Should Brandon Roy play PG?

[Gee_Dupe11]

IMO Brandon Roy should play point. he can run the offense,hes got the handle and hes good passer and would of had Webster at the 2 but my problem with that is that Webster has been struggling this summer and i dont believe hes ready to start so i think Juan Dixon should play the 2 Guard but Guard the Opp. Teams Point Guard. so the line-up would look like this 4 now

Roy/Jack/Dickau or Blake
Dixon/Webster/Miles
Miles/Outlaw/Webster
Randolph/LaFrentz/Skinner
Pryzbilla/Aldridge/Skinner

Hopefully they trade Randolph Miles Dixon

 

[ilive4ball]

Yeah I wanna see Roy start. I think he could be the the Chris Paul of the year

 

[Gee_Dupe11]

i really see Brandon Roy having a great year like a 16PPG type stuff and become the face of the team and be All-Star game snub like Chris Paul

 

[og15]

PG is normally not a position you can just thrust people into, so I'm not sure if that would be the best situation for him. I think it would be good for him to handle some point duties, but he shouldn't be "the PG" of the team.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">i really see Brandon Roy having a great year like a 16PPG type stuff and become the face of the team and be All-Star game snub like Chris Paul</div>
Who did Paul deserve to make the All-Star game over? You're not a snub just because you deserved to make it and didn't. Go check the definition of the word. You're a snub if someone else who didn't deserve it made it over you. Every year you have guys who deserve to and don't make it, doesn't always mean they were snubbed. People have an obsession with using the word thinking it just means if you don't make it you were then snubbed.

 

[asdf]

I said in the other thread that Roy is probably best suited as sort of a free-lance player; a guy that plays a bit of foward, 2 guard and the point. If Roy is going to be the playmaker for the majority of the game then I don't think its a good position to put him in since Jack, Dickau and Dixon all need playing time at that position.

 

[og15]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting asdf:</div><div class="quote_post">I said in the other thread that Roy is probably best suited as sort of a free-lance player; a guy that plays a bit of foward, 2 guard and the point. If Roy is going to be the playmaker for the majority of the game then I don't think its a good position to put him in since Jack, Dickau and Dixon all need playing time at that position.</div>
Yup, exactly, I agree. I think he's a guy that you can use to set up the offense once in a while and to share playmaking duties, but you don't make him the primary PG, especially as a rookie.

Also it's not like Jack is bad, and I mean he's had the summer so his game should also improve.

 

[Char]

I haven't really seen Roy play, but isn't he a little tall(6'5) to be PG? If he has good handles, he can play PG in the NBA. If he doesn't, I really would avoid putting him at the PG spot. Aren't Jack, Dickau, Blake, or even Dixon are better suited to be PGs for Portland?

 

[og15]

You can't truly be too tall to play PG as long as you have the skills, I mean if a 7'4 guy came that could handle the ball like a guard and pass like one, hey, no one will stop him from playing PG. Livingston is a 6'7 PG, Lebron can play PG and is 6'8, so can Joe Johnson and he's 6'7, and of course you know this. So of course we wouldn't be contemplating the idea if he didn't have the skills to do it, so yes, he does have the ability

Also Dixon is not a PG, though he is 6'3 and rail thing, he's a SG at heart, really has minimal PG skills.

 

[Gee_Dupe11]

yea that what i ment im PREDICTING that some one thats less deserving then Roy will be be in the all star game and he will be a snub

 

[asdf]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Char:</div><div class="quote_post">I haven't really seen Roy play, but isn't he a little tall(6'5) to be PG? If he has good handles, he can play PG in the NBA. If he doesn't, I really would avoid putting him at the PG spot. Aren't Jack, Dickau, Blake, or even Dixon are better suited to be PGs for Portland?</div>

A little too tall? Wow, I've never heard that statement before. I don't think that being "too tall" is a bad thing. Just ask a 6'11 guy named Magic Johnson.

 

[Char]

What I meant by being too tall is that unless Roy has the ballhandling skills, he has no chance at PG. Also, Magic was 6'9, not 6'11.
When a PG is tall, he has to be extremely quick and talented like Livingston, because they will get matched up with much quicker and smaller guys who can pester them on defense. As I said, I haven't really seen Roy play.
The ratio of tall guys playing PG to 6'-6'4 guys playing PG is big, isn't it?

 

[og15]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting asdf:</div><div class="quote_post">A little too tall? Wow, I've never heard that statement before. I don't think that being "too tall" is a bad thing. Just ask a 6'11 guy named Magic Johnson.</div>
Yea like Char said, Magic was 6'9, also Char, you're right, there's a lot more guys who are 6'0 - 6'4 playing PG than there are taller guys, but like I said in the previous post, it's unlikely that there would be a thread contemplating this if people didn't actually think Roy had the ability to do so.

 

[Moo2K4]

I think Roy could play point guard, but he'd have to be groomed into that position. PG is the hardest position in the NBA to learn in my opinion, and not everyone can do it. While I think Roy has the ability and intangibles to do it, I don't think he will, not with Jarret Jack and Dan Dickau on the roster, both of whom are capable of playing the PG spot.

 

[Custodianrules2]

Let's put it this way, a shooting guard is the secondary point guard on the floor anyway. Brandon Roy should be fine at SG, while Jack or Dickau plays the pure point position. If there is ever a time the Blazers want to get big, they can play Roy at pg during some minutes and use somebody like Travis Outlaw or Martwell Webster on somebody that can guard point guard.

Actually, I don't know who on the Blazers has decent lateral movement to defend point guard. I know Roy isn't a freak. Webster is a good athlete, but he's no freak either. Travis Outlaw or D-Miles? I'm not too sure about the Blazers' chances this year because young teams don't really turn around unless there's a clear franchise player leading the way (one that makes others better). It could be Roy, it might not be. He's a safe guy, an nba ready guy, but is there much upside left?

The Blazers should definitely be looking at point guard prospects in the first round if Jack isn't more than a backup. I like Jack's size and point guard mentality, but can he shoot and handle on-ball defensive pressure?

 

[babybulls]

og just came into this room to hate on some blazers fans


paul shoulda made the All-star game though and ray allen, pau, tmac will be ones he shoulda made it over. there are others that he could have made it over

However, I think the praise on roy is a little high... i don't see him having a chris paul type season but I do think he's in one of the best positions to contribute as a rookie. I could be wrong though he could blow up like paul did. My bigger question would be long term, do u want roy at the point long term?

 

[Char]

Dang, I'm now curious to see Roy play. Is he a 2 guard with enough ballhandling skills to play the PG spot consistiently?? If he's consistient enough to play PG, the Blazers could easily go big with him running the point at times throughout the season. I can imagine Roy getting a lot of minutes at PG when the Blazers play teams with taller PGs like Livingston.
Other than Livingston, who is a "tall PG" in the NBA?? someone refresh my memory..

 

[P.A.P.]

This reminds me of Wade's rookie year where he was basically forced to play PG and did a verygood job at it. Roy has played the point at times at Washington, so he won't be entirely knew to it, but he's better off playing as as primary SG/SF with some PG duties.

 

[Gee_Dupe11]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Char:</div><div class="quote_post">Dang, I'm now curious to see Roy play. Is he a 2 guard with enough ballhandling skills to play the PG spot consistiently?? If he's consistient enough to play PG, the Blazers could easily go big with him running the point at times throughout the season. I can imagine Roy getting a lot of minutes at PG when the Blazers play teams with taller PGs like Livingston.
Other than Livingston, who is a "tall PG" in the NBA?? someone refresh my memory..

</div>

Marko Jaric,Reece Ganes,Mardy Collins,Joe Johnson(not any more),theres more

 

[og15]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting babybulls:</div><div class="quote_post">og just came into this room to hate on some blazers fans


paul shoulda made the All-star game though and ray allen, pau, tmac will be ones he shoulda made it over. there are others that he could have made it over

However, I think the praise on roy is a little high... i don't see him having a chris paul type season but I do think he's in one of the best positions to contribute as a rookie. I could be wrong though he could blow up like paul did. My bigger question would be long term, do u want roy at the point long term?</div>
I'm not hating on them. Tmac got voted into the All-Star game as a SF, how could Paul have made it over him? It wasn't even possible, the coaches didn't decide that. Gasol was chosen as a C, he was on a team with a higher record than Paul, and at the break putting up about 20 PPG, 9 RPG, 4 APG, and 2 BPG. So Paul was neither putting up better numbers, winning more, or more important to his team, and he didn't even play the same position

.

Ray Allen is the only actualy arguable one. He was putting up 25-4-3 with 1.5 SPG before the break. Paul was putting up about 17-6-8 with 2 SPG. The Hornets were at about .500 when the reserves were chosen, so they had the better record, but they were not a "good" team. Which is what normally get's players on, playing for a top team. Paul put up just as impressive numbers for the most part, and his team was better, so he deserved it too, but we can't argue that Ray Allen was not playing at an All-Star level and didn't deserve it, therefore Paul was not snubbed. Look up the meaning of the word.


<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Marko Jaric,Reece Ganes,Mardy Collins,Joe Johnson(not any more),theres more</div>
I think Marko and Joe Johnson are the only ones that you'd actually want playing, though JJ is better at SG and Marko seems more suited to be a backup. There's also Bob Sura, Jiri Welsch (well he's gone now), John Salmons and Zoran Planinic (gone too). Jalen Rose can too in theory, and did for the Raptors in 03-04, but he doesn't really have a PG mentality, and he can't defend any PG's. Brent Barry can also play PG, he did for the Sonics back in 03-04, and I guess Jamal Crawford would be considered a big PG, and so would Larry Hughes, but their PG days are over. Jiri has also been used more at SG/SF on the teams he's played on, Warriors were really the only ones that used him at PG. Diaw played PG for the Hawks as a rookie and still has the ability to, Penny (though not in the league) when he's healthy can also, and that's about all I can think it.

 

[babybulls]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting og15:</div><div class="quote_post"> Look up the meaning of the word.

</div>

stop saying that, it doesn't add to your argument or make you sound smart. I didn't even use the word snub in my post so why are you telling me to look up it's definition. Also, I hate when people come in here and say that stuff because many words are used as slang so looking up the definition doesn't help anyone.

 

[Midnight Green]

For me the Blazers need to let their young talent develop this is the lineup I would go with....

PG- Jack
SG- Martell Webster
SF- Brandon Roy
PF- LaMarcus Aldridge
C- Magloire

Trade Randolph and Miles they don't want to be there forget them. I think if they get rid of Randolph and Miles the "Jail Blazer" persona will finally be gone from this team.

 

[P.A.P.]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting babybulls:</div><div class="quote_post">stop saying that, it doesn't add to your argument or make you sound smart. I didn't even use the word snub in my post so why are you telling me to look up it's definition. Also, I hate when people come in here and say that stuff because many words are used as slang so looking up the definition doesn't help anyone.</div>

Well if you're saying Paul should of made it over so and so, you're saying he got snubbed. Why only reply to that part of his post too? He wrote 3 full paragraphs in response to you, and you nit pick and respond to that only and don't even give a good response.

 

[babybulls]

^^ i think his point is saying that people misuse the word snub, as you just misused it while trying to defend him... so why don't you read some posts before jumping in to the argument. The definition of the word snub means to completely blow off, so what he is saying is chris paul would be "snumbbed" if he wasn't even considered for the all-star game... at least that is what it would mean by definition. So by defintiion CP was not snubbed. I am simply saying that chris paul should have made the all-star team, but i don't want to get into an argument player by player cause I think it is stupid. He went by stats then started talking about team accomplishments and was changing his debate to fit him. If you are going to go by team accomplishments, there is no way paul should not have been in the all-star because no one thought the hornets would turn around the way he did. Also, he agrued position but all the time players get injured and are replaced by players of another position so I do not believe position was a factor.

 

[og15]

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting babybulls:</div><div class="quote_post">stop saying that, it doesn't add to your argument or make you sound smart. I didn't even use the word snub in my post so why are you telling me to look up it's definition. Also, I hate when people come in here and say that stuff because many words are used as slang so looking up the definition doesn't help anyone.</div>
Then why are you arguing with me? I didn't say Paul did not deserve to make it, I was telling him Paul was not snubbed. So if we both agree Paul deserved to make it, but circumstances didn't fall his way, what are we debating about?

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">^^ i think his point is saying that people misuse the word snub, as you just misused it while trying to defend him... so why don't you read some posts before jumping in to the argument. The definition of the word snub means to completely blow off, so what he is saying is chris paul would be "snumbbed" if he wasn't even considered for the all-star game... at least that is what it would mean by definition. So by defintiion CP was not snubbed. I am simply saying that chris paul should have made the all-star team, but i don't want to get into an argument player by player cause I think it is stupid. He went by stats then started talking about team accomplishments and was changing his debate to fit him. If you are going to go by team accomplishments, there is no way paul should not have been in the all-star because no one thought the hornets would turn around the way he did. Also, he agrued position but all the time players get injured and are replaced by players of another position so I do not believe position was a factor</div>
Well the first 2 guys you posted Paul could not have made it over because that was a positional situation. I don't think surprise factor get's you in the All-Star game. I also said with wins it's usually when you're on a good team, and the Hornets were just in the .500 range at that time. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Hornets were at about .500 when the reserves were chosen, so they had the better record, but they were not a "good" team. Which is what normally get's players on, playing for a top team</div> If you look at the guys people say don't deserve it and get in on wins, it's always the guys on a #1 or #2 team. Eg: some of the Pistons guys, Manu Ginobili in 04-05 etc, so I didn't change my argument, I was just saying that the coaches seems to try to award guys on top teams because I guess it means their numbers might be lower, but they mean more to winning. A guy on a .500 team normally won't get if over a guy on a bad but not horrific team based on that alone, but it could be a factor. I liked Paul over Ray, but I had a feeling Ray would get it anyways, he's the older guy, there's usually an older guy bias.

So really you're not arguing against me at all....

Also if you haven't realized, I'm a Paul fan, he's amazed me since I saw him at Wake, so it's not like I'd have bias towards Ray, it's even the other way around.