RealGM

Probably time to open a new thread.

Anyway, want to trade for Ingram and offer Ingram the max? As our possible 2 guard

fendilim wrote:Probably time to open a new thread.

Anyway, want to trade for Ingram and offer Ingram the max? As our possible 2 guard

He's more of a PG than Suggs...but no, not for a max...maybe if he were a FA, but don't want to pay for the privilege of an overpay.

At this point I'm ready for the Finals to be over so I can watch WePark do the complete opposite of we've been arguing / discussing for the last couple of months.

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:Probably time to open a new thread.

Anyway, want to trade for Ingram and offer Ingram the max? As our possible 2 guard

He's more of a PG than Suggs...but no, not for a max...maybe if he were a FA, but don't want to pay for the privilege of an overpay.

Lol

fendilim wrote:

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:Probably time to open a new thread.

Anyway, want to trade for Ingram and offer Ingram the max? As our possible 2 guard

He's more of a PG than Suggs...but no, not for a max...maybe if he were a FA, but don't want to pay for the privilege of an overpay.

Lol

LOL? He’s much more proficient putting the ball on the floor and (wait for it)…more than TWICE the assists.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t trade Suggs straight up for him, but Ingram is much more of an offensive creator

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:

Skybox wrote:
He's more of a PG than Suggs...but no, not for a max...maybe if he were a FA, but don't want to pay for the privilege of an overpay.

Lol

LOL? He’s much more proficient putting the ball on the floor and (wait for it)…more than TWICE the assists.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t trade Suggs straight up for him, but Ingram is much more of an offensive creator

Ingram won’t play pg here. He’ll be more of sg.

If you mean run the offense, sure. But he won’t be the pg.

fendilim wrote:

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:Lol

LOL? He’s much more proficient putting the ball on the floor and (wait for it)…more than TWICE the assists.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t trade Suggs straight up for him, but Ingram is much more of an offensive creator

Ingram won’t play pg here. He’ll be more of sg.

If you mean run the offense, sure. But he won’t be the pg.

I really don’t care what you call them, but Suggs’ height doesn’t make him a PG. I wouldn’t sign Ingram for a max regardless

…it could work, but Ingram would be the primary ballhandler/initiator…that’s what he does

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:

Skybox wrote:
LOL? He’s much more proficient putting the ball on the floor and (wait for it)…more than TWICE the assists.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t trade Suggs straight up for him, but Ingram is much more of an offensive creator

Ingram won’t play pg here. He’ll be more of sg.

If you mean run the offense, sure. But he won’t be the pg.

I really don’t care what you call them, but Suggs’ height doesn’t make him a PG. I wouldn’t sign Ingram for a max regardless

…it could work, but Ingram would be the primary ballhandler/initiator…that’s what he does

you do realize that Ingram has lower ast% despite having higher usage at the same point in their career?

Suggs will get there. Suggs is a lot better playing the pg position. He doesn’t have to run the offense, just have to get a bigger guard to play make and pair with him at this point.

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:

Skybox wrote:
LOL? He’s much more proficient putting the ball on the floor and (wait for it)…more than TWICE the assists.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t trade Suggs straight up for him, but Ingram is much more of an offensive creator

Ingram won’t play pg here. He’ll be more of sg.

If you mean run the offense, sure. But he won’t be the pg.

I really don’t care what you call them, but Suggs’ height doesn’t make him a PG. I wouldn’t sign Ingram for a max regardless

…it could work, but Ingram would be the primary ballhandler/initiator…that’s what he does

People get role and position confused I think. Position tends to be determined based on your physical attributes and skills. Role, on the other hand, describes your responsibilities on the court. This is why the you are the position you can guard heuristic is so useful. Size and skill tends to determine who you can guard. Bigger guys defend bigger guys. Smaller guys defend smaller guys. Point guards tend to be the smaller guys.

eyriq wrote:

Skybox wrote:

fendilim wrote:Ingram won’t play pg here. He’ll be more of sg.

If you mean run the offense, sure. But he won’t be the pg.

I really don’t care what you call them, but Suggs’ height doesn’t make him a PG. I wouldn’t sign Ingram for a max regardless

…it could work, but Ingram would be the primary ballhandler/initiator…that’s what he does

People get role and position confused I think. Position tends to be determined based on your physical attributes and skills. Role, on the other hand, describes your responsibilities on the court. This is why the you are the position you can guard heuristic is so useful. Size and skill tends to determine who you can guard. Bigger guys defend bigger guys. Smaller guys defend smaller guys. Point guards tend to be the smaller guys.

Suggs is a hellacious defender and had a great year spotting up for 3’s. That’s not a PG…that’s a much better Gary Harris or a smaller OG Anunoby. He’s got terrible handles and can’t move through traffic to draw defenders to warp defenses. He’s got negligible assists. He can defend SGs or PGs easily. He gets the tougher guard assignment…he’s not really that small and he defends bigger.

PG is kind of an awkward term on this team anyway, with two forwards who, almost always, begin their offense on the perimeter, penetrate and either shoot or pass upon drawing defenders…that’s traditional PG behavior. We don’t need a real PG, but we do need a guard that can, basically, do what Paolo does, with the ball in his hands. Paolo & Franz, even at 6’10, are significantly better offensive initiators than Suggs. I know what roles are and I see what role Suggs has shown the ability to perform effectively…3&D, traditional SG. “Position” doesn’t mean anything, except what they mistakenly put on your trading card, when they feel the need to use the traditional words, regardless of what you do. Try and classify Isaac, Paolo, Franz, even WCJ, to an extent…they defy traditional labels. To say that Jamal Murray and Tyus Jones play the same position is laughable. Tatum and Zion and Anthony Davis? It’s really not an important distinction anymore…we need another player to (also) initiate offense…this year, Suggs became a much better player by not pretending to be that, and just played off of our oversized initiators.

I think Ingram could work with Suggs at point. Having 4 players that can initiate offense if they gel as a team would be dangerous. Even if they kept WCJ.

JD Davison is gonna be a really good player.

Celtics have no space for him.

Skybox wrote:

eyriq wrote:

Skybox wrote:
I really don’t care what you call them, but Suggs’ height doesn’t make him a PG. I wouldn’t sign Ingram for a max regardless

…it could work, but Ingram would be the primary ballhandler/initiator…that’s what he does

People get role and position confused I think. Position tends to be determined based on your physical attributes and skills. Role, on the other hand, describes your responsibilities on the court. This is why the you are the position you can guard heuristic is so useful. Size and skill tends to determine who you can guard. Bigger guys defend bigger guys. Smaller guys defend smaller guys. Point guards tend to be the smaller guys.

Suggs is a hellacious defender and had a great year spotting up for 3’s. That’s not a PG…that’s a much better Gary Harris or a smaller OG Anunoby. He’s got terrible handles and can’t move through traffic to draw defenders to warp defenses. He’s got negligible assists. He can defend SGs or PGs easily. He gets the tougher guard assignment…he’s not really that small and he defends bigger.

PG is kind of an awkward term on this team anyway, with two forwards who, almost always, begin their offense on the perimeter, penetrate and either shoot or pass upon drawing defenders…that’s traditional PG behavior. We don’t need a real PG, but we do need a guard that can, basically, do what Paolo does, with the ball in his hands. Paolo & Franz, even at 6’10, are significantly better offensive initiators than Suggs. I know what roles are and I see what role Suggs has shown the ability to perform effectively…3&D, traditional SG. “Position” doesn’t mean anything, except what they mistakenly put on your trading card, when they feel the need to use the traditional words, regardless of what you do. Try and classify Isaac, Paolo, Franz, even WCJ, to an extent…they defy traditional labels. To say that Jamal Murray and Tyus Jones play the same position is laughable. Tatum and Zion and Anthony Davis? It’s really not an important distinction anymore…we need another player to (also) initiate offense…this year, Suggs became a much better player by not pretending to be that, and just played off of our oversized initiators.

Actually Suggs’ role this year and last year was the same.

Remember 2022-2023 year Gary Harris started over him. And the debate going into 2023-2024 was if Gaty or Suggs starts.

Then Suggs started at SG first, people started saying he won the starting SG position already. Then Fultz got injured, forcing Suggs to be the PG position.

Its no secret Suggs’ success has been against point guards. He played that position since high school. Only his first two years in Orlando did he play shooting guard.

Playing him at shooting guard basically negates what made him successful at the point. His physical attributes, his strengths and built is good for a point guard. He gets positional advantage there. But playing against shooting guards in the NBA, he suddenly becomes normal.

Hardaway off the bench would be interesting next year

1st Free Agent off the market?

RichCollab wrote:1st Free Agent off the market?

Miles Bridges

OnlyFranz22 wrote:

RichCollab wrote:1st Free Agent off the market?

Miles Bridges

He’d be a great addition for us.

fendilim wrote:

OnlyFranz22 wrote:

RichCollab wrote:1st Free Agent off the market?

Miles Bridges

He’d be a great addition for us.

He’d be a great addition for anyone.

I’d be pumped if we went after him.

Size/Shooting/Playmaking

OnlyFranz22 wrote:

fendilim wrote:

OnlyFranz22 wrote:
Miles Bridges

He’d be a great addition for us.

He’d be a great addition for anyone.

I’d be pumped if we went after him.

Size/Shooting/Playmaking

Athleticism as well.

fendilim wrote:

OnlyFranz22 wrote:

fendilim wrote:He’d be a great addition for us.

He’d be a great addition for anyone.

I’d be pumped if we went after him.

Size/Shooting/Playmaking

Athleticism as well.

Ummm Miles Bridges? Are you sure you arent talking about Mikal Bridges?

Miles is the 3-4 player whilr Mikal is the 2-3 player in terms of position.