Positional redundancy = good

[RedDawg#8]

There is a ton of duplication of skillsets on the roster. 

I agree Trae and Lou are the weaker comparison, followed by JC and Gallo. But there are still a ton of similarities between them.

As mentioned, the scoring of Trae and Lou, and to me, the ability to draw fouls and get to the line was a lot more alike than the other stuff.

JC and Gallo are both stretch 4's that can get you buckets in the post. Gallo is obviously a little more dynamic in that regard, as he can handle the rock better, and JC obviously stronger on the glass, defensively, and as a vertical threat.

To Sturt's point, there is enough variance that each player can bring something different to the table when they are on the court. But stylistically, we were able to maintain our identity and not have to deviate completely away from our strengths just because we subbed a guy in or out.

We could run PnR with the 5's, PnP with the 4's, the wings all could space the floor, we had a secondary ballhandler in both of our 2's, Defense and DPS with both Cam and Dre. All to different degree's of strength.

I think the only times we drastically shifted our play style was when Dunn and Cam were both on the floor and you saw ball pressure like never before. When Gallo and JC play together and you get more spacing. JC, Gallo, and CC together giving you more size and rebounding. 

[JTB]

7 hours ago, Diesel said:

Our problem....

We don't shoot well enough.   GS did show us the way.  They could never match up with a physical team... but those threes are a difference maker.  Trae has to get better at hitting his threes.   He's ball dominant but 31% from three is not good enough to get us the chip.  He needs to be north of 36%.  If he does that then everything else he does will be potent.  We also needed Hunter's efficiency over KHuerter's disappearing.   When our shooting is working, there's no team that can beat us. 

 

 

That’s a great point but if it’s not something I’d like to depend on . 
I try to stay away from the “warriors way” because that team was historic with the 3 ball ….they were just insanely awesome and it’s not something easy teams can mimic when the going gets tough.

we need to rely on mid range and paint points. If the 3 ball is there awesome…take it

[sturt]

(This, from a PM discussion, seems to fit here... and again, for what it matters, some of this but not all is relatively new thinking for me... )

 

[Diesel]

15 hours ago, JTB said:

That’s a great point but if it’s not something I’d like to depend on . 
I try to stay away from the “warriors way” because that team was historic with the 3 ball ….they were just insanely awesome and it’s not something easy teams can mimic when the going gets tough.

we need to rely on mid range and paint points. If the 3 ball is there awesome…take it

I say more often than not... during this playoff run, it was our three ball that bailed us out of a lot of big holes... especially the 25 pt comback.  For us, I think it's almost infectious... and I understand your trepidations. But I say...  We are built this way.  We are built to be 3 pt shooting team.   Bogi and Gallo aren't going to dominant the halfcourt game.. they are built to be able to spread the floor with their shooting.  JC too.   And like it or not... Trae has to be a three point shooter to make everything else he does work... otherwise, teams will just drop back and stop all the floaters.  His game is based on using his speed to take his man off the dribble.. and if his man doesn't step up.. he has to hurt him with the three.   That's how we are built.