Should KG spend some time at the 3?

Fencer reregistered · Post #1 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:46 pm

If memory serves, Minny experimented with playing KG at the 3 as his primary position, and it didn't go particularly well. Still, he does have the skills, both offensively and defensively, to be an outstanding SF. So when Paul is sitting, would it ever make sense to have KG defending the 3 as his primary responsibility?

Or in a big lineup would it make more sense for Davis (for example) to do his best on the opposing 3, with Garnett available to help clean up if somebody gets past him?

GreenGrizz · Post #2 » by **GreenGrizz** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:50 pm

Hell no, he will roll his ankle.

threrf23 · Post #3 » by **threrf23** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:23 pm

If Doc and Danny feel he can, yes. I would assume he's capable of it, and if so might as well take advantage of that when it would create favorable matchups on either end.

Banks2Pierce · Post #4 » by **Banks2Pierce** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:37 pm

I would agree with this decision if it weren't for the fact that KG is the best PF in the entire league.

Shaq could've been a decent PF, but you never saw the Lakers put him there.

SonicYouth34 · Post #5 » by **SonicYouth34** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:43 pm

GreenGrizz wrote:Hell no

TheCelticTruth · Post #6 » by **TheCelticTruth** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:52 pm

sure? i dont have any reason to say no, but he has been more of a pf swinging to center occasionally the last few years than a pf swinging to sf, and there may be a reason for that.

save the "KG cant play SF" stuff though, because its wrong. unless you think tom guggliotta was ever capable of playing center... kg was a small forward early on and moved to pf over time

kmgarnett21 · Post #7 » by **kmgarnett21** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:53 pm

minny didnt really experiment with him at the 3 for a long time. he filled in every now & then during special line ups. he CAN do it, but he's best at the high post 4 spot.

you could put him at the three tho.

rondo
ray
kg
powe/baby
obryant/perk

Post #8 » by **ParticleMan** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:00 pm

Overall I think you want to put your best players at their best position. That gives you the best chance to win. Plus we are not really short on SFs. I'd rather see the kids get minutes than KG trying to run around the perimeter chasing some shooter.

But I could imagine a situation like against the Lakers lineup of Bynum/Gasol/Odom that KG would be good at the 3.

Cyclical · Post #9 » by **Cyclical** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:20 pm

He already plays like a SF much of his time on the floor. He spends at least 75% of his time on the perimeter - something traditional PF's don't do. Would a lineup of Perk-Powe-KG work? Not sure, but at least for a few minutes it could throw the opposing team way off...

On another subject, is it just me or does anyone else here always click "save" instead of "submit" ever since the website format change...?

MVP16 · Post #10 » by **MVP16** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:40 pm

There's no need for KG to be playing sf. It takes away many of his strengths...defending the pick and roll, defending the interior, rebounding...and on offense he is a great shooter/dribbler for a pf, but for a sf he is average. We have plenty of wings on the roster...Pierce/Ray/TA/Giddens/Walker and House/Pruitt can also play sg. KG is strictly a pf/c for us. What's the benefit of KG playing sf?

Al n' Perk No Layups! · Post #11 » by **Al n' Perk No Layups!** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:09 pm

Why would you want him playing small forward? We have Paul Pierce at the three and it's not like we have some dominant bigs behind him at the four. Why play Rondo, Paul/Ray, KG, Powe, and Perk over Rondo, Ray, Paul, KG, and Perk? With the minutes Pierce usually plays and the amount of wings we have I don't even see why this would be used even situationally.

Celtics2000 · Post #12 » by **Celtics2000** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:06 pm

Fencer reregistered wrote:If memory serves, Minny experimented with playing KG at the 3 as his primary position, and it didn't go particularly well. Still, he does have the skills, both offensively and defensively, to be an outstanding SF. So when Paul is sitting, would it ever make sense to have KG defending the 3 as his primary responsibility?

Or in a big lineup would it make more sense for Davis (for example) to do his best on the opposing 3, with Garnett available to help clean up if somebody gets past him?

Fencer reregistered · Post #13 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:15 am

Unless you think that at least one of the Allens can cover every SF in the league, then the way the roster is currently constituted, one of the PFs will occasionally have to slide over to SF.

Hence the topic.

MVP16 · Post #14 » by **MVP16** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:55 am

Fencer reregistered wrote:Unless you think that at least one of the Allens can cover every SF in the league, then the way the roster is currently constituted, one of the PFs will occasionally have to slide over to SF.

Hence the topic.

Pierce can cover any starting sf in the league. TA can cover any backup sf or play spot minutes on most starters. Also, GIddens/Walker have the size to cover sfs if needed. What sfs besides Lebron are you worried about and how would one of the pfs do a better job on them then TA?

RickyDizzle · Post #15 » by **RickyDizzle** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:30 pm

[quote="Cyclical"]He already plays like a SF much of his time on the floor. He spends at least 75% of his time on the perimeter - something traditional PF's don't do. Would a lineup of Perk-Powe-KG work? Not sure, but at least for a few minutes it could throw the opposing team way off...

On another subject, is it just me or does anyone else here always click "save" instead of "submit" ever since the website format change...?[/quote]

Every friggin time.

Post #16 » by **canman1971** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:43 pm

RickyDizzle wrote:

On another subject, is it just me or does anyone else here always click "save" instead of "submit" ever since the website format change...?[/quote]

Every friggin time.

This has never been a problem for me. Use the "contact us" link below and they will look into it for you. canman

Post #17 » by **sully00** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:25 am

I like the idea of KG and Powe and another big on the floor in second unit situations. Moves Pierce to the 2 and makes for a strong counter to teams preferences to go small with their second units. Teams will be giving ability as well as size.

Not a starting line up but solid for 10 mpg.

Jammer · Post #18 » by **Jammer** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:27 am

sully00 wrote:I like the idea of KG and Powe and another big on the floor in second unit situations. Moves Pierce to the 2 and makes for a strong counter to teams preferences to go small with their second units. Teams will be giving ability as well as size.

Not a starting line up but solid for 10 mpg.

I doubt Pierce will be playing any SG this year, with Giddens, Tony Allen and Ray.

I'd be surprised if KG plays any SF this year, as well.

If Walker and Giddens are signed, it will be interesting who is inactive out of the 14 players.

My hunch is Pruitt and Walker.

Post #19 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:32 am

KG can't play the 3 anymore, KG WAS a 3 back in the day, but he was a lot thinner at the time, and more athletic, and still learning to play as a post player.

He still has the skills to do it, but he's lost the quickness to do so, even though he's probably still the elite in terms of 7'+ athletes.

No though, he's a 4/5 now, he hasn't been able to play 3 for long stretches for years now, but boy was he amazing when he could.