we are missing a PG

Any And All Things T-Wolves Related
User avatar
Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
Posts: 13844
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by Q12543 [enjin:6621299] »

It's getting hard to ignore the numbers on LaVine. From a pure production standpoint, he is putting up some really impressive numbers for a 2nd year 20-year old, regardless of position.

As a PG, I think we just need to accept that his primary weapon is himself. He's not a PnR wizard like so many of these other PGs. But I think if he's put in a flow type of offense - think triangle or corner offense - you don't really need a supremely gifted facilitating PG. And we have the bigs in Towns and Bjelica capable of facilitating from these sets.
User avatar
BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]
Posts: 3290
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520] »

Shumway wrote:
TheSP wrote:More people going full Porkchop! It's an epidemic I tells ya!!


Never go Full Porkchop.

Everyone knows you never go full Porkchop!


Nice one Shum.
User avatar
BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520]
Posts: 3290
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by BizarroJerry [enjin:6592520] »

Agree with others that we don't need another PG. But my optimism with Rubio is waning, I'm ok using a combo of Zach and Andre this year, but I'd also like to,see tyus get a chance later this season should golden boy continue to be unreliable
User avatar
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
Posts: 9432
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564] »

Q12543 wrote:It's getting hard to ignore the numbers on LaVine. From a pure production standpoint, he is putting up some really impressive numbers for a 2nd year 20-year old, regardless of position.

As a PG, I think we just need to accept that his primary weapon is himself. He's not a PnR wizard like so many of these other PGs. But I think if he's put in a flow type of offense - think triangle or corner offense - you don't really need a supremely gifted facilitating PG. And we have the bigs in Towns and Bjelica capable of facilitating from these sets.


Yeah, I probably shouldn't use a word like "always" in describing a 20-year-old kid, but I suspect that he is always going to be a shoot-first PG. While I prefer pass-first PGs, the three of the best right now (Curry, Westbrook and Lillard) are best described as shoot-first. Zach is generally going to look for his shot after getting a screen rather than look for the rolling screener. At least that's the way it is now...it could change. Meanwhile, he looks awfully good working off of screens.

Anyone have any theories as to why Zach continues to be ball-dominant even when he is paired with a true PG (Andre or Ricky)? Do others think Sam is dictating this, or is it just Zach's nature to want to have the ball in his hands? If it's the latter, I'm okay with it. But if Sam is dictating it, I question why he would want the ball in the hands of a developing PG rather than an established PG. I don't know...just seemed a little odd to see Andre come down the court without the ball and set up in the right corner. And even odder when I have seen Ricky do it.
User avatar
Monster
Posts: 24071
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by Monster »

The premise of this thread is that Rubio and Lavine and Tyus aren't the answer but then the suggested options are guys that are not true PGs that aren't that great of defenders or Collison who is a very good fringe starter and coming out of college was an undersized guy with questions about his athletism and upside (sound familiar?)...and now he is 28. I get the Martin for Collison idea is more of a possible shortish term move which would be ok with me but I don't see him as the answer although I do like him and always have.

Maybe Rubio can't stay healthy and isn't the answer. Maybe Lavine won't progress enough to be a scoring starting PG. Maybe Tyus won't be able to overcome his physical limitations and won't be able to play defense at a high enough level. To me the Wolves have enough interesting AND young options for right now plus they have Miller playing pretty well as a vet guy for this season. I am sticking with seeing how this season plays out. If the Wolves have to look for some legit PG depth this offseason it will be out there it's a ridiculously deep position.
User avatar
Coolbreeze44
Posts: 13192
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by Coolbreeze44 »

Question - If you go full Pork Chop, is there any going back?
User avatar
TAFKASP
Posts: 5356
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by TAFKASP »

CoolBreeze44 wrote:Question - If you go full Pork Chop, is there any going back?


Nope, once you've gone full Porkchop beef is forever off the menu!
User avatar
Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
Posts: 13844
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by Q12543 [enjin:6621299] »

longstrangetrip wrote:
Q12543 wrote:It's getting hard to ignore the numbers on LaVine. From a pure production standpoint, he is putting up some really impressive numbers for a 2nd year 20-year old, regardless of position.

As a PG, I think we just need to accept that his primary weapon is himself. He's not a PnR wizard like so many of these other PGs. But I think if he's put in a flow type of offense - think triangle or corner offense - you don't really need a supremely gifted facilitating PG. And we have the bigs in Towns and Bjelica capable of facilitating from these sets.


Yeah, I probably shouldn't use a word like "always" in describing a 20-year-old kid, but I suspect that he is always going to be a shoot-first PG. While I prefer pass-first PGs, the three of the best right now (Curry, Westbrook and Lillard) are best described as shoot-first. Zach is generally going to look for his shot after getting a screen rather than look for the rolling screener. At least that's the way it is now...it could change. Meanwhile, he looks awfully good working off of screens.

Anyone have any theories as to why Zach continues to be ball-dominant even when he is paired with a true PG (Andre or Ricky)? Do others think Sam is dictating this, or is it just Zach's nature to want to have the ball in his hands? If it's the latter, I'm okay with it. But if Sam is dictating it, I question why he would want the ball in the hands of a developing PG rather than an established PG. I don't know...just seemed a little odd to see Andre come down the court without the ball and set up in the right corner. And even odder when I have seen Ricky do it.


Yeah, it sort of defeats the purpose to have Andre or Rubio out there if Zach ends up bringing the ball up and initiating the offense anyway. Neither of those guys are shooters, so they don't even space the floor.

The only thing I can think of is if the "play" Mitchell is calling is basically for everyone to spread out and let Zach try to go one-on-one for a quick shot in order to increase the pace of play while giving everyone else a rest. I can actually see the sense in this every once in a while, but ultimately you want Andre or Rubio running the show the vast majority of time they are out there. Otherwise, they don't serve much purpose on offense.
User avatar
Leado01
Posts: 1425
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by Leado01 »

Well said LST!

I'm still not even mildly worried with Rubio's ankles. The guy isn't going to play til he's 30 or 35 because he's already had a full career of pro work (11 years as a pro wear on you). I'm ok with the small sits here and there because we have (pleasantly surprised) a very good change of pace backup in Lavine, and Andre Miller is a very serviceable backup as well.

Sit on this team for the season. Let Martin get his shooting back. See what happens.

Tony Parker was in a horrendous 1/2 season slump last season . . .not only shooting, but also within the offense. Pop made him play through it. Keep going. You're our guy.

We have a very talented team and it should be our goal to keep as many of these players together as possible and let them learn to play, and learn to play through difficult times.

When a player goes down, he's dead to the team until he returns and it's that simple. We don't need to trade the injured player, we need the backup to step up. Our PG's are stepping up.
1965-2025
"He Meant Well"
User avatar
petecorcoran [enjin:6658618]
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:00 am

Re: we are missing a PG

Post by petecorcoran [enjin:6658618] »

I agree with Monster... we need to see how this season plays out.

That said, there is a lot to suggest Zach cannot be a PG... or even a combo. Yes, the PER is good, but the Real +/- is not. It's not surprising to me that Rubio and Towns lead the team in Real +/-... and Zach is down the list. I've seen more good passes from Towns in 17 games than Zach in a season plus... and more from Ricky all the time.

We can still question whether Ricky can stay healthy enough to be the long-term answer... and can still question if Tyus can develop into a good backup. But no further questions in my mind on Zach... he's a 2. And the Wolves record of 1-6 with Zach starting and 7-3 with Ricky starting is not an aberration.

The question on Zach is whether he's best suited to be a starting 2 or to be a dynamic 6th man. Right now, his defense is atrocious... even worse if I could think of a word to describe worse than atrocious.
Post Reply