Simple Explanation: Scola In Causes Pat/Hill Regression

I dont want to lose Scola. He's the only real inside scoring threat we have. Trade hayes or Hill. Scola is a true pf. Hayes isnt a true center and i love to Hayes to death but it easier to masked Scolas shortcomings with a true center(i mean with a 7 footer or close to it) than to mask Hayes shortcomings(his height) with a better pf.

There arent too many better pf in the league than Scola.

 

Ideally, I'd like to see Patterson start at PF alogside a center who can score some, play defense a lot and pass within the Adelman system. Basically, a taller, shotblocking version of Hayes, but good luck finding someone like that.

I'd love to have Scola (and Hayes) coming off the bench, but I doubt that's financially feasible. An upgrade at the PF/C spot will probably require trading Scola.

 

I don't think anybody wants to keep Hayes at C, at least not as the starter. More properly, he should get backup minutes at both spots. If we don't trade for a center that gets real minutes, the starter will be either Hayes, Hill, PPatt, or Thabeet. Not what I'd like to see.

 

i dont really see whats so special about jordan

 

Me neither...But according to popular demand , some people think his occasional highlight reel dunks and block into the front row, will put us over the top.. Dont think so

 

In the current NBA market, young players are a better trade bait than an older guy, no matter how reliable the older guy is.

Said that, Ppat, Hill, Budinger or Lowry would make better trade assets right now that a player labeled as 'old'like Scola (no matter how players relying on fundamentals rather than athleticism, like Nash, can play until 37).

So, if a true defensive C is to be gotten, it's more likely that a young desired player would have to go, not Scola.