His size, defense and potential to breakdown defenses slashing to the basket dishing or scoring would seem to give us the best opportunity for advantage at the one than the two. Perhaps he does not have great experience as a “floor general” and maybe there is concern that he will turn the ball over to much. This I think could be improved pretty quickly with coaching and experience and clearly the kid has the work ethic and the desire to be the best he can be. It has got to be easier to get shooting SG than a dynamic two way PG.
I think it's just a logistics thing right now. Shump has only had 2 games under his best after a short training camp without the normal Summery League.
We did hear that he took some rotations in practice with the first team, so perhaps it is underway and he just needs to feel out the NBA game and also figure out HOW to run the offense.
Soon is my guess. He's been a pseudo backup PG at times, right?
if he plays 10 more games and only has 2 good ones, then we fucked up Landry or Toney's confidence for nothing.. have to wait and see
I don't know but I do know that if anything happens to Baron we will be alright with a playmaker like SHUMPERT at the 1 or 2
gunsnewing wrote:I don't know but I do know that if anything happens to Baron we will be alright with a playmaker like SHUMPERT at the 1 or 2
and Baron may be the other reason the coaching staff won't push Shump into the lead PG spot: it's tough for rookies to adjust to the NBA no less having their roles switched from SG to PG back to more of a SG within the span of months.
Shumpert is a long-term SG. No need to hurt his development by throwing him out of position early in his career. He's not the long-term solution at PG. Better off keeping him where he is.
If he walks like a duck, quacks like a duck then he must be a shootinng guard. He has a scorers mentality, he's fast and furious and he's aggresive. Please just end these dream situations of Iman being a PG and realize that you'll enjoy him even more at the 2. People are going to start HATING the guy when they see he can't be a PG, just like Douglas. Completely ridiculous.
Knixkik wrote:Shumpert is a long-term SG. No need to hurt his development by throwing him out of position early in his career. He's not the long-term solution at PG. Better off keeping him where he is.
+1
Shump did actually play some PG in the last game. I don't think it's necessary to make him play as a dedicated PG. He's more of D Wade type of guard. He can create but is mostly a scorer. You just let him be a guard and do what is needed. He seemed to handle it OK for a rook playing his 2nd game.
We already tried Stat as C, Fields as SG, and TD as PG, etc. Good luck with Shrimp...
If we have some holes and do not have players to fill them it will not help if we fake it.
After watching Iman these few games, I know it is a small sample, but he is not a PG. His game is better suited for SG.
nixluva wrote:Shump did actually play some PG in the last game. I don't think it's necessary to make him play as a dedicated PG. He's more of D Wade type of guard. He can create but is mostly a scorer. You just let him be a guard and do what is needed. He seemed to handle it OK for a rook playing his 2nd game.
I vote we get rid of the word Point Guard....And just use the word Guard. PG's are becoming extinct, and that word should be shot. What we have now in the NBA are playmakers at all posiitons.
Thats like asking D.Wade to just be a PG. He would not be the super star he is now.
Shump is a guard with playmaking skills and talent that makes others better. The NBA is going away from PG's and Centers.....It will soon be all Guards and Fowards in the near future.
There are 2 positions in the NBA....guards and forwards. Some guards like to post up....Some forwards like to shoot threes......Most superstars will fill more than one position....I see Shump as the next young star in this league, guarding 3 positions.
Whats the definition of a PG? Definition from Wikipedia.....
"Most current NBA point guards are between 5'10" and 6'4" (1.93 m) or shorter in height. In 2011 the average height point guards in the NBA was just over 6'1. A true point guard's job is to create scoring opportunities for his team. The role includes passing and running the offense: setting up plays on the court, getting the ball to the teammate that he feels is in the best position to score, and dictating the tempo of the game. This also means knowing when and how to instigate a fast break and when and how to initiate the more deliberate sets." Thats Baron Davis, the only person on this team that fits this discription.
Shump has PG abilities, but I wouldn't classify him as a PG, because that would limit his ceiling. Wade is probably the best example of what he could turn into. A guard with court vision and passing abilities. John Stockton, Steve Nash, Mark Jackson, don't exist anymore. Everybody wants to be a playmaker now! Thanks to MJ......
b/c he's not a friggin pg. lol.
blkexec wrote:nixluva wrote:Shump did actually play some PG in the last game. I don't think it's necessary to make him play as a dedicated PG. He's more of D Wade type of guard. He can create but is mostly a scorer. You just let him be a guard and do what is needed. He seemed to handle it OK for a rook playing his 2nd game.
I vote we get rid of the word Point Guard....And just use the word Guard. PG's are becoming extinct, and that word should be shot. What we have now in the NBA are playmakers at all posiitons.
Thats like asking D.Wade to just be a PG. He would not be the super star he is now.
Shump is a guard with playmaking skills and talent that makes others better. The NBA is going away from PG's and Centers.....It will soon be all Guards and Fowards in the near future.
There are 2 positions in the NBA....guards and forwards. Some guards like to post up....Some forwards like to shoot threes......Most superstars will fill more than one position....I see Shump as the next young star in this league, guarding 3 positions.
Whats the definition of a PG? Definition from Wikipedia.....
"Most current NBA point guards are between 5'10" and 6'4" (1.93 m) or shorter in height. In 2011 the average height point guards in the NBA was just over 6'1. A true point guard's job is to create scoring opportunities for his team. The role includes passing and running the offense: setting up plays on the court, getting the ball to the teammate that he feels is in the best position to score, and dictating the tempo of the game. This also means knowing when and how to instigate a fast break and when and how to initiate the more deliberate sets." Thats Baron Davis, the only person on this team that fits this discription.
Shump has PG abilities, but I wouldn't classify him as a PG, because that would limit his ceiling. Wade is probably the best example of what he could turn into. A guard with court vision and passing abilities. John Stockton, Steve Nash, Mark Jackson, don't exist anymore. Everybody wants to be a playmaker now! Thanks to MJ......
Paul, Deron, Rondo, Rose, Parker, Rubio, Wall, Jameer, Curry, Jennings... and Nash and Kid still around
Bbal without true PG is not a team sport, but jumping/dunking show.
He's a better SG. He's had a couple of minor TD moments at PG, so no thanks.
blkexec wrote:nixluva wrote:Shump did actually play some PG in the last game. I don't think it's necessary to make him play as a dedicated PG. He's more of D Wade type of guard. He can create but is mostly a scorer. You just let him be a guard and do what is needed. He seemed to handle it OK for a rook playing his 2nd game.
I vote we get rid of the word Point Guard....And just use the word Guard. PG's are becoming extinct, and that word should be shot. What we have now in the NBA are playmakers at all posiitons.
Thats like asking D.Wade to just be a PG. He would not be the super star he is now.
Shump is a guard with playmaking skills and talent that makes others better. The NBA is going away from PG's and Centers.....It will soon be all Guards and Fowards in the near future.
There are 2 positions in the NBA....guards and forwards. Some guards like to post up....Some forwards like to shoot threes......Most superstars will fill more than one position....I see Shump as the next young star in this league, guarding 3 positions.
Whats the definition of a PG? Definition from Wikipedia.....
"Most current NBA point guards are between 5'10" and 6'4" (1.93 m) or shorter in height. In 2011 the average height point guards in the NBA was just over 6'1. A true point guard's job is to create scoring opportunities for his team. The role includes passing and running the offense: setting up plays on the court, getting the ball to the teammate that he feels is in the best position to score, and dictating the tempo of the game. This also means knowing when and how to instigate a fast break and when and how to initiate the more deliberate sets." Thats Baron Davis, the only person on this team that fits this discription.
Shump has PG abilities, but I wouldn't classify him as a PG, because that would limit his ceiling. Wade is probably the best example of what he could turn into. A guard with court vision and passing abilities. John Stockton, Steve Nash, Mark Jackson, don't exist anymore. Everybody wants to be a playmaker now! Thanks to MJ......
Absolutely
Shumpert is talented, works hard and he plays with passion. Period.
My kingdom for better basketball players
Yes he looks like a SG where if he hits threes enough he could be above average.. But, his strength is defense. Using the definition of a PG above, don’t you think it would be most effective if our best, tenacious defender is shutting down or at least hindering opponent’s playmakers. I like the picture of him setting up plays slashing to the hoop where if he beats the D lays it in or if not, hands to Stat for a dunk. Yes, he can do these things from SG but so many guys can stand at the arc waiting to shoot threes. The PG will have his hand on the ball more than anyone. I like the idea that when a team slacks on D you have someone that can take advantage immediately. I think our offence could be much more dynamic and scary with Iman at point.
blkexec wrote:nixluva wrote:Shump did actually play some PG in the last game. I don't think it's necessary to make him play as a dedicated PG. He's more of D Wade type of guard. He can create but is mostly a scorer. You just let him be a guard and do what is needed. He seemed to handle it OK for a rook playing his 2nd game.
I vote we get rid of the word Point Guard....And just use the word Guard. PG's are becoming extinct, and that word should be shot. What we have now in the NBA are playmakers at all posiitons.
Thats like asking D.Wade to just be a PG. He would not be the super star he is now.
Shump is a guard with playmaking skills and talent that makes others better. The NBA is going away from PG's and Centers.....It will soon be all Guards and Fowards in the near future.
There are 2 positions in the NBA....guards and forwards. Some guards like to post up....Some forwards like to shoot threes......Most superstars will fill more than one position....I see Shump as the next young star in this league, guarding 3 positions.
Whats the definition of a PG? Definition from Wikipedia.....
"Most current NBA point guards are between 5'10" and 6'4" (1.93 m) or shorter in height. In 2011 the average height point guards in the NBA was just over 6'1. A true point guard's job is to create scoring opportunities for his team. The role includes passing and running the offense: setting up plays on the court, getting the ball to the teammate that he feels is in the best position to score, and dictating the tempo of the game. This also means knowing when and how to instigate a fast break and when and how to initiate the more deliberate sets." Thats Baron Davis, the only person on this team that fits this discription.
Shump has PG abilities, but I wouldn't classify him as a PG, because that would limit his ceiling. Wade is probably the best example of what he could turn into. A guard with court vision and passing abilities. John Stockton, Steve Nash, Mark Jackson, don't exist anymore. Everybody wants to be a playmaker now! Thanks to MJ......
Couldn't disagree more. There are two very distinct roles in the back court. If what you are saying is true, we wouldn't have this problem with TD right now. He's a decent enough scorer, but not a playmaker. If you want to call PG "playmaker", that's fine, but you still have a playmaker and a scorer in the back court.
Likewise, in the forward position, you have a wing, and a rebounder/paint player. Again, distinct roles. You can live with a SF getting 4-5 rebounds per game, but from your PF, you'll want 8+, and his points coming in the paint. Stretch-4, ala Dirk, is some kind of hybrid.
Guards, shmards...
Portland is running the West with Raymond Felton and three other former Knicks on the roster - Marcus Camby, Kurt Thomas and Jamal Crawford.
Something ain't right about that
misterearl wrote:Guards, shmards... Portland is running the West with Raymond Felton and three other former Knicks on the roster - Marcus Camby, Kurt Thomas and Jamal Crawford.
Something ain't right about that
The only answer must be chemistry.
Panos wrote:misterearl wrote:Guards, shmards... Portland is running the West with Raymond Felton and three other former Knicks on the roster - Marcus Camby, Kurt Thomas and Jamal Crawford.
Something ain't right about that
The only answer must be chemistry.
Either way you slice it, Raymond Felton and Jamal Crawford make an entertaining backcourt combination.
Gallinari at the three. David Lee. Tyson Chandler. Yeah, if I ruled the world, then I would bring Wilson Chandler off the bench with Landry Fields.
Don Chaney is the head coach. Yeah, that's the ticket.
