Lillard is the most amazing blazer I've seen in person.

Maynor is a 25 year old PG who has only played 3 seasons and missed a lot of games from injury (and being underutilized). He may still have some upside in a bigger role. If I had to roll the dice on who has more potential to improve between Matthews and Maynor, I'd go with Maynor. Matthews is a year older, was undrafted, and has 4 years of starters minutes to show what he's got.

Anyway, it's not that Maynor is good enough to push Lillard to play out of position. It's more like an Eric Snow kind of situation where Iverson could move to SG because he was more effective there. It may be that the team is more effective with Lillard in more of a SG role.

At some point Wes is going to have another injury, and Maynor will get the start. It's going to be interesting to see if Maynor can cement that role as a starter if he gets the opportunity.

 

With Maynor starting, you then have no backup PG, again. And we see how much better our bench/team seems to perform with a good backup PG. It'd be absurd to then alter that by starting him, and making Wes our backup G.

 

It wouldn't bode well for us defensively either. It's just extremely rare for two point guards to start together (on a decent team especially), although pretty much every team utilizes a two PG lineup at some point these days. The Snow-Iverson reference was a good one. I just think Lillard is much better as a PG.

The answer isn't giving Maynor more minutes, it's acquiring a SG who deserves those minutes minutes.

 

I'm sure Maynor and Lillard can play alongside each other occasionally in small ball lineups, but long-term there's absolutely no way those two can be your starting 1 and 2 from a defensive perspective. Teams would quickly adjust and throw large guard lineups at them. The Dubs had to break up Curry and Ellis for exactly the same reason.

 

Not really. Start Lillard/Maynor, and when one sits you bring in Wes. Always have one of Lillard or Maynor on the court (which we pretty much do now anyway). The only real difference is you play Maynor 10 more mpg, and let him start (and often finish). With Lillard averaging nearly 40mpg, planning around him playing 20 mpg at PG with Wes isn't that hard.

It's not absurd to say, "The current lineup of Lillard/Wes with Maynor off the bench works. But maybe Lillard/Maynor with Wes off the bench works even better." Seems like a pretty natural question to ask at this point. Especially given how the league seems to be going away from traditional 6'5 SG's like Roy/Kobe/Wade/Allen.

In the end, it's all about Lillard. Which guy "fits" next to him better? The bigger natural SG who hits 3's well and defends? Or the PG (who at 6'3 has pretty good size), a much better handle, a mediocre outside shot and better passing?

I don't know the answer, frankly. But it's close enough that I'm wondering.

 

Monte Ellis wasn't a natural passer. He wanted to be The Man, when Curry was clearly better at that role. Not really the case with Lillard/Maynor. (Also, just going by an eyeball test, although Curry/Ellis are the same height as Lillard/Maynor, it seems like Lillard/Maynor are just stronger/heavier.)

The Sixers had a lot of success in the early 2000's with a starting guard lineup of 6'3 and 6'0. Mavs did it with Terry and Kidd.

It's becoming a waterbug league where 6'2 guys are scoring points, drawing fouls and getting to the line (and passing to teammates a little along the way).

We see Wes Matthews post up smaller guards all the time, and frankly I never feel like it's a huge advantage. Not just because Wes isn't a great post SG, but it just seems like it's not as effective an offense. With the hand-checking rules it just seems like there are easier ways to get buckets/guards in foul trouble. Andre Miller, Ray Allen, lots of these SG's have that play run a couple times a game, but it seems less and less like an option now than it was back in the early 2000's where Bonzi and Smitty made their living there.

If we went that route, we'd definitely have one of the smaller guard lineups in the league. But we'd also have one of the fastest.

 

I'd also add that the Miami Heat had a championship back court of 6'4 and 6'3 (Wade and Damon Jones). Wade started his rookie year at PG (and had a very nice rookie year at 16/4/4), but really blossomed when he moved over to the 2.

 

A Maynor and Lillard backcourt at the end of games is a terrible idea in most instances. Defense. I still feel like you're glossing over defense. Maynor and Lillard are both not good defenders.. Being undersized would make it doubly worse.

 

I love Wes but the heart hustle/defense he brings would be sorely missed if we replaced him with Redick. Redick can shoot the lights out and his handles are better then Wes but his D is very suspect. I'd love to have both Redick and Wes with one of them being the sixth man off the bench.

 

I agree, while Maynor/lillard are both listed as 6'3 so they are not undersized at PG but whoever is at SG would be abused like there is no tomorrow (already happens at times when they are both on the court).

 

Which SG will abuse Lillard that is not already abusing every other SG in the league anyways? A lot of the great SG's score at will because of their quickness not because of their size. Maybe in those cases we are better off. Anyways I would not do it all game long but sometimes smaller players bother bigger players more than bigger players. They certainly do LMA.

I will take small quick PG's over big, bad passing, and bad dribbling SG'd down the stretch of a game anytime.

 

You already have a small quick PG, Lillard. I'd rather have the big, good shooting SG who can play defense.

 

Asking Lillard to guard 2s for the rest of his career doesn't seem like an especially good recipe for team success. Just because lots of other mediocre 2 guards are getting beat on doesn't mean you throw in the towel and give up playing D at that spot too. Small lineups are fine in small doses and very particular circumstances, but this is not a good "general" long run strategy.

Sounds like a false choice to me. Wouldn't you rather just get a big 2 who can dribble a little and play a little bit of D to pair with Damian?

 

This is why I hope Elliot Williams can come back healthy next season. I know it's a long shot, but I love the idea of a Lillard/Maynor/Matthews/Williams four guard rotation. Williams is 6'5" and as athletic as anyone in the league. He had a reputation as a good defender in college, and in his very limited NBA action, he showed an ability to create his own shot and score against anyone (21.3 PTS/36).

The best part, if he is healthy, we get him for free without giving up anything. We don't have to trade anyone and don't have to overpay for a mediocre free agent. We could use our cap space on a defensive minded center and draft BPA with out 1st round pick. You could start Wes and Lillard, and mix it up throughout the game. You could go small, with Lillard/Maynor, go offense/defense late in the game, bring in Williams for instant offense when no one else can get anything going. I know it may never happen, but I'm really pulling for Williams to put these injuries behind him so we can see what he can do.

BNM

 

Kind of why I have said about 20 times we should only do it in small doses, and yes I would rather have a big SG that can dribble , shoot, pass, attack the basket, and play D. How long do I have to wait before we get one?

 

Watching him at the game last night, I remarked that more and more, he is starting to remind me of Dwayne Wade.

 

The clutchness and will to win like Wade is similar for sure.

 

It basically does! Almost every jumpshot he misses either rims in and out or goes right off back rim. That's a sign of a terrific shooter and if he gets even better which I think he will, then he will be unguardable.

 

And you saw Roy's Game 4 vs Dallas.

 

I've hoped that from the beginning.