RealGM

Tonight Game against Boston was the first game JC hasn't started since he obtained the starting PG role. For me, this is the first time i've enjoyed our boys play a entire game for quite some time. Our offense looked smooth, we were attacking from different positions. etc. Our team looked completely different and more importantly , defensively sound.

While 1 game maybe a small sample size, are we a better team when JC doesn't play?

SwaggWagg wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj1--j4fi4U

omg, thats some funny ****.

So many gifs in there.

Defensively, we are MUCH better.

Offensively? I'm not sure. Although BK7 doesn't get as many assists as JC, I think we get better overall ball movement. I'm really not a huge fan of having one ball-dominant guy. The trick is BK7 limiting his TOs.

BTW - what the heck is JC missing games due to a 'sore elbow' for? Is that our version of "tanking," or is he a little on the fragile side?

Piston Pete wrote:Defensively, we are MUCH better.

Offensively? I'm not sure. Although BK7 doesn't get as many assists as JC, I think we get better overall ball movement. I'm really not a huge fan of having one ball-dominant guy. The trick is BK7 limiting his TOs.

BTW - what the heck is JC missing games due to a 'sore elbow' for? Is that our version of "tanking," or is he a little on the fragile side?

depending on what they are calling it, it actually effects your shot and ability to pass quite a bit. especially if its a nerve. its actually quite surprising how hard it is to pass with pace when your elbow is sore. just speaking from personal experience

Until they specify otherwise, IMO, sore elbow and injured elbow are two different stories in my book.

On paper the team should be solid. Stuckey and Knight have the penetration and shooting and Moose and Drummond are complimentary bigs, but that's all on paper. Who actually turns up is anybodies guess.
If stuckey plays under control and picks his shots well and Knight is aggressive and looks for his shots, the team could be good, but we've seen all year that that isn't the case.
I actually think Calderon is a good inclusion. His defense sucks balls, but offensively he's solid as a rock.
If stuckey and knight can get their **** together, that would be a nice guard rotation, but im not holding my breathe.

dVs33 wrote:On paper the team should be solid. Stuckey and Knight have the penetration and shooting and Moose and Drummond are complimentary bigs, but that's all on paper. Who actually turns up is anybodies guess.
If stuckey plays under control and picks his shots well and Knight is aggressive and looks for his shots, the team could be good, but we've seen all year that that isn't the case.
I actually think Calderon is a good inclusion. His defense sucks balls, but offensively he's solid as a rock.
If stuckey and knight can get their **** together, that would be a nice guard rotation, but im not holding my breathe.

did you catch todays game? boys actually looked decent and interested.

We clearly don't need Jose Calderon. That being said- Knights not ready to be a teams primary ball handler.

princeofpalace wrote:We clearly don't need Jose Calderon. That being said- Knights not ready to be a teams primary ball handler.

agreed. Stuckey ran the point most of the game, and knight at times, which i wouldn't mind especially since stuckey's going to ball out now that these games don't mean anything

SwaggWagg wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj1--j4fi4U

Damn Knight has had a rough career so far...

I hope he dunks on DeAndre Jordan in his career to make up for that poster..

Blkbrd671 wrote:

dVs33 wrote:On paper the team should be solid. Stuckey and Knight have the penetration and shooting and Moose and Drummond are complimentary bigs, but that's all on paper. Who actually turns up is anybodies guess.
If stuckey plays under control and picks his shots well and Knight is aggressive and looks for his shots, the team could be good, but we've seen all year that that isn't the case.
I actually think Calderon is a good inclusion. His defense sucks balls, but offensively he's solid as a rock.
If stuckey and knight can get their **** together, that would be a nice guard rotation, but im not holding my breathe.

did you catch todays game? boys actually looked decent and interested.

i saw the boston game and it was enjoyable to watch for the most part.
Knight still doesn't look 100% though. He isn't as aggressive as he needs to be. that missed lay up was just ugly too haha
I thought at the start of the season running Stuckey and knight together and splitting the ball handling duties between them would be best, but they proved throughout the season that they can't make it work for a full game. and thats why Calderon is important. He's great at finding guys at their right spots and it frees knight up to just find his way offensively. Knight doesn't look like he's caught up to the speed of the nba yet. sure he has amazing games once in a way, but he's not there just yet.
Every time i watch knight, every dumb mistake he makes its clear what hes trying to do, but he just seems either too slow to react or he is rushing himself to where his legs are going faster than his brain.
He'll be fine with time, but calderon can teach him while he's developing.

I don't know if we are better are worse as a team with Calderon, as the results are pretty much the same in the win/loss column. But I do know its good to have a veteran PG running the show. And last night, even though it wasn't Calderon, we did have Stuckey running the point, who is also a veteran PG. He's not a true PG, but he has played the position long enough to be considered a veteran PG, and give you that type of stability that you need at that position. In terms of taking care of the ball, making pretty good decisions, controlling the pace, etc.

Bottom line, we need to go into next year with a proven veteran PG from day 1, whether thats Calderon or whoever. I don't think we can or should gamble another whole season on Knight at PG. All it takes is a bad week or two to start a season to completely ruin the season, as we saw this year. Not blaming Knight for the 0-8 start, but just saying we need to give ourselves the best chance to get off to a great start, and starting an unproven PG from day 1 is too risky a gamble.

So I don't know if keeping Calderon guarantees we get off to a better start, but I like our chances better than if we were to go with Knight. So unless we have other options, might as well just keep Calderon.

Realistically, we could save the money on Calderon and just go with Stuckey to start at PG next year, who would give us that veteran presence we lack with Knight, but I'm pretty sure thats already been proven not to work, and don't think anyone wants to go down that path again. And even if we draft Burke, the odds of having success with a rookie PG are less than if we went with Knight, so the reality of the situation is we just don't have anybody better than Calderon right now. We have to play cards we're dealt.

Last night's game was fun to watch for a change.Stuckey played fairly well. Knight struggle a little when he took over point in the first half ,2 turnovers, but played solid in the second half.He played ,I think 5 to 7 mins at point in the second half while the team made its run and left when we were back within two.Didn't get alot of assist but no turnovers , and pretty good Def., which is all you can ask from a backup point guard.I think we only ran Stuckey at point guard and Knight as backup for a week or two before injuries pushed Knight into starting and we never went back.With the little options we have at upgrading the point maybe we should think about Stuckey at the point upgrade the 2 and keep Knight as a combo backup sharing minutes at both .At least until next yr. when Stuckey expires and maybe we can pry a point guard from somebody else.

I really don't believe starting Jose at PG next year will help us in any way long-term. I think he's partially to be blame for Knight's terrible stretch of games since the trade too. Starting him with Knight was a mistake, either start one or the other. You could argue Knight didn't really earn the starting position I guess, but that's another debate.

Commit to developing him at PG until the trade deadline of the end of his rookie deal or find someone else. Pushing him to the 2 spot, which he cannot play on a consistent basis, is pointless. Jose was suppose to be the mentor, not to replace him...

At this point, either we start Knight at PG(or even off the bench for 28-30 mins) or look to replace/deal him. Otherwise we are wasting our time.

Yea I saw you guys didn't get blown out by 20+ then I saw Jose didn't play and was like ohhhhh there it is!

I wouldnt mind re-signing Calderon as our back-up PG to continue to mentor Knight...The guy can knock down an open 3pter too, you can't deny that...

Stuckey and Knight backcourt never worked because stuckey was playing like sh*. also frank had Knight running the point majority of the time instead of splitting minutes with Stuckey.

i agree that we need a veteran pg presence on this team to either control the pace or mentor knight into the position, however i hope the vet. PG is not JC. All he does is come down , read his options and make a pass, there's very little playmaking involved and for the majority of the time it doesn't seem like theirs that much ball movement in comparison to last nights game and games prior to the trade.

The other part that bothers me is if we do end up resigning Jose, what message are we sending knight, what direction are we taking? How can we commit to being a defensive minded team when the PG on our team is one of the biggest PG liabilities in the league. The one thing that was incredibly obvious was how much better we were defensively last night. If we want to be a playoff team and actually a good one, we can't have our guards letting the opposing guards have their way.

^Why not just run a zone with light hedges while he's in the game...With Calderon as our 20min back-up I think our team can cover him defensively in that short period...