Future of PG position (in MIN)

andyhop · Post #161 » by **andyhop** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 1:59 am

Culver doesn't have to be the point guard to be one of the primary creators plenty of non point guards intiate the offense for their teams

wesleyt95 · Post #162 » by **wesleyt95** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:32 pm

andyhop wrote:Culver doesn't have to be the point guard to be one of the primary creators plenty of non point guards intiate the offense for their teams

No one is saying that but with our current roster construction it'd be extremely convenient if Culver worked at point

SO_MONEY · Post #163 » by **SO_MONEY** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:39 pm

wesleyt95 wrote:
andyhop wrote:Culver doesn't have to be the point guard to be one of the primary creators plenty of non point guards intiate the offense for their teams

No one is saying that but with our current roster construction it'd be extremely convenient if Culver worked at point

But he won't, he is not a PG, frankly his best position is probably SF. PG is not practical or realistic.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

wesleyt95 · Post #164 » by **wesleyt95** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:47 pm

SO_MONEY wrote:
wesleyt95 wrote:
andyhop wrote:Culver doesn't have to be the point guard to be one of the primary creators plenty of non point guards intiate the offense for their teams

No one is saying that but with our current roster construction it'd be extremely convenient if Culver worked at point
But he won't, he is not a PG, frankly his best position is probably SF. PG is not practical or realistic.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

And who are you? I'll put my money on Ryan's word over yours, yes it is realistic... he's best suited as a 2 not a 3 so I know you don't know what you're talking about

K4P · Post #165 » by **K4P** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 8:43 pm

What does Jeff Teague do that Culver can't?

Post #166 » by **Klomp** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 9:52 pm

KAT4PREZ wrote:What does Jeff Teague do that Culver can't?

Those things have very little to do with each other.

shrink · Post #167 » by **shrink** » Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:09 pm

I don’t know who are PG of the Future is, but I am not worried about it.

The league right now is filled with many good to great PG’s - several were the big free agency acquisitions just a few months ago. Most of the younger teams have committed lottery picks hoping their PG prospects will become stars. On top of this, next year’s draft has a good crop of lottery PG’s to add to the total. And even further on top of that, in today’s NBA, PG responsibilities are being disseminated to non-PG’s more than ever.

The bottom line here is that there will be PG’s available in trade, and in the draft, that we can get at a discount. Teams will be eager to trade if they end up with two, either drafting another PG or a different player emerging as running the office. There are very few teams right now that are buyers - they either have their PG, or they invested a lottery pick in the PG of their future.

I am not disappointed we missed out on DeAngelo Russell on the max, plus whatever else we’d have had to give up for the cap space to sign him. I am not disappointed we passed on Coby White. Someone will turn up in the next year, by the time Teague expires, and I hope we don’t overpay because we feel pressured by the uncertainty. I’d be more worried if we needed to find swingmen, who are much rarer and costlier to acquire.

wesleyt95 · Post #168 » by **wesleyt95** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:45 am

shrink wrote:I don’t know who are PG of the Future is, but I am not worried about it.

The league right now is filled with many good to great PG’s - several were the big free agency acquisitions just a few months ago. Most of the younger teams have committed lottery picks hoping their PG prospects will become stars. On top of this, next year’s draft has a good crop of lottery PG’s to add to the total. And even further on top of that, in today’s NBA, PG responsibilities are being disseminated to non-PG’s more than ever.

The bottom line here is that there will be PG’s available in trade, and in the draft, that we can get at a discount. Teams will be eager to trade if they end up with two, either drafting another PG or a different player emerging as running the office. There are very few teams right now that are buyers - they either have their PG, or they invested a lottery pick in the PG of their future.

I am not disappointed we missed out on DeAngelo Russell on the max, plus whatever else we’d have had to give up for the cap space to sign him. I am not disappointed we passed on Coby White. Someone will turn up in the next year, by the time Teague expires, and I hope we don’t overpay because we feel pressured by the uncertainty. I’d be more worried if we needed to find swingmen, who are much rarer and costlier to acquire.

You're right but with Culver at point our starting 5 & bench is set and our clock starts now... there's no more waiting or question marks

wesleyt95 · Post #169 » by **wesleyt95** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:57 am

If he can't handle it fine, we draft another pg and delegate Okogie to the bench... if it works we're a matchup nightmare 1-5 w/ the option to sub Wigs for Vonleh for bigger lineups; we'd also be able to draft bpa and not forced to reach for anything

SO_MONEY · Post #170 » by **SO_MONEY** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:15 am

wesleyt95 wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
wesleyt95 wrote:No one is saying that but with our current roster construction it'd be extremely convenient if Culver worked at point
But he won't, he is not a PG, frankly his best position is probably SF. PG is not practical or realistic.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

And who are you? I'll put my money on Ryan's word over yours, yes it is realistic... he's best suited as a 2 not a 3 so I know you don't know what you're talking about

lol.

andyhop · Post #171 » by **andyhop** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:35 am

Don't overthink positional importance you can win with great point guards like Curry and you can win with limited point guards like Mario Chalmers. Its team composition that matters not whether your point guard can run an offense

wesleyt95 · Post #172 » by **wesleyt95** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:46 pm

andyhop wrote:Don't overthink positional importance you can win with great point guards like Curry and you can win with limited point guards like Mario Chalmers. Its team composition that matters not whether your point guard can run an offense

If Culver is the one distributing (regardless of position) Okogie makes a hell of a back court mate... is there anything a 'limited pg' can do that Okogie can't? Especially a year from now vs a rookie?

wesleyt95 · Post #173 » by **wesleyt95** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:50 pm

I understand we're set up for the future but even LaVine ran point some as a rookie, Culver has showed waaay more as a lead guard than Zach ever did at UCLA... I'm pretty sure it's inevitable

wesleyt95 · Post #174 » by **wesleyt95** » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:55 pm

Our 1st next year might be better used on a Wiggins replacement God forbid, maybe we could package both for DeMar or Tobias or sum **** idk

KGdaBom · Post #175 » by **KGdaBom** » Sat Aug 24, 2019 6:44 am

wesleyt95 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
wesleyt95 wrote:I agree. Doncic had a seasoned skillset from day 1, but Culver did a lot of damage as the only NBA prospect on that TT team... if Point Culver works our starting 5 is set and we only gain more leverage & flexibility w another 1st and Gorgui expiring, Teague off the books a year from now

I don't believe it will happen, but IF Culver could be successful as our primary ball handler how awesome would that be? Answer: Extremely awesome. A 6'7" Point with great rim attacking ability and a 44 inch vert who can guard 1-3. Salivating even though most likely it will never happen.

Why not believe when Saunders and Rosa's says it will happen? We'd have the second biggest mismatch in the league behind Ben Simmons, except Culver could score from all 3 levels

They say he may play some PG. Not primary. Big difference.

Jedzz · Post #176 » by **Jedzz** » Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:05 pm

Saunders is big on size mismatch talk lately. Time for mismatches then. Switch on this.

PG Covington/Okogie

Biff Cooper · Post #177 » by **Biff Cooper** » Mon Aug 26, 2019 6:25 pm

I'd really like to see us share the ball a ton and not rely on any one person or position to be responsible for bringing the ball up the court and breaking down the other team's defense - position-less basketball. Have a team that is completely unselfish with personal stats - where all that matters is the final score on the scoreboard. Five guys on the court together that can identify and exploit matchup advantages, efficiencies, and hot streaks. Five guys who can each guard multiple positions on defense and switch on most action. Five guys who can all decently handle the ball and bring it up the court to start the offense. This seems like the future of basketball, and it seems well suited for a team with KAT on it. Hopefully it is also well suited for a team with Culver on it. In this situation, I don't even know that we need a PG who gets huge minutes every game. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...

minimus · Post #178 » by **minimus** » Mon Aug 26, 2019 8:00 pm

Biff Cooper wrote:I'd really like to see us share the ball a ton and not rely on any one person or position to be responsible for bringing the ball up the court and breaking down the other team's defense - position-less basketball. Have a team that is completely unselfish with personal stats - where all that matters is the final score on the scoreboard. Five guys on the court together that can identify and exploit matchup advantages, efficiencies, and hot streaks. Five guys who can each guard multiple positions on defense and switch on most action. Five guys who can all decently handle the ball and bring it up the court to start the offense. This seems like the future of basketball, and it seems well suited for a team with KAT on it. Hopefully it is also well suited for a team with Culver on it. In this situation, I don't even know that we need a PG who gets huge minutes every game. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...

It correlates well with Rosas last interviews. He basically said, that he want us to create a competitive environment where young players can develop and be challenged everyday. Thibs tried to change culture here by bringing here Rose, Butler and JC. I mean it was clear from very beginning that it will be ISO heavy basketball. At the moment there are many guys who might push other guys out of rotation: Reid, Layman, Bell, Vonleh, Culver, KBD, Okogie, Nowell. They all have chips on the shoulders. They are young enough to absorb a good culture. It will a 2-3 years process, but till then the main responsibility will be on KAT, how he will cope with this, we will see. Hopefully he will find a good way to balance between share, delegate and lead.

Biff Cooper · Post #179 » by **Biff Cooper** » Tue Aug 27, 2019 12:39 am

Good -

I've read the trade thread a few times lately, and I just can't get into it. It just hasn't felt like we should be doing anything, so it kind of felt like a waste of time to discuss. I was hoping Rosas was just going to go with these young players this year and get a year closer to having a decent cap situation.

KAT is definitely our core. We need to hope that several of our other guys under longer term deals become part of the core going forward (Culver / Wiggins / Layman / Okogie / Dieng). If that happens I could see the Rosas / Calipari approach of signing one-and-dones possibly being a long-term solution to build the rest of the roster every year.

wesleyt95 · Post #180 » by **wesleyt95** » Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:39 am

Biff Cooper wrote:Good -

I've read the trade thread a few times lately, and I just can't get into it. It just hasn't felt like we should be doing anything, so it kind of felt like a waste of time to discuss. I was hoping Rosas was just going to go with these young players this year and get a year closer to having a decent cap situation.

KAT is definitely our core. We need to hope that several of our other guys under longer term deals become part of the core going forward (Culver / Wiggins / Layman / Okogie / Dieng). If that happens I could see the Rosas / Calipari approach of signing one-and-dones possibly being a long-term solution to build the rest of the roster every year.

Are you on the point-Culver train as well?