Tomas Satoransky---32nd Overall.

[dangermouse]

So is Sato buried behind Beal and Meeks at SG or behind Otto and Oubre at SF? I guess both?

[NatP4]

big year ahead for Sato, rotting on the bench behind Sloan/Frazier/Meeks/whoever the **** else

You have to relax on this. Sato is not a PG. He is a solid passer, but he doesnt have the ball handling/quickness/vision for that to be his primary role. In Europe, he had a distinct size and athletic advantage that allowed him to be a PG, not here.
He is wing on both ends of the court and Brooks sees that. That doesnt mean he cant be a playmaker at times, but we should not confuse the two.

Meeks is a strict SG sniper. His role is obvious and doesnt conflict with Sato's in any way. Im not sure of your beef there.
Sloan/Frazier will be the ones competing for the "Backup PG" role. The loser of that comp will be the one who doesnt play, not Sato.
Sato on the wing not only works best for him, but also for us as it allows us to play Otto more at the 4...which I think everyone wants.

I thought we would sign a vet wing instead of Sloan, but instead they look at Sato and that role. Im fine with that.

We're talking about a coach that scrapped our best lineup with Otto at the 4 in order to play Jason smith at the 4 as our 6th man (which the entire fanbase advocated for even though it was statistically our worst lineup by far) and what about McClellan? Is he a complete afterthought now? The ONLY way this makes sense is if Oubre is now starting with Otto at the 4, which will NEVER happen because they think Morris is a god.

Wall scrub backup PG other scrub backup PG
Beal Meeks McClellan
Oubre Sato
Porter Morris Scott
Gortat Mahinmi Smith

I can see it, I hear what you're saying, Sato becomes that 2/3 ball handling wing like an Andre Iguodala type, the minutes are there if they 100% commit to small ball, but guess what? They won't. We will look like this for certain:

Wall scrub wonder twins
Beal Meeks
Otto Oubre Sato
Morris Smith Scott
Gortat Mahinmi

[NatP4]

Now picture the first game of the year, Brooks subs in a full bench unit of Frazier-Meeks-Oubre-Smith-Mahinmi, that is **** awful and no different from the pile of **** we threw out there last season, and that is assuming Brooks is only semi stupid and not full braindead Brooks that does something like Frazier-Sloan-Meeks-Smith-Mahinmi so that he can have his classic two PGs that can't shoot playing together and Oubre benched again.

Can't wait for the season

[payitforward]

"scrub wonder twins" -- LOL !!

The trash-to-maybe-meh players we picked up this off-season (Frazier, Sloan, Scott, Meeks) reflect no more than the fact that we needed to fill out the roster but had no $$ to work with. Add in Ernie's pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey player evaluation methodology I suppose.

They're going to be hoping for more from Satoransky than from those guys -- especially b/c Sato not playing makes Ernie look bad.

Nicholson, Burke, Thornton, Jennings & Bogdanovic, who combined for 2500+ minutes last year, are gone. Our starters played too many minutes last year as well.

We'd be a better team if we started Oubre & Porter instead of Porter & Morris. That would also open up minutes at the backup 3.

[DCZards]

We're talking about a coach that scrapped our best lineup with Otto at the 4 in order to play Jason smith at the 4 as our 6th man (which the entire fanbase advocated for even though it was statistically our worst lineup by far) and what about McClellan? Is he a complete afterthought now? The ONLY way this makes sense is if Oubre is now starting with Otto at the 4, which will NEVER happen because they think Morris is a god.

Scott Brooks was dealt a lousy bench last season and a high-priced backup center who was injured most of the season. Yet the Zards had their best regular season in decades and came very close to making the ECF finals. But Brooks is a terrible coach because he didn't rely on what you in your expert opinion consider to be the team's best lineup. Give me a freaking break!

[NatP4]

We're talking about a coach that scrapped our best lineup with Otto at the 4 in order to play Jason smith at the 4 as our 6th man (which the entire fanbase advocated for even though it was statistically our worst lineup by far) and what about McClellan? Is he a complete afterthought now? The ONLY way this makes sense is if Oubre is now starting with Otto at the 4, which will NEVER happen because they think Morris is a god.

Scott Brooks was dealt a lousy bench last season and a high-priced backup center who was injured most of the season. Yet the Zards had their best regular season in decades and came very close to making the ECF finals. But Brooks is a terrible coach because he didn't rely on what you in your expert opinion consider to be the team's best lineup. Give me a freaking break!

you mean the teams best lineup statistically? insult me and defend brooks all you want, stats are stats.

[DCZards]

We're talking about a coach that scrapped our best lineup with Otto at the 4 in order to play Jason smith at the 4 as our 6th man (which the entire fanbase advocated for even though it was statistically our worst lineup by far) and what about McClellan? Is he a complete afterthought now? The ONLY way this makes sense is if Oubre is now starting with Otto at the 4, which will NEVER happen because they think Morris is a god.

Scott Brooks was dealt a lousy bench last season and a high-priced backup center who was injured most of the season. Yet the Zards had their best regular season in decades and came very close to making the ECF finals. But Brooks is a terrible coach because he didn't rely on what you in your expert opinion consider to be the team's best lineup. Give me a freaking break!

you mean the teams best lineup statistically? insult me and defend brooks all you want, stats are stats.

You mean those small sample stats that the small ball lineup played primarily against the other team's backups?

Not saying that the small ball lineup hasn't been or can't be effective. But at the end of the day matchups also have to be taken into account.

[pcbothwel]

Scott Brooks was dealt a lousy bench last season and a high-priced backup center who was injured most of the season. Yet the Zards had their best regular season in decades and came very close to making the ECF finals. But Brooks is a terrible coach because he didn't rely on what you in your expert opinion consider to be the team's best lineup. Give me a freaking break!

you mean the teams best lineup statistically? insult me and defend brooks all you want, stats are stats.

You mean those small sample stats that the small ball lineup played primarily against the other team's backups?

Not saying that the small ball lineup hasn't been or can't be effective. But at the end of the day matchups also have to be taken into account.

DC is right... if you think Oubre has proven to be better player than Kieff you're nuts. He might very well make the leap this year, but he hasnt yet. I'm not sure about Sloan or Frazier as individuals, but its not a bad bet to say one of them will be able to hold down the primary backup job to Wall.
Having Sato as wing/Iggy type player allows us to play Otto more at the 4 and not be dependent on Oubre.

[NatP4]

you mean the teams best lineup statistically? insult me and defend brooks all you want, stats are stats.

You mean those small sample stats that the small ball lineup played primarily against the other team's backups?

Not saying that the small ball lineup hasn't been or can't be effective. But at the end of the day matchups also have to be taken into account.

DC is right... if you think Oubre has proven to be better player than Kieff you're nuts. He might very well make the leap this year, but he hasnt yet. I'm not sure about Sloan or Frazier as individuals, but its not a bad bet to say one of them will be able to hold down the primary backup job to Wall.
Having Sato as wing/Iggy type player allows us to play Otto more at the 4 and not be dependent on Oubre.

he's not right at all, it wasn't a small sample size at all, the lineup of wall-beal-oubre-porter-gortat played significant minutes and turned our season around, BBALLbreakdown made an entire video about the lineup. again, all this takes is a simple google.

and I was arguing in favor of our small ball lineup over the lineup of wall-beal-porter-smith-gortat which was statistically our worst lineup despite Brooks and the fanbases obsession with getting Smith playing time. said nothing about Morris or the normal starting 5 which was good.

using Sato as a wing should free them up to start both oubre and otto at the same time, which is in fact our best lineup. stats are stats, and its not a small sample size.

[keynote]

I think Shep wants to turn Sato into a Garrett Temple type: a solid-but-unspectacular, defensive-minded sub who can play three positions...adequately. I recognize the value of having a Temple type on the team; especially if and when injuries throw a monkey wrench into the rotation.

My best-case scenario would be for Sato to develop into a Shaun Livingston type (elite backup PG with post-up/midrange skills, court vision, and solid defense), but he'll never have Livingston's wingspan, and he's a long ways off from being that effective and confident as a scorer. Sato has a better chance at developing into a more skilled version of Temple -- *if* he gets a little stronger. If the official weight measurements are to be believed (210 lbs. seems high for Sato), Sato is already an inch taller and 15 lbs. heavier than Temple; yet from the eye test, Temple was/is a more willing physical defender. If Sato is to be useful as a backup swingman, he'll need to add a bit more muscle to make up for his pedestrian 6'7"-6'8" wingspan. And, if Sato wants to reach Livingstonian levels, he needs to work on a post-up turnaround until it's automatic.

[payitforward]

...if you think Oubre has proven to be better player than Kieff you're nuts. ...

I wouldn't describe Oubre as having "proven" anything. & in any case, they aren't alternatives one for the other.

All the same, I'd say a pretty good argument can be made, even now, that Oubre is already the better player. If you compare the two of them last year to the average production of an NBA player at their positions, they're both below average, but Morris is a lot more below average than Oubre.

What Markieff did do better than an average big last season is shoot 1.3% better on 3-point attempts & shoot an outstanding 83.7% on FTs. But, even with that, his TS% was more than 2% below an average big, because his 2pt % was way worse than an average big.

So, he was below average as a scoring big (on just about average usage, btw). As for the rest, overall -- & especially rebounding -- he was way way worse than average. Note that these numbers are not below average for a starter, but below the average of all the players who logged any minutes at the 4 last year.

Oubre too was below average for a player at his position. Just not as far below an average wing as Kieff was below an average big -- even tho Oubre was only 21 & a second-year player getting his first significant minutes.

Now, "better than Kieff" isn't much of a challenge, so as I say -- Oubre hasn't proven anything yet. But, at least he has the potential to be a good player.

OTOH, Markieff is going into his 7th NBA season, & not one of them has been a "good" season. Moreover, he's 28 & about to head out of his prime years. There's no reason whatever to think he'll ever be anything but below average.

That said, of course it's not impossible! Markieff or any other player might surprise us. I'd love to see that. I'd be happy -- for him & for the Wizards.

[payitforward]

...the lineup of wall-beal-oubre-porter-gortat

vs

...the lineup of wall-beal-porter-smith-gortat

differs by one player -- Oubre in place of Smith, right?

Overall last year Smith played 1068 minutes. Given that Gortat/Mahinmi combined for only 3100 of the 3936 regular season Center minutes (you'd have to add all the overtime minutes to get the slightly larger exact total), most of Smith's minutes must have been at Center.

So, how many minutes did Smith log w/ either Gortat or Mahinmi also on the floor? How many PF minutes?

Whatever that number is, surely he can't have played all of them with Wall/Beal/Porter/Gortat, can he? In short, what exactly is the size of this sample?

&, if these 2 lineups, identical except for Smith vs. Oubre, were so very different in effectiveness, surely that would show in the numbers the other four players put up in these 2 configurations. How did those numbers differ?

[Ruzious]

You mean those small sample stats that the small ball lineup played primarily against the other team's backups?

Not saying that the small ball lineup hasn't been or can't be effective. But at the end of the day matchups also have to be taken into account.

DC is right... if you think Oubre has proven to be better player than Kieff you're nuts. He might very well make the leap this year, but he hasnt yet. I'm not sure about Sloan or Frazier as individuals, but its not a bad bet to say one of them will be able to hold down the primary backup job to Wall.
Having Sato as wing/Iggy type player allows us to play Otto more at the 4 and not be dependent on Oubre.

he's not right at all, it wasn't a small sample size at all, the lineup of wall-beal-oubre-porter-gortat played significant minutes and turned our season around, BBALLbreakdown made an entire video about the lineup. again, all this takes is a simple google.

and I was arguing in favor of our small ball lineup over the lineup of wall-beal-porter-smith-gortat which was statistically our worst lineup despite Brooks and the fanbases obsession with getting Smith playing time. said nothing about Morris or the normal starting 5 which was good.

using Sato as a wing should free them up to start both oubre and otto at the same time, which is in fact our best lineup. stats are stats, and its not a small sample size.

It's a fact that Sato's and Oubre's stats sucked. If Oubre plays consistently well, he'll get more PT, but they have no idea what they're going to get from Oubre on a game to game basis, because he's so inconsistent. If Sato shows any ability to shoot reasonably well, he'll get more PT. So far, he hasn't, and if you watch the games, you saw the better teams daring him to shoot, and he still wouldn't. Until that changes, he shouldn't get any significant PT. Bottom line is that if they play well with any consistency, they'll get PT, but they haven't done that, so far.

[payitforward]

...It's a fact that Sato's and Oubre's stats sucked. If Oubre plays consistently well, he'll get more PT, but they have no idea what they're going to get from Oubre on a game to game basis, because he's so inconsistent. If Sato shows any ability to shoot reasonably well, he'll get more PT. So far, he hasn't, and if you watch the games, you saw the better teams daring him to shoot, and he still wouldn't. Until that changes, he shouldn't get any significant PT. Bottom line is that if they play well with any consistency, they'll get PT, but they haven't done that, so far.

Well, to be fair... Oubre did get 1605 minutes last year -- more than twice what Sato got.

[80sballboy]

It's all a mentality. If you want to earn minutes in the NBA, show some aggression and don't just pass the ball around the horn whether you are a point, 2 or 3. Maybe as a wing, he'll be more aggressive but I tend to think as an "old" rookie, you are what you are as a rookie. That soft mentality isn't changing, even if he realistically puts 10 pounds on his thin frame. Until he shows otherwise, he's Garrett Temple-lite. But Temple at least is 200+ pounds at 6-6. Amazing that Temple is listed at 195 and Sato at 210 and they don't look like the same physically.

[NatP4]

It's all a mentality. If you want to earn minutes in the NBA, show some aggression and don't just pass the ball around the horn whether you are a point, 2 or 3. Maybe as a wing, he'll be more aggressive but I tend to think as an "old" rookie, you are what you are as a rookie. That soft mentality isn't changing, even if he realistically puts 10 pounds on his thin frame. Until he shows otherwise, he's Garrett Temple-lite. But Temple at least is 200+ pounds at 6-6. Amazing that Temple is listed at 195 and Sato at 210 and they don't look like the same physically.

now rewind back a few years and replace Satoransky with Otto Porter in this post. Just wait

[NatP4]

DC is right... if you think Oubre has proven to be better player than Kieff you're nuts. He might very well make the leap this year, but he hasnt yet. I'm not sure about Sloan or Frazier as individuals, but its not a bad bet to say one of them will be able to hold down the primary backup job to Wall.
Having Sato as wing/Iggy type player allows us to play Otto more at the 4 and not be dependent on Oubre.

he's not right at all, it wasn't a small sample size at all, the lineup of wall-beal-oubre-porter-gortat played significant minutes and turned our season around, BBALLbreakdown made an entire video about the lineup. again, all this takes is a simple google.

and I was arguing in favor of our small ball lineup over the lineup of wall-beal-porter-smith-gortat which was statistically our worst lineup despite Brooks and the fanbases obsession with getting Smith playing time. said nothing about Morris or the normal starting 5 which was good.

using Sato as a wing should free them up to start both oubre and otto at the same time, which is in fact our best lineup. stats are stats, and its not a small sample size.

It's a fact that Sato's and Oubre's stats sucked. If Oubre plays consistently well, he'll get more PT, but they have no idea what they're going to get from Oubre on a game to game basis, because he's so inconsistent. If Sato shows any ability to shoot reasonably well, he'll get more PT. So far, he hasn't, and if you watch the games, you saw the better teams daring him to shoot, and he still wouldn't. Until that changes, he shouldn't get any significant PT. Bottom line is that if they play well with any consistency, they'll get PT, but they haven't done that, so far.

this is such a narrow perspective. Do I really have to list off all of the other factors for you?

less morris ISOs
otto playing his best position at the 4
better transition with multiple wings
sato playing meaning burke and jennings, who were clearly worse than him, not playing
Smith, who is terrible especially at the 4, not playing
better rebounding

Satoransky was one of the best defenders at his position in the NBA, and average offensively, why don't you look up some stats outside of PPG, go look at the lineup data as well. this is beyond pathetic

[Ruzious]

he's not right at all, it wasn't a small sample size at all, the lineup of wall-beal-oubre-porter-gortat played significant minutes and turned our season around, BBALLbreakdown made an entire video about the lineup. again, all this takes is a simple google.

and I was arguing in favor of our small ball lineup over the lineup of wall-beal-porter-smith-gortat which was statistically our worst lineup despite Brooks and the fanbases obsession with getting Smith playing time. said nothing about Morris or the normal starting 5 which was good.

using Sato as a wing should free them up to start both oubre and otto at the same time, which is in fact our best lineup. stats are stats, and its not a small sample size.

It's a fact that Sato's and Oubre's stats sucked. If Oubre plays consistently well, he'll get more PT, but they have no idea what they're going to get from Oubre on a game to game basis, because he's so inconsistent. If Sato shows any ability to shoot reasonably well, he'll get more PT. So far, he hasn't, and if you watch the games, you saw the better teams daring him to shoot, and he still wouldn't. Until that changes, he shouldn't get any significant PT. Bottom line is that if they play well with any consistency, they'll get PT, but they haven't done that, so far.

this is such a narrow perspective. Do I really have to list off all of the other factors for you?

less morris ISOs
otto playing his best position at the 4
better transition with multiple wings
sato playing meaning burke and jennings, who were clearly worse than him, not playing
Smith, who is terrible especially at the 4, not playing
better rebounding

Satoransky was one of the best defenders at his position in the NBA, and average offensively, why don't you look up some stats outside of PPG, go look at the lineup data as well. this is beyond pathetic

Sato can't guard quick PG's. I think that's obvious to anyone who's watched him play. Everything else you said - regardless of its accuracy or lack thereof - doesn't go against anything I said. Sato and Oubre both played poorly last year and will more than likely get more PT if they start playing well on a consistent basis.

[payitforward]

It's all a mentality. If you want to earn minutes in the NBA, show some aggression and don't just pass the ball around the horn whether you are a point, 2 or 3. Maybe as a wing, he'll be more aggressive but I tend to think as an "old" rookie, you are what you are as a rookie. That soft mentality isn't changing, even if he realistically puts 10 pounds on his thin frame. Until he shows otherwise, he's Garrett Temple-lite. But Temple at least is 200+ pounds at 6-6. Amazing that Temple is listed at 195 and Sato at 210 and they don't look like the same physically.

now rewind back a few years and replace Satoransky with Otto Porter in this post. Just wait

I'm all for Satoransky getting a chance. Heavy minutes & the opportunity to keep earning them w/ good play.

But the comparison with Otto Porter lacks all logic & all common sense probability. For one thing, Sato is a year and a half older than Otto. He's been a professional basketball player since 2009 (when Otto was 16). As far as skills & ability, Tomas Satoransky, who will turn 26 in a few months, is in his best years; at his peak.

Lets see if he can adapt his skills & ability to be productive in the NBA. But, comparing him to Otto Porter does him no favors at all. In his second year, at 21 & after missing almost his entire rookie year with an injury, Otto was much much better than Sato was as a 25 year old rookie last year.

Nor should this be a surprise. Otto Porter was the 3d pick in the NBA draft. Sato was a R2 pick. You do him no favors with this comparison.

[FAH1223]

Welcome back SATO

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter