PG Conundrum

One of our biggest problems last season was inconsisten play at the point. At times Harris looked like the All Star PG he once was, however, and especially in the first half of the season, he looked like he couldn't stay in front of a glacier on defense and that Jefferson was a better ball distributer and less of a black hole than him! This lead to both our bargain elderly statesman backups, Watson and Tinsley, at times looking like better floor generals than our $8mil starter. It was even argued in this forum that one or the other of them should start! The problem was that as the season wore on, all of them were shown to be incomplete players, Harris was the best scorer but not a true PG, Watson the junk yard dog on D but couldn't score himself and Tinsley could actually set up an offense and get other players involved but not much else, and none could hit a 3 to save their lives!

So, we get swept by SA and we all scream for an upgrade. KOC goes out and gets Mo Williams, a player that certainly fills our needs better than any of Harris, Watson or Tinsley. He can hit the 3, pass or score as needed, is tenacious and a leader, oh and he can shoot the 3!

Here's the kicker. KOC then went and traded Harris. To be honest, as a small market team we didn't need to have two starting PGs being paid over $8mil in the same squad and Ma. Williams, in my opinion fills in a bigger need and compliments our current list, especially as a backup and stretch 4, than Harris. It also means there is no obligation to put Harris (or Williams) at the 2, freeing up more minutes for Burks, Hayward and possibly Murphy to develop and grow.

But ... We now are in virtually the same situation as last season with our backup players at the point being ok, but there is still going to be a big drop off in PG play when Williams isn't on the floor, and let's not even contemplate him getting injured!

So, am I reading this wrong? Will Mo's ability to shoot the three and his all round improvement over Harris combined with (hopefully) better three point shooting from our young players make our PG unit better than last season? Or, are we back in the same place we were last season looking for our back up point guard who can genuinely fill in for our starter without a massive drop off in play? Or, does Burks and Hayward have the goods to be alternative PG's, meaning we don't have to go looking, the answer is already there?

The other thing that got me thinking was the proposed trade with SA for Green also included Tinsley going to Min. Is this an acknowledgement from KOC that what we have at the point isn't going to get it done, that we need to get rid of one of our backups and pick up someone different?

Tarakaan wrote:

One of our biggest problems last season was inconsisten play at the point. At times Harris looked like the All Star PG he once was, however, and especially in the first half of the season, he looked like he couldn't stay in front of a glacier on defense and that Jefferson was a better ball distributer and less of a black hole than him! This lead to both our bargain elderly statesman backups, Watson and Tinsley, at times looking like better floor generals than our $8mil starter. It was even argued in this forum that one or the other of them should start! The problem was that as the season wore on, all of them were shown to be incomplete players, Harris was the best scorer but not a true PG, Watson the junk yard dog on D but couldn't score himself and Tinsley could actually set up an offense and get other players involved but not much else, and none could hit a 3 to save their lives!

So, we get swept by SA and we all scream for an upgrade. KOC goes out and gets Mo Williams, a player that certainly fills our needs better than any of Harris, Watson or Tinsley. He can hit the 3, pass or score as needed, is tenacious and a leader, oh and he can shoot the 3!

Here's the kicker. KOC then went and traded Harris. To be honest, as a small market team we didn't need to have two starting PGs being paid over $8mil in the same squad and Ma. Williams, in my opinion fills in a bigger need and compliments our current list, especially as a backup and stretch 4, than Harris. It also means there is no obligation to put Harris (or Williams) at the 2, freeing up more minutes for Burks, Hayward and possibly Murphy to develop and grow.

But ... We now are in virtually the same situation as last season with our backup players at the point being ok, but there is still going to be a big drop off in PG play when Williams isn't on the floor, and let's not even contemplate him getting injured!

So, am I reading this wrong? Will Mo's ability to shoot the three and his all round improvement over Harris combined with (hopefully) better three point shooting from our young players make our PG unit better than last season? Or, are we back in the same place we were last season looking for our back up point guard who can genuinely fill in for our starter without a massive drop off in play? Or, does Burks and Hayward have the goods to be alternative PG's, meaning we don't have to go looking, the answer is already there?

The other thing that got me thinking was the proposed trade with SA for Green also included Tinsley going to Min. Is this an acknowledgement from KOC that what we have at the point isn't going to get it done, that we need to get rid of one of our backups and pick up someone different?

To sum up what you are saying is Utah has a hole at the backup PG spot. I look at Watson and Tinsley as guys I love as emergency or 3rd string PG. As the primary backup, im ehhhh. I look at the depth chart, and backup PG is a problem.

I think Utah looks to trade their draft pick to get one.

Quick, who's Tony Parkers back up?????


Answer: I dont know either. Patty Mills?
Mo is a really good PG. I'm of the position that Mo is going to have his best year ever. That this will go down as the most underrated move of the summer. Mo is going to be really good. And our back up isn't going to be as important as last year, because the team is going to be alot better.
Earl plays great defense and gets the team going. I like it and his style of play on this team. And I like him as the 2nd string, love it actually. He was so good that alot of folk were saying he should be starting. Then Tinsley came on, and some folks said he should be starting. IMO, we are in a very good position. Tinsley and Earl are going to do the same things this year, that they did last; and those were good enough for us to want them to start.

(whats this trade with Tinsley to Minn and us getting Danny Green????)

Let me start by saying that I want the Jazz to improve anywhere they can. By no means do I ever fully think that "we're so good that there's no reason to improve".

But I also don't feel like backup PG is a weakness.

Right now the team has two quality, but aging, backups, which is as good of a position or better than many other playoff calibur teams can say.

Here's some of the second string guys on playoff teams. Many of which the Jazz #2 AND #3 PG compares favorably to (I'm talking about current skill level, not long term value). And few-to-none have a #3 guy as good as either of the Jazz bench players.

ATL - Pargo
BOS - Bradley
CHI - Watson
LAK - Blake
MIA - Cole
ORL - Duhon

Would I like to see improvement? Yes.
Do I think it's a weakness that has to be addressed immediately? Not really.

zero24gravity wrote:

Let me start by saying that I want the Jazz to improve anywhere they can. By no means do I ever fully think that "we're so good that there's no reason to improve".

But I also don't feel like backup PG is a weakness.

Right now the team has two quality, but aging, backups, which is as good of a position or better than many other playoff calibur teams can say.

Here's some of the second string guys on playoff teams. Many of which the Jazz #2 AND #3 PG compares favorably to (I'm talking about current skill level, not long term value). And few-to-none have a #3 guy as good as either of the Jazz bench players.

ATL - Pargo
BOS - Bradley
CHI - Watson
LAK - Blake
MIA - Cole
ORL - Duhon

Would I like to see improvement? Yes.
Do I think it's a weakness that has to be addressed immediately? Not really.

If the Jazz could get a guy like Sessions's who can also play the 2 guard then I think they make a move other than something like that this group of PG's will do very nicely, looking around the league there are not a lot of good one's to go around making a lot of team's weak at that position. I would like to see the Jazz find a Young up and coming PG that can be groomed into the kind of player they are looking for to lead this team but Mo could be part of this team for a few more year's so the Jazz don't have to be in a hurry to find a guy like that.

I'm not concerned about the PG position right now. Tinsley and Watson are pretty capable backups. If our starter goes down for a extended period of time we could be in trouble. Most teams can say that though.

Romoholic wrote:

I'm not concerned about the PG position right now. Tinsley and Watson are pretty capable backups. If our starter goes down for a extended period of time we could be in trouble. Most teams can say that though.

I agree, for 13-15 minutes a game plus the intangibles Watson and Tinsley bring they are a great combo backing up Mo. Short of grooming a young PG it's a pretty good situation.

rorybreaker wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

I'm not concerned about the PG position right now. Tinsley and Watson are pretty capable backups. If our starter goes down for a extended period of time we could be in trouble. Most teams can say that though.

I agree, for 13-15 minutes a game plus the intangibles Watson and Tinsley bring they are a great combo backing up Mo. Short of grooming a young PG it's a pretty good situation.

Agree 100%! How many times last year we all wished Watson or Tinsley played more than Harris, that shows right there these old guys can still play, 10-15 minutes a night is perfect.

Aaron Brooks recently had his qualifying offer withdrawn by PHO after they signed Dragic. If the Jazz move one of their vet PG's in some kind of bigger trade then he would be an appealing option as a backup to Mo IMO.

zero24gravity wrote:

Aaron Brooks recently had his qualifying offer withdrawn by PHO after they signed Dragic. If the Jazz move one of their vet PG's in some kind of bigger trade then he would be an appealing option as a backup to Mo IMO.

I'd llike to see Brooks in / Watson out... Mo Williams, Aaron Brooks, Jamal Tinsley would be a really good PG rotation.

Sampaguy wrote:

rorybreaker wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

I'm not concerned about the PG position right now. Tinsley and Watson are pretty capable backups. If our starter goes down for a extended period of time we could be in trouble. Most teams can say that though.

I agree, for 13-15 minutes a game plus the intangibles Watson and Tinsley bring they are a great combo backing up Mo. Short of grooming a young PG it's a pretty good situation.

Agree 100%! How many times last year we all wished Watson or Tinsley played more than Harris, that shows right there these old guys can still play, 10-15 minutes a night is perfect.

http://www.slcdunk.com/2012/7/17/3164037/saying-hello-to-mo-williams


Good article on what a perfect fit Mo is, and also if you feel like getting excited about this team this year.

outerspacefan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Aaron Brooks recently had his qualifying offer withdrawn by PHO after they signed Dragic. If the Jazz move one of their vet PG's in some kind of bigger trade then he would be an appealing option as a backup to Mo IMO.

I'd llike to see Brooks in / Watson out... Mo Williams, Aaron Brooks, Jamal Tinsley would be a really good PG rotation.

I agree, but I'm puzzled by Phoenix's move. Is there a health issue that isn't on the radar?

Saint Louis wrote:

outerspacefan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Aaron Brooks recently had his qualifying offer withdrawn by PHO after they signed Dragic. If the Jazz move one of their vet PG's in some kind of bigger trade then he would be an appealing option as a backup to Mo IMO.

I'd llike to see Brooks in / Watson out... Mo Williams, Aaron Brooks, Jamal Tinsley would be a really good PG rotation.

I agree, but I'm puzzled by Phoenix's move. Is there a health issue that isn't on the radar?

Sacramento snatched up Brooks in hurry. Seems like the Suns just din't feel they needed him with Dragic coming aboard.