Dmega Show full post »
JeffB
LKeet6 wrote:


Fred, derozan, OG, siakam, poeltl is a decent line, I think! Assuming at least 3-4 serviceable bench players, how many wins for that team, do we think?


30
Quote 0 0
LKeet6
JeffB_STR82DVD wrote:


30


Harsh! I think that's assuming what they'd do now, without improvement...

I'd worry about the front-line in that 5, but best case, siakam hitting some 3s and poeltl becoming a defensive specialist, and that's a great 4-5 combo.

Fred is starting quality, derozan is awesome, OG 3 and D; Wright, powell, miles and maybe one or two mid-level guys; that's more than a 30 win team for me! I think hovering. 500 and challenging for 8th!
Quote 0 0
moremilk
at this point, I'm just perfectly content to leave it up to masai - whatever he decides, I'm game.

The truth is, what makes it so hard to decide what to do, also makes it easy to accept whatever decision. You can easily make an argument pro/against for each approach.

And, perhaps unfairly, I would like to wait until the next Cleveland series to really evaluate casey and the team. If the cavs romp through their next opponent, perhaps it's just a matter of them catching top form against us. 

However, if they struggle or even lose, that should be a major, major red flag. If the cavs struggle against Indiana and say boston, but completely demolish Toronto, it will be very hard to justify staying the course imo. Something must be very wrong with the composition of the team, whether it's demar, casey or something else.
Quote 1 0
moremilk
JeffB_STR82DVD wrote:
30


if demar doesn't play  single second, I think we're still winning 45 games imo, possibly even 50.

For all his offensive skills, I think we are far too forgiving of his horrendous defense. Not always, but not infrequently either. Often it doesn't matter, because we're too good anyway, but he's really a pretty bad defender most games and quite terrible in a few.
Quote 0 0
deaner
moremilk wrote:


if demar doesn't play  single second, I think we're still winning 45 games imo, possibly even 50.

For all his offensive skills, I think we are far too forgiving of his horrendous defense. Not always, but not infrequently either. Often it doesn't matter, because we're too good anyway, but he's really a pretty bad defender most games and quite terrible in a few.


Both Lowry and Demar have not bought in on the defensive side of the ball IMo. It’s tough on your bigs when the perimeter is so soft.
Quote 0 0
JeffB
deaner wrote:


Both Lowry and Demar have not bought in on the defensive side of the ball IMo. It’s tough on your bigs when the perimeter is so soft.


Lowry is better defensively than DD and it's not that close. We see him diving on balls, leading the league in charges etc...he's got his faults on D, but he makes game changing plays at that end of the court that DD just doesn't do. Puts his body on the line.
Quote 0 0
deaner
JeffB_STR82DVD wrote:


Lowry is better defensively than DD and it's not that close. We see him diving on balls, leading the league in charges etc...he's got his faults on D, but he makes game changing plays at that end of the court that DD just doesn't do. Puts his body on the line.
oh I agree, but he’s pretty soft on the ball. The effort is more in surges than consistent.
Quote 0 0
JeffB
deaner wrote:
oh I agree, but he’s pretty soft on the ball. The effort is more in surges than consistent.


I agree, he certainly struggles vs certain matchups. But he seems to come up with the timely steal, charge, shot contest when it's needed.
Quote 0 0
moremilk
deaner wrote:
oh I agree, but he’s pretty soft on the ball. The effort is more in surges than consistent.


He's ok on the ball too, but struggles against quick point guards. But who doesn't, you need both length and quickness to contain those - that's why OG is so good.

Lowry is 32, he doesn't have the same quickness he once had.

Demar is in his prime, what's his excuse? He definitely has the length to be a good defender.
Quote 0 0