The more we talk about how certain players probably won't get playing time despite our most vehement protestations, the more I wonder if our third line is actually better than our second, depending on how they're split up. My best guess as of this moment is that our primary positional backups are Baldwin, Curry, Turner, Layman, Collins, with our third string being Simons, Stauskas, Trent, Swanigan, Leonard. Imagine those units faced off. Looking at it laid out like that, the 2nd stringers have the clear defensive advantage with Wade, ET, and Zach, as well as superior ball handling across positions 1-3. The 3rd stringers would own the boards, and appear to have the best shooting across the board (although Curry and Layman certainly could hold their own). 2nd string looks to have an athleticism advantage; size is pretty comparable. What do you think? Would you divide the 2nd and 3rd string differently than I did? How would the scrimmage play out? Does this thought exercise tell you anything about the future of the team?
I think Stotts will experiment with different combinations early in the season and it's going to be very competitive...I think some of the 2nd string guys on your list will have bad games at times early and get some time for the 3rd stringers...I also think Collins is likely to get in foul trouble and either Meyers or Biggie will get a lot of those Ed Davis minutes..probably Biggie gets more Collins minutes early on. By December we'll probably settle down to a 10 man rotation keeping at least one starter on the court...after the allstar break it'll trim down to 9 man rotations and Stotts will have his rotations set...I don't expect the rookies to crack the rotation this season other than garbage time
Can I just say again, for the record how pathetically thin our GM left us up front. Right this second. Without seeing the team on the floor. While I dont like units, per say Backup Baldwin Curry Trent Collins Leonard 3rd Simons Stauskus Turner Layman Swanigan
Leonard as a third string in his... what year is he in? 7th? And he still gets $10 mil. Good job, Neil!
Unfortunately I see us starting the season like this: Backup Curry Stauskas Turner Collins Leonard 3rd Baldwin Simons Layman Trent Swanigan I think Neil is gonna double down on his mistakes.
Our talent at the back of our roster is pretty underrated for sure. And as a believer in both Collins and Simons, those two have a serious chance to change the conversation surrounding this team. Not championship contender but perennial HC west playoff team for the next 5+ years.
Yes, this is the way I would see it also. Give Turner a shot with better shooters around him. Give Leonard one (last?) chance to be a player before he becomes MLEC. Collins and Curry are locked in. I also agree Stauskas is the first shooter after Curry off the bench. Would love to see Baldwin step up into the rotation, but unless he has a relentless balance of attacking, defending and hitting the three, he starts behind the new shooters--because Olshey wants to see what it looks like to have ET run the second unit.
I think it would be wise to see if any trade value can be built for Meyers before the deadline...if he has an impact...we'd be smart to build on that early and move him at the deadline with some actual value.
If ML came in and had positive impact, finally looked to be figuring things out and NO trades hi, I’d have very conflicting emotions about it. First hurray we finally got rid of that contract. Second though is oh great we suffer through 6+ years of that then when it finally looks to be paying off here comes our gm to trade him away. So I guess that’s kind of a no win for NO, but I guess maybe that’s why you don’t out bid your self in contract negotiations. I get what you’re saying it’s not a bad strategy, just saying That situation is a little conflicting too.
He needs a change of scenery....fans booed him for no reason other than entering a game last year...Blazers fans never boo players that I can remember..would be a win win to trade him for a wing or even another big
I agree in many ways, but wouldn’t it kind of feel bad to have him finally start coming around just in time for us to trade him? Believe me I’m not arguing against the idea of trading him.
Not me. He'll never be anything but a fringe backup. If we get anything of value for him it will be a plus.
Fair enough. If he raises his value enough to be of any value in a trade he’ll have to look like much more than a fringe backup... No one wants 10m a year for a fringe back up. I guess in my mind he’d have to play like a legit back up, like some guy who deserves 20 minutes a game. Again - not trying to argue not to trade him, I’ve been on the bandwagon he needs new scenery and we need that cap space for something else, for a while now.
Neil doesn't choose who plays, Stotts does. That said, we will probably see something like this to start the season. Stotts is going to do a lot of experimenting. Too much experimenting. Stauskus should be a situation guy, not a solid 2nd string. Meyers will get minutes. Stotts will want to look at 3 guard combinations with Collins in the front court with different guys at power forward. Maybe have hark leave early and come back in with the second string. Probably be forced to give Meyers some minutes now that Davis is gone. Stotts will go extra small with sfs at the pf position...Hark, maybe Layman. Stotts will always look to have a starter or two in, with bench guys working in around them. The front court is thin as a potato chip. Gonna force some Unorthodox lineups. Putting shooters around Turner off the bench makes sense. I wish Turner was gone. If It was up to me: 2nd String PG: Wade Baldwin SG: Curry SF: Turner PF: Hark out early back in at the 4 C: Collins 3rd String Simons Trent Meyers Swanigan Layman Stauskus
