Horford injured.

[SBM]

As for this year.

Teague
Korver
Demarre
Millsap
Brand

We could really use some upgrading.

Best deals
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=mup2nnn

Magic: Bebe and Dennis
Hawks: Vucevic

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=lb69cbe

Raptors: Bebe and Dennis
Hawks: Jonas Val

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=l2qb2mx

Sixers: Hawes
Hawks: Brand and Bebe

Teague
Korver
Demarre
Millsap
Vucevic/Val/Hawes

Would all make this team much better this year and possibly in the future.

I REALLY like Vucevic, but even I'm not willing to spend two 1st round draft picks to get him.

There's no way I'd give up two 1st round draftees to rent Spencer Hawes for 5 months.

I have no opinion on Jonas Val...

You did not read my trade proposal for Hawes and Bebe + Dennis is a fair price and good trade for Vucevic or Jonas Val

[parson]

FWIW I think this team as currently contstructed would be TERRIBLE with an Asik/Horford/Millsap front court.

It would be UGLY. You would basically tell the opposing team to play a box and 1 on Korver and this team would have ZERO outside shooting or shooting off the dribble

You're essentially saying that we need DeMarre Carroll to keep our offense running. Do you really think that, if we took out Carroll and inserted Asik but kept everyone else the same, that our offense would become "ugly?"

"ZERO" outside shooting? With Al Horford and Paul Millsap shooting from midrange?

Actually, what would be different would be we'd lose the 3pt shooting of Carroll and gain offensive rebounding (and putbacks) from Asik. I'm not arguing that Asik would make our offense better but I can't see how losing DeMarre Carroll is going to kill our offense.

[parson]

Teague
Smart/Levine/Exum- Top 7 pick not sure any of these guys pushes us to another level
Korver
Horford
Gortat-FA pick up

Some scouts are claiming that Exum is the next Kobe Bryant. If we can't hit on a star, I could see us reach for a Center who is only a midrange value like Willie Cauley-Stein.

This is a good year to get lucky in the draft.

[PandaKidd]

FWIW I think this team as currently contstructed would be TERRIBLE with an Asik/Horford/Millsap front court.

It would be UGLY. You would basically tell the opposing team to play a box and 1 on Korver and this team would have ZERO outside shooting or shooting off the dribble

You're essentially saying that we need DeMarre Carroll to keep our offense running. Do you really think that, if we took out Carroll and inserted Asik but kept everyone else the same, that our offense would become "ugly?"

"ZERO" outside shooting? With Al Horford and Paul Millsap shooting from midrange?

Actually, what would be different would be we'd lose the 3pt shooting of Carroll and gain offensive rebounding (and putbacks) from Asik. I'm not arguing that Asik would make our offense better but I can't see how losing DeMarre Carroll is going to kill our offense.

I think Asik in the middle , who has no hands and barely any offensive skills, jams the middle for Millsap and AH. It would push them out. It would take lots of PNR and penetration to get them open outside jumpshots. I dont really want millsap and AH relying on outside jumpers.

Jamaal is right, it would have to be a 3 man rotation so we could have an extra shooter on the floor (carroll)

[parson]

I think Asik in the middle , who has no hands and barely any offensive skills, jams the middle for Millsap and AH. It would push them out. It would take lots of PNR and penetration to get them open outside jumpshots. I dont really want millsap and AH relying on outside jumpers.

Horford doesn't play in the middle, nor does Millsap have to. NObody is standing in the middle in our offense. It's exactly my point: we wouldn't have to change our offense very much if we added Asik. All we'd really change is we'd take Carroll off the 3pt line and put Asik in the post. We'd lose a decent 3pt shooter and gain a good offensive rebounder. That might end up boosting our offense, instead of hurting. It certainly isn't going to hurt much to lose Carroll's offense.

[azuresou1]

Carroll's main value on offense is not his actual production so much as the threat that he can hit 3s at a reasonable clip. As in, although defenses don't need to hone in on him by any means, they at the very least need to make a token rotation over in the event that he's open. This in turn frees up our ball movement.

Swapping in Asik would absolutely hurt our offense, because no one fears Asik due to his nonexistent range and terrible hands. This lets the opposing big man roam much more freely in the paint, which in turn would allow their forwards to roam as well, either in harassing passing lanes or allowing them to safely hard double.

The net effect is that we not only would turn the ball over more, but our resulting looks at the basket would also be worse.

[azuresou1]

I guess an assumption here by me is that Millsap would not be an effective SF. This is no knock on him, but rather that the SF spot has evolved to the point where modern SFs need to be an effective tertiary ball handler and dual dribble penetration/shooting threats. Millsap has good handles, penetration, and shooting for a PF, but when you compare him to true SFs, he's sorely lacking.

Comparing Millsap's jumpshooting eFG% (which rolls in 3pt shooting) to several good-but-not-elite SFs on playoff teams:

Millsap: .456 eFG%, 7.7 PPG
Parsons: .563 eFG%, 8.9 PPG
Iguodala: .636 eFG%, 9.0 PPG
Batum: .548 eFG%, 9.2 PPG

Then again, a few years ago he did play the SF spot very well for Utah, so maybe I'm completely wrong on this one.

[PandaKidd]

Carroll's main value on offense is not his actual production so much as the threat that he can hit 3s at a reasonable clip. As in, although defenses don't need to hone in on him by any means, they at the very least need to make a token rotation over in the event that he's open. This in turn frees up our ball movement.

Swapping in Asik would absolutely hurt our offense, because no one fears Asik due to his nonexistent range and terrible hands. This lets the opposing big man roam much more freely in the paint, which in turn would allow their forwards to roam as well, either in harassing passing lanes or allowing them to safely hard double.

The net effect is that we not only would turn the ball over more, but our resulting looks at the basket would also be worse.

+11entybillion

[Jamaaliver]

Swapping in Asik would absolutely hurt our offense, because no one fears Asik due to his nonexistent range and terrible hands. This lets the opposing big man roam much more freely in the paint, which in turn would allow their forwards to roam as well, either in harassing passing lanes or allowing them to safely hard double.

The net effect is that we not only would turn the ball over more, but our resulting looks at the basket would also be worse.

Perhaps, but again we've seen other teams with similarly limited players and their offense didn't fall into a black hole.

We had to bear Johan Petro, Zaza Pachulia and Jason Collins in a similar role and showed the ability to compete.

Similarly, Houston won more games than us last year with Asik at center.

Our offense is based largely on ball movement, not on individual skills anymore. It's not as if Asiki is new to basketball or new to the NBA. And if anyone can coach around Omer's limited skillset, it's Bud. But his post defense and rebounding could lead to many more fast break opportunities and would be invaluable during the Eastern Playoffs when things slow down and defense is paramount.

[parson]

I guess an assumption here by me is that Millsap would not be an effective SF.

That's the $64,000 question, isn't it? I understand your reasoning but maybe it'd be better if we looked at how Chuck Daly used Adrian Dantley and Mark Aquire at SF: they weren't traditional wings but they posted up their opponent inside. If the defense collapsed on the SF, he kicked it out to the guards or Laimbeer (who was almost as good as Horford from midrange). Rick Mahorn just went around looking for someone to hit while setting a pick.

We could keep our offense based on Teague's penetration, Korver's 3pt shots, Horford's midrange and Millsap's penetration, subtract Carroll's 3 and ball-handling and add in Asik's picks - which he's very good at. Korver would certainly benefit from Asik but I think the rest of the team would, as well.

Then there's the DEFENSIVE aspect, where Asik would really help our team defense to excel.

As for the players fitting certain positions, I don't think it matters, except for PG and Center. There, it's best to have a traditional fitting. At the rest of the slots, I'd rather just put the best players we have in. In that line of logic, Millsap's at least the 2nd best player we have.

[azuresou1]

@Jamaal: Houston played small ball all of last year with guys like Parsons and Francisco Garcia manning the 4 spot. That's basically the complete opposite of what we'd be doing. Plus, James Harden is a preeeeetty good wing scorer...

Note that San Antonio, where Bud is from, NEVER runs 3 big lineups, and in fact revolutionized small ball in the league. Also, we won't win many fast breaks with Korver/Millsap at the wings.

@parson: I can't say for certain about Dantley and Agguire since I wasn't born when they were actually good... which is kind of my point. That's going back 30 years.

As for issues of fit, look at how much difficulty Detroit is having integrating Josh with Drummond and Monroe. Or rather, find any other team in the league that successfully runs a 3 big lineup for extended periods of time. They basically don't exist... for good reason.

[parson]

We can argue philosophy and both be right (or both be wrong), especially about the Spurs. If what they're doing could be easily recognized, everyone could stop it. But I don't think they're running teams off the floor. Instead, I see a clever system of movements based on the individual player's talents. The players, themselves, decide what actions to take, based on the game situation. That's why Korver, when asked in the preseason about the offense, said it wasn't so much about plays as it was about concepts.

I do think that one hint as to the Spurs (and "Spurs-lite") approach is in the Spurs' love of relatively-short-but-long-armed players. I think they prefer body control over the usual physical attractions. For the most part, they play one big man and 4 shorter ones. That's something I've noticed about Ferry's acquisitions: long arms. Millsap, Carroll, Brand (!!!), Schröder, Nogueira (!!!), Jenkins. Millsap and Brand are especially short for their positions. Except for Nogueira, the rest aren't all that tall for their positions. I won't bore you with the Spurs' players' wingspans and vertical reaches but most of them are very interesting. You might like to take a few minutes and look them up. The Spurs remind me of the old Dallas Cowboys (for you, and your relative youth, I mean OLD, the 60's and 70s), who were taking measurements of players that the other teams either didn't know about or didn't care.

Forgive the rambling (I'm getting sick). I'm just saying that we ought to put the 5 best players we have on the court. The only reason to trade Millsap would be if we couldn't get him playing time.