This discussion was created from comments split from: 2016 Wing Recruiting (Langford, Brown, Battle, etc.).
Curious to see what you guys think - do you like pass first PGs that create and get into the lane to make shots for the team (DTJ/Winston) as a primary attribute, or do you prefer shoot first PGs (Aiken)? Or perhaps a mixture of both (Goodin)?
Curious to see what you guys think - do you like pass first PGs that create and get into the lane to make shots for the team (DTJ/Winston) as a primary attribute, or do you prefer shoot first PGs (Aiken)? Or perhaps a mixture of both (Goodin)?
For me, it really depends on the makeup of the team. If we have a lot of shooters and not really any other creators, give me a pass-first creator. If we have a few wings who can create, I’m fine with a shooter. A mixture of both is ideal, though.
Related Read: Chris Paul vs. the NBA’s new school point guards
I’m with Alum…think it depends on existing roster compisition. For our team, I don’t think there’s any doubt that we need a PG closer that can create for others. For me it doesn’t matter if it’s skilled/craft type (Winston), an atheltic guy (Goodin/Brown), just so long as they make the game easier for the team. Personally, I always prefer athletes that can finish at the rim, but as long as our next PG can create good shots for the team in a halfcourt set off the dribble I’ll be happy.
Personally, I think there are many ways to skin a cat at the PG spot, I just want a PG that can help my team win. Trey and Darius couldn’t be more different in style but I loved them both. I hate Duke but love what Tyus Jones did for them, I like Koenig, I like Walton, I like Spike, etc.
Its the one things about the offensive system JB employs that I like the most…flexibility. The fact that you can go from Darius one year and Burke the next is evidence of that.
My assumption is, if JB is recruiting a kid as a PG, he can fill that role…I don’t care what they look like quite frankly. And I’d say between Spike, Walton, Burke and Morris…JB knows what he’s doing.
Anybody can fill a role, the question is how WELL is the role filled? Will Aiken fulfill the role as well as Winston. Can Brown distribute as well as Goodin, etc? These are the type of questions relevant in my opinion.
Regardless of quality of player… I agree with @Tom_McC that Beilein’s system has proven that the point guard is definitely a spot that can have very different sorts of players.
Darius Morris/Quentin Goodin is one mold… Trey Burke/Cassius Winston is another…
I think it’s hard to say that one model works better than the rest and honestly I’m not really sure where Walton fits into the scale yet either.
And my point is, based on past history, JB will offer a guy he thinks can fill that role. His done a very good job at finding guys to fill the PG spot and I have no doubts he will get the right guy in here.
And my point is, based on past history, JB will offer a guy he thinks can fill that role. His done a very good job at finding guys to fill the PG spot and I have no doubts he will get the right guy in here.
Again, at least you make known your deference to JB…the ‘if its good enough for JB its good enough for me’ approach. I appreciate the honesty.
For me, I’m not deferential (shocker, I know!), and I think most guys can fulfill a role, but JB’s hand is forced because our primary targets aren’t taking the bait as of yet…so the interest in a guy may be via default rather than ‘hey, this guy can really flourish at PG’
Just my take
We need a playmaker that can get into the lane and get shooters open and/or create their own shot. Be it from the 1 or the 2 position.
I worry we’ll fall along the lines of IU’s half court offense last year (minus the level of talent). Stagnant IMO because neither their 1 or 2 guards were great at creating for others.
So am I reading this correctly to mean that it really doesn’t matter the quality of player because JBs system makes a star of everyone/the system supersedes the player?
So am I reading this correctly to mean that it really doesn't matter the quality of player because JBs system makes a star of everyone/the system supersedes the player?
why not, in football you have QBs who put up insane stats but get knocked as just being system QBs and then don’t do squat in the NFL, don’t see why that can’t be the case in basketball
So am I reading this correctly to mean that it really doesn't matter the quality of player because JBs system makes a star of everyone/the system supersedes the player?
No… I’m saying quality is quality … it’s obviously important. But focusing stylistically I can see either style working in Beilein’s offense.
Thanks for clarifying…I agree for the most part but think existing roster plays a part in the preferred model
So am I reading this correctly to mean that it really doesn't matter the quality of player because JBs system makes a star of everyone/the system supersedes the player?why not, in football you have QBs who put up insane stats but get knocked as just being system QBs and then don’t do squat in the NFL, don’t see why that can’t be the case in basketball
Its never about the system to me, all about the player. Its the reason Steven Threet was a bum for UM while Denard Robinson is the greatest rushing QB in college history. Identical system, different players. Jims and Joes, not x’s and o’s
With all the shooters on the floor in a typical Coach B lineup, I think guys like Darius Morris can really shine. Taller pg’s who can pass and see over the D.
Exceptional ball handling is not a priority. Taking advantage of the angles on a spread out court and making sound decisions is a priority. This makes Kam Chatman intriguing. He has a chance to be Darius like, with the opportunities this offense presents, both in half court, and pushing the ball on fast breaks. MAAR too, but I think Chatman might have more upside. Hard to gauge at this point.
I think they will, but I wouldn’t be shocked if M doesn’t bring in a “true” pg in '16.
Coach B is a different type of cat. When he had Tim Hardaway bringing the ball up court against VCU’s Havoc, I thought he had lost his mind, but the man was way way ahead of me. Still is near as I can tell
So am I reading this correctly to mean that it really doesn't matter the quality of player because JBs system makes a star of everyone/the system supersedes the player?why not, in football you have QBs who put up insane stats but get knocked as just being system QBs and then don’t do squat in the NFL, don’t see why that can’t be the case in basketball
Its never about the system to me, all about the player. Its the reason Steven Threet was a bum for UM while Denard Robinson is the greatest rushing QB in college history. Identical system, different players. Jims and Joes, not x’s and o’s
But as seen by his gradually declining production, when you try to fit Denard into a system he’s not made for, his value goes down. But that doesn’t mean he’s not a great talent. It’s really about the Jimmies and Joes FOR your Xs and Os. Have JB and Izzo swap rosters and neither are going to have a chance to win the conference. But with the rosters they both currently have fitting their system, they both have the ability to win alot of games.
So am I reading this correctly to mean that it really doesn't matter the quality of player because JBs system makes a star of everyone/the system supersedes the player?why not, in football you have QBs who put up insane stats but get knocked as just being system QBs and then don’t do squat in the NFL, don’t see why that can’t be the case in basketball
Its never about the system to me, all about the player. Its the reason Steven Threet was a bum for UM while Denard Robinson is the greatest rushing QB in college history. Identical system, different players. Jims and Joes, not x’s and o’s
But as seen by his gradually declining production, when you try to fit Denard into a system he’s not made for, his value goes down. But that doesn’t mean he’s not a great talent. It’s really about the Jimmies and Joes FOR your Xs and Os. Have JB and Izzo swap rosters and neither are going to have a chance to win the conference. But with the rosters they both currently have fitting their system, they both have the ability to win alot of games.
You do make a compelling point that both are certainly factors. But if the player is really that good, the system simply doesn’t matter. The system/fit makes the biggest impact on marginal players. I don’t give a shit what system you put a Kobe Bryant, Westbrook, Curry, CP, Tim Duncan, Trey (college), Okafor, Winslow, Towns…those guys are going to be dominant.
Not sure if I’d call Steve Nash marginal, but the right system made him a two-time MVP.