GT #66 Wizards @ Timberwolves 7:00 PM

[nate33]

Win or lose, I have to say I'm impressed with Parker and Portis. I don't know if either is a starter on a good team and they are certainly taking advantage of bad teams or one like Minnesota, who is basically close to tanking. Take away what they will be asking for, assuming Portis still wants his $14-16M, I wouldn't mind having at least one back but for a lot less than that. I don't care what the defensive metrics say, Parker can help you off the bench with his size, his passing, his versatility, but I wouldn't even pay him half that $20M TO. Portis can be a stetch 5 but his lack of foot speed and athleticism eliminates his ability to protect the paint. His lack of elevation also shows in his inability to convert some puppies.

But both can be useful role players and they play hard. At least with a contract in sight.

Agreed.

I'd be fine if we brought one of them back. I don't think we can bring back both though. That's too much money for not enough defense. Portis has been a slightly better player statistically, but my eye test says that Parker is more talented. The Wizards are a long way away from competing for a title, so I think we're better off taking the high risk high reward gamble on Parker. Also, Parker will probably be cheaper. Finally, we've got no clear cut option for a starting PF of the future, whereas we already have Bryant slotted as the center for the future.

We would be the worst defensive team in the league.

What can I tell you. Good defensive bigs are hard to find.

The alternative is to not sign either Parker or Portis and try and find a starting caliber forward who plays good D with the MLE. That's no easy task.

[80sballboy]

Win or lose, I have to say I'm impressed with Parker and Portis. I don't know if either is a starter on a good team and they are certainly taking advantage of bad teams or one like Minnesota, who is basically close to tanking. Take away what they will be asking for, assuming Portis still wants his $14-16M, I wouldn't mind having at least one back but for a lot less than that. I don't care what the defensive metrics say, Parker can help you off the bench with his size, his passing, his versatility, but I wouldn't even pay him half that $20M TO. Portis can be a stetch 5 but his lack of foot speed and athleticism eliminates his ability to protect the paint. His lack of elevation also shows in his inability to convert some puppies.

But both can be useful role players and they play hard. At least with a contract in sight.

Agreed.

I'd be fine if we brought one of them back. I don't think we can bring back both though. That's too much money for not enough defense. Portis has been a slightly better player statistically, but my eye test says that Parker is more talented. The Wizards are a long way away from competing for a title, so I think we're better off taking the high risk high reward gamble on Parker. Also, Parker will probably be cheaper. Finally, we've got no clear cut option for a starting PF of the future, whereas we already have Bryant slotted as the center for the future.

We would be the worst defensive team in the league.

We already are one of them and were with the great Otto Porter. Not if you bring Parker/Portis off the bench. Need to get longer and more athletic starting-wise but next season is basically a throw-away anyways.

[queridiculo]

I mean, not like I care, but why would Brooks call a timeout there?

Figured you'd want to save it for the final possession.

[nate33]

Taj Gibson won this game for Minnesota.

[queridiculo]

Taj Gibson won this game for Minnesota.

My vote goes to time machine Rose.

[Dat2U]

Agreed.

I'd be fine if we brought one of them back. I don't think we can bring back both though. That's too much money for not enough defense. Portis has been a slightly better player statistically, but my eye test says that Parker is more talented. The Wizards are a long way away from competing for a title, so I think we're better off taking the high risk high reward gamble on Parker. Also, Parker will probably be cheaper. Finally, we've got no clear cut option for a starting PF of the future, whereas we already have Bryant slotted as the center for the future.

We would be the worst defensive team in the league.

What can I tell you. Good defensive bigs are hard to find.

The alternative is to not sign either Parker or Portis and try and find a starting caliber forward who plays good D with the MLE. That's no easy task.

Parker starting at PF would be a great tank commander if he could hold the starting job long enough. But I have my doubts.

[prime1time]

At the very least Brooks should have went offense for defense down the stretch. Can't just let Gibson destroy us down the stretch.

[80sballboy]

We would be the worst defensive team in the league.

What can I tell you. Good defensive bigs are hard to find.

The alternative is to not sign either Parker or Portis and try and find a starting caliber forward who plays good D with the MLE. That's no easy task.

Parker starting at PF would be a great tank commander if he could hold the starting job long enough. But I have my doubts.

I like Parker off the bench but not as a starter. The bench has improved with him around though he dribbles too much. Starting PF could be Uncle Jeff or some rookie (even Brooks would have to start a top-10 rook, I think). I think Dwight probably returns for the PO though he might be naive enough to think he could get $10M on the open market for a year.

[80sballboy]

At the very least Brooks should have went offense for defense down the stretch. Can't just let Gibson destroy us down the stretch.

That's fine. Brooks is now the tank commander.

[80sballboy]

Oh no, KAT heard a pop.

[payitforward]

If you give a team 15 more shots than you get, you lose. Pretty much every time.

That's why it is so important to play Jeff Green 38 minutes in order to ensure that he can pick up 5 rebounds. & why it's critical to keep Bryant's minutes down to 15 so he can only pick up 4 rebounds.

Of course, you can also give the other team more shots by turning the ball over 9 more times than they do. & there you have another reason to play Jeff Green 38 minutes -- he can supplement his 5 rebounds with 3 turnovers. For the same reason, it's important to claim that Bobby Portis had a good game b/c he scored 21 points on only 18 shots & pulled down 12 rebounds making his 3 turnovers & 5 fouls (fouls also give the other team more shots) not worthy of mention.

All these things are important if you're tanking I mean.

[Ruzious]

I love Beal's level-headed demeanor on the court. He never looks rattled when things are going badly, and he's never too emotional when they go well.

Yeah, he's really improved in that area - love to see that maturation process.

[Ruzious]

If you give a team 15 more shots than you get, you lose. Pretty much every time.

That's why it is so important to play Jeff Green 38 minutes in order to ensure that he can pick up 5 rebounds. & why it's critical to keep Bryant's minutes down to 15 so he can only pick up 4 rebounds.

Of course, you can also give the other team more shots by turning the ball over 9 more times than they do. & there you have another reason to play Jeff Green 38 minutes -- he can supplement his 5 rebounds with 3 turnovers. For the same reason, it's important to claim that Bobby Portis had a good game b/c he scored 21 points on only 18 shots & pulled down 12 rebounds making his 3 turnovers & 5 fouls (fouls also give the other team more shots) not worthy of mention.

All these things are important if you're tanking I mean.

And Green was playing center at times last night. I don't get that - especially against a great offensive rebounding team like Minnesota. Green was really awful last night. He must have passed up a half dozen open 3's in order to drive into double teams. If he doesn't feel comfortable taking those 3's, he probably shouldn't be playing.

Tanks a lot!

[nate33]

Green was really awful last night. He must have passed up a half dozen open 3's in order to drive into double teams.

Or to swing it to other players who were covered better. Green looked like he was downright scared to shoot it. There was a possession in the final minute of overtime where he turned down a wide open look from three.

[dangermouse]

When Beal went for the layup instead of the 3 when we were down by 3, I just thought "wow tank is strong"

Then he nailed that step back on the buzzer lmao. Thankfully Green and Portis kept us out of the game.