foye's history at PG

[theNBAnerd]

So the Jazz' wings are equivalent to the wings the Lakers and Heat had. Gotcha.

And just took a quick look, Bryant has a much better assist rate than Hayward or Burks. By a LOT.

And Fisher's career assist rate is still better than Hayward's last year.

there you go. that's exactly why i'm worried about PG on this team. we just don't have a lot of guys who are great at creating. which is why i think we should address the backup point and let foye be a shooter, which is his specialty anyway.

 

[gregbroncs]

https://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/sort/assistRatio

Earl Watson passes the ball more than ANYONE in the league last year. You don't have the best assist ratio being a "below average" passer. Better assist ratio than Nash, Calderon, and Rondo. Tinsley was 7th in assist ratio. Harris was 25th (22nd among PGs), and where was Foye? 135th. If you take Foye's BEST ever assist rate he's ever had for a season, he would have ended 70th last year.

Not too concerned about the plus minus debate, but WANTING Foye to be backup PG because he only gives up two points per game is the stupidest argument you can make because Watson was -3, FOR THE WHOLE SEASON. He does what you want in a backup PG, not lose ground.

But shooting 40% from the arc makes you a good point guard on this forum, I guess.

The post basically ignored the whole point of the post you quoted. I don't think our PG's are going to be treated as traditional PG's.

Burks as the offensive PG only suggests to be worse because he was a rookie playing without camp on a roster with no shooters. Can Burks do it? Maybe. Can Hayward? Probably. Can Watson be a starting PG or even a backup on a contending team? highly doubtfull. His passing does not make up for his complete lack of anything resembling a shot. I think half the players in the league could shoot better than Watson with their eyes closed. Tinsley is far more likely to be a decent PG for this team than Watson. I don't mind him as the 2nd sting PG instead of Foye. But I'd much rather Foye and Burks get minutes over Tinsley as they are better players overall.

1 thing is for sure. The FO has given Ty a lot of players to deal with at every position. This is looking like a make or break year for him IMO. I hope he has success and this team shines under Corbin. Mostly because I hate to waste another year of Favors, Hayward and Burks' time in the league watching his rotations be far worse than 95% of the real coaches in the league.

 

[gregbroncs]

So the Jazz' wings are equivalent to the wings the Lakers and Heat had. Gotcha.

And just took a quick look, Bryant has a much better assist rate than Hayward or Burks. By a LOT.

And Fisher's career assist rate is still better than Hayward's last year.

So we are now comparing the rookie season and the 2nd season of our 2 young players to the career of a 1st ballot hall of famer? Seems like just another bunch of stat cherry picking to me. All while doing so with one of the worst outside shooting teams in the league. Much easier to get assists when the other guys on the team can shoot.

Also why do our wings need to be as good? There are other ways to build a team than just those 2 teams.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

The post basically ignored the whole point of the post you quoted. I don't think our PG's are going to be treated as traditional PG's.

Burks as the offensive PG only suggests to be worse because he was a rookie playing without camp on a roster with no shooters. Can Burks do it? Maybe. Can Hayward? Probably. Can Watson be a starting PG or even a backup on a contending team? highly doubtfull. His passing does not make up for his complete lack of anything resembling a shot. I think half the players in the league could shoot better than Watson with their eyes closed. Tinsley is far more likely to be a decent PG for this team than Watson. I don't mind him as the 2nd sting PG instead of Foye. But I'd much rather Foye and Burks get minutes over Tinsley as they are better players overall.

1 thing is for sure. The FO has given Ty a lot of players to deal with at every position. This is looking like a make or break year for him IMO. I hope he has success and this team shines under Corbin. Mostly because I hate to waste another year of Favors, Hayward and Burks' time in the league watching his rotations be far worse than 95% of the real coaches in the league.

So you'd rather have Tinsley on the court than Watson, when the stats clearly show the Jazz were better when Watson was on the court and not Tinsley? The stats suggest that his passing (and defense) DOES in fact make up for his lack of a shot.

And no "traditional" PG means you have another player that can pass the ball that isn't the PG. Burks is not that. Hayward might be, but his assist rate last year was worse than Derek Fisher's career average. And Burks isn't a playmaker. The ball stays in his hands when near scoring position. Maybe that'll change somewhat in his second year, but as a rookie, he had a sub ten percent assist rate. Millsap and Jefferson had higher assist rates than he did last year.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

So we are now comparing the rookie season and the 2nd season of our 2 young players to the career of a 1st ballot hall of famer? Seems like just another bunch of stat cherry picking to me. All while doing so with one of the worst outside shooting teams in the league. Much easier to get assists when the other guys on the team can shoot.

Also why do our wings need to be as good? There are other ways to build a team than just those 2 teams.

And yet Watson and Tinsley had great assist rates for this bad shooting team, and Harris was average to below average.

 

[gregbroncs]

So you'd rather have Tinsley on the court than Watson, when the stats clearly show the Jazz were better when Watson was on the court and not Tinsley? The stats suggest that his passing (and defense) DOES in fact make up for his lack of a shot.

And no "traditional" PG means you have another player that can pass the ball that isn't the PG. Burks is not that. Hayward might be, but his assist rate last year was worse than Derek Fisher's career average. And Burks isn't a playmaker. The ball stays in his hands when near scoring position. Maybe that'll change somewhat in his second year, but as a rookie, he had a sub ten percent assist rate. Millsap and Jefferson had higher assist rates than he did last year.

Yes I'd rather have Tinsley on the court than Watson. And i'd prefer if neither of them played more than scrub minutes behind: Mo, Foye, and Burks.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Yes I'd rather have Tinsley on the court than Watson. And i'd prefer if neither of them played more than scrub minutes behind: Mo, Foye, and Burks.

So if you were coach, you'd choose to play the players that made the team worse? Gotcha.

 

[theNBAnerd]

So we are now comparing the rookie season and the 2nd season of our 2 young players to the career of a 1st ballot hall of famer? Seems like just another bunch of stat cherry picking to me. All while doing so with one of the worst outside shooting teams in the league. Much easier to get assists when the other guys on the team can shoot.

Also why do our wings need to be as good? There are other ways to build a team than just those 2 teams.

if you'd feel more comfortable with the comparison if we didn't look at his whole career, kobe has actually only had ONE season where his assist rate was worse than gordon's last season -- and it was his rookie season.

but i'm kinda just messing with you, because i actually AGREE with you that hayward is our best creator. the difference is, that fact worries me. if we really go into the season expecting gordon to facilitate the entire offense (or hayward and burks, or hayward and watson and burks, or whatever), we're going to have a rough time

 

[gregbroncs]

So if you were coach, you'd choose to play the players that made the team worse? Gotcha.

No I think your hand picking stats to say they are worse. I choose to not believe your hand picked stats. I don't believe the Jazz are worse with those players on the floor.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

No I think your hand picking stats to say they are worse. I choose to not believe your hand picked stats. I don't believe the Jazz are worse with those players on the floor.

Hand picking stats? I'll give you some hand holding stats.

Can't go worse with raw data, right?

Tinsley played 505 minutes last year. During those minutes, the Jazz scored 1044 points. They gave up 1072.
Watson played 1032 minutes last year. During those minutes, the Jazz scored 1995 points. They gave up 1998.
In 2726 minutes Tinsley did not play, the Jazz outscored opponents by 69 total points.
In 2199 minutes Watston did not play, the Jazz outscored opponents by 44 points.


There is absolutely NO denying that out of the three possible scenarios, Tinsley on floor, Watson on floor, neither on floor, Tinsley being on the floor was the worst option. Tinsley<Watson<Neither. This is what you'd expect from backup and third string players.

 

[gregbroncs]

Hand picking stats? I'll give you some hand holding stats.

Can't go worse with raw data, right?

Tinsley played 505 minutes last year. During those minutes, the Jazz scored 1044 points. They gave up 1072.
Watson played 1032 minutes last year. During those minutes, the Jazz scored 1995 points. They gave up 1998.
In 2726 minutes Tinsley did not play, the Jazz outscored opponents by 69 total points.
In 2199 minutes Watston did not play, the Jazz outscored opponents by 44 points.


There is absolutely NO denying that out of the three possible scenarios, Tinsley on floor, Watson on floor, neither on floor, Tinsley being on the floor was the worst option. Tinsley<Watson<Neither. This is what you'd expect from backup and third string players.

LOL. Still just another hand picked stat. Who'd they play with? Who were they against? Who was available when they were playing? I could probably come up with 100 other senario's that make this stat just as irrelevant than any other hand picked stat.

Bottom line when our backup PG's were on the floor the Jazz were outscored by their opponents. Your stats show this to be the case. Since my argument is Burks and/or Foye is better than Tinsley or Watson I hardly see how this stat is refute's that. It actually appears to support my claim as you stated that we are better off with neither of them on the floor.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

LOL. Still just another hand picked stat. Who'd they play with? Who were they against? Who was available when they were playing? I could probably come up with 100 other senario's that make this stat just as irrelevant than any other hand picked stat.

No you couldn't, and you're too lazy to try, so screaming "nuh uh" isn't convincing.

Bottom line when our backup PG's were on the floor the Jazz were outscored by their opponents. Your stats show this to be the case.

Watson by three points. Statistically negligible. But to actually put something on it, the Jazz were outscored by ONE point every 340 minutes Watson played. That's one point every 17 games.

Since my argument is Burks and/or Foye is better than Tinsley or Watson I hardly see how this stat is refute's that. It actually appears to support my claim as you stated that we are better off with neither of them on the floor.

And Foye is better at being the point guard since he can shoot? Without a point guard on the floor, the Jazz best distributor of the basketball would be a guy who's been worse at distributing the ball than Derek Fisher's career, and who might not even be on the floor in this scenario. Next best would be? You want a lineup of Foye, Burks, Ma. Williams, Favors, and Kanter? Not an assist rate of over 10 percent in the bunch aside from the pedestrian 14% Foye has. It's essentially asking C.J. Miles to run the point. Is THAT a good idea?