Do We Really Need A Stretch 4 If Healthy?

[dlts20]

Wall wants a stretch 4 and nearly all the fans want a stretch 4 but do we honestly need one? Some have got so desperate for it that they go crazy about drafting 2nd rounders like Kelly strictly because he's a stretch 4 when in reality he probably would never even get off the bench anyways. Then others wanna draft Bennett to be at the 4 even though he's shorter than Webster & Ariza.

We seemed to need a stretch 4 but most of it was based on injuries, scrub backups, and lack of progression. We either had Wall who for his whole career has looked like one of the top 5 worst shooters in the NBA. Beal sucked the first 2 months just like he did in College. Ariza was the same. Beal became great but Wall was just coming back so he was playing off the bench or rusty and couldnt shoot.

Then Wall finally gets a J that makes him unstoppable but Beal gets hurt at the same time. Ariza starts to look great with Wall back but then gets hurt. Webster was great when we had injuries or everyone else sucked but when those guys started getting good then he started to suck. Nene has solid range for a true big and Book has even further range but both played hurt from the jump and never fully recovered.

All in all my point is that we never got to see our true team and I think if we even get 50% of what we shouldve been then we wont need a stretch 4, let alone the 100% I think we will be. Basically I think the Wall transformation was legit and he will be able to hit that J. Then you have both Beal and probably Webster on the wings. What team will leave them open? If that happens then you dont need a stretch 4. There shooting will space the floor enough.

Again, I think Nene took so much heat last year that he's going to be highly motivated. If he is then he can knock down that mid range FT line J. He doesnt have to have deep range. If he can hit that lil J then Wall will eat teams up with that, his own mid range J, and both Beal & Webster spacing the floor. Then you also have Porter, Ariza, & Rice who I think will all have solid J's. You still have Book who is healthy could hit the J with a lil range.

I just think that the stretch 4 seemed like an absolute need only because of how nothing ever came together. We played behind from the jump. With Wall & Beal healthy along with either Webster, Ariza, or Porter at the 3 then that is enough spacing. If Nene is healthy then thats all she wrote. He will knock it down at the elbow. We sucked because Wall couldnt shoot, Beal couldnt shoot for 2 months and then was hurt when Wall was great. Webster got hurt when Wall was great, Ariza got hurt.

Never had all those things together. Not to mention that the league plays so small at times with like Lebron or Melo at the 4 so I think we could matchup with Wall, Beal, Webster or Ariza, and then Porter at 4. Thats mad shooting. I just like the fact we have 3 good perimiter guys and then 2 inside guys. I think thats a good mix that we shouldnt try to disrupt just to get a stretch 4. Then next thing we are crying about being a perimiter team with no low post scoring or banging against the best teams. Its a great mix now if we remain somewhat healthy and both Wall & Beal continue to progress

[Knighthonor]

Porter not strong like Bennett to play the 4.
Bennett had the moves and talent, as well as the size (not height) to play the 4.

[dlts20]

Porter not strong like Bennett to play the 4.
Bennett had the moves and talent, as well as the size (not height) to play the 4.

dont get it twisted. I dont think Porter can play the 4 at all and he doesnt need to. We have alot of bigs who should be able to hold that down. I was just speaking of when other teams go really small and put SF's at the 4. Essentialy the same guys that Porter would be guarding at the 3 anyways.

Either way, thats not the gist of my argument. My point is that we should have enough shooting at the 1, 2, & 3 spots that we dont need a stretch 4. Also that both Nene & Book will shoot alot better if healthy. Even if they dont, I still like the balance of our 1, 2, & 3 spots of shooters and the inside potential of Mek, Nene, Seraphin, & Book

[rockymac52]

Interesting post, I enjoyed reading it. I'm open to the general premise, but I'm not sure I agree with a lot of the reasons you stated.

1. I think a lot of us are getting ahead of ourselves when it comes to John Wall and his jumper. It's fun to be optimistic, but I think a lot of us are overrating just how much he improved from 3. Wall only shot 27% from 3 point range this season, with only 12 made 3s total. That's very bad. Now, I know many of you are about to jump on me for that, and talk about how he was coming off the bench and getting the rust off in the first month, and how he really put it all together for the last 2 months or so. However, I'm not so sure that's the case. Here's what Wall shot from 3 broken down by month:

January: 0-7
February: 1-6
March: 10-22
April: 1-10

There's no denying he was awful from 3 in those first two months. There's also no denying that he was fantastic in March. But then there's also no denying that he was terrible again in April. So we're left with 3 months (probably only about 2 full months in games played) where he made a total of 2 3 pointers, and was clearly very bad from beyond the arc, and then 1 month where he was very good. I hate to say it, but it's pretty typical Wizards fan thinking to ignore all of the bad stats and only focus on the good ones instead. What made March so different? And if Wall really made some great improvement in March, then why did he completely regress in April? Furthermore, in that one awesome month, Wall managed to go 6-7 from deep over a 6 game stretch in the first half of the month (2 of those games he didn't even attempt a 3 though). He went 4-15 (27% - exactly the same as he shot for the entire season) from deep in all of the other games that month. So, as you can see, outside of 4 games in early February, Wall was not a good 3 point shooter. He wasn't even adequate, he was absolutely awful yet again. Outside of those 4 games, Wall shot 6-38 (16%) from deep.

To be fair, 3 pointers aren't the end-all, be-all with Wall. A lot of his improvement was the result of an improved mid-range game as well. The big gain was in shots from 16-23 feet. He shot 36% in that range, compared to 30% as a rookie and 29% as a sophomore. Not the biggest improvement, but an improvement nonetheless. I've already talked about Wall more than enough, so I won't go into too much more detail, but it's only fair that I mention that Wall's mid-range FG% did make significant strides in the last 2 months compared to the first 2, so that may be a legit improvement.

The overall point on Wall is that (1) I'm not totally convinced his jumper is actually that much better, and (2) he still is not a capable 3 point shooter.

2. The need for a stretch 4 is not merely to add more 3 pointers, it's about spacing. You're right that with our collection of wings, likely in the corner, they should give us plenty of 3 pointers and should get plenty of attention from the opposing team's defense. You're also right that if one of our big men can be reliable mid-range (FT line area) shooter, then that can get the spacing job done adequately. However, it would definitely be BETTER if our big man could shoot from 3, as opposed to being limited to the free throw line or so. This is only magnified by taking into account Wall's weakness shooting from deep.

3. I agree that many people on this board have tricked themselves into believing we have a dire need for a stretch 4, when in reality, it's more of a luxury. Furthermore, we don't necessarily need a cliche stretch 4, as in, a guy who is known for his ability to shoot from deep primarily. That's certainly one route we could go, but there's also the type of guys who shoot more long 2s and not necessarily 3s, and also can score in other ways, as well as perhaps being good defenders (ex: Garnett, Aldridge). Furthermore, while I'd be interested in acquiring a role player stretch 4 like Bonner or Novak, that's even more of a luxury, and it's not going to drastically transform this team's overall talent. Guys like that are only playing 10-15 MPG, 20 MPG at most. So except for when they're subbed in, we're still going to be rolling with Nene at the 4 and Okafor at the 5 for the majority of the game, so whatever spacing issues we have right now are still going to be present then.

4. When I first saw this thread, I thought you were going to go in a different direction, and you kinda did at one point, but only briefly. I think there's some validity to the theory that we don't a stretch 4 because Ariza and/or Porter can fill that role. Think about it. We clearly have a logjam of sorts at the wing between Ariza, Porter, Beal, Rice, and probably Webster. For this coming season, we'll be able to make it works minutes-wise, but that's going to require someone to play some backup minutes at PF (most likely Ariza, possibly Porter). Regardless of which player that is, the reality is that whenever that situation happens, we're going to essentially have a stretch 4, because all of those wings are capable 3 point shooters.

I also like where you were going with the point about small ball lineups. The league is shifting towards more small ball, meaning there will be more opportunities for us to play a traditional SF at PF and get away with it, without having them be a major defensive liability against traditional PFs. So whenever another team goes small, we can easily put in any of our wings at the 4, and they technically won't even be playing out of position, because they'll still be defending a SF.

5. Lastly, and I'll keep this quick, I think Porter might project as a stretch 4. At the moment, he's obviously very thin, and I doubt we'd feel comfortable letting him play any minutes at PF when the other team has a traditional PF in the game. But I think with his length, if he can add some weight in the next few years, he might be able to hold his own against big men. For what it's worth, he played PF most of the time this past season. It's only college, so I'm sure plenty of the guys he was going up against weren't the size of NBA PFs, but I'm also sure that sometimes they were, and he held his own.

Also, I found this post-draft quote by Grunfeld very telling: "He has the total package," Grunfeld said. "He has good work ethic. He's a team player. He can do multiple things out on the floor. He can guard several positions, and he's a young player who we think could be with us for many, many years to come. And he fits in well with what we're trying to do as far as Bradley and John are concerned."

Could he have been any more clear? I don't see Porter defending SGs, especially given the concerns about his lateral quickness. Also, there's almost always going to be another player on the floor with him that is better suited to defend the SG (Beal, Webster, Rice, and arguably Ariza).

Here's another post-draft Grunfeld quote on Porter: "Otto has great size for his position at small forward, but he can play some power forward if he has to. If you want to go small, he can guard 2 guards, so he provides a lot of versatility"

Not really sure what Ernie meant when he said Porter could guard SGs if we went small, because that's pretty contradictory. But it's interesting that he thinks Porter can defend SGs, I'm not sure I agree, but good to know. But again, he said it quite clearly... Porter can play PF here and there. I personally think Ariza can get by in a similar sense. I'm not saying I expect either player to be our starting PF in the future, but I think both players could do a fine job as one of our backup PFs, and when they're in the game in that role, whaddyaknow, we have our stretch 4.

[nate33]

rockymac answered this so comprehensively that there's little else to add.

It's definitely true that Wall cannot yet be considered a good shooter. You need 3 good shooters on the floor to truly challenge a good defense. When we NEED a bucket, we definitely want to be able to go with a PF that can shoot it. If the opposing PF is just a shooter himself (like a Ryan Anderson) or if he's a no offense role player like Ibaka or Haslem, then Ariza/Porter can get the job done as the stretch four. But if the opposing PF is a legit scoring threat like Boozer, West or Griffin, then Ariza/Porter can't match up defensively. A true stretch-four with the size to matchup with those guys would be a real asset.

[rockymac52]

rockymac answered this so comprehensively that there's little else to add.

It's definitely true that Wall cannot yet be considered a good shooter. You need 3 good shooters on the floor to truly challenge a good defense. When we NEED a bucket, we definitely want to be able to go with a PF that can shoot it. If the opposing PF is just a shooter himself (like a Ryan Anderson) or if he's a no offense role player like Ibaka or Haslem, then Ariza/Porter can get the job done as the stretch four. But if the opposing PF is a legit scoring threat like Boozer, West or Griffin, then Ariza/Porter can't match up defensively. A true stretch-four with the size to matchup with those guys would be a real asset.

Thanks, Nate.

Interesting what you said about Ariza/Porter being able to get by at PF as long as he's defending a stretch 4 or a no-offense type. That definitely makes sense and I agree with you. I'm curious though... let's say the other team had a PF that would be problematic for Ariza/Porter to defend. We'll go with Blake Griffin for this example. So we agree that Ariza/Porter wouldn't be capable of defending Griffin. But what if the opposing team's center is one of those no-offense types, in this case, DeAndre Jordan? Do you think Ariza/Porter could defend Jordan, while whoever our center is (Okafor) defended Griffin? Or would the additional size of a real center compared to a traditional PF be too much for Ariza/Porter to handle?

[sfam]

Great posts Nate and Rocky. I think at a minimum, the talk of Webster coming back probably ends, and we use the money instead to find a big with at least a decent midrange game. If Nene is in and his hitting, our need for a stretch 4 goes down considerably. This gives us both the spacing in the front court, and needed scoring. I would love to have another front court player who can get his own shot, either by sheer athleticism (Bennett, such is life) or perhaps a good post-up player with a decent midrange. This would be worth the MLE I think. It would protect us against Nene getting injured and would keep the spacing fine.

The other hopes of course is either that Singleton buys a clue and a jump shot, and realizes his only chance to make it on this team is as a 4, and that Seraphin gets a better shot and buys some BBIQ. Either of those would be really nice to have, but I don't know that you go in counting on them happening.

[rockymac52]

Great posts Nate and Rocky. I think at a minimum, the talk of Webster coming back probably ends, and we use the money instead to find a big with at least a decent midrange game. If Nene is in and his hitting, our need for a stretch 4 goes down considerably. This gives us both the spacing in the front court, and needed scoring. I would love to have another front court player who can get his own shot, either by sheer athleticism (Bennett, such is life) or perhaps a good post-up player with a decent midrange. This would be worth the MLE I think. It would protect us against Nene getting injured and would keep the spacing fine.

The other hopes of course is either that Singleton buys a clue and a jump shot, and realizes his only chance to make it on this team is as a 4, and that Seraphin gets a better shot and buys some BBIQ. Either of those would be really nice to have, but I don't know that you go in counting on them happening.

Thanks. I disagree about Webster. He's here to stay. Ernie made that about as clear as he could in his pre-draft press conference.

One potential target that I keep coming back to though, is Patrick Patterson. I can't get a sense for whether the Kings value him going forward. If they aren't too attached, which I suspect may be the case since they have several capable big men, and Patterson isn't exactly known for his defense, then maybe we can work out a trade. They could really use a player like Ariza.

[Saqs]

I'd take the versatility that the Jrs give us over a "stretch 4". It would be nice to have a David West on the roster as well tho.

[dlts20]

You guys make some great points but I disagree with you guys about Wall while at the same time agreeing with you guys about Wall. I agree that Im not sold on his deep ball but I made it very clear in my post that I think a solid mid range game is all Wall needs to be great. I think he could be somewhat like Wade who never really had 3pt range but with his combination of mid range game and attacking ability, you couldnt stop him.

If you have 2 deep ball shooters on the wing and 2 bigs down low then there are some teams who need there PG to have 3pt range but that is because there PG is not the driving or passing threat Wall is. 1st off 80% of our Offense is the pick & roll with Wall. Teams still back off him because he's so fast. That gives him more than enough room to hit a mid range J.

Now when he comes off the pick, teams still have to go under because if you go over then he's too fast and will be in the lane shooting, getting fouled, or dishing. If you go under then all he needs to do is make that mid range J which he can hit now. That makes it so that all our big needs to do is make a FT line jumper. Dont forget Wall's long skip passes cross court.

Then we talk about posting. If you throw it to Nene and sometimes Oak then you have your wings at the 3pt line for great spacing for our post guy. Wall can stand up top with his feet inside the 3pt line and mostly at top of the key. Wall's guy cant double our big from there and if he does then he's got 2 choices to make. Either get back slow and or not run back at all which still gives Wall a wide open J at the top of the key or the guy can run back fast in which Wall will catch and go with it to the hoop which will suck in the D.

Basically I dont think Wall needs 3pt range but even then I think he could hit for around 30% this year which isnt great but isnt horrible. However I think you will see that we dont need a stretch 4 as much when you arent starting and playing guys like Garrett Temple big minutes. I do agree with going small. Porter's not ready yet full time but he has the frame to put on weight. I also think Ariza is physical enough to do it if needed

[sfam]

Great posts Nate and Rocky. I think at a minimum, the talk of Webster coming back probably ends, and we use the money instead to find a big with at least a decent midrange game. If Nene is in and his hitting, our need for a stretch 4 goes down considerably. This gives us both the spacing in the front court, and needed scoring. I would love to have another front court player who can get his own shot, either by sheer athleticism (Bennett, such is life) or perhaps a good post-up player with a decent midrange. This would be worth the MLE I think. It would protect us against Nene getting injured and would keep the spacing fine.

The other hopes of course is either that Singleton buys a clue and a jump shot, and realizes his only chance to make it on this team is as a 4, and that Seraphin gets a better shot and buys some BBIQ. Either of those would be really nice to have, but I don't know that you go in counting on them happening.

Thanks. I disagree about Webster. He's here to stay. Ernie made that about as clear as he could in his pre-draft press conference.

One potential target that I keep coming back to though, is Patrick Patterson. I can't get a sense for whether the Kings value him going forward. If they aren't too attached, which I suspect may be the case since they have several capable big men, and Patterson isn't exactly known for his defense, then maybe we can work out a trade. They could really use a player like Ariza.

That was before selecting two people that play Webster's role. Unless we have a deal in the works to move Ariza, I'm thinking Webster is probably gone. Otherwise, he or Ariza, or Porter or Rice is going to spend the year on the bench. And we'll still have no depth at the PG or PF position.

[rockymac52]

Great posts Nate and Rocky. I think at a minimum, the talk of Webster coming back probably ends, and we use the money instead to find a big with at least a decent midrange game. If Nene is in and his hitting, our need for a stretch 4 goes down considerably. This gives us both the spacing in the front court, and needed scoring. I would love to have another front court player who can get his own shot, either by sheer athleticism (Bennett, such is life) or perhaps a good post-up player with a decent midrange. This would be worth the MLE I think. It would protect us against Nene getting injured and would keep the spacing fine.

The other hopes of course is either that Singleton buys a clue and a jump shot, and realizes his only chance to make it on this team is as a 4, and that Seraphin gets a better shot and buys some BBIQ. Either of those would be really nice to have, but I don't know that you go in counting on them happening.

Thanks. I disagree about Webster. He's here to stay. Ernie made that about as clear as he could in his pre-draft press conference.

One potential target that I keep coming back to though, is Patrick Patterson. I can't get a sense for whether the Kings value him going forward. If they aren't too attached, which I suspect may be the case since they have several capable big men, and Patterson isn't exactly known for his defense, then maybe we can work out a trade. They could really use a player like Ariza.

That was before selecting two people that play Webster's role. Unless we have a deal in the works to move Ariza, I'm thinking Webster is probably gone. Otherwise, he or Ariza, or Porter or Rice is going to spend the year on the bench. And we'll still have no depth at the PG or PF position.

His pre-draft quote was in response to a question about if who we picked in the draft would have any impact on our pursuit of Webster!!! It was literally a question saying, if you guys draft a SF, are you still bringing back Webster? And he said it wouldn't change a thing! Sure, adding Rice was unexpected, and it further crowds the wings, but it's fine, he's a 2nd round pick, he's the one who has to earn the minutes in the rotation, not Webster.

[hands11]

rockymac answered this so comprehensively that there's little else to add.

It's definitely true that Wall cannot yet be considered a good shooter. You need 3 good shooters on the floor to truly challenge a good defense. When we NEED a bucket, we definitely want to be able to go with a PF that can shoot it. If the opposing PF is just a shooter himself (like a Ryan Anderson) or if he's a no offense role player like Ibaka or Haslem, then Ariza/Porter can get the job done as the stretch four. But if the opposing PF is a legit scoring threat like Boozer, West or Griffin, then Ariza/Porter can't match up defensively. A true stretch-four with the size to matchup with those guys would be a real asset.

You put Nene, Booker on those players. Kevin if he gets better.

I never bought into this, we need Ryan Anderson as a S4 stuff as the highest priority.

We always had Trevor A to play S4. Now we also have Otto also.

I never saw it as an issue and now its even less of one.

[doclinkin]

Here's another post-draft Grunfeld quote on Porter: "Otto has great size for his position at small forward, but he can play some power forward if he has to. If you want to go small, he can guard 2 guards, so he provides a lot of versatility"

Not really sure what Ernie meant when he said Porter could guard SGs if we went small, because that's pretty contradictory. But it's interesting that he thinks Porter can defend SGs, I'm not sure I agree, but good to know. But again, he said it quite clearly... Porter can play PF here and there.

Punctuation problem by the reporter quoting him. This is closer to the sense of it:

"Otto has great size for his position at small forward, but he can play some power forward if he has to, if you want to go small. He can guard 2 guards... -- so he provides a lot of versatility"

And truth is, as I said I think in the happyhappy thread, I can see him moving like a 2-guard in the offense that has John Wall doing most of the ballhandling duties. He can run patterns like Rip Hamilton and Reggie MIller to spring himself free. Neither of those two players were above the rim types, and Witt has adapted some of Flip Saunders sets for use with our personnel, which included many of the things Flip asked Rip Hamilton to do in Detroit. If the opponent SF has to chase him that frees up players like the powerhouse GRjr or the surprisingly strong Beal (who held down the SF spot in Florida) to play underneath or finish alley oops if they catch an alley or a mismatch.

I can see long armed sets with Ariza or Webster next to Porter, doesn't matter which one you call shooting guard. His passing makes his ballhandling less of a liability, if he dribbles into trouble he can swing it to the right guy. I do think he can guard some 2-gaurds by playing off of them somewhat and daring them to try to shoot over his long arms. If he keeps a wide active stance he'll be tough to go around on a blow-by, and is strong enough to know to shade his match-up to the non-dominant side, or funnel them to the defense.

Yes it would be useful if we had a PF with some range (though don't tell Kev Seraphin that or he'll give up on dunking and rebounding entirely in favor of shooting outside shots, like he's scared of the paint or something). But it's not critical that we stretch the floor that much. We do fine with Nene taking the optional shot from the high post if his man refuses to guard him out there. And we didn't have to draft one in order to succeed. Hey, if we just continue to add competent shooting at all positions then suddenly the spacing opens up and John Wall is that much more of a weapon. Yes pick and pop would be a nice option, but I'll take efficient scoring no matter where it comes from.

[Knighthonor]

Now that the team has an major injury, I wonder how people feel about this now.

[DaRealHibachi]

Now that the team has an major injury, I wonder how people feel about this now.

I rather have a actual Okafor replacement than a stretch 4; EO is known for his rebounding and defense, stretch 4's are commonly not..