Ray McCallum.

[Nikolizzle]

One thing that I haven't seen posted about is Ray McCallum.

Everyone is talking about what price we should re-sign Thomas at, or whether we should draft a PG like Smart, but no one seems to talk about Ray.

He's shown that he can play starter minutes in a good number of consecutive games (Whether that could last for a season, who knows) and put up fantastic stats for a rookie with little help in his position.

I actually don't recall how his defense was (At least, compared to IT) but by the same token, I don't recall it being awful.

Is there anyone else who thinks he could be our starting PG this year?

 

[Letsgokings13]

Not right away if we plan on winning as much as we can next year. We need someone with experience of some sort IMO

 

[The_Jamal]

Nope. Ray t displayed excellent back-up PG play. Solid defense and very steady with his ball security. Can occasionally get hot and contribute in a big way with passing/scoring.

Not to say he can't be a starter in the future, but we should not be relying on him to be our de facto starter next season. As of now, he's just not reliable enough of a playmaker or scorer to be a starter.

 

[roasthawg]

Ray at point, ???? at sg, Gay at sf, Gordon at pf, Cousins at C. I like that lineup going into next year. Thomas off the bench is great too.

 

[Nikolizzle]

McCallum
McLemore
Gay
Gordon
Cousins

That's a lineup I like.

But as a starter, Ray averaged 7.2 assists. That's nothing to sneeze at.

 

[JLoss22]

Gordon starting at PF....?

 

[CurseOfTheSalmons]

he's the back up point guard next year. i do not think he should start.

 

[Letsgokings13]

I dont think we are serious about winning if we start two sophs and a rookie, but i like that line up too. only small position is PF...

 

[roasthawg]

he's the back up point guard next year. i do not think he should start.

What if we bring IT back? I like McCallum starting and IT off the bench, IT is a beast as a sixth man. McC can hold down the point with the first team.

 

[CurseOfTheSalmons]

he definitely should not be starting over isaiah!

 

[roasthawg]

he definitely should not be starting over isaiah!

He doesn't have to play more minutes that Isiah... IT could still get more playing time. McC would get more time with the first unit is all... IT gets more time being the main scoring option with the second unit. IT is the more valuable player in this scenario.

 

[Entity]

Gordon? Did you not get the memo? We are trading the pick. Why speculate on who we draft at 8?

 

[Nikolizzle]

Gordon? Did you not get the memo? We are trading the pick. Why speculate on who we draft at 8?

Why speculate on us trading the pick? It's not done. I'll believe the trade rumour when I see it happen.

But if it would make you happy:

McCallum
McLemore
Gay
Evans
Cousins

 

[pshn80]

McCallum
McLemore
Gay
Gordon
Cousins

That's a lineup I like.

But as a starter, Ray averaged 7.2 assists. That's nothing to sneeze at.

Your lineup ...... no way! I sincerely hope we can avoid Ben starting next season. I don't think there is a PG around who could make that work.

 

[Bricklayer]

One thing that I haven't seen posted about is Ray McCallum.

Everyone is talking about what price we should re-sign Thomas at, or whether we should draft a PG like Smart, but no one seems to talk about Ray.

He's shown that he can play starter minutes in a good number of consecutive games (Whether that could last for a season, who knows) and put up fantastic stats for a rookie with little help in his position.

I actually don't recall how his defense was (At least, compared to IT) but by the same token, I don't recall it being awful.

Is there anyone else who thinks he could be our starting PG this year?

He reminded me a little of an Earl Watson out there.

Steady defense, safe PG play, erratic jumper with hot streaks, not a lot of creativity. Prime Watson was a very good backup PG. But he was a poor starter and needed specific personnel to help him out.

 

[Kingster]

No, I don't think Ray would be the guy you would want as starter next year. He's certainly an excellent 2nd rounder; most are busts. But he's not an upgrade over Thomas. He can hit the open shot. He's shown some ability to get his own shot, but it's pretty erratic, and oftentimes he can't get separation for his shot. His passing is pretty good, but he's not going to consistently put pressure on the opposing defense with his penetration.

As far as his defense is concerned, I thought he got burned a lot by quicker guards. But on the other hand, I saw some nice things he did such as not giving up on plays and having some nice blocks and some steals. I don't think McCallum is ever going to awe you with his defense, but he should be very solid in a year or two.

 

[funkykingston]

Ray McCallum shows the promise of being a very good backup PG. But there is no category of PG play that he is upper eschelon at or shows the promise to eventually be. He's a good defender but doesn't have the length and quickness to be great. He moves the ball willingly but doesn't have even good court vision making the right play but not the great plays. And his jumper is good and he does get hot meaning I think we'll eventually see more consistency but he's not ever going to be a top tier shooter. And he's not a real scoring threat either. Definitely not sixth man type material, but he could play a valuable role, especially while he's inexpensive on his rookie deal.

On a great team he'd be the third string PG, always ready to give solid minutes and not hurt the team when he's out there.

 

[Gary]

Why speculate on us trading the pick? It's not done. I'll believe the trade rumour when I see it happen.

But if it would make you happy:

McCallum
McLemore
Gay
Evans
Cousins

That lineup would get us about 25 wins.

 

[hrdboild]

McCallum as starting PG is most likely a stop-gap solution with the idea being that we save our cap-space flexibility for a big free agent splash next year. I'm okay with that though if the alternative is overpaying for a middling starter or bringing back IT as the starter. Temporary solutions aren't ideal but we don't have a lot of flexibility this off-season and a temporary solution is better than a multi-year deal we're going to regret. If anybody tells me the organization's goal for next season is to compete for a top 5 pick again though, I'm going to get very angry. I didn't like that plan last year and I like it even less now.

 

[kingsboi]

Ray with improvements of course, will be a solid back up point guard. Which is fine with me considering we used a 2nd round pick on him.