An issue now is people referring to IT as a scorer. We don't need a scorer at the point next to a scorer in Reke and a scorer in Cuz, and MT at times. We don't need that role. If you want a scorer at point, then move Reke back there where he can get 20/5/5. You give IT the ball and let him loose, and he gives you 13/3.6/1.9. Give Reke the ball and let him loose, he gives you 20/5/5, probably more now actually.
Some think as long as a guy is hitting at a decent %, he can fancy himself a scorer and gun away. We have three scorers in Cuz/Reke/MT. So you're not acknowledging the role a PG should play next to them, which is to set them up as we don't need a 4th guy thinking he's a scorer, but instead saying it's fine if IT decides he's going to be a scorer because he's converting at a decent %. It's a role we don't need. If more scorers was a good thing, then why don't the top teams in the league have 5 scorers in their starting lineups? Why do they instead have role players next to their scorers? What happens if Chalmers shows up one day, starts jacking shots and hitting at a decent clip, taking bad pullup 3's, then turns to Lebron and says, hey man, I'm a scorer, and scorers take bad shots so chill. Nevermind I'm the point and am supposed to be setting you, Wade and Bosh up, I'm actually a scorer now, and since I'm hitting at 44% we're better, since more scorers is mo bettah, right?
We've gone from IT is a pass first PG who's passing is far superior to Reke's and that's why he's playing point for us, to now he's a scorer who's allowed to take bad shots and should be given time to improve running a team?
What I really don't get is some saying IT just needs time to learn the position now. Why wouldn't those people also want Reke to have that same chance given the talent disparity between the two? Why wouldn't you work with the more talented player? You can argue Reke didn't do great as a 20 and 21 yr old, is 23 now, but IT is 24. So we're intent on developing the older and less talented player? Reke shouldn't develop with the ball in his hands past age 21/22 but IT needs more time at 24?
Reke at 20 averaged 5.8 asts.
Reke at 21 averaged 5.6 asts
At 22, last year being moved off the ball then stuck in the corner, averaged 4.5 asts
This year, getting far fewer touches than IT, he's at 3.4 asts to IT's 3.6.
So we had one guy at age 20 and 21, playing the role IT is now, averaging 5.7 asts and without a more mature Cuz to look for. Then we have IT at age 24, playing the role Reke did, handling the ball most trips down the floor and free to attack, yet he's averaging 3.6 asts. For all the talk of IT being a better passer, the stats don't show it. Reke has been the better playmaker his entire career. He's about equal to IT on APG this year and there's long stretches where he doesn't touch the rock. And if the argument now is well, IT is a scorer, then at the least have IT play off Reke.
It's crazy that we had a guy who when 20/21 average 19/5.7 as a PG on a far less talented team, we decided he can't handle the ball and instead have chosen to ride the 24 yr old averaging 13/3.6, and is a defensive liability. And IT is the one would should be patient with? When Reke was 21 and putting up 18/5.6 at point on a bad foot, he just didn't cut it and we had to move him off the ball. Yet a 24 yr old putting up 13/3.6 we should be patient with?
His biggest challenge this year is to get an NBA contract worth in the millions. Although I still think my criticism is based fairly on what I see, it doesn't take into consideration that he is playing for his basketball life and when you are on a team going nowhere, there is no reason not to play for your own needs. You better score because guys who score get the contracts. He is on the outside looking in and needs to change that.
