Shead should start

[Grew]

IQ is more and more proving that he isn't a point guard. He just doesn't have the instincts for the position. No leadership, no point of attack defense. He doesn't create off the bounce for himself or others and he has no mid range pull up game. His handle is below average for the position, and he's not crafty getting to the rim. He brings almost nothing to most possessions, he just brings it up the court, passes the ball and effectively becomes just another wing, waiting in the corner. It's partially on Darko, the offense has seemed very stationary and boring, but I don't think IQ really has the skills even if Darko told him to just go break down the D and make a play.

I wanted so bad for Quick to show he was the next Maxey, but he doesn't seem to be built like that.

Shead is just a better PG, and with Quick in a shooting slump, he's just been the better player. Shead has a presence out there, like he's actually running the team. He's a threat to get to the rim or make a play for a teammate out of little to nothing. He takes pride in defending the point of attack even if he fouls a bit too much.

I want to like IQ but he's been so bad this year that we might be in a better spot if we had Shead/Hepburn running the point. I believe our record would be the same as it is now if IQ wasn't even on the team. Maybe Shead/Hep could have won us an extra game, who knows, IQ has been that bad.

[PushDaRock]

IQ is more and more proving that he isn't a point guard. He just doesn't have the instincts for the position. No leadership, no point of attack defense. He doesn't create off the bounce for himself or others and he has no mid range pull up game. His handle is below average for the position, and he's not crafty getting to the rim. He brings almost nothing to most possessions, he just brings it up the court, passes the ball and effectively becomes just another wing, waiting in the corner. It's partially on Darko, the offense has seemed very stationary and boring, but I don't think IQ really has the skills even if Darko told him to just go break down the D and make a play.

I wanted so bad for Quick to show he was the next Maxey, but he doesn't seem to be built like that.

Shead is just a better PG, and with Quick in a shooting slump, he's just been the better player. Shead has a presence out there, like he's actually running the team. He's a threat to get to the rim or make a play for a teammate out of little to nothing. He takes pride in defending the point of attack even if he fouls a bit too much.

I want to like IQ but he's been so bad this year that we might be in a better spot if we had Shead/Hepburn running the point. I believe our record would be the same as it is now if IQ wasn't even on the team. Maybe Shead/Hep could have won us an extra game, who knows, IQ has been that bad.

lmao it's been 6 games

[TeamDisgruntled]

Are we trying to assemble a starting lineup of players who can’t shoot?

Shead shooting .462 3pt% over 2 attempts per game 17mpg. He's been hooping over the summer and increased his range and consistency.

It's a matter of time Shead steps into the Lowry role

We need a much larger sample size. He’s been a bad shooter his entire collegiate and pro career.

I been as hard on Shead as anyone but tbf since mid November of last season Shead is 73-210 on 3pt attempts for 34.8% .. not great but not awful. Seems to be trending up with reps, let’s hope it continues.

[Grew]

IQ is more and more proving that he isn't a point guard. He just doesn't have the instincts for the position. No leadership, no point of attack defense. He doesn't create off the bounce for himself or others and he has no mid range pull up game. His handle is below average for the position, and he's not crafty getting to the rim. He brings almost nothing to most possessions, he just brings it up the court, passes the ball and effectively becomes just another wing, waiting in the corner. It's partially on Darko, the offense has seemed very stationary and boring, but I don't think IQ really has the skills even if Darko told him to just go break down the D and make a play.

I wanted so bad for Quick to show he was the next Maxey, but he doesn't seem to be built like that.

Shead is just a better PG, and with Quick in a shooting slump, he's just been the better player. Shead has a presence out there, like he's actually running the team. He's a threat to get to the rim or make a play for a teammate out of little to nothing. He takes pride in defending the point of attack even if he fouls a bit too much.

I want to like IQ but he's been so bad this year that we might be in a better spot if we had Shead/Hepburn running the point. I believe our record would be the same as it is now if IQ wasn't even on the team. Maybe Shead/Hep could have won us an extra game, who knows, IQ has been that bad.

lmao it's been 6 games

Yep and we got to see IQ run point a little bit last year. He came into this year knowing his role, he looks uncomfortable playing it. Even if he gets comfortable, he hasn't developed true PG skills. I was hoping he was one of those guys that just played other positions due to versatility, and having teammates ahead of him at PG. IQ wasn't even really a full time PG in college. So far in his opportunity as a starting PG, he seems just unsuited to the role, mentally, physically and skill set wise. I think we are seeing he was never a PG, the wiring isn't there. I hope he proves these posts to be premature.

[PushDaRock]

IQ is more and more proving that he isn't a point guard. He just doesn't have the instincts for the position. No leadership, no point of attack defense. He doesn't create off the bounce for himself or others and he has no mid range pull up game. His handle is below average for the position, and he's not crafty getting to the rim. He brings almost nothing to most possessions, he just brings it up the court, passes the ball and effectively becomes just another wing, waiting in the corner. It's partially on Darko, the offense has seemed very stationary and boring, but I don't think IQ really has the skills even if Darko told him to just go break down the D and make a play.

I wanted so bad for Quick to show he was the next Maxey, but he doesn't seem to be built like that.

Shead is just a better PG, and with Quick in a shooting slump, he's just been the better player. Shead has a presence out there, like he's actually running the team. He's a threat to get to the rim or make a play for a teammate out of little to nothing. He takes pride in defending the point of attack even if he fouls a bit too much.

I want to like IQ but he's been so bad this year that we might be in a better spot if we had Shead/Hepburn running the point. I believe our record would be the same as it is now if IQ wasn't even on the team. Maybe Shead/Hep could have won us an extra game, who knows, IQ has been that bad.

lmao it's been 6 games

Yep and we got to see IQ run point a little bit last year. He came into this year knowing his role, he looks uncomfortable playing it. Even if he gets comfortable, he hasn't developed true PG skills. I was hoping he was one of those guys that just played other positions due to versatility, and having teammates ahead of him at PG. IQ wasn't even really a full time PG in college. So far in his opportunity as a starting PG, he seems just unsuited to the role, mentally, physically and skill set wise. I think we are seeing he was never a PG, the wiring isn't there. I hope he proves these posts to be premature.

How many teams have what you would consider a "True" PG as a starter?

[Pointgod]

Shead should not start. He’s demonstrated nothing to show that he’s a starting calibre PG. His decision making is still questionable and he’s not a plus defender yet even though he’s active.

[YogurtProducer]

by any measure except volume stats, shead's been better so far this season. which isn't saying that shead's been amazing, but just showing how bad IQ's been.

their per 100

This can be summed up as “Greta shooter has bad 6 games of shooting, bad shooter has good 6 games shooting”

You don’t hyper overreact to 6 games.

However, stuff like volume isn’t gonna change. Darko has to do better at making sure our top scorers are in a position to utilize their skill sets. IQ taking 11 shots a night isn’t a good use of him. He’ll, I’d say RJ at only 13 and Barnes/Ingrma at 15 isn’t either.

IQ can continue to start, but we certainly need to see more lineups that have 2 of those 4 guys.

IQ/Ochai/Battle/Barnes/Manu for example
Or
Shead/Dick/Ingram/CMB/Poeltl

Just puts everyone in a position to succeed. There’s only 1 ball, but all 4 of those guys should be taking 15+ shots a night on a team like this.

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

Just puts everyone in a position to succeed. There’s only 1 ball, but all 4 of those guys should be taking 15+ shots a night on a team like this.

I've seen big three's, never seen a big four before. Only so much ball to go around.

[Dennis 37]

Pro: better defense
Con: wasting $32.5M on an inconsistent bench combo guard.

Will his trade value decrease being great off the bench?

Its decreasing now as a starter.

[YogurtProducer]

Pro: better defense
Con: wasting $32.5M on an inconsistent bench combo guard.

Will his trade value decrease being great off the bench?

It’s decreasing now as a starter.

No team is changing the trade value of a guy based on his starting or off the bench. Front offices aren’t that stupid.

[Dennis 37]

Shead should not start. He’s demonstrated nothing to show that he’s a starting calibre PG. His decision making is still questionable and he’s not a plus defender yet even though he’s active.

I dont think it's just about Shead. If IQ is having limited shots because there are a lot of mouths to feed in the SL, would he not get more shots off of the bench?

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

Pro: better defense
Con: wasting $32.5M on an inconsistent bench combo guard.

Will his trade value decrease being great off the bench?

It’s decreasing now as a starter.

No team is changing the trade value of a guy based on his starting or off the bench. Front offices aren’t that stupid.

You think he has trade value? Like, that's a third of our roster.

[Grew]

lmao it's been 6 games

Yep and we got to see IQ run point a little bit last year. He came into this year knowing his role, he looks uncomfortable playing it. Even if he gets comfortable, he hasn't developed true PG skills. I was hoping he was one of those guys that just played other positions due to versatility, and having teammates ahead of him at PG. IQ wasn't even really a full time PG in college. So far in his opportunity as a starting PG, he seems just unsuited to the role, mentally, physically and skill set wise. I think we are seeing he was never a PG, the wiring isn't there. I hope he proves these posts to be premature.

How many teams have what you would consider a "True" PG as a starter?

You're thinking along the lines of an oldschool point guard who brings leadership and team direction. There is less of that in today's NBA for sure. IQ is definitely not that from what we have seen. The new school PG can break down a defense and create for themselves or others. IQ doesn't really fall into this category either from what we have seen. Most rosters in the NBA have at least one guy who falls into the latter category, even if his position is not the 1. We still lack this on our roster.

I was hoping BI would fill this role, but he's more of an ISO hooper who doesn't beat his man or break down the D, he just shoots over the top when he gets to his spot.

So I guess the better way of putting it would be. IQ is an offball guy. He's better suited to catch and shoot 3s, or attacking a closeout. Without the creator archetype on our roster, IQ is being tasked to be that guy, and he's failing. He's being tasked to be a bit of an old school point guard, but he doesn't bring leadership or point of attack defense, he just sets up a dry offense. Probably 20 teams start a guy at PG better suited than IQ to one of these roles.

I don't think Darko has figured out how to make the best of this roster yet. That's understandable. We shall see if IQ, Darko and this team as a whole can figure it out.

[Harcore Fenton Mun]

He didn't even play them together in pre season. You could see this coming a mile away.

[PushDaRock]

Yep and we got to see IQ run point a little bit last year. He came into this year knowing his role, he looks uncomfortable playing it. Even if he gets comfortable, he hasn't developed true PG skills. I was hoping he was one of those guys that just played other positions due to versatility, and having teammates ahead of him at PG. IQ wasn't even really a full time PG in college. So far in his opportunity as a starting PG, he seems just unsuited to the role, mentally, physically and skill set wise. I think we are seeing he was never a PG, the wiring isn't there. I hope he proves these posts to be premature.

How many teams have what you would consider a "True" PG as a starter?

You're thinking along the lines of an oldschool point guard who brings leadership and team direction. There is less of that in today's NBA for sure. IQ is definitely not that from what we have seen. The new school PG can break down a defense and create for themselves or others. IQ doesn't really fall into this category either from what we have seen. Most rosters in the NBA have at least one guy who falls into the latter category, even if his position is not the 1. We still lack this on our roster.

I was hoping BI would fill this role, but he's more of an ISO hooper who doesn't beat his man or break down the D, he just shoots over the top when he gets to his spot.

So I guess the better way of putting it would be. IQ is an offball guy. He's better suited to catch and shoot 3s, or attacking a closeout. Without the creator archetype on our roster, IQ is being tasked to be that guy, and he's failing. He's being tasked to be a bit of an old school point guard, but he doesn't bring leadership or point of attack defense, he just sets up a dry offense. Probably 20 teams start a guy at PG better suited than IQ to one of these roles.

I don't think Darko has figured out how to make the best of this roster yet. That's understandable. We shall see if IQ, Darko and this team as a whole can figure it out.

Well, you're the one bringing up "true PG" skills, so that's why I'm asking and you're already saying those don't exist anymore.

[Grew]

How many teams have what you would consider a "True" PG as a starter?

You're thinking along the lines of an oldschool point guard who brings leadership and team direction. There is less of that in today's NBA for sure. IQ is definitely not that from what we have seen. The new school PG can break down a defense and create for themselves or others. IQ doesn't really fall into this category either from what we have seen. Most rosters in the NBA have at least one guy who falls into the latter category, even if his position is not the 1. We still lack this on our roster.

I was hoping BI would fill this role, but he's more of an ISO hooper who doesn't beat his man or break down the D, he just shoots over the top when he gets to his spot.

So I guess the better way of putting it would be. IQ is an offball guy. He's better suited to catch and shoot 3s, or attacking a closeout. Without the creator archetype on our roster, IQ is being tasked to be that guy, and he's failing. He's being tasked to be a bit of an old school point guard, but he doesn't bring leadership or point of attack defense, he just sets up a dry offense. Probably 20 teams start a guy at PG better suited than IQ to one of these roles.

I don't think Darko has figured out how to make the best of this roster yet. That's understandable. We shall see if IQ, Darko and this team as a whole can figure it out.

Well, you're the one bringing up "true PG" skills, so that's why I'm asking and you're already saying those don't exist anymore.

Kyle, Fred, McConnell- Dudes like that are "true" "oldschool" PG's. Steph, Dame, Ja - Dudes like this are "true" "newschool" creation style PG's. Garland, Trae, Hali- Dudes like that are a mix of both. IQ is neither.

[dTox]

Read on Twitter

I would still wait for IQ to come around instead of rushing to bench him, he's not this bad

[mihaic]

I been on that for a while…

Me too. I think the starting lineup would.perform better.

Me three. Was calling it since last season. Obviously not particularly in favour of Shead (who I like), but because Quick is not a starting PG. Wrong role.

[mihaic]

Read on Twitter

I would still wait for IQ to come around instead of rushing to bench him, he's not this bad

Obviously not bad... wrong role, and it's hard to play both him and Shead as that's too undersized. If at least he gets his 3pt back he will be more passable, right now it's not good at all.

[Thaddy]

We should use RJ as the PG and move him off ball.