Comments on: Tuesday Bolts – 6.23.09

By: Crow

Crow — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 07:29:15 +0000

If it is Rubio-Westbrook at least it is two above average size guys. That is the way to do it.

Lots of the 2 small PG lineups last a year then you look at the +/- and there are generally blah to terrible and eventually the coach or the GM or the stat guy quietly reduces it or phases it out. New Orleans gave up on it. Denver gave up on it. Detroit gave up on it. It never worked in Memphis.

The two PGs with size (and some defense) together has worked in Cleveland. For awhile in Washington before Arenas got hurt and Daniels became a shadow. J-Williams -Wade won a title. Blake-Roy is sorta of that even if you don’t think of it way initially. Rose-Hinrich really ought to be milked heavy, far heavier than it has. Kidd-Terry,anybody and M Daniels in Indiana count too to me.

If they go Rubio-Westbrook- and they get along- then a lob to the rim that Westbrook cuts or backcuts to go get should be an option off of almost any play.

By: J.G.

J.G. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:18:05 +0000

@J.G.
Oh, sorry I forgot to answer your question. I’m intrigued by Rubio and have been warming to the idea of him and RW in the same backcourt…but I’d say in a perfect world, if RW is the point guard of the future, I think you trade down from #3 and get Harden along with some assets, who I’m very high on and have been for awhile.

But it’s just so up in the air, who knows? You know?

By: J.G.

J.G. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:14:10 +0000

@Dustin Wow, I definitely didn't see Simmons warming to the idea of Rubio and Westbrook in the same backcourt. Great heads up.

By: Vince

Vince — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:55:21 +0000

Simmons and Ford have actually switched me over to the Rubio camp — they were very much pro-Rubio in general at #3.

Ford’s point (which is too simple and smart for me to have come up with on my own) is that when you have Rubio, Westbrook, KD, and Green — basically 4 of the best 15 or so players to have come out in the last three years — you let the on-court issues about positions and the like work themselves out. Simmons’ point was that he would watch every single game if those 4 guys were on the same team. Great points, I’m sold. Rubio at 3!

By: Royce

Royce — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:43:23 +0000

@Dustin Nice find. Thanks.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:42:09 +0000

New BS report with Chad Ford talking about the draft, trades, etc.

Starts talking about the Thunder @ 21 minutes or so.

Simmons loves the idea of Rubio and Westbrook in the backcourt together.

By: MartzMimic

MartzMimic — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:35:21 +0000

I was looking on HoopsHype and found this comment in a blip from ESPN.com talking about the Bucks-Spurs trade:

“I understand why they did that. They have a few years left of Tim Duncan’s career, and it’s going to take a lot of improvement to win the West – the Lakers are far better at this point, and new threats like the Nuggets, Blazers and Thunder are entering the scene.”

By: okiefunk

okiefunk — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:30:25 +0000

This may just be “okie voodoo” but did anyone else notice that the picture of KD, Westbrook and Green next to Trammel’s article was from the OU vs DAVIDSON game??? Davidson where Stephen CURRY plays!?! Is Barry trying to tell us something?

*Or perhaps I am spending way, WAY too much time looking for hidden meanings and astral signs!

By: Dustin

Dustin — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:27:20 +0000

@ J.G.
Thanks for all the great information.
I forget who would you like the Thunder to draft?

By: J.G.

J.G. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:21:24 +0000

Okay, crunched numbers and as of right now, with the cost of the third pick, the 25th pick and the bumps in salaries, the Oklahoma City Thunder’s salary for next year, without adding any other players, will be $50 million dollars.

The projected salary cap for next year is $57.3 million.

That’s only $7.3 million in cap space, not the $10 million or $14-20 million everyone seems to think we’ll have. Tack on the Ibaka possibility at atleast $1.25 million a year and a potential free agent acquisition and…well, um, yeah.