Post#643 » by NaturalThunder » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:46 pm
Thinking about the whole -18 in nine minutes...
Isn't some of that coaching? I mean, sure, it greatly magnifies how hilariously bad the roster (sans-Westbrook) is as a whole, but couldn't Donovan have brought Westbrook back 60-90 seconds sooner each half? That's just 2-3 more minutes, split between each half, for Russ. Not ideal, but maybe it's enough to still keep OKC at a +14ish clip with Westbrook and instead of being -18 in nine minutes without him, we're only -10 or -12 in 6-7 minutes without him.
And really, it's mostly about how hilariously awful our backup PG situation is. You cannot expect to make any kind of playoff noise if you do not have a second player capable of coming in, stemming the tide, and at least semi-capably running the offense while creating shots for others and himself. We have one such player: Russell Westbrook. That's it and that's turning out to be our biggest downfall in the postseason. I mean Cole and Christon haven't been solely responsible for the eye-poppingly bad +/- numbers while they were on the floor and Westbrook was on the bench, but they are the biggest reason why it's been so bad.
That's why I feel like Presti should be under some pretty heavy scrutiny from the media today. We're so heavily reliant on Westbrook in part because we don't have another PG who's even kinda sorta close to being an NBA caliber player, at least not on a playoff team. In comparison, and it's more important now than ever in today's space-and-pace, shoot a lot of 3s NBA, the Rockets have four players who can create their own shot and/or create for others in Harden, Lou Williams, Beverley, and Gordon.
Said in a thread about which point guards would make OKC better if they replaced Westbrook:
Coxy wrote:I think with a PG like George Hill, they'd be better than current.