Eric said this right after he signed: "After the conversations I had with (Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy) he views the two and three spot almost like they are the same spot," Piatkowski said. "It might just depend on who you're guarding that night." I don't believe I've heard much discussion around this comment. I found it interesting, myself. Any thoughts on what this could mean? Sounds to me like Van Gundy doesn't care about having a prototypical small forward. Sorry, I don't have a trade proposal to throw out at this time.
To me.. it means something like.. Piatowski is saying.. "After the conversations I had with (Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy) he views the two and three spot almost like they are the same spot," Piatkowski said. "It might just depend on who you're guarding that night."
It's quite obvious, considering he had 2 SG's playing both spots when he was in New York. But then again, he was desperately trying to play one of them at the 1 and failed, so maybe it's not very accurate? I think it's important that one of the 2 is a very good 3-pt shooter, since we have a great C. I think that I'd be perfectly ok with, for example, Posey and Pike playing the 2/3, and they can change positions easily based on offense and defense.
I guess that he means he is going to play the best players he has. Skill, not size, will determine who gets the minutes at the 3.
Well, it sounds to me like Pike doesn't expect the coach to sign or trade for any more big boys, but plans on shuffling the guys he's got around in a vague semblance of the traditional forward positions (no modifiers). Well, hey, the guy's won more NBA games than me, so I may as well trust that judgement.
The small forward as a prototypical position really is starting to cease to exist in today's NBA and is becoming more and more the province of mobile, undersized PFs(Garnett, Wallace, Marion) or shooting guards. In fact, in the Eastern conference, it would probably be incorrect to differentiate between the SF position and SG position at all. That's probably what he meant - Van Gundy sees two swingmen positions there as interchangeable. Freak, as a Texas basketball fan - this is exactly the same thing we do under Barnes. Regarding signings and trades, I would look for us to probably retain Hawkins - and increase the depth at the wing positions with specialist role players like Griffin and Pike, rather than overpay to try and find the prototype for a position that is rapidly losing definition. Which may explain why we let Posey go.
My thoughts are that if JVG really views the 2 and 3 spots as interchangable, then he must not really be considering playing Griffin at the 3 very much because Griffin sure can't guard any of the 2's in this league. Griffin may be interchangable (and I think it is questionable at best) as a 3-4, but interchangable as a 2-3 is out of the question. If the 2 and 3 are interchangable then we are going to be running a smaller lineup and Griffin, MoT, and Cato are going to be splitting time at the 4 and the 5 spot behind Yao. So much for the idea of playing the Yao, Cato, and Griffin lineup except for limited minutes against teams like Dallas when they are running Nowitzki, Raef, and Bradley in the game together which is very rare.
you really need to get used to using E. Griffin and A. Griffin now as we now have two griffins and that makes your entire post unclear.
Please name NBA Small Forwards that Piatowski and A Griffin wont be able to guard ? It looks like that JVG must have a lot of changes and plans up his sleeve which will be new to us and our Team!
Good point. You may have hit upon something. Defensive assignments: Lakers - Kobe SG / Fox SF > Cat or Pike SF, AGriff on Kobe SG. SAC Kings - Christie SG / Peja SF > Cat or Pike on Christie SG, AGriff at SF Dallas - Finley SG / Dirk SF > Cat or Pike SG, AGriff SF (possibly EGriff on Dirk). Spurs - Manu SG / Bowen SF > Cat or Pike on Bowen, AGriff on Manu. It appears that (at least defensively), Cat, Pike and AGriff can switch between SG & SF depending on the matchup. Cuttino has been known to play some good D. If AGriff now gets the tougher assignment, Cat may be a little fresher for Q4. Nothing against Rudy, but IMO JVG will be more inclined to let Adrian Griffin play the 2 defensivley, more than RT would let Posey play the 2 on D. It could help Cat's game.
I'm thinking backup PG and backup PF/C as far as signings. But more conventional SF if involved in a trade for Rice (given the interchangeability of the SG/SF as mentioned above to Yetti) . Didn't CD mention something about looking for a vet PG and PF/C? Maybe it was a post here but I thought it was a direct quote from the Chronicle..?
p - I think a lot, if not most college teams do that though. I just thought it was a product of there not being any good big men in the NCAA. It's a guard's game, right? Seems like everybody's playing 3 and sometimes 4 guards at a time. I could be wrong though. When I first read the quote, I thought "could be bad news for Posey" (as far as remaining in Houston). Does this mean Mobley could even play some SF? Probably not. I like the point about (E.) Griffin. But he's never really played the 3 and never has shown that he can anyway.
actually, i think feigen (or whoever wrote it) said we would probably be looking for backup vet pg or pf/c and then cd's quote right after was just that we're looking to get the best players we can. i'm sure CD wanted to say "yes, that's what we're after" but he just gave us typical tight-lipped rockets front office diplospeak. not that being tight-lipped is a bad thing when dealing with signings and trades.
You're probably right, but it was the first example I thought of - the way we ran shooting guards out there in both positions and there wasn't anything to indicate who was SF or who was SG - they played the same role on opposite sides of the court. That happens a lot in the Eastern Conference, it's what I expect to happen here. Well, if the quote is accurate - he might, on account of their not being a "small forward position" on the team anymore.
I don't think Eddie Griffin was selected to play SF. He was compared to Tim Duncan, and was said to have a killer post game, and they also said he could block shots like crazy. During his rookie campaign, he played some SF, but only because him and Kenny T were our best F's. He's a PF. He's 6'11, and not laterally quick. It would be murder to put him at SF, unless it was a favourable matchup.
Clutch's pre-draft comparison for Griffin was Tim Duncan, but I remember the prevailing opinion of the draft "experts" was that the 215 pound (at the time) Griffin would have to play the 3 because he was so slightly built. j
