payitforward wrote:80sballboy wrote:Typical Wiz. Garbage one night, show up against a team that plays zero defense. Knicks are just too plodding up front. Of course, the longer you play guys like Thornton, the more his deficiencies will show up on the defensive end. You're actually asking him to check Derek Rose. Really? Then Jennings comes in and starts gunning. I'd like to see Otto's splits at home and on the road. He's getting close to becoming a complete player but still needs more consistency. I actually though Jason Smith didn't suck tonight so that's a start.
From my observation of Thornton, he is a pretty smart basketball player, and he gives effort on defense. He seems fairly strong, but otherwise his lack of athleticism limits him as a defender.
For a guy on a veteran minimum salary, Marcus Thornton is a more than adequate player. But he should be at the back of the bench where VetMin players are supposed to be. Instead, he's 6th on the team in minutes. No.
Who gives a f-ck about his salary. We all knew this before the season. They MUST get a decent backup shooting guard behind the always-injured Beal. I'd be ok if Thornton was the fifth or sixth guard, but he wasn't. I'd be ok if Sato could shoot well enough to play to play backup 2. But he can't. So here we are playing a rolly-poly two guard who can shoot it when open, turns it over when being hounded and just can't defend.
), but the numbers are too small to mean anything. I.e. he is 1-9. Remember, Porter missed 10 in a row to start the season. He was over 40% the last 2 seasons in Europe. True enough, though, that doing this well is a must for him or any guard. But, why draw conclusions so quickly? Do you think, for example, that he's going to stay a 60% FT shooter, wch is where he is now? Early days and small sample.