Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,438 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Some GM's insist on drafting the best player available, whereas others are content to find the best fit and fill their weakest positions. Babcock pulled a coup up in Toronto when he made what I thought was a terrible mistake by drafting Charlie Villanueva iin the lottery. Not only did I think think he was going to be a bust, but I also thought it was a ridiculous pick because he's about the same size as Chris Bosh. Either player should be an NBA power forward. What were the Raptors going to do with Charlie? Well, it's not as much of an issue when the new player ends up being really, really good, as Charlie has been thus far. You get him on the court somehow, and you'll create some sort of mismatch even if one player plays the "wrong" position.

We've debated quite a bit whether Peja and Ben Wallace would be good fits for this team, but clearly both are extremely valuable with regard to asset collecting. I think Paxson was thinking in this way when he drafted Gordon, who clearly wasn't an ideal shooting guard due to his height. Paxson really must have felt he was the best player available.

When I think about it this way, I really thinking we'll be picking up Peja this offseason. Sure, he's a true SF, and so is Deng, but in this case I suspect Paxson will be willing to complicate the roster in order to add one of the best players available. Who plays what position, and who gets traded if anyone does, will shake out later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Darius Miles Davis said:
Some GM's insist on drafting the best player available, whereas others are content to find the best fit and fill their weakest positions. Babcock pulled a coup up in Toronto when he made what I thought was a terrible mistake by drafting Charlie Villanueva iin the lottery. Not only did I think think he was going to be a bust, but I also thought it was a ridiculous pick because he's about the same size as Chris Bosh. Either player should be an NBA power forward. What were the Raptors going to do with Charlie? Well, it's not as much of an issue when the new player ends up being really, really good, as Charlie has been thus far. You get him on the court somehow, and you'll create some sort of mismatch even if one player plays the "wrong" position.

We've debated quite a bit whether Peja and Ben Wallace would be good fits for this team, but clearly both are extremely valuable with regard to asset collecting. I think Paxson was thinking in this way when he drafted Gordon, who clearly wasn't an ideal shooting guard due to his height. Paxson really must have felt he was the best player available.

When I think about it this way, I really thinking we'll be picking up Peja this offseason. Sure, he's a true SF, and so is Deng, but in this case I suspect Paxson will be willing to complicate the roster in order to add one of the best players available. Who plays what position, and who gets traded if anyone does, will shake out later.



very interesting take on the situation. I do have to dissagree with you about ben gordon not being an ideal shooting guard. Everyone is hating on him because he's had a slow start. The man will come around. As far as peja vs. ben? I think peja would be realistic. Ben puts people in the seats in d town and they'd be stupid to give that up. Good writing though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,438 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
MightyMouse1984 said:
very interesting take on the situation. I do have to dissagree with you about ben gordon not being an ideal shooting guard. Everyone is hating on him because he's had a slow start. The man will come around. As far as peja vs. ben? I think peja would be realistic. Ben puts people in the seats in d town and they'd be stupid to give that up. Good writing though.
It's not Ben Gordon's start this year that makes me doubt that he's an ideal candidate for shooting guard, it's his height. Ben is generously listed as 6'3", when as I seem to remember the combine measurement for him with shoes was 6'2.25". He's really on the short side for that position. Allen Iverson played shooting guard for a long time at 6' even, but he's probably the most talented small guy to ever play the game. He also had Eric Snow to play with, a 6'4" point guard who could specialize on defense and would switch to guard shooting guards. Hinrich is actually similar to Snow in his ability to do this despite being a bit smaller.

You can't tell me that Gordon is an ideal shooting guard candidate coming out of the draft. Any shooting guard under the height of 6'5" is considered undersized.

But anyway, the point of this is that Paxson looked past convential thought and took a risk by drafting Ben. It clearly paid off in year one. Whether he's the ideal long term solution remains up for debate, but outside the box thinking (shoutout to rlucas) can work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Darius Miles Davis said:
It's not Ben Gordon's start this year that makes me doubt that he's an ideal candidate for shooting guard, it's his height. Ben is generously listed as 6'3", when as I seem to remember the combine measurement for him with shoes was 6'2.25". He's really on the short side for that position. Allen Iverson played shooting guard for a long time at 6' even, but he's probably the most talented small guy to ever play the game. He also had Eric Snow to play with, a 6'4" point guard who could specialize on defense and would switch to guard shooting guards. Hinrich is actually similar to Snow in his ability to do this despite being a bit smaller.

You can't tell me that Gordon is an ideal shooting guard candidate coming out of the draft. Any shooting guard under the height of 6'5" is considered undersized.

But anyway, the point of this is that Paxson looked past convential thought and took a risk by drafting Ben. It clearly paid off in year one. Whether he's the ideal long term solution remains up for debate, but outside the box thinking (shoutout to rlucas) can work.

DAMN...I was gonna use the iverson example lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,915 Posts
At this point, I'm not sure how much choice we have. We've more or less committed ourselves to this free agency period, and our 1 time opportunity to spend our 16-20 million dollar wad. There really isn't anyone in next year's FA class that looks like he's going to be 'the guy' for us, so really, the only other road we can take is to just go out and acquire as many good players as possible and try and sort things out later.

Peja looks like a strong possibility, and if we could get him at a decent price, I think it would help. We obviously have other guys that play his position, but, I think he'll always be useful since he has a dominant skill, and Skiles has shown a knack for molding gameplans that do a good job of using a players particular talents within a particular offensive or defensive system. Especially with perimeter players. And if he came here, he would just be a cog in our machine, and wouldn't be relied upon to be our go-to guy, a role he has proven that he's not ideally suited for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,921 Posts
Asset collecting may be the way to go this summer. I have looked at all the superstar (garnett, peirce) trades and I think I would actually rather just keep what we have. Getting Garnett/Peirce is going to take 70%+ of our cap this summer plus two more likely three of our eight young core players and maybe a pick OR TWO. That is going to be costing us 4-6 rotation level players, and we will have nothing but minimum contracts and maybe a little less than the mid if we are lucky to build the rest of the team.

If we just asset collect we can have a very deep squad. Lets say we draft Sheldon and Reddick, and sign Stoyakovich and Mohammed.

Stoyakovich / Deng / Nocioni
Sweetney / Williams / Songaila?
Chandler / Mohammed
Gordon / Reddick / Basden
Hinrich / Duhon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
I agree that it will probably be the "asset collection" route that Pax will take. The Bulls will have about $28mil committed to players, with options on Othella, Songalia, and Allen for about $8mil more if they choose to pick them up. At the least the Bulls will have about $14mil to spend on FAs and on their draft picks. The picks will probably take up to $4mil, leaving about $10mil for the FAs.

Of course the Bulls could choose not to exercise the options they have, and Songaila could exercise his to opt out, which could free up to an additional $8mil for FAs. Those options could become very useful in trade scenarios. In addition, the bulls are listed as having a $3,9mil trade exception which expires in October 2006. This could also be quite helpful in a trade with a team close to the luxury tax threshold.

Trading for a superstar may not be the best route. A lot of folks are pushing for a trade for KG. KG would take up two superstar salaries under the current CBA. The question is whether he would provide two superstars worth of output for the Bulls. Getting two players for $10+ mil each or three players for about $7mil each may be better options.

Getting Peja next year only makes sense if Deng moves to another position. It seems to me that PF would be the only real option for him, and he would have to put on some weight for that. Having Deng and Peja at SF doesn't seem very realistic.

Overall, keeping below the salary cap would also be a plus as it would put us in a strong position regarding future trades.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,386 Posts
If we just asset collect we can have a very deep squad. Lets say we draft Sheldon and Reddick, and sign Stoyakovich and Mohammed.
Indeed, though i'm not ready to predict how the draft would go.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top