PDA

View Full Version : a lot of posters here....



diego
06-08-2004, 11:13 AM
A lot of posters here keep knocking trade ideas of SGs and stating because they play no defense. What i wanted to do is got some real thoughts on what people here think is realistic. IMO we dont need a SG that is a great defender. We dont have one now. BUt I would like one quick enough to stay with other SGs which Reggie cannot.

I have seen people diss Rose, Vince Carter, Tmac, etc...becasue they play no defense supposedly. But IMO, with Artest having the ability to guard all star SG and SFs, we dont necessarily need our next SG to be great. Not to mention we still ahve Freddie as well.

We need scoring from the guard spot. PERIOD. It is not likely you are going to find a player like Artest who can guard anyone and score as well. That is the main reason we need to keep him and ship Al. If we bring in a SG with less defensive skills we need Ron to be able to play those high scorers.

Also many here say this player and that player wont fit Ricks system defensively, but his system is built upon team defense. Tinsley and Reggie suck defensively, but it is team defense that allowed us to be such a good defensive team. So in essence why cant this work with a younger scoring SG. You cannot tell me that Vince, or Tmac, or whoever plays worse defense than Reggie. Reggie may try hard, dont get me wrong, but there is a big difference in trying hard and actually stopping someone.

All in all, I am not saying that Vince, or whoever is the answer, but im tired of hearing about defense out of that spot liek we already have it. WE NEED SCORING in the backcourt. And i am inclined to believe that someone can improve their defense a lot easier than a defender can improve their scoring. As long as we have Foster, JO, Artest, then i feel comfortable about our defense no matter who we bring in. BUT we must get some scoring ouot of our guards if we want to contend next year.

LAPacer
06-08-2004, 11:21 AM
The backcourt needs some D. Tinsley's D is only average. If we get a shooting guard with no D, it will offset their impact on offense.

But I agree that people are really going overboard with dissing Rose, VC, and TMac. Its not like they are Ricky Davis or Lee Nailon who play absolutely no defense. Rose, VC, and TMac were once all very good defenders. Very very good (maybe i'm getting carried away in Rose's case). I think in the right environment, they would D it up. Ron's D is contagious and Rick won't put up with token D.

BillS
06-08-2004, 11:22 AM
In my case, I'm only dissing SG D if Artest is part of the trade (in fact, I'm going to diss just about anything feasible if Ronnie is part of the trade because I think Ronnie has waaaay too much upside to give away for anything but an impossible exchange).

diego
06-08-2004, 11:43 AM
The backcourt needs some D. Tinsley's D is only average. If we get a shooting guard with no D, it will offset their impact on offense.

But I agree that people are really going overboard with dissing Rose, VC, and TMac. Its not like they are Ricky Davis or Lee Nailon who play absolutely no defense. Rose, VC, and TMac were once all very good defenders. Very very good (maybe i'm getting carried away in Rose's case). I think in the right environment, they would D it up. Ron's D is contagious and Rick won't put up with token D.



Now see i can agree with this. We do need some defense out of our backcourt. But nobody can tell me whoever we get wont be an upgrade over reggie. I love Reggie and in his prime was a very solid defender, but now he gets beat routinely, cant close out on shooters quick enough, and is a liability in the post.

Hicks
06-08-2004, 12:07 PM
A lot of posters here keep knocking trade ideas of SGs and stating because they play no defense. What i wanted to do is got some real thoughts on what people here think is realistic. IMO we dont need a SG that is a great defender. We dont have one now. BUt I would like one quick enough to stay with other SGs which Reggie cannot.

I have seen people diss Rose, Vince Carter, Tmac, etc...becasue they play no defense supposedly. But IMO, with Artest having the ability to guard all star SG and SFs, we dont necessarily need our next SG to be great. Not to mention we still ahve Freddie as well.

We need scoring from the guard spot. PERIOD. It is not likely you are going to find a player like Artest who can guard anyone and score as well. That is the main reason we need to keep him and ship Al. If we bring in a SG with less defensive skills we need Ron to be able to play those high scorers.

Also many here say this player and that player wont fit Ricks system defensively, but his system is built upon team defense. Tinsley and Reggie suck defensively, but it is team defense that allowed us to be such a good defensive team. So in essence why cant this work with a younger scoring SG. You cannot tell me that Vince, or Tmac, or whoever plays worse defense than Reggie. Reggie may try hard, dont get me wrong, but there is a big difference in trying hard and actually stopping someone.

All in all, I am not saying that Vince, or whoever is the answer, but im tired of hearing about defense out of that spot liek we already have it. WE NEED SCORING in the backcourt. And i am inclined to believe that someone can improve their defense a lot easier than a defender can improve their scoring. As long as we have Foster, JO, Artest, then i feel comfortable about our defense no matter who we bring in. BUT we must get some scoring ouot of our guards if we want to contend next year.

Agreed. People are making the wrong emphasis on these potential SGs. Defense comes second in this case.

Slick Pinkham
06-08-2004, 12:11 PM
Simple really.

If we trade Al to get a SG, he better be an upgrade on defense and scoring to Reggie, and of course be much younger (not asking for the moon here).

If we trade Ron to get a SG, play Al at SF, the new SG had better play really good defense because he will have to guard all the stud 2-guards that Ron used to guard and that Al can't guard.

Unclebuck
06-08-2004, 12:34 PM
diego, I always think defense first, that is just the way I am.

Bills made a good point, if Ron is traded, then defense is very important, and yet diego I see your point, I'll sacrifice some defense for offense, Some

Ultimate Frisbee
06-08-2004, 12:36 PM
How many SGs are there that are both good on offense and defense? 1. Kobe.

rushmore
06-08-2004, 12:38 PM
I think we already have a SG on our squad who's a good defender...Fred Jones. His offensive game is just limited.

Anyway, I would sacrifice some D for a legitimate offensive player. Unless, of course, Ron is included in a trade.

Mourning
06-08-2004, 04:35 PM
Same here. The question is offcourse the expectation of what quality of player would come here. It seems like soo many people are expecting T-Mac, Ray Allen or Pierce to come over here. I just dont see that happening and if it does its going to cost us a lot, Artest to start with I would think.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Suaveness
06-08-2004, 04:50 PM
I think we already have a SG on our squad who's a good defender...Fred Jones. His offensive game is just limited.

Anyway, I would sacrifice some D for a legitimate offensive player. Unless, of course, Ron is included in a trade.

I wouldn't say limited. It is still developing. And it's going pretty well in my opinion.

Mourning
06-08-2004, 04:54 PM
Aggreed, Suave, its going well, better than I expected at the beginning of this season with Jones not so super summercamp and pre season. Still I think he's a back up for at the very least one more year, and I still doubt he would be consistent outside threat game in, game out. Great back up, no doubt, not yet close to a starter I think. Just my :twocents: .

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

ABADays
06-08-2004, 07:17 PM
Could you change the name of the thread please? I had my credit card ready to buy some.

Roaming Gnome
06-08-2004, 07:32 PM
Why do we all think that bringing in a shooting guard that can fill it up but has only average defense at best is "sacraficing"? Reggie's D is marginal at best...how is that a sacrafice?