Pros and cons for both Patty and Armon:
Patty:
Pros
- really fast
- good shooter
- has a "live body" willing to take a charge
- Displays decent court vision
Cons
- forces things in the half-court
- seems to be shoot first vs. pass first
- less than ideal height, length, bulk
- fast foot speed but not exactly an explosive athlete
- has trouble keeping his dribble alive in half-court situations
Armon
Pros
- willing defender
- great size for his position
- good athleticism and strength for a point guard
- works well with a ball screen
- plays with pace and control, ability to change gears
- can finish through contact
- decent 10 foot floater
- willing passer
- decent court vision
Cons
- Not a great shooter
- got progressively worse from the college three point line
- question marks about shot selection and decision making at Nevada
- tries to make a lot of jump passes (aaarrrrrrgggh!!)
- can he make more than just the simple pass?
- Does he have enough lateral quickness to stay in front of NBA point guards?
Neither may end up being able to hang in the league, but considering this team's needs I guess I'd lean more towards the guy with an NBA body and the rough outline of a pass first, defensive minded point guard that Armon seems to suggest he might become some day.