Which player besides Lillard would you most be upset to see traded?

Serious question (as I continue to beat this drum): With a proper big man coach, who has higher potential, 23-year old Jusuf Nurcic, or 20-year old Zach Collins?

To me, they are both young, raw and have the potential to be excellent 2-way players. Nurk is better today, but he's also 3 years older and in his 4th NBA season.

Ignoring contract situations, and just focusing strictly on skill set/talent, which as the higher upside? Or more specifically, which one will end up the "better" player (everybody has upside, few reach their maximum potential).

Personally, I like would hate to lose either and think they can co-exist.

But (wait for it), both need proper coaching to reach anything close to their full potential. Nurk's defense has been solid, but he's been a trainwreck offensively. The talent is there, it's the execution that's lacking. He's careless with the ball, is a terrible finisher around the rim for a player of his size and commits way to many unforced turnovers. But, those things are correctable, with proper coaching.

Collins is very young and raw. Again, we see glimspes of the talent. His lack of strength will improve as he bulks up, but he's still very, very raw, commits too many fouls, etc. Again, he NEEDS proper coaching to reach his full potential.

I'm not suggesting we trade one, or the other, just curious, based on where they are today, their ages, strengths and weaknesses, who most people think will have the better career when all is said and done.

BNM

 

I'm with you. They are clearly different players. It would be great to have both if both develop to what I perceive to be their potential.

If Nurk gets on the right training program this summer, I expect him to be a monster around the basket next season. I'm not even worried about Collins improving his overall game. He's like a Swiss army knife modern day big man.

 

Two years ago, Ed was my favorite player on the team. Last year, not so much. This year, he's back. Between Ed, Pat and Shabazz, we actually have a solid bench for the first time in forever. Too bad we'll probably end up losing at least two of them.

BNM

 

FTFY Plural bro. He had 3. All of which were LOVELY.



He's much better than Crabbe in every aspect of the game. Even the one we had Crabbe here for, shooting. But even more than that he passes the eye test.

Hard skills like:
Shooting
Ballhandling
Defense (OTB and Off Ball)
BBIQ

And soft skills like:
Athleticism (hops and dunking ability) NEVER seen Crabbe catch an alley-oop...
Aggressiveness
HUSTLE
Focus

And Pat has certainly replaced Crabbe's "contribution" to the team... You folks wishing we still had him and his bloated salary (which will STILL be larger than Pat's after we re-sign him) aren't making sense.

 

I think Zach because he already has better footwork than Nurk. He NEVER flops. He ISN'T SOFT. He has much more of a killer instinct than Nurk.

Also, Zach can already stretch the Defense. I believe he will be better than Nurk.

#yesisaidit

 

Agree with everything you wrote! Some of us saw this coming a year ago - that Pat could easily become a much cheaper, more versatile Crabbe replacement. Crabbe is just a one trick pony - and even that has been exposed in BRK, where he can't rely on defenses leaving him open to focus on Dame and C.J. His .360 3FG%is below league average. He's now below average at the ONE thing he did well in the Stotts' system.

BNM

 

Pat averages 1 dunk for every 67 minutes played.

Crabbe averages 1 dunk for every 588 minutes played.

BNM

 

Of those 3, Pat is the most likely to be re-signed.

 

I SHIT YOU NOT. When It happened, after I stood up in my house and clapped, I said:

"Game Blouses"

 

I agree with dviss - Collins can/will be better than Nurk.
Watching the St Marys v BYU game last night, and SMC has arguably one of the best big men in the country and no "big" man coaches. Their staff is just a bunch of good college coaches. He was an overweight, mediocre player until last year. Now hes a Wooden Award finalist. Anyway, no, its no apples to apples, but the idea that a big man coach will fix our big men...I am not buying it. That player got better, listened to coaches, put in work, and is tough as nails. I think the 5-6 guys on our coaching staff know enough, have seen enough, and understand the game enough that no big man on this roster can blame coaching for their lack of success.

Nurk is body like Tarzan, game like Jane. Man up. He's soft.
Collins is a teenager
Caleb isn't very good and cant jump over a phone book
Meyers is Meyers, hed much rather float around the perimeter shooting 3s. He could be coached by an ex-Point Guard
Ed is doing great
Vonleh is a mystery at this point...I like him.

 

I disagree. I think all of these guys could benefit from a proven big man coach to improve their footwork, their low post moves and their defensive position/ability to defend without fouling.

Yeah, Meyers is Meyers, but if you look back, his development peaked right before Kim Hughes was fired. Hughes was actually working with Meyers in Illinois the day he got fired and Meyers regression was immediate and stunning. Not saying Meyers would have ever been great, but he was more useful four years ago than he is today.

Vonleh is in his 4th season and still has ZERO offensive game.

Nurk's flaws are correctable. Collins is raw. Swanigan needs to learn better foot work and moves to make up for his lack of athleticism.

Hughes had a proven record of "coaching up" several big men. So does Kevin McHale. I'm not saying it has to be one of those guys, but big men require different skills to be successful than perimeter players do. To get the most out of them requires specialized coaching. We don't currently have that, which I believe is THE major reason for a lack of development/improvement (and even regression) among our young big men.

BNM

 

I realize you disagree, many do. Until someone is able to tell me that the coaching staff isn't giving quality coaching, I blame players. if they are not accepting it or think they should be shooting 3's or they are 'all good thanks coach', then its on them.

Who coaches the Celtics big men? Rockets? Clippers?

 

How come Hakeem makes $100K for 2 weeks of training then??

 

I change my mind, it’s still Zach I’d be upset about but I’ll take streaky over soft anyday so Keep CJ over Nurk.

 

The only players I’d really care about leaving are Dame/Zach/and Ed

I think any toughness this team has is because of Ed, either directly or because guys appear to look up to him. When he dunks other guys lift their arms and flex, he has an impact on this team in more ways than the 15 min he gets.

 

Zach's PER is up to 8.1, which is terrible, but it started in the negatives, or a very low number in the 1st month of the season.

Anyone know how to calculate his PER over the last month?

Zach's 3FG% is up to 35%, which is awesome for a guy who hasn't been comfortable on the floor.

 

https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html

I tried to read that but got a headache so I stopped.

 

Here are his game logs since he's been in the rotation:

 

People want a permanent big man coach on this team. I am just not sure what the rest of the NBA does. Yes, lets bring Duncan or Hakeem or Kareem in for a couple weeks. I just don't know what teams like Boston, LA, Houston do on a day to day basis, because looking at their coaching staffs online I do not see any former NBA big men.