What's new
By:

An Important Question

Should Foye be the Back up PG

  • Total voters
    42
YB85 said:
Have you ever seen Foye play PG? If so, that should answer your question. If not, you need to do some research.
Click to expand...

Well, If it opens up minutes for Burks and lessons the logjam at the 4, than maybe it's worth it. Not to mention, Foye is great defensively against PG's according to synergy sports. If you remember last year, PG's tore us up!!
 
YB85 said:
Have you ever seen Foye play PG? If so, that should answer your question. If not, you need to do some research.
Click to expand...
If he's in there at the one I expect him to play like a shooting guard on offense (while Burks or Hayward distribute) and to guard the other team's point guard on defense. I think that's worth experimenting with.
 
I need to see him playing the point before I say one way or the other. If playing pg hurts the jazz then no. I say play the players that give us the best chance to win. If Burks plays it's because he's a good player if not then whatever, but he needs to earn his playing time.
 
Yes, I would rather have a guy who can't play PG than a guy who is horrendously bad at shooting.
 
burks will get his minutes either way. you have enough minutes for 4 wings, and i think the top four are g-time, marvin, burks and foye. even if foye never plays a minute at point, burks will get his minutes.
 
I like Watson and Tinsley as bench guys. They play hard when given a chance. However, I think their lack of O and a little slow on D really hurt the team as a whole. So I would love to see Foye take over the spot. Of course he needs to earn it.
 
I am very much for Foye at PG, doesn't mean he has to be a traditional one. We have have Burks or Hayward running the "point". Foye is a huge upgrade in talent than Tinsley or Watson.
 
ultimatefrizzdude said:
I am very much for Foye at PG, doesn't mean he has to be a traditional one. We have have Burks or Hayward running the "point". Foye is a huge upgrade in talent than Tinsley or Watson.
Click to expand...

he is definitely more "talented" in an overall sense, but that doesn't mean he's a better PG. paul millsap is more talented than earl & JT, too, but you don't want him running the point.

the proper way to leverage foye's strengths is to use him as a spot-up shooter and occasionally a backdoor screen and cut man. the IMPROPER way to leverage foye's strengths is to hand him the ball and have him run the offense. it's failed everywhere he has been so far.
 
ultimatefrizzdude said:
I am very much for Foye at PG, doesn't mean he has to be a traditional one. We have have Burks or Hayward running the "point". Foye is a huge upgrade in talent than Tinsley or Watson.
Click to expand...

In what world would you think Burks would run the point better than Foye? Foye is a terrible distributor of the ball as the point, and adequate distributor as a shooting guard. Burks has shown to be much, much, MUCH worse as a distributor at SG than Foye at SG.

Hayward is kind of meh as a point man since he's not terrible great at ball handling in tight spaces. If you guys want no PG during times Mo will be on the bench/injured, then you're probably looking at 10 assists per 36 minutes.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
If he's in there at the one I expect him to play like a shooting guard on offense (while Burks or Hayward distribute) and to guard the other team's point guard on defense. I think that's worth experimenting with.
Click to expand...

You mean like Devin Haross minus the defense part? &and minus the shooting guard part?
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
If he's in there at the one I expect him to play like a shooting guard on offense (while Burks or Hayward distribute) and to guard the other team's point guard on defense. I think that's worth experimenting with.
Click to expand...
Burks - and Hayward - will get plenty of opportunities to penetrate and initiate plays. I agree, as long as Alec or Randy can bring the ball up the court it makes little difference whether you call Foye the "PG" and Burks the "SG" or vice versa.

Just remember summer league when we all thought Burks was going to play a lot at the PG. Well, he wasn't the "PG" when Ahearn and Stockton were in, but he did run the offense.
 
I voted yes, but only because I want us to at least try him at the spot and see what happens. There was no need for him to play backup PG in the Clippers seeing as they had 4 PGs on their roster already, but he HAS played PG in his earlier days as far as I remember. It'll be interesting to see how he does. His shooting alone will be WORLDS ahead of Watson and Tinsley
 
dalamon said:
I voted yes, but only because I want us to at least try him at the spot and see what happens. There was no need for him to play backup PG in the Clippers seeing as they had 4 PGs on their roster already, but he HAS played PG in his earlier days as far as I remember. It'll be interesting to see how he does. His shooting alone will be WORLDS ahead of Watson and Tinsley
Click to expand...

yes he has.







and the offenses he ran were awful every time he did.
 
theNBAnerd said:
yes he has.







and the offenses he ran were awful every time he did.
Click to expand...



Keep in mind that a) now he's playing a backup role, b) everyone sucked at running that pathetic attempt at a triangle offense in Minnesota (presuming that where he dedicated a lot of his PG minutes at). No one is asking him to start at PG. I'm sure he's good enough at passing in transition, and would make a nice complement to Burks if he can't control most of the duties on his own. He'll be playing against BENCH PGs, I mean c'mon the Pargos and the Norris Coles and the Andrew Goudelocks don't stand a chance. Personally, I think that the Jazz would be stupid not to experiment with him at the 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top