No but in staggered rotations I expect a pt of attack defender to be on the court and so far the Dame Ant combo isn't floating my boat...Ant is way too passive with Dame out there...I don't want to dig holes early in games like last season.
Malcolm Brogdan will be getting paid 300k more than Ant next year and he's gonna be a bench player. Jordan Poole will be the 6th man on his team and also get a max deal. There's your precedence if you really need it. I don't necessarily think moving Ant to the bench is the end all be all solution, but it at least needs to be an option.
That second half sounds much more realistic; they each play 18 minutes; 12 minutes they play together and 12 minutes they play solo. Why not just do the same thing with both of them starting? 0min Dame & Ant Start 6min Ant sits (Both have played 6 mins) 10min Ant replace Dame (Dame 10min Ant 6) 16 min Dame replace Ant (Dame 10 min Ant 12) 18 min Ant joins (Both 12 mins - final 6 together) Both players get their 36 minutes. If its a blowout both sit the final 6+ minutes and only play 30 minutes. Ginobili didn't start many years; but those years he played well under 30 mpg and the Spurs were loaded with deep starting talent. Bringing Simons off the bench doesn't improve the defense or change the dynamic of the team unless his minutes get cut to under 30mpg.
So the two teams in the finals that are loaded and deep into the tax. One with a historic backcourt duo of Steph and Klay. The other added Brogdon to be a rotational piece, not one of their two primary players. Those situations sound more similar to some years of the Spurs having Ginobili off the bench. Although many years Ginobili was a full time starter. Thats a little different than the Blazers putting $100 million Simons on the bench for a lottery team to start a player in Winslow who is in his 8th season; has averages of 8ppg, shoots 41%/31%
How many teams have a player coming off the bench who averages more than a starter(pts/rebounds/assists) who the bench player could replace in that same position? Forget about money for a moment. im curious and have no idea.
Thats a bit too open of criteria; every team in the league would have likely one or more players who exceed a starter in points or rebounds or assists.
Hard for me to see many realstic scenariors where Hart is on the roster a year from now. I like Hart, but the fit with Dame/Ant combined with our legit need at SF, on top of our shortcomings when it comes to bigs, make him a fairly obvious trade chip.
Last year the Blazers had Simons with more assists than Powell Little with more PPG than Covington The Warriors had two sub forwards in Otto Porter and Kuminga both scoring more than Draymond. The hard part is most the great bench players start significant portions of the season, and most the mediocre starters come off the bench for a lot of it; so its a hard comparison to make. Also hard to define the same position; as teams might switch a PG and Center for starts with every one else sliding a position.
Maybe we could trade him for Eric Bledose type contract that has $5 million of salary next year and Didi! Then we won't lose Hart for nothing.
ahh i see you are picking the stats i noted apart. I meant in all three or i should have clarified better stats across the board. Significantly better stats. Or the obvious better player. im in the “bring Ant off the bench” group personally, but im trying to see where that happens in other areas of the league.
http://www.espn.com/nba/history/awards/_/id/40 I'd bet a number of guys on this list would outdo at least one starter.
Hart is a good player and has to claim the starting SF position, not just start. That's the only way I see him as a Blazer beyond this year. The fit beside Lillard and Simons is less of a concern, IMHO, than taking that position in no uncertain terms. With that said, like TINCE, I cannot see Hart on the Blazers after this season (and I do expect him gone by the trade deadline). His skills at both ends, the size of contract, and length of contract makes him THE player to trade whether in a significant package or alone. He has trade value. The back-up bigs need a serious upgrade in size with talent. The 3 needs an upgrade in size and talent. It goes through Hart. After Hart, it's between Winslow and Little with Little going out only in a significant package for a talent/size upgrade. IMHO, the moves by Cronin, et.al. this summer -- GP2, Sharpe, and (to a lesser degree for now) Walker -- made trading Hart more likely as GP2 brings the D, Sharpe with better size and ceiling, and Walker with size and the beginnings of a multi-skilled, high IQ player. [The high value acquisition of Grant as a starter should solve one ongoing problem.]
This is the point I've tried to make, but said in a nice, calm manner, a skill which I clearly do not seem to possess.
Unfortunately Hart Little Winslow did nothing to clearly deserve the starting 3 so far. I hope Nas breaks out. Maybe his underwhelming play is due to being sidelined for an extended period and simply needs more time to play up to his potential. I don't think he's quite ready but I wanna see how Sharpe looks playing with Dame Ant Grant and Nurk. Not sure if that's been done in practice but I'm curious.
Winslow makes sure scoring at the hoop happens. Not by bulldozing to the hoop, but by passing to his teammates who know he can get them the ball for easy scores. Nobody gets better looks for Nurkic than Winslow. Winslow will dribble right up to Nurk and hand him the ball if he has to.
