Washington Wizards Free Agency: Can the Wizards keep Mike Scott?
Why Scott should stay
For me last season, the Wizards lost the game in the first quarter. When they started of slow, they had to play catch up the remaining three-quarters.
There were a few games where Markieff Morris didn’t show up. Part due to not being 100 percent and other times partly due to being Keef. I advocated putting Scott in for the first quarter. Just to provide some life.
The Wizards just played from behind too much last season. Not saying Scott is better than Keef. Just that it was clear who was “ready to play”. Scott was always ready.
If Washington could put away ego, just so they could have a go at better seeding, there were some games where Scott should have started. Even if was just to start five minutes in the first quarter. Just to show the other teams, that the Wizards had some life in them.
Why go small in the fourth, to make up for mistakes in the first quarter?The Wizards should’ve started off small. If ego is your guide, then keep Keef on the floor in the first quarter with Scott.
Either manage minutes or manage egos. The Wizards coaching staff chose neither to their detriment.
If Wizards are serious about positionless basketball, then they cannot be afraid to start someone from the second-unit, when they know someone hasn’t been playing well of late.
I believe a wise coach once said, ‘there’s no first-unit, no second-unit. Just one team.’
The Wizards should still be in the market for a center. But the rotations are without limitation if Scott stays. Yes, there may be some minutes where there’s a three-guard lineup with Keef and Scott.
Doesn’t matter if some don’t like that lineup. The point of the matter is that opponents won’t know the Wizards playbook before they even step onto the court.
The Wizards formula won’t be the same formula every single game.
The Wizards should be in a position to throw everything at their opponent. When they reach that level, then they are playing positionless basketball.