Best Shooters Available (By Type)

We all agree that shooting is needed. What I think we fail to do, however, is differentiate the types of shooters/shots and realize we need multiple types. Surrounding Zion with only catch and shoot guys would leave the offense stagnant and predictable. Too many off the dribble, unassisted guys and Zion might not touch the ball enough. Needs to be a combination of types of shooters. Here is a list of guys who either are available via FA or reasonably could be available in a trade if Griff is aggressive enough

Off the Dribble

Player Attempts Percentage

McCollum 5.7 36.7%
Kemba 5.5 34.7%
FVV 4.1 35.3%
Buddy 3.8 38.4%
Brogdon 3.6 34.5%
Fournier 3.1 40.3%
Beal 2.9 30.8%
Lonzo 2.4 31.3%
Ingram (FWIW) 2.3 30.2%
M Beasley 2.3 38.1%
D. Robinson 2.1 37.9%
N. Powell 2.0 36.8%
A. Burks 2.0 46.5%
W. Ellington 2.0 49.5%

Several others had decent volume but shot it horribly (Graham and Rozier on Charlotte, for example). Suprising names on here for me that could be undervalued are Buddy and Fournier. Also sad to see nobody on our team shot it at an even average clip (JJ was the best). We need to upgrade this BIG TIME

Catch and Shoot

Bertans 6.8 40.8%
D Robinson 6.4 41.6%
Buddy 6.4 39.6%
M Beasley 6.2 41.3%
Lonzo 5.9 40.2%
Markkanen 5.7 40.5%
Bullock 5.6 42.5%
Porzingis 5.4 38.2%
OG 5.2 42.4%
Rozier 5.4 43.3%
D Graham 5.3 42.3%
K Love 5.1 33.6%
FVV 4.9 38.1%
KAT 5.0 41.4%
M. Turner 4.2 34.0%

This list can go on forever and quite a few guys shoot it well and at a high volume. But what I think you would find is that there are numerous guys who can give you THIS skill at a cheap cost, if its all you are looking for. For instance, Bryn Forbes took 4.1 per game and made 46.3% of them. Batum hit over 40% for the minimum. Niang hit a high percentage and shot nearly 1 per every 4 minutes for Utah.

Catch and shoot guys arent hard to find. You dont have to pay a lot for them and you can get them almost anywhere in the draft. If the Pelicans are going to use quality resources this offseason, spend money, etc - they should do it for the guys who can produce off the dribble. Supplimenting them with catch and shoot guys wont be hard to do after that.

Fournier is a FA (but reportedly looking for $20 million) and Buddy is probably pretty easily acquirable. Either could probably start or at least see the court a lot. I have read on social media that some expect the Pels to pursue Powell, so he may be an option.

I always find it funny when a guy is "expecting" a number as if that dictates what he will get. I have heard so many guys in this class are in for massive numbers but I keep looking around, trying to find all these teams that will be using cap room to go get free agents. It just isnt out there. On average, about 5-7 guys per offseason get more than the MLE from teams that are not their current team. There are very few teams who have cap space this summer. Show me the team dying to spend 15, let alone 20 mil of it on Fournier. Only way he gets close to that is if the team with his bird rights give it to him, but Celts are right up on the tax. Cant see it. Once the Knicks and Spurs decide who they are going to spend their money on, a lot of guys are going to panic and players who want 20 mil are going to be begging for the full MLE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I always find it funny when a guy is "expecting" a number as if that dictates what he will get. I have heard so many guys in this class are in for massive numbers but I keep looking around, trying to find all these teams that will be using cap room to go get free agents. It just isnt out there. On average, about 5-7 guys per offseason get more than the MLE from teams that are not their current team. There are very few teams who have cap space this summer. Show me the team dying to spend 15, let alone 20 mil of it on Fournier. Only way he gets close to that is if the team with his bird rights give it to him, but Celts are right up on the tax. Cant see it. Once the Knicks and Spurs decide who they are going to spend their money on, a lot of guys are going to panic and players who want 20 mil are going to be begging for the full MLE

---

Didn't opine on whether he would get it, only that it is what he is reportedly looking for.

MM what's your thoughts on taking the "vet project" approach (vet players who shine wore off due to health or bad seasons) and looking into players like John Wall or Devante Graham?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverfoxx

MM what's your thoughts on taking the "vet project" approach (vet players who shine wore off due to health or bad seasons) and looking into players like John Wall or Devante Graham?

---

I am a big fan of that. Why I started the 'Who would you gamble on?" thread

Its simple supply and demand. If you are going after the guys without the red flags or currently bad narratives around them, then you are bidding against many others - and thats even if their current team wants to let them go.

I'd rather find a few guys who are on the down side of their narrative arc and accept the negatives/put them in a position to succeed. Love, Kemba, Buddy, Beasley, Fournier, Siakam, CJ, Porzingis - some of those guys will continue to disappoint relative to salary, but some will go be given away for little to nothing and be a major value relative to acquisition cost. Neither of the guys you mentioned would be on my list, because of skill set, but I'd target and go get at least one high salary guy who is trending down from the list above

I'm still personally in on the ''get Buddy and see what he can do as a 3rd/4th option, maximising his shooting off Zion's gravity'' train. His contract is sizeable but it's not ridiculous and while his auxiliary skills aren't wild he's a historically incredible shooter and why wouldn't you pair that with Zion if the cost was sensible?

I am all for Buddy if the cost is Adams and 2nds or Bledsoe and our worst 1st (something we top-20 protect)

The issue to me with Buddy is his willingness. His ideal role is a super 6th. Something he doesnt like doing in Sacto and probably wont be excited about doing until he fails to win for a couple more years. To make him a starter here, Lonzo probably has to go out and either you dont bring another good guard in, or you block NAW's pathway.

Why I tend to like slightly older reclamation projects. They are over themselves and just want to prove they are worth SOMETHING. I dont think Buddy is there yet, but if he is, I'd be all for his skill set here

I’m on the Siakam train. He’s expensive. But he’s got the right set of skills. And letting him reduce his offensive workload and concentrate on what he’s best at might rejuvenate him. I know he wasn’t too bad in his multi dribble pull up game back in ‘19. I remember Harden was ridiculous on lots of dribbles that year if I might digress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

I’m on the Siakam train. He’s expensive. But he’s got the right set of skills. And letting him reduce his offensive workload and concentrate on what he’s best at might rejuvenate him. I know he wasn’t too bad in his multi dribble pull up game back in ‘19. I remember Harden was ridiculous on lots of dribbles that year if I might digress.

---

Not sure I want Siakam at his salary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Not sure I want Siakam at his salary.

---

This is the entire point. If you did want him at his salary, you couldnt have him and/or would have to pay a ton for him.

Similar words would have been typed about CP3 in 2019. Nobody wanted Tobias Harris last offseason, because of his salary, Wiggins came with a great draft pick because he wasnt worth his salary.

To get real value, you gotta gamble and hit on one of these guys, all while saving the assets for a sure thing when it presents itself.

I think my rankings (and what I think they will cost plays a major factor), would go:

1. CJ
2. Beasley
3. Love
4. Fournier
5. Buddy
6. Siakam
7. Kemba
8. Porzingis

I like going that gamble route, giving up minimal to no assets over the 'give up 2 firsts for good players who are viewed positively around the league' type of guys. Like Brogdon. Or maybe Smart, etc. I'd rather buy the dip

Are these 3pt attempts or all pull up attempts, mid range included?

Love, Kemba and Porzingis stay hurt. I like Buddy and Fournier but they're both liabilities on defense (or were).

I think alec burks would be a good fit also

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

Love, Kemba and Porzingis stay hurt. I like Buddy and Fournier but they're both liabilities on defense (or were).

---

Kemba never got hurt until his recent issues. And remember, we hated when people called Jrue injury prone when it was only one issue that he eventually got over. Again, it wouldnt be a gamble if the guys had no negatives. To buy low, the guy actually has to be low

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Are these 3pt attempts or all pull up attempts, mid range included?

---

3 pt pull up only

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

3 pt pull up only

---

Thanks, what is considered league average for 3pt percentage for off the dribble and catch and shoot so I have something to compare to to see how these guys compare and if they are above average

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Thanks, what is considered league average for 3pt percentage for off the dribble and catch and shoot so I have something to compare to to see how these guys compare and if they are above average

---

For guys who have decent volume (2 or more off dribble and 3.5 or more catch and shoot), the average off dribble is about 34.4%. Good would be anothing over 36. Great would be anything over 37.5 (which is pretty rare)

Catch and shoot - average is 36.2%. Good is anything over 38%. Great is anything over 41%. The super elite will be in the mid 40s. Marcus Morris was absurd at almost 50% this year, but that is an outlier. Ingram's 43+ percent puts him in the top tier when considering volume. Lonzo giving you 40% on 6 attempts is very good, bordering on great. But such a drastic drop off the dribble makes him much easier to close out hard on. Why CJ is a better "shooter" despite a worse percentage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Kemba never got hurt until his recent issues. And remember, we hated when people called Jrue injury prone when it was only one issue that he eventually got over. Again, it wouldnt be a gamble if the guys had no negatives. To buy low, the guy actually has to be low

---

Yeah, but Kemba is 31 and my understanding is that he has chronic knee issues. Don't mind gambling on guys, but if it becomes another Adams issue (puts us at or over tax), not sure we want to take that chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Yeah, but Kemba is 31 and my understanding is that he has chronic knee issues. Don't mind gambling on guys, but if it becomes another Adams issue (puts us at or over tax), not sure we want to take that chance.

---

Thats fine. Who are the guys you would want to gamble on? Much easier to say who you wouldnt with this list than who you would. So, who would be your gamble(s)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Thats fine. Who are the guys you would want to gamble on? Much easier to say who you wouldnt with this list than who you would. So, who would be your gamble(s)?

---

Wasn't there another thread on that? I was thinking much lower like an Otto Porter-type player. Hield was another who is a bit expensive but may be on the outs. I guess I get a bit squeamish on the $30+ million players that are older and/or injured.

edit: I guess I could be talked into Kemba if it meant Adams/Bledsoe going the other way with maybe another asset coming back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Off the Dribble

Player Attempts Percentage

Lonzo 2.4 31.3%

Catch and Shoot

Lonzo 5.9 40.2%

---

So when Lonzo catches the ball so wide open that he has time to stand there and take a dribble and then shoot it, do they consider that a catch and shoot or off the dribble?

The fact that Lonzo is so high on the list when the eye test makes me doubt that he's really a good shooter, makes me wonder how an actual good shooter would do playing off of Zion's gravity well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freyfamilyreuni

So when Lonzo catches the ball so wide open that he has time to stand there and take a dribble and then shoot it, do they consider that a catch and shoot or off the dribble?

The fact that Lonzo is so high on the list when the eye test makes me doubt that he's really a good shooter, makes me wonder how an actual good shooter would do playing off of Zion's gravity well.

---

Lonzo shoots 37.9% with Zion on the court, 37.6% when he is off. No difference

I dont believe in all this gravity stuff. A guy shoots how he shoots for the most part. Zion isnt going to make guys much better - just like Fred Vinson doesnt.

In fact, Lonzo's volume is pretty much the same both with Zion on and Zion off (5.8 attempts per 23 mins when Zion is off. 6 per 22.5 wins when he is on)

Almost no difference in Lonzo. Ingram actually shoots better without Zion (40 percent vs 37 percent). Again, similar volume.

Zion wont make guys better. We have to get the guys who are already good. Both off the dribble and on the catch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Zion isnt going to make guys much better - just like Fred Vinson doesnt.

---

I know you tend to downplay Vinson's value as a shooting coach, but I disagree with that statement. Both Lonzo and BI credit Vinson with changing their mechanics to make them a better shooter. Is he a magician that makes all players better? No. Just like Nelson cannot make all players stay healthy.

More guys have gotten better since leaving the Pels that guys who have improved since joining. A good amount more.

I dont think Vinson is bad. I think he is like every other shooting coach in the NBA - and you guys dont know 27 or 28 of the other ones. But he is no better or worse than him, yet I feel the fans view him as a fixer. Where you can take a bad or average guy and make him good/great. And the objective data simply does not bear that out. I am not gonna count on Zion or Vinson to make guys better shooters. I am gonna go get good shooters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Lonzo shoots 37.9% with Zion on the court, 37.6% when he is off. No difference

I dont believe in all this gravity stuff. A guy shoots how he shoots for the most part. Zion isnt going to make guys much better - just like Fred Vinson doesnt.

In fact, Lonzo's volume is pretty much the same both with Zion on and Zion off (5.8 attempts per 23 mins when Zion is off. 6 per 22.5 wins when he is on)

Almost no difference in Lonzo. Ingram actually shoots better without Zion (40 percent vs 37 percent). Again, similar volume.

Zion wont make guys better. We have to get the guys who are already good. Both off the dribble and on the catch

---

The percentage Lonzo makes from 3 with or without Zion isn?t exactly an indictator of gravity because of Zion. A better indicator would be how many of the 3 were wide open 3s with Zion on or off the court. Would be a better way to tell if Zion helps guys get open more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

The percentage Lonzo makes from 3 with or without Zion isn?t exactly an indictator of gravity because of Zion. A better indicator would be how many of the 3 were wide open 3s with Zion on or off the court. Would be a better way to tell if Zion helps guys get open more

---

No difference in open/wide open. Checked all those as well. In addition, BI shoots better in every area with Zion off as compared to on. Including MUCH better at the rim (67.7% vs 59.8%)

And I already know the next step - It doesnt matter/say much. But if it were flipped, those numbers would show something.

We take the numbers that support the narrative we want and lift them up and write off the numbers that dont support the narrative we want.

Personally, I dont take much from it either way. Other than I say - go get guys who can shoot well. Dont get guys who are average and hope Zion elevates them to good. Josh Hart will stay Josh Hart whether he is playing off Point Zion or off of Point Ish Smith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

No difference in open/wide open. Checked all those as well.

---

Gotcha

I dont think Zion creates more open looks than when he is off because, if you think about it, you MUST have a center on the court when Zion is on the court to have any chance of having a solid defense/rebounding.

So, now there are two non shooters on the court. Easy to help off guys to go run at shooters and/or you just double Zion with the guy covering the center. If you could get a big wing who could protect the rim and/or rebound at an elite level (or Zion starts to do either of those things), then he can get guys more open looks because you can have 5 out in that situation

I like the approach of educated gamble.

I wouldn't mind Lonzo on my list. If he's already borderline great on catch and shoot that's something, if he could improve that by had work maybe his next step is to improve off the dribble.

I think that the things that Lonzo does well as easily replaced by bargain guys. You are right - if he shoots up drastically on the things he does poorly, he pays off and outperforms the next contract.

But I havent even seen glimpses of those things improving. We say his shot got drastically better, but he was an efficient catch and shoot guy in college. That skill didnt go from an F to a B. It was always there. He is bad off the dribble pull up, bad in the half court in general, bad at finishing in the lane. I'd rather pay a guy who was good at those things at some point, but had injuries or a bad fit, etc than bet on a guy to develop those things all of a sudden

I would try 2 deals, LOVE for adams and bledsoe, Also, ARCIDIACONO and MARKKANEN for lonzo. whatever draft picks reasonable.

I like Kemba especially if we get assets back like Robert Williams and potentially a first. I?d start both until better options are either drafted or develop. Thinking about Kira and Hayes who could develop and maybe their second contract could be manageable if it takes them a while to beat out Kemba and Williams.

Same for Beasley, he could start or be a super 6th man if NAW develops.

Otto Porter would be awesome if medicals checkout and price is right. Just need a good shooting big and Portia has been mentioned lately

Kemba, Kira
Beasley, NAW
BI, Porter
Zion, Portis
Williams, Hayes

Not taking into account any draft picks or Lonzo, Hart decisions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Nail

I would try 2 deals, LOVE for adams and bledsoe, Also, ARCIDIACONO and MARKKANEN for lonzo. whatever draft picks reasonable.

---

But now you have just added more catch and shoot guys, decent ones - not even great. At a high price tag, bringing no defense. You have added skills that I showed are amongst the easiest to get for cheap and paid highly for them while detracting from areas that are harder to find for cheap

There's a guy with a connection to New Orleans who shot over 40% from three this year on 3.8 per game who is a free agent this year. I would take him in second, but I might be the only one in here who would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

But now you have just added more catch and shoot guys, decent ones - not even great. At a high price tag, bringing no defense. You have added skills that I showed are amongst the easiest to get for cheap and paid highly for them while detracting from areas that are harder to find for cheap

---

For comparison, where are some of the elite guys on hitting 3s off the dribble, like Curry, Lillard, Harden, Kryrie, Tatum, Durant, etc..?.Know they aren't available, but interested to see what the bell curve looks like including top guys...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

For comparison, where are some of the elite guys on hitting 3s off the dribble, like Curry, Lillard, Harden, Kryrie, Tatum, Durant, etc..?.Know they aren't available, but interested to see what the bell curve looks like including top guys...

---

The ELITE high level, high volume guys are in the low 40s. Steph was 40.9 percent. Conley was the best of all the higher volume guys at 41.5%. A few guys were around 39 (Zach Lavine, Jamal Murray). Lillard was 37.1% but was almost 45% in clutch moments

There were some medium volume guys who were really good. Durant was 46.1% but only took 2.2 per game. Middleton was 41.2 but at just 2.6 per game.

As for guys who had similar volumes as BI and Lonzo, Jaylen Brown took the same amount and shot equally bad. Ingles was on the other end, similar volume but shot 41.2%. Of the guys that took as many as BI or more, the only guys who shot worse were John Wall, Oladipo, and Devonte Graham. Lonzo is in the bottom 10% of guys who shot 2 or more per game too.

And in case folks were wondering, Lonzo and BI were bad the year before too. Lonzo showed no improvement in this area, where Ingram signicantly raised his volume and had a minor uptick in percentage. He almost doubled the number he took this year from the previous year and went up to slightly over 30% (up from 27.9%) - so there is hope as he takes more and gets more comfortable.

Malik Beasley...damn. He's gonna get serious feta, isn't he?

Players that can create off the dribble anywhere on the floor are more valuable than a player that has good numbers pulling up from 25 ft+. Again, 3 level iso creators are what this league revolves around. They are the ones that actually warp a defense and make their teammates better through kick out opportunities. Hell Zion did this and he doesn't even shoot 3s.

Phoenix only has Chris Paul who shot only 2.6 attempts per game at 37.3%. Booker only shot 30.8% on 2.8 attempts. So Chris Paul is it. They have no one else. But again, Booker is a 3 level creator. So they dont need anyone else.

The best way to look at this would be eFG% or TS% to capture mid range/at the rim on a minimum number of attempts. That way you dont give so much weight to a player that can simply be chased off the line if they don't get solid screen help. There you can understand why Ingram was still able to warp defenses as much as he did (46.9% eFG).

These players obviously cost a lot. I'd use FA and trades to target c&s guys on short cheap contracts. Preferably those that at least show some ability to put the ball on the floor. But use the draft to target these 3 level creators. Which is why I'm so high on Davion (and Duarte to a lesser degree) outside of the players at the top of the draft (Suggs, Green, Cunningham). If anything, I try to make a move to get into the top 4 to draft one of those guys.

Trade the farm for KAT?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Trade the farm for KAT?

---

I personally wouldnt UNLESS you still have enough left to get complimentary pieces. Like, my best offer would be:

Ingram, Bledsoe, Adams plus 3 picks for KAT, Beasley, Reid, and Okogie

Then, I gotta trade the rest of the stash for a 2-way wing like OG (Hart S&T plus a boatload of picks)

Lonzo-Beasley-OG-Zion-KAT

with a deep bench of Kira, NAW, Okogie, Marshall, Didi, Hayes, and Naz Reid. That team I would be excited about and would give up Ingram and 7 picks for. Still got tons of youth, even without any future picks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Lonzo shoots 37.9% with Zion on the court, 37.6% when he is off. No difference

I dont believe in all this gravity stuff. A guy shoots how he shoots for the most part. Zion isnt going to make guys much better - just like Fred Vinson doesnt.

In fact, Lonzo's volume is pretty much the same both with Zion on and Zion off (5.8 attempts per 23 mins when Zion is off. 6 per 22.5 wins when he is on)

Almost no difference in Lonzo. Ingram actually shoots better without Zion (40 percent vs 37 percent). Again, similar volume.

Zion wont make guys better. We have to get the guys who are already good. Both off the dribble and on the catch

---

Because defenses don't play Lonzo any differently when Zion is on the floor or when BI is on the floor. They always help off of Lonzo to either double, or triple, or quadruple Zion or BI. Despite his percentage in catch and shoot threes. Probably because Lonzo is just as likely to go 0 and 8 while completely left alone as he is to go 8 and 0.

BI's percentage goes up when Zion's off the floor, because BI has more space to attack the basket and get easier buckets. Despite the fact that BI seems to be a decent catch and shooter, he rarely does it. He's more comfortable dribbling to certain spots and taking a mid range shot. Zion's presence gets in the way of that.

As for your assertion that Zion doesn't make people better, that's ridiculous. If he was surrounded by shooters who could consistently hit open 3's then you would see how much better he could make players. You could simply watch how many players get open three point shots when he's on the court and dishes off to them, only to brick the shots. So you can't really argue when Zion attacks four guys at the basket. That's still a much more effecient way of scoring than dishing out to our bricklaying guards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I personally wouldnt UNLESS you still have enough left to get complimentary pieces. Like, my best offer would be:

Ingram, Bledsoe, Adams plus 3 picks for KAT, Beasley, Reid, and Okogie

Then, I gotta trade the rest of the stash for a 2-way wing like OG (Hart S&T plus a boatload of picks)

Lonzo-Beasley-OG-Zion-KAT

with a deep bench of Kira, NAW, Okogie, Marshall, Didi, Hayes, and Naz Reid. That team I would be excited about and would give up Ingram and 7 picks for. Still got tons of youth, even without any future picks

---

Yeah not gonna lie, that lineup would be devastating

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I dont think Zion creates more open looks than when he is off because, if you think about it, you MUST have a center on the court when Zion is on the court to have any chance of having a solid defense/rebounding.

So, now there are two non shooters on the court. Easy to help off guys to go run at shooters and/or you just double Zion with the guy covering the center. If you could get a big wing who could protect the rim and/or rebound at an elite level (or Zion starts to do either of those things), then he can get guys more open looks because you can have 5 out in that situation

---

People don't seem to consider this enough. What's the point of having a driving, wrecking ball at PG when we have a Steven Adams in there who elicits the opponents to clog the lane. At the end of games last year we turned the ball over way too many times due to this (plus the fact that even our shooters weren't too scary for the opp0nents)

Yes. It's evident we need a rim protector that can shoot. Since they're like unicorns we must understand that in order to find one we must understand that these traits might be all he brings to the table. Another rout would be to simply go long everywhere for the best post defense is ball pressure

Also what's the use of having another guy on the court who is the size of a PG like Bledsoe, Davion Mitchell or even Kira Lewis because that just gives the opponents a player for their PG to guard defensively.

Our opponents are going to be in trouble if we roll out a lineup of 6'5' guys and up who can move and guard multiple positions. Kinda like the last Pistons team to win it all. Prince and Hamilton were ideal wings for a large PG like Billups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fullcourtpress

People don't seem to consider this enough. What's the point of having a driving, wrecking ball at PG when we have a Steven Adams in there who elicits the opponents to clog the lane. At the end of games last year we turned the ball over way too many times due to this (plus the fact that even our shooters weren't too scary for the opp0nents)

Yes. It's evident we need a rim protector that can shoot. Since they're like unicorns we must understand that in order to find one we must understand that these traits might be all he brings to the table. Another rout would be to simply go long everywhere for the best post defense is ball pressure

Also what's the use of having another guy on the court who is the size of a PG like Bledsoe, Davion Mitchell or even Kira Lewis because that just gives the opponents a player for their PG to guard defensively.

Our opponents are going to be in trouble if we roll out a lineup of 6'5' guys and up who can move and guard multiple positions. Kinda like the last Pistons team to win it all. Prince and Hamilton were ideal wings for a large PG like Billups.

---

Height doesn't guard multiple positions. Players guard multiple positions. You have to evaluate the skill level of each individual player. You can roll out a bunch of 6'5" guys with 7'3" wingspans that get eaten alive.