luke at pg?
Moderators: dVs33, Cowology, theBigLip, Snakebites
luke at pg?
-
- Junior
- Posts: 450
- And1: 154
- Joined: Aug 09, 2012
luke at pg?
I am interested in the opinions of those who are very familiar with Luke's game. Is Luke a good enough ball handler to play pg for us? Would playing point overwhelm him and put too much on his shoulders?
Before the criticism of his handles pour in, let me say Reggie is no wizard with the bb. I see Reggie as an excellent backup pg.
. A backcourt of Luke and Avery excites my imagination. I think it makes the team better too.
. Before we dismiss the idea entirely remember Chauncey Billups. Not a great ballhandler but smart tough and a great shooter.
. Time to think outside the box
Before the criticism of his handles pour in, let me say Reggie is no wizard with the bb. I see Reggie as an excellent backup pg.
. A backcourt of Luke and Avery excites my imagination. I think it makes the team better too.
. Before we dismiss the idea entirely remember Chauncey Billups. Not a great ballhandler but smart tough and a great shooter.
. Time to think outside the box
Re: luke at pg?
- Kilo
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,261
- And1: 5,249
- Joined: Jun 18, 2011
-
Re: luke at pg?
In a couple years I think he could play some. Wouldn't put it on the rookie though. Reggie, Galloway and Ish can handle it now.
Weaver = Hinkie
VW to Portland
VW to Portland

Re: luke at pg?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 38,753
- And1: 22,818
- Joined: Oct 08, 2013
-
Re: luke at pg?
I would definitely consider it as he as the vision and passing ability to build off of. Either way to me he's a combo guard so I think you will see him there at times but he will also benefit more from a passing PG next to him like Ish cause of the way he likes to move and cut with out the ball to get that little bit of separation he needs for that shot.
Re: luke at pg?
- Pharaoh
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,443
- And1: 4,742
- Joined: Aug 10, 2001
Re: luke at pg?
Not a great ball handler and there's a massive difference between creating seperation to get your own buckets vs delivering the rock at the right time and place.
Game & Tempo management are keys for every team - Luke is a rookie!
Game & Tempo management are keys for every team - Luke is a rookie!
Re: luke at pg?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,587
- And1: 4,464
- Joined: Aug 29, 2014
-
Re: luke at pg?
Nah, he is a secondary ball handler not a PG he's the type that takes what the defense gives him. He isn't really the type that forces a defense to do anything.
Championships
Re: luke at pg?
- whitehops
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,302
- And1: 7,006
- Joined: Dec 12, 2012
- Location: Toronto
-
Re: luke at pg?
i think he could because he's good at running the pick and roll which is one of the main components to our offense (assuming we move more way from the motion offense we ran last year). i still think that putting luke on-ball so often takes away from what he's best at which is moving off-ball to create opportunities for himself. when gets the ball off screens he can run pseudo-pick and rolls like we did with KCP when he was here which takes advantage of his off-ball scoring and his on-ball ability to create for himself and others.
basically, i think we have enough secondary ballhandlers (bradley, galloway) for luke to not be in a position to play point this year. doesn't mean he won't initiate the offense at times because if bradley or galloway are playing PG then i expect them to share ball handling duties with luke to some extent.
basically, i think we have enough secondary ballhandlers (bradley, galloway) for luke to not be in a position to play point this year. doesn't mean he won't initiate the offense at times because if bradley or galloway are playing PG then i expect them to share ball handling duties with luke to some extent.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Junior
- Posts: 450
- And1: 154
- Joined: Aug 09, 2012
Re: luke at pg?
Reggie is a pg that dominates the ball. It's not unusual for Reggie to have the ball in his hands for aa much as 18 seconds per possession. That's not how I envision luke. My question is can he bring the ball up the court and get the team in its offensive sets. To me a shooter with his bb IQ is more valuable than Reggie and his athleticism.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,587
- And1: 4,464
- Joined: Aug 29, 2014
-
Re: luke at pg?
davidvolumes wrote:Reggie is a pg that dominates the ball. It's not unusual for Reggie to have the ball in his hands for aa much as 18 seconds per possession. That's not how I envision luke. My question is can he bring the ball up the court and get the team in its offensive sets. To me a shooter with his bb IQ is more valuable than Reggie and his athleticism.
Well sure most on the team can do that, going up the court and calling a play isn't really close to all the stuff PG should do though. You need a creator on the floor 9/10 its the PG.
Championships
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Junior
- Posts: 450
- And1: 154
- Joined: Aug 09, 2012
Re: luke at pg?
I don't remember Chauncey being a creator.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,465
- And1: 2,323
- Joined: Apr 01, 2013
-
Re: luke at pg?
Unless someone on the Pistons forum is a huge Duke fan, and watched Kennard play the last two years, all you'll hear here are opinions supported by hope.
Re: RE: Re: luke at pg?
- Pharaoh
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,443
- And1: 4,742
- Joined: Aug 10, 2001
Re: RE: Re: luke at pg?
davidvolumes wrote:Reggie is a pg that dominates the ball. It's not unusual for Reggie to have the ball in his hands for aa much as 18 seconds per possession. That's not how I envision luke. My question is can he bring the ball up the court and get the team in its offensive sets. To me a shooter with his bb IQ is more valuable than Reggie and his athleticism.
To the bold: assume he can do that.
That doesn't mean he's a PG
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Starter
- Posts: 2,016
- And1: 1,399
- Joined: Mar 14, 2016
-
Re: luke at pg?
Do you remember when people talked about Stanley running the second unit as PG? Yeah, that's right, remember kids, what you can do in 2k17 you maybe can't do it in real life.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,698
- And1: 1,420
- Joined: Jan 19, 2002
-
Re: luke at pg?
ImHeisenberg wrote:Unless someone on the Pistons forum is a huge Duke fan, and watched Kennard play the last two years, all you'll hear here are opinions supported by hope.
Does this apply to opinions both good and bad? This comment seems entirely dismissive and gratuitous. Is it possible that some have taken the time to read Duke fan sites and the journalists who cover Duke/college basketball? It is condescending to suggest that opinions not in line with your own are simply people clasping their hands together and casting their eyes to the sky in hope.

To OP's question; I don't think LK is a PG. He does seem to have good passing ability and floor vision, but I don't think the potential of his game is best served by having him be a primary ball handler. To the matter of the team's coaching, given LK's acknowledged shooting, if the offense doesn't make a serious effort to get him good shots then we have something to talk about.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,216
- And1: 3,351
- Joined: Sep 06, 2013
Re: luke at pg?
If we got in an injury situation and we needed someone to step in - yeah, I think he could do that for a bit. He's a very heady player and he generally plays to his strengths. ie wouldn't go out and try to be something he isn't and get himself in trouble.
Is that what we want in a backup pg on this team though? Probably not. If Luke is at pg, the second unit is full of guys like Bullock, tolliver, Leuer that need to play with a creator to be effective. If not, we're just tossing the ball around the perimeter and hoping to get an open look of pick and pops.
This might be a different conversation of this was a team with 2 offensive studs and one was always on the floor. Then a sharp shooting "pg" that didn't mind playing off the ball would make sense.
Is that what we want in a backup pg on this team though? Probably not. If Luke is at pg, the second unit is full of guys like Bullock, tolliver, Leuer that need to play with a creator to be effective. If not, we're just tossing the ball around the perimeter and hoping to get an open look of pick and pops.
This might be a different conversation of this was a team with 2 offensive studs and one was always on the floor. Then a sharp shooting "pg" that didn't mind playing off the ball would make sense.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,465
- And1: 2,323
- Joined: Apr 01, 2013
-
Re: luke at pg?
hoophabit wrote:ImHeisenberg wrote:Unless someone on the Pistons forum is a huge Duke fan, and watched Kennard play the last two years, all you'll hear here are opinions supported by hope.
Does this apply to opinions both good and bad? This comment seems entirely dismissive and gratuitous. Is it possible that some have taken the time to read Duke fan sites and the journalists who cover Duke/college basketball? It is condescending to suggest that opinions not in line with your own are simply people clasping their hands together and casting their eyes to the sky in hope.Since the debacle that was last season it seems there is a cadre here that make it their mission to deride any expression of hope.
To OP's question; I don't think LK is a PG. He does seem to have good passing ability and floor vision, but I don't think the potential of his game is best served by having him be a primary ball handler. To the matter of the team's coaching, given LK's acknowledged shooting, if the offense doesn't make a serious effort to get him good shots then we have something to talk about.
You made a mountain out of a mole hill.
I am hopeful for Kennard, but I'm not going to assume I've watched him play over the last two years extensively enough to really know any more than what half-educated pundits have had to say about him.
Re: luke at pg?
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,698
- And1: 1,420
- Joined: Jan 19, 2002
-
Re: luke at pg?
ImHeisenberg wrote:hoophabit wrote:ImHeisenberg wrote:Unless someone on the Pistons forum is a huge Duke fan, and watched Kennard play the last two years, all you'll hear here are opinions supported by hope.
Does this apply to opinions both good and bad? This comment seems entirely dismissive and gratuitous. Is it possible that some have taken the time to read Duke fan sites and the journalists who cover Duke/college basketball? It is condescending to suggest that opinions not in line with your own are simply people clasping their hands together and casting their eyes to the sky in hope.Since the debacle that was last season it seems there is a cadre here that make it their mission to deride any expression of hope.
To OP's question; I don't think LK is a PG. He does seem to have good passing ability and floor vision, but I don't think the potential of his game is best served by having him be a primary ball handler. To the matter of the team's coaching, given LK's acknowledged shooting, if the offense doesn't make a serious effort to get him good shots then we have something to talk about.
You made a mountain out of a mole hill.
I am hopeful for Kennard, but I'm not going to assume I've watched him play over the last two years extensively enough to really know any more than what half-educated pundits have had to say about him.
Fair enough, as I agree none of us can be sure of how he will fare in the real NBA. As we've all witnessed time and again the big step is the most difficult (the ghost of Austin Daye.) I have no desire to pick a fight with a fellow long-term member of the board whom I respect. I guess I have a higher opinion of journalists, as most I would consider "real" are rather well educated, but they can be just as wrong as the rest of us. I'm sure that my level of irritation has increased with what seems a pervasive tendency by some to step on anything hopeful or positive, and being that was not your intent my response was an overreaction. Tempered hope is always good advice.

Re: luke at pg?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,465
- And1: 2,323
- Joined: Apr 01, 2013
-
Re: luke at pg?
hoophabit wrote:Fair enough, as I agree none of us can be sure of how he will fare in the real NBA. As we've all witnessed time and again the big step is the most difficult (the ghost of Austin Daye.) I have no desire to pick a fight with a fellow long-term member of the board whom I respect. I guess I have a higher opinion of journalists, as most I would consider "real" are rather well educated, but they can be just as wrong as the rest of us. I'm sure that my level of irritation has increased with what seems a pervasive tendency by some to step on anything hopeful or positive, and being that was not your intent my response was an overreaction. Tempered hope is always good advice.
No worries. I hope he's the second coming of JJ Redick that's a better ball handler. I think that's probably his ceiling in the NBA. But, who knows? I thought Stanley Johnson was a star in the making after his rookie summer league, now I'm not confident he'll be in the NBA in five years.