I have been thinking about this since the OKC game ended. It wasn’t noticeable until this game, but for maybe 40 minutes we had two point guards on the floor (combination of Paul+Castle, Tre+Castle, etc.) where the offense ran fine and then maybe 8 minutes where only one point guard was on the floor (for example, Castle or Paul with Barnes, Keldon, Champ, Bassey) where the offense looked way worse. In that one point guard-only line-up, one of the non-point guards would initiate the offense himself from time to time (because it’s our offensive scheme), and it ran miserably.
It just made me believe that I never want to see a line-up put out there without two players with point guard skills— I don’t care how good you are as a scorer (like Vassell). I just think if this is the scheme going forward (and maybe it has been that way for more than a year) and that we’re going to let players “take turns” initiating the offense, then I want it only to be initiated by the point guards on the floor.
The purpose of this post? If Castle IS the point guard of the future, I don’t think it means we shouldn’t draft another point guard in this upcoming draft. Draft another guy like him even and watch those two monsters take turns initiating the offense and wreak havoc. I’m OK if we draft Dylan Harper, Traore, or whatever popular point guard from this draft. This idea applies to future trades as well. A trade opens up for DeAaron Fox and we’re keeping Castle? Go for it and play them together.
This isn’t the 2000’s anymore. Let’s welcome this new era and get away from traditional lineups. We have a center who wants to play like a wing on offense. A new age is here.
Last edited by Dejounte; 11-21-2024 at 12:45 AM.
How about 3 PG at the same time? Castle, Tre, CP3
Phoenix once had Bledsole, Isisah Thomas and Dragic - the 3 PGs death lineup!
I don't think a third PG is the exact need but just like every other team in the league nowadays a wing with self creation ability would be a fantastic addition that the team currently lacks.
Wouldn't be opposed to seeing more of Paul-Castle-Vassell lineups, they've played very little together so far this season - only 14 mins - and have a slightly negative net rating but it seems like a good idea to give it a serious go.
I mean that's basically the point of positionless basketball. Ideally you get an SF who can do that, but since Castle can play 3 positions you just take BPA. Somebody with elite speed at the 1 would do wonders for our offense.
I wouldn't look too much into it right now, it's just the way our roster is constructed.
The best players are on the floor, regardless of their role.
We have 4 PGs and 2 SGs on the roster, with Devin being injured yet again.
If it persists when both Tre and Devin are available, then we can talk. Tre came back after Devin got injured again.
Two point guards can be a thing if their off ball offense and defense are good enough. Jrue and Derrick work well together because they're not a defensive liability.
Luka and Kyrie have overwhelming offensive talent, but Luka doesn't do off the ball and they're poor defensively.
If we can get a point guard who's also good off the ball and can defend to play alongside Castle, then by all means.
My opinion is that you should always go with BPA in the lottery.
LeBowen fine, whether it’s by design or not that we’re playing two point guards at the same time it doesn’t matter to me. When or if we start rolling out the “traditional” line-ups once we’re at full strength I believe I’d still feel the same way about the offense looking smoother when Castle and Paul (or some other variation) are out there together. I have no qualms about having our version of the Celtics PG duo, that would be nice.
The point I was trying to make is that every team in the league would play multiple point guards if those point guards were big enough threats (and literally, size wise) off the ball and good enough defensively.
Castle is already a very good defender and good off the ball if we're talking being in the right position. His shooting is a work in progress, but he's way ahead of where we thought he'd be.
Most point guard duos fail because it's just about taking turns with defensive issues on the other end.
You mentioned Fox, Kings decided against keeping both him and Haliburton and I'd say that it was a smart choice.
I'd personally rather have one of those point forwards in the starting lineup together with Castle, would make us a matchup nightmare. For example if that Demin kid turns out to be the real deal and is available.
All this has led me to warm up to Kasparas, tbh. But yes, Egor is most ideal and IMO, heads and shoulders above everyone else in this draft class.
In last year NBA final, both Boston with White/Holiday and Dallas with Irving/Doncic were playing starting lineup featuring 2 players able to play PG. Cavs, the best record of this season, is also starting 2 "PGs" with Garland and Mitc . 2 PGs lineups can work and work very well.
However, it doesn't always work with the best failure example being the Murray/Young experiment in Atlanta. In Castle case, pairing him with a PG, who isn't a good shooter, likely won't work. I have nothing against pairing him with a PG that can shoot.
Another consequence of adding a PG is that it will move Vassell to the SF spot and having him playing more off ball. It isn't the best way to use him.
This is what I was going to say, but you beat me to it. I would take Egor Demin (right now) as high as #2 behind Flagg. 9.1 assists per 36min as a 6'9" SG? While shooting 55% from 3? And looking like a beast on defense? Yes, please.
Another way of putting this is that if the Spurs had two copies of Tre Jones they would never play together, but if they had two copies of Castle they would play lots of minutes together, right?
Castle that could shoot, yeah. That's why I made Derrick/Jrue comparison.
I'd say that our biggest advantage with Castle at point would be that opponents wouldn't be able to hide their point guards anywhere.
Adding another traditional point guard would give them that opportunity. But if we had a 6'6+, 5 out lineup, it would be impossible to stop.
this could qualify ...........
6'9
This has been said multiple times by ME referencing Okc; why the long post as if you had an epiphany? Dejavue…most certainly.
Correlations, causations, blabla
Personnel and profiles matter more
This sort of situation goes way back, with maybe one of the best examples being the Laker team that drafted Magic Johnson and paired him with Norm Nixon, who the year before had been the starting PG. A decade before that, the Knicks paired Clyde Frazier and Earl Monroe, and in the 90s the Bulls variation on this was to have a starting back court of two tall SGs who were both capable of playing minutes at PG while Pippen played the role of point forward. It never hurts to have multiple initiators of an offense.
What happened to you, tbh?
It's like a completely different person started using the account over the summer.
It's a topic with valid arguments and points to discuss. They can be wrong, doesn't matter, it's just a forum.
Yet you just come in here, much like in a lot of other topics and are so negative and dismissive of everything.
Noone is forcing you to read it, I don't read a lot of stuff in here. It's not like we went off-topic on a game thread.
i havent watched closely at this point, but if there are signs that Demin can develop into a reasonable defender, yeah you have to consider that. with his length, iq, and shooting he could easily thrive off-ball on possessions where castle runs the show or vassell runs the occasional pick and roll
Wemby is already by far the most impactful defender in the league.
Jeremy and Castle will be elite in no time.
Devin is solid enough, not a negative when fully healthy and engaged.
We don't need the fifth guy to be a good defender, just to not be a negative that gets hunted.
If that fifth guy is an elite scorer and playmaker, we'd definitely be able to live with his defense. Especially if it's a wing with good size.
yeah thats why i used "reasonable" defender tbh
and frankly, despite how good he should be, vassell has been a pretty mediocre defender last couple of years. if he doesnt have the stamina to a full effort guy on both ends, then i'd rather he sell out on defense. he doesnt need to exert as much energy in the shotmaking department if we have Paul/Castle leading the show and Wemby still handling quite a bit
I dont' think Castle is a point guard. I think he's capable of being a point guard, but he's also capable of being a two. I think you're conflating being a PG with a player who's able to create offense for themselves and for others which doesn't only come from PGs but on our roster those 3 that you named happen to be the ones who can do that. But if we had a 3 or 4 who could do that then there would be no problem with only have one of our PGs out there.
We just lack players who can penetrate and create shots on a regular basis.
I will say that that's the great thing about Castle. You can play him with both Paul and Tre because he's a big guard. Definitely agree with Dejounte that we need to have as many creators - if you want to call them PGs thats fine - as possible because there are too many people on this team who can't create offense for .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
