Terrence Williams at Point Forward

[bajaden]

Ball handlers that cannot see the floor very well, unless you count Cousins. I see a lot of 1 on 1 ball with the worst assist tally. Evans/Williams/MKG/Camby/Cousins. Sure the score would be 89-81 or something there about, but we would still be losing because we don't have a PG out there. Yes, our defense would be better, but no our team probably wouldn't be much better in regards to fitting pieces together. Rather than put Evans back at PG where he has not looked good, I would rather give him a year at SG.

Your getting a little carried away with this point guard thing. Was Fisher a PG? I mean in the sense your talking about. I'll tell you, I've been very impressed with Williams ability to distribute the ball, and to be honest, I think he has just as good, if not better court vision than IT. I wouldn't have said that before signed him, but kudos to Bricky for seeing what I didn't see. Point is, Evans is a good passer and so is Williams. MKG is a very good ballhandler and passer. Cousins is a good passer. All four of those guys together, wouldn't really need a so called, pure PG. What they need is a coach that has a system that allows them to flourish. All you need to do is plug in someone at PF that can defend the post and rebound. If he can score as well, then thats a bonus.

 

[Gary]

Your getting a little carried away with this point guard thing. Was Fisher a PG? I mean in the sense your talking about. I'll tell you, I've been very impressed with Williams ability to distribute the ball, and to be honest, I think he has just as good, if not better court vision than IT. I wouldn't have said that before signed him, but kudos to Bricky for seeing what I didn't see. Point is, Evans is a good passer and so is Williams. MKG is a very good ballhandler and passer. Cousins is a good passer. All four of those guys together, wouldn't really need a so called, pure PG. What they need is a coach that has a system that allows them to flourish. All you need to do is plug in someone at PF that can defend the post and rebound. If he can score as well, then thats a bonus.

You two and I will have to agree to disagree then. And no, I am not getting carried away. I believe there is a PG position for a reason and shouldn't be filled with someone who is limited as just a ball handler or a guy that can make a simple pass. It's so much more than those two things. I don't think you need a PURE PG to run things, but I don't think you can fill the position who is mainly a 1 on 1 player who's biggest weakness at the PG spot is that he did not see the floor well at all.

And you cannot compare Fisher to to Evans at all. There is a guy name Kobe who is the distributor, and neither Evans or Williams can ever come close to the skill level that Kobe has in the sense of seeing his teammates when he's not taking the shot.

I put a guy like Fisher with guys like Beno last year. Strictly a guy that took the ball up after an opponents made basket but is not the facilitator of the offense. Until Evans can see the floor like Wade/Kobe/Westbrook then I will not look forward to seeing him play PG.


Basically the point to my post is that I like PGs that can see the floor. It's night and day watching Evans and IT in the terms of getting teammates involved. That's all I want to see. If Evans ever learns that then I would be happy with him playing PG.

 

[Sac.1989]

Give those three guys, along with Cousins, and a Camby type player, to a good solid coach with proven credentals, and I'm a happy man. Gilchrist has a good midrange jumper, and I think Terrence Williams shot has improved quite a bit since he came into the league. Especially his midrange game. The defense on that team would more than make up for the lack of 3 pt shooting. Which, by the way you could go to the bench for in Thornton, IT, and Jimmer.

how we make this happen. I mean really how can GP and Smart not see the light

 

[Kingster]

I hate this argument. Yes square peg round hole we hear it alot around here... Meanwhile in the real world no two people fit together perfectly. It requires work no matter the context to get a relationship to work right sure some fit better then others but they have other issues. People have to make adjustments and understand their own and others limitations on the court an offensive system needs to take into account what you have not require the players you have to ignore their strengths and rely on the weakest parts of their games. Maybe you have different offensive systems depending who is on the floor maybe different plays are run maybe you give your second unit more freedom if they have a purer point guard but if you don't have a pure PG all you really need to run plays is someone to bring the ball up and call out a play number( and they don't have to be the same guy).


/note I said the argument not a particular person on this board.

Yes, and in the real world there is a 50% divorce rate. We need to get real and have some divorces, and then we will have more compatibility with our lineup.

 

[Kingster]

Well we needn't look any further than coach Popovich. What were people saying a few years ago? Spurs were getting old, they're declining. What does Pop do? Gets new young guys - Patty Mills, Gary Neal, Danny Green, Dejuan Blair, Tiago Splitter, George Hill at one point. None of these guys were even high lottery picks. Keeps the core of Parker, Ginobili and Duncan, but changes from a pure defensive, battle-it-out halfcourt team to one that scores at a higher pace but still defends pretty well. Result? This "old, declining" team has the best record in the West. And again, who makes up this team? Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Stephen Jackson, Bonner, Diaw (who people said was out of shape, days behind him) are the vets. Mills, Green, Neal, Blair, Splitter, Leonard are all young guys who play important roles on the team. Why is it then that more than half the team consists of young, not very talented guys but these "scrubs" can execute better than any of our youngsters or veterans? It's because the Spurs actually has a coach who coaches, who teaches them to become real NBA players, who designs his systems to maximise the strengths of his players. You know what would have happened if he had insisted on them remaining a pure defensive team? They would not be as good, because it is very, very difficult to have an elite defensive team when more than half of your players are young guys.

Now we have our brilliant, COY candidate Keith Smart. Coach Smart insists on playing an uptempo, running style of play when our best player is a 260lb center. Coach Smart insists on taking the ball out of Evans' hands after clearly saying that Evans is not an SF. Coach Smart runs plays for us to isolate Jason Thompson, the future of post-players in the NBA. Coach Smart comes in as Kings head coach saying that he emphasizes defense first, but that due to the team's natural offensive talent he would have to find a balance, and proceeds to develop one of the worst defensive teams in the league. Coach Smart says he learnt to "put players in the perfect position to succeed", by putting them into their strength areas, and goes on to play Tyreke at SF.

Of course it helps that Pop can assemble the players he wants to fit his style.

So either you get a good coach like Pop who can make the most of what he's given, or you assemble a team made to run and gun and gamble on steals and hire Keith Smart and maybe make the 7-8th spot in the playoffs for 2 years.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/01/06/coach-keith-smart-talks-with-grant-napear/
http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/kings-hope-change-is-for-the-better/

Really pisses me off how he came in saying all the right things but hasn't lived up to all that he was preaching.

I do believe coaching is important. But there is another element to consider - coachability of the players. That doesn't mean a player is inherently uncoachable, but that because he's young and immature, and because he's immature he thinks he knows when he doesn't know. And because he's surrounded by other greenlings his immaturity is reinforced rather than broken down. There's no question in my mind that a big part of the problem is that we don't have the a Duncan, a Parker, a Ginnobli that form a good veteran core. You think Tim Duncan would tolerate Cousins dribbling up the court like a point guard? How about Tony Parker? What if Garnett was a King? Do you think he'd have Cousins in tears over his stupid plays on the court? Heck, it would be a Big Baby II scenario. The coach is a general, but he needs to have some captains and lieutenants that kick some A$$ when young guys get out of line. As it is, Smart is joined at the hip with the most talented, most immature player on his team. That's a high risk ride, no matter how you cut it. Just as Westphal rode the coatails of Tyreke, now it's Smart doing the same thing with Cousins. And was it just a coincidence that Cousins entered the picture that Westphal was fired? Did Westphal align himself with the right horse at the wrong time? And when the new bigger horse came along, did Westphal have difficulty in realigning his allegiances? And now is it a coincidence that while Cousins is in ascendancy that Tyreke's star is much dimmer? I doubt it. This is the core of the problem - the coach is forced to ride with the young talented and immature player, so he coddles and cajoles that young immature player, and in so doing he retards the growth of that young immature player. Coddling doesn't produce maturity. Coddling extends the immaturity. Smart is trying to coddle just enough to stay employed, but not so much that eventually maturity does take place. That's a very narrow tightrope to walk.

 

[Uncia03]

Your getting a little carried away with this point guard thing. Was Fisher a PG? I mean in the sense your talking about. I'll tell you, I've been very impressed with Williams ability to distribute the ball, and to be honest, I think he has just as good, if not better court vision than IT. I wouldn't have said that before signed him, but kudos to Bricky for seeing what I didn't see. Point is, Evans is a good passer and so is Williams. MKG is a very good ballhandler and passer. Cousins is a good passer. All four of those guys together, wouldn't really need a so called, pure PG. What they need is a coach that has a system that allows them to flourish. All you need to do is plug in someone at PF that can defend the post and rebound. If he can score as well, then thats a bonus.

The key is having a coach who can implement a system.

A backcourt of Tyreke/Terrence has equal, if not better, passing than a backcourt of Westbrook/Sefolosha or Fisher/Kobe.

We all know that Tyreke can pass, but the issue is that Westphal threw him out there and said, "Go make stuff happen." and Tyreke did the best he could.
Now imagine if we had a coach who taught execution in the half-court set. Do people honestly believe that Tyreke wouldn't be able to pass in offense filled with set plays using multiple screens and hard cuts?

We've also seen that Terrence is not only a willing passer, but a good passer for his size. The very first play of last game was a set play where he hit Jimmer coming off a down-screen for the open 3pt shot.

Anyway, none of it really matters unless you have a coach willing to teach.
If you have a coach like Westphal who says, "Get out there and do your thing.", or a coach like Smart who says, "We can only score easy points in transition, so push the ball and go for steals.", then this team will never be competitive and it's hard to stomach.

 

[Uncia03]

Ball handlers that cannot see the floor very well, unless you count Cousins. I see a lot of 1 on 1 ball with the worst assist tally. Evans/Williams/MKG/Camby/Cousins. Sure the score would be 89-81 or something there about, but we would still be losing because we don't have a PG out there. Yes, our defense would be better, but no our team probably wouldn't be much better in regards to fitting pieces together. Rather than put Evans back at PG where he has not looked good, I would rather give him a year at SG.

If you had a coach who actually taught how to execute plays in the half-court then you wouldn't see as much 1-on-1. The fact is that it's good to have players who can score 1-on-1. But it is a team game and that means that in order to be successful you need a team offense.
Westphal had two different offenses.
Offense 1 (Year 1 & 2): Tyreke go out there and do your thing and make things happen
Offense 2 (Year 3) : 'Read-and-React' which is probably the worst offense you can have when you have young players, especially with limited time for training camp or practice

Smart has had 1 offense and that is 'Easy Buckets'. He's already said that this team doesn't know how to score 'hard' buckets in the half-court. So instead of even trying to teach the players how to do that, he's saying we can only win by getting easy buckets. Buckets in transition, pushing the ball after the rebound, going for deflections and steals.

Now I have no problem with pushing the ball in transition and trying to get easy buckets, but that isn't hard to teach or coach. What is hard to teach and coach is a myriad of set plays in the half-court set, all 5 players working as an offensive unit, creating good screens and cutting hard at the right time. Smart's basically said, "It's too hard to teach that, so we won't even bother."

Now, there hasn't been a lot of practice time, so I don't think there is any way that our players would be successful this year even if we did have an X's & O's type of coach. However, if we did have someone this year who was beginning to lay the foundation of that style of play, it would be far preferable to the junk offense which is being run out there right now.

Give me a coach who cares enough about winning to teach our players how to execute properly in the half-court...is that asking too much?

 

[bajaden]

You two and I will have to agree to disagree then. And no, I am not getting carried away. I believe there is a PG position for a reason and shouldn't be filled with someone who is limited as just a ball handler or a guy that can make a simple pass. It's so much more than those two things. I don't think you need a PURE PG to run things, but I don't think you can fill the position who is mainly a 1 on 1 player who's biggest weakness at the PG spot is that he did not see the floor well at all.

And you cannot compare Fisher to to Evans at all. There is a guy name Kobe who is the distributor, and neither Evans or Williams can ever come close to the skill level that Kobe has in the sense of seeing his teammates when he's not taking the shot.

I put a guy like Fisher with guys like Beno last year. Strictly a guy that took the ball up after an opponents made basket but is not the facilitator of the offense. Until Evans can see the floor like Wade/Kobe/Westbrook then I will not look forward to seeing him play PG.


Basically the point to my post is that I like PGs that can see the floor. It's night and day watching Evans and IT in the terms of getting teammates involved. That's all I want to see. If Evans ever learns that then I would be happy with him playing PG.

Look at the subject of this thread. I wasn't talking about Evans as the PG, I was talking about Williams as the PG. Williams does see the floor, and Williams is a good passer, and has a pass first mentality. Just because he happens to be 6'6" doesn't take anything away from that. If you go back to our heyday with Vlade, Webb, Peja and Christie, Bibby was the PG, but once he brought the ball up the floor, he played off the ball more than on the ball. Why? Because everyone else on the team could pass the ball.

I've been extremely impressed with Williams ability to see the floor. He has a feel for the game you can't teach. Sometimes the guy your looking for is right under you nose. I'd just like to plug Williams in at the PG position and see what the results are. He's shown that he can still get his points here and there, and when necessary. Put Tyreke at the off guard position, and plug in a decent shooting, good defending Sf with decent size, and were better right away defensively. Just improving our perimeter defense would be a huge step for this team. Lets face it, one of the reasons our frontcourt defense suffers is because its constantly trying to cover the mistakes of our backcourt. Now add a shotblocker next to Cousins as well, and were on our way.

 

[bajaden]

Yes, and in the real world there is a 50% divorce rate. We need to get real and have some divorces, and then we will have more compatibility with our lineup.

Does this mean you don't love me anymore! Is the handwriting on the wall? Do I need an attorney? Where did it all go so wrong?

 

[Bricklayer]

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/20/4428861/newcomer-who-prefers-to-pass-grows.html#mi_rss=Kings/NBA

 

[Lockehead]

I'd welcome a backcourt of Williams/Evans, if and only if, Williams shows he can defend PG's on a consistent basis because Evans can't.

Then, it'd potentially make for a good defensive backcourt, and it'd be interesting on the offensive end as well.

As for being a point forward, who would we have at the PG position then? Jimmer? Don't forget there's only one ball, and we'd expect Cousins and Evans to be the primary options, with Williams being the point-forward. I don't see how IT would make sense given that he works best with the ball, though his PG defense isn't bad at all at this point. We've also seen Jimmer work well with Williams, and i dont doubt that he'd have the same impact next to Reke and Cousins as well if he's a roleplayer.

Edit: I want to add: Salmons does not deserve the blame that has been placed upon him by most of the Kingsfans. OK, he didn't do so well as a starter. But what do you expect? When he started, he was besides Reke/Thornton/Cousins, all of whom who were looking for their own shot before the team's. That put Salmons in an odd position. How does anyone expect him to be a roleplaying veteran at the SF position, when 3 other guys are out there looking for their own shot, especially for a guy of his skill level? How can he be blamed for his defense against SF's when he's not even supposed to be matched up against SF's much like Reke's current position? He's done a lot better leading the second unit, where he wasn't the 4th option. It's not a surprise.

 

[mr. moustache]

Evans can and has guarded PGs without issue. The super-quick ones certainly give him trouble, but that goes for the vast majority of PG defenders in the league.

Evans is a better defender at PG than he is at SF.

I'd welcome a backcourt of Williams/Evans, if and only if, Williams shows he can defend PG's on a consistent basis because Evans can't.

Then, it'd potentially make for a good defensive backcourt, and it'd be interesting on the offensive end as well.

As for being a point forward, who would we have at the PG position then? Jimmer? Don't forget there's only one ball, and we'd expect Cousins and Evans to be the primary options, with Williams being the point-forward. I don't see how IT would make sense given that he works best with the ball, though his PG defense isn't bad at all at this point. We've also seen Jimmer work well with Williams, and i dont doubt that he'd have the same impact next to Reke and Cousins as well if he's a roleplayer.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'd welcome a backcourt of Williams/Evans, if and only if, Williams shows he can defend PG's on a consistent basis because Evans can't.

Then, it'd potentially make for a good defensive backcourt, and it'd be interesting on the offensive end as well.

As for being a point forward, who would we have at the PG position then? Jimmer? Don't forget there's only one ball, and we'd expect Cousins and Evans to be the primary options, with Williams being the point-forward. I don't see how IT would make sense given that he works best with the ball, though his PG defense isn't bad at all at this point. We've also seen Jimmer work well with Williams, and i dont doubt that he'd have the same impact next to Reke and Cousins as well if he's a roleplayer.

Tyreke has always done a decent job against most PGs. This silliness has to stop.

As for Jimmer, he can't play until he learns to defend. He's a gaping wound whenever he is out there. It threatens his entire NBA career, not only a role as a starter. The logical lineup given current personnel is Reke PG, THornton SG, Wiliams SF, with TWill and Reke splitting the duties, and Throntont the dedicated kickout man/long range scorer. Add one shotblocking PF, and Cousins, and you are still overstressed with scorers, but you are back into a reasonable lineup that may work. In a perfect world Reke and Williams and even Thornton with his gambling cause a bit of backcourt defensive havoc, and the shotblocker protects the rim. Oh, and you can switch everything with size/strength, which is a huge advantage on defense, and you can hide Thornton on the weakest offensive player amongst the opposing PG/SG/SF trio. Then IT comes in as the 6th man/change of pace, and realistically you could take out any 1 of the other 3 guys depending on how they are playing/the game goes.

 

[Lockehead]

Evans can and has guarded PGs without issue. The super-quick ones certainly give him trouble, but that goes for the vast majority of PG defenders in the league.

Evans is a better defender at PG than he is at SF.

Without issue? That i disagree with. When it comes to guarding PG's Reke has been successful against guarding PG's in a one on one isolation play. In that circumstance, i agree that Reke can be a good defender. But how often does that happen over the course of a game? There's PG's running around all over the place, and using screens. It wasn't too long ago that we saw Reke constantly get hit by screens from chasing around a PG, and was left reaching for the steal as the last resort. Reke is quick, but compared to a PG, except for some of the aged ones, he's no match for their speed and mobility.

 

[Lockehead]

Tyreke has always done a decent job against most PGs. This silliness has to stop.

As for Jimmer, he can't play until he learns to defend. He's a gaping wound whenever he is out there. It threatens his entire NBA career, not only a role as a starter. The logical lineup given current personnel is Reke PG, THornton SG, Wiliams SF, with TWill and Reke splitting the duties, and Throntont the dedicated kickout man/long range scorer. Add one shotblocking PF, and Cousins, and you are still overstressed with scorers, but you are back into a reasonable lineup that may work. In a perfect world Reke and Williams and even Thornton with his gambling cause a bit of backcourt defensive havoc, and the shotblocker protects the rim. Oh, and you can switch everything with size/strength, which is a huge advantage on defense, and you can hide Thornton on the weakest offensive player amongst the opposing PG/SG/SF trio. Then IT comes in as the 6th man/change of pace, and realistically you could take out any 1 of the other 3 guys depending on how they are playing/the game goes.

Again, my only concern is the defense at the PG position. Thornton is stiff as a log when it comes to moving his feet. Reke has his problems i've already mentioned. If T-will who may or may not have better lateral movement than Reke can show he can guard PG's i'd be willing to try it.

On another note, that still adds to a bit of the overstressing of scorers like you've mentioned. Which is partly why i suggested Jimmer instead of Thornton.

 

[Gary]

Look at the subject of this thread. I wasn't talking about Evans as the PG, I was talking about Williams as the PG. Williams does see the floor, and Williams is a good passer, and has a pass first mentality. Just because he happens to be 6'6" doesn't take anything away from that. If you go back to our heyday with Vlade, Webb, Peja and Christie, Bibby was the PG, but once he brought the ball up the floor, he played off the ball more than on the ball. Why? Because everyone else on the team could pass the ball.

I've been extremely impressed with Williams ability to see the floor. He has a feel for the game you can't teach. Sometimes the guy your looking for is right under you nose. I'd just like to plug Williams in at the PG position and see what the results are. He's shown that he can still get his points here and there, and when necessary. Put Tyreke at the off guard position, and plug in a decent shooting, good defending Sf with decent size, and were better right away defensively. Just improving our perimeter defense would be a huge step for this team. Lets face it, one of the reasons our frontcourt defense suffers is because its constantly trying to cover the mistakes of our backcourt. Now add a shotblocker next to Cousins as well, and were on our way.

Ehhh.. Still not a fan.. Williams isn't someone I want to see playing point anything. I have been impressed by his play, and he has shown the ability to make the nice pass, but running an offense is totally difference than making a nice pass here or there.

I would like to see them try it though, but not in any meaningful game (try it in pre-season).

 

[DesertFox]

Ehhh.. Still not a fan.. Williams isn't someone I want to see playing point anything. I have been impressed by his play, and he has shown the ability to make the nice pass, but running an offense is totally difference than making a nice pass here or there.

I would like to see them try it though, but not in any meaningful game (try it in pre-season).

Or pretty much now. T WIll can have a lot of uses on a team filled with not quite point guards like Reke/Jimmer.

 

[Glenn]

Or pretty much now. T WIll can have a lot of uses on a team filled with not quite point guards like Reke/Jimmer.

Nothing innovative will happen now. Smart will continue to hone his (losing) small ball game and blame it on someone or something else. We aren't winning as it is. Correction: we are winning at a lower rate than before small ball. Why not experiment starting tonight? I don't understand this coach or maybe what is more frightening, I DO understand him. How can he be defended? Let us not divert our attentions from what is going on now. Let us quit that arguing about Tyreke, IT, MT, or anything else for that matter and let us stare directly at the chatter box coach. I swear, when he talks, he doesn't take time to think. He has canned responses to questions but none are real possible solutions to the softball questions thrown his way. Gee, Coach Smart, we have entered the easiest part of our season and are doing worse. Why is that? What are you going to do about it? And I mean, what are YOU going to do about it?

Silence!

 

[Lockehead]

Nothing innovative will happen now. Smart will continue to hone his (losing) small ball game and blame it on someone or something else. We aren't winning as it is. Correction: we are winning at a lower rate than before small ball. Why not experiment starting tonight? I don't understand this coach or maybe what is more frightening, I DO understand him. How can he be defended? Let us not divert our attentions from what is going on now. Let us quit that arguing about Tyreke, IT, MT, or anything else for that matter and let us stare directly at the chatter box coach. I swear, when he talks, he doesn't take time to think. He has canned responses to questions but none are real possible solutions to the softball questions thrown his way. Gee, Coach Smart, we have entered the easiest part of our season and are doing worse. Why is that? What are you going to do about it? And I mean, what are YOU going to do about it?

Silence!

Heh, i have the same concerns in reguards to the media-questions part. I've given up on listening to his post-game interviews because they all sound the same. At least with Westphal, it gives us room to ponder. With Smart, it seems as if he answers questions on a whim. I hope that's not his approach to the game of basketball.

 

[Kingster]

Does this mean you don't love me anymore! Is the handwriting on the wall? Do I need an attorney? Where did it all go so wrong?

Sorry to inform you, but I've already got the attorney, so you don't need one...

 

[bajaden]

Ehhh.. Still not a fan.. Williams isn't someone I want to see playing point anything. I have been impressed by his play, and he has shown the ability to make the nice pass, but running an offense is totally difference than making a nice pass here or there.

I would like to see them try it though, but not in any meaningful game (try it in pre-season).

With all due respect, he's done more than just make a nice pass. He's been very creative at times, driving and then dishing. He's made some very difficult outlets. He hits players coming off screens at the precise moment they need the ball. I'm not sure what you've been watching, but I'm not impressed easily, and he's impressed me. I realize you have a closed mind where Tyreke is concerned going all the way back to Memphis. I think he could average 10 assists a game and you'd still find fault with him. But that aside, Williams has a lot of PG skills, and I go back to my original premise, that you don't need a pure PG on a team that has the right pieces. Teams have won championships without your so called PG.

 

[bajaden]

Sorry to inform you, but I've already got the attorney, so you don't need one...

Screwed again!

 

[Gary]

With all due respect, he's done more than just make a nice pass. He's been very creative at times, driving and then dishing. He's made some very difficult outlets. He hits players coming off screens at the precise moment they need the ball. I'm not sure what you've been watching, but I'm not impressed easily, and he's impressed me. I realize you have a closed mind where Tyreke is concerned going all the way back to Memphis. I think he could average 10 assists a game and you'd still find fault with him. But that aside, Williams has a lot of PG skills, and I go back to my original premise, that you don't need a pure PG on a team that has the right pieces. Teams have won championships without your so called PG.

I guess I am watching the Cheerleaders? Dunno. Go to almost every home game, and the ones I don't go to I watch on TV. Nothing Williams has done makes me want to try him out at PG, but if the coaching staff wants to then I would watch.. Maybe it's because he's a SF? Before you all rip on me just remember the guy was out of a job a month ago, and you all ripped me for wanting another guy that was out of a job before who did well with Evans at Memphis, and who had good D, and could pass the ball like Williams. I am sure you know who he is.

I just don't see it man. I would like to see it tried but I just don't see it and frankly, we have a decent PG right now who is still in his rookie year so I am not sure why everyone is wanting a change when he's dome nothing (individually) to lose his spot. I don't think IT is the long term answer or anything but I wouldn't mind him being a Tyus Edney kind of PG who's filling in until we get someone better. Also, In my opinion I feel that we gave up on Edney as well too soon. The team made the playoffs with him, and the next year we sucked again when we got a SG to play PG (Abdul-Rauf).

We shall see though!

 

[VF21]

Screwed again!

Pssssst, bajaden? Talk to Brickie.

 

[swisshh]

It's tough to be certain that Evans would be a better defender at PG than Twill since Tyreke's defensive effort comes and goes. He has had trouble with quick PGs, as you could argue IT has done a far better job versus Parker than Tyreke ever did, but he's also been schooled by guys like Lin who aren't lightning quick. It's partly effort with Tyreke and partly low bball IQ.

I've held off on the Williams/Evans backcourt and the TWill as point-forward because of a few reasons: the lack of outside shooting, TWill 's career turnover problems and TWill's size as a SF not being much a leap over Tyreke. We've seen the Evans and TWill duo a bit already and defenses have packed the paint against it with some decent success.

And all of this sort of discussion I find to be premature. One, there's no telling if TWill will get resigned and if he will continue at the same level of play in his return. Two, and more importantly than that, none of these fixes meant to appease or cure the Tyreke situation will ultimately work. The only solution is Tyreke fixing the holes in his game and when that happens then suddenly you don't have to contemplate all these what-ifs because Evans will work with more types of players. When that happens then you can play your best unit and not worry that it will self-destruct out on the floor.

 

[bajaden]

I guess I am watching the Cheerleaders? Dunno. Go to almost every home game, and the ones I don't go to I watch on TV. Nothing Williams has done makes me want to try him out at PG, but if the coaching staff wants to then I would watch.. Maybe it's because he's a SF? Before you all rip on me just remember the guy was out of a job a month ago, and you all ripped me for wanting another guy that was out of a job before who did well with Evans at Memphis, and who had good D, and could pass the ball like Williams. I am sure you know who he is.

I just don't see it man. I would like to see it tried but I just don't see it and frankly, we have a decent PG right now who is still in his rookie year so I am not sure why everyone is wanting a change when he's dome nothing (individually) to lose his spot. I don't think IT is the long term answer or anything but I wouldn't mind him being a Tyus Edney kind of PG who's filling in until we get someone better. Also, In my opinion I feel that we gave up on Edney as well too soon. The team made the playoffs with him, and the next year we sucked again when we got a SG to play PG (Abdul-Rauf).

We shall see though!

First, I wasn't one of those that disagreed with you. He wasn't at the top of my list, but neither was Williams. I was against signing Williams. And so far, I was wrong. And lets be clear, I'm not saying what I'm proposing would work. I would just like to see it it would work. It wouldn't be a huge risk to try it for the remaining games of the season. We're presently going nowhere anyway, so why not? Next season? Well, we don't even know for sure if Williams will be here next season. Or who will be on the team. Hopefully the team will look entirely different. For the better!

Where I tend to butt heads with people is with this one size fits all approach. You can't win without a pure PG. You can't win without an elite shotblocker. You can't win without at least 2 superstars on your team. I could go on, and, there's no doubt that if you have any of those things on your team, your one step closer to being a contender. But I could list teams that won without those attributes. The Warriors team with Rick Barry is one example. A rare example perhaps, but they did win the championship. And they won it without your typical PG, and without a great shotblocking center or PF. They had one superstar on the team with Barry.

In the end, it does come down to talent, and teamwork. Especially teamwork. Look at what the Spurs are doing right now. They look like a well oiled machine. And yes, thats where I'm going. COACHING!!!!! Or lack thereof is one of our biggest problems. But thats another thread. So for now, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Which I think you proposed some time ago. I have to get over this getting the last word in thing.

 

[Gary]

I would love a PG who makes players around him better.. Dare I mention the unnamed player who since being out his team has had only 5 total wins and went from 2nd place to last in their division?

I just don't think we should be trying to make players that aren't PGs into PGs just as mad scientist experiments, but I would admit it would be neat to watch and see if it worked.

Let's grab a guy like Kendall Marshall and call it a day at the draft. Who cares that he's projected to go a little higher than where we will draft. We saw what happened when we tried to trade down last year didn't we? Unless we could get another pick out of the draft I say we take a chance on Marshall. He's not an offensive guard so we have no worries about him shooting too much, and he's not a slouch on D although he's not the greatest defender out there (but he does have PG size which should make a few people here happy).

So I am tossing my hat into the Kendall Marshall ring as a guy I would want if we don't get the top pick.. Along with Robinson. HAZZAH!

 

[Bricklayer]

I would love a PG who makes players around him better.. Dare I mention the unnamed player who since being out his team has had only 5 total wins and went from 2nd place to last in their division?

I just don't think we should be trying to make players that aren't PGs into PGs just as mad scientist experiments, but I would admit it would be neat to watch and see if it worked.

Let's grab a guy like Kendall Marshall and call it a day at the draft. Who cares that he's projected to go a little higher than where we will draft. We saw what happened when we tried to trade down last year didn't we? Unless we could get another pick out of the draft I say we take a chance on Marshall. He's not an offensive guard so we have no worries about him shooting too much, and he's not a slouch on D although he's not the greatest defender out there (but he does have PG size which should make a few people here happy).

So I am tossing my hat into the Kendall Marshall ring as a guy I would want if we don't get the top pick.. Along with Robinson. HAZZAH!

You remain fascianted with an unnecessary class of player. Pure PGs ar absolutely key if you have no talent. Take Nash off Phoenix and they are a 20 win team. When you have great individual talents pure PGs are not only no longer necesaary, they are actually in the way if they take the ball out of their betters' hands. Phil Jackson has 11 rings and the only year he ever had a pure PG it was dysfunctional and melted down in the playoffs. Miami doesn't have one. Chiacgo's is score first, OKC's is REALLY score first. This single minded pursuit of an irrelevancy given our lineup bespeaks tonedeafness.

 

[Gary]

You remain fascianted with an unnecessary class of player. Pure PGs ar absolutely ket if you have no talent. Take Nash off Phoenix and they are a 20 win team. When you have great individual talents pure PGs are not only no longer necesaary, they are actually in the way if they take the ball out of their betters' hands. Phil Jackson has 11 rings and the only year he ever had a pure PG it was dysfunctional and melted down in the playoffs. Miami doesn't have one. Chiacgo's is score first, OKC's is REALLY score first. This single minded pursuit of an irrelevancy given our lineup bespeaks tonedeafness.

Tone deaf? What about talking about moving a career SG/SF to PG and then arguing for it as some kind of excellent plan. It's not! Just like moving Evans from PG to SF.. That was stupid wasn't it? That's the way I feel about moving Williams to PG. So one guy is out of position so lets move another guy out of position, and then move Cousins to SG since he can make some jump shots. It's not going to work! Geezz It's like talking to a brickwall sometimes and not bricklayer.

Wade/James see the floor better than any of our team and Chalmers is a PG that can see the floor pretty well, but he does what he's asked to do.

Rose is more of a PG than anyone on our team as well. So he's score first. e still makes players around him better.. THAT'S WHAT I WANT! I would love to have a PG that makes our team better. Forgive me if I am speaking gibberish.. I didn't know our fans wanted the opposite which was moving a bench player SF who we picked up off of waivers a month ago to play PG for our team.


One last thing. I refuse to talk about the teams which both had 2 of the top 50 players in the NBA EVER who had main players (Jordan/Kobe) who could see the floor better than all of our players combined. If I had Kobe I wouldn't be complaining about a PG, but we don't have Kobe, and Evans/Williams are never going to be Kobe.

[forrestgump]That's all I have to say about that.[/forrestgump]

 

[Bricklayer]

Tone deaf? What about talking about moving a career SG/SF to PG and then arguing for it as some kind of excellent plan. It's not! Just like moving Evans from PG to SF.. That was stupid wasn't it? That's the way I feel about moving Williams to PG. So one guy is out of position so lets move another guy out of position, and then move Cousins to SG since he can make some jump shots. It's not going to work! Geezz It's like talking to a brickwall sometimes and not bricklayer.

Wade/James see the floor better than any of our team and Chalmers is a PG that can see the floor pretty well, but he does what he's asked to do.

Rose is more of a PG than anyone on our team as well. So he's score first. e still makes players around him better.. THAT'S WHAT I WANT! I would love to have a PG that makes our team better. Forgive me if I am speaking gibberish.. I didn't know our fans wanted the opposite which was moving a bench player SF who we picked up off of waivers a month ago to play PG for our team.


One last thing. I refuse to talk about the teams which both had 2 of the top 50 players in the NBA EVER who had main players (Jordan/Kobe) who could see the floor better than all of our players combined. If I had Kobe I wouldn't be complaining about a PG, but we don't have Kobe, and Evans/Williams are never going to be Kobe.

[forrestgump]That's all I have to say about that.[/forrestgump]

Actually I am talking about usign TWill as a Pippen-lite type SF, not a PG. And I am talking about supplementing that with another half a PG in Tyreke.