What's new
By:

foye's history at PG

theNBAnerd said:
so while he was on one of the worst teams in the league, his team was slightly less crappy (still crappy, but a little bit less so) than when other guys were running the point.

that's definitely a point you want to hang your hat on, wes.
Click to expand...

slightly less crappy? there's a huge difference between a 2.2 point and 5.5 point differential you moran. if you don't like that fact, then don't start the thread and use statistics based around such to begin with. keep spewing out dog**** though.
 
I suspect Foye is here as more of a shooter. It's really all about player combos anyway. He is a far better defender than either Watson or Tinsley. Just an example, but if Hayward and Burks are on the floor with Foye, we might still be able to distribute the ball effectively, w/o a "true" PG. Certainly the defense would be better than if Tinsley or Watson were on the floor instead of Foye...
 
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.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
slightly less crappy? there's a huge difference between a 2.2 point and 5.5 point differential you moran. if you don't like that fact, then don't start the thread and use statistics based around such to begin with. keep spewing out dog**** though.
Click to expand...

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.
 
NAOS said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
dipship31 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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?!
 
theNBAnerd said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top