Game Day Thread! Pelicans vs Grizzlies 3/07/15

The only question that matters is whether Ajinca and a player TBD can give you 75% of Asik's defense and 400% of his offense for 65% of his cost.

I feel like people are attached to Asik, and it really just comes down to value. Asik is fine on a short deal with a team option in the 3rd year, or a 4 yr deal at around $8m per. 4 years and $40+m for Asik is absolutely insane both because of the length and the cost.

400% of his offense or his scoring?

Putting the ball through the hoop is not the only way to effect the game on offense. Asik is a great offensive rebounder and is the best pick setter on this team by a mile. He also has shown some solid passing skills from the high post, and maybe most importantly, he doesn't demand the ball from his high usage teammates.

I don't know what 400% of his offense would look like. You would have to find a guy who puts up 28 points and 12 offensive rebounds in 26 minutes. Basically, you would need Wilt Chamberlain in his prime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rt0307

Anthony Davis had 23 pts, 10 reb & 5 blk vs Grizzlies Saturday, his 8th 20-10-5 game of the season. Rest of NBA has 6 such games COMBINED.

— ESPN Stats & Info (@ESPNStatsInfo) March 8, 2015

---

Two more than the rest of the league. Awesome!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

400% of his offense or his scoring?

Putting the ball through the hoop is not the only way to effect the game on offense. Asik is a great offensive rebounder and is the best pick setter on this team by a mile. He also has shown some solid passing skills from the high post, and maybe most importantly, he doesn't demand the ball from his high usage teammates.

I don't know what 400% of his offense would look like. You would have to find a guy who puts up 28 points and 12 offensive rebounds in 26 minutes. Basically, you would need Wilt Chamberlain in his prime.

---

Honestly, I think you should know that I know basketball, having been coached by some of the best to ever do it for 10 years out of my life. So you don't have to say putting the ball through the hoops is the only way to effect the game on offense. I know this, man. And it sounds kind of condescending.

Ajinca is easily a much better offensive player than Asik, and it's not even close, and he doesn't have to be high usage to show that. I'm looking at his skill level away from the basket and in the post, as well as moving without the ball and passing the ball. He allows the offense to run better as well because he's not just in the way on the end of the court. He actually has to be defended after he sets a pick. He's actually a an option for our guards to dump it off to when they get into the paint. Asik isn't. The guards are better off forcing up the shot, which makes them less efficient.

Now does that mean he's "400%" or 4x better than Asik, I'm not sure. How much better would you say he is on offense?

My question still remains, is it better to pay Ajinca and a player TBD 65% of the cost for xx% of Asik's defense and xx% of his offense?

You can plug in whatever numbers you want, but it's still a relevant question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Honestly, I think you should know that I know basketball, having been coached by some of the best to ever do it for 10 years out of my life. So you don't have to say putting the ball through the hoops is the only way to effect the game on offense. I know this, man. And it sounds kind of condescending.

Ajinca is easily a much better offensive player than Asik, and it's not even close, and he doesn't have to be high usage to show that. I'm looking at his skill level away from the basket and in the post, as well as moving without the ball and passing the ball. He allows the offense to run better as well because he's not just in the way on the end of the court. He actually has to be defended after he sets a pick. He's actually a an option for our guards to dump it off to when they get into the paint. Asik isn't. The guards are better off forcing up the shot, which makes them less efficient.

Now does that mean he's "400%" or 4x better than Asik, I'm not sure. How much better would you say he is on offense?

My question still remains, is it better to pay Ajinca and a player TBD 65% of the cost for xx% of Asik's defense and xx% of his offense?

You can plug in whatever numbers you want, but it's still a relevant question.

---

I agree. Asik is a liability on offense and in crunch and the way our players are handicapped shows it. The offense flows better FROM EYE TEST when players have a option to dump of the ball in the post when defenses cave in on the perimeter. Ive seen plenty of times when the shot clock is closing in, and inside the post is a great option, it becomes unrealiable and a costly turnover whenever the silly goose Asik is in the paint. Our team doesnt trust him in the paint, and if you cant see that, then your simpily ignoring the reality. Ajincia was huge in our mini run of wins for a reason. And his confidence is growing, why not let the guy break free?

Put Asik in the game when it matters. For defensive purposes and eating rebounds. But Ajincia is far more a important piece becomes the team flows better with him on the court. I dont care what the numbers say. We all see it. ASIK HANDICAPS US.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Honestly, I think you should know that I know basketball, having been coached by some of the best to ever do it for 10 years out of my life. So you don't have to say putting the ball through the hoops is the only way to effect the game on offense. I know this, man. And it sounds kind of condescending.

Ajinca is easily a much better offensive player than Asik, and it's not even close, and he doesn't have to be high usage to show that. I'm looking at his skill level away from the basket and in the post, as well as moving without the ball and passing the ball. He allows the offense to run better as well because he's not just in the way on the end of the court. He actually has to be defended after he sets a pick. He's actually a an option for our guards to dump it off to when they get into the paint. Asik isn't. The guards are better off forcing up the shot, which makes them less efficient.

Now does that mean he's "400%" or 4x better than Asik, I'm not sure. How much better would you say he is on offense?

My question still remains, is it better to pay Ajinca and a player TBD 65% of the cost for xx% of Asik's defense and xx% of his offense?

You can plug in whatever numbers you want, but it's still a relevant question.

---

I would grade the players like this:

Defense:

Asik - 85
Ajinca - 65

Offense:

Ajinca - 70
Asik - 65

I think Ajinca can make more shots on offense and is a bigger threat to score, but I think Asik does everything else better (set screens, move without the ball, knows his limitations, pass, etc.) on the offensive end.

I think the other side is a big difference, however. Ideally, I wouldn't have to compare and contrast, though. Because my plan if I were Dell would be to bring back both and I think he has the resources to do it. I like them being my center combo for the next 3-4 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I would grade the players like this:

Defense:

Asik - 85
Ajinca - 65

Offense:

Ajinca - 70
Asik - 65

I think Ajinca can make more shots on offense and is a bigger threat to score, but I think Asik does everything else better (set screens, move without the ball, knows his limitations, pass, etc.) on the offensive end.

I think the other side is a big difference, however. Ideally, I wouldn't have to compare and contrast, though. Because my plan if I were Dell would be to bring back both and I think he has the resources to do it. I like them being my center combo for the next 3-4 years.

---

In in crunch time moment in the playoffs, would you trust Asik at the C position? If he had to be a option in the post?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I would grade the players like this:

Defense:

Asik - 85
Ajinca - 65

Offense:

Ajinca - 70
Asik - 65

I think Ajinca can make more shots on offense and is a bigger threat to score, but I think Asik does everything else better (set screens, move without the ball, knows his limitations, pass, etc.) on the offensive end.

I think the other side is a big difference, however. Ideally, I wouldn't have to compare and contrast, though. Because my plan if I were Dell would be to bring back both and I think he has the resources to do it. I like them being my center combo for the next 3-4 years.

---

Ok, if you really think there is that much separation between Asik and Ajinca on defense, but that little separation between the two on offense, there's no point in us discussing this because we won't ever agree that sky is above and the ground is below.

But I think it's funny that you keep talking about Asik's screening. If you were the coach of the other team, how would you tell your team to play an Ajinca screen vs an Asik screen? Further on offense, knowing the limitations of Ajinca and Asik, what would you coach them to do when setting screens?

Think about that, and then tell me which player's screen action is more effective in our offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I would grade the players like this:

Defense:

Asik - 85
Ajinca - 65

Offense:

Ajinca - 70
Asik - 65

---

And further, even though I think your ratings are flawed, if I told you for 30% of the money you could have Player X that is 75% the defender, 110% the offensive player, 1 year younger, and showed an improvement over his 2013/14 numbers as opposed to Asik and his aching back and knees, who looks to have peaked 3 years ago, wouldn't you jump on it and spend the $40m you want to give Asik elsewhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

And further, even though I think your ratings are flawed, if I told you for 30% of the money you could have Player X that is 75% the defender, 110% the offensive player, 1 year younger, and showed an improvement over his 2013/14 numbers as opposed to Asik and his aching back and knees, who looks to have peaked 3 years ago, wouldn't you jump on it and spend the $40m you want to give Asik elsewhere?

---

This wouldn't be a true scenario since Asik is actually having one of, if not his best, years ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

And further, even though I think your ratings are flawed, if I told you for 30% of the money you could have Player X that is 75% the defender, 110% the offensive player, 1 year younger, and showed an improvement over his 2013/14 numbers as opposed to Asik and his aching back and knees, who looks to have peaked 3 years ago, wouldn't you jump on it and spend the $40m you want to give Asik elsewhere?

---

I have to address the common misconception that the money we use to pay Asik can be spent elsewhere. Asik's bird rights allow us to go over the cap in order to retain him, something we couldn't do with other FAs available. So your options are pretty much limited to Asik or someone cheap like a Dalembert or Steimsma. There is no scenario where we don't push like hell to retain Asik.

I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by studentofthegam

They have a language filter setting on the site for people who are as sensitive as you. And I would not have a problem with what you said had you simply stated you didn't agree with the language used on the site. You went much further and started with your usual I am better than everyone attitude even to the point where you referred to the majority of the site as psychotic (seems like you are the one who is upset, not me.)

---

I find that last part funny bc you seem to be going extreme bro might wanna relax a little bit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by studentofthegam

I have to address the common misconception that the money we use to pay Asik can be spent elsewhere. Asik's bird rights allow us to go over the cap in order to retain him, something we couldn't do with other FAs available. So your options are pretty much limited to Asik or someone cheap like a Dalembert or Steimsma. There is no scenario where we don't push like hell to retain Asik.

---

My point would be that Ajinca and someone cheap would be better long term than a 4 yr commitment to Asik.

We could sign and trade Asik, creating a trade exemption that could be useful to us next season. Maybe we attach a protected future 2nd round pick if the other team needs incentive to help us.

But also, by not exceeding the cap by whatever it cost to resign Asik, we have the addition of that amount to spend in 2016-18 when the cap increases.

If you don't think having an extra $10-12m in cap room is important in 2016-18 and believe Asik makes you a championship contender next season, by all mean go for it.

But I think Ajinca and an upgrade to Withey that can play 15mpg, is a much better deal than Asik at 4yrs/$40m or more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

This wouldn't be a true scenario since Asik is actually having one of, if not his best, years ever.

---

Ok, whatever. Still doesn't change the math. Do you invest in the younger player, Ajinca, that gives you 75% on defense and 110% on offense or pay 350% more for Asik, the older player with knee and back problems?

I think the answer is obvious and probably why you didn't answer the question the first time. But if you're going to die on your resigning Asik hill, just say so and I'll move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Ok, whatever. Still doesn't change the math. Do you invest in the younger player, Ajinca, that gives you 75% on defense and 110% on offense or pay 350% more for Asik, the older player with knee and back problems?

I think the answer is obvious and probably why you didn't answer the question the first time. But if you're going to die on your resigning Asik hill, just say so and I'll move on.

---

It's not an either or option. We can keep Ajinca and Asik. That is exactly what I would do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

It's not an either or option. We can keep Ajinca and Asik. That is exactly what I would do.

---

But that's a luxury move. That's the kind of thing you do when you're not rotating DC/QPon at Small forward, or when you've made a playoff run and you just need to bring the band back because you were a few bad breaks away from the finals.

I'm not so much worried about Omer in 2015/16 as I am dreading having him on or roster/cap beyond that. When the cap goes up, that $10-12m you give Omer is summer, is $10-12m less you have to spend on free agents beyond this summer.

Let's say we go over the cap to resign Asik at $10m, cap goes up $20m in 2016, Gordon expires, and Ryno expires. We'd be looking at approximately $35m to spend. If we don't resign Asik, we're looking at $45m to spend in 2016.

If I can get 75% of the defensive production and 110% of the offense from Ajinca and actually have that $10m extra to spend in 2016, which is the better long term play? Which is the better play for building the best team possible in AD's next contract. Which option gives you the most flexibility?

Mythrol, if this team was closer to championship contention, I'd be on board with bringing Asik back. If we could get him for 3 years with a team option, I might even give him his $10m per! But he's no longer a value at 4 year AND $40-44m.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverfoxx

In in crunch time moment in the playoffs, would you trust Asik at the C position? If he had to be a option in the post?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

But I think it's funny that you keep talking about Asik's screening. If you were the coach of the other team, how would you tell your team to play an Ajinca screen vs an Asik screen? Further on offense, knowing the limitations of Ajinca and Asik, what would you coach them to do when setting screens?

Think about that, and then tell me which player's screen action is more effective in our offense.

---

In three recent victories Asik was in the game during crunch time to set up huge go-ahead buckets. In two games including last night he set great down screens to free up EG at the top of the key for critical threes. In the DET game he set a great down screen for AD to help ice that game. So he has proven to be a functional player in crunch time, depending on the situation.

Silverfoxx, why would he need to be an offensive option with the players he'd likely be on the court with? Moot question IMO. Whenever we've wanted our center to be an primary option, Monty has just situationally subbed in AA, which supports those who say keep both. That's great flexibility.

NM3, I think you're specifically thinking of on-ball screens only when everyone else is thinking all around. Sagging down on off-ball screens doesn't do much good if the screener perfectly walls off the defender and creates plenty of space for the shooter. No, Ajinca is not as effective as far as positioning himself and walling off defenders in a screen. And Lord knows AD isn't. Asik is the best screening big we have easily, maybe not as far as being a secondary offensive threat after the screen but for freeing up the first option for a great look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

400% of his offense or his scoring?

Putting the ball through the hoop is not the only way to effect the game on offense. Asik is a great offensive rebounder and is the best pick setter on this team by a mile. He also has shown some solid passing skills from the high post, and maybe most importantly, he doesn't demand the ball from his high usage teammates.

I don't know what 400% of his offense would look like. You would have to find a guy who puts up 28 points and 12 offensive rebounds in 26 minutes. Basically, you would need Wilt Chamberlain in his prime.

---

You got to think of a better argument than "he sets good screens". What does it matter if he sets good screens if no one needs to respect him as a roller? Moving without the ball is great but you literally don't have to guard him because of he goes outside a 2 ft zone of the rim he literally can't score. The scouting report reads: "leave Omer Asik completely alone. He will make some dunks but half the time he will drop the ball or it will be blocked or swiped. Is that not how you would scout the Pelicans? If I am a coach of the other team I say, every time Asik has the ball in his hands good things will happen for us so let that happen. Having a player like that really makes it difficult for other players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djpaul89

In three recent victories Asik was in the game during crunch time to set up huge go-ahead buckets. In two games including last night he set great down screens to free up EG at the top of the key for critical threes. In the DET game he set a great down screen for AD to help ice that game. So he has proven to be a functional player in crunch time, depending on the situation.

Silverfoxx, why would he need to be an offensive option with the players he'd likely be on the court with? Moot question IMO. Whenever we've wanted our center to be an primary option, Monty has just situationally subbed in AA, which supports those who say keep both. That's great flexibility.

NM3, I think you're specifically thinking of on-ball screens only when everyone else is thinking all around. Sagging down on off-ball screens doesn't do much good if the screener perfectly walls off the defender and creates plenty of space for the shooter. No, Ajinca is not as effective as far as positioning himself and walling off defenders in a screen. And Lord knows AD isn't. Asik is the best screening big we have easily, maybe not as far as being a secondary offensive threat after the screen but for freeing up the first option for a great look.

---

What are you saying by saying that he is the best screening big we have? That's great, that doesn't mean we keep him. I'm stronger than my wife, does that make me really strong?

The argument isn't that Ajinca is better than asik, you could argue that he is, but I'm not, im just saying that Asik is a negative for this offense and could be argued for this defense in some situations, we will have to upgrade at some point- soon.

They are better at different times. This is one case where matchups truly matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heybigmatt

What are you saying by saying that he is the best screening big we have? That's great, that doesn't mean we keep him. I'm stronger than my wife, does that make me really strong?

---

I said nothing about keeping or not keeping him in my post. Weak straw man argument in an attempt to make a comeback.

I have come to terms with the fact that I will never be able to sway most of those who are against Asik, and that is fine. I would just hope that an open mind can be kept. I feel like some people have dug in here and maybe use a little bit of hyperbole to exaggerate his weaknesses.

He is quite goofy and doesn't look like what you think of when you imagine a basketball player, but he does a lot of good too. The money argument is fine with me. Prefer to use those resources elsewhere and try your luck going really cheap at center? Fine. But let's not over exaggerate his weaknesses and dismiss his strengths too. That would be all I ask.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Ok, if you really think there is that much separation between Asik and Ajinca on defense, but that little separation between the two on offense, there's no point in us discussing this because we won't ever agree that sky is above and the ground is below.

But I think it's funny that you keep talking about Asik's screening. If you were the coach of the other team, how would you tell your team to play an Ajinca screen vs an Asik screen? Further on offense, knowing the limitations of Ajinca and Asik, what would you coach them to do when setting screens?

Think about that, and then tell me which player's screen action is more effective in our offense.

---

This is so true, if we are scouting both players, i say guys its really simple, don't guard asik anyone he sets a screen on just armbar him so he can't get through until the defender can get through the screen then sink down to the lane. Never pay attention to Asik. Thats my scouting report. I don't see how you can refute that?- oh- box him out.

Ajinca- you got to pay attention to him, he is slow, but if he gets position on the block its hard to block his shot, probably send a defender down to double in the post because he won't be able to handle the pressure. Has a soft stroke so will pop back on screens be wary of this. Thats my scouting report on ajinca.

Defensively

Pull asik away from the basket, drive the ball because their perimeter defense is sub bar, and he won't be able to recover in time have any affect. Great one on one defender, Good rebounder.

Ajinca, slow, not much of a defender, does have length that can alter shots, put the pressure on him and he will give up rebounds. Go at him and he will give up fouls. Can alter shots.

Am i way off on any of these scouting reports?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I have come to terms with the fact that I will never be able to sway most of those who are against Asik, and that is fine. I would just hope that an open mind can be kept. I feel like some people have dug in here and maybe use a little bit of hyperbole to exaggerate his weaknesses.

He is quite goofy and doesn't look like what you think of when you imagine a basketball player, but he does a lot of good too. The money argument is fine with me. Prefer to use those resources elsewhere and try your luck going really cheap at center? Fine. But let's not over exaggerate his weaknesses and dismiss his strengths too. That would be all I ask.

---

dude I want to be swayed, i am a pelicans fan. Give me something better than, he sets good screens though.... I want to like asik, i just don't have much hope for a center who can't jump over a credit card, can't catch, easily stripped and blocked center. he just won't command any respect and I don't think anything i just said is hyperbole. He is a fantastic 1 on 1 defender of big men, that goes without saying and he can make plays on offensive rebounds and get rebounds on defense as well. I think we need more than that. And i think it is more important than a small forward, so I hope we get rid of ryno/ tyreke /eg and focus all that money on a center who can command some attention to free up space for AD and Jrue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djpaul89

I said nothing about keeping or not keeping him in my post. Weak straw man argument in an attempt to make a comeback.

---

so you are saying he is the best we have, but that isn't that good. so you agree with me? Therefore, if you agree with me, then you got to believe he has to go.

can people stop saying straw man argument?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I have come to terms with the fact that I will never be able to sway most of those who are against Asik, and that is fine. I would just hope that an open mind can be kept. I feel like some people have dug in here and maybe use a little bit of hyperbole to exaggerate his weaknesses.

He is quite goofy and doesn't look like what you think of when you imagine a basketball player, but he does a lot of good too. The money argument is fine with me. Prefer to use those resources elsewhere and try your luck going really cheap at center? Fine. But let's not over exaggerate his weaknesses and dismiss his strengths too. That would be all I ask.

---

I get all that... Im just waiting on someone to tell me why they'd resign Asik for 4yr/$40m when you can get 80% of the player for 30% of the cost. Especially when we still need serious help on the wing and centers no longer win championships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heybigmatt

This is so true, if we are scouting both players, i say guys its really simple, don't guard asik anyone he sets a screen on just armbar him so he can't get through until the defender can get through the screen then sink down to the lane. Never pay attention to Asik. Thats my scouting report. I don't see how you can refute that?- oh- box him out.

Ajinca- you got to pay attention to him, he is slow, but if he gets position on the block its hard to block his shot, probably send a defender down to double in the post because he won't be able to handle the pressure. Has a soft stroke so will pop back on screens be wary of this. Thats my scouting report on ajinca.

Defensively

Pull asik away from the basket, drive the ball because their perimeter defense is sub bar, and he won't be able to recover in time have any affect. Great one on one defender, Good rebounder.

Ajinca, slow, not much of a defender, does have length that can alter shots, put the pressure on him and he will give up rebounds. Go at him and he will give up fouls. Can alter shots.

Am i way off on any of these scouting reports?

---

I would add these:

You left off Asik's ability to box out on the defensive end, his ability to get position on the offensive end, ability to defend without fouling (aka a smart defender), looks to push the ball out of rebounds and start fast breaks, ability to hedge and recover, rarely gets pulled out of the paint or caught out of position, able to get into the head of other players and rattle them, and he is a physical player on both sides of the ball. Also he's not a good rebounder, he is an elite rebounder.

Tends to bring the ball down on offensive rebounds allowing the defense time to recover, rarely finishes above the rim, FT shooting is poor enough that you can get away with hard fouls instead of allowing easy buckets, struggles more with hyper athletes than talented smart players, and if forced to put the ball on the floor can get turnovers.

Ajinca needs to be guarded tight even out to 18ft, is a good rebounder and length allows him to put back with ease, can score face up or out of post, due to size is difficult to bully on the defensive end, and makes FTs at a good rate for a big so he is not a liability in late game situations.

Is slow and can struggle with faster C's, if pressured will turn the ball over, if attacked on defense will foul at an alarmingly high rate, can be used to get into the bonus, is prone to becoming tired and playing sloppy if forced to play extended minutes, and can be caught out of position defensively sometimes.

I'm not as b-ball savvy as you gents but I'd keep both. I like Asik defense even though his hands are made of stone. I thought he play Gasol pretty good the other night. Ajinca's offense has been great back so far this season, the only thing that scares me is how quick Ajinca can pick up fouls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heybigmatt

dude I want to be swayed, i am a pelicans fan. Give me something better than, he sets good screens though.... I want to like asik, i just don't have much hope for a center who can't jump over a credit card, can't catch, easily stripped and blocked center. he just won't command any respect and I don't think anything i just said is hyperbole. He is a fantastic 1 on 1 defender of big men, that goes without saying and he can make plays on offensive rebounds and get rebounds on defense as well. I think we need more than that. And i think it is more important than a small forward, so I hope we get rid of ryno/ tyreke /eg and focus all that money on a center who can command some attention to free up space for AD and Jrue.

---

Marc Gasol 2-7 from the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I get all that... Im just waiting on someone to tell me why they'd resign Asik for 4yr/$40m when you can get 80% of the player for 30% of the cost. Especially when we still need serious help on the wing and centers no longer win championships.

---

4yr/ 36m = GOAT. 4yr/40m = worst deal ever. LMAO.

Tyreke is 80% the player that Westbrook is. One is a max player, one is 10m/yr. Sometimes 20% is a big enough difference to pay an extra 50% (Ajinca is not 30% the price if he gets 5m/yr and Asik gets 10m/yr). Why not look at it as - We can get Ajinca AND Asik for the cost of Deandre Jordan or Roy Hibbert?

Signing Asik also will not stop us from being able to offer a sizable contract to a good wing player. The only thing he might do is make us not be able to get LBJ . . .however if we operate under the assumption that Durant and LBJ are not a real possibility then any other FA wing that we realistically have a shot at we can offer.

The simple answer is: The combination of Asik and Ajinca gives us a solid front court rotation to pair with Davis. He is the defensive anchor to pair next to AD which allows him to roam on defense and play outside of the paint on offense. His contract will not be big enough to hinder any realistic future signings and will hold plenty of value if we find a better long term replacement. Signing Asik gives us the best combination of winning now while still having flexibility in the future.

I'm still waiting for someone to give a realistic reason we should not bring him back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heybigmatt

so you are saying he is the best we have, but that isn't that good. so you agree with me? Therefore, if you agree with me, then you got to believe he has to go.

can people stop saying straw man argument?

---

Wow. You put way too much into my post that was not there. But I'll play along.

No I don't agree with your screening point. And even if I did, why would that necessarily mean I think he has to go?

He is a great screener IMO, not just in comparison to the rest of our bigs but in his own regard. I doubt those three screens in crunchtime that helped ice our games would have been as effective with our other bigs. And I see you chose to gloss over those examples and points I made about off ball screening to dismiss that strength. Sagging off and ignoring Asik doesn't do anything if he's screening off the ball to free up a spot up or pull up jump shot and actually makes that style of defense a worse defensive option, because now the defending big isn't in position to help and deny the ball to the shooter.

He has more offensive value besides just scoring the ball is the overarching point. The fact that our other bigs don't set screens as well gives him added value around here. He extends possessions for us and ends them for the opponent as evidenced by being the 3rd best rebounder in the NBA (according to Mythrol). That is SERIOUS value there alone for a big man that wouldn't be easily replaced. And on the occasions that he facilitates from the high post I've seen that he's capable of being an effective passer.

With that said, his offensive deficiencies can be...annoying to say the least. But with the high usage offensive weapons that surround him, that's not all that crucial for us. And if we retain all our big men, he'd be part of the most versatile frontcourt in the NBA.

TLDR: In my eyes, he's a keeper.

P.S.: I'd also be interested in seeing how the Monty system big man effect works on him. Over his tenure, big men have made big jumps in their 2nd year.

I'm of the mindset of keeping Asik and Ajinca. If we can keep Asik for 7-8m per year. He's not worth more than that. Asik is a very good 1 on 1 low post defender. He's a banger down low and we need that. However I'd rate Ajinca a much higher offensive player than Asik. It's really not even close. Ajinca can knock down the mid range jumper with some consistency. Asik has problems making lay ups. Ajinca has low post moves including a turn around jumper. Asik has problems catching passes down low. It's really not close at all. Ajinca has a long ways to go be considered a good defender but he's getting better and better with time. He's improved a ton since we first signed him. No reason to think he can't keep Improving on that side of the ball. He's been having his spurts lately without fouling as much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

4yr/ 36m = GOAT. 4yr/40m = worst deal ever. LMAO.

Tyreke is 80% the player that Westbrook is. One is a max player, one is 10m/yr. Sometimes 20% is a big enough difference to pay an extra 50% (Ajinca is not 30% the price if he gets 5m/yr and Asik gets 10m/yr). Why not look at it as - We can get Ajinca AND Asik for the cost of Deandre Jordan or Roy Hibbert?

Signing Asik also will not stop us from being able to offer a sizable contract to a good wing player. The only thing he might do is make us not be able to get LBJ . . .however if we operate under the assumption that Durant and LBJ are not a real possibility then any other FA wing that we realistically have a shot at we can offer.

The simple answer is: The combination of Asik and Ajinca gives us a solid front court rotation to pair with Davis. He is the defensive anchor to pair next to AD which allows him to roam on defense and play outside of the paint on offense. His contract will not be big enough to hinder any realistic future signings and will hold plenty of value if we find a better long term replacement. Signing Asik gives us the best combination of winning now while still having flexibility in the future.

I'm still waiting for someone to give a realistic reason we should not bring him back.

---

Not much difference in my opinion between 4/36 and 4/40. I never said 4/36 was GOAT.

I don't want to give him 4 years and if we do I want the annual discounted more than $1m. In fact, in other threads I've suggested that I'd be ok with $10m annual, but would prefer if it wasn't for 4 years. Hell I might give Asik as much as 3/36 if the 3rd year is a team option.

I can understand your point. You're someone who believes you need to have a center to win a championship. However I've seen multiple teams win titles with guys less talented than Ajinca playing center. And I believe we could get Ajinca for 3 yrs/$10m, so that's the path I'd take.

It's crazy when people say player x and player y aren't real possibilities and only certain players are realistic. Kevin Love says he'll resign with Cleveland. That should show you how much some of these stars want to win.

“America has only three cities: New York, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Everywhere else is Cleveland.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Not much difference in my opinion between 4/36 and 4/40. I never said 4/36 was GOAT.

I don't want to give him 4 years and if we do I want the annual discounted more than $1m. In fact, in other threads I've suggested that I'd be ok with $10m annual, but would prefer if it wasn't for 4 years. Hell I might give Asik as much as 3/36 if the 3rd year is a team option.

I can understand your point. You're someone who believes you need to have a center to win a championship. However I've seen multiple teams win titles with guys less talented than Ajinca playing center. And I believe we could get Ajinca for 3 yrs/$10m, so that's the path I'd take.

It's crazy when people say player x and player y aren't real possibilities and only certain players are realistic. Kevin Love says he'll resign with Cleveland. That should show you how much some of these stars want to win.

“America has only three cities: New York, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Everywhere else is Cleveland.”

---

You just said in the other thread that you'd be all on board for Asik if he had Tiago Splitter's 4yr/36m deal. . . I simply fail to see a huge difference between 9m/yr and 10/yr. I don't understand how you can be all for Splitters deal but be so anti a deal worth only 4m more over the life of it. Makes no sense. Here's your exact quote:

Quote:

---

Spurs gave Tiago 4yr $36m. Which is great considering cap is going up, which everyone knew was happening when they agreed to it. If we can get Asik for that, I'm all in.

---

I believe we need at least a decent center to win, yes. The main difference seems to be you believe Ajinca by himself can be that center for us. I simply can't see that. He has played great the last. . .say 3 weeks (while ignoring people calling for him to be benched in Dec/Jan for Withey to take over) but that is taking a HUGE risk to hedge the 5 position over the next few years on that sample size.

When you combine that with the fact that Ajinca made comments last year about thinking he plays best off the bench in limited minutes and I don't think he can be the starting center solution for us. He can be a solid backup center that offers a change of pace to Asik but his foul rate will keep him for playing long minutes if not his energy levels.

If your argument has devolved to the level of, "Who's to say we can't sign LBJ or Durant?" Then you really have no argument at all. No GM, especially one in a small market, can ever hedge their bets to expect to sign a top 5 player in the FA market. Then once we miss out on them next summer we will end up with a wing player that we could have signed anyway while keeping Asik, except we won't have him. Excuse me if I see that long term plan as horribly pathetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

You just said in the other thread that you'd be all on board for Asik if he had Tiago Splitter's 4yr/36m deal. . . I simply fail to see a huge difference between 9m/yr and 10/yr. I don't understand how you can be all for Splitters deal but be so anti a deal worth only 4m more over the life of it. Makes no sense. Here's your exact quote:



I believe we need at least a decent center to win, yes. The main difference seems to be you believe Ajinca by himself can be that center for us. I simply can't see that. He has played great the last. . .say 3 weeks (while ignoring people calling for him to be benched in Dec/Jan for Withey to take over) but that is taking a HUGE risk to hedge the 5 position over the next few years on that sample size.

When you combine that with the fact that Ajinca made comments last year about thinking he plays best off the bench in limited minutes and I don't think he can be the starting center solution for us. He can be a solid backup center that offers a change of pace to Asik but his foul rate will keep him for playing long minutes if not his energy levels.

If your argument has devolved to the level of, "Who's to say we can't sign LBJ or Durant?" Then you really have no argument at all. No GM, especially one in a small market, can ever hedge their bets to expect to sign a top 5 player in the FA market. Then once we miss out on them next summer we will end up with a wing player that we could have signed anyway while keeping Asik, except we won't have him. Excuse me if I see that long term plan as horribly pathetic.

---

As I've said, which you ignore, my problem with Asik is multiple, but at the same time, I'm not decidedly against Asik like some folks.

Acknowledge the gray area and it'll all be ok.

Asik is not the "ideal" center for this team. Even if he fits on defense, he's a detriment on offense, which means even if you don't believe like I do that he's started to break down physically, you need to pair him with a center like Ajinca. I've never argued that Ajinca can handle the duties of being our center by himself, but that Ajinca plus a player TBD would be necessary to handle the role.

My problem with Asik, is that he may command a a 4yr contract in excess of what I want to pay him for the role of marginal lead dog in a 2 man center rotation. I would have the same problem giving Ajinca a 4 yr deal in excess of $40m. But I think I can sign Ajinca for less, and find another 6'10-7'0" bruiser for a fraction of what it'll cost to sign Asik.

I get the fact that the team is up against the cap and wouldn't have the saved dollars to spend this season, but if Asik wasn't already on this team would you seriously look at the big picture and advocate that we go out and sign that guy to a 4 yr 40+ million dollar deal if we had Ajinca giving us 20 minutes a game of solid production and we developed some other player into a 15mpg rebounder/defender?

Signing Asik to a 4 year deal strikes me the same way the signing of James Posey did. People couldn't wait to get rid of Okafor, and Asik is not as good as Okafor. I think we'll all be able to rationalize and accept an Asik contract in 2015/16, but we'll absolutely regret it in the last 3 years of his contract when he's 30-33 years old, playing less than 20 mpg and playing less than 70 games. What little athleticism he has is likely going to get worse.

Every dollar we spend on Asik, is a dollar less we can spend on the wings and at PG. The quality of our wings and a PG, even if that's just resigning Jrue, will have a greater impact on whether AD stays in NOLA and wins championships than Asik will as a diminishing and aging big man. Is that going to mean we sign a LBJ or KD level free agent, maybe not, but it puts us at the table for the Wesley Matthews, Draymond Green, etc types in 2016-18. It could be the difference between going after one of those guys and our own guys, and going after two big fishes.

I just ask myself, what would Pat Riley do?
Does Asik have enough basketball skill to be a Spur?

I don't think championship organizations sign a player like Asik to long term deals for big money.

I mean, while the difference between what I would offer Asik and what you would offer Asik might be marginal, it's that difference that would allow me to sign a shooter like Morrow or Babbitt for the bench. And not signing him at all is the difference between having a Babbitt/Morrow type player and a DeMarre Carroll type player.

For someone who wants to win championships the line of reasoning of "Ajinca plus TBD" is so far out there that it boggles my mind.

As we have seen multiple times 4 quarters does not always make a dollar in the NBA. Teams don't just let big men walk for the possibility that they might in a to couple of years be able to bring in some center who might possibly be able to replace 80% of what the center who walked did. All this to save 1m/yr? LOL.

The problem seems to be you are underestimating Asik, and overestimating Ajinca and the ability to find a center that can replace Asik.

I do not believe this TBD will be as easy to find as you do. And even if we do he is still going to have to be traded for or signed.

In the meantime however what do we do if Ajinca goes down? We become pretty much SOL the next year or two with any type of injury at the C position. Again, all to try and save a measly 1m/yr?

Where my confusion comes from is how you can be "all in" on 9m/yr but would let him walking with no real plan or ability to replace him for 10m/yr.

This whole Ajinca + TBD feels just like people resting their hopes on a draft pick and saying, "But it could be anything!" When the truth is draft, Free Agency, or wherever the odds of replacing Asik are not high.

Even if you somehow magically find a guy in Europe who went under everyone's radar and sign him to the same type of 2yr deal as Ajinca. Guess what? Before Asik's contract would even be up you are going to be paying this new guy a lot more money than Asik's deal would have been. Or even worse, some other team who will have more cap space sees him and steals him away or forces you to pay more!

That feels a heck of a lot more YOLO than just giving Asik an extra million a year and having the position secure and locked up.

9m per year and 10m per year are both too much for Asik imo.

As much as I have been in the Asik gotta go camp, the more I look at everybody's arguements, and look at what the options for this summer would be, I am more willing to pay Asik over 10. That had been my line between thinking it was a good or a bad deal. But now I'm worried about the length of the contract. Back problems don't age well. This guy is a total mystery to me. Are health problems slowing him this season that will get better over the summer? Will he catch better when he knows his teammates tendencies better? Or does he keep breaking down and still can't catch squat? If this goes bad a 4 year deal will have us howling worse than EG's deal. While we suffered through him our team was supposed to stink, there are high expectations for the next 4 years...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

For someone who wants to win championships the line of reasoning of "Ajinca plus TBD" is so far out there that it boggles my mind.

As we have seen multiple times 4 quarters does not always make a dollar in the NBA. Teams don't just let big men walk for the possibility that they might in a to couple of years be able to bring in some center who might possibly be able to replace 80% of what the center who walked did. All this to save 1m/yr? LOL.

The problem seems to be you are underestimating Asik, and overestimating Ajinca and the ability to find a center that can replace Asik.

I do not believe this TBD will be as easy to find as you do. And even if we do he is still going to have to be traded for or signed.

In the meantime however what do we do if Ajinca goes down? We become pretty much SOL the next year or two with any type of injury at the C position. Again, all to try and save a measly 1m/yr?

Where my confusion comes from is how you can be "all in" on 9m/yr but would let him walking with no real plan or ability to replace him for 10m/yr.

This whole Ajinca + TBD feels just like people resting their hopes on a draft pick and saying, "But it could be anything!" When the truth is draft, Free Agency, or wherever the odds of replacing Asik are not high.

Even if you somehow magically find a guy in Europe who went under everyone's radar and sign him to the same type of 2yr deal as Ajinca. Guess what? Before Asik's contract would even be up you are going to be paying this new guy a lot more money than Asik's deal would have been. Or even worse, some other team who will have more cap space sees him and steals him away or forces you to pay more!

That feels a heck of a lot more YOLO than just giving Asik an extra million a year and having the position secure and locked up.

---

Ok, dude, you win.

I really don't want to sign Asik at all. I said I was all in at 4/36, but honestly, even that makes me uneasy. I don't think Asik is worth 3x what Ajinca is, and would struggle to pay him whatever that number ends up being, which based on ESPN projections is closer to 4/44. I just don't see it, but it's not because I hate Asik. I think people are ****ting on Ajinca in their effort to justify why we need to sign Asik.

Explain to me how a center who's PER has gone up to 21, #6 among centers, is less valuable than a center who's PER is 40th among centers? And Ajinca's PER has gone up as his minutes have gone up, so it's not a small sample size thing.

I don't disagree that they compliment each other, but I think Asik is more the complement to Ajinca, than the reverse.

You're operating out of fear that you can't replace Asik. I think Asik is a very replaceable player at a much more affordable cost than 4/44.

I'd rather operate out what's the ideal scenario, and the ideal scenario is that we get a Plumlee, Nazr Mohommad, Ian Mahinmi, Aron Baynes, Kevin Seraphin, Mitch McGary type to complement Ajinca at a fraction of the cost.

Asik is a 25 mpg player, with no athleticism, dealing with back and knee issues, getting older, and only contributing positively on one end of the court. I'm just terrified to lock that guy up for 4 years!

But whatever, you win. Show'em the money! Let'em have it!

Would you give him 4/48?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

As I've said, which you ignore, my problem with Asik is multiple, but at the same time, I'm not decidedly against Asik like some folks.

Acknowledge the gray area and it'll all be ok.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Ok, dude, you win.

I really don't want to sign Asik at all.

---

There's really nothing more to be said. I've been wasting my breath under the assumption you actually wanted a discussion.