PDA

View Full Version : Daniels at PG



Swingman
06-09-2007, 07:51 PM
What does everyone think of the possibility of Daniels at PG?

I like the idea if his ballhandling and passing skills are up for the challenge.

I think the big benefit is having a good defender at the point, which is probably why JOb is going to try him there.

It's a question mark how well it will work IMO because he'll need to work on his PG skills I would think and will need to at least become a threat to score from outside given JOb's love for the 3.

Hicks
06-09-2007, 07:57 PM
Didn't he have a stretch for Nellie at the point when Nash was hurt where he put up something like 20-5-5? That's enough for me to consider it could potentially work.

CableKC
06-09-2007, 08:00 PM
I know he played some extened PG minutes in Dallas early in his career....but that was a couple of seasons ago.

To tell you the truth.....I think he can be a solid backup PG. But until I see him play extended minutes at the PG spot.....I can't say that he would be a good Starting PG.

I wouldn't mind trying him out there for some backup minutes. I really liked what I saw when we had him in the lineup with Dunleavy......there was great ball movement that I really loved.

burnzone
06-09-2007, 08:10 PM
I voted, but my choice is somewhere between the top 2.

I think he's better than 'backup at best', but I don't think he's had enough experience as the starting PG, to where I can say at this point in time that he'll be a 'good starting PG'

I'd need to see more intangibles, does he know where people need to be, can he make a good entry pass to the post.

Can he start and play 35+ minutes, and go against the opposing teams' starting unit, and keep his assist to turnover ratio down, and limit mistakes.

I absolutely believe he has the tools to be a PG, but it is yet to be determined if he's a starting PG, or a combo guard that can play there if you need him to.

LG33
06-09-2007, 08:17 PM
If he can stay on the floor (and we get rid of Jamaal), then I'm all for it. But he's had injury problems and I would hate to build the offense around him (as ball handler, that is).

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 08:22 PM
You missed an option in the poll:

"If Tinsley is our only other option, Ill take Daniels."

Swingman
06-09-2007, 08:31 PM
You missed an option in the poll:

"If Tinsley is our only other option, Ill take Daniels."

I thought that part was obvious since we're not in the FA market and I don't think we'll be getting a PG in the draft even if we get the 19th pick.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 08:38 PM
I missed the part where O'Brien said he was gonna try Daniels at the 1. I dont see anything in the other threads, anyone got a link?

Swingman
06-09-2007, 08:46 PM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007706010477

Anthem
06-09-2007, 09:14 PM
Hypothetically, I could see it working. But we don't have enough info yet to know.

Oneal07
06-09-2007, 10:17 PM
I'd do it. . .put him at the point cause he can penetrate. . .and you know he won't settle for jumpers

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 10:30 PM
Hypothetically, I could see it working. But we don't have enough info yet to know.

Yep, and LG's right, I don't like the idea of planning for it when we don't know how dependable his health will be.

Let's put it this way. Assume we don't or can't trade Tinsley. Would you be comfortable not re-signing McLeod (or getting a comparable backup point) in favor of Daniels and Army being the backups? I don't know if I'm comfortable with that even if we do keep McLeod.

avoidingtheclowns
06-09-2007, 10:58 PM
theres no middle ground in the answers so i chose 1 because i'd like to see him start at PG a few games this season. i think a lineup of daniels, dunleavy, granger, odom and bynum would be quite interesting to watch (obviously if the trade goes thru).

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 11:02 PM
Kegboy, the way you phrased it was kind of weird but in answer to your question: no. I think we should resign Mcleod, but not because I would be uncomfortable with Daniels as our backup. Daniels has nothing to do with me wanting to resing Mcleod, I just want him instead of DA.

Hypothetically, with the team we have, I would want Daniels starting and Mcleod backing him up and I would be comfortable with that. I understand Tinsley is better than both of them, I just dont want to watch him play anymore and think Daniels could be more than serviceable. DA just needs to retire.

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 11:10 PM
Kegboy, the way you phrased it was kind of weird but in answer to your question: no. I think we should resign Mcleod, but not because I would be uncomfortable with Daniels as our backup. Daniels has nothing to do with me wanting to resing Mcleod, I just want him instead of DA.

Hypothetically, with the team we have, I would want Daniels starting and Mcleod backing him up and I would be comfortable with that. I understand Tinsley is better than both of them, I just dont want to watch him play anymore and think Daniels could be more than serviceable. DA just needs to retire.

So you're comfortable enough with his knee to hand him the keys? I think he can play point just fine in Obie's system, but with our medical staff's track record the last few years I can't say I could make that move.

Alpolloloco
06-09-2007, 11:39 PM
So you're comfortable enough with his knee to hand him the keys? I think he can play point just fine in Obie's system, but with our medical staff's track record the last few years I can't say I could make that move.

We apparently were comfortable giving the keys to Tinsley, who isn't an iron man himself (to say the least), so I wouldn't mind Daniels as our starting PG (or give Saras a second chance ... with consistent starting minutes ;)).

avoidingtheclowns
06-09-2007, 11:44 PM
how about having our starting PG be penny hard.. crap wrong thread.

Roaming Gnome
06-10-2007, 12:43 AM
I'm not feelin' it...Hope I'm wrong!

I just keep having these flashback of Fred Jones being forced to play point guard in the play-offs and waking in a cold sweat!

Dr. Goldfoot
06-10-2007, 01:36 AM
I don't remember him ever starting at point guard. I think it's a wivestail. I looked at the boxscores from his starts and he was always coupled with Steve Nash, Devin Harris or Jason Terry. He may have spent some time at the one but I can't find anything indicating he ever started there.

Major Cold
06-10-2007, 06:50 AM
http://www.82games.com/03DAL4C.HTM

http://www.82games.com/04DAL5C.HTM

I don't think these help but I could not find anything better

Wait...
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/splits?statsId=3764&sYear=2004&sType=3
Playing as guard but that could be shooting guard. Played 38 mpg though so that is starter minutes. His guard stats and starter stats are the same. So as a rookie he played well but the team.....not so much(see82games.com stat)

RamBo_Lamar
06-10-2007, 06:56 AM
Trade the Bum.

Kegboy
06-10-2007, 10:44 AM
I'm not feelin' it...Hope I'm wrong!

I just keep having these flashback of Fred Jones being forced to play point guard in the play-offs and waking in a cold sweat!

Ron Mercer! :arrgh:

Anthem
06-10-2007, 10:46 AM
Ron Mercer! :arrgh:

:freakout:

Don't ever do that again.

grace
06-10-2007, 11:29 AM
Ron Mercer! :arrgh:


:freakout:

Don't ever do that again.

Ron Mercer! :drool:

Is that better?

sig
06-10-2007, 12:04 PM
Quis did not get extended minutes at PG is Dallas in his rookie year. He got some time there and may have played a couple of games as a starter there due to injuries to others. During the Mavs last 15 games or so he was inserted in the starting lineup at SG while Finley was out. He played some PG when Nash got breathers. When Fin came back from his injury, Daniles remained in the lineup and Fin played SF with Antoine Walker moving to center. Typical Nellie ball. Nellie allowed Daniels to jack up shots between 15 and 25 per game which actually took away from Nash, Dirk, and Fin. Result was a loss to the beatup Kings in 5 games in round 1. I think Nellie saw the hand writing on the wall with that version of the Mavs. They would have lost playing their vets or young guys. I wonder if he was getting Daniels experience. He was able to put up some nice stats.

Anyway, I don't think Daniels is anywhere near a long term answer at PG. He can handle the ball and at times will get assists. But I don't think his versatility translates into running an offense as a PG. He is more adapt at creating his own shots in the lane as opposed to getting the others involved with open shots. He is a decent defender but most PG's will blow right by him with their quickness. If the Pacrs unload Tinsley, I could see Daniels filling the role until the Pacers find their permanent PG. I think his best role is off the bench using his versatility to play 3 positions. Best case is he develops a good outside shot and becomes the starting SG.

Evan_The_Dude
06-11-2007, 03:28 PM
Daniels works as the PG as long as you have an above average ball handler at the 2-guard. As of now until thing's change, Dunleavy is our starting 2-guard, and I'd definitely say he's an above average ball handler in addition to having a good feel for where to be and when on the offensive side. With those two in the back court, it wouldn't really matter which one brings the ball up because they're both capable. Also, if the entire team can be on one page offensively and they're all at least decent passers, the point guard won't have as much pressure on him to be a traditional dribble-penetration point guard [see Rick Adelman's Sacramento Kings - Bibby was more of a 2nd 2-guard than a point guard]. If Daniels and Dunleavy are in the back court, and Jermaine is traded, I hope to God Ike is working on those passing out of double team skills.

Anthem
06-11-2007, 03:33 PM
If Daniels and Dunleavy are in the back court, and Jermaine is traded, I hope to God Ike is working on those passing out of double team skills.
Ike will never get the ball. Other teams will clog the lane and dare Dun and Quis to hit from outside.

May we rest in peace.

maragin
06-11-2007, 03:52 PM
I'd be interested to see what he could do with some real minutes at the PG.

I'd also be interested to see what turning the keys over to Jordan Farmar would do.

sig
06-14-2007, 02:09 AM
With Daniels at PG and dunleavy at SG, PG's like Parker, Marbury, Baron Davis, Devin Harris will have a field day blowing by whomever is guarding them. Imagine Daniels and Dunleavy guarding Nash and Barbosa. Daniels is probably a decent defender at SG but not at PG. How is Dunleavy on defense at SG?

Naptown_Seth
06-14-2007, 02:57 AM
Ike will never get the ball. Other teams will clog the lane and dare Dun and Quis to hit from outside.

May we rest in peace.
I'm going to agree and disagree here. While it's true that they wouldn't have to respect the 3 ball, I think Rip proved that you can make a nice living with the mid-range jumper still and really punish teams that sag. And Quis, heck it doesn't matter how they pack down on him, he knifes in anyway and that will keep defenses on their toes.

With off-ball motion like Dun running the curl catch and shoot to the elbow like he did so well last year you can put the defense in motion and get some holes to feed the ball through or attack with the dribble. But the key is motion away from the ball or cutter. The team needs to be on the same page rather than staring with confusion as 1 or 2 guys do everything (which was the problem last year).


Having the 3 helps plenty and Rip showed that by adding it (plus they had Billups and Sheed), but you CAN make it work without it. I mean prior to the 3pt line you still had guys like Wilt, Jabbar and Malone getting theirs.


Honestly right now I'd say asking JOB to run HIS system with this roster is no more realistic than asking Rick to turn last year's team into runners. JOB is just going to have to bring the game inside the arc unless the roster gets a moderate overhaul (or improvement by players).