UConn in the NBA Feb ‘25

[CardiacAndre7]

Great. Steph will spend more time highlighting what he’s not good at instead of being able to lean into what he’s great at.

Highlighting what he’s not good at? How about working to improve the deficiencies in his game? Yeesh man…

 

[RuffRuff]

I'll take a meh Fox everyday

My point is that’s why they got Fox.

 

[aceboon]

The new basketball theory is way overblown. There is still a difference between a true table setting PG and the combo guard or the SG who plays PG out of necessity.

Cavs have Garland and Mitchell, a table setter and the true bucket getter.

Knicks have Brunson and Hart, the star and the role player who plays off him.

Pacers have Halliburton and Nembhard (which is probably what the Fox Castle dynamic would be, P.S. Haliburton wanted out of the Kings and Fox for this EXACT reason)

Trae Young and Murray didn’t work for this reason too, two more dominant PG types.

He can literally not develop as a lead guard with one of the best lead guards in the NBA who will need and deserve to have the ball in his hands.

This is not true, Haliburton was very disappointed when the Kings traded him, he didn't ask to be dealt

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

This is not true, Haliburton was very disappointed when the Kings traded him, he didn't ask to be dealt

You’re right I messed that up. It did turn out to be great for him though as he got a chance to show he’s capable of being the guy very early. He’s accomplished a lot already and he’s only 24.

 

[Hunt for 7]

That's a hell of a take.

Yes one hell of a take and now we have podcasts asking the question if this will impact the growth of Castle. Maybe saying they were impatient was not the right definition. My concern was the impact on Castle’s development. BJ Armstrong thinks there is reason for some concern. Not sure how this move could be considered good for Castle.

Of course Fox makes them better right away. And if anyone has the make up to work through any challenge placed in their path it is Castle. But he will play less and he has lost his starting role.

So rose colored glasses, saying this is a net negative impact on Castle I do not agree with, IMO it is worse take than what I said.

I would prefer to see Castle starting and playing 30 minutes a game that just is not going to happen now. Will the Spurs be better possibly. But I am a Castle fan way more than a Spurs fan.

 

[RuffRuff]

Yes one hell of a take and now we have podcasts asking the question if this will impact the growth of Castle. Maybe saying they were impatient was not the right definition. My concern was the impact on Castle’s development. BJ Armstrong thinks there is reason for some concern. Not sure how this move could be considered good for Castle.

Of course Fox makes them better right away. And if anyone has the make up to work through any challenge placed in their path it is Castle. But he will play less and he has lost his starting role.

So rose colored glasses, saying this is a net negative impact on Castle I do not agree with, IMO it is worse take than what I said.

I would prefer to see Castle starting and playing 30 minutes a game that just is not going to happen now. Will the Spurs be better possibly. But I am a Castle fan way more than a Spurs fan.

You do realize if the Spurs want to actually win, not just collect stats for rookies, they need good players to do that? To me it's a suggestion that they're aware they drafted two great pieces, now have to put some talent around them to actually start winning.

This rationale is a real negative spin. What's the alternative? Sucking for a couple more years allowing just Wemby and Steph to develop? Him not starting is par for rookies, load management, letting them sequence into a new roster, etc. Not worried about it as long as he's still getting good minutes. They're moving from a 35 game schedule to an 82 in a wash of a season.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

You do realize if the Spurs want to actually win, not just collect stats for rookies, they need good players to do that? To me it's a suggestion that they're aware they drafted two great pieces, now have to put some talent around them to actually start winning.

This rationale is a real negative spin. What's the alternative? Sucking for a couple more years allowing just Wemby and Steph to develop? Him not starting is par for rookies, load management, letting them sequence into a new roster, etc. Not worried about it as long as he's still getting good minutes. They're moving from a 35 game schedule to an 82 in a wash of a season.

They’re currently two games out of the play-in in Steph’s first year and Wemby’s second year.

I think it’s fair to say that by next year and the year after they would’ve been a playoff team as is with Steph as the perimeter star of the show.

 

[Hunt for 7]

You do realize if the Spurs want to actually win, not just collect stats for rookies, they need good players to do that? To me it's a suggestion that they're aware they drafted two great pieces, now have to put some talent around them to actually start winning.

This rationale is a real negative spin. What's the alternative? Sucking for a couple more years allowing just Wemby and Steph to develop? Him not starting is par for rookies, load management, letting them sequence into a new roster, etc. Not worried about it as long as he's still getting good minutes. They're moving from a 35 game schedule to an 82 in a wash of a season.

Like I said my only interest is that Castle becomes a star in this league. I am not a Spurs fan and I understand all of that. My only interest is that Castle develop as quickly as he can and become one of the young stars in the NBA. Of course it improved the Spurs but that is not what I am interested in. If the argument you are making is that Castle will benefit from having a bit smaller role on a better team then so be it. I hope you are correct.

 

[superjohn]

Yes one hell of a take and now we have podcasts asking the question if this will impact the growth of Castle. Maybe saying they were impatient was not the right definition. My concern was the impact on Castle’s development. BJ Armstrong thinks there is reason for some concern. Not sure how this move could be considered good for Castle.

Of course Fox makes them better right away. And if anyone has the make up to work through any challenge placed in their path it is Castle. But he will play less and he has lost his starting role.

So rose colored glasses, saying this is a net negative impact on Castle I do not agree with, IMO it is worse take than what I said.

I would prefer to see Castle starting and playing 30 minutes a game that just is not going to happen now. Will the Spurs be better possibly. But I am a Castle fan way more than a Spurs fan.

If you're a Castle fan you should be ecstatic. Spurs have themselves the best big 3 in the NBA for many years, they're going to be talked about all the time, they're going to be on TV all the time, and they're going to win NBA championships. As one of the big three all of this is amazing for Castle.

 

[RuffRuff]

Like I said my only interest is that Castle becomes a star in this league. I am not a Spurs fan and I understand all of that. My only interest is that Castle develop as quickly as he can and become one of the young stars in the NBA. Of course it improved the Spurs but that is not what I am interested in. If the argument you are making is that Castle will benefit from having a bit smaller role on a better team then so be it. I hope you are correct.

In theory as their PG of the future, Fox should make him better. It's not about less minutes as much as it is putting talent around him. Now if they keep going out and keep acquiring more pieces, then I might worry a tad.

I'm in the same camp as you - my only interest in the NBA is Uconn alum, with a specific interest in Steph because he currently has easily the highest potential for star power. We need one of those for the Uconn brand, as a recruiting tool. If we want our recruiting brand to be top of house, it's the one thing we're really missing. We've put plenty of volume in the last couple years, Steph feels like the one guy that can be a star.

 

[bballgrda]

Blows my mind that people still argue with Huskywarrior, dude has repeatedly shown himself to be one of the dumbest posters on this site when it comes to basketball.

 

[CardiacAndre7]

They’re currently two games out of the play-in in Steph’s first year and Wemby’s second year.

I think it’s fair to say that by next year and the year after they would’ve been a playoff team as is with Steph as the perimeter star of the show.

You’re making a lot of assumptions with this. Star of the show? We all love Steph and think he’s gonna be great, I think by yr 4 he’s an all-star, but star of the show is a jump.

 

[superjohn]

Blows my mind that people still argue with Huskywarrior, dude has repeatedly shown himself to be one of the dumbest posters on this site when it comes to basketball.

He thankfully blocked me but every thread is ruined because it's the same people clearly arguing with him about his same idiotic takes over and over.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

You’re making a lot of assumptions with this. Star of the show? We all love Steph and think he’s gonna be great, I think by yr 4 he’s an all-star, but star of the show is a jump.

I don’t know why you removed the word before Star that I put in there.

 

[RuffRuff]

They’re currently two games out of the play-in in Steph’s first year and Wemby’s second year.

I think it’s fair to say that by next year and the year after they would’ve been a playoff team as is with Steph as the perimeter star of the show.

They have a generational talent in Wemby, they want to be better than the 10th place team.