Danny passed on another Center/Big

Did anybody see this kid Mitch McGary? It was only one game, but he looked like he sure belonged or didn't belong cause hes too good. This white kid had me thinking of a young Dave Cowens or young Jeff Ruland, he might be 6'11", can move and bang at this level, has good hands, even blocked a couple shots....we might have goofed again. If Sams theory that if they show they can do it 3 times in one game is true and we can expect it to be a given that they can do it again, then this kid showed alot ofcourse only at this level, but still its glimmers.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Did anybody see this kid Mitch McGary? It was only one game, but he looked like he sure belonged or didn't belong cause hes too good. This white kid had me thinking of a young Dave Cowens or young Jeff Ruland, he might be 6'10, can move and bang at this level, has good hands, even blocked a couple shots....we might have goofed again. If Sams theory that if they show they can do it 3 times in one game is true and we can expect it to be a given that they can do it again, then this kid showed alot ofcourse only at this level, but still its glimmers.

cow,

McGary is 6'10 1/2" in shoes with a 6'11 1/2" wingspan.  That's not quite "alligator armed" but it's not good.  We need an intimidator.  Sure, we could use a bruiser too, but we really need someone LONG.

And as far as a young Cowens or Ruland, Cowens could jump clear to the moon.  This kid is probably more like Tyler Hansbrough than Ruland.

Cole Aldrich was the #11 pick in the 2010 draft by New Orleans who traded him immediately to OKC.  He's 6'11", 245# and looked like a moose in summer league.  He played two years at OKC and they couldn't wait to ship him out.  Part of a year in Houston, part of a year in Sacto and last year with the Knicks.  He is now a free agent and Phil used a 2nd round pick to take Cleananthony Early.  Think Aldrich will be back?

Summer league means nothing.  They are mostly NBA ham-and-eggers, the basketball equivalent of club fighters, not prize fighters.  That's why I get a little happy when Iverson does something well, we NEED some help at center, but I don't go toooo crazy ( as in 'Lance Stephenson crazy') because I know that summer league means nothing.

Besides, we got so many damn holes to fill we'd need 4 or 5 first round picks to fill them all this year.



bob



.

Cow,

You might be taking my theory to a level I hadn't intended. Yes, there have been times when I said that, if I saw certain talents enough time, I felt the player could probably do it again. But those talents involved things like making passes or exhibiting quick hands or blocking out or setting picks. They weren't dependent on height or the level of competition.

The fact that this kid blocked a couple of shots could have everything to do with the quality and/or the height of the competition.

As for Iverson, I also get happy when he makes a good move—the first game more so than the second. But I feel our major need is not for "some help at center." It's for a front line center. I think of Iverson's ceiling as being a backup and hopefully providing "some help at center" but not as the lead center.

Sam

bob thats true you might be right, as Marcus Banks impressed me in SL years ago, McGary was going against Mason Plumlee who is no slouch and a legit bigman. Cowens and Ruland didn't have particularly long arms, but both could defend, Cowens was a maniac athlete too. We will see, I like the kid so far, he will not be a Hansborough or Aldrich IMHO, he seems to have way more handle and athleticism than those guys. Would love to see another modern version of Cowens....agreed need to see ALOT more.

Speaking of Iverson, I see he played 12:23 against the Pacers, accumulating 5 fouls, 3 rebounds and 1 point. Not awe-inspiring, to say the least. I didn't see the game however and wonder if there could be any glimmers coming from that performance. Hawk

hawksnestbeach wrote:Speaking of Iverson, I see he played 12:23 against the Pacers, accumulating 5 fouls, 3 rebounds and 1 point. Not awe-inspiring, to say the least. I didn't see the game however and wonder if there could be any glimmers coming from that performance.  Hawk

Hawk,

There was very few glimmers coming out of that game, period. The first half we ran, had good pace, took it to them. The second half we had no energy, no fire, no running. I wish I could say it was just Iverson but Kelly picked up 6 fouls too.

Just plain ugly, flat-out ugly.


bob


.

Thanks, Bob, Hopefully we can get some of that out of our system. Hawk

Hawk,

The glimmers regarding Iverson were all from the first game. He rebounded well, showed surprising offensive awareness, blocked a couple of shots and otherwise clogged the lane, and—most surprising to me—threaded three inside passes through traffic for scores.

The jury's definitely still out on him, but—depending on transactions over the summer—I won't be shocked to see him in preseason camp. Probably as no more than a backup at best.

Sam

Still trying to figure out why we bought Iverson's pick from Indiana.

We could have used the money to go after Joffrey Lauvergne or Alex Oriakhi.

Iverson was easier to spell.

Sam

Does Danny have a master plan to get a 5 by July 12? are we gonna use the exemption by then?

all that being said I think McGary is gonna be a key rotation player for Thunder, hes shown alot more in one game then Iverson has ever shown, no comparison. McGary is not a 7 foot rim protector, but hes better than anything we have at the 5 right now.

Why is it so important that we have a 5 onboard THIS year ?

swish

well for one thats the way the game is played, the center position has been crucial throughout the history of the game, do we really want to see another year of us being undersized and beat up inside? The East is not even that good, if we just had a legit 5 alot of other parts could fall into place.

swish wrote:Why is it so important that we have a 5 onboard THIS year ?

swish

swish,

I've been one of those calling for a center along with others (I suppose Me, Sam and Cowens form the "pivotal" quorum on that).  I want a center to anchor our defense.  If defense fuels offense then you need to nail your defense down first and unless you have the best player on the planet on your team you pretty much need a center.  

On the other hand, I don't want to lock us into something big and/or longterm with a player that won't fit the bill.  I don't want to get a center just so we can have a center.  I'm starting to think I'd rather go to war for one more year with Joel Anthony (who has played NBA center for 7-going-on-8 years), Vitor Faverani (who played center in Europe for years.  He's not my prototype, but as a backup...?) and bruiser and probably perpetual 3rd stringer aspiring to become 2nd stringer Colton Iverson.  Is that optimal?  Hell freaking no, but unless we get a center who can accept he's a 2nd stringer who is being given a great opportunity to start but, once Danny's wheels finally finish turning, he's going to be back to backup, then I'm not sure that's good.  Look at Asik in Houston this year.  He thought he was a starter, was signed to be a starter and then Howard came along and became the starter and that screwed things up with Asik.  I don't want that to happen here.  If we get a starting center and he doesn't deliver, that's one thing, but I don't want to get a 2nd stringer who thinks it's his job forever.  As Dirty Harry said "A man's got to know his limitations".

What I'm really hoping for, of course, is that Danny can whip up some magic, but we're talking about pulling one big damn rabbit out of his hat. There's a reason why the center position isn't on the all-star ballot anymore, there just aren't that many good ones out there.



bob



.

bob,

I think we are pretty much on the same page. If this present team were considered to be a championship contender I could see them making a move to shore up a particular weak position. But this team has glaring weaknesses in multiple categories and could very well require multiple years to become a serious challenger. It took Danny 4 years of roster shaping before he was able to acquire the pieces needed to win it all in 2007-08. By the way, that 2007-08 club had 9 new players on the roster. Talk about a makeover--That could be one for the ages. Patience may very well be the best virtue available right now.

swish

bobheckler wrote:

swish wrote:Why is it so important that we have a 5 onboard THIS year ?

swish,

I've been one of those calling for a center along with others (I suppose Me, Sam and Cowens form the "pivotal" quorum on that).  I want a center to anchor our defense.  If defense fuels offense then you need to nail your defense down first and unless you have the best player on the planet on your team you pretty much need a center.  

On the other hand, I don't want to lock us into something big and/or longterm with a player that won't fit the bill.  I don't want to get a center just so we can have a center.  I'm starting to think I'd rather go to war for one more year with Joel Anthony (who has played NBA center for 7-going-on-8 years), Vitor Faverani (who played center in Europe for years.  He's not my prototype, but as a backup...?) and bruiser and probably perpetual 3rd stringer aspiring to become 2nd stringer Colton Iverson.  Is that optimal?  Hell freaking no, but unless we get a center who can accept he's a 2nd stringer who is being given a great opportunity to start but, once Danny's wheels finally finish turning, he's going to be back to backup, then I'm not sure that's good.  Look at Asik in Houston this year.  He thought he was a starter, was signed to be a starter and then Howard came along and became the starter and that screwed things up with Asik.  I don't want that to happen here.  If we get a starting center and he doesn't deliver, that's one thing, but I don't want to get a 2nd stringer who thinks it's his job forever.  As Dirty Harry said "A man's got to know his limitations".

What I'm really hoping for, of course, is that Danny can whip up some magic, but we're talking about pulling one big damn rabbit out of his hat.  There's a reason why the center position isn't on the all-star ballot anymore, there just aren't that many good ones out there.

Outside <---- another advocate for getting a center

I've argued that getting a defender in the middle fundamentally changes the entire defense -- allows the defense to exert pressure outward from a strong core instead of collapsing inward to protect a weak one -- and would allow the Celtics to leverage one of their best assets, which is athleticism on the defensive perimeter. It could mean a swing of 6-10 points per game, which for a team that plays many close games, would be huge. That's in addition to moving Sullinger to his proper position. All this allows them to start properly playing the system at both ends and integrating players into roles they should be playing instead of doing the best they can with a patchwork setup.

Is getting a center this year absolutely necessary to the ultimate rebuilding process? No. But it is one of the most important steps they can take to move the rebuilding process forward.

The summer isn't over, so who knows what else will transpire, but if they go into next season with Tyler Zeller at center, that's a significant upgrade -- not because Zeller is that good, but because he's an actual center.