Official: you be the GM (what would you do)

This is a little one-note, but it's an easy base upon which to build:

Trade or cut everyone who had a PER less than 13 last year during the regular season. We only had seven guys - SEVEN! - with a per above 13 last year. San Antonio? They had 12 guys above a PER of 13.

That leaves us with our starting five, and two high-risk, high-reward bench guys: TRob, and Thrill.

Bring in low-risk, consistent guys. Nate guys. Pop guys. Guys who started for us back in the dark years. Scrappy guys. Guys who throw themselves to the floor in January games. Let them work their asses off got get 18-20 minutes a game. Play a more strict play-based system for the bench, and play them together. Let the starters flow. Make the bench read from the sheet music.

 

Doesn't that plan presume that none of our current bench fodder has the ability to improve? I can see coming to the conclusion that the old guys are as good as they are going to get (Watson/Mo/Dorell). This is where the evaluation expertise of our staff is important. They should know to which of our projects are worth devoting another year.

 

I definitely admit that I didn't have time to flesh out the idea, since I'm at work

Take away Dorrell, Mo, and Earl... you have Crabbe, Claver, McCollum, Leonard, and Freeland. You have to consider if they are going to (a) play better than a replacement "scrappy" player, and (b) play as well for the same amount of cash money. Leonard and Crabbe aren't ready, and won't be in time. Leonard's contractis a miniature boat anchor given his contribution level. Both are gone in my plan.

Freeland is a scrappy player in the Nate mold, so he can stay, if he can improve his game a bit more. CJ probably deserves another year. Claver could be a scrapper, but he's not performing well at all... but he's really cheap so maybe he gets another year and a larger role to prove himself.

So yeah, it's not as simple as I posted. But we need - NEED - at least a 13 PER out of everyone in our (hopefully 10-man) rotation.

 

Good points. You just drained most of my hope. A trade is probably in order.

 

I kind of disagree. Terry really only uses and 8 man rotation, so guys like Leonard, McCollum and Crabbe have space to invest a year or 2 more into before we cut bait. Leonard kinda reminds me of Jermaine Oneail, not in terms of comparable skills or that I think he will have the same success should he go elsewhere, but in that he just seems young and trying to figure out the speed of the game. This upcoming season is really the pivotal season to see if we have a kid worth hanging onto, his cost isn't a bank breaker by any means.

 

Paul Allen won't want to just cut guys making millions and have to pay a replacement another million. If we can find a team to eat the contracts of Leonard, Wright, Clavier sure go do it.

 

That's the likely scenario yeah.

 

San Antonio has shown us the wisdom of lowering starter minutes: longevity, strong bench play (though that's a bit chicken or egg), and long term post-season success from being well-rested. It might behoove us to move from an 8-man rotation to a 9- or 10-man rotation, which wouldn't be scary if our bench was better.

 

Everyone on this team except Batum and Crabbe can be considered expiring deals, Either they expire or have a team Option or are RFA. Combining Wright + other bench pieces might help another team be liberated of a contract they might want to get out of for cap or $$$ reasons.

 

I agree completely, but Stotts historically as a head coach has typically used a short rotation.

 

I'm hopeful that he will be in new territory soon, with a team that's good enough to loosen the grip a bit. So far as head coach he's had done bad teams to deal with and bad benches at least.

 

Stotts with Atlanta used 9 guys 10mpg in 53 gmaes or more
In Milwaukee he used 10 one year and 9 the other

Like I said in another thread Pops used 13.

 

A major reason the Blazers' starters played so many minutes is because the bench was so bad. Portland only made the playoffs by 4 games (Dallas held the tiebreaker). Had LMA been injured even 8 more games, I'm not sure the Blazers make the playoffs.

 

Pop has 13 players better than Mo, so yeah.

 

Agreed; like I said, it's a chicken or egg situation.

 

For me, the solution is to try and move guys like Wright, Leonard, or Freeland in a trade to bolster the bench. The starters are very, very good. When the Spurs bench was on the floor with Portland sans LMA, it was a bloodbath.

 

Yeah, we need a player off the bench that you can pass to, and who will score pretty efficiently. Sixth man is a great spot for a mostly okay bench player who's better offensively than defensively. Greg Monroe?

 

Agreed, though I would prefer to keep Leonard one more year. I don't think he's going to be some supstah, but I do think he can become a solid backup 5 with some experience and more work this summer. I have my Keep list, for now, as the 5 starters, Trob, Meyers, CJ and Will. Freeland and Wright might be able to bring a decent reserve upgrade. Then use MLE to add another.

 

I still want to say Marvin Williams would be my #1 target for the MLE for us.

 

BTW the reason I say Williams, is most of the guys people in here are proposing made MORE than MLE last year, and their teams are worried about being able to match offers to keep them. Examples being Gortat, Deng, Lowry. Others are already primary starters for their teams. Marvin is going to be 28 and looks like a legit rotational bench guy. He doesn't look like the kind of player many teams are going to spend big on to be a starter. As a wing from the NW Portland seems like a good fit, and he would be better than any of our current bench players. Is he a sexy pickup, no, but he's a solid pickup that fills a need. Then you can trade wright and a filler for a player another position, maybe a PG.

2nd String
CJ, Barton, Marvin, Thomas, Freeland