Rui Hachimura

[dckingsfan]

Spacing.

yeah but... I think some minutes there would be fine. I would much rather see a bit of time with both Lopez and Gafford than a Ish, Westbrook, Neto, Beal + C lineup. Or at least I would like to see it as a change of pace.

Having said that, with no Len - I would think he would get 24ish minutes.

Gafford could probably play some minutes with Bryant next to him next year. I think it would be ugly next to Lopez or Len, though, especially if Westbrook is playing. Ish Smith can't really shoot either. Maybe, mayyyyybe next to Neto, Beal, and Bertans. But even then, I don't think it would work.

Well, the 3PG lineup doesn't work either ... if I have a choice between those two.

A rotation of Bonga, Avidja and Mathews is our best choice, IMO. If Bell needs a few minutes fine. But if we are going to break glass, I would rather have a two C lineup than the four guard lineup.

So, four guard lineup it is

[nate33]

Spacing.

yeah but... I think some minutes there would be fine. I would much rather see a bit of time with both Lopez and Gafford than a Ish, Westbrook, Neto, Beal + C lineup. Or at least I would like to see it as a change of pace.

Having said that, with no Len - I would think he would get 24ish minutes.

Gafford could probably play some minutes with Bryant next to him next year. I think it would be ugly next to Lopez or Len, though, especially if Westbrook is playing. Ish Smith can't really shoot either. Maybe, mayyyyybe next to Neto, Beal, and Bertans. But even then, I don't think it would work.

I just don't see the need, unless there are a bunch of injuries.

Also, Gafford looks like a high energy type who may have trouble playing more than 24-28 minutes a game given his intensity level. So is Bryant. I'd rather have them both play 24 minutes at max effort.

[FAH1223]

Can we pick-up Mo Wagner?

Right now, no. You'd have to wait a calendar year to re-sign someone you traded away. The NBA changed the rules due to Ilgauskas getting traded to us, then he didn't wanna play in DC, got bought out and immediately re-signed with the Cavs.

The full rule is that he can't sign with the most recent team. Meaning, for example, if Mo goes on a 3rd team sometime in the next year, gets waived, then we could potentially re-sign him...

[nate33]

Can we pick-up Mo Wagner?

Right now, no. You'd have to wait a calendar year to re-sign someone you traded away. The NBA changed the rules due to Ilgauskas getting traded to us, then he didn't wanna play in DC, got bought out and immediately re-signed with the Cavs.

The full rule is that he can't sign with the most recent team. Meaning, for example, if Mo goes on a 3rd team sometime in the next year, gets waived, then we could potentially re-sign him...

This is true, but there is an exception as I understand it. We can resign Mo after a full calendar year after the trade, or after his existing contract expires, whichever is first. Since Mo's contract will expire this summer, we could sign him as an unrestricted free agent after July 1st, just like we could sign any unrestricted free agent.

[dckingsfan]

Can we pick-up Mo Wagner?

Right now, no. You'd have to wait a calendar year to re-sign someone you traded away. The NBA changed the rules due to Ilgauskas getting traded to us, then he didn't wanna play in DC, got bought out and immediately re-signed with the Cavs.

The full rule is that he can't sign with the most recent team. Meaning, for example, if Mo goes on a 3rd team sometime in the next year, gets waived, then we could potentially re-sign him...

This is true, but there is an exception as I understand it. We can resign Mo after a full calendar year after the trade, or after his existing contract expires, whichever is first. Since Mo's contract will expire this summer, we could sign him as an unrestricted free agent after July 1st, just like we could sign any unrestricted free agent.

Ah, too bad...

[nate33]

Right now, no. You'd have to wait a calendar year to re-sign someone you traded away. The NBA changed the rules due to Ilgauskas getting traded to us, then he didn't wanna play in DC, got bought out and immediately re-signed with the Cavs.

The full rule is that he can't sign with the most recent team. Meaning, for example, if Mo goes on a 3rd team sometime in the next year, gets waived, then we could potentially re-sign him...

This is true, but there is an exception as I understand it. We can resign Mo after a full calendar year after the trade, or after his existing contract expires, whichever is first. Since Mo's contract will expire this summer, we could sign him as an unrestricted free agent after July 1st, just like we could sign any unrestricted free agent.

Ah, too bad...

I wouldn't be opposed to signing him as our 3rd center. In a way, Wagner might be ideal as a 3rd center in that he has a high beta. Against some matchups, he's awesome and looks like a starting center. Against other matchups, he is terrible and shouldn't play. As a 3rd stringer, we would have the luxury of playing him only in matchups that favor him. Also he is a great locker room guy. Finally, if he can get just a little bit better as a 3-point shooter, he might suddenly become a much better player.

I'm not saying we shouldn't keep our eyes open for other options, but if Mo turned out to be the guy we signed, I'd be okay with it.

[payitforward]

yeah but... I think some minutes there would be fine. I would much rather see a bit of time with both Lopez and Gafford than a Ish, Westbrook, Neto, Beal + C lineup. Or at least I would like to see it as a change of pace.

Having said that, with no Len - I would think he would get 24ish minutes.

Gafford could probably play some minutes with Bryant next to him next year. I think it would be ugly next to Lopez or Len, though, especially if Westbrook is playing. Ish Smith can't really shoot either. Maybe, mayyyyybe next to Neto, Beal, and Bertans. But even then, I don't think it would work.

Having Gafford changes what we need next year. We don't need Robin Lopez at all. Our rotation should be Bryant and Gafford. We'd sign a 3d-string C; maybe Len is that guy, maybe not.

When a guy is effective on the floor in the minutes he gets, you give him more minutes. Period. You never fail to do that. Never.

Then you see what happens. Nate is certainly right that Gafford doesn't give you spacing. So... maybe it wouldn't work well to have him on the floor at the 4. The way you find out is by putting him there and seeing what happens. There are lots of odd lineups that turn out to be effective.

You learn nothing if you don't try it.

[FAH1223]

yeah but... I think some minutes there would be fine. I would much rather see a bit of time with both Lopez and Gafford than a Ish, Westbrook, Neto, Beal + C lineup. Or at least I would like to see it as a change of pace.

Having said that, with no Len - I would think he would get 24ish minutes.

Gafford could probably play some minutes with Bryant next to him next year. I think it would be ugly next to Lopez or Len, though, especially if Westbrook is playing. Ish Smith can't really shoot either. Maybe, mayyyyybe next to Neto, Beal, and Bertans. But even then, I don't think it would work.

Having Gafford changes what we need next year. We don't need Robin Lopez at all. Our rotation should be Bryant and Gafford. We'd sign a 3d-string C; maybe Len is that guy, maybe not.

When a guy is effective on the floor in the minutes he gets, you give him more minutes. Period. You never fail to do that. Never.

Then you see what happens. Nate is certainly right that Gafford doesn't give you spacing. So... maybe it wouldn't work well to have him on the floor at the 4. The way you find out is by putting him there and seeing what happens. There are lots of odd lineups that turn out to be effective.

You learn nothing if you don't try it.

Bryant can play PF. And he spaces the floor.

[nate33]

Gafford could probably play some minutes with Bryant next to him next year. I think it would be ugly next to Lopez or Len, though, especially if Westbrook is playing. Ish Smith can't really shoot either. Maybe, mayyyyybe next to Neto, Beal, and Bertans. But even then, I don't think it would work.

Having Gafford changes what we need next year. We don't need Robin Lopez at all. Our rotation should be Bryant and Gafford. We'd sign a 3d-string C; maybe Len is that guy, maybe not.

When a guy is effective on the floor in the minutes he gets, you give him more minutes. Period. You never fail to do that. Never.

Then you see what happens. Nate is certainly right that Gafford doesn't give you spacing. So... maybe it wouldn't work well to have him on the floor at the 4. The way you find out is by putting him there and seeing what happens. There are lots of odd lineups that turn out to be effective.

You learn nothing if you don't try it.

Bryant can play PF. And he spaces the floor.

Bryant can't stay in front of a chair. He can't guard power forwards who, these days, are indistinguishable from small forwards

I just don't understand why everyone wants to play twin towers despite NOBODY doing it with any success over the past 3 years. At best, it's a compromise to protect an undersized center (like Anthony Davis or Bam Adebayo) from excessive wear and tear in the regular season. But everyone knows that their ideal configuration in the playoffs or crunch time is to play with Davis and Bam at center.

We don't have that issue because Gafford and Bryant are true centers who don't need to be protected from the grind. We also have plenty of options at power forward with Hachimura, Avdija and Bertans. I just don't get this fetish.

[dckingsfan]

Having Gafford changes what we need next year. We don't need Robin Lopez at all. Our rotation should be Bryant and Gafford. We'd sign a 3d-string C; maybe Len is that guy, maybe not.

When a guy is effective on the floor in the minutes he gets, you give him more minutes. Period. You never fail to do that. Never.

Then you see what happens. Nate is certainly right that Gafford doesn't give you spacing. So... maybe it wouldn't work well to have him on the floor at the 4. The way you find out is by putting him there and seeing what happens. There are lots of odd lineups that turn out to be effective.

You learn nothing if you don't try it.

Bryant can play PF. And he spaces the floor.

Bryant can't stay in front of a chair. He can't guard power forwards who, these days, are indistinguishable from small forwards

I just don't understand why everyone wants to play twin towers despite NOBODY doing it with any success over the past 3 years. At best, it's a compromise to protect an undersized center (like Anthony Davis or Bam Adebayo) from excessive wear and tear in the regular season. But everyone knows that their ideal configuration in the playoffs or crunch time is to play with Davis and Bam at center.

We don't have that issue because Gafford and Bryant are true centers who don't need to be protected from the grind. We also have plenty of options at power forward with Hachimura, Avdija and Bertans. I just don't get this fetish.

Wait. The context of this conversation is the stopgap while Hachimura and Bertans are out.

And I do think Gafford can guard PFs of all types. My two cents on that topic. And I agree with PIF on experimenting with Bryant/Gafford - why not try.

[Ruzious]

Having Gafford changes what we need next year. We don't need Robin Lopez at all. Our rotation should be Bryant and Gafford. We'd sign a 3d-string C; maybe Len is that guy, maybe not.

When a guy is effective on the floor in the minutes he gets, you give him more minutes. Period. You never fail to do that. Never.

Then you see what happens. Nate is certainly right that Gafford doesn't give you spacing. So... maybe it wouldn't work well to have him on the floor at the 4. The way you find out is by putting him there and seeing what happens. There are lots of odd lineups that turn out to be effective.

You learn nothing if you don't try it.

Bryant can play PF. And he spaces the floor.

Bryant can't stay in front of a chair. He can't guard power forwards who, these days, are indistinguishable from small forwards

I just don't understand why everyone wants to play twin towers despite NOBODY doing it with any success over the past 3 years. At best, it's a compromise to protect an undersized center (like Anthony Davis or Bam Adebayo) from excessive wear and tear in the regular season. But everyone knows that their ideal configuration in the playoffs or crunch time is to play with Davis and Bam at center.

We don't have that issue because Gafford and Bryant are true centers who don't need to be protected from the grind. We also have plenty of options at power forward with Hachimura, Avdija and Bertans. I just don't get this fetish.

Giannis and Brook Lopez have won more regular season games than anyone - but have not gotten to the championship series - yet.

[nate33]

Wait. The context of this conversation is the stopgap while Hachimura and Bertans are out.

And I do think Gafford can guard PFs of all types. My two cents on that topic. And I agree with PIF on experimenting with Bryant/Gafford - why not try.

Then why are we talking about Bryant?

I think the league has experimented enough with the concept to show that it doesn't work in the modern NBA under the current rules.

[nate33]

Giannis and Brook Lopez have won more regular season games than anyone - but have not gotten to the championship series - yet.

In the past, Milwaukee had consistently refused to even try Giannis at center. This year, they're experimenting with it more often, though still not enough to my liking. (Mostly they have Portis at center. I'm talking about a lineup with Giannis at center and true wing, someone like Middleton, at PF.) It'll be interesting to see how it works out if they go small in the playoffs. One issue is that they don't really have enough non-bigs on the roster to do it for very long.

[payitforward]

Bryant can't stay in front of a chair....

That's what Dat said about Mathews, & it developed that, yes, he can guard a chair.

He can teach Thomas Bryant.

I just don't understand why everyone wants to play twin towers despite NOBODY doing it with any success over the past 3 years. ...I just don't get this fetish.

Yeah... that's what everybody said about the 3 point guard lineup!

More seriously, at least a little: if a guy is playing as well as Gafford, the idea is to give him more minutes. You are obviously right that playing him at Forward would have a negative effect on our spacing, but it would have a positive effect on our rebounding, blocked shots, etc. etc. etc. So, you'd get a chance to find out what the net effect was.

In any case, if Rui needs r&r time, then I see no problem experimenting w/ some minutes for Gafford at the 4. After all, what's at risk? Making the Plow Under tournament?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Rui was averaging 19/7 on 52% in his previous seven games before injury and in the seven games since he's returned he's averaging 9/4 on 40%. They've been trying to manage the knee soreness but it's time to rest him.

Yeah, it takes two to six months to heal from long-term tendinopathy - my diagnosis

Seriously, I know they are chasing a play in spot but this could get serious if you don't give him a couple of months.

And, he really isn't contributing now...

Question: who do you move to the starting PF slot?

I’d probably start Jordan Bell at PF. His hustle, rebounding and D would set a nice early tone.

With a lineup consisting of Westbrook, Beal, Avdija, Bell, and Gafford, this would be the best lineup the Wizards have had in over 20 seasons.

[dckingsfan]

Yeah, it takes two to six months to heal from long-term tendinopathy - my diagnosis

Seriously, I know they are chasing a play in spot but this could get serious if you don't give him a couple of months.

And, he really isn't contributing now...

Question: who do you move to the starting PF slot?

I’d probably start Jordan Bell at PF. His hustle, rebounding and D would set a nice early tone.

With a lineup consisting of Westbrook, Beal, Avdija, Bell, and Gafford, this would be the best lineup the Wizards have had in over 20 seasons.

Take Bell out of the equation and I am right there with you

[Ruzious]

I’d probably start Jordan Bell at PF. His hustle, rebounding and D would set a nice early tone.

With a lineup consisting of Westbrook, Beal, Avdija, Bell, and Gafford, this would be the best lineup the Wizards have had in over 20 seasons.

Take Bell out of the equation and I am right there with you

The good sign about Bell is that he played great in the G League - granted only 7 games at 27.7 minutes per game. he made 54 of his 67 FGA's (80.6%!) and 52 of 61 FTA's (85.2%). His per 36 numbers were 23.1 points, 12.0 rebounds, 4.3 assists, 2.8 blocks, and 1.7 steals - with to's being the negative - 4.5. A PER of 31.8. Just 192 minutes - but enough to show there could be some there there. Heck, if he can just hit foul line jumpers at that rate, give him some playing time, because we know he can play defense.

[nate33]

With a lineup consisting of Westbrook, Beal, Avdija, Bell, and Gafford, this would be the best lineup the Wizards have had in over 20 seasons.

Take Bell out of the equation and I am right there with you

The good sign about Bell is that he played great in the G League - granted only 7 games at 27.7 minutes per game. he made 54 of his 67 FGA's (80.6%!) and 52 of 61 FTA's (85.2%). His per 36 numbers were 23.1 points, 12.0 rebounds, 4.3 assists, 2.8 blocks, and 1.7 steals - with to's being the negative - 4.5. A PER of 31.8. Just 192 minutes - but enough to show there could be some there there. Heck, if he can just hit foul line jumpers at that rate, give him some playing time, because we know he can play defense.

It's a amazing how a guy who was so dominant in his league just a few weeks ago is suddenly totally unwilling to shoot at the NBA level. You would think a guy who can average 23 points while shooting 85% on free throws, would be willing to take an open jumper if available, but Bell turns them all down.

I'm not sure if he should be praised because he shows remarkable discipline to recognize his weaknesses relative to the superior talent of the NBA, or if he should be denigrated for having no confidence whatsoever.

[dckingsfan]

Take Bell out of the equation and I am right there with you

The good sign about Bell is that he played great in the G League - granted only 7 games at 27.7 minutes per game. he made 54 of his 67 FGA's (80.6%!) and 52 of 61 FTA's (85.2%). His per 36 numbers were 23.1 points, 12.0 rebounds, 4.3 assists, 2.8 blocks, and 1.7 steals - with to's being the negative - 4.5. A PER of 31.8. Just 192 minutes - but enough to show there could be some there there. Heck, if he can just hit foul line jumpers at that rate, give him some playing time, because we know he can play defense.

It's a amazing how a guy who was so dominant in his league just a few weeks ago is suddenly totally unwilling to shoot at the NBA level. You would think a guy who can average 23 points while shooting 85% on free throws, would be willing to take an open jumper if available, but Bell turns them all down.

I'm not sure if he should be praised because he shows remarkable discipline to recognize his weaknesses relative to the superior talent of the NBA, or if he should be denigrated for having no confidence whatsoever.

Lots of good points in this thread.

Either way (with respect to Bell)... he isn't ready for the NBA right now (IMO), he is still lost out there.

[DCZards]

The good sign about Bell is that he played great in the G League - granted only 7 games at 27.7 minutes per game. he made 54 of his 67 FGA's (80.6%!) and 52 of 61 FTA's (85.2%). His per 36 numbers were 23.1 points, 12.0 rebounds, 4.3 assists, 2.8 blocks, and 1.7 steals - with to's being the negative - 4.5. A PER of 31.8. Just 192 minutes - but enough to show there could be some there there. Heck, if he can just hit foul line jumpers at that rate, give him some playing time, because we know he can play defense.

It's a amazing how a guy who was so dominant in his league just a few weeks ago is suddenly totally unwilling to shoot at the NBA level. You would think a guy who can average 23 points while shooting 85% on free throws, would be willing to take an open jumper if available, but Bell turns them all down.

I'm not sure if he should be praised because he shows remarkable discipline to recognize his weaknesses relative to the superior talent of the NBA, or if he should be denigrated for having no confidence whatsoever.

Lots of good points in this thread.

Either way (with respect to Bell)... he isn't ready for the NBA right now (IMO), he is still lost out there.

Bell is in his fourth NBA season and is more ready/aware than younger guys like Rui, Deni and Bonga.

Bell was a solid off-the-bench contributor on a 2017-18 Warriors team that won the championship.