levi wrote:
> Jim Welters wrote:
> > So were the Spurs in the postseason. In retrospect it was better McCants got
> > to play more.
> >
> > Jim Welters
> >
> >
> > in article 1158788735.621892.281540 RemoveThis @k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, Andy H at
> > aharcus RemoveThis @msn.com wrote on 9/20/06 4:45 PM:
> >
> > >
> > > I thought KG worked hard to convince Michael Finley to come here, and
> > > was pretty disenchanted when he decided to sign with the Spurs.
> > >
>
> >From what I saw, Finley just never seemed to fit in with the
> Spurs. He's a bit long in the tooth, perhaps, to be a "savior".
> Perhaps this year he'll be more accustomed to whatever his
> role will be - which will almost certainly be different than what
> he was in Dallas.
>
> And yes, how soon we forget McCants. Regular readers here
> know that I was not a fan of his and then with his surgery, I'm
> figuring he's already pretty much washed up. I guess the Wolves
> must think he's done too, otherwise why did they draft even more
> "promising" guards (e.g. Foye)?
Multiple reasons:
It can be debated (as we have), but many in the NBA believe the new
rules have made this a guard league. A guard like Gilbert Arenas, who
would have been a fine NBA player before the rules change, is now
playing at a superstar level.
Even if McCants fully recovers (which is a decent possibility if you
look at Kidd and Amare), they won't have him this season. They needed
an explosive guard and they can work on trades while McCants is out.
Following the "best talent" strategy. There was a good study I read a
while back (can't remember where) showing the folly in drafting for
need over talent. One obvious, extreme example is the Bowie/Jordan
draft. Portland didn't draft Jordan because they had Drexler.
Regardless, the team would have been better off with two great
perimeter players. Maybe the Wolves learned from the Avery debacle
that you draft by talent, not need.
>> Stay informed about: Wolves NBA Champoions in 2010