RealGM

prime1time wrote:As is often the case, it's easier to criticize other plans than to put together an actual plan. I'm not giving up anything to get rid of Westbrook. Trading Westbrook and Beal for cap space and minor prospects would be a disaster. Cap space to do what with? MInor prospects that will never become stars? If we trade Beal we are rebuilding. Why should I give something up for Westbrook? No prospect on this team is good enough to where I am that concerned about their development that I'm willing to package Beal to get rid of Westbrook. If we are rebuilding, I keep Westbrook or I buy him out. The notion that there is some massive sense of urgency to move Westbrook is ludicrous. A rebuild means you're building a team 5 to 7 years in the future.

The "damage" that could be done by keeping Westbrook doesn't even come close to the damage that could be done by trading Beal just to get rid of him. In fact I find it funny that your worst case is trading a 2021 1st that might include Suggs, Cunningham, Mobley/Green. Beal could bring in a haul of a high 2021 1st (Wolves 2021 1st via Warriors) and multiple other assets.

Agreed.

I agree with the notion of moving Westbrook ASAP, but you don't sacrifice assets to make it happen. The worst-case scenario as you buy him out.

WallToWall wrote:1. I would not trade Westbrook. He has value as a bench player. Bring him in when the opponents starters are sitting, and he will destroy the opponent. Just build a bench unit that fits his style of play.
2. More than likely, the coach will not be in that role with the Wizards next season. Why are we wanting to make moves now, before a new coach is in place? Wouldn't it be better to pick the coach first, and then figure out the players to go after/trade?

I think it's totally unrealistic to relegate Westbrook to a role of bench scorer. Maybe if we had Popovich as coach, he could convince him to do it. But no coach we are likely to acquire will have the juice to bench Westbrook. Indeed, Brooks has manipulated the rotation to put Westbrook in the bench scorer role, and it still doesn't work very well. (He sits Westbrook at the 6 minute mark so he can come back in at 9 minutes to run the bench unit when Beal sits.) The team is -7.2 per 100 possessions with Westbrook on the floor and Beal off.

I agree with point #2, but I think that's pretty much a given. Assuming Brooks is gone, we will surely be looking for a new coach as soon as the season ends. We should have the new coach before draft day.

I agree with the notion that Westbrook must be dumped. The only question is whether or not there is a way to maximize Westbrook's production for a month or two so that other teams might be interested in acquiring him. I think that ship has sailed though.

nate33 wrote:

WallToWall wrote:1. I would not trade Westbrook. He has value as a bench player. Bring him in when the opponents starters are sitting, and he will destroy the opponent. Just build a bench unit that fits his style of play.

I think it's totally unrealistic to relegate Westbrook to a role of bench scorer. Maybe if we had Popovich as coach, he could convince him to do it. But no coach we are likely to acquire will have the juice to bench Westbrook. Indeed, Brooks has manipulated the rotation to put Westbrook in the bench scorer role, and it still doesn't work very well. (He sits Westbrook at the 6 minute mark so he can come back in at 9 minutes to run the bench unit when Beal sits.) The team is -7.2 per 100 possessions with Westbrook on the floor and Beal off.

It is a rare bird who will agree to have a bench role. Everyone wants to compete. Yet, I think Westbrook can be convinced. If he can decide that it is in his best interest to not play back to backs, he can [probably] see that a bench role will extend his career and keep his triple-double numbers going. I do think that we don't have a bench unit that can work with his strengths and weaknesses. Maybe the recent trade brings the atheletic rebounding center capable of easy put backs, and can run with Westbrook. Maybe, with the recent trade, we now have an athletic SG capable of running with Westbrook, and hitting 3's with regularity. Maybe...they just haven't had enough run time together for us to make a judgement. We still need to fill the 4 and 3 position with complimentary bench players. Maybe one of those players is Rui as he seems to have built a rapport with Westbrook. A bench like this could tear it up against other bench players.

Right. I find that people often underestimate the value of re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I mean, suppose a guy sitting one of those chairs is constantly getting sunburned. We assume it's because he's sitting in the sun -- but that's such an easy & superficial view. It may be the chair itself.

Obviously, what you want to do is pull that deck chair back into the shade. Then, when the guy moves to another chair which is in the sun, we will find out if he's not getting sunburned any more.

Fortunately, with the recent acquisition of Chandler Hutchison, we have a guy capable of moving the deck chairs.

payitforward wrote:

gesa2 wrote:

payitforward wrote:
This goes to something nate was saying (& not only nate, for that matter) about the effect of a player's performance on the performance of other players. I've resisted this point of view, because it introduces extreme complexity into any attempt to judge players as individuals.

In most cases, I'm still resistant to the idea. But watching Russ on the floor, it can't be denied in his case: he basically makes everyone else worse. For which reason, the net of how good the team is doesn't get much benefit if any from his producing on his own.

Russ started the season hampered by a quad injury, & he didn't try to do as much on the floor as he is these days. It's no coincidence, I don't think, that as he has felt more & more able to (& free to) dominate the action we have seen Garrison Mathews' numbers go down, we've seen Deni's numbers go down, & in fact we've also seen some of Rui's numbers go down.

The eye test????

Never thought I’d see it!

You didn't!

It's not the eye test -- it's the effect of one player on the ability of other players to get to play the game. That's in the numbers.

There's nothing the matter with numbers. Numbers aren't "simple." Numbers aren't "artificial." Numbers aren't "misleading." Numbers are about as complicated as anything the human mind has created.

You don't want to admit it but you've come to the dark side lol. Deny it all you want but I'm taking personal victory lap

Would you trade westbrook for rubio, beasley and herengomez.


Sent from my SM-G965U1 using RealGM mobile app

gambitx777 wrote:Would you trade westbrook for rubio, beasley and herengomez.


Sent from my SM-G965U1 using RealGM mobile app

In a heartbeat.

But I don't see Minnesota taking on Westbrook unless they dump D'Angelo Russell in the deal.

payitforward wrote:

9 and 20 wrote:

payitforward wrote:The problem is not exactly that Russell Westbrook is playing badly overall. If you look at his numbers over time this year, they've gotten better & better, & on the season he's actually quite good, well above average. He's not the MVP guy he was some years ago, but if you isolate his production it looks good overall -- even with the bonehead side of the ledger taken into account.

This goes to something nate was saying (& not only nate, for that matter) about the effect of a player's performance on the performance of other players. I've resisted this point of view, because it introduces extreme complexity into any attempt to judge players as individuals.

In most cases, I'm still resistant to the idea. But watching Russ on the floor, it can't be denied in his case: he basically makes everyone else worse. For which reason, the net of how good the team is doesn't get much benefit if any from his producing on his own.

Russ started the season hampered by a quad injury, & he didn't try to do as much on the floor as he is these days. It's no coincidence, I don't think, that as he has felt more & more able to (& free to) dominate the action we have seen Garrison Mathews' numbers go down, we've seen Deni's numbers go down, & in fact we've also seen some of Rui's numbers go down.

My guess is it's always been this way with Russ -- but that when he was putting up all-NBA numbers as an individual, his marginal effect on the other guys on the floor didn't matter as much. You could ignore it, b/c his team was still better w/ him on the floor than off.

Now, however, what he takes away from other players' productivity outweighs anything his dominance can add. Worse yet, because these other players are mostly young players, his floor dominance is seriously hampering their development.

Troy Brown's stagnation this year might have been virtually entirely a product of Russ. &, since Russ plays all but about 12.75 minutes of every game he plays, it's hard to work around this problem.

Since it's hard to imagine the problem lessening over time, I have to go with Chaos Revenant on this -- it doesn't matter how well Russell Westbrook plays; he's in the way of progress. In fact, you might even say that the better he plays the more of a problem he poses to the future of the Washington Wizards.

Does this make sense?

Why would you resist that idea only (or mostly or partly) because of the complexity it brings with it?....

By "complexity" I mean something other than "more difficult because more complicated." Viz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity

9 and 20 wrote:Basketball is very much a team game where one guy's play impacts others. If the goal is just to judge players as individuals, I guess it's fine. But it won't, in and of itself, help build a good team....

Nothing helps anything "in and of itself," but if I am going to draft a player or trade for a player, I need to develop some reliable way to develop an idea of how good that player is. If I'm unable to figure that out, I won't draft or trade well, will I?

If you mean to go further & say that, somehow, there simply is no such thing as an independent idea of how good an individual player is, then... chaos. But, in fact, being able to "judge players as individual" will certainly "...help build a good team" !!

Anyone can draft Ja Morant, but those young smartniks who started running the Memphis FO a couple of years ago also knew to pick Brandon Clarke #21 in 2019.

& they also knew enough to trade for the #30 pick in the 2020 draft & pick Desmond Bane.

& they also knew enough to trade up 5 spots in R2 to get Xavier Tillman.

Anyway, you know that's true. If I bring together LeBron, Wade & Bosh my biggest concern is NOT about how their play as individuals impacts each other. Tho of course you would hope that a really good player also makes it easier rather than harder for other players to be effective.

Positive synergies -- Jerry Rice made Joe Montana more effective, but that's a bit different from making him "better."

So, you are still right that in a team game "one guy's play impacts others." The greatest quarterback in the world won't look good if his receivers don't run routes well & have bad hands. IOW, the better two players are as individuals (Montana & Rice) the more significant their positive synergies can be.

& that's where the oddity & disappointment come in w/ respect to Russell Westbrook.

OK. All I think I'm saying is that a player's stats should be taken in the context of the team he's playing with. If you think the team matters not all that much, or at least less than I do, I guess that's fine?

I'm not sure where or how the random Memphis backups and rotation players fit into what you're saying. Memphis is a little better than .500 and leans mostly on Ja Morant and Valanciunis (spelled wrong, maybe). Replace those guys with Westbrook (or Ish Smith/Neto) and Robin Lopez and I don't think they're .500 and their rotation players would probably look much worse. I don't know for certain the rotation guys would be worse, but I think it's likely.

Trading Westbrook to the Clippers would be great. It would keep him happy going to LA, I think, which is a nice bonus. Us getting useful players in the deal - Beverly and Kennard especially, is a double bonus.

If we're trading Beal, what about to Philly or to Boston, depending on how they do in the playoffs? Jaylen Brown or Ben Simmons. Both guys are young and on long-term contracts. Beal and Embiid would be amazing together and in Boston, Beal would get to play with his St. Louis buddy, Tatum. In each case, the other team would probably need to throw in a draft pick or two, I would think, since Beal makes them better than either Brown or Simmons.

Am I the only one who secretly thinks the Wizards need to keep Westbrook and start winning with him?

Sent from my SM-T500 using RealGM mobile app

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Am I the only one who secretly thinks the Wizards need to keep Westbrook and start winning with him?

Sent from my SM-T500 using RealGM mobile app

It's a very good question - actually a great question. To my mind, he's earned a lot of respect over the years for what he's accomplished - and for being one of the hardest working players in the game - his fitness level is amazing. He still puts up trip dubs at an Oscar Robertson historic rate. It's sad that he can't win now. We really owe it to him to get him a coach and GM that can minimize his faults and put together a supporting cast that can win with him. Of course, he's got to be willing to work with them.

Ruzious wrote:

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Am I the only one who secretly thinks the Wizards need to keep Westbrook and start winning with him?

Sent from my SM-T500 using RealGM mobile app

It's a very good question - actually a great question. To my mind, he's earned a lot of respect over the years for what he's accomplished - and for being one of the hardest working players in the game - his fitness level is amazing. He still puts up trip dubs at an Oscar Robertson historic rate. It's sad that he can't win now. We really owe it to him to get him a coach and GM that can minimize his faults and put together a supporting cast that can win with him. Of course, he's got to be willing to work with them.

I’ve struggled with this same question regarding Russ and the possibility of building a winner around him...and, of course, Beal over the 2-3 years.

I’m not sold on the notion that the Zards HAVE to trade Westbrook to build a winner. I think the key is hiring a coach that convinces Russ to play in a way that—first and foremost—maximizes the skills of his teammates.

DCZards wrote:

Ruzious wrote:

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Am I the only one who secretly thinks the Wizards need to keep Westbrook and start winning with him?

Sent from my SM-T500 using RealGM mobile app

It's a very good question - actually a great question. To my mind, he's earned a lot of respect over the years for what he's accomplished - and for being one of the hardest working players in the game - his fitness level is amazing. He still puts up trip dubs at an Oscar Robertson historic rate. It's sad that he can't win now. We really owe it to him to get him a coach and GM that can minimize his faults and put together a supporting cast that can win with him. Of course, he's got to be willing to work with them.

I’ve struggled with this same question regarding Russ and the possibility of building a winner around him...and, of course, Beal over the 2-3 years.

I’m not sold on the notion that the Zards HAVE to trade Westbrook to build a winner. I think the key is hiring a coach that convinces Russ to play in a way that—first and foremost—maximizes the skills of his teammates.

That’s a great question.

I don’t think his feel for the game is good enough, at this age, to break those habits.

I hate to say that because I like him a lot and appreciate how hard he plays.

Maybe in five out ball, where you truly surround him with four deadeye shooters and if Pops was his coach and told him NO shots outside of ten feet and no shots before three secs left on the shot clock.

If you give Russ a rim-running offensive rebounder/lob threat you convert many of his WTF jump passes and bad shots into assists & points. Ideally they are able to hit a jumper from above the FT line. If they pick/screen well then Beal and Bertans know how to get themselves open for his passes.

On the offensive end that suggests Thomas Bryant, who runs hard on every play and hits a solid % down low. Gafford has the raw tools on this end as well, plus he is a deterrent in defensive rim defense, but Bryant's decent range means his man may follow him outside giving Russ more room both to attack the rim and rebound any long misses on offense. Bryant's missed three becomes Russ' putback when there is no Big in the lane.

You'd want players in all positions who box out their man, even if they don't rebound. You need to give Russ lanes to jump in and grab it. He's going to go for it on offense, so will be out of position on transition defense, but if he does collect it often enough then you give a head start for your own transition attack, with your finishers outrunning the defense.

I'd want Hachimura to keep working his outside shot, sure, if he does so you can play him as a big SF, but wherever he plays I want him to figure out a finishing move down low. He has good hands to catch the pass, he needs to figure out how to score when Russ does find him. You want him to maximize his tweener aspect with inside/outside scoring depending on his match-up. Also, if he learned to set a hard pick, he could clear out players who ran into him. That's a solid individual.

I personally wish we had a coach who would run sets with Russ off the ball. With his energy he would run opponents ragged if he was in motion all game. If teams had to account for him while he ran past screens and we had a smooth passing Big who he trusted to deliver him the ball, we could run a reverse Pick and Roll with the Big taking the dribble hand off on a give and go as Russ cuts to the lane to catch the pass and finish. This is why I look at Neemias Queta as a nice passing Big. If Russ and Beal were both in motion, then no team would know who to guard at any given time. They couldn't just pack the lane and dare Russ to jack one up from long. If he knew he was going to get the ball back, and have easier finishes, maybe he would willingly give up some of his dribble time.

Outside shooters of course, especially if they add defense. True 3 and D like Bruce Bowen who set the model in San Antonio. If we had rugged defenders I think Russ' toughness and activity would inspire players to intimidate on this end. And maybe give Russ energy here as well. On defense he often ballhawks and cheats off his man to fight for rebounds instead, so you need long wing defenders who can cover for the holes he leaves when he is essentially playing power forward from the PG position.

So, yeah. You basically just need to build a good team. Strong at both ends, skilled and tough. From the coach to the last guy on the bench. I do think Russ may be willing to take a mentor role as his career extends. Veterans do learn over time. He seems to have embraced a teaching role here. He would just have to respect the coach we get, and have players who could make him look good by finishing his passes with points. If Russ is going to have the ball and dribble, still, you can develop offenses that give him passing targets by getting open, or clear lanes for him to attack the thing. But that is coaching and an innovative mind. Consider that he has had Brooks as a coach for most of his career. Donovan showed up and adjusted everything around him, turning him into the MVP. I think you CAN build a team around him. You just need what every other team needs: savvy competitive and efficient players that turn his mistakes into successes, and a coach who sets the team up to do that.

Dat2U wrote:

payitforward wrote:

gesa2 wrote:The eye test????

Never thought I’d see it!

You didn't!

It's not the eye test -- it's the effect of one player on the ability of other players to get to play the game. That's in the numbers.

There's nothing the matter with numbers. Numbers aren't "simple." Numbers aren't "artificial." Numbers aren't "misleading." Numbers are about as complicated as anything the human mind has created.

You don't want to admit it but you've come to the dark side lol. Deny it all you want but I'm taking personal victory lap

It's enough for me that I've made you two so very happy. It's all that matters to me, & I mean that.

In fact, I'm moved almost to tears. I say "almost," because I've convinced my friend here to shed them, so that I can drink them up.



That's me dressed in orange in the picture.

doclinkin wrote:If you give Russ a rim-running offensive rebounder/lob threat you convert many of his WTF jump passes and bad shots into assists & points. Ideally they are able to hit a jumper from above the FT line. If they pick/screen well then Beal and Bertans know how to get themselves open for his passes.

On the offensive end that suggests Thomas Bryant, who runs hard on every play and hits a solid % down low. Gafford has the raw tools on this end as well, plus he is a deterrent in defensive rim defense, but Bryant's decent range means his man may follow him outside giving Russ more room both to attack the rim and rebound any long misses on offense. Bryant's missed three becomes Russ' putback when there is no Big in the lane.

You'd want players in all positions who box out their man, even if they don't rebound. You need to give Russ lanes to jump in and grab it. He's going to go for it on offense, so will be out of position on transition defense, but if he does collect it often enough then you give a head start for your own transition attack, with your finishers outrunning the defense.

I'd want Hachimura to keep working his outside shot, sure, if he does so you can play him as a big SF, but wherever he plays I want him to figure out a finishing move down low. He has good hands to catch the pass, he needs to figure out how to score when Russ does find him. You want him to maximize his tweener aspect with inside/outside scoring depending on his match-up. Also, if he learned to set a hard pick, he could clear out players who ran into him. That's a solid individual.

I personally wish we had a coach who would run sets with Russ off the ball. With his energy he would run opponents ragged if he was in motion all game. If teams had to account for him while he ran past screens and we had a smooth passing Big who he trusted to deliver him the ball, we could run a reverse Pick and Roll with the Big taking the dribble hand off on a give and go as Russ cuts to the lane to catch the pass and finish. This is why I look at Neemias Queta as a nice passing Big. If Russ and Beal were both in motion, then no team would know who to guard at any given time. They couldn't just pack the lane and dare Russ to jack one up from long. If he knew he was going to get the ball back, and have easier finishes, maybe he would willingly give up some of his dribble time.

Outside shooters of course, especially if they add defense. True 3 and D like Bruce Bowen who set the model in San Antonio. If we had rugged defenders I think Russ' toughness and activity would inspire players to intimidate on this end. And maybe give Russ energy here as well. On defense he often ballhawks and cheats off his man to fight for rebounds instead, so you need long wing defenders who can cover for the holes he leaves when he is essentially playing power forward from the PG position.

So, yeah. You basically just need to build a good team. Strong at both ends, skilled and tough. From the coach to the last guy on the bench. I do think Russ may be willing to take a mentor role as his career extends. Veterans do learn over time. He seems to have embraced a teaching role here. He would just have to respect the coach we get, and have players who could make him look good by finishing his passes with points. If Russ is going to have the ball and dribble, still, you can develop offenses that give him passing targets by getting open, or clear lanes for him to attack the thing. But that is coaching and an innovative mind. Consider that he has had Brooks as a coach for most of his career. Donovan showed up and adjusted everything around him, turning him into the MVP. I think you CAN build a team around him. You just need what every other team needs: savvy competitive and efficient players that turn his mistakes into successes, and a coach who sets the team up to do that.

This writeup makes me hopeful that we could be good next year with just a few changes at the margins. Maybe another good shooter on the wings - like Garrison Mathews but better? Bertans/Hachimura/Avdija check a lot of the boxes for forwards - maybe not the boxing out part, though. Gafford/Thomas should be a decent combo. Maybe there is a good MLE-level 3D guy we could grab? If everything falls right, maybe we push into the top 4 in the east.

I don't know, though. Many teams before the Wiz have tried to build a team around Westbrook. A couple had a lot more success than the Wiz have had in several years. I'm not going to put my money on Ted and Tommy to make it happen again - especially with an older Russ.

I definitely agree that canning Brooks is job number 1.

9 and 20 wrote:If we're trading Beal, what about to Philly or to Boston, depending on how they do in the playoffs? Jaylen Brown or Ben Simmons. Both guys are young and on long-term contracts. Beal and Embiid would be amazing together and in Boston, Beal would get to play with his St. Louis buddy, Tatum. In each case, the other team would probably need to throw in a draft pick or two, I would think, since Beal makes them better than either Brown or Simmons.

Yeah, I'm starting to think that trading Beal for Jaylen Brown plus a pick or two might end up being the best available package. I'd probably do it. Brown is only 24, and like Beal, he seems to get better every year. I really like him.

doclinkin wrote:If you give Russ a rim-running offensive rebounder/lob threat you convert many of his WTF jump passes and bad shots into assists & points. Ideally they are able to hit a jumper from above the FT line. If they pick/screen well then Beal and Bertans know how to get themselves open for his passes.

On the offensive end that suggests Thomas Bryant, who runs hard on every play and hits a solid % down low. Gafford has the raw tools on this end as well, plus he is a deterrent in defensive rim defense, but Bryant's decent range means his man may follow him outside giving Russ more room both to attack the rim and rebound any long misses on offense. Bryant's missed three becomes Russ' putback when there is no Big in the lane.

You'd want players in all positions who box out their man, even if they don't rebound. You need to give Russ lanes to jump in and grab it. He's going to go for it on offense, so will be out of position on transition defense, but if he does collect it often enough then you give a head start for your own transition attack, with your finishers outrunning the defense.

I'd want Hachimura to keep working his outside shot, sure, if he does so you can play him as a big SF, but wherever he plays I want him to figure out a finishing move down low. He has good hands to catch the pass, he needs to figure out how to score when Russ does find him. You want him to maximize his tweener aspect with inside/outside scoring depending on his match-up. Also, if he learned to set a hard pick, he could clear out players who ran into him. That's a solid individual.

I personally wish we had a coach who would run sets with Russ off the ball. With his energy he would run opponents ragged if he was in motion all game. If teams had to account for him while he ran past screens and we had a smooth passing Big who he trusted to deliver him the ball, we could run a reverse Pick and Roll with the Big taking the dribble hand off on a give and go as Russ cuts to the lane to catch the pass and finish. This is why I look at Neemias Queta as a nice passing Big. If Russ and Beal were both in motion, then no team would know who to guard at any given time. They couldn't just pack the lane and dare Russ to jack one up from long. If he knew he was going to get the ball back, and have easier finishes, maybe he would willingly give up some of his dribble time.

Outside shooters of course, especially if they add defense. True 3 and D like Bruce Bowen who set the model in San Antonio. If we had rugged defenders I think Russ' toughness and activity would inspire players to intimidate on this end. And maybe give Russ energy here as well. On defense he often ballhawks and cheats off his man to fight for rebounds instead, so you need long wing defenders who can cover for the holes he leaves when he is essentially playing power forward from the PG position.

So, yeah. You basically just need to build a good team. Strong at both ends, skilled and tough. From the coach to the last guy on the bench. I do think Russ may be willing to take a mentor role as his career extends. Veterans do learn over time. He seems to have embraced a teaching role here. He would just have to respect the coach we get, and have players who could make him look good by finishing his passes with points. If Russ is going to have the ball and dribble, still, you can develop offenses that give him passing targets by getting open, or clear lanes for him to attack the thing. But that is coaching and an innovative mind. Consider that he has had Brooks as a coach for most of his career. Donovan showed up and adjusted everything around him, turning him into the MVP. I think you CAN build a team around him. You just need what every other team needs: savvy competitive and efficient players that turn his mistakes into successes, and a coach who sets the team up to do that.

I dunno doc. I think every team that has had Westbrook has tried to do the same thing, but it hasn't really worked yet, at least not since he lost the ability to finish in the lane with reasonable efficiency.

I don't see Westbrook as being that useful off the ball. His man does not need to stick with him as he runs around screens, he can just stay in the paint and just keep an eye on Russ in case he dives to the rim (or sets a back pick for a teammate to dives to the rim).

The best way for Westbrook to help the team is for him to improve his catch-and-shoot 3-point shot. He has actually been half-decent at this this year, shooting 35.3%. (Last year, he shot 29.1% and the year before 32.1%) If he can get that up to 37% or so, it will make a massive difference because teams will need to respect him off the ball, which will open things up for everyone else.

I'd like to see him become more like late-career Jason Kidd. Play D, get rebounds, run a few pick-and-rolls but keep the usage rate down. His ability to create a pull-up shot at a roughly 38% FG% whenever he wants can be used at the end of the shot clock. We should try and run a San-Antonio type offense with Russ being our Tony Parker bail-out option if the offensive set didn't get us a good shot in the first 20 seconds of the shot clock.

nate33 wrote:

doclinkin wrote:If you give Russ a rim-running offensive rebounder/lob threat you convert many of his WTF jump passes and bad shots into assists & points. Ideally they are able to hit a jumper from above the FT line. If they pick/screen well then Beal and Bertans know how to get themselves open for his passes.

On the offensive end that suggests Thomas Bryant, who runs hard on every play and hits a solid % down low. Gafford has the raw tools on this end as well, plus he is a deterrent in defensive rim defense, but Bryant's decent range means his man may follow him outside giving Russ more room both to attack the rim and rebound any long misses on offense. Bryant's missed three becomes Russ' putback when there is no Big in the lane.

You'd want players in all positions who box out their man, even if they don't rebound. You need to give Russ lanes to jump in and grab it. He's going to go for it on offense, so will be out of position on transition defense, but if he does collect it often enough then you give a head start for your own transition attack, with your finishers outrunning the defense.

I'd want Hachimura to keep working his outside shot, sure, if he does so you can play him as a big SF, but wherever he plays I want him to figure out a finishing move down low. He has good hands to catch the pass, he needs to figure out how to score when Russ does find him. You want him to maximize his tweener aspect with inside/outside scoring depending on his match-up. Also, if he learned to set a hard pick, he could clear out players who ran into him. That's a solid individual.

I personally wish we had a coach who would run sets with Russ off the ball. With his energy he would run opponents ragged if he was in motion all game. If teams had to account for him while he ran past screens and we had a smooth passing Big who he trusted to deliver him the ball, we could run a reverse Pick and Roll with the Big taking the dribble hand off on a give and go as Russ cuts to the lane to catch the pass and finish. This is why I look at Neemias Queta as a nice passing Big. If Russ and Beal were both in motion, then no team would know who to guard at any given time. They couldn't just pack the lane and dare Russ to jack one up from long. If he knew he was going to get the ball back, and have easier finishes, maybe he would willingly give up some of his dribble time.

Outside shooters of course, especially if they add defense. True 3 and D like Bruce Bowen who set the model in San Antonio. If we had rugged defenders I think Russ' toughness and activity would inspire players to intimidate on this end. And maybe give Russ energy here as well. On defense he often ballhawks and cheats off his man to fight for rebounds instead, so you need long wing defenders who can cover for the holes he leaves when he is essentially playing power forward from the PG position.

So, yeah. You basically just need to build a good team. Strong at both ends, skilled and tough. From the coach to the last guy on the bench. I do think Russ may be willing to take a mentor role as his career extends. Veterans do learn over time. He seems to have embraced a teaching role here. He would just have to respect the coach we get, and have players who could make him look good by finishing his passes with points. If Russ is going to have the ball and dribble, still, you can develop offenses that give him passing targets by getting open, or clear lanes for him to attack the thing. But that is coaching and an innovative mind. Consider that he has had Brooks as a coach for most of his career. Donovan showed up and adjusted everything around him, turning him into the MVP. I think you CAN build a team around him. You just need what every other team needs: savvy competitive and efficient players that turn his mistakes into successes, and a coach who sets the team up to do that.

I dunno doc. I think every team that has had Westbrook has tried to do the same thing, but it hasn't really worked yet, at least not since he lost the ability to finish in the lane with reasonable efficiency.

I don't see Westbrook as being that useful off the ball. His man does not need to stick with him as he runs around screens, he can just stay in the paint and just keep an eye on Russ in case he dives to the rim (or sets a back pick for a teammate to dives to the rim).

The best way for Westbrook to help the team is for him to improve his catch-and-shoot 3-point shot. He has actually been half-decent at this this year, shooting 35.3%. (Last year, he shot 29.1% and the year before 32.1%) If he can get that up to 37% or so, it will make a massive difference because teams will need to respect him off the ball, which will open things up for everyone else.

I'd like to see him become more like late-career Jason Kidd. Play D, get rebounds, run a few pick-and-rolls but keep the usage rate down. His ability to create a pull-up shot at a roughly 38% FG% whenever he wants can be used at the end of the shot clock. We should try and run a San-Antonio type offense with Russ being our Tony Parker bail-out option if the offensive set didn't get us a good shot in the first 20 seconds of the shot clock.

Scott Brooks says you guys are overthinking this and watching too much film.

nate33 wrote:

9 and 20 wrote:If we're trading Beal, what about to Philly or to Boston, depending on how they do in the playoffs? Jaylen Brown or Ben Simmons. Both guys are young and on long-term contracts. Beal and Embiid would be amazing together and in Boston, Beal would get to play with his St. Louis buddy, Tatum. In each case, the other team would probably need to throw in a draft pick or two, I would think, since Beal makes them better than either Brown or Simmons.

Yeah, I'm starting to think that trading Beal for Jaylen Brown plus a pick or two might end up being the best available package. I'd probably do it. Brown is only 24, and like Beal, he seems to get better every year. I really like him.

No thanks. Brown will never be better than Beal. Then you have the same situation in a few years as he hits UFA in his prime at 27. That’s a marginal move. Give me a rookie(s) with 8 years of team control and 4 years of rookie salary with the upside to be better than Brown.