Originally Posted by niggles
Wouldn't have happened. Our bench would have been godawful without the SAC players, TRoss wouldn't have got the court time, JV might not have developed the same and DeRozan likely wouldn't have had the same season with the usage that Gay would have taken. Or Lowry. We could have been the Knicks--maybe.
I have to agree with this point. Bill you got to remember our roster before the Rudy Gay trade was:
You can't honestly tell me we would have finished with 40 wins even if Gay pulled his shit together. Stone and Buycks would never have put up anywhere close of the points and assists that Vasquez has given us since arriving.
I would agree would could get by with Ross and Fields as our perimeter defenders instead of Ross and Salmons, but at the same time Ross would not be playing 30+ minutes a game and it's not like DD or Gay are solid defenders so I don't know how that would have worked out.
While TH is not bad, neither him or Acy could help spread the floor like Patterson off the bench. The majority of time the key would be blocked off by our bigs, thus not allowing DD/Gay/Lowry to drive, which in turn would force us to be more of a jump shooting team. (Yes I know we are still somewhat of a jump shooting team, but you have to admit since the trade the paint has opened up a lot more for slashing/driving to the hoop.)
Gray/Acy/TH combined would not have given us the stats of Patterson and Hayes, so I just don't see us winning a least 40 games with our previous roster.
We probably would have been fighting for the 8th seed with between 32-34 wins right now because the Eastern Conference is so bad, but we wouldn't have achieved 40 wins in my opinion.