Very simple poll. How many of you can see Shane and Trevor running the 2 and 3 slots with Brooks at the point? I just can't see it. Trevor is a 3 offensively. I don't see him being able to play shooting guard. But maybe I am wrong. Maybe they are interchangeable as off the ball slashers/spot up shooters creating space while Brooks runs around like a mouse on cocaine breaking everybody down for Trevor's finishes and Shane and Trevor's 3 balls?
PG - Brooks - Brings the ball up the court, sits at 3 point line, penetrates SG - McGrady - Sets teamates up, creates for himself and teammates SF - Ariza/Battier - Focuses on D, looks for the open 3 in corners, ect PF - Scola - Focuses on pick and roll w/ McGrady, solid inside/outside C - Andersen - inside/outside game They can't be on the court together unless we have a playmaker. These should be the roles.
I voted Yes because they obviously CAN do it....Its whether it can work or not. I think it could, it would give us a helluva good perimeter defense, better than the Artest/Batman pairing ever was. If Brooks is at the point and Scola is scoring inside its a nice balance on offense to have two guys spreading the floor with their 3pt shooting.
The lack of size at the 2 will leave us with no other choice. Brooks will have to come of the bench or else start at the 1, even though Lowry remains a better choice as the starting 1.
Shane is a player you can plug in any spot except probably the point guard spot. He can adjust and adopt to situations that are presented to him.
I agree Rockets86, but also if them both starting doesn't work, Shane could become the 6th man, he seems like he'd be ok coming off the bench. I don't think Shane has a huge ego, he seems laid back. I think whatever helps the team, is what both guys would say
You could ask "Can Shane walk on water?" and most of the people on here would vote yes... Honestly, how many teams have less offense at the swing positions than we do right now? Milwaukee (god they're bad) and maybe Minnesota and New Jersey are the only teams that come to mind for me. Maybe you could throw New Orleans and/or New York in there if you wanted to be really generous. Are there any teams I'm missing?
the reason Artest at SG worked was becuase he could spot up and shoot. Ariza is a better spot up shooter than Artest AND a better slasher. he's also much more efficient than T-Mac at everything. The only downside of Ariza playing SG is his handles, but even then thats not a problem.
True, Shane can adjust to coming off the bench or starting. It is hard to think of combinations right now because the roster has not been set. If Shane comes off the bench then does that mean with the current roster that a rookie would start? Or will Adelman play a two pg set up? Lots of combination that could only be assessed when the roster is set.
Now I hate the guy as much as the next person but even on one leg he has more talent than any of our other guards. So what does that say about them?
of course they can play together, bigger question who is going to create their open looks? and can they average 20 pts per game combined
That's less because of Battier/Ariza being on the floor and more us not having any All-Star players on our entire roster that aren't injured. Ariza and Battier on the floor spaces it out giving more room for Brooks to operate. This could be potentially really potent if they can shoot 40%+ from long range and if Brooks can make smart decisions and distribute. If's are if's, though.
