you dont force versatility, which is what reggie is doing, sometimes on his own, sometimes due to injuries. at this juncture, the msot important things for our young kids is FUNDAMENTALS, not versatility. Play your position, play it well, play it the way it was meant to be played. Especially if you have players that fit well into natural positions, ala hawes/thompson/martin.
tweeners, such as odom, such as antawn jamison, such as hedo, are the cream of the crop in versatility, but, i think you go too far in asking for this versatility. thompson, if he is ever a great player, will do it at the 4 spot, and nowhere else.
likewise, hawes, if ever to be a great player, will do it at the 5. lets develop what we need FIRST. why do you need hawes to be a 4? why jason a 3? i would rather hawes be a HOF center over an all star at both positions. and its an extreme example, but its fact that you cannot have everything you want.
there are only so many hours, so much development time, so much potential for anyone. this is fact. then you get into tradeoffs; more time at the 3 is less time at the 4, etc. more time shooting 3's is less time posting up. these are all undisputed facts. why you want them to spend mroe time at other spots than needed is beyond me.
so do you want a player that is an upper tier center/power forward, or a top tier center? you choose top tier every time.
Like what you insinuate there are only limited minutes to share and I think we have to use those precious minutes the smartest way we can - We have to be able to use those minutes doing the following:
fast tracking the development of our young bigs AT THE SAME TIME
playing our veterans who could be on the trading block to maintain/increase their value AND
find the right chemistry/identity of the team.
Central to the problem that will always pop out ( even now that Moore is finally no longer starting at #4 - thank God !) is the reality that we still have Miller at #5 and Salmons at #3 and the uncertainty of the possibility that they would be traded to upgrade our team some more. It would be hard for the coaching staff to just let them come off the bench and play reduced minutes, lest you devalue their worth which can be detrimental in the bargaining table comes that time we trade them.
We cannot devalue Miller by not starting him and giving him reduced minutes?
Fine. Then I'll start Hawes first at #4 and get him his bulk of his minutes at #5 ( where he seems to naturally belong ) at times Miller gets his break. IF Miller finally gets traded, then Hawes becomes the fulltime starter and gets most of his minutes at #5.
What do we get from doing this?
1.) More actual playing time for Hawes which we all want. He learns the bulk of his basketball FUNDAMENTALS at #5 and some on #4.
This is not as ridiculous as you've always think, as if a center is being asked to play point guard/shooting guard. A lot of quality "bigs" has done it ( Duncan, KG, and now Gasol ) and I don't know why you unbelievably and stubbornly can't get it. (Or maybe you think Hawes will never be one of those cream of the crop and you think he is only going to be in the caliber of Chris Mihm or Mark Blount? )
2.) Hawes becomes versatile and learns #4 which can give us some flexibility in the future. Maybe something like in the mold of the Lakers Bynum and Gasol, especially if the Thabeet Gambit comes into play?
3.) If Miller plays motivated, and the 20 year-old Hawes turns out to be a very good power forward, then we get at the very least a poor-man's version of Webber/Divac passing bigs for now. Then, the likes of a mediocre point guard like the old version Bibby and now Udrih will probably be sufficient for us to develop an elite team.
4.) We maintain Miller's stock on the trading block.
So you see, it's not just to develop Hawes at #5 that we need to think of. We cannot just insist we ONLY need to play our bigs in certain positions because they seem natural in that position. We also have to consider the Miller factors - mainly about the question of when he's going to get traded if indeed he is going to be traded, what kind of player can we get in exchange for him, or if we're using him until 2010 and/or beyond as a back-up for Hawes. We also have to consider Hawes' age, which tells you he can realistically be taught how to play #4. We need him to do just that considering future match-up problems with the likes of Howard and Oden at #5 and the formidable frontline of Bynum and Gasol of the Lakers....etc. etc. etc. etc.
Most of all, we have to consider the timing. Maybe, NOW is the best time in the process of our rebuilding to experiment on things - fast tracking of the development of our kids; exploring the possibility of giving the Kids the needed versatility we can use in the near future; and finding/molding the identity of this team with/without the veterans.
Yes, you guys can say "you don't FORCE versatility". That is your opinion and I respect that. But I would rather try to actively develop versatility, rather than wait for it to passively develop - especially NOW that we have the luxury of time and right circumstances to do it.
Have you ever thought of how versatility can develop if you won't even try?
.
), and last but not least, he spoke of his offensive rebounding
. Were talking about a PF that has averaged 1.4 offensive rebounds per game for his career. Wow! That probably ranks him right behind Malone.
