Growth.

[Kblaze8855]

See also:










if you don’t like Duncan Robinson, you don’t like NBA basketball. Not that not liking NBA basketball would be some egregious character flaw, like it was considered when that phrase originated. It’s OK if you don’t like NBA basketball. But if you do? I think you should like Duncan Robinson. Through what may be nothing more than willpower, and a sheer desire to not be a liability who has to sit when it counts…he’s…good. Not great. But good. He was always a good shooter. Now? Hes a good player(admitting of course that they’re all good).

Acknowledge him.

[ImKobe]

He looked like he was going to be out of the league until he went off against Milwaukee in the POs. The horrible shooting year he had made him attack the basket more and look to create for others, so he's still contributing in games where he can't make 3s.

Case in point his game against Sacramento -- 1/11 FG 0/6 from 3, but a season-high 11 assists and a team-high +25 in an 11-point win, in a road game without Jimmy Butler.

[FultzNationRISE]

His two man game with Bam was nice in last year’s playoffs. Robinson ended up the big beneficiary of Herro’s injury.

Herro’s another one of those ‘new tweeners’ to me (whereas tweener used to be about being in between sizes, now its about being in between roles). He has the talent to be seen as more than a role player, but he’s never gonna be the featured guy on a good team that’s contending. And if youre not featuring him, does it make sense to use him as a role player? I think youre just better off using a true role player like Robinson.

[tpols]

Steve Novak but with some handle and passing. And he's a competitive dude. For having minimal athleticism he's come a long way.

[Kblaze8855]

His two man game with Bam was nice in last year’s playoffs. Robinson ended up the big beneficiary of Herro’s injury.

Herro’s another one of those ‘new tweeners’ to me (whereas tweener used to be about being in between sizes, now it’s about being in between roles). He has the talent to be seen as more than a role player, but he’s never gonna be the featured guy on a good team that’s contending. And if youre not featuring him, does it make sense to use him as a role player? I think youre just better off using a true role player like Robinson.

I dont think there are enough players likely to win a title as a featured player to set out to build teams that way. I understand your point. Look at a guy like LaMelo Ball. You wouldn’t think he’s going to win a title as the man. And you figure it doesn’t make sense to have him as a role player when you can get a natural role player who is both going to cost less And be more comfortable in his role. And that’s fine(if I summed up your feelings properly that is).

Problem is…there are never enough contenders to assume that such people won’t land on star roles. You don’t have a choice. What does a team like the Pacers or Hornets do? Just….have C- guys for a decade hoping to luck into an A+?

Its an option.

But not if your owner isn’t the type to let you lose for 7 years and keep your job.

Depending on ownership you might be trying to get from joke to decent or from decent to good. Teams like the Pacers don’t even intend to contend. They pretty much told Paul George that.

The league is full of teams that wont likely win that still have to put something on the floor to get fans to show up and hopefully win a little between tank jobs.

Thats where the Herro guys live. And it’s a good living.

Its nice to have principles but its even nicer to have a job.