RealGM

i understand that Teague is not a true PG. some people beleive that it is critical that Joe has a "pure" PG as a teammate.

some people think Bibby is a "pure" PG, other think he is not. some think Bibby is a chucker, some don't. some think Bibby can create and pass, and other don't.

regardless if you disagree with a Joe/Teague backcourt, we really don't know what is going to happen, because in all honesty, the Hawks have never had a player like Teague before.

from Mookie, to Terry, to Lue, to E.Davis, to Vaughn, to Sura, to Bibby, the Hawks and Joe have never had a high flying PG. Hawks have had skilled PGs before, and shooting PGs before.

a Joe plus high flying PG is something we have never seen before and not really sure if it will work or not work, but i assume even if you didn't like the Teague pick, i think those same people and every Hawk fan would approve and love to have Monta Ellis on a rookie contract, because Teague becoming another Monta Ellis is actually within the relm of possibility (although it is the best case scenario)

The "pure pg" argument means very little to me. How is that working out for Marcus Williams? The fact is that the direction the NBA is heading in favors guys like Teague who can get to the basket. His passing is definitely a weakness-but expecting a player at 19 to have no question marks in their game is pretty naive. If Teague turns out to be a Rodney Stuckey/Aaron Brooks type scorer with mediocre pg skills then we made a good pick.

The one thing that gets me here is the "high flying" part. From the 2 or 3 x I've seen Teague, he generally plays below the rim (and yes, I realize there's a handful of nice dunks on youtube). Still, his WCS is prolly a small SG in the Barbosa / Nate Robinson mold. As long as we have a playmaking SG beside him (ala JJ), he should be fine. The big ? though is that what we really needed to take the next step this year? I don't know... it could be. His quickness and length gives us another tool to use against opponent's quick Gs - now if he'll just commit to D.

I don't hate Teague, I just wish we'd gotten more. Think about it: if CHI had opted for Blair or PHI had opted for Maynor or MIN hadn't decided to corner the market on PGs in this draft and draft 3 before our pick came up, then we could have had Holiday or Lawson fall into our laps. That hurts. I'm not disappointed with the picks we made, just disappointed with how the draft turned out.

theat-high flying is just a way to put his athleticism. There are less than 5 guys 6'4 and under I can think of in the NBA right now that actually dunk on a regular basis. Wade,Westbrook,and Monta Ellis pre-injury are the only ones that come to mind. You may see a player like Rondo or Devin Harris or Westbrook dunk in traffic once in a blue moon(the same for Teague) outside of uncontested fast breaks but those two are still extremely athletic. Teague can get to the rim and finish in traffic....can the same be said for players we've had before like AJ,Lue,and Bibby?

A non lottery pick is just not going to be the key for any team taking the next step that same year they are drafted. I know you haven't been on the board for previous drafts but if you went back(I know it's not possible)and looked back over some of the reasons we shouldn't have taken certain players(thad young,rondo,stuckey,etc)in hindsight it looks extremely dumb. The bottom line is quality player=quality pick at 19 regardless of what his particular strengths and weaknesses are. The key is to avoid someone who just doesn't do anything well enough to warrant being in an 8 man rotation.

HoopsGuru25 wrote:theat-high flying is just a way to put his athleticism. There are less than 5 guys 6'4 and under I can think of in the NBA right now that actually dunk on a regular basis. Wade,Westbrook,and Monta Ellis pre-injury are the only ones that come to mind. You may see a player like Rondo or Devin Harris or Westbrook dunk in traffic once in a blue moon(the same for Teague) outside of uncontested fast breaks but those two are still extremely athletic. Teague can get to the rim and finish in traffic....can the same be said for players we've had before like AJ,Lue,and Bibby?

A non lottery pick is just not going to be the key for any team taking the next step that same year they are drafted. I know you haven't been on the board for previous drafts but if you went back(I know it's not possible)and looked back over some of the reasons we shouldn't have taken certain players(thad young,rondo,stuckey,etc)in hindsight it looks extremely dumb. The bottom line is quality player=quality pick at 19 regardless of what his particular strengths and weaknesses are. The key is to avoid someone who just doesn't do anything well enough to warrant being in an 8 man rotation.

The thing though is that this was not your average non lottery pick. This draft was so deep at PG that one that was lottery worthy was bound to fall to us.

And not only is Teague lottery worthy, but if wasn't for the post-season he would have been a top 10 pick. Hell when Wake Forest was really flying high he was getting top 5 consideration.

And when he enters the league he will be a top 5 athlete at the PG position. He will not be an above average playmaker, but he doesn't have to be.

If he just creates off the dribble, that puts enough pressure on defenses to make them sag off Josh Smith and Joe Johnson, making our offense that much more dangerous.

He's not a pure PG but neither was Bibby. That's why Joe Johnson led our team in assists

the hawks desparetely needed some one who could create shots for his teammates. so what do they do? they trade for jamal crawford and draft jeff teague. major fail.

why do they need some one who can create shots for his teammates? well, i dunno maybe because the offense consist of sitting around for 18 seconds and watching joe johnson dribble.

\

johnny878 wrote:the hawks desparetely needed some one who could create shots for his teammates. so what do they do? they trade for jamal crawford and draft jeff teague. major fail.

why do they need some one who can create shots for his teammates? well, i dunno maybe because the offense consist of sitting around for 18 seconds and watching joe johnson dribble.

\

It would have been major fail if Ty Lawson was still there but he wasn't.

Considering who was there, he was the right pick. Certainly not a failure of one.

And Jeff Teague is not a wait and sit PG. He's an uptempo, take anybody in the league off the dribble, type of PG.

Dribble penetration is really what we were missing more than anything. The only dribble penetrating we have seen for years has been from opposing guards. Teague has work to do as a defender but with his wing span and athleticism and work ethic he could be a great one in time

I have faith in Teague's first step and NBA perimeter D rules to get him into the lane and cause the defense to react. Once he's there it remains to be seen if he can hit his teammates for an open shot or not or finish on his own. In the playoffs last year, Joe was worn down to the point his drives weren't creating openings for others because he couldn't get separation from his own man to force the defense to help.

Just because you're athletic doesn't mean you will be a good nba player. Look at James White for example.

Teague needs to develop a true pg's game. Louis Williams came into the league right out of South as a undersized sg. They are trying to convert him to pg but he doesn't have that mentality of being a pass first, pass second, shoot 3rd type of player. If we have 3 starters (for example, lets say we have a teague/crawford/jj lineup) just jacking up shots and not running plays to get the ball inside, we will be horrible.

HoopsGuru25 wrote:theat-high flying is just a way to put his athleticism. There are less than 5 guys 6'4 and under I can think of in the NBA right now that actually dunk on a regular basis. Wade,Westbrook,and Monta Ellis pre-injury are the only ones that come to mind. You may see a player like Rondo or Devin Harris or Westbrook dunk in traffic once in a blue moon(the same for Teague) outside of uncontested fast breaks but those two are still extremely athletic. Teague can get to the rim and finish in traffic....can the same be said for players we've had before like AJ,Lue,and Bibby?

Fair enough. Just that everytime I see "high flying" I think of a player with his eyes above the rim, but I guess I could see where others would use it to mean something else.

HoopsGuru25 wrote:A non lottery pick is just not going to be the key for any team taking the next step that same year they are drafted. I know you haven't been on the board for previous drafts but if you went back(I know it's not possible)and looked back over some of the reasons we shouldn't have taken certain players(thad young,rondo,stuckey,etc)in hindsight it looks extremely dumb. The bottom line is quality player=quality pick at 19 regardless of what his particular strengths and weaknesses are. The key is to avoid someone who just doesn't do anything well enough to warrant being in an 8 man rotation.

Not sure where all this is coming from. I agree and have agreed that Teague is worth the #19. Even said in this thread that his worst case is a Barbosa-like SG which is worth the 19 pick in this draft (I consider a high floor a huge compliment for a prospect). I think we both agree that there were some names that jumped out if somehow they fell to us (Jrue Holiday and Brandon Jennings specifically for me with Lawson running 3rd), but alas, it didn't happen. If I was selecting @ that point, I would have selected between Teague, Maynor, and Mullens, and I couldn't fault anyone as long as they took 1 of those 3.

Are there really any Teague "haters" out there? Just curious...

I know there are some who would have preferred Maynor or Mills, but do any of those people "hate" Teague?

I don't think too many people hate the pick either.

And I don't think it would bother Teague if they did. This guy is taking the Gilbert Arenas chip on the shoulder approach. He's been doubted his whole life. Was rated only the 9th best PG coming out of HS, and the 57th overall prospect in his HS class.

Then he comes to the NBA and is taken behind 7 more PGs, and 17 more players overall.


He's got as much upside as any PG in this draft with his elite combination of length and athleticism. And again he has the work ethic to make him reaching that potential not seem that far fetched

Im very excited about the pick

mrhonline wrote:Are there really any Teague "haters" out there? Just curious...

I know there are some who would have preferred Maynor or Mills, but do any of those people "hate" Teague?

yeah, their are some out their that wanted to draft a "pure" PG, and i agree, Teague is not that. they don't think that athletes can succeed in the NBA but in reality they have the highest success rate. they pretty much wanted to draft an Acie Law clone in Maynor.

...