range jumper and a corner 3. I know he is working on both, but we really need to see it. Beyond that he is a total bada** this season. He is single handily putting us top of the league in offensive rebounds and keeping us from historic lows in defensive rebounds. I cannot say enough good about him except in the above area where I am deeply concerned.

winforlose wrote:

TheProdigy wrote:I absolutely love what Vando brings to this team. The OP hit the nail on the head - Vando solves our biggest problem. We have enough shooting on the roster that we can surround Vando with 4 capable shooters and still have adequate spacing.

Also, just a friendly reminder that Vando is a freak athlete. Have you noticed how often he's out leaping guys for rebounds? At the pre-draft combine, he measured 12 feet, 1.5 inches max vertical reach (vertical + standing reach). Basically this means if you give him a few steps, he can touch a spot 2 feet and 1.5 inches above the rim. That's crazy. For reference, anything over 12 feet is elite. Pair that with his never ending motor, and you have a special player. He's also averaging 3.7 stocks per game when prorating his playing time over 36 min.

I agree with 90% of what you said, but the other 10 is problematic. The problem with Vando is that he is a compete non threat from outside the paint. Opposing centers are assigned Vando and guard the lane. This takes away the drive from Ant and Dlo. Four shooters is not enough to entirely fix it. The solution is for Vando to develop a mid range jumper and a corner 3. I know he is working on both, but we really need to see it. Beyond that he is a total bada** this season. He is single handily putting us top of the league in offensive rebounds and keeping us from historic lows in defensive rebounds. I cannot say enough good about him except in the above area where I am deeply concerned.

Don't get me wrong, I recognize the holes in his game. If Vando were a good shooter, he would be a unicorn type player that would get closer to $30M per year compared to the $4.5M we're currently paying him. Guys with elite rebounding + elite switchability + perimeter shooting simply don't exist. You will find guys that offer 2 out of 3, but not all 3 traits.

Vando's lack of shooting does present some issues on offense, but it's somewhat covered up by the rest of our roster construction. I would be much more concerned if we had other guys in the rotation who couldn't shoot (i.e. Okogie). Having 2 players in the game clogging the lane is a major problem, but having 1 guy who can't shoot isn't the end of the world. Especially when that guy is adding so much value rebounding and on defense. Did you notice that Vando was our primary defender on Butler last night?

Plus, like you said Vando is working on his jump shot. He's still only 22 years old and he's shooting 85% from the free throw line so far this year. It's a small sample size but it could bode well for the future.

TheProdigy wrote:

winforlose wrote:

TheProdigy wrote:I absolutely love what Vando brings to this team. The OP hit the nail on the head - Vando solves our biggest problem. We have enough shooting on the roster that we can surround Vando with 4 capable shooters and still have adequate spacing.

Also, just a friendly reminder that Vando is a freak athlete. Have you noticed how often he's out leaping guys for rebounds? At the pre-draft combine, he measured 12 feet, 1.5 inches max vertical reach (vertical + standing reach). Basically this means if you give him a few steps, he can touch a spot 2 feet and 1.5 inches above the rim. That's crazy. For reference, anything over 12 feet is elite. Pair that with his never ending motor, and you have a special player. He's also averaging 3.7 stocks per game when prorating his playing time over 36 min.

I agree with 90% of what you said, but the other 10 is problematic. The problem with Vando is that he is a compete non threat from outside the paint. Opposing centers are assigned Vando and guard the lane. This takes away the drive from Ant and Dlo. Four shooters is not enough to entirely fix it. The solution is for Vando to develop a mid range jumper and a corner 3. I know he is working on both, but we really need to see it. Beyond that he is a total bada** this season. He is single handily putting us top of the league in offensive rebounds and keeping us from historic lows in defensive rebounds. I cannot say enough good about him except in the above area where I am deeply concerned.

Don't get me wrong, I recognize the holes in his game. If Vando were a good shooter, he would be a unicorn type player that would get closer to $30M per year compared to the $4.5M we're currently paying him. Guys with elite rebounding + elite switchability + perimeter shooting simply don't exist. You will find guys that offer 2 out of 3, but not all 3 traits.

Vando's lack of shooting does present some issues on offense, but it's somewhat covered up by the rest of our roster construction. I would be much more concerned if we had other guys in the rotation who couldn't shoot (i.e. Okogie). Having 2 players in the game clogging the lane is a major problem, but having 1 guy who can't shoot isn't the end of the world. Especially when that guy is adding so much value rebounding and on defense. Did you notice that Vando was our primary defender on Butler last night?

Plus, like you said Vando is working on his jump shot. He's still only 22 years old and he's shooting 85% from the free throw line so far this year. It's a small sample size but it could bode well for the future.

I totally agree. The thing about a young team is they are all going to improve over time. Whereas a team like the Lakers are looking at decreased production as the vets get older and they don’t always want to change to make things work (they are more set in their ways and tied to their style.) I just wish Vando and Finch could come up with little things like off ball screens and cuts to make V8 a bit more dangerous in the short term and free the lane for Ant. The drive and kick Ant did was beautiful last night and we would see a lot more of it if V8 was just a bit a more of a threat.