ImageImageImage

Why not Luke at PG?

Moderators: dVs33, Cowology, theBigLip, Snakebites

MotownMadness
RealGM
Posts: 38,753
And1: 22,818
Joined: Oct 08, 2013
   

Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#1 » by MotownMadness » Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:35 am

Someone on the GB thread brought this up and got me thinking it makes sense now and for our future.

With Luke on the wing he has no sort of measurement advantage having a wingspan smaller than his height. He hasn't been a liability defensively though.

But if you were too put him at the PG spot he actually gains a advantage with his measurables at 6'6.

Plus it's not like he doesn't have the playmaking and vision to succeed there while also being a 40%+ 3pt shooter. Definitely makes sense with this starting lineup for spacing and the fact Griffin has the ball a lot while being a playmaker himself.

So

Kennard/Ish
Bullock/Galloway
Johnson/Ennis
Griffin/Tolliver
Drummond/Griffin

There's your 9 man rotation. Now we just need to fire SVG and bring in some one who would have the balls and sense to try it.
Pugz
Rookie
Posts: 1,033
And1: 168
Joined: Jul 01, 2008
Location: Detroit
Contact:
     

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#2 » by Pugz » Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:55 am

its something that ive thought about too. something that is definitely worth a shot. it needs a serious try. im just worried hed be a little slow and his ball handling may lack a bit for that. but id definitely try it
Image
bstein14
RealGM
Posts: 32,721
And1: 9,552
Joined: Jun 22, 2001

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#3 » by bstein14 » Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:15 am

I've already thought Luke at PG especially with Stanley or Blake also on the floor is fine.
Canadafan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,086
And1: 1,997
Joined: Nov 03, 2014
       

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#4 » by Canadafan » Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:00 am

Anybody but Ish! Even Galloway
User avatar
MrBigShot
RealGM
Posts: 18,541
And1: 20,094
Joined: Dec 18, 2010
 

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#5 » by MrBigShot » Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:30 am

I don't think he has the combination of handle/vision/playmaking you need to play PG.
"They say you miss 100% of the shots you take" - Mike James
User avatar
Manocad
RealGM
Posts: 69,969
And1: 10,562
Joined: Dec 13, 2005
Location: Middle Fingerton
Contact:
       

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#6 » by Manocad » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:00 am

Love the idea. Move Drummond to SG as well.

Rock on.
Image
MotownMadness
RealGM
Posts: 38,753
And1: 22,818
Joined: Oct 08, 2013
   

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#7 » by MotownMadness » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:02 am

Manocad wrote:Love the idea. Move Drummond to SG as well.

Rock on.

Yeah bro same thing for sure, rock on
MotownMadness
RealGM
Posts: 38,753
And1: 22,818
Joined: Oct 08, 2013
   

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#8 » by MotownMadness » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:07 am

MrBigShot wrote:I don't think he has the combination of handle/vision/playmaking you need to play PG.

I think he just plays timid because he wants to play error free so he doesn't get yanked. You let him get comfortable and he has the tools to become a PG. He carried Duke a lot with the ball in his hands. He's got vision, can shoot and is crafty without the big first step and big athleticism.

He would play off ball a lot and not be like Ish running in circles looking for assist i will admit. He doesn't have that kind of ball handling.
User avatar
dVs33
Forum Mod - Pistons
Forum Mod - Pistons
Posts: 10,186
And1: 1,874
Joined: Apr 20, 2010
Location: Melbourne, Oz
   

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#9 » by dVs33 » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:32 am

I definitely think ishneeds to be back on the bench, so I'd be happy with this. Kennard needs to play more and we don't have a solution at pg
sc8581
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,876
And1: 766
Joined: Jul 22, 2013

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#10 » by sc8581 » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:47 am

Kennard doesn't have the handles, if he's pressured he will turn it over a lot.
User avatar
Izzite
Senior
Posts: 555
And1: 327
Joined: Apr 21, 2016
Location: Beast Lansing
     

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#11 » by Izzite » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:46 am

Yeah I was thinking about this a while back, shortly after Reggie’s injury. It’s definitely worth a look. I personally can’t stand watching ish pound the air out of the ball. He does some things well, but disrupts flow with starters.

Kennard will give us another solid 3 pt threat with the starting unit, which is needed horribly. Watching ish spot up in the corner for a 3 makes me cringe every single time.
vic
Veteran
Posts: 2,619
And1: 1,101
Joined: Dec 27, 2012

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#12 » by vic » Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:26 am

When he got drafted I said that him at pg was the only way he would be a plus player for the Pistons.
He has no advantage at SG unless he's playing against backups
You need 2-way wings, 2-way shooting bigs, and you can't allow low iq players on the court. Assist/turnover ratio is crucial. Shooting point guards are icing on the cake IF they are plus defenders.
Weaver & Casey, govern yourselves accordingly!
Billl
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,212
And1: 3,348
Joined: Sep 06, 2013

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#13 » by Billl » Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:12 pm

The solution to not having a pg is not to just move a non-pg into the role.
User avatar
whitehops
General Manager
Posts: 8,300
And1: 7,003
Joined: Dec 12, 2012
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#14 » by whitehops » Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:42 pm

MrBigShot wrote:I don't think he has the combination of handle/vision/playmaking you need to play PG.


Yeah I think at this point he doesn’t have the ability to get into the paint by himself/with little help consistently to break down the defense. I think his vision/passing is fine, he just can’t put enough pressure on a defense to be the lead guard.

I’d still like to see them run more plays for him though.
afroxnas
Junior
Posts: 328
And1: 167
Joined: Feb 17, 2016
   

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#15 » by afroxnas » Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:13 pm

The simple answer is because Kennard is not able to stay in front of any of the starting PG in this league.
MotownMadness
RealGM
Posts: 38,753
And1: 22,818
Joined: Oct 08, 2013
   

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#16 » by MotownMadness » Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:20 pm

I just wonder if having his shooting and playmaking is enough to have more of a impact then a non Shooter like Smith. I just can't find a logical reasoning for Ish Smith to be out there running in circles while defenses leave Blake on a island.
User avatar
whitehops
General Manager
Posts: 8,300
And1: 7,003
Joined: Dec 12, 2012
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#17 » by whitehops » Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:46 pm

MotownMadness wrote:I just wonder if having his shooting and playmaking is enough to have more of a impact then a non Shooter like Smith. I just can't find a logical reasoning for Ish Smith to be out there running in circles while defenses leave Blake on a island.

i think galloway would be better starting over ish. the offense mainly runs through blake anyways, galloway provides them with more spacing and he's better suited to guarding point guards than luke. galloway would still only play ~12-15 minutes a game but i think it gives the starting lineup more balance than ish or luke.

that way ish's minutes would stay the same but he'd be out there more with kennard, tolliver and bullock/ennis with either blake or drummond which gives him a lot more space to probe.
MotownMadness
RealGM
Posts: 38,753
And1: 22,818
Joined: Oct 08, 2013
   

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#18 » by MotownMadness » Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:55 pm

whitehops wrote:
MotownMadness wrote:I just wonder if having his shooting and playmaking is enough to have more of a impact then a non Shooter like Smith. I just can't find a logical reasoning for Ish Smith to be out there running in circles while defenses leave Blake on a island.

i think galloway would be better starting over ish. the offense mainly runs through blake anyways, galloway provides them with more spacing and he's better suited to guarding point guards than luke. galloway would still only play ~12-15 minutes a game but i think it gives the starting lineup more balance than ish or luke.

Something, we need spacing in that lineup. Honestly I think Luke has better court vision then Galloway already as a rookie but just hasn't been able to really show it yet.

Defensively though yeah your probably right and Galloway is the way to go.
hoophabit
Analyst
Posts: 3,697
And1: 1,420
Joined: Jan 19, 2002
 

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#19 » by hoophabit » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:38 pm

The general idea of having Luke help with the play making has merit. He has shown a knack for this, both with the Pistons and at Duke. Of course, he's not a PG. A guy can play SG and help facilitate. Of course, he can't be expected to consistently stay in front of the quick PGs. That said, having him mostly stand in the corner behind the 3 pt line is selling him short.
csaw2112
Ballboy
Posts: 26
And1: 4
Joined: Dec 25, 2005
Contact:

Re: Why not Luke at PG? 

Post#20 » by csaw2112 » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:47 pm

Building on this line of thought, offensively I wonder if the Pistons can utilize Blake similar as the 76ers do Simmons. Each are a triple-double waiting to happen and should never put up a three. If possible, then the opposing PG is either guarded by Kennard or Bullock, depending on match-ups.

Return to Detroit Pistons