Patrick Patterson..the next Kyle Singler

[bondom34]

Hes been misused but Grant has objectively been better.

[ThunderBolt]

What’s a realistic pay day for Grant if he continues playing the same way the rest of the year?

[Pillendreher]

Hes been misused but Grant has objectively been better.

Because they are letting Grant use his athleticism, while Patterson is treated like Morrow offensively. Grant is taking 58 % of his shots at the rim. 60 % of his shots have either been dunks, layups or hook-shots. Besides the odd 3, we're having Grant take it to the rim and he has been (way?) better at that because he has been able to control his body better and has been smarter about using his athleticism. He's also shooting a career high from the FT line.

I'm not complaining about that. Hell, I'd say the way we've been using Grant has been mostly ideal (save for the odd isolation here and there ). In fact, that's where my criticism comes from: We're using the one skill Grant has, which is his athleticism, while completely missusing Patterson. It is simply not fair to say 'Grant has been better' when Grant gets to do the things he's good at while playing with (way better) players around him, while Patterson is reduced to being a bail-out guy on offense (the only shots he gets are those after broken plays; the only time he sets a screen or touches the ball is after we can't get anything going) and is stuck with our bench.

Every NBA player has a different skillset. You can only get the most out of them if you use them according to that skillset and try to hide their weaknesses.

[Pillendreher]

What’s a realistic pay day for Grant if he continues playing the same way the rest of the year?

I'd say 8-10 million at least. GMs will always pay for athleticism.

[bondom34]

Hes been misused but Grant has objectively been better.

Because they are letting Grant use his athleticism, while Patterson is treated like Morrow offensively. Grant is taking 58 % of his shots at the rim. 60 % of his shots have either been dunks, layups or hook-shots. Besides the odd 3, we're having Grant take it to the rim and he has been (way?) better at that because he has been able to control his body better and has been smarter about using his athleticism. He's also shooting a career high from the FT line.

I'm not complaining about that. Hell, I'd say the way we've been using Grant has been mostly ideal (save for the odd isolation here and there ). In fact, that's where my criticism comes from: We're using the one skill Grant has, which is his athleticism, while completely missusing Patterson. It is simply not fair to say 'Grant has been better' when Grant gets to do the things he's good at while playing with (way better) players around him, while Patterson is reduced to being a bail-out guy on offense (the only shots he gets are those after broken plays; the only time he sets a screen or touches the ball is after we can't get anything going) and is stuck with our bench.

Every NBA player has a different skillset. You can only get the most out of them if you use them according to that skillset and try to hide their weaknesses.

They've struck Patterson as backup center which is the main issue. But at the same time credit to Grant for playing really well. He's been a bright spot thus far

[Pillendreher]

They've struck Patterson as backup center which is the main issue.

That's not just on Patterson tho. That's the combo Grant-Patterson. Those guys can't make up for playing out of position like that.

[bondom34]

They've struck Patterson as backup center which is the main issue.

That's not just on Patterson tho. That's the combo Grant-Patterson. Those guys can't make up for playing out of position like that.

Its not Totally but he still needs to make shots. And if we're doing that you can't be mad at grant for playing center either and being bad there.

[Pillendreher]

They've struck Patterson as backup center which is the main issue.

That's not just on Patterson tho. That's the combo Grant-Patterson. Those guys can't make up for playing out of position like that.

Its not Totally but he still needs to make shots. And if we're doing that you can't be mad at grant for playing center either and being bad there.

I'm not mad at Grant. I'm mad at Donovan and Presti. This team needs rebounding and screensetting. This should be addressed. Grant has played better than I expected, but those flaws are still very much there.

[bondom34]

That's not just on Patterson tho. That's the combo Grant-Patterson. Those guys can't make up for playing out of position like that.

Its not Totally but he still needs to make shots. And if we're doing that you can't be mad at grant for playing center either and being bad there.

I'm not mad at Grant. I'm mad at Donovan and Presti. This team needs rebounding and screensetting. This should be addressed. Grant has played better than I expected, but those flaws are still very much there.

Can't really disagree there. Right now I still think pp is a little slow after injury too which is hurting him.

[slick_watts]

sleestak has a point, though. how come role players always seem to struggle on this team? patterson and abrines were supposed to be the key contributors off the bench for us and they haven't even been effective at the things we knew they could do. jerami grant has been better than both of them which says a lot more about them than grant. donovan is actually playing josh huestis and terrance ferguson over patterson and abrines at times this year. who would have even thought that could be a defensible move?

doug mcdermott has not been a world beater in new york but he's better than he was here. ish smith has had a renaissance since leaving the thunder, and is playing close out minutes in detroit over reggie jackson sometimes. domantas sabonis? some of that could certainly be development but the drastic changes in his game in year 2 call into question how he was used here last season. anthony morrow had the best season of his career and then dropped off the edge of the world.

curiously, this seems way more prevalent with offensive role players. particularly shooters. defensive role players seem to do fine here.

what's the cause? this team is going to suck if patterson and abrines don't pull it together.

[Pillendreher]

curiously, this seems way more prevalent with offensive role players. particularly shooters. defensive role players seem to do fine here.

what's the cause? this team is going to suck if patterson and abrines don't pull it together.

Maybe because defense is schemed and offense is not? We clearly have a defensive system, but an offensive system is close to non-existent.
I think you just can't expect players to make shots just like that. Under Donovan we basically placed Morrow on the wing/in the corner and asked him to just hit shots without any rhythm whatsoever. He didn't know what was gonna happen, but was supposed to be ready whenever to hit a shot.

[Andre Roberstan]

sleestak has a point, though. how come role players always seem to struggle on this team? patterson and abrines were supposed to be the key contributors off the bench for us and they haven't even been effective at the things we knew they could do. jerami grant has been better than both of them which says a lot more about them than grant. donovan is actually playing josh huestis and terrance ferguson over patterson and abrines at times this year. who would have even thought that could be a defensible move?

doug mcdermott has not been a world beater in new york but he's better than he was here. ish smith has had a renaissance since leaving the thunder, and is playing close out minutes in detroit over reggie jackson sometimes. domantas sabonis? some of that could certainly be development but the drastic changes in his game in year 2 call into question how he was used here last season. anthony morrow had the best season of his career and then dropped off the edge of the world.

curiously, this seems way more prevalent with offensive role players. particularly shooters. defensive role players seem to do fine here.

what's the cause? this team is going to suck if patterson and abrines don't pull it together.

Smith seems an odd inclusion here, as his Thunder stint was actually one of the things that got him back on people's radars.

I think the issue with shooters is that offensive role players often thrive when they know exactly where and how they're getting the ball. Teams with more structured offensive systems (San Antonio, Utah, Golden State, Portland, Atlanta, Brooklyn) tend to get better production out of more marginal players because they're system teams.

Very few guys come into the game warm. Getting them reps and putting them in spots they like helps with that. Defense doesn't suffer from this as much because it's not as much of a rhythm thing.

For some odd reason, despite that, Scott Brooks managed to get solid to good production out of some real end-of-roster guys while he was here. My guess is that it has to do with his super-structured rotations.

Hypothesis: role guys need as much certainty about their role and place in the offense as possible, and the more things about their role you can make consistent, the better they tend to play.

[bondom34]

[

Hypothesis: role guys need as much certainty about their role and place in the offense as possible, and the more things about their role you can make consistent, the better they tend to play.

Every time I've ever read about players roles I hear this. Guys want to know what is expected of them and when. At this point they're professionals and are ready for a given role, they just need to be given it consistently.

[Pillendreher]

[

Hypothesis: role guys need as much certainty about their role and place in the offense as possible, and the more things about their role you can make consistent, the better they tend to play.

Every time I've ever read about players roles I hear this. Guys want to know what is expected of them and when. At this point they're professionals and are ready for a given role, they just need to be given it consistently.

And that's what Brooks (to a fault) did and what Donovan is refusing to do. I've been preaching this for months, so I claim this take

[bondom34]

[

Hypothesis: role guys need as much certainty about their role and place in the offense as possible, and the more things about their role you can make consistent, the better they tend to play.

Every time I've ever read about players roles I hear this. Guys want to know what is expected of them and when. At this point they're professionals and are ready for a given role, they just need to be given it consistently.

And that's what Brooks (to a fault) did and what Donovan is refusing to do. I've been preaching this for months, so I claim this take

I have too but you can put your name to it and I'll just tag along

[slick_watts]

i'll add this: westbrook is not an accurate passer. he does not hit a high % of his passes to shooters in their shooting pockets.

[Pillendreher]

i'll add this: westbrook is not an accurate passer. he does not hit a high % of his passes to shooters in their shooting pockets.

I think it's also about him being unpredictable in a certain way. You don't really know what he's gonna do. You're standing in the corner and don't know if the ball is gonna go to another teammate, if he takes a pullup or if the takes it to the rim.
Now of course no team is just sticking to a script and everything is just predestined, but I think the chaos Westbrook feeds off is also a little weird for teammates.

[bondom34]

Yeah I don't think he's inaccurate but more unpredictable. He hits guys a lot of times and they just don't have their hands up. Now how to fix that I don't know other than just reps.

[dakomish23]

I don’t know for sure, but it would seem Russ finds guys more for layups / dunks than 3’s.

[RunOKC]

He's getting a raw deal

We turned him into a 15MPG spot up shooter pretty much...