Camden wrote:I've made my case for both SG and C positions. I'll just simply state my picks.
SG: Kevin Martin
C: Karl-Anthony Towns
I in the same boat as you. Gotta believe the #1 overall pick is going to be starting on the NBA's worst team. And while LaVine certainly looked good the last month or so of the season, I can't say he's a proven scorer i.e. 20 point/night guy like Martin. I don't think there would be enough scorers without him if they start Towns (Rubio doesn't score much and I don't expect much scoring from Towns his 1st year).
But as others have stated - it probably doesn't matter too much. Everyone is going to play and I'm assuming Sam will experiment during the season to find the best combinations.
It is interesting to me because Sam said this year is about development. I think his starting lineup could indicate if he is being truthful or if he is setting the table for an excuse if the team struggles. If it is truly about development, he would probably want Towns out there in the trenches with KG in his ear as much as possible. If he wants to develop LaVine, a case can be made that he should be learning to play off the ball with Ricky so they can build a rapport. He could learn alongside Dre as well but he is the future along with Ricky.
Question: We want LaVine to become a good/great scorer, right? Wouldn't he be able to be more aggressive if he was coming off the bench, young James Harden in OKC style?
I think in terms of fit, Rubio-Martin-Wiggins-Garnett-Towns makes the most sense as the starting lineup.
Miller-LaVine-Muhammad-Bjelica-Dieng makes the most sense as the second unit to me too. LaVine and Muhammad will be looked upon for scoring whereas Bjelica and Dieng are do-it-all type players who can both stretch the floor, and Miller will operate the offense smoothly. I'm excited about that unit, actually.
Camden0916 wrote:Question: We want LaVine to become a good/great scorer, right? Wouldn't he be able to be more aggressive if he was coming off the bench, young James Harden in OKC style?
I think in terms of fit, Rubio-Martin-Wiggins-Garnett-Towns makes the most sense as the starting lineup.
Miller-LaVine-Muhammad-Bjelica-Dieng makes the most sense as the second unit to me too. LaVine and Muhammad will be looked upon for scoring whereas Bjelica and Dieng are do-it-all type players who can both stretch the floor, and Miller will operate the offense smoothly. I'm excited about that unit, actually.
That doesn't make sense. If Lavine started with Ricky/Wiggins/KG/Towns he'd instantly be tied with Wiggins for the best scoring option and given his better handle probably a little bit better of an option. Harden came off the bench because they literally had no one on that unit who could score. We have Bazz at a minimum and maybe more with guys like Dieng/AP/NB. But Bazz is our sixth man scoring punch already and I don't see why Lavine gets to be more aggressive coming off the bench when we would need him to be a top 2 scorer on the starting unit anyway. Think of it this way. He's a top 2 scoring option whether he plays with the starters or the bench, so shouldn't he be spending his time with the starters if the long-term plan is to have him be a starter? Lavine showed he could score the ball last year when he got the chance. I'm not sure why giving him a smaller role next to a more potent scorer in Bazz over Wiggins helps him become a better scorer. That seems like last year was a step forward and this year would be two steps back only to eventually take over the starting job anyway. If we traded Martin and started Wiggins and Bazz I would agree with your assessment, but as long as Bazz is on the second unit we don't need other young guys to take a step back to help the second unit score.
Camden wrote:Question: We want LaVine to become a good/great scorer, right? Wouldn't he be able to be more aggressive if he was coming off the bench, young James Harden in OKC style?
I think in terms of fit, Rubio-Martin-Wiggins-Garnett-Towns makes the most sense as the starting lineup.
Miller-LaVine-Muhammad-Bjelica-Dieng makes the most sense as the second unit to me too. LaVine and Muhammad will be looked upon for scoring whereas Bjelica and Dieng are do-it-all type players who can both stretch the floor, and Miller will operate the offense smoothly. I'm excited about that unit, actually.
That's a very intriguing lineup offensively. Defensively, it could be the worst second unit in the league.
Camden wrote:Question: We want LaVine to become a good/great scorer, right? Wouldn't he be able to be more aggressive if he was coming off the bench, young James Harden in OKC style?
I think in terms of fit, Rubio-Martin-Wiggins-Garnett-Towns makes the most sense as the starting lineup.
Miller-LaVine-Muhammad-Bjelica-Dieng makes the most sense as the second unit to me too. LaVine and Muhammad will be looked upon for scoring whereas Bjelica and Dieng are do-it-all type players who can both stretch the floor, and Miller will operate the offense smoothly. I'm excited about that unit, actually.
That's a very intriguing lineup offensively. Defensively, it could be the worst second unit in the league.
There's no way to fix that right now, unfortunately. The best thing to hope for is that Dieng plays defense like we all hoped he could and LaVine uses his physical tools to become at least average. I think Bjelica's going to be fine (not great, not bad) on defense and we know Miller and Muhammad are going to be poor. This is where coaching would help a lot, but well, you know how that goes...
Camden wrote:Question: We want LaVine to become a good/great scorer, right? Wouldn't he be able to be more aggressive if he was coming off the bench, young James Harden in OKC style?
I think in terms of fit, Rubio-Martin-Wiggins-Garnett-Towns makes the most sense as the starting lineup.
Miller-LaVine-Muhammad-Bjelica-Dieng makes the most sense as the second unit to me too. LaVine and Muhammad will be looked upon for scoring whereas Bjelica and Dieng are do-it-all type players who can both stretch the floor, and Miller will operate the offense smoothly. I'm excited about that unit, actually.
That's a very intriguing lineup offensively. Defensively, it could be the worst second unit in the league.
Don't think it would improve much defensively if you substituted Martin for Lavine. Either way, that unit had better be able to score. But realistically, a good coach will usually not have 5 2nd liners on the court at once.
I agree that there isn't much we can do right now to shore up the 2nd unit defensively, unless KG, Rubio, and Wiggins all come off the bench. But when people like Tim and others talk about us being deep, I think they are looking at it from a pure offensive perspective. Defensively, we are very thin and Mitchell has rightfully made it priority. We'll see if he can coach this team up in that area.
