Calling the bench
As you hopefully have noticed (although probably not), I've been gone for a couple days. This isn't just because we're in the dog days of the season and there's nothing to talk about. I just moved back to school, so things are a little hectic. Besides running this blog, I'm also a sports editor at my weekly school newspaper (in case you're wondering, here's my article for this week), and production nights are Sunday and Monday, so I probably won't be updating here too much on those days. Jake's in charge then, and he'll be running the entire site in my stead.
Anyway, today's Tuesday, so I'm back, and I've been wondering about the so-called upgrades to our bench. Coming into the offseason, I think we can agree that the two main goals were to improve our defense and to improve our bench depth. I'm not sure that we've solved the first problem, although we could theoretically still use our low-level exception to go over the luxury tax and snag Ruben Patterson. But what about bench depth? We lost Jarvis Hayes and Michael Ruffin (and probably one of Calvin Booth and Roger Mason) and replaced them with Nick Young, Dominic McGuire, and Oleksiy Pecherov. Ernie also seems to be banking on a healthy return for Darius Songaila and continued improvement from Andray Blatche, which seem reasonable, but hardly are guarantees.
Truthfully, is our bench really that much better? I'd say marginally, but not significantly. If we're going to improve this year, it's because we stay healthy, not because of this sudden bench depth we just acquired. At least that's how I see it.
I guess this is a roundabout way of suggesting that Ernie sign Patterson. I'm not sure how well he'd mesh here, both on and off the court, but it's been proven that a good team can survive having one knucklehead (although Blatche may qualify there as well). Right now, D-Mac is Caron's only backup, and as good as he was in summer league, I'm not sure we can count on him just yet. Patterson is a tough, physical defender that would immediately upgrade our defense. He'd also give us a lot of flexibility. We can play him at the 4, we can use him to back up Caron, or we could use him at the 3 with Caron in the backcourt. Offensively, he had a career year last year, and while he probably won't get nearly as many touches as he did in Milwaukee, I like that he has a good post-up game. That's a dimension this team lacked, and if he can provide it in 20 minutes or so per game, it'll make a great offense even better.
But that seems like a bit of a pipe dream at this point. Patterson probably won't settle for the low-level exception even this late into the process, and Ernie probably won't go over the luxury tax for him. So I ask you guys, did we do enough to make the bench better this season? If so, how much better will it be? If not, then what would have been a better strategy?
0 recs |
7
comments
Comments
the bench
All this uncertainty and I haven't even mentioned defense. I don't expect any defense from any of them except maybe Blatche.
One free agent who I believe is still out there that intrigues me as a replacement for Booth is Mark Jackson of NO/Ok City. This is based totally on 1 game I saw last year against the 'zards where he hit about 4 jumpers. I have no clue what his price is though and doubt its cheap enough for us.
by hotplate on Aug 28, 2007 12:21 PM EDT 0 recs
I'll say this
by JakeTheSnake on Aug 28, 2007 4:41 PM EDT 0 recs
No thanks on Patterson
Given the contract and luxury tax issues we faced in the offseason, I'm not sure what Ernie could have done much different. I am optimistic that Blatche will be a lot better, and having an athlete like him coming fof the bench will be a huge plus. I don't think Young or Pecherov will contribute at all this season, but I can see McGuire logging helpful minutes in the second half of the season, bringing some energy and athleticism as the 82 games drag on. Having Songaila around for 82 also should make us deeper. He didn't really come back until we'd lost Gil and Caron last season.
by Vanilla Gorilla on Aug 29, 2007 11:26 AM EDT 0 recs
Couldn't have said it better.
by mamemimo on
Aug 29, 2007 11:51 AM EDT
up
0 recs
V.G., we usually agree
For the record, Ernie is never bringing in Ruben Patterson, not in a million years. But on the question of whether he should be, I say yes.
As a fan, I totally understand that it's very difficult to root for Ruben Patterson. His off-court rap sheet is tremendous, and if I were a father trying to teach discipline to their kid through professional sports, I'd have a hard time rooting for Patterson. But as mentioned above, a team can survive -- and in most cases, it thrives -- with one token crazy dude (call it the Bill Simmons theory). Golden State didn't get better until they got Stephen Jackson. Ditto for the 2003 edition of the Spurs. Detroit didn't become DEETROIT BASKETBALL until they made the Rasheed Wallace trade. The Bulls' second threepeat would not have happened without Dennis Rodman.
As bad as Patterson is off the court, I haven't really seen too much evidence that he's a cancer on the court, which is kind of what matters in the end. I'd be worried that he'll steal shots from the Big 3, but if we use him with AD in the second unit, I think he can be extremely effective. He would immediately become our best defender as well.
I hate speaking in these types of cliches, but the Arenas-era Wizards have almost been too nice to become a real contender. They need toughness, they need an edge that can provide a new dimension. Who better to enable that then Ruben Patterson?
by Pradamaster on
Aug 29, 2007 1:18 PM EDT
up
0 recs
One thing to remember ...
Yeah, he has some character issues, but the guy is like Corliss Williamson in that you can just keep going to him in iso in the post and get a quick burst of buckets during droughts or in big fourth quarter situations. With Nick Young and DMG pitching in, we would definitely be able to sustain our offense more effectively than last year when one of the Big 3 is resting. And I think we need some good old vitriolic attitude on our squad. We need someone with indomitable will.
Without Ruben, I think the bench will only be marginally better; with Patterson, it will be improved significantly. But I too agree with prada that with Mr. Pollin and EG at the helm, it's not gonna happen. Still, I think it would really help our team out, and the risks would ultimately be worth it, especially if we get him for a decent price. He could easily be the x-factor for us in the post-season, someone who gets the guys riled up to play with toughness and confidence when we need it the most.
by miestersean on
Aug 29, 2007 11:49 PM EDT
up
0 recs













