• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Ricky Rubio - Take the Money and Limp

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
bs80 said:
Are you asking why we should be looking to trade one of the three? I say that because we drafted all three expecting them to be starting lineup material. If Okoro is not cut out for the 3, then there's no way that Collin, Darius, and Okoro all make sense in the starting lineup. I personally think that Isaac should be groomed as our future starting 2, and that either Collin or Darius need to be traded. Collin happens to be the easy one to pick on because he's due up for an extension first.
Click to expand...
Collin's the easy one to talk about because he's proven (to a lot of us) that he cannot be a starting point guard in the NBA.

If he could run the point effectively and play team defense without getting lost and giving up easy buckets every time down the floor, I'd max him as soon as we're allowed and never look back.

I'm right now, optimistically hoping that he embraces the opportunity to rename the "Manu role" to the "Sexton role" and thrives coming off the bench--I hope he learns how to be a limited-minutes backup PG in the NBA, becomes an efficient super-scoring sub off the bench, and figures out how to play defense without dying on basic concepts like a pick-and-roll.
 
bs80 said:
Are you asking why we should be looking to trade one of the three? I say that because we drafted all three expecting them to be starting lineup material. If Okoro is not cut out for the 3, then there's no way that Collin, Darius, and Okoro all make sense in the starting lineup. I personally think that Isaac should be groomed as our future starting 2, and that either Collin or Darius need to be traded. Collin happens to be the easy one to pick on because he's due up for an extension first.
Click to expand...
You act like the starting lineup actually means anything in today's game when the lineup that finishes the game is often a different group. Four guards with one of them splitting minutes at the 3 spot is in no way, shape or form "too many". If anything we'll need more to fill out the depth chart.
 
bs80 said:
Yeah, the more I think about it the more I think you're right. But as I mentioned in another thread, if Okoro is best suited as a 2, then the backcourt club becomes rather crowded. Ricky and Isaac are totally different players, I know, but still, we gave up a potential contributor at a position of need to bring Ricky in.
Click to expand...

I would like Okoro to develop before we hand him the SG spot and ship off Sexton. I think Sexton, Garland, and Okoro can be a 3 man rotation at guard. If Sexton further develops his PG skills and Okoro develops his overall guard skills better, there isn't really a need for a backup PG like Rubio.

I understand why Rubio was brought in but I see it as a short term thing vs a long term answer. A defensive minded PG with a 3pt shot could make Okoro more of a SG/SF while hopefully we have a bigger wing to pick up the slack for big SF/PF type wings.

I think more wings help us become a more modern NBA team.
 
Out of the Rafters at the Q said:
Collin's the easy one to talk about because he's proven (to a lot of us) that he cannot be a starting point guard in the NBA.

If he could run the point effectively and play team defense without getting lost and giving up easy buckets every time down the floor, I'd max him as soon as we're allowed and never look back.

I'm right now, optimistically hoping that he embraces the opportunity to rename the "Manu role" to the "Sexton role" and thrives coming off the bench--I hope he learns how to be a limited-minutes backup PG in the NBA, becomes an efficient super-scoring sub off the bench, and figures out how to play defense without dying on basic concepts like a pick-and-roll.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree one bit, just didn't want to highlight any of Collin's perceived deficiencies because that tends to run the conversation off on a tangent, especially since this is a Rubio thread.

On another note, if we can't find a way to offload Love this year, it would be fantastic if his old teammate Ricky could come here and be a first-hand example of how to be a fantastic veteran leader.
 
Good NBA teams don't have only one starting quality player for each position. The more starting quality players you can have to rotate through all the available minutes, the better you are as a team. You don't get rid of talent because you have one or 2 extra guys at a roster spot.
 
buzzdog said:
You act like the starting lineup actually means anything in today's game when the lineup that finishes the game is often a different group. Four guards with one of them splitting minutes at the 3 spot is in no way, shape or form "too many". If anything we'll need more to fill out the depth chart.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I got lazy in my wording, I should have referred to it as starter-type minutes. IMO, if a team is going to invest three consecutive high lottery picks, then during crunch-time, they we better be able to take advantage of all three of them. If we can't consistently trust a lineup that consists of Collin/Darius/Isaac at the same time, then I think that's a major concern.

To your point, there will be games where that combination works fine thanks to the particular lineup the opponent is trotting out there down the stretch. But the name of the game is exploiting mismatches, and I don't believe that we will see many games that really matter where the opponent trots out a lineup where Sexton/Garland/Okoro can share the floor without running into a mismatch.
 
inliner311 said:
I would like Okoro to develop before we hand him the SG spot and ship off Sexton. I think Sexton, Garland, and Okoro can be a 3 man rotation at guard. If Sexton further develops his PG skills and Okoro develops his overall guard skills better, there isn't really a need for a backup PG like Rubio.

I understand why Rubio was brought in but I see it as a short term thing vs a long term answer. A defensive minded PG with a 3pt shot could make Okoro more of a SG/SF while hopefully we have a bigger wing to pick up the slack for big SF/PF type wings.

I think more wings help us become a more modern NBA team.
Click to expand...
You're probably right that Rubio might be short term and if so I hope he teaches our young guys a few things about defense and assists. But if he turns out to be a catalyst I hope keeping him around is in the cards, having vets like him is usually a good thing if they fit.

I agree we're short of wings unless Cedi gets his head out of his ass and Windler continues to flop. I can hope neither of those things happen, and that Cedi and Windler work out as viable wings. But there's no way I'd hold my breath on that bet.
 
buzzdog said:
Good NBA teams don't have only one starting quality player for each position. The more starting quality players you can have to rotate through all the available minutes, the better you are as a team. You don't get rid of talent because you have one or 2 extra guys at a roster spot.
Click to expand...
You're right, depth is a good thing. But are we really maximizing our assets if we can't trust them to all play 35+ minutes in critical games? We see all three recent lottery picks as legitimate talents, but the question is, would any of them present more value if moved to another team?
 
I seen Garland and Sexton. Collin subs out first and Rubio comes in. Sexton comes back in when Garland gets his first breather. Essentially, Sexton will be the de facto two on offense for all minutes he’s on the floor now. Will still get opportunities to handle and attack, but Garland and Rubio will play 48 minutes collectively of PG and will run the majority of the plays.

Certain lineups will see Okoro at two, but he’ll start at SF

Nance will come in off the bench and will sometimes play SF, sometimes, PF.
 
Nathan S said:
Has a team ever benched their leading scorer? I just don't think it's a real possibility.
Click to expand...
Things get weird with bad teams in the NBA.

I feel like Brandon Jennings may have been the leading scorer for the Pistons at some point when they were shit. Dude became a backup PG quite quickly. I'm not sure if Brandon Knight ever scored enough to be up there Greg Monroe was a focal point of their offense and they let him walk--he was soon out of the league after that. You can say the same thing about Blake Griffin more recently (without being out of the league).

When Reggie Jackson took their scoring reigns, they would've been better off letting him walk or benching him--he turned into a negative asset really quickly.

Derrick Rose was their leading scorer in the 2020 season, coming off the bench. He stayed on the bench for 2021.

Ricky Davis was our leading scorer in 2002 and was benched in 2003.
 
Nathan S said:
Has a team ever benched their leading scorer? I just don't think it's a real possibility.
Click to expand...

I think getting Rubio was an indication that they want to just run back Sexton, Garland, and Okoro as starters but won't run them all together as much.

I just don't know if a lineup with both Rubio and Okoro at PG and SG will exist with our current depth of wings and bigs. Can we put together enough 3pt shooting to make up for those two sharing the floor together?
 
Randolphkeys said:
A sixth man role is different than being "benched".
Click to expand...

Rather than argue semantics, can you think of any team that has moved their leading scorer from being a starter to being a "sixth man?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top