- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The Playoff Rosters, Team Building Philosophy, and the Future of the Pelicans
Posted on 5/8/13 at 9:26 am
Posted on 5/8/13 at 9:26 am
So I'm watching the playoffs, and it occurs to me that we are seeing a very interesting contrast in styles between a lot of the teams that are left. You have what I would consider Big Ball vs Small Ball, or basically Rugged v Finesse.
The Grizzlies (and the Pacers) are the "new wave" of old school (if that makes sense): Big, rugged teams that pound away, play great post and perimeter Defense, dominate in the post, and then have guys that can nail corner 3s. The Grizzlies post presence would be hard for any team to duplicate, and the Pacers have a variety of guys with length, quickness, etc. I also do put the Spurs in this category as I see them as a tough, rugged defensive team with guys playing the perimeter 3s and dominate post presence.
On the other side you have smaller ball, you have teams like the Knicks who have a SF playing PF...they rely on ISO, perimeter scoring, jumpers from the elbow, and have a Center inside that is not a scorer but a guy that cleans up the missed jumpers. I do lump the Heat in this category because they do go small ball A LOT, the key difference being that they play spectacular Defense, obviously. And of course, the Knicks and Heat have two big, athletic SFs with unique skillsets, who are both among the very best players in the game, one of them an All Time Great and the other (melo) an all time great scorer.
So while those things can't be duplicated exactly, the model on which the teams are built can be followed.
Getting to my point:
THIS offseason is the offseason where our roster should begin to take shape, where the philosophy on which they want to build the team should begin. We have already started with the piece: Anthony Davis. But is AD better suited for one way, or the other? Do we groom him for a future as a slightly undersized Center to play small ball, run up and down...or do we have him as a dominate PF? Do we try to upgrade the Center position with a more rugged player like Pekovic to pair with Davis and give us a strong, physical post game? Then assemble 3 point shooters to space the floor, like Ryno, Martell Webster, Trey Burke, etc.?
Tell me your thoughts on the future of our roster, and how we start to assemble the team going forward. This is the offseason where the vision has to take shape.
Thoughts?
The Grizzlies (and the Pacers) are the "new wave" of old school (if that makes sense): Big, rugged teams that pound away, play great post and perimeter Defense, dominate in the post, and then have guys that can nail corner 3s. The Grizzlies post presence would be hard for any team to duplicate, and the Pacers have a variety of guys with length, quickness, etc. I also do put the Spurs in this category as I see them as a tough, rugged defensive team with guys playing the perimeter 3s and dominate post presence.
On the other side you have smaller ball, you have teams like the Knicks who have a SF playing PF...they rely on ISO, perimeter scoring, jumpers from the elbow, and have a Center inside that is not a scorer but a guy that cleans up the missed jumpers. I do lump the Heat in this category because they do go small ball A LOT, the key difference being that they play spectacular Defense, obviously. And of course, the Knicks and Heat have two big, athletic SFs with unique skillsets, who are both among the very best players in the game, one of them an All Time Great and the other (melo) an all time great scorer.
So while those things can't be duplicated exactly, the model on which the teams are built can be followed.
Getting to my point:
THIS offseason is the offseason where our roster should begin to take shape, where the philosophy on which they want to build the team should begin. We have already started with the piece: Anthony Davis. But is AD better suited for one way, or the other? Do we groom him for a future as a slightly undersized Center to play small ball, run up and down...or do we have him as a dominate PF? Do we try to upgrade the Center position with a more rugged player like Pekovic to pair with Davis and give us a strong, physical post game? Then assemble 3 point shooters to space the floor, like Ryno, Martell Webster, Trey Burke, etc.?
Tell me your thoughts on the future of our roster, and how we start to assemble the team going forward. This is the offseason where the vision has to take shape.
Thoughts?
5
Posted on 5/8/13 at 9:32 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
have him as a dominate PF
Marc Gasol is probably the best center in the league right now. I don't think that you can bank on finding another one of him. We're going to have to be somewhere in between, like the Celtics.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 9:46 am to ShamelessPel
quote:
Marc Gasol is probably the best center in the league right now. I don't think that you can bank on finding another one of him.
Well I'm aware of that as I said: "The Grizzlies post presence would be hard for any team to duplicate".
However, I'm trying to be a little more abstract: I'm talking about team philosophy, roster building, the "type" of players we want to surround AD with, the style of play we want. We're going to need to start picking up a "type" of player and mold the team in that direction.
I know we aren't going to just go find the next Marc Gasol.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 9:59 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
We're going to need to start picking up a "type" of player and mold the team in that direction.
I don't think this is how roster building operates. You don't pass on talent to try to fit holes.
Really, look at the teams that won titles in the last 10-12 years. Everyone except the Spurs just accumulated talent and relied on that talent and the coach to find the best way to play together.
I don't think trying to emulate the smartest FO in the NBA is a feasible option btw.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 9:59 am to Fun Bunch
Of the two, I'd think we are more likely to go with the Pacers / Grizzlies formula because of the parts we already have.
We can bring in Pekovic to play center, draft Trey Burke as the point, and bring in guys like Martell Webster and/or Dorell Wright to play the 3.
The potential roster-
Burke / Rivers
Gordon / ?
Webster or Wright / Miller
Davis / Anderson
Pekovic / Smith
Vasquez and Lopez would be flipped to pick up other pieces, such as a backup 2 if Rivers is going to be a point rather than a 2 going forward.
If we move on from Gordon, we could potentially bring in someone like JJ Reddick, who is an incredible shooter even if he can't create his own shots.
The offense would run the pick-and-roll / pick-and-pop through Burke and Davis. Pekovic's ability to score in the low post would make him a threat as an outlet while the outside shooting of Redick and Webster / Wright makes them a threat from behind the arc.
Sound reasonable?
We can bring in Pekovic to play center, draft Trey Burke as the point, and bring in guys like Martell Webster and/or Dorell Wright to play the 3.
The potential roster-
Burke / Rivers
Gordon / ?
Webster or Wright / Miller
Davis / Anderson
Pekovic / Smith
Vasquez and Lopez would be flipped to pick up other pieces, such as a backup 2 if Rivers is going to be a point rather than a 2 going forward.
If we move on from Gordon, we could potentially bring in someone like JJ Reddick, who is an incredible shooter even if he can't create his own shots.
The offense would run the pick-and-roll / pick-and-pop through Burke and Davis. Pekovic's ability to score in the low post would make him a threat as an outlet while the outside shooting of Redick and Webster / Wright makes them a threat from behind the arc.
Sound reasonable?
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:02 am to ShamelessPel
quote:
I don't think this is how roster building operates. You don't pass on talent to try to fit holes.
I never said a single word about "filling holes".
Yes, you do try to accumulate talent. You don't pass on a guy that is that much better than everyone else. I've said that many times on this board.
However, you do have to think about philosophy and how pieces "fit", especially in FA.
And in a weak draft like this, let's say you have Anthony Bennett and Trey Burke rated very closely...who you pick says a lot about the roster you are trying to build, does it not?
Also, I'm trying to take a more abstract approach with this thread:
Its less about players and more about the style of play you see this team going in the future.
If you want to talk about what will be available in the draft and FA, what we can get, and HOW THAT will shape the style of play, have at it.
This post was edited on 5/8/13 at 10:06 am
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:08 am to teke184
quote:
Of the two, I'd think we are more likely to go with the Pacers / Grizzlies formula because of the parts we already have.
We can bring in Pekovic to play center, draft Trey Burke as the point, and bring in guys like Martell Webster and/or Dorell Wright to play the 3.
The potential roster-
Burke / Rivers
Gordon / ?
Webster or Wright / Miller
Davis / Anderson
Pekovic / Smith
Vasquez and Lopez would be flipped to pick up other pieces, such as a backup 2 if Rivers is going to be a point rather than a 2 going forward.
If we move on from Gordon, we could potentially bring in someone like JJ Reddick, who is an incredible shooter even if he can't create his own shots.
The offense would run the pick-and-roll / pick-and-pop through Burke and Davis. Pekovic's ability to score in the low post would make him a threat as an outlet while the outside shooting of Redick and Webster / Wright makes them a threat from behind the arc.
Sound reasonable?
That would be a pretty ideal offseason in my mind. Pekovic, Burke, Webster would be spectacular.
However, Pek IS an RFA, so we would probably have to ship something off to get him.
Flip Saunders was on the radio this morning and made it pretty clear they were not doing anything with Love, as some have speculated.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:16 am to Fun Bunch
I think rugged is the way to go. It fits Monty's defense first philosophy and the small ball teams have a dominant scoring SF which the Pelicans probably can't duplicate unless they win the lottery in 2014.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:19 am to TigerinATL
quote:
I think rugged is the way to go. It fits Monty's defense first philosophy and the small ball teams have a dominant scoring SF which the Pelicans probably can't duplicate unless they win the lottery in 2014.
My thought as well. We really can't duplicate the small ball teams as we just don't and won't have that SF that those teams have (or in the case of a Clippers, and all world PG and a finesse PF).
While I kind of have my heart set on Trey Burke, it did make me think that if we went with a guy like Bennett and tried to get Pekovic, that is a big, rugged 3-4-5.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:19 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
However, Pek IS an RFA, so we would probably have to ship something off to get him.
It depends on how we approach things and how Flip changes the Minny roster by the time the new league year starts.
They currently have $52m tied up in 9 roster spots, with $5m in team options for 2 more spots.
That means they are limited in what they can do to improve the team this season if they resign Pekovic or match an offer sheet to him.
We can make Pek a verbal offer and then talk to Minny about a trade.
I could realistically see sending out Lopez and Gordon for Pek if we have other moves lined up, such as getting Reddick to replace Gordon.
Minny may listen to that because a 2 is one of the positions they need help at and Lopez is at least a stop-gap measure at center until they find a long-term replacement for Pek.
If Flip refuses a trade, go all-in on Pek and dare Minny to match.
Matching fricks them cap-wise for this season and potentially for the next few seasons, as Rubio will likely get a long-term extension rather than become an RFA.
Having the three of them on huge deals would potentially tie up $45m or more in just three players.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:30 am to teke184
They don't have a lot of salary commitment for 2014 and they have Rubio for the next two years before his QO/re-sign him. So they aren't in dire straights or anything, but it does create some problems this year.
Sending them Gordon and Lopez is a lot to send for Pekovic, who is a good Center, and a good fit for us, but not exactly an elite type of guy. There's no chance I would send them all that for an RFA.
Sending them Gordon and Lopez is a lot to send for Pekovic, who is a good Center, and a good fit for us, but not exactly an elite type of guy. There's no chance I would send them all that for an RFA.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:38 am to Fun Bunch
I lean more towards a small ball lineup and being flexible in what you can do on the court. Switches on defense, mulitiple ball handlers/creators/passers.
Davis, in his prime, wil be an ideal center for the new perimeter style of play we see in the league now. He can run, defend out to the 3pt line, hit jumpers, attack the rim, protect the rim, etc.
Not against a big name C, but I just dont think they have to have one because Davis cant play a ton of C minutes at this point in his career. And, based on some of his comments, I think Monty is flexible enough in his schemes to make it work
I also think its easier to find good, smaller players. If they draft a guy like Porter and then trade for Bledsoe, that is a team that would cause some havoc.
Ideally your crunch time lineup is
Bledsoe
Gordon
Porter
Anderson
Davis
Obviously this is looking at the team a couple years from now. But its a versatile, long, athletic, and skilled 5.
Davis, in his prime, wil be an ideal center for the new perimeter style of play we see in the league now. He can run, defend out to the 3pt line, hit jumpers, attack the rim, protect the rim, etc.
Not against a big name C, but I just dont think they have to have one because Davis cant play a ton of C minutes at this point in his career. And, based on some of his comments, I think Monty is flexible enough in his schemes to make it work
I also think its easier to find good, smaller players. If they draft a guy like Porter and then trade for Bledsoe, that is a team that would cause some havoc.
Ideally your crunch time lineup is
Bledsoe
Gordon
Porter
Anderson
Davis
Obviously this is looking at the team a couple years from now. But its a versatile, long, athletic, and skilled 5.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:43 am to Fun Bunch
The question for the Wolves is are they going to max out Rubio? If so, I dont know how they keep him, Love, and Pekovic. Do they gamble that Love will be happier w/o Kahn and wont bolt if/when he opts out in 2 years?
They will hope for health and a playoff run next season. But if it doesnt go well next year, I could see them rpulling a DWilliams trade with Love.
They will hope for health and a playoff run next season. But if it doesnt go well next year, I could see them rpulling a DWilliams trade with Love.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:45 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Sending them Gordon and Lopez is a lot to send for Pekovic, who is a good Center, and a good fit for us, but not exactly an elite type of guy. There's no chance I would send them all that for an RFA.
I'm just spitballing at this point.
I mentioned Gordon specifically because I was looking to clear cap space for additional moves.
We've got $35m in space right now, but that's without exercising $8m in team options or signing Pekovic.
Assuming the cap is $60m, we need to move Lopez and Gordon for either space or other pieces once we get Pekovic.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 10:53 am to Fun Bunch
If I was picking, I would pick the defense oriented model.
One of my favorite team(s) was the early 2000s Pistons. I like that hard-nose, grind out model a lot better than any other.
I think the more finesse teams that rely on scoring/shooting have a tougher time sustaining wins. Relying on shooting can get you into the playoffs, but it makes it tough to push through multiple game series.
I think the grind out teams do not need to rely on a superstar as much as the finesse teams do.
One of my favorite team(s) was the early 2000s Pistons. I like that hard-nose, grind out model a lot better than any other.
I think the more finesse teams that rely on scoring/shooting have a tougher time sustaining wins. Relying on shooting can get you into the playoffs, but it makes it tough to push through multiple game series.
I think the grind out teams do not need to rely on a superstar as much as the finesse teams do.
Posted on 5/8/13 at 11:05 am to Chair
Last few championship teams:
Miami- finesse
Dallas-kind of a hybrid
Lakers-finesse
Lakers-finesse
Celtics-hybrid but more towards defense
Spurs-defense
Miami- finesse
Dallas-kind of a hybrid
Lakers-finesse
Lakers-finesse
Celtics-hybrid but more towards defense
Spurs-defense
Posted on 5/8/13 at 11:12 am to HeadyBrosevelt
Bynum and gasol are finesse who knew?
Posted on 5/8/13 at 11:13 am to HeadyBrosevelt
Bynum and gasol and artest are finesse who knew?
This post was edited on 5/8/13 at 11:14 am
Posted on 5/8/13 at 11:24 am to MrBlue105
Gasol is definitely finesse. He has (or at least had for those championship runs) a phenomenal shot for a big man. Not to mention he is a huge pussy 
Posted on 5/8/13 at 11:24 am to MrBlue105
quote:
Bynum and gasol and artest are finesse who knew?
One of these is different.
This post was edited on 5/8/13 at 11:25 am
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News