What's new

foye's history at PG

The personnel combinations we have on this roster (with no true PG) don't present a problem for Lindsay to build around. He just came from SAS, where there isn't a PG either (since Parker is nothing but north-to-south) and where Manu has had significant playmaking duties (ahem, Burks and Hayward).

I don't see a problem with Foye playing the 1 as long as he can guard the 1.

lindsay wasn't the coach in SAS. lindsay's job is to put the personnel there, then pop/corbin get to decide how to use them.
 
Wes pretty much destroyed this thread. A better way to look at it would be to say how much the point differential went up/down for his teams compared to what they finished the year with.

'11-'12 way too small of a sample size to care
'10-'11 still too small to care
'09-'10': +3 PPG roughly
'08-'09: -2 PPG roughly
'07-'08': +4 PPG roughly
'06-'07': -.1 PPG roughly

Again nothing great, but certainly nothing against him to say he can't play the point.
 
Wes pretty much destroyed this thread. A better way to look at it would be to say how much the point differential went up/down for his teams compared to what they finished the year with.
'11-'12 way too small of a sample size to care
'10-'11 still too small to care
'09-'10': +3 PPG roughly
'08-'09: -2 PPG roughly
'07-'08': +4 PPG roughly
'06-'07': -.1 PPG roughly

Again nothing great, but certainly nothing against him to say he can't play the point.

how is that a better way to look at it? so you're ok with a PG giving up points on the scoreboard as long as the team loses by fewer points than when he is not playing? that is ridiculous math, dipship. i want to have point guards with whom we can actually outscore the opposition.

simply put:
1) foye has never run an offense that scored more points than the opposition,
2) foye has never run an offense that scored a point per possession or better,
3) if foye's BEST season of pp100 production at the point were our team offensive efficiency, we would be tied for 23rd worst offense in the league.

and despite all that, you want to give him the ball because earl boykins and shaun livingston did an even worse job, so that somehow validates him?!
 
nice to see the name-calling start so early in the thread. are you randy foye's cousin, or just incapable of articulating your side of the argument without belittling the other person? either way, i'll try to be less or a moran for you.

by "slightly less crappy" i mean that his team was still getting beat with him running the point. so they were only getting beat by 2.2 points instead by 5.5 points. big whoop, he's still a losing point guard.

the guy's value is as a shooter. let's not expect guys to magically develop an extra component to their game just because it's summer and it's easy to imagine things that aren't there.

Are you Salty? For the third time, your whole argument that "he's still a losing point guard" falls flat on its' face when you take three seconds out of your life to look at how crappy their roster was. Or maybe I can put it into words easier for you to understand.

Kevin Love's a losing power forward and Stephen Curry's a losing guard, or even better Ron Artest's a winning small forward or Matt Bonner's a winning power forward.

Maybe try using a different argument or set of stats to defend your analysis of said player for that year at least. In fact, I expect you to cherry pick.
 
lindsay wasn't the coach in SAS. lindsay's job is to put the personnel there, then pop/corbin get to decide how to use them.

I know there isn't any "name calling" in this post, but you are essentially calling me an idiot.... cuz NO **** SHERLOCK!

Lindsay's job is to find players or trade players based on their value. Well, their value to the team is NOTHING BUT their productive relationships to one another. Therefore, if we can't acquire the PG of our wetdreams, then we work with smart combinations of what we have. Lindsay and Corbin will work on this together.

FYI, Lindsay comes from a coaching background and this certainly weighed heavily in his favor as far as Utah is concerned.
 
I like that he makes a statement on how he barely played PG last season, but not reminding us with Bledsoe, Mo, and Chauncey all backing up Paul, there was ZERO need for him to play there.


So make that 1/5, not 6 (still think your point is garbage, but whatevs)
 
Foye is not a PG and Sap is not a SF. Pretty straightforward IMO. On occasion with unique match ups it can work but not a day in day out plan.
 
I'm not arguing that he's a point guard. I'm simply saying his argument/stats to back up his claim suck more **** than he does.
 
Hey fellas, I gots an idea.... let's cling like a mother ****er to the ageless conception of what a PG is. After this clinging, we'll be able to write smart sounding essays about how our players ARE or AREN'T pointguards cuz we'll know all about what a pointgaurd is. Sound fun?
 
Are you Salty? For the third time, your whole argument that "he's still a losing point guard" falls flat on its' face when you take three seconds out of your life to look at how crappy their roster was. Or maybe I can put it into words easier for you to understand.

Kevin Love's a losing power forward and Stephen Curry's a losing guard, or even better Ron Artest's a winning small forward or Matt Bonner's a winning power forward.

Maybe try using a different argument or set of stats to defend your analysis of said player for that year at least. In fact, I expect you to cherry pick.

i used six seasons of stats from three different teams. if roster quality was to blame, then at some point he would have accidentally lucked into a decent season where he at least executed well enough for a single point per possession.

plus, your argument that rosters are to blame is a little silly when you consider that in every case, his team's offensive efficiency was better when he WASN'T at the point. it's not like HE was being dragged down by an inefficient team -- in fact, the reverse was true.

team points per 100:
LAC '12 - 109
LAC '11 - 106
WAS '10 - 104
MIN '09 - 106
MIN '08 - 104
MIN '07 - 104
 
... then at some point he would have accidentally lucked into a decent season where he ...

@Wes:

mortal_kombat_finish_him.png
 
I raise you one NAOS. Let's state that any players who have a negative +/- are losers and any who have a positive one are winners. Pau Gasol must have sucked and been totally incapable of playing the 4 or 5 because he was a losing 4 and 5 in Memphis for the majority of his time there.
 
I haven't really seen Foye play the point or I don't recall it. What I have seen is that he can do things: he's quick and can penetrate, and he can shoot. I don't think we brought him to play the point either, but as a guy who can score and hit the 3.
 
Foye can't play point because hit Assist Rate is more similar to Al Jefferson than it is Devin Harris, or any of the Jazz' current PG group.

And yes, Tony Parker, a guard who isn't a point guard, according to one poster in this thread, still has the assist rate of a PG.
 
I haven't really seen Foye play the point or I don't recall it. What I have seen is that he can do things: he's quick and can penetrate, and he can shoot. I don't think we brought him to play the point either, but as a guy who can score and hit the 3.

From what I've read, his penetrating ability is similar to CJ Miles.









Waits for it.
 
Foye can't play point because hit Assist Rate is more similar to Al Jefferson than it is Devin Harris, or any of the Jazz' current PG group.

And yes, Tony Parker, a guard who isn't a point guard, according to one poster in this thread, still has the assist rate of a PG.

that poster didn't say he wasn't a point guard... he said Parker isn't a pure point guard from fantasy land. This is particularly true of the young Parker. My sources tell me that said poster is ready to defend these claims.
 
that poster didn't say he wasn't a point guard... he said Parker isn't a pure point guard from fantasy land. This is particularly true of the young Parker. My sources tell me that said poster is ready to defend these claims.

He just came from SAS, where there isn't a PG either

Coulda fooled me, or anyone else who reads.





(Not to say I know that the post wasn't just terribly worded. It's just funner this way.)
 
... oh boy, it's Darkwing Shmuck and NBAherd in the same thread! Brandishing their unimpeachable interpretation of statistics! Leaving no babies uneaten!!
 
Back
Top