No he get's paid 11 million to start. He would overtake Lopez in the starting lineup before too long. as good as lopez has been for the team this year he is still only a slightly above average defensive center. He would be a fantastic backup and is a good starter but Sanders has DPOY potential and has shown he has that ability. We should not look at the starting 5 as some holy combination that can never be messed with. Lopez is a big upgrade over what Hickson gave us last year but we still need more from that spot with how inept our backcourt is defensively.
That would be a mistake, I think. We definitely should not demote Lopez given the chemistry that the starters currently have and Lopez's familiarity with the team. No, Sanders should just take any and all frontcourt reserve minutes. The major problem with this whole idea is that you can't really play Sanders and Lopez together, which means no rest for Aldridge. Or maybe you can: Robin seems able to hit a midrange jump shot, so...
Maybe not right away but Lopez has only been here for half a season. Why should he be guaranteed a starting role? How can anyone else build chemistry with the starters if they don't play together?
I think Lopez is being undervalued. He may actually be a better player than Sanders, all round. We don't know that Sanders isn't the all-defense version of JJ Hickson - that is, somebody who looks great individually but doesn't actually help the team much. Lopez may be kind of lumbering but he's the absolute essence of a team player and has a considerably better PER than Sanders. If Sanders earns a starting position, then fine, let him earn it. But you don't just hand a starting role to a guy you traded for if the incumbent has been great for you. That's just against the unwritten rules.
I'd say the all defense version of JJ Hickson would be perfect for the starters. We have enough scoring in the starting 5 that a -offensive player at center wouldn't hurt. Robin's offense would bring a nice dimension to the bench as well and would help some of our scoring problems there. I'm not saying to just hand him the starting job, just that if he comes in and earns it then he should be given it. The chemistry Lopez has with the starters should not keep Sanders on the bench if sanders is performing better than Lopez. PER probably isn't the best stat to compare them with since it only measures offense.
I think we're basically in agreement. Our only difference is on the likelihood of Sanders earning the starting spot after a while. I think Lopez's contributions are massive in terms of spacing, passing, offensive rebounding and the like. I think he's the major reason for the Blazers' big improvement from last year. I think the starters should be a well-oiled machine and the bench is the place for players who can come in and disrupt things.
Most definitely. I think you're underestimating Sanders a bit though. He has great ability as a rebounder and he is also arguably a better passer than Lopez. He assists on a higher % of plays and had 83 on the year last year. Sanders 12-13 ORB% 12% DRB% 25.8% TRB% 18.6% Block% 7.6% (best in league) Assist% 6.8% Sanders 13-14 ORB% 9.9% DRB% 20.5% TRB% 15% Block% 5.8% Assist% 5.2% Lopez 13-14 ORB% 13.6% DRB% 15% TRB% 14.3% Block% 3.3% Assist% 3.7% I think Sanders can provide a lot of things Lopez brings while also improving the overall team defense more
We better get him before the Mavs do: http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/mave...arry-sanders-make-sense?ex_cid=espnapi_public
Yeah I'm just not feeling the value for $$$ here. I know we need to help our bench, but I think so many of the trades are just not very well thought out, with the focus being mor eon getting Sanders than what we would actually have left. Example... Leonard/CJ/Mo/Wright for Sanders/Ridnour So our 2nd unit would be? Ridnour - Barton - Freeland and Sanders. We complain now about a lack of offensive production from our bench, and we would be taking a step back here. And if yo look at hollingers analysis his #'s suggest a -3 game affect on the Blazers.
I hear what you're saying with the "what's left after the trade" part of your post, but Hollinger's -3 is stupid. It means absolutely nothing. And in regards to my proposed trade - which, admittedly I put very little thought/effort into - we're sending out two rotation players (Mo & CJ) and getting two rotation players in return. So it doesn't do anything to our depth, it just changes what positions we have depth at - we give up back-court depth for front-court depth. I'd argue that Ridnour is a better PG than Mo (and Lillard!), but wouldn't provide the scoring potential that Mo does. So then the question becomes: Will Ridnour's ability to play PG generate more points than Mo's ability to generate points for himself? The second unit would be: Ridnour Robinson Freeland Lopez I think R/F/L have all shown some ability to score, and perhaps with someone like Ridnour - rather than Mo - on the floor they'd get better scoring opportunities. We'd be weak at SG, so other than spot minutes for Crabbe either Wes or Dame would need to play the bulk of those minutes. If Sanders is truly as great at defense as people proclaim him to be I think we could weather being weak at SG since SG is the least talented position in the NBA.
First of all, you're forgetting Crabbe. Second, we can always mix at least one starter in there. Third, Hollinger's "this will affect the team's outcome" thing is practically a random number generator. First, it's presumably based on his beloved PER, which is no measure of team success. Second, there's no way it could calculate how PER would change with a change of team, and it's arguable that Sanders's PER is unrepresentatively depressed because of the wacky Bucks' season and his injuries and suspension. Fourth, some "bench mobs" have been remarkably successful despite it not looking likely. Think Sacramento's odd assortment in the glory days of the Kings.
Ok So Crabbe.... I didn't forget him, he just hasn't played enough for me to comfortably be able to say yeah he'd fill a void. We have that same void now and he's not playing now.
Right now his role is being filled by CJ. There's only really a point in playing one of them, given how few minutes the one gets anyway.
I am going to say this once and only once if Milwaukee is willing to trade him for any combination of players off our bench then we must make that deal simple as that because it is a fucking gift. Paul Allen has plenty of money so adding Sanders means very little if the goal is to keep the current core together. Milwaukee though is not going to deal him for some combo of Crabbe, Leonard or whatever scrubs people keep suggesting.
