We Still Need a Point Guard

[RC_Drunkford]

As long as the old man isn't doing full on hockey subs, they should be fine staggering starters mins with bench guys. Will take a good amount of games to find the right combo but right now I'm thinking Tre should a lot of time with DV/Wemby and Malaki should be paired up with Keldon/Sochan a lot.

I agree, but knowing Pop we will definitely see an all bench line up out there until he figures out who he has to stagger with the bench unit

[couchman]

Great new video from JxmyHighroller includes some break down on how the PG position has evolved in the modern NBA, and it shows why the Spurs have been right to try to convert larger playmakers into Point Guards rather than draft prototypical ones who resemble CP3 or whatever traditional archetype.

The video

Key takeaways:
The avg PG is bigger than ever at 6’3” because modern defense can’t hide a smaller guy from mismatches.
Touches for PGs have gone down dramatically as modern offenses tend to put the ball in the hands of their best player a lot more instead of having the designated PG do that.

That doesn’t mean that you don’t need a PG. Just that their role has changed.
That also means more options for how to solve for that position.

This also supports how the Spurs have approached the position ever since drafting DJM.
They want bigger playmakers and THEN they worry about teaching them the PG skills.
See DJM, Primo, Derrick White, Blake Wesley, Sochan, and even Branham got some run at PG last year.

I’ve said that the Spurs will solve the PG position in the next 12 months, but don’t expect it to look like an archetypical PG.
It might even be Sochan as the long term answer.

[spurraider21]

Great new video from JxmyHighroller breaks down how the PG position has evolved in the modern NBA, and it shows why the Spurs have been right to try to convert larger playmakers into Point Guards rather than draft prototypical ones who resemble CP3 or whatever traditional archetype.

The video

Key takeaways:
The avg PG is bigger than ever at 6’3” because modern defense can’t hide a smaller guy from mismatches.
Touches for PGs have gone down dramatically as modern offenses tend to put the ball in the hands of their best player a lot more instead of having the designated PG do that.

That doesn’t mean that you don’t need a PG. Just that their role has changed.
That also means more options for how to solve for that position.

This also supports how the Spurs have approached the position ever since drafting DJM.
They want bigger playmakers and THEN they worry about teaching them the PG skills.
See DJM, Primo, Derrick White, Blake Wesley, Sochan, and even Branham got some tun at PG last year.

I’ve said that the Spurs will solve the PG position in the next 12 months, but don’t expect it to look like an archetypical PG.
It might even be Sochan as the long term answer.

they gave lonnie some of those duties as well

[RC_Drunkford]

The positionless basketball approach might pan out to be another revolutionary move by Pop that then gets copied by the entire league

[TD 21]

Seriously? The term isn't new at this point and it's been tried by a myriad of teams.

I can't believe how many think this is part of some grand plan and not just an interim one until they draft or trade for lead ball handler X. I do expect said player to have good positional size and be as comfortable off ball as on though.

[Dejounte]

The positionless basketball approach might pan out to be another revolutionary move by Pop that then gets copied by the entire league

It’s gonna be fun watching tallball and basically watch these short guards be eliminated from existence

[scott]

part of the problem of tracking most common lineups is how many games everybody missed. keldon only played 2/5 games, sochan played 3/5, etc

and even then, 24 minutes is quite a small sample

This is a great point. To give some context, the most used 5-man lineup in the entire league last year was Fox-Sabonis-Huerter-Murray-Barnes at 900 minutes over 63 games. From there there is a big drop off to a Hawks lineup#2 at 738 minutes over 44 games and a Nuggets line up at 701 minutes over 41 games. Then another big drop off to a bunch of lineups in the high 500s.

The Spurs most heavily used lineup last year (Jones-Dev-Keldon-Soch-Jak) was only 189 minutes over 18 games!

It will be interesting to track lineups and see what emerges after what we assume will be our #1 lineup of Soch-Dev-KJ-Wemby-Collins. If those 5 can put up 500 minutes together this year that would be awesome.

[scott]

It’s gonna be fun watching tallball and basically watch these short guards be eliminated from existence

I wonder if we’ll see some Sochan-Dev-Wemby-Collins-Bassey lineups at some point. That would be fun.

[Atl Spur]

I wonder if we’ll see some Sochan-Dev-Wemby-Collins-Bassey lineups at some point. That would be fun.

That might be nasty!

[tim_duncan_fan]

Hurray for tall ball.

Those small ball lineups, Forbes, late-career Mills, etc were soul-crushing

[couchman]

"Tall ball" concepts are probably not the initial reason for this startling lineup.
Sochan doesn't give us a mismatch in the post because he doesn't have a developed post game at the moment.

Despite that, there are benefits to the lineup, and also problems that it solves.

I think the main reason Pop chose this lineup for now is that Wemby has shown that he can do very well on offense when he gets to play on the weakside with 3 shooters on the strong side. This is an oversimplification, but the idea remains true that shooters around Wemby gives him space to stretch out and use his length on offense more effectively.

That means we can't start two non shooters in Tre (PG) and Sochan (SF). Keldon has to start to get enough shooting around Wemby.
I don't think starting Sochan ahead of Keldon was ever a real option.

But if Sochan plays off the bench it threatens to slow his development and also reduces his chances of building chemistry with Wemby.
Those two have shown some chemistry already that we should build on.
Sochan is also one of our top talents on the team that we need to develop.
Developing Tre is less important because he is already close to his ceiling.

The tall ball lineup also has benefits on defense.
Sochan rebounded BETTER as a PG in the preseason than he did as a forward. It is a very small sample size but that stood out to me.
His size and switchability also left few mismatches on the court defensively.
I'm excited to see how this plays out in the real season.

[Seventyniner]

"Tall ball" concepts are probably not the initial reason for this startling lineup.
Sochan doesn't give us a mismatch in the post because he doesn't have a developed post game at the moment.

Despite that, there are benefits to the lineup, and also problems that it solves.

I think the main reason Pop chose this lineup for now is that Wemby has shown that he can do very well on offense when he gets to play on the weakside with 3 shooters on the strong side. This is an oversimplification, but the idea remains true that shooters around Wemby gives him space to stretch out and use his length on offense more effectively.

That means we can't start two non shooters in Tre (PG) and Sochan (SF). Keldon has to start to get enough shooting around Wemby.
I don't think starting Sochan ahead of Keldon was ever a real option.

But if Sochan plays off the bench it threatens to slow his development and also reduces his chances of building chemistry with Wemby.
Those two have shown some chemistry already that we should build on.
Sochan is also one of our top talents on the team that we need to develop.
Developing Tre is less important because he is already close to his ceiling.

The tall ball lineup also has benefits on defense.
Sochan rebounded BETTER as a PG in the preseason than he did as a forward. It is a very small sample size but that stood out to me.
His size and switchability also left few mismatches on the court defensively.
I'm excited to see how this plays out in the real season.

I like the rebounding angle here. I have heard several commentators in the preseason talking about how the fact that teams take a lot of threes means rebounds go farther from the basket than otherwise and so having guards that are good at rebounding is an advantage. That means having tall guards could be even more important now than ever before. The Darius Garlands of the world shouldn't be getting many boards over Sochan.

It's easy to say that Wemby should average big rebounding numbers because he's so tall, but his technique needs a lot of work, many rebounds off of long shots won't be near him, and he isn't going to outmuscle very many opposing bigs.

[FutureMan]

I’m not against the tall lineup at all. I think a better point guard is still needed for nights that certain players are resting and/or injured. Graham, Wesley, and picks for Tyus Jones makes me feel way more comfortable and to me it gives us the depth the team will need to make a run at the playoffs. Plus they would be able to convert Barlow.

At this point though the Spurs have the luxury of waiting a couple months before making a trade. Let’s just see how it goes.

[sfernald]

This all sounds great in theory until you watch the games and realize his teammates are barely able to get Wemby into his sets and no one apparently knows how to throw a lob pass to seven foot five pterodactyl!

[Mr. Body]

This all sounds great in theory until you watch the games and realize his teammates are barely able to get Wemby into his sets and no one apparently knows how to throw a lob pass to seven foot five pterodactyl!

Too bad they'll never figure out how to do this. We're totally screwed.

[sfernald]

Too bad they'll never figure out how to do this. We're totally screwed.

Well, I’m positive Wesley will figure it out just as soon as he figures out how to make a layup!

[rjv]

The positionless basketball approach might pan out to be another revolutionary move by Pop that then gets copied by the entire league

i was just talking to someone about this the other day. that Pop might once again develop yet another scheme or philosophy, meaning that he will have been the only coach to have made so many changes and adaptations over a span of three decades. if this happens, he certainly places himself on the top of any GOAT conversations.

[CorrectCrusader]

This all sounds great in theory until you watch the games and realize his teammates are barely able to get Wemby into his sets and no one apparently knows how to throw a lob pass to seven foot five pterodactyl!

This will come with time.

[TD 21]

i was just talking to someone about this the other day. that Pop might once again develop yet another scheme or philosophy, meaning that he will have been the only coach to have made so many changes and adaptations over a span of three decades. if this happens, he certainly places himself on the top of any GOAT conversations.

It didn't require ingenuity at each point to figure out the ideal way to play.

Pop was fortunate to have superstar and star players who were willing to allow the offense to continue to evolve depending on what stage they were at in their careers and what would be best for the team.

[ambchang]

i was just talking to someone about this the other day. that Pop might once again develop yet another scheme or philosophy, meaning that he will have been the only coach to have made so many changes and adaptations over a span of three decades. if this happens, he certainly places himself on the top of any GOAT conversations.

That’s one of the aspects that is often overlooked when ranking coaches. People put Phil Jackson high at the rankings because he won 11 rings but the reality is that he had clearly the best/most dominant player in the game along with another top five player in 9 of those 11 les, and had the best frontcourt in the other two. He brought no lasting impact to the game because no team can replicate that type of lineups. Pop adapted and ushered in new and fresh ideas to the game which were copied by other teams because many teams can get the same ingredients to implement that style.

From using the baseline as a third defender in the two tower days to the beautiful game to hopefully the next dynastic era, pop put his stamp in how the game evolved. Like how Jack Ramsey encouraged fitness and stamina, red Auerbach used the fastbreak, how Riley first managed to use showtime but later had the Knicks rough and borderline illegal thugball, to how daly emphasized physical defense, these coaches out in something new. Even mike dantoni, as much as like to make fun of him, got SSOL and Rick adelman got the price ton offence (both had clear impact to pop offensive and defensive philosophies) brought more to the game than Phil Jackson.

[Mr. Body]

That’s one of the aspects that is often overlooked when ranking coaches. People put Phil Jackson high at the rankings because he won 11 rings but the reality is that he had clearly the best/most dominant player in the game along with another top five player in 9 of those 11 les, and had the best frontcourt in the other two. He brought no lasting impact to the game because no team can replicate that type of lineups. Pop adapted and ushered in new and fresh ideas to the game which were copied by other teams because many teams can get the same ingredients to implement that style.

From using the baseline as a third defender in the two tower days to the beautiful game to hopefully the next dynastic era, pop put his stamp in how the game evolved. Like how Jack Ramsey encouraged fitness and stamina, red Auerbach used the fastbreak, how Riley first managed to use showtime but later had the Knicks rough and borderline illegal thugball, to how daly emphasized physical defense, these coaches out in something new. Even mike dantoni, as much as like to make fun of him, got SSOL and Rick adelman got the price ton offence (both had clear impact to pop offensive and defensive philosophies) brought more to the game than Phil Jackson.

Phil also used someone else's offensive system. He left teams as soon as their eras were over. What matters most to me is that he left no coaching legacy whatsoever. Pop has an extensive coaching tree. I think he had like a third of the coaches in the playoffs last year came from him. Phil has no one.

[Em-City]

The positionless basketball approach might pan out to be another revolutionary move by Pop that then gets copied by the entire league

Phoenix seem to be going down the "no point guard" path in a similar approach

[ismael-robert]

Reavers with the near double double outperforms Dlo

[itzsoweezee]

Luka was very effusive about Wemby today. How long until his contract is up? Two years?

[Obstructed_View]

This is a great point. To give some context, the most used 5-man lineup in the entire league last year was Fox-Sabonis-Huerter-Murray-Barnes at 900 minutes over 63 games. From there there is a big drop off to a Hawks lineup#2 at 738 minutes over 44 games and a Nuggets line up at 701 minutes over 41 games. Then another big drop off to a bunch of lineups in the high 500s.

The Spurs most heavily used lineup last year (Jones-Dev-Keldon-Soch-Jak) was only 189 minutes over 18 games!

It will be interesting to track lineups and see what emerges after what we assume will be our #1 lineup of Soch-Dev-KJ-Wemby-Collins. If those 5 can put up 500 minutes together this year that would be awesome.

It's hard to lose sixty games when your team has talent.