Should the Spurs Trade for John Collins?

[LeBowen]

So… what is a Traditional PF and what is a Modern PF? Because to many of us, Collins looks like a modern PF. The proposed acquisition of him would be to play that role, not to play “Traditional PF” or C.

I think your logical premise is a good one we should talk about: “If Player is a Trad PF, then Player also must be a C, otherwise Player must be a Modern PF.” Yep, I’m on board with that… let’s agree on that! But now that leaves us with talking about who qualifies as these things. I agree that John Collins is not a C. I don’t agree that John Collins is a “trad PF” and not a “Modern PF”. Let’s talk about that.

All this role talk is pointless to me.
It's obvious modern basketball is moving in a direction where lineup compositon doesn't matter as long as you can defend well enough.
If we can get away with Barnes at PF and somehow still fix our rebounding issues, then I see no reason to get someone more physical. But we probably can't.

Jeremy would definitely be ideal as a starter next to Wemby if we're talking defense. We'd gain so much value if he can fix his shot and get to a respectable level, just enough so teams actually have to put some kind of contest on him.
28-30-34-30-0
You know what are those numbers?
3pt percentage of OKC starters in the playoffs.

If we're trying to build the best defensive lineup in the league, which Harper/Castle/Bryant/Sochan/Wemby can definitely be 3 years down the road, we just need everyone to be in that 33-36% range while not turning down shots they're supposed to take.

[scott]

Shooting is not the most important thing when it comes to Wemby's front-court partner. That's why Victor was more effective next to Bassey than Zach. Collins/Wemby might work because Victor takes so much space away that John can survive at PF. Even a normal good backuo center doesn't do that. That people want to treat the non-Wemby minutes as an afterthought boggles my mind. Those are the minutes in which the Spurs were killed. If they'd been even a decent defense during his off time, they would be elite over all.

For me, the plan should be:

1) Get a real 25 MPG center who can play tough interior D and score inside.

2} Plan on Vic getting 33 MPG and play with that center 10 minutes a night.

3) Plan to play modern forwards at PF 38 minutes a game. If you're moving contracts, try to get another combo-forward in the deal.

4) Plan to give a lot of SF minutes to Castle, Vassell and Champagnie

5) Actually coach guys to rotate, get back and box out. Hire Thibs as a defensive consultant.

Victor and Bassey have played 61 minutes together for Vic’s entire career. All of those minutes happened in Victor’s rookie season. In those 61 minutes, the team posted a -5 NETRTG.

It seems to me that you’re basing a lot of your Big Man worldview on a small sample of outdated information. We’re free to disagree, but I’ll just go on the record and say that I don’t believe that 61 minutes from two seasons ago (which weren’t even very effective) should form much of the basis of how we view roster construction around Wemby.

[scott]

All this role talk is pointless to me.

You aren’t required to respond to, or even read this discussion.

[LeBowen]

You aren’t required to respond to, or even read this discussion.

<.<
You misunderstood my point.
I'm saying that we don't need to corner the roster into a certain style of lineups.
We can make it work without a traditional PF if we can fix our team rebounding.

The entire small ball gimmick by peak Warriors was based on running bigger and slower players off the floor.
If our PG/SG/SF perimeter defense is elite, we don't need a big PF because there's no way for opposing teams with big PF/C duos to stay on the floor against Wemby and an elite shooter like Barnes was this season.

We kind of made it work in that stretch with CP3/Castle/Champ/Barnes/Wemby lineup, despite having two slow veterans, then Devin recovered and our defense plummeted when he replaced Champ.
Then Jeremy recovered and our spacing was ed.
We can't have an undersized lineup that's also poor from behind the arc, but we most definitely can run an undersized lineup if the shooting is good enough.

D'Antoni's basketball was a gimmick, but you can't say he wasn't onto something.
Our guards won't be on the level of prime Harden and CP3, but if those two had Webmy's rim protection and range, the league would've been just as broken as it was when KD joined the Warriors.

[scott]

<.<
You misunderstood my point.
I'm saying that we don't need to corner the roster into a certain style of lineups.
We can make it work without a traditional PF if we can fix our team rebounding.

The entire small ball gimmick by peak Warriors was based on running bigger and slower players off the floor.
If our PG/SG/SF perimeter defense is elite, we don't need a big PF because there's no way for opposing teams with big PF/C duos to stay on the floor against Wemby and an elite shooter like Barnes was this season.

We kind of made it work in that stretch with CP3/Castle/Champ/Barnes/Wemby lineup, despite having two slow veterans, then Devin recovered and our defense plummeted when he replaced Champ.
Then Jeremy recovered and our spacing was ed.
We can't have an undersized lineup that's also poor from behind the arc, but we most definitely can run an undersized lineup if the shooting is good enough.

D'Antoni's basketball was a gimmick, but you can't say he wasn't onto something.
Our guards won't be on the level of prime Harden and CP3, but if those two had Webmy's rim protection and range, the league would've been just as broken as it was when KD joined the Warriors.

You miss my point. If you aren’t interested, don’t respond.

But I’m interested, which is why I’m engaging with another poster.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER

[LeBowen]

You miss my point. If you aren’t interested, don’t respond.

But I’m interested, which is why I’m engaging with another poster.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER

I feel like Danny Green right now...

[spurraider21]

All this role talk is pointless to me.

You aren’t required to respond to, or even read this discussion.

Mom, Dad... please stop fighting

[RC_Drunkford]

<.<
You misunderstood my point.
I'm saying that we don't need to corner the roster into a certain style of lineups.
We can make it work without a traditional PF if we can fix our team rebounding.

The entire small ball gimmick by peak Warriors was based on running bigger and slower players off the floor.
If our PG/SG/SF perimeter defense is elite, we don't need a big PF because there's no way for opposing teams with big PF/C duos to stay on the floor against Wemby and an elite shooter like Barnes was this season.

We kind of made it work in that stretch with CP3/Castle/Champ/Barnes/Wemby lineup, despite having two slow veterans, then Devin recovered and our defense plummeted when he replaced Champ.
Then Jeremy recovered and our spacing was ed.
We can't have an undersized lineup that's also poor from behind the arc, but we most definitely can run an undersized lineup if the shooting is good enough.

D'Antoni's basketball was a gimmick, but you can't say he wasn't onto something.
Our guards won't be on the level of prime Harden and CP3, but if those two had Webmy's rim protection and range, the league would've been just as broken as it was when KD joined the Warriors.

I mean the whole point of getting John Collins (or PJ or Santi) as a PF is to fix the rebounding issue while maintaining the Barnes level shooting. Having a physical PF who can space the floor and get boards would really help to unlock Wemby.

[Tyrone Jenkins]

I mean the whole point of getting John Collins (or PJ or Santi) as a PF is to fix the rebounding issue while maintaining the Barnes level shooting. Having a physical PF who can space the floor and get boards would really help to unlock Wemby.

Yes, THIS!!!!

The whole point of bringing in a true PF / backup C / stretch 4 is to maintain spacing and defense while improving rebounding. It's why Sochan won't work at the 4 along our 3 non-shooters.

John Collins solves a lot of the issues we have.

[LeBowen]

I mean the whole point of getting John Collins (or PJ or Santi) as a PF is to fix the rebounding issue while maintaining the Barnes level shooting. Having a physical PF who can space the floor and get boards would really help to unlock Wemby.

None of them are Barnes level shooters. They're great shooters for their role, but they're players teams try and help off and get punished.
Barnes was elite this season and is an actual shooter. We wouldn't run off the ball screens for John Collins to get an open 3pt look.

Obviously I'd replace Barnes with one of those three, no question, but my previous post was about the idea of not running traditional PFs in the lineup which can obviously be done even if Barnes starts, let alone a defensively better SF who's also a good shooter.

[Dejounte]

Yes, THIS!!!!

The whole point of bringing in a true PF / backup C / stretch 4 is to maintain spacing and defense while improving rebounding. It's why Sochan won't work at the 4 along our 3 non-shooters.

John Collins solves a lot of the issues we have.

You guys keep assuming that’s how the FO wants to build the team. Trust me, I get it. I wanted it too. But they show us again and again with their moves that they want a modern, mobile PF vs a taller one who lacks the lateral quickness to consistently be on the perimeter to defend quicker guys. They want a guy there that roams outside the paint vs staying in it on defense.

[Sugus]

It's all about his finger / shooting hand with John Collins imo. If the feel is he can still shoot effectively despite the ed-up hand, he's clearly worth some assets at least, on positional depth and versatility alone. If you don't trust that finger though, hard pass.

[HankChinaski]

I dont understand the hate on this guy. He is a hustle do the dirty work player . Provides some defensive utility and rebounding at the 4. Has nice touch and handles around the rim. A little range from 3.

Watched several games last season and he was solid through out.

The ideal role player you can slot in the starting lineup at the 4 that is going to be a net positive with starting unit.

[TD 21]

You guys keep assuming that’s how the FO wants to build the team. Trust me, I get it. I wanted it too. But they show us again and again with their moves that they want a modern, mobile PF vs a taller one who lacks the lateral quickness to consistently be on the perimeter to defend quicker guys. They want a guy there that roams outside the paint vs staying in it on defense.

Yeah, Collins (Portis is another, though he'll probably re-sign with the Bucks) is the an hesis of the type of player they've long preferred at PF, which is a big wing (Diaw, Gay, Barnes).

The problem with the former archetype is, other than spot up shooting, you don't get the benefit ball skill wise of four perimeter players surrounding Wembanyama, thereby forcing the opposing C to defend him, when most don't stand a chance.

If they acquire a rotational PF/combo big, they'll probably just sign Yabusele. Although if they don't decongest the wing-forward rotation in the process, he'd have to play almost exclusively as the solo big, which is a recipe for disaster rim protection/defensive rebounding wise.

[Dejounte]

Lanky, versatile types the Spurs like (listing both attainable and unattainable)
-Jalen Williams
-Pascal Siakam
-Tari Eason
-Obi Toppin
-Aaron Gordon
-Jonathan Kuminga
-Tobias Harris
-maybe PJ Washington but he may be a little too slow and doesn’t compensate it enough with his strength
-OG Anunoby
-Jaden McDaniels
-Toumani Camara
-Scottie Barnes
-Kyle Kuzma
-Trey Murphy III
-Herb Jones

[LeBowen]

I keep wondering if we could get Okongwu with Devin, ATL pick and swap returned.
It's one of the few teams that actually needs a player like Devin, but I doubt they'd trade Okongwu.

[spurraider21]

thats a lot to give for a backup C

pass

[RC_Drunkford]

None of them are Barnes level shooters. They're great shooters for their role, but they're players teams try and help off and get punished.
Barnes was elite this season and is an actual shooter. We wouldn't run off the ball screens for John Collins to get an open 3pt look.

Obviously I'd replace Barnes with one of those three, no question, but my previous post was about the idea of not running traditional PFs in the lineup which can obviously be done even if Barnes starts, let alone a defensively better SF who's also a good shooter.

John Collins shoots a better percentage from the corners than Barnes. Park Collins in the corner so he can cut to the rim occassionally and it's perfect, since he's a lob threat as well. He shot 40% on similar attempt numbers (0.7 less than Barnes) and that was on a terrible team. He'd get a way better shot diet on the Spurs than on the Jazz.

[LeBowen]

John Collins shoots a better percentage from the corners than Barnes. Park Collins in the corner so he can cut to the rim occassionally and it's perfect, since he's a lob threat as well. He shot 40% on similar attempt numbers (0.7 less than Barnes) and that was on a terrible team. He'd get a way better shot diet on the Spurs than on the Jazz.

He shot 53% from one and 29% from the other corner.
I'm all for Collins as a starter over Barnes because he offers more than just shooting, but Barnes is clearly a bigger 3pt threat and that was all I was saying.

[Dverde]

Just want to point out that Harrison Barnes made almost a hundred more 3pt shots than Collins last year. He has this trick about being available to play in games.

[Dex]

Just want to point out that Harrison Barnes made almost a hundred more 3pt shots than Collins last year. He has this trick about being available to play in games.

KAWHI LEONARD HATES THIS ONE TRICK!!!

[mystargtr34]

Barnes has been a terrific stop gap solution at the 4 because of his shooting, but the position needs an upgrade if the Spurs want to make the playoffs imo. Barnes is a poor rebounder, has been for most of his career and has regressed further with the Spurs. Defensive rebounding is arguably the biggest weakness the team has (26th in DRB% last season) other than maybe defense as a whole (25th in DRTG last season). That’s not entirely on Barnes they had poor rebounders and defenders scattered throughout the lineups last year. The catch is the replacement needs to be able to his 3’s close to Barnes level while providing better rebounding and/or defense. Collins does the rebounding part better, not sure if he’s any better defensively, and he’s a slightly worse shooter.

[scott]

Just putting this on the record... here is what is going to happen:

Step 1. A bunch of tweets will say the Spurs are interested in John Collins
Step 2. Online betting sites will list the Spurs as a heavy favorite to get Collins at some point
Step 3. Some other team* will acquire John Collins for a price that seems completely reasonable the Spurs could have easily met
Step 4. People will complain the Spurs didn't get John Collins
Step 5. In reality, it turns out the Spurs were never actually interested in John Collins
Step 6. A new trade candidate will emerge, the cycle will repeat

*Probably the Lakers

[Blizzardwizard]

Just putting this on the record... here is what is going to happen:

Step 1. A bunch of tweets will say the Spurs are interested in John Collins
Step 2. Online betting sites will list the Spurs as a heavy favorite to get Collins at some point
Step 3. Some other team* will acquire John Collins for a price that seems completely reasonable the Spurs could have easily met
Step 4. People will complain the Spurs didn't get John Collins
Step 5. In reality, it turns out the Spurs were never actually interested in John Collins
Step 6. A new trade candidate will emerge, the cycle will repeat

*Probably the Lakers

step 7: spurs don't sign a worthwhile PF or backup C this offseason and sniffers tell us to be patient because there'll be players available at the trade deadline


step 8: spurs don't sign a worthwhile PF or backup C at the trade deadline and sniffers tell us to be patient because there'll be players available in the offseason


step 9: spurs don't sign a worthwhile PF or backup C in the offseas-

[objective]

Collins is much better on defense and twice the rebounder Barnes is. Barnes is toast and is the next Michael Finley ... Once he loses that shot watch out, Lovecraftian monster level.

27 minutes a game spent on Barnes.

That's where the team next improves. People talking up replacing 15 minutes of backup center play as the most important thing in the world and ignoring the 27 minutes of shame with no defense, no rebounds Barnes ... Wut?