Gordon at PG.
- Thread starter BENTLEY
- Start date
cctrackstar
Well-Known Member
-sigh- will Salt Lake ever get over Stockton? In what hard rule book does it say that the point guard is the one who distributes the ball? Sure, they bring it up because they are the most agile due to their size and quickness, but once the ball gets into the half court set, it certainly doesn't have to be the point guard who runs the offence. Even better is if the entire team knows how to distribute the ball. I am rather excited at the number of players who have court vision on this team. Many have already been mentioned, Hayward, Burks, Harris, don't forget the other two point guards in Tinsley and Watson. I think Paul can pass well. I hope more players on the team can develop this ability. Imagine a team where the opposing players can never tell where the pass is going to come from?
I've mentioned this before, but recent championship teams have not had dominant point guards, does anyone think that Derek Fisher is a true pass first point guard? I don't even know who Jordans Point guard was. Jason Kidd is way over the hill to be the determing factor, Chauncey is more of a combo guard, and I don't know who Duane Wayde's point guard was when he won it. Even LeBron's new team whom everyone thinks will be the one to beat from the east for years doesn't have a dominant point guard. It isn't necessary to have one, in fact I'm starting to wonder if it's even a good idea at all. That's not to say that I don't want a talented player at the 1, what I'm really saying is that I want a team where all the players know the offence, have court vision and can pass the ball.
I've mentioned this before, but recent championship teams have not had dominant point guards, does anyone think that Derek Fisher is a true pass first point guard? I don't even know who Jordans Point guard was. Jason Kidd is way over the hill to be the determing factor, Chauncey is more of a combo guard, and I don't know who Duane Wayde's point guard was when he won it. Even LeBron's new team whom everyone thinks will be the one to beat from the east for years doesn't have a dominant point guard. It isn't necessary to have one, in fact I'm starting to wonder if it's even a good idea at all. That's not to say that I don't want a talented player at the 1, what I'm really saying is that I want a team where all the players know the offence, have court vision and can pass the ball.
BENTLEY
Well-Known Member
Well, he is a Point Shooting Guard. And a really good one. And I'm really happy with that.
Don't like him at Small Forward. But I'm counting on the 2012 draft to fill the jazz' needs there anyway.
I just thought Hayward might be the most effective PG on the current Jazz (in spite of not playing there). I'm just fantasizing about them grooming him as a PG for a little while, get Stock to spend a couple weekends with him, I think he could be really good there. I like the way the offense moves when he directs it. And he's 6'8". That gets me stiff.
Don't like him at Small Forward. But I'm counting on the 2012 draft to fill the jazz' needs there anyway.
I just thought Hayward might be the most effective PG on the current Jazz (in spite of not playing there). I'm just fantasizing about them grooming him as a PG for a little while, get Stock to spend a couple weekends with him, I think he could be really good there. I like the way the offense moves when he directs it. And he's 6'8". That gets me stiff.
jazzfan1971
Well-Known Member
What we did tonight is fine. We let Gordon run the plays on offense and Harris defend the pgs on defense.
Favors, Hayward and Harris. (no particular order)
Which is what he started to do in April last year when he took off. What are the odds?!
I'm fine with not having a PG who dominates the ball and all assists run through him. However, with that being said, if we opt for a less-distributing PG then the most important thing, above anything else, that our point guard must do is be a huge threat from the outside. That's the only reason I don't want so many of the guys that get suggested (no slashers, no Rondos). I'd prefer someone in the form of a Kirk Hinrich, Chauncey Billups, or... Jimmer.
I'd take Rondo in a heartbeat.
BluesRocker
Banned
Gordon is the next Magic Johnson
How were the Jazz suppose to get Jimmer if they got Kanter. Jimmer was already picked when the Jazz selected Burks. I would love to get MKC as our starting SF. Play Burks, Hayward, MKC, Favors and Kanter. The Jazz would win multiple championships with that lineup in four years or so.
I believe there are really only two positions offensively: Perimeter players and bigs.
Any perimeter player could conceivably be the primary ball handler. Gordon's not a PG, per se, and Harpring was squawking something fierce last night about Hayward's offensive position ("I SEE HIM MORE AS A 2 BECAUSE HE CAN HANDLE THE BALL, 3S DON'T EVER HANDLE THE BALL" X20 TIMES).
Hayward should handle the ball a lot and I think we're seeing his role start to be defined a little more. I think he is a legit ballhandler, even if he doesn't score a lot on isos (not many do, either, but not many have the vision and the passing ability from the wing that he's showing either).
Any perimeter player could conceivably be the primary ball handler. Gordon's not a PG, per se, and Harpring was squawking something fierce last night about Hayward's offensive position ("I SEE HIM MORE AS A 2 BECAUSE HE CAN HANDLE THE BALL, 3S DON'T EVER HANDLE THE BALL" X20 TIMES).
Hayward should handle the ball a lot and I think we're seeing his role start to be defined a little more. I think he is a legit ballhandler, even if he doesn't score a lot on isos (not many do, either, but not many have the vision and the passing ability from the wing that he's showing either).
This is a very good post. But, we should discuss the defensive side of the court .. gets much tougher than then the O ball.
Lakers_Slapper
Well-Known Member
WoooooW. Just because Magic Johnson was 6 ft 9 and point guard, doesn't mean that every player that is around 6 ft 9 is a potential point guard. The sooner that you realize Gordon Hayward was not sent to the Utah Jazz by a higher power the easier this will be for you to understand. The sooner you stop comparing NBA greats to 2nd year below-average players, the less stupid you will sound.
Magic Johnson was an incredible point guard. But because he was 6 ft 9 doesn't mean everybody in the NBA thats 6 ft 9 should be a point guard. Paul Milsap is 6 ft 8, should we say, "well he's only an inch shorter than Magic Johnson, lets throw him in at PG.' I know your on the Gordon Hayward Choo Choo Train, but lets remember that he is just a person, not a savior sent down from heaven. Happy New Year, no more Egg Nog for you.
JohnnyClutch
Well-Known Member
But it also takes Harris off the floor. He had the one good game, scoring wise, versus Philly. He didn't make plays for others, he just scored well.
BENTLEY
Well-Known Member
Johnny is correct. Just because Harris is 6' 3" doesn't mean he's a distributer, and just because Hayward's 6'9" doesn't mean he isn't one. I like Harris but he doesn't make his teammates better and he needs to be traded this year.
And though Magic and Hayward are the same height - no one's saying that's the reason to move Hayward to PG. The reason to try him there is because Hayward's a good distributer and makes his teammates better - which can't be said of Harris.
Regarding Hayward's size, I originally assumed he'd be a small forward (I think we all did) but he doesn't excel there. He's much better at shooting guard where he can be more of a distributer. Why not just give him head distributer duties? He plays more like a pass first PG than anyone on the team. I'm convinced he's the Jazz' best option at PG. His height is icing. Just like it helps him at SG it's a "huge" advantage at PG. At SF Hayward's average to invisible. At SG he's so much better. Why? Distributing skills, perimeter scoring skills, AND he's bigger than the other team's SG. This helps him do whatever he wants to do, be it distribute the ball or score. But let me say this for the negative Nancys as well as the bleary eyed fans: HAYWARD'S NOT MAGIC! No one said he was. All someone pointed out was that both players are really big for the position - and for ANY player that's a "huge" advantage.
Every draft scout salivates over a PG that's 6'4" or 6'5". Wow, such an advantage - so we wanna see if they can really play. Given the option between a 6'1" PG and a 6'5" PG we so want the taller guy to be skilled enough to justify grabbing him. It's basketball - the guys with size have the advantage. Again, Hayward's 6'9" - so if he has enough skill to justify taking him at PG I wanna do it. He's currently the Jazz' most skilled distributer IMO - AND he's huge for the position so that's why I'm all for trying him there. Just because he's not Magic Johnson and will never be like Magic Johnson (other than in stature) doesn't mean he shouldn't play PG.
This is all an exercise in armchair coaching though anyway. Corbin won't even play Hayward at SG.
And though Magic and Hayward are the same height - no one's saying that's the reason to move Hayward to PG. The reason to try him there is because Hayward's a good distributer and makes his teammates better - which can't be said of Harris.
Regarding Hayward's size, I originally assumed he'd be a small forward (I think we all did) but he doesn't excel there. He's much better at shooting guard where he can be more of a distributer. Why not just give him head distributer duties? He plays more like a pass first PG than anyone on the team. I'm convinced he's the Jazz' best option at PG. His height is icing. Just like it helps him at SG it's a "huge" advantage at PG. At SF Hayward's average to invisible. At SG he's so much better. Why? Distributing skills, perimeter scoring skills, AND he's bigger than the other team's SG. This helps him do whatever he wants to do, be it distribute the ball or score. But let me say this for the negative Nancys as well as the bleary eyed fans: HAYWARD'S NOT MAGIC! No one said he was. All someone pointed out was that both players are really big for the position - and for ANY player that's a "huge" advantage.
Every draft scout salivates over a PG that's 6'4" or 6'5". Wow, such an advantage - so we wanna see if they can really play. Given the option between a 6'1" PG and a 6'5" PG we so want the taller guy to be skilled enough to justify grabbing him. It's basketball - the guys with size have the advantage. Again, Hayward's 6'9" - so if he has enough skill to justify taking him at PG I wanna do it. He's currently the Jazz' most skilled distributer IMO - AND he's huge for the position so that's why I'm all for trying him there. Just because he's not Magic Johnson and will never be like Magic Johnson (other than in stature) doesn't mean he shouldn't play PG.
This is all an exercise in armchair coaching though anyway. Corbin won't even play Hayward at SG.