In his 30s, though. He only spent a few years of his 20s in the NBA and was a starter at that time. If he had come to the NBA at 21, I don't know how accepting he'd have been about a bench role.
His defense was a big part of his impact. If CJ ever improves defensively and keeps putting up the same stats, then I'd be inclined to agree, but we're not there yet.
You're right. I doubt CJ would be willing to accept that kind of role at his age. I'm just trying to think outside of the box about how he might stay here and be part of a contender. With Lillard and CJ as the starting duo I doubt they'll every be able to paper over the gap that's created when they are both on the court together.
I think the main problem is that the Spurs had sufficient talent that they could afford to stagger Ginobili's minutes so that he was the alpha when Duncan and Parker were on the bench. Right now, the Blazers flounder when either player is on the bench because they need both guys to compete. If the Blazers added a lot more talent--a superstar and more good role-players--then it could work to move McCollum to a reserve role where he gets as many minutes as possible non-overlapping with Lillard/Superstar.
Absolutely the same thing I've been face-palming during games over. Our offense moves our guards and wings instead of the ball. No wonder they're tired! Cut the weave out entirely, lessens chance of turnovers on bumped handoffs, save that energy for the transition game and Defense.
I think the Parker comparison is a better one. I never really thought of it until now, but they have some similarities. CJ is better at scoring (better shot, better change of direction), Parker possibly better at passing...but he also had better players to pass to, and a better system to pass within. So, despite the fact that Parker won a Finals MVP, I don't think it's too far fetched to say CJ is as good as, or better than, Parker.
Drives me crazy - passing moves the ball MUCH quicker than dribbling does. But 90% of our passes keep the ball in the same general area of the floor - a 20' path above the 3-point line. Lots and lots of running but no actual ball movement, so the defense never gets off balance.
CJ is a starter, but If you believe the back court is too small and too porous on D, you need to pair one with a bigger guard who can play D. As good as the two are, we aren't looking like contenders.
Did they flounder in the games Dame missed? Before that stretch, we we getting blown out a lot of games.
For the season, I've read that the team has a significantly worse point differential when only one of them is on the court, as opposed to them both being on the court.
I'm losing track of time. How many games did he miss? I ask because I wonder if it's a large enough sample size to draw any conclusions from (quality of opponent also matters).
5 games. We went 2-3, lost by 8 to the Warriors on the road. Last time we had played them, with Dame, we lost by 45 there.
And then they lost by 2 at home with him. I don't know if there's anything to be learned there. Overall they lost to some good teams and beat some bad ones. I do remember thinking that they looked competitive in some of those losses (Toronto in particular), but I'm not sure what else you take from it, if you're looking for some kind of narrative.
From my POV, the time with him out and a bigger SG alongside CJ, we played much better. It may have been the turning point for the whole season. Considering we played those games without one of our only two scorers, the team leader, we didn't fall apart. Instead, we played better. We were in the games we lost. We beat teams we were supposed to beat (we were losing those games prior). Stotts has since inserted a big SG in the lineup (ET), allowing CJ to play the worse of the SG/SF on other teams. Another observation I have is that CJ seems to be a pretty good defender of PGs. He's smallish to guard SGs every night. He just doesn't get to guard PGs so much. ET held Klay Thompson to 6-21 shooting last game. That's SOLID. Unfortunately, we had nobody who could stop Durant.
Don't get me wrong, I'm in the camp that thinks we probably have to trade one of them. I'm just saying that sometimes unscouted looks yield surprising results for a short amount of time.
I'm pretty sure teams have looked at film of CJ and Crabbe playing together. If it were, say, Layman playing big minutes, there isn't much film to watch.
