Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,498 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
He should no longer be a starter until he gets more aggresive. Every time he gets the ball he's at the 3 point line and immediatly passes the ball off to someone plus his jumper is real cold. We should go out and get a center, but for now I say start the a-train.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,964 Posts
Twin was humiliated last night against the Spurs. I don't think he's just playing hurt anymore. I think his poor quality play is affecting his mental game. Nesterovic is neither an elite nor a tough center - if Twin can't match up better with him, he's in trouble. As I said in a previous thread, I don't mind Twin keeping his starting position (for now), but 20 MPG seems fair. If he continues to play badly, removing him from the starting line-up and dropping his PT further are fair options, too.

Of available players, Williams and Scalabrine are the best options to take over the remaining 28-plus minutes at C if Collins' PT is cut.

Williams . . . PRO: A-Train is the Nets' strongest, most reliable low-post presence. To include K-Mart, A-Train is the only Nets big who will consistently (AND successfully - sorry, Veal) battle inside against big, physical front-courts. Most importantly, he scores in the low-post. CON: While A-Train can hit the top-of-the-key jumper and has a few effective low-post moves, he's not versatile enough to be a focal point in the offense, which often bears out when he plays too many minutes. A-Train is playing hurt, and historically, he's not a durable player. 19-20 MPG is just about right given his physical limitations, and that's when he's relatively healthy. If Scott over-uses A-Train, he'll lose him, probably for a longer stretch than his recently recovered groin injury.

Scalabrine . . . PRO: If the argument for Twin as the primary C is his acumen with the motion offense, then Veal should receive strong consideration to play heavy minutes at the pivot. Whereas A-Train is a traditional low-post strongman, Veal brings the 'finesse' skill-set required of the pivot in the motion offense. Indeed, it's a role he played at USC. Veal offers more options than Twin from the pivot (think Brad Miller). Of course, Veal hustles, brings energy, plays smart, is fundamentally sound, and all that. He's also one of the best help defenders on the team. CON: Veal would be an under-sized pivot, without A-Train's power and athleticism to compensate. As a rebounder in the low blocks, Veal is a vertical-challenged positional rebounder who tends to be outquicked to the ball; not good when boarding against NBA Cs. (Neither PRO nor CON) In his post defense, he's no stopper, but generally is effective keeping himself between his man and the basket, he's strong enough to keep Cs out of the paint, has good footwork and plays physical.

Rogers . . . PRO: He has the talent and ability to be dynamic. CON: Highly unreliable focus, effort and decision-making. Much more often a detriment than a contributor.

My opinion. Twin is no rising star, but we've seen better from him. If Twin is ineffective now because he's hurt, then he should sit out or play reduced minutes - like Manu on the Spurs - until he's healthy again. The Nets are razor-thin at the 1, 2 and 3 but they're deep in 4s. Scott might as well use them at the 5 while Twin recuperates, considering all his 4s have experience playing the 5. I would use both Veal and A-Train, to include playing them together, and assign one nightly as the primary depending on match-ups. Rule of thumb - A-Train plays more against the bigger, more physical frontcourts (Spurs, healthy Lakers, etc) while Veal plays more against the softer, finesse frontcourts (Kings, Mavs, Sonics, etc).
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top