RealGM

If Chauncey Billups replaced Sam Cassell on the 2004 Timberwolves, how would their season have finished?

Assume if Minnesota makes the Finals they face the same Detroit team with a Billups clone.

How much help does KG need?

I think Cassell was actually clearly better that year. The only thing that would swing this in favor of Billups would be his availability in the playoffs. Sam really only played 2/6 of the games against the Lakers (played less than a minute in a game, and then about 4 mins in another).

SHAQ32 wrote:How much help does KG need?

Huh?

Do you even read?

The Wolves have a decent shot at a title with a healthy Cassell in 2004. I don't see much of a difference between 2004 Cassell and Billups. In fact, Cassell was a better offensive player this season which the Wolves needed.

Well if Billups stays healthy (and the Pistons don't have Billups) I think the title odds go up!

But Cassell was a much more aggressive pick & roll creator than Billups in 2004. I don't think people realize how much Billups changed over his NBA career. He came in a bit of a chucker and after a couple years his place in the league was uncertain. He started getting more serious about being a point guard in 2002, but was still pretty basic as a passer. Even in early Detroit years, he was mostly an attacking guard with a post up game and pull up 3-pointer, who made solid decisions with the ball in his hands. His decision making ability just kept growing once he established himself as a star level player, but it wasn't until 2006 when he became the consumate floor general we all remember. Go back and watch 2004 Billups and you see he's still moreso an aggressive scorer. Rip Hamilton was doing a similar amount of playmaking back then. I think if Billups was a better playmaker a few years earlier in his career, the Pistons offense would have looked completely different (like it started to in 2006 when Saunders took over and got Billups to play more pick & roll and slow down his attack a bit).

Sam had already been that aggressive playmaking guard for years in New Jersey and Milwaukee. He'd just never played with a pick & roll partner like KG. It's a shame these guys only got 1 healthy year together. They were dynamite in the 2-man game.

But I still wish the Wolves had kept Billups. Choosing Terrell Brandon over him at that point in both their careers was classic poor decision making by a franchise defined by them.

cupcakesnake wrote:Well if Billups stays healthy (and the Pistons don't have Billups) I think the title odds go up!

But Cassell was a much more aggressive pick & roll creator than Billups in 2004. I don't think people realize how much Billups changed over his NBA career. He came in a bit of a chucker and after a couple years his place in the league was uncertain. He started getting more serious about being a point guard in 2002, but was still pretty basic as a passer. Even in early Detroit years, he was mostly an attacking guard with a post up game and pull up 3-pointer, who made solid decisions with the ball in his hands. His decision making ability just kept growing once he established himself as a star level player, but it wasn't until 2006 when he became the consumate floor general we all remember. Go back and watch 2004 Billups and you see he's still moreso an aggressive scorer. Rip Hamilton was doing a similar amount of playmaking back then. I think if Billups was a better playmaker a few years earlier in his career, the Pistons offense would have looked completely different (like it started to in 2006 when Saunders took over and got Billups to play more pick & roll and slow down his attack a bit).

Sam had already been that aggressive playmaking guard for years in New Jersey and Milwaukee. He'd just never played with a pick & roll partner like KG. It's a shame these guys only got 1 healthy year together. They were dynamite in the 2-man game.

But I still wish the Wolves had kept Billups. Choosing Terrell Brandon over him at that point in both their careers was classic poor decision making by a franchise defined by them.

Initially I wasn't sure what the final sentence refers to.
My understanding was ...
there isn't a clear binary moment of choice between the two (and in reality I don't think there needed to be)
Brandon was injured and under contract at the time Billups leaving.
...
But you know what, whilst I think there was substantial possibility, widely known that Brandon's injury may be career-ending, there are McHale quotes that make it seem like that's the choice (and that he's made it and that Chauncey couldn't play at the 2 at all - and seem to suggest they've given up trying to keep him). I think that part of it is dumb (though Brandon can get underrated (though as alluded to older at that point) and Billups wasn't all he'd become).

SHAQ32 wrote:How much help does KG need?

Against Shaq, Bryant, Malone? I guess Billups is unfair.

Colbinii wrote:The Wolves have a decent shot at a title with a healthy Cassell in 2004. I don't see much of a difference between 2004 Cassell and Billups. In fact, Cassell was a better offensive player this season which the Wolves needed.

Mostly agree. Though a potential relevant difference between Cassell and Billups is an assumption that Billups will remain healthy through the playoffs. That, imo, gives them a little better chance of beating the Lakers in the WCF.

Owly wrote:

cupcakesnake wrote:Well if Billups stays healthy (and the Pistons don't have Billups) I think the title odds go up!

But Cassell was a much more aggressive pick & roll creator than Billups in 2004. I don't think people realize how much Billups changed over his NBA career. He came in a bit of a chucker and after a couple years his place in the league was uncertain. He started getting more serious about being a point guard in 2002, but was still pretty basic as a passer. Even in early Detroit years, he was mostly an attacking guard with a post up game and pull up 3-pointer, who made solid decisions with the ball in his hands. His decision making ability just kept growing once he established himself as a star level player, but it wasn't until 2006 when he became the consumate floor general we all remember. Go back and watch 2004 Billups and you see he's still moreso an aggressive scorer. Rip Hamilton was doing a similar amount of playmaking back then. I think if Billups was a better playmaker a few years earlier in his career, the Pistons offense would have looked completely different (like it started to in 2006 when Saunders took over and got Billups to play more pick & roll and slow down his attack a bit).

Sam had already been that aggressive playmaking guard for years in New Jersey and Milwaukee. He'd just never played with a pick & roll partner like KG. It's a shame these guys only got 1 healthy year together. They were dynamite in the 2-man game.

But I still wish the Wolves had kept Billups. Choosing Terrell Brandon over him at that point in both their careers was classic poor decision making by a franchise defined by them.

Initially I wasn't sure what the final sentence refers to.
My understanding was ...
there isn't a clear binary moment of choice between the two (and in reality I don't think there needed to be)
Brandon was injured and under contract at the time Billups leaving.
...
But you know what, whilst I think there was substantial possibility, widely known that Brandon's injury may be career-ending, there are McHale quotes that make it seem like that's the choice (and that he's made it and that Chauncey couldn't play at the 2 at all - and seem to suggest they've given up trying to keep him). I think that part of it is dumb (though Brandon can get underrated (though as alluded to older at that point) and Billups wasn't all he'd become).

Can't speak to any true intention but that was the idea floated out there at the time: the front office still felt committed to Terrell Brandon and his return from injury. Despite his breakout in the playoffs, we didn't even offer Billups a contract.

I was really into Billups at the time. I didn't see future Finals MVP (and fringe MVP candidate), but I always felt KG paired well with aggressive scorers. Add in the fact that Billups actually liked to shoot 3s, and he just felt like a very rare stylistic fit for us during the KG era. Detroit was sort of my other team back in the early 2000s so I was happy at least he where Billups landed.

I was very excited about Terrell Brandon when we got him and relieved that we got a Marbury replacement, one that had less of an ego. He was really good for us for 1 season. But it wasn't a great fit. Like KG, Brandon was more of a facilitator. He wasn't a very dynamic pick & roll partner because his passing was super conservative and his scoring consisted almost entirely of taking long 2s dribbling around screens. He was a big part of Minnesota's conservative offense. For whatever reason, Minny decided to surround KG with a lot of guys who liked to take long pull up 2s. It worked very effectively with KG as this pseudo DHO (2000s style), but it wasn't an offense that produced anything really good. It was an easy offense to turn off in the playoffs.

trex_8063 wrote:

Colbinii wrote:The Wolves have a decent shot at a title with a healthy Cassell in 2004. I don't see much of a difference between 2004 Cassell and Billups. In fact, Cassell was a better offensive player this season which the Wolves needed.

Mostly agree. Though a potential relevant difference between Cassell and Billups is an assumption that Billups will remain healthy through the playoffs. That, imo, gives them a little better chance of beating the Lakers in the WCF.

Hey Trex, its nice to see you posting actively again. You've been a hardy staple of mine for the past 10 years and I appreciate your approach.