In the next 3 or so years, I'm running a lot of 2 PG sets. That works because both Harper and Castle are quite capable of defending up a position...Notionally, the minutes distribution is 32/32/32, taking all the minutes at PG and SG. Once we have both Castle and Harper on their second contracts (assuming they develop as projected, of course), we will be forced to move on from Fox (hopefully we can get a decent return and send him to someplace decent).
Player The restricted-age video store section of Dylan Harper
- Thread starter scott
- Start date
In the next 3 or so years, I'm running a lot of 2 PG sets. That works because both Harper and Castle are quite capable of defending up a position...Notionally, the minutes distribution is 32/32/32, taking all the minutes at PG and SG. Once we have both Castle and Harper on their second contracts (assuming they develop as projected, of course), we will be forced to move on from Fox (hopefully we can get a decent return and send him to someplace decent).
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2025
- Messages
- 6,712
- Reaction score
- 8,378
Don't know how to embed a video from reddit... but here are Dylan's last two plays on the offensive end before he was subbed out not to return with over 10min left in the game, still down 12 (Harper exits after Keldon hits a FT):
We can only speculate that the coaching staff must have not been pleased.
Also, it is worth keeping in mind that we cut a 12 point deficit (90-78) at 10:23 down to 2 (100-98) at 5:04. On that 20-10 run, Barnes had 6, Wemby 4, Fox 4, Castle 5, Keldon 1 on the scoring during that stretch.
While it's impossible to think that Harper didn't deserve time during that stretch, the team actually went on a run. We played good D on the possession when Barnes fouled Bridges (at 1:07) and Barnes clearly committed a foul on the "high five" but it did not impact the shot, which was a miss and we had the rebound IIRC. That was the key play right there and I don't think Harper being in the game would have changed much. Obviously, getting another chance after the foul on Miller was successfully challenged gave us a shot which Wemby threw away with a 29-foot 3pt attempt.
Not trying to make excuses for Mitch... but you can kind of see why Dylan didn't return in the 4th. Personally I would have brought him back in when we called a timeout at 3:30 and ran the Hydra alongside Keldon or Champ and Wemby to close it out.
We can only speculate that the coaching staff must have not been pleased.
Also, it is worth keeping in mind that we cut a 12 point deficit (90-78) at 10:23 down to 2 (100-98) at 5:04. On that 20-10 run, Barnes had 6, Wemby 4, Fox 4, Castle 5, Keldon 1 on the scoring during that stretch.
While it's impossible to think that Harper didn't deserve time during that stretch, the team actually went on a run. We played good D on the possession when Barnes fouled Bridges (at 1:07) and Barnes clearly committed a foul on the "high five" but it did not impact the shot, which was a miss and we had the rebound IIRC. That was the key play right there and I don't think Harper being in the game would have changed much. Obviously, getting another chance after the foul on Miller was successfully challenged gave us a shot which Wemby threw away with a 29-foot 3pt attempt.
Not trying to make excuses for Mitch... but you can kind of see why Dylan didn't return in the 4th. Personally I would have brought him back in when we called a timeout at 3:30 and ran the Hydra alongside Keldon or Champ and Wemby to close it out.
I watched the footage. Fair enough if Mitch wasn't happy with him trying to drive in with 3 defenders (1v3), but I don't see what is wrong with the body language on the rebound from Keldon (I'm guessing he was just disappointed with the previous play).
I think Harper has been hearing the chatter about Kon and his odds of winning ROTY and being the better pick so far, so Harper wanted to try to make this a statement game on national TV. That's what would make you take on a 1v3 when you have 2 or 3 teammates wide open for a far better shot. Otherwise he played a great game.
It was a dumb attempt and he is clearly still adjusting to NBA bigs actually being athletic but we also see Castle do similar to that 5 times a game without getting insta-yanked. I don't think the 2nd part was anything. I think Mitch thought Dylan was feeling himself a bit much with that 1v3 and needed to hear and think about it for a minute. That minute turned into the rest of the game because Mitch has ADHD.
Area 51.247
Defense is a non-negotiable.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2025
- Messages
- 243
- Reaction score
- 127
"Insta-yanked". Add that to the dictionary.
LeBowen
Believe
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2025
- Messages
- 4,446
- Reaction score
- 4,028
It's simple, imo.
Mitch's vision of ideal offense is two ballhandlers, two shooters and a traditional rim running big.
That's why looked more fluid without Wemby and that's why he can't keep him consistently engaged in offense during games.
And obviously that's why we won't be seeing any of Fox/Castle/Harper together, at least not until one of the two young guys develop their shot.
Fox won't get benched unless he's completely out of it, Castle won't get benched because he's our best defender, leaving Harper with rookie treatment even though he can be the difference maker on both ends when he gets it going.
Mitch's vision of ideal offense is two ballhandlers, two shooters and a traditional rim running big.
That's why looked more fluid without Wemby and that's why he can't keep him consistently engaged in offense during games.
And obviously that's why we won't be seeing any of Fox/Castle/Harper together, at least not until one of the two young guys develop their shot.
Fox won't get benched unless he's completely out of it, Castle won't get benched because he's our best defender, leaving Harper with rookie treatment even though he can be the difference maker on both ends when he gets it going.
ambchang
🧑🔧🔛🕕
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2025
- Messages
- 731
- Reaction score
- 646
first, we were supposed to be positionless so all this talk about who is 1//2/3 seems contradictory.
Second, there is nothing wrong with having three lead guards taking turns initiate the offence.
Finally, if there must be a single primary ball handler then having fox be it, draw the defence then dump it to either Harper or Castle for a drive makes sense.
Harper is averaging the same minutes James wiseman did as a rookie. It’s insulting.
Second, there is nothing wrong with having three lead guards taking turns initiate the offence.
Finally, if there must be a single primary ball handler then having fox be it, draw the defence then dump it to either Harper or Castle for a drive makes sense.
Harper is averaging the same minutes James wiseman did as a rookie. It’s insulting.
LeBowen
Believe
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2025
- Messages
- 4,446
- Reaction score
- 4,028
It's not about positions, but spacing.
As of now both Castle and Harper shrink the floor.
They don't get guarded on the perimeter the same way Devin/Champ/Keldon/Barnes do and there's no denying that.
Having one of them on the floor is doable, but having both means one always has to be on the ball or the spacing is non-existant.
Absolutely not...if Castle and Harper get their shooting to a respectable level.
Doesn't have to be elite, but they can't be dared to shoot.
Harper made two yesterday, which is great, but noone even bothered running towards him as he was taking those shots.
If Fox is out there with them, where are his driving lanes when two defenders can sag off and stand a few steps behind the 3pt line?
Also excludes Kornet from those lineups.
And reduces Wemby to being a 3pt shooter. (joke incoming, I know)
Meaning Fox has to give the ball up, meaning he gets reduced to a spot up shooter and isn't playing in the role we're paying him for.
He's 9th in mpg, the least out of any regular rotation member.
What infuriated me the most was Mitch giving McL/Waters/Sochan spot minutes in a lot of games.
Hot take, but long term either Fox or Mitch will have to go. Unless we see miraculous shooting development by at least one of Harper/Castle.
Nothing will happen before the end of 26-27 season, but if this is the system Mitch is trying to play, then it just won't work.
Castle and Harper are obviously untouchable, no matter what, meaning either we trade away Fox or find another coach if Mitch doesn't figure something out by this time next year.
Alright, yep, I'd say this is why Mitch pulled him. You're right, I don't think about things like that at all as I personally don't care about those awards, but maybe that's what Dylan was trying to do. Show him up and show that he's better. That 1v3 may have tipped his hand to Mitch and Mitch didn't like it and yanked him.
Maybe, that is right too, but I think @kxs783 nailed it. Looking at the rest of his stats, Dylan was trying to score, but we don't know if that is because the Spurs were behind and he was trying to get the Spurs back in the game, or if it was a personal battle he was trying to outdo Kon. That 1v3 may have tipped his hand a bit, or maybe it was a natural play that he thought he could finish and Mitch just wanted to pull him to get his point across that he needs to pass to the open man.
i'm not buying it, steph makes penetrations like that ALL THE TIME. In fact, i'd say that is the signature mitch play, given the current history. Far more likely, he simply saw Barnes making two triples and didn't want to ditch fox in the clutch and castle was playing well.
Alright, I won't disagree with what you're saying. That's pretty true too. I think something did tweak Mitch, though, as it did seem he wasn't happy with something as Dylan was coming out of the game.
he does have a history of pretending to have a spine
Mostly with rookies, though. Easier to punch down.
ambchang
🧑🔧🔛🕕
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2025
- Messages
- 731
- Reaction score
- 646
Good points about spacing, but the point is, if they are being challenged to shoot, shoot it. Take the other team's dare. Harper is shooting 25% and Castle 28% from 3, that's an eFG% of 37.5% and 42%, bad. When they are wide opened (6+ feet from closest defender), Harper shoots 24% and Castle 32.5%, which isn't bad for Castle, which means that Harper is the only one who could be dared to shoot. Fox is at 34% wide opened and 37.5% opened (4-6 feet), so he shouldn't be a problem. You put Vassell and Wemby in and that is a reasonable shooting team, although rebounding and paint protection would be a huge problem at which point you can have Champaigne or Keldon in there instead.
This isn't meant to be a some 48 min a game thing, but if the other team does not have paint protection, this is absolutely a lineup that can work.
Other times, you have any two of the three, then have Kornet/Wemby, Julian/Vassell, and another player (Keldon most likely) and it could also work.
The way I envisioned the offence with three of them is a lot of passing and cutting, especially with Castle being able to overpower his defender and the vision and passing all three of them have.
Not saying the two young PGs don't have to improve their outside shooting, because they absolutely have to, but not playing Harper adequate minutes simply because of that isn't a reason.
Area 51.247
Defense is a non-negotiable.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2025
- Messages
- 243
- Reaction score
- 127
Wonder how games and minutes played compare to this point?
spurraider21
Savvy Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2025
- Messages
- 2,687
- Reaction score
- 2,524
ah yes, the catch and shoot role that jimmy butler made famous as a SF
Jimmy Butler matched Castle's rookie season fga per game only once in his entire career and wasn't even close any other year.
spurraider21
Savvy Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2025
- Messages
- 2,687
- Reaction score
- 2,524
Castle in his rookie season averaged 12.2 FGA per game, and Jimmy Butler has averaged more than that for 10 consecutive seasons so i have no idea what you are talking about
and even if what you said is true... who cares? i'm actually advocating for Castle shooting the ball less by taking him off the ball, which would be closer to the lower number you think butler has
were you looking at rasual butler stats by any chance?
Ding, ding, ding! Someone finally explained my reasoning on wondering why we drafted Harper. Of course the talent is there but the fit isn't at this moment. I think they made the pick knowing one of these guys will be used for trade bait eventually and nothing else. We had much bigger needs that we could've filled using the draft, yet we drafted another guard who plays the exact same way as the two in front of him. The point was made plenty of times before the draft that you can't play all of them together because of their shooting issues, so why draft him? Again this is not a knock on Harper, this is a knock on the organization not drafting to build a team properly. Someone made the argument that you don't draft for fit, you draft the talent lol. Well we'll have to trade one of this guys anyway to find a piece that fits better with helping Wemby with floor spacing, so in essence, you always look/draft for fit once you have your key pieces in place. Wemby, Fox and Castle were already in place, we just needed to upgrade the supporting pieces. The Harper pick only would've made since if we didn't already have Fox or Harper. Now there's chatter about trading one or sitting Castle because of the lack of playing time for Harper. I don't see under any circumstances where he'll ever leapfrog Fox or Castle for playing time until one is gone. You drafted a #2 pick to have him sitting on the bench not getting significant playing time. Wild.
LeBowen
Believe
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2025
- Messages
- 4,446
- Reaction score
- 4,028
Harper is an S-tier talent.
You always pick those players and figure it out later, even if it means suffering through bad fit for a season or two.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2025
- Messages
- 6,712
- Reaction score
- 8,378
The reasons for drafting Harper are so obvious they aren't really worth discussing...
The better discussion is why draft Harper *and* max out Fox *and* choose to make Castle your lead PG.
Doing any two of those three things is rational. Doing all three doesn't make any sense. (Actually doing both of the last two still don't make sense to me, regardless of the first, but that's another topic)
