Xatticus wrote:MagicMatic wrote:What this debate is really about in my opinion comes down to logical roster construction. I’ve been saying this for… I don’t know… The last 4 seasons.
No 3 player combination of Okeke/ Isaac / Barnes / Kuminga make sense on a basketball court together. Why? Because they individually don’t provide enough offense and Orlando’s back court isn’t talented enough to shoulder their lack of floor spacing. Not many back courts would be, apart from Curry/Klay or Lillard/McCollum.
The response to this criticism has lately been “who cares we’ll figure it all out later after we get the talent”. I disagree with that notion simply because you have to put players in the best chance to highlight their strengths and succeed. Flipping young prospects rarely gets you the same return as making a good selection or trading your pick.
That's not what it's about to me. I see no evidence whatsoever to indicate that Kuminga is a better offensive player than Barnes at present. "Potential" is the word we use when something isn't there, but we hope that it will be some day. Scottie Barnes was objectively more efficient at the offensive end.
"Bucket getters" are shot thieves. They will invariably steal shots from their teammates. They aren't creating possessions. This is tolerable if they are actually good enough to justify their extra usage. If they aren't, then they are just damaging the offense. Kuminga made his team's offense worse, not better.
Orlando tied with Denver for 8th in the league in field goal attempts per game. Our offensive problems have nothing to do with a lack of field goal attempts. Basketball is quite simple. Teams trade possessions. The only ways to create extra possessions are via turnovers and rebounds. A higher usage rate is not inherently superior to a lower usage rate. A player's offensive value lies not in how many points that player scores, but rather in their impact on their team's offensive efficiency.
I have learned recently that most people around here have only a vague familiarity with Magic Johnson. I haven't made the comparison myself, though I do see similarities. The fact is that despite those similarities, Magic Johnson was just a much better player at the same age. That said, Magic Johnson was not a good shooter. He wasn't a great athlete. He was very smart and he was selfless. He didn't settle for crappy shots he couldn't hit. He attacked the paint and he found his open teammates. He took high percentage shots and he got to the free throw line.
I have no delusions about Barnes' skill set. He isn't going to become what most around here want. He can, however, become a very good offensive player. That's well within his reach.
Getting harder to find good conversation here lately, but I like where MMatic's head is at. I too value roster construction. Picking the right guy trumps picking BPA. Side note: BPA is an opinion, and obviously you don't pass up on BPA if the drop off is clear and you can secure an elite prospect. However, in most cases unless you're picking in the Top 5, it's hard to clearly put a ranking on BPA. So roster construction is going to be more important for the majority of the time.
Case in point, I think Chuma was drafted due to roster construction when we reached for him. He would've been a fair pick if he had been healthy, but he wasn't. He was a clear reach. The part that I disagree with MMatic here is that I don't consider Chuma and Isaac strictly as inside scorers. Both need to continue to mature, and I don't think they have topped out yet. Aggressive Chuma is gold. Passive Chuma is mold. Isaac's shine is wearing, but we've got to believe. He is a 3 level scorer. Until he crushes our hearts, we just have to remain hopeful.
Does Barnes/Kuminga fit with us? Ideally no. But why? Not because of Chuma or Isaac. But rather, because even having 1 inefficient shooter is 1 too many in today's game. We already have that with Fultz. Fultz is the reason why Barnes and Kuminga are hard to fall in love with. Not too mention, the chucker that Cole is (you might want to patent "shot thief", I love it!) and the rawness of RJ. Coin Toss Ross doesn't help and Gary Harris is just a guy. Our backcourt is the reason why Barnes and Kuminga don't work because none of them are reliable deep threats. Put them on Golden St and Barnes/Kuminga might flourish way more than they would in ORL. Team, coach, system, winning environment means just as much to a player's success.
This is why I would aggressively trade up for Suggs. Green is a lock at HOU. No use in chasing there. However, Suggs is definitely within reach. Masai loving Barnes is not a smoke screen imo. We could entice him to do a no-brainer trade with us. He gets his guy and picks up more assets. While we get Suggs. Suggs settles the chaos. Brings pace and control, making the smart play, has ice in his veins and could be the one piece to turn this team around quickly.
If we do end up with Barnes, I'll force myself to get behind him. I won't fool myself into thinking that we got ourselves a star, but I'll take a guy who can defend opposing 3s and 4s and pass the ball. To be clear, he passes the ball because he knows he can't shoot... not that he has some great passing vision. I cringed at the mention of Magic Johnson. The Kawhi and Draymond comps are crazy too.
If we do end up with Kuminga, it will feel better than settling, because I'm a glass is half full kinda guy. If he ends up hurting the team because he takes ill advised shots, then he'll flame out of the league. But I'm just not ready to proclaim him to be that kind of player after only 13 G-League games. He really does possess a rare combination of athleticism, fluidity and physique. I do think that he moves like a real fluid wing. Unlike Barnes. Hiring a guy like Moseley is the ideal type of coach he needs.
