Page 2 of 3
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:25 am
by return2glory
thebirdman wrote:Now that he signed the contract his weight is going up again...
They are reporting that there is a bonus in his contract to keep the weight off. I hope that's true.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:28 am
by return2glory
Against some teams BBD can play 5-10 minutes a game at SF. He has lost weight, has quick feet, has been working on increasing his range, and won't be as tired as he was in the playoffs because he won't be asked to play 35-40 minutes a night.
Besides what SF can stay with a 280-290 pound BBD besides Lebron?
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:15 am
by Jammer
Gant, you had exalted status.
Now, you're just one of my Heroes.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:13 pm
by humblebum
Playing Davis at the Swing position, while interesting, would really nullify his offensive strengths while exacerbating his defensive weaknesses. Davis is a face up PF-C offensively. His back to the basket game is well, well below average. Put him at Swing and now he's in a position where he has to play with his back to the basket because his ball handling/creation abilities are subpar on the perimeter and his opponents would be much quicker. That effectively eliminates his greatest potential strength which is to be a face-up PF-C who can knock down the mid-range and distance shot, take you off the dribble, set screens, run pick and pop/roll, etc.
That's the offensive disadvantage to using Davis at Swing... defensively it would dramatically reduce team speed and quickness. Ultimately, Davis is better served having to match up with the big interior PF's and C's and then be able to utilize his improved quickness and leaping ability to deny post entry, get deflections, blocks, steals, strips, and charges, and ultimately to be able to rebound the basketball more effectively by improving his range horizontally and vertically. And the added bonus of using Davis, with improved speed and quickness, is that he can beat opposing bigs down the floor and get early offense for the team.
So all in all, I think that the idea of putting Davis or KG or any interior player at the Swing spot is based on the premise that "hey, he's a better player than the other guys we could use there, why not give it a shot." But Davis is the square peg in a round hole at Swing and ultimately that would hurt both Davis individually and the team as a whole.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:27 pm
by MyInsatiableOne
thebirdman wrote:Now that he signed the contract his weight is going up again...
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:40 pm
by UGA Hayes
Ainge better trade Davis the play after he takes his first three.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:45 pm
by MyInsatiableOne
UGA Hayes wrote:Ainge better trade Davis the play after he takes his first three.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:54 pm
by CeltsfanSinceBirth
Antoine Walker had better handles and quicker feet than Davis, and he was absolutely atrocious at the 3. I wouldn't want to see Davis being played there.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:56 pm
by sully00
GuyClinch wrote:Doc would never play BBD at the 3. You might as well just play Garnett at the 3 if you want to get all silly..
I think that is about as far as this idea can go. You can play a big front court just like you can play a small backcourt. Baby can't guard Vince Carter or Melo, and neither can KG so that isn't a match up you can go to. Now that said Baby can probably stand in front of Kyle Korver or Garnett can. When this team talks about a "big 3" the purpose of having a bigger SF is to try to force teams to use a smaller player on Paul Pierce so he can just go got work at the top of the key and shoot over his defender.
Added to that Sheed, KG, and Davis will allow you to spread the floor and force bigs to run around on defense and open things up for Rondo. It isn't something you can do as a rotation every game but when the offensive advantage is greater than the defensive disadvantage you can do it. It is simliar to using Scal as a SF.
As for Davis shooting 3's, he doesn't have to be great at it for it to be effective, it can be like speed on the base paths the threat of it can be effective. But I imagine the growing pains on that are not going to be fun.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:22 pm
by Gant
I think it's a matter of footspeed. The thing that is exceptional about Baby is his feet. He's really fast, and with the lost weight he'll be faster.
He wouldn't be going against frontline guys as a SF- No one would want that. He'd be matching up against backup 3s like Gallinari, Radmanovic, Alexander, Cardinal (and Gomes), Simmons, Sefolosha, Hill, and Finley- guys like that. He'd do fine against most of them.
It's a matter of minutes. There's an open spot behind Pierce and Daniels is not always the right guy (often but not always, plus Marquis will be behind Ray as well).
Also Doc doesn't mind playing guys out of position if he feels they're better than a youngster (such as Posey at the 4).
I bet they experiment with this in preseason. If it works, great. If not, no harm done.
If Walker or Giddens emerge they could win those minutes. If not a slimmed down Baby could be the answer.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:58 pm
by MyInsatiableOne
CeltsfanSinceBirth wrote:Antoine Walker had better handles and quicker feet than Davis, and he was absolutely atrocious at the 3. I wouldn't want to see Davis being played there.
Well said!
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:13 pm
by elrod enchilada
Gant--
Thanks for taking up this issue; I was regarded as insane for mentioning it, despite the fact that I always qualified it in two important ways:
1. Big Baby had to get down to 270, for the record that is 50 pounds less than he played at in the playoffs;
2. It would make Baby a swing forward; there would be some 3s he would not be able to guard
From where I sit, Baby has only a limited future as a 4, regardless of weight. He is simply an subpar rebounder for a 4. And he is at best 6-7 without a lot of wingspan or spring, so he will always have issues covering taller 4s. There will be some times he will be able to prosper as a 4, but other times he will not. At the 3 he has as much or more upside, especially as he adds range to his shot.
I have zero problem with a 270 lb. Baby playing 10-15 mpg at the 3 as long as Perk, KG and Sheed are manning the 4 and 5 slots.
At the 3 Baby is going to be difficult for the other team to guard, assuming the reports of his added range prove true. He will be able to post up a smaller man, and he will have good quickness (at 270) to go with his still impressive strength.
Every indication is that the Cs are obsessed with Baby losing weight and keeping it off. I agree. It will determine how good of a career he will have. And if he has a great career, I suspect he will spend part of it playing the 3. He can be a swing forward.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:38 pm
by Gant
elrod enchilada wrote:Gant--
Thanks for taking up this issue; I was regarded as insane for mentioning it, despite the fact that I always qualified it in two important ways:
1. Big Baby had to get down to 270, for the record that is 50 pounds less than he played at in the playoffs;
2. It would make Baby a swing forward; there would be some 3s he would not be able to guard
From where I sit, Baby has only a limited future as a 4, regardless of weight. He is simply an subpar rebounder for a 4. And he is at best 6-7 without a lot of wingspan or spring, so he will always have issues covering taller 4s. There will be some times he will be able to prosper as a 4, but other times he will not. At the 3 he has as much or more upside, especially as he adds range to his shot.
I have zero problem with a 270 lb. Baby playing 10-15 mpg at the 3 as long as Perk, KG and Sheed are manning the 4 and 5 slots.
At the 3 Baby is going to be difficult for the other team to guard, assuming the reports of his added range prove true. He will be able to post up a smaller man, and he will have good quickness (at 270) to go with his still impressive strength.
Every indication is that the Cs are obsessed with Baby losing weight and keeping it off. I agree. It will determine how good of a career he will have. And if he has a great career, I suspect he will spend part of it playing the 3. He can be a swing forward.
We'll show 'em Elrod!
(My sanity has been questioned many times as well, though usually for reasons unrelated to basketball analysis.)
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:52 pm
by aboubata
it might happen, but it won't be this season.
Having big baby at the 3 is a big time development and I wouldn't do it this season, I don't think doc would either.
If he can keep his weight off, step out and hit outside shots occasionally this year then he will be good 4 to stretch the floor for Rondo and Pierce.
Next year, he could go for the 3.
I really think that Ryan Gomes, who was in the same position (and not as big), took about 1+ season to be comfortable with playing the 3 in the NBA.
It really isn't just about speed (which big baby would have to learn to play with) it is also about where to be on the floor.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:31 pm
by theman
Baby at the three.
Marquis Daniels playing point.
I guess Bill Walker can see some minutes are center.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:09 pm
by humblebum
As much as I respect Gant and Elrod I think that you guys are really forcin' this issue. Davis is not a back to the basket player. He's not even close to being effective in those situations. So now we want to move him to a position he's never played in his life, over other potentially more capable players at that position, so that he can take advantage of smaller players with his currently poor back to the basket game? That just seems like the most silly of ideas and that's not even touching on questions regarding defending the pick and roll/pop, shedding screens, foul concerns with perimeter defense, chasing offensive players running off screens, etc. Davis would basically have to completely rework his game to become an even serviceable SF... why put that amount of developmental time when you know he can already be an effective backup PF? With his improved conditioning and less weigh he could end up improving his rebounding and shotblocking... his two main weaknesses as a big man.
So if all this is being driven by Davis' limited opportunity for minutes at PF-C... IMO that's not a good enough reason to force Davis into a position where he has a tremendous learning curve. Frankly, if we're going to give Davis even situational minutes at SF I'd much rather invest that developmental time (because there would be some SERIOUS growing pains for Davis in that role) on a guy like Walker who at least has the type of physical ability where he could become more than just a spot minute/situational SF (which is about as high as Davis' upside as a SF would be, IMO).
I really appreciate the discussion and most of your arguments guys but I think you're both so far off on this. I don't even think that Doc would even consider using Davis as a SF unless he turned himself into Ron Artest over the offseason. I suppose that's possible but I'm certainly not counting on it.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:16 pm
by SeizeCoup
Davis is a Center.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:40 pm
by Gant
Big Baby is a unique player. He has unusual strengths like very fast feet for a huge guy. He's also got unusual weaknesses like a lack of height, poor jumping and short arms. (The vertical will improve with the dramatic weight loss.)
No matter what position anyone envisions Baby playing he's going to have flaws. My feeling (and I think Elrod has said the same thing) is that you actually hide as much of his weaknesses (or more) at small forward as you do anywhere else.
At the 4 and 5 he runs into problems all the time. He's always overmatched in some way at those spots but he uses his strengths to offset his shortcomings.
Baby at small forward is exactly the same situation- except he suddenly is tall enough and in most cases fast enough to play that spot.
Will there be a huge adjustment for him? Not on offense- he's already comfortable on the outside. On defense? Yes against some guys. But he'll be a nightmare for small forwards on the other end. No normal body small forward wants to get pounded all night by this guy.
Like I said before- the minutes and roster almost make this a must-try. And I bet they do try it and see how it looks. If it doesn't look good, no harm done.
One last thing: The weight loss is really going to change his game anyway. He's going to be faster, will jump better, and will be much lighter. He's not anchored to the post any more.
Big Baby's got the shot, the speed, the ability to adapt his game, and now the body to play this position.
I thank you for your patience and interest in this important subject that affects all of us so profoundly.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:21 am
by joneb
Against certain teams I think it's quite feasible to have Baby playing the 3 spot. But there are going to be some teams that present huge matchup problems for him. I don't see him matching up with guys like Lebron, Danny Granger, Richard Jefferson, or other threes that have exceptional quickness, coupled with a good handle. I agree that Baby possesses exceptional foot speed for a man of his size, but guarding the league's elite threes is beyond his capabilities. But if we're talking about going up against a team's second unit 3, then it's a completely different story. There may be some backup 3s that have a speed advantage over Baby, but Glen could neutralize the speed advantage with his strength. So I will support Gant and Elrod on this issue, because we could see it this year. If he's extended his range, added some lateral quickness and some lift, then he might surprise many of you with what he can do at that position. I would be curious to see how a 2nd unit frontline of Baby , Sheed, and Shelden could mesh together.
Re: Big Baby at the 3
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:09 am
by Dogen
Baby says he's been working on his three pt shooting. I don't see him as any sort of traditional wing player, but if he can start hitting that shot, he could also initiate the offense. Not bring the ball up, ut he does have great passing skills and I'd be curious to see him on the perimeter with Sheed in the post at times.