McGraw addresses a "tall" issue

[Basghetti80]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=299041

McGraw addresses how both Lakers and Magic have "tall" lineups and how to compete in the Finals you can get away with one smaller guard playing at one time but not two. He wonders if Bulls would be better with Salmons at starting 2 guard with Gordon or Hinrich in 6th man role. Says because of this only one of them should be back. Even goes into the draft saying that Earl Clark or Terrence Williams perhaps should be looked at more for the Bulls at 16 because of their size other than Blair or James Johnson who are both undersized power forwards. Also mentions that if the Bulls can acquire one of the power fowards they covet that maybe Tyrus should play more SF. That comment I don't agree with because if we trade for one of the power forwards we want Tyrus is gone in the trade I think. All in all an interesting article and one that we should consider.

 

[dougthonus]

Not a real big fan of this line of thinking.

Being in the finals is a talent issue. Both the Lakers and Magic have a lot of really great tall players, but if you don't have great tall players you won't be any good.

The clippers are a tall team, how are they doing?

 

[Basghetti80]

Doug I know what you are saying. Obviously it takes great players not just tall players. But admittedly when you look at these two teams they are bigger than others. The Clippers have Eric Gordon at 6'3 in the backcourt, Randolph who is 6'9 and plays below the rim. Plus Randolph stinks. It is not just tall but great as well. That is obvious. His bigger ooint was even smallers guy who are great don't generally get to that level. He did not make this point but games like NBA finals comes down to matchups a lot of the time and to match up with those type of players and teams. And majority of the time a 6'3 SG and a 6'8 PF are not going to allow you to match up unless those players are unwordly great. Obviously there are
tall players who are crap just like short players who are crap. To get to the Finals going by his point you need to be tall and great. Think about how bad our team now matches up with Lakers or Magic. Now obviously this comparision is a talent as much as a height issue but to get their level the best player to start is to get bigger at our other positions. Rose is a great start as he has great size and great talent at the PG spot. Now we need to work on other sports with this in mind.

 

[JimmyBulls]

Re:McGraw addresses a

I agree with McGraw to a certain degree. When you look at the EC with Lebron and Howard, you are going to have to build teams with size. I don't think there's another way to look at it. Going forward the Bulls must build the team around the concept of size, strength, length and quickness.

I don't agree that Tyrus should be moved to the three, he should simply be moved out period. I don't think the Bulls should feel compelled to draft career college level underachievers like Williams and Clark either. But ignoring height in the current league is something that shouldn't happen.

A player the Bulls should be monitoring very closely is Marc Gasol. If the Grizzlies opt to draft Thabeet with the second pick, I think they could look to move Gasol to another team. I think a Thomas/Gasol deal would make a lot of sense for both teams. Thomas could fill the Grizzlies hole at the four, and Gasol could give the Bulls much needed size and strength.

 

[dougthonus]

Re:McGraw addresses a

I think taller players with elite talent are obviously better than shorter players with it. If at all possible getting elite players whoa re also bigger is a plus.

However, in the end, the most important thing is to get the good players. There are more major draft mistakes because people decide to draft tall than any other reason.

 

[Ralphb07]

Re:McGraw addresses a

I understand what he's saying and at the end he even said that if they don't have talent height doesn't matter

I think we can get by with Gordon and Rose in the back court but we do need bigger guys up front... especially at the PF spot.

Blair and Johnson would be upgrades and nice enough size up front with when you combined their body frame.....

I've wonder about Clark and think @ 16 might not be a bad choice.... Williams either if we do let one of Gordon or Kirk go

 

[clonetrooper264]

Re:McGraw addresses a

There is definitely a difference between tall players and good tall players. Height by itself is no guarantee for any kind of success whatsoever. Obviously there is a difference between an elite big man and an elite wing player. Who would you take, CP3 or Amare? It depends on what you're trying to do. Of course an ideal situation is that you have both (see Kobe and Pau)

 

[jsain360]

Size is important depending how a person plays, if a guy is undersized, he has to be able to play bigger than their frame, like a Joe Dumars, he gave opposing SGs fits deffensively and offensively, before Amare, Marion was seeing a lot of time at the 4, but his athletic ability helped him play bigger than his 6'7" 218lbs frame

 

[houheffna]

McGraw and I are on the same page, he calls Wade smaller but he also acknowledges Wade's abilities. It takes a special player to excel at SG though undersized on a level like Wade or Dumars for that matter. I think you have to have size in the backcourt but I am mainly looking at defense.

 

[Diddy1122]

Re:McGraw addresses a

McGraw is a decent writer & I agree with some of what he says. But it doesn't just take tall guards to win a championship. It takes all around talent, which is what the Lakers have and why they will probably win this series. As for using a taller defensive specialist to start & bringing BG off the bench, well we tried that already. Remember Thabo starting? Not saying he's lock down but he was our best "tall" defenisive guard. And we sucked when he was starting.

Salmons is not a 2, people need to get that out of their heads. I don't know how this ever got started, he didn't play the 2 in Sacramento or Philly, he didn't play the 2 since he's been here. It's been the media saying that this guy can play the 2 as a way of justifying Ben Gordon leaving. Salmons is not quick enough laterally to stay in front of most of the 2's in this league. And if he's out there at the 2, he's not going to be breaking down his opposing defender off the dribble very often.

And Tyrus at the 3!? What has he been smokin'!? This guy can barely defend 4's & he wants to put Tyrus against quicker players out on the perimeter? Tyrus at the 3 would be an absolute disaster.

The Bulls need to focus on getting a solid, defensive rebounding, low-post player to spell minutes along side Noah & Miller. We were man handled on the defensive glass all year because that's not Tyrus or Noah's strong suits. If we pick up a defensive-minded tall guard, great, but PF needs to be the focus of this off-season & draft. If we swing a trade for Bosh or Amare or another low-post guy, then we should look at guard. Sam Smith is hearing Okafor maybe gotten for cheap. I say the Bulls try for it if Bosh or Amare don't pan out.

 

[houheffna]

Re:McGraw addresses a

I don't think we should try to experiment with a smaller backcourt and try to set precedence. I really feel that if we can have a three guard rotation that would be good.

A few years ago, I remember when size in the backcourt and having a true SG was something a lot of people asked for. That is when Brandon Roy was a viable option in the draft. And that was who I wanted. I would bet the farm that Paxson still sees that as a pressing need. If you have Gordon coming off the bench behind Rose and another guard you have a great guard rotation.

Salmons can be used as a 2, wasn't too long ago when some were talking about Deng at the 2. Until we find a SG with the size, speed, and defensive prowess that it takes to win championships. You can have an undersized backcourt for another year based solely on the fact that you can't do any better. However, you need to try Salmons to see what he can do...offensively he can do things at the 2 position definitely. I think he adds the ability to get to the basket and go to the line when necessary. His game matured a lot last year and the Bulls need to see all options.

We better get more than Bosh too, if we want to win a championship.

 

[Shakes]

Re:McGraw addresses a

The Magic aren't in the finals because they're tall, they're in the finals because they shots well above their season averages for 3 pointers against a team that's normally a good 3 point defensive team. If anything the Magic is an example of a team that likes to go small, given they basically run a SF at the PF position (and get away with it because Dwight is a great rebounder/defender at C).

If you're going to use the Magic as an example of how to build a team then Ben Gordon, for all his lack of height, is perfect in a "one big guy + shooters" model.

 

[houheffna]

Re:McGraw addresses a

The 1 guy plus shooters model was used by who? The Rockets of the mid 90's. Well, Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell played defense as well as the whole team's identity was defense and Olajuwon scoring. On any given night, Maxwell, Smith, Horry, or Cassell could score 25-30 points. But defense was the one constant amongst the whole team.

And the Magic's length cause Boston and Cleveland serious problems, that is a big reason why they are in the finals. When you have a 4 like Lewis, and a 3 like Hedo, that is a very tall front line with Hedo and Lewis shooting threes and Hedo handling the ball, that causes lots of problems for most teams. I think their height and skill set has a lot to do with it.

 

[Diddy1122]

Re:McGraw addresses a

houheffna wrote:

The 1 guy plus shooters model was used by who? The Rockets of the mid 90's. Well, Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell played defense as well as the whole team's identity was defense and Olajuwon scoring. On any given night, Maxwell, Smith, Horry, or Cassell could score 25-30 points. But defense was the one constant amongst the whole team.

And the Magic's length cause Boston and Cleveland serious problems, that is a big reason why they are in the finals. When you have a 4 like Lewis, and a 3 like Hedo, that is a very tall front line with Hedo and Lewis shooting threes and Hedo handling the ball, that causes lots of problems for most teams. I think their height and skill set has a lot to do with it.

The Rockets also had Clyde "The Glide" for their second championship, which certainly helped their chances. And yes they were built around the dominant interior defense of Hakeem, but I would dare say that Maxwell, Smith, Horry, & Cassell could go off for 25-30 on any given night. Horry was a starter and never averaged more than 12ppg while with Houston & was out there for defense & 3-pt shooting. Smith exclusively shot 3's, that was his role, & Cassell was a rookie coming off the bench. Maxwell is probably the only one out of those 4 who would have gone off for 25-30 but it was not a given on any night.

The difference for the Magic is they have better scorers around Howard, but their perimeter defense, other than Pietrus, is severely lacking. Howard is not the dominant offensive force that Hakeem was. And Hakeem was a much better passer from the post. It was impossible to double him because of this. Dwight has alot to learn in this aspect. But I can see this type of team winning a championship down the road. Dare I say if they had a fully healthy Jameer all season, they would've been the best team in the East, and going into next season they will be.

 

[houheffna]

Re:McGraw addresses a

I think we veered off the subject. My point was that I agreed with Mr. McGraw on this. It is not just the fact that Turk and Lewis can score, its where they can score from and who has to guard them. That is what causes the mismatches that allows them to be successful. Lewis would give most PFs a hard time and most SFs a hard time. Same with Hedo.