- Thread starter
- #41
Logicallylethal
Well-Known Member
Don't need or want Westbrook. He'd be a score first point guard on a team whose offense is based on ball movement.
Where do you put Westbrook on a team what has:
PG- Ball
SG - George
SF - Ingram
PF - Randle
C - Zubac
Are you going to have Ball coming off the bench even though he seems like the perfect point guard for your system?
Do you start Westbrook at SG, George at SF and bring Ingram off the bench even though you've been touting him as one of the "faces of the franchise"?
Set aside your Lebron hatred for a second and consider a lineup of:
PG - Ball
SG - George
SF - Ingram
PF - Lebron
C - Zubac
That's as close to postionless, ball movement based offense as it gets. It also makes them at least solid on defense.
That lineup makes the Lakers a real threat to the Warriors. Especially if Zubac develops enough to help attack the Warriors in their one area of weakness.
If the Lakers get creative or Bron and George are willing to take less than the max then maybe they can fit in Avery Bradley as well.
It's unfortunate, but any team that gets built these next 3-4 years will be primarily built to beat the Warriors. And I feel like in order to beat the Warriors you need someone to lock down Steph. Outside of Kawhi, I don't see anyone better guarding Steph than Avery Bradley.
George and Bron can take turns on Klay and Durant. Ingram if he develops with his length and athleticism SHOULD BE a good perimeter defender as well.