I like Kirk Hinrich, but I now question if he's going to be available. I'm not completely sold on Andre Miller and how he would fit in with the offense. I'm really coming around to the idea that we don't need a proto-typical point guard. Brandon and Hedo can manage the playmaking for a little over half the game, especially in the fourth quarter. Jerryd, Rudy, and Patty can handle the guard position the remainder of the minutes. I don't want to lose Batum's hustle and defense in the starting line up, and I'm excited to see what Hedo can do for Batum's offense. I'm imagining Batum remaining with the starters, giving us a line-up of Brandon, Batum, Hedo, LA, and Greg. Batum can guard the best/quickest perimeter player with Bayless ready in waiting to spell him when/if he tires. This leaves Jerryd, Rudy, and Joel as guys I want coming off the bench, with Rudy getting the bulk of remaining backcourt minutes and ... drum roll please ... David Lee getting the bulk of the minutes coming off the bench in the front court. Would this be successful? Do we have to get a true point guard? Many teams have won championships without one. Can we?
It sure seems as if David Lee has been a target of Pritchard's for a long while, just like Hedo. Travis and Blake to New York for a re-signed David Lee?
If you have Przybilla as a key reserve, how does David Lee get the bulk of the reserve front court minutes? That's the problem...if you have Przybilla and Lee, neither is going to get near starter minutes. Przybilla might be okay with that, but Lee is unlikely to be. Further, Lee is really not a legitimate center. Giving him significant minutes at center would be a downgrade. Giving him only the power forward minutes that LMA leaves on the table would mean getting 10-12 MPG.
I'd much rather have a guy like Turiaf now instead of Lee. Turiaf would be more willing to accept that role of 10-15 mins per game, while we'd just be wasting a talent like Lee making a ton of money on the bench.
If you can move spare parts for David Lee: do it. He's good and he would provide production irrespective of the position and/or the role he's asked to play. Joel and Oden have been hurt pretty consistently the last few years, and Alridge is likely to get bumped and bruised, too... getting Lee on the (relative) cheap and setting up a four man big man rotation would be worth trying. I'd prefer an upgrade at the PG spot, but I prefer David Lee to hanging on to Outlaw and expecting second rounders to be effective power forwards. Ed o.
Finally. Someone who posts with some common sense. Lee is not, and will not be a back-up. Nor should he be. Period. In order to bring him in, LA leaves. Now, if you want to discuss a sign & trade- LA for Lee, then we can talk about it. I know ABM & I had this discussion the other night and he seems to prefer Lee as he considers LA a "liability" in the playoffs. As for me, I see advantages and disadvantages to each player. I'll take either one.
BeerBoy, this has to stop. You have made about the third grade A post in the last week and I'm bloody sick & tired of liking posts made by Beaver fans. So knock it off. That said, what an interesting set of stats.
Well, it's actually kind of a bargain for an above-average PF, if you're rebuilding in NYK. They're not getting Boozer, Lee, Amare, or anyone else worth mentioning for 10.7M next year.
