europa wrote:Why are we so convinced he's a PF? Because he's 7-feet tall? His game is more akin to a SF than a PF so why not play to his strengths and add a more physical defender and rebounder to the starting lineup?
I think I'm in Jerrod's boat on this.
If you play him at SF then his game will need to look more like a PF, posting up and using his size since he won't have the same room for jumpers. Moreover, the pick/roll becomes less effective because smaller defenders will have an easier time switching/rotating IMO. He doesn't have the handle to be a true SF, maybe that will come but I wouldn't bank on it.
If you play him at PF then he'll look like an SF, because he's got a nice outside shot and can use his mobility to get by many bigs. His handle isn't a big problem there and he's not a defensive liability either despite his lack of upper body bulk. The bottom line is he has skills and physical attributes that create mismatch opportunities at both positions. I don't think he's a tweener per se since that implies he's not really good enough to play either position, but he'll always have some attributes of both spots.
I think one of the main advantages of moving him to SF is his rebounding would be above average for that position while it's below average for a PF. But I think he'd be worse defensively, as he's still not mobile enough for the best SFs. And for all of our problems, rebounding hasn't been as big of an issue this year.
The idea of finding the elusive physical PF is interesting and worth thinking about, but Bogut's increased physicality and defensive presence makes me less concerned about that. I think it's much more realistic that we could find an athletic three who can defend and shoot a bit. Heck, I would have been happy to get Mo Pete last summer. Certainly not a long-term solution but he could have filled a role for us.