it is a big advantage for ty to be on the bench at the beginning of the game and see how everything develops. he will know what needs to be done in advance instead of being in the game and trying to figure it out for himself on the fly. when ali- foreman had their classic boxing match ali used the rope a dope strategy. he let foreman hit him for several rounds while staying on the ropes. foreman tired himself out and ali finished him off. when lawson is on the bench in the first quarter the starters are out using up energy. in the fourth quarter when fatigue is setting in ty has just begun to warm up and can literally run away with the game. at the end of the utah game the nuggets were having a hard time keeping up with their own player. in the fourth quarter rudy fernandez was scoring on ty. when ac came in he prevented rudy from getting the ball in the first place. that is one difference between ac and ty. ac is a better defender AWAY from the ball and ty is a better ON ball defender UNLESS the player is taller and can shoot. i am sure ac will go over that with ty during the film sessions and practice.

Needs to limit his turnovers. He’s improved slightly, but not enough.

Why? Because that means that Lawson will get minutes to spell Chauncey at the 1. If Lawson starts, that means that AC has to come in. Chauncey can’t play 46 minutes a night like he did against Portland. When JR comes back, AC should be coming off the bench.

But the debate isn’t who should start, but who should get more minutes.

What do they each bring to the table?
First, let’s talk about what they have in common:
They each are good perimeter defenders because of their quickness. That same quickness they bring to the offense, both with a willingness to push the ball and tempo. They are both inexpensive as a PG back-ups.
Both are shorter than the average PG. Neither one is a great shooter (so far for Lawson, throughout his career for AC).

But where do they differ?
AC is a better off-ball defender, a tireless worker who will smother his opponent to keep him from ever touching the ball. That way his lack of height is negated because the opponent can’t shoot over him if they don’t have the ball. AC, usually, is aware of his deficiencies and will only shoot the ball when the shot-clock is running down or the rare drive to the basket. He’s shown that on occasion he can be a smart offensive rebounder and can get to long rebounds on the defensive end. He’s got a great lob pass downcourt.
Lawson is one of the fastest guys on the court and can really push the tempo, creating a mismatch for opponents. He’s a decent on-ball defender as long as the opposing player isn’t that much taller than him. He’s got quick hands, he had a great strip of Oden in Thursday night’s game. He’s much faster than AC and gets to the rim much quicker.

Pasted like this, it’s close, but I would rather see AC get minutes — but there is one last comparison that tips the scales way, way, WAY in Lawson’s favor.

What’s that? Put it this way… if AC and Lawson were to perform at nearly the same level all year long, who would benefit more from the minutes? Lawson, of course, because he’s in his first year, rather than AC who is nearing his last.

But whatever. I’ll continue this for at least another 5 games or so.