NDave79 wrote:This isn't a 100 percent draft related, but enough imo (since we are debating point guards a lot here) that I preferred to post here than start a new thread.
I'm kinda confused what direction we want to go with PG.
On one hand there is all this talk about this new offense about the sharing of ball handling and creation. Boylen said his biggest regret of his rookie head coaching season was that he didn't incorporate the new system sooner. Lauri and Lavine seemed to thrive and for a stretch we had the best offense in the NBA according to certain stats.
Obviously Dunn struggled as would be expected as his offensive strengths relate to things he does with the ball in his hands (unfortunately, his strengths don't really justify catering your offense around him so far. He just hasn't been good enough to warrant that).
But Pax keeps talking about bringing in a PG that has the ability to find and pass the ball to our elite shooters; basically a guard that needs the ball in his hands to play to his strengths. There are rumors about Lonzo Ball and I get the feeling they were infatuated with Morant.
These guys need the ball in there hands to be effective, but Boylen talks about a system that is very different from a ball dominant PG system. I guess I'm just confused and it seems like maybe there isn't an exact consensus within the Bulls about the best way to go forward.
I'm a fan of the multiple ball handler system and feel like we have seen enough success (in the short span where we had some offensive success) to go forward down this path, but from interviews and stuff, Pax seems set on finding a traditional PG imo, even though he already played and had success in a multi ball handler system.
I feel like a player like with the theoretical skills of Garland would be ideal, but Pax talks like the Bulls need a more traditional elite passer like Ball or Morant. I guess I feel like Boylen wants the off ball player and Pax wants the on ball player. Obviously, in perfect world you would get someone who excels at both, but that doesn't seem to be a realistic option.
What is our plan, lol?
Well said and documented.
I think Pax thinks we have enough offense 2-5 and just need a pure PG to set those guys up hence Morant and Ball.
I think he’s wrong. I think a multi handler system with a PG that can shoot and play off ball is best.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Pax puts word out he will trade for Garland just so he can take White who has the better defensive potential and pushes pace. Total bluff.
Keep in mind that Brogdon keeps coming up as Bulls #1 target.
I think garland is def more of a setup PG than White but both could work in our system. I think Pax will Pick the one that falls and if one doesn’t fall he will move up and get one. I don’t see him sitting at 7 and taking a wing. I don’t see him trading for a vet when he can sign one for free.
I will be surprised if we leave the draft without garland or white
