khans2k5 wrote:Saw a tweet quoting Thibs that he wants a tough, shot blocking center next to KAT. That should all but end the Markkanen talk as he is none of the above lol. Again, nothing but the best from Chad Ford tying us to another stretch 4 because he has no information regarding who our team actually wants.
So either Thibs wants to zig when everybody else is zagging... or he's really behind the times.
How can you say he's behind the times when very good teams like LAC, Utah, SA and Memphis are built like that? GS is the only successful small ball team in the league. Teams like SA and CLE only bust it out when it's needed against GS. Otherwise they play 2 bigs most of the time. Small ball is overrated as a necessary way to build. Only 3 teams are good at it in the whole league and they happen to have most of the best players in the league to do it at such a high level. Just because they are the 3 best teams right now doesn't mean that's the only way to build your team. Plenty of other successful teams who just haven't won titles still play a rim protecting center and 2 bigs in general.
Utah found more success this season with Joe Johnson playing some small-ball 4. Memphis started the transition with Randolph coming off the bench. San Antonio is a classic zig/zag team (can't dispute their results).
I simply think that Towns is a transcendent player as a stretch 5 who can exploit any matchup at any time. For a team already dismal defensively, I don't see how bringing in a 7-footer to guard in space is going to help on that end.
I do believe, however, that Markkenan can do some things offensively if his outside shot is legit. I just think there's a limit there in a lot of matchups if he can't exploit smaller players guarding him.
If Towns can't defend the rim as the 5, then we have almost no chance at ever being successful and so far he's been garbage protecting the rim without KG playing next to him. Towns should be a 5, but if he doesn't step it up as a rim protector someone else needs to be put there even if it means taking away some of his mismatch potential on the offensive end. Defense starts at the rim. It won't matter how big of a mismatch he is at the 5 if we can't stop anyone on the other end. That's why the Warriors/Cavs series wasn't close. GS could protect the rim with Durant and Green and Cleveland was giving up good look after good look at the rim. Those small ball lineups work best with a guy who can protect the rim aka Green, Gasol, Gobert, etc. If Towns is gonna be a matador it just won't work here and I don't think we should risk another season of bad defense in hopes he gets it and starts challenging people at the rim.
Fair enough.
So that should make the Markkenan pairing even less viable. Markkenan was notoriously terrible at the college level protecting the rim. Thus, having Towns there to help out seems like a disaster.
khans2k5 wrote:Saw a tweet quoting Thibs that he wants a tough, shot blocking center next to KAT. That should all but end the Markkanen talk as he is none of the above lol. Again, nothing but the best from Chad Ford tying us to another stretch 4 because he has no information regarding who our team actually wants.
So either Thibs wants to zig when everybody else is zagging... or he's really behind the times.
How can you say he's behind the times when very good teams like LAC, Utah, SA and Memphis are built like that? GS is the only successful small ball team in the league. Teams like SA and CLE only bust it out when it's needed against GS. Otherwise they play 2 bigs most of the time. Small ball is overrated as a necessary way to build. Only 3 teams are good at it in the whole league and they happen to have most of the best players in the league to do it at such a high level. Just because they are the 3 best teams right now doesn't mean that's the only way to build your team. Plenty of other successful teams who just haven't won titles still play a rim protecting center and 2 bigs in general.
Utah found more success this season with Joe Johnson playing some small-ball 4. Memphis started the transition with Randolph coming off the bench. San Antonio is a classic zig/zag team (can't dispute their results).
I simply think that Towns is a transcendent player as a stretch 5 who can exploit any matchup at any time. For a team already dismal defensively, I don't see how bringing in a 7-footer to guard in space is going to help on that end.
I do believe, however, that Markkenan can do some things offensively if his outside shot is legit. I just think there's a limit there in a lot of matchups if he can't exploit smaller players guarding him.
If Towns can't defend the rim as the 5, then we have almost no chance at ever being successful and so far he's been garbage protecting the rim without KG playing next to him. Towns should be a 5, but if he doesn't step it up as a rim protector someone else needs to be put there even if it means taking away some of his mismatch potential on the offensive end. Defense starts at the rim. It won't matter how big of a mismatch he is at the 5 if we can't stop anyone on the other end. That's why the Warriors/Cavs series wasn't close. GS could protect the rim with Durant and Green and Cleveland was giving up good look after good look at the rim. Those small ball lineups work best with a guy who can protect the rim aka Green, Gasol, Gobert, etc. If Towns is gonna be a matador it just won't work here and I don't think we should risk another season of bad defense in hopes he gets it and starts challenging people at the rim.
Fair enough.
So that should make the Markkenan pairing even less viable. Markkenan was notoriously terrible at the college level protecting the rim. Thus, having Towns there to help out seems like a disaster.
I don't see how it works defensively.
I am firmly on the boat that would be an absolute disaster of a defensive frontcourt. If you thought giving up as much as we did with Dieng and Towns was bad, wait till you see what adding a no rim protecting, poor rebounding Lauri can do to a defense. And then you pair some of his minutes with Dieng and it's still a disaster. We'd have to score 120 a game because we are for sure giving up 119 a night with that frouncourt trio.
I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
I think most have been fair by pointing out the specific reasons (among his weaknesses) why he might not be a good fit here.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
I think most have been fair by pointing out the specific reasons (among his weaknesses) why he might not be a good fit here.
News to me lol, ive lost track of how many posters here that have tried to brush off the one skill he does have. Rarely has anyone mentioned fit it's all about how about how easy they think he will he able to be shut down.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
I think most have been fair by pointing out the specific reasons (among his weaknesses) why he might not be a good fit here.
News to me lol, ive lost track of how many posters here that have tried to brush off the one skill he does have. Rarely has anyone mentioned fit it's all about how about how easy they think he will he able to be shut down.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
I think most have been fair by pointing out the specific reasons (among his weaknesses) why he might not be a good fit here.
News to me lol, ive lost track of how many posters here that have tried to brush off the one skill he does have. Rarely has anyone mentioned fit it's all about how about how easy they think he will he able to be shut down.
You might need to read posts more thoroughly.
Nah, you just made shitty comparisons to Markkanen like others and got called out. Don't get mad about it lol youre not the first poster here to typecast him with the first tall white shooter you can think of
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
I think most have been fair by pointing out the specific reasons (among his weaknesses) why he might not be a good fit here.
News to me lol, ive lost track of how many posters here that have tried to brush off the one skill he does have. Rarely has anyone mentioned fit it's all about how about how easy they think he will he able to be shut down.
We just have different definitions of fit. Offensively sure. But what's not being presented from the pro-Markkanen side is how he works defensively with KAT. How does his rebounding or lack thereof fit with this roster? Defensively he is not a fit at all with this team. So does he really "fit" here if only half his game fits while the other does not? Especially when you factor in we have plenty of scoring and not a lot of defense and rebounders next to Wiggins and Zach because KAT and Ricky can't grab them all. All we get back is he's 7' and mobile so the potential to get better defensively is there. That's the line for almost every draft prospect ever and few with his skillset and physical attributes become good defenders. They have to be hidden and we don't know if anyone on our roster right now can makeup for that fact and if they can't you are looking at a terrible defensive unit which is not a recipe for success.
It pains me to say it, but I'm with my good buddy Khansy on this one.
I think a number of us have mentioned the fit issue when we've ripped on how soft he played at Arizona. What are the three things Thibs wants? Shooting, defense, and toughness. Markkanen fails miserably in two of those categories. Guys don't typically grow a pair when they come to the NBA. Things like toughness, rebounding, and motor (or lack thereof) are evident in college and generally don't change. Shooting on the other hand....it doesn't always translate (although I do agree I think he has a good chance of being a good NBA shooter).
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I feel like I need to defend Markkanen a bit here, even though I don't think we should touch him.
On a strong defensive team that can compensate for his defensive weaknesses or a super-high octane D'Antoni-style system that would maximize his talents by hoisting a ton of 3s, I think Markkanen could actually be a really useful player.
We are not either of those teams, so he makes no sense for us.
But I think he's getting unfairly maligned here. Mobile seven footers who can shoot it from deep range like that, including off the dribble, offer a very valuable skill. The problem is, it's about all he offers, so fit is really crucial for a player like that. He doesn't have the defense (or length) that a guy like Porzingis brings--but remember, a lot of people were skeptical of Porzingis too. I doubt Markkanen will end up being nearly as good as Porzingis, but nobody thought Porzingis would be this good either. So you never know.
I think most have been fair by pointing out the specific reasons (among his weaknesses) why he might not be a good fit here.
News to me lol, ive lost track of how many posters here that have tried to brush off the one skill he does have. Rarely has anyone mentioned fit it's all about how about how easy they think he will he able to be shut down.
You might need to read posts more thoroughly.
Nah, you just made shitty comparisons to Markkanen like others and got called out. Don't get mad about it lol youre not the first poster here to typecast him with the first tall white shooter you can think of
Ok. You're right. He's nothing like other three-point shooting tall guys who haven't shown the consistent ability to score on post ups or defend in space. He's a much closer comparison to D. Wade or D. Lillard or Anthony Davis.
