DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Do All Great Shooting Guards Need to be Great Jump Shooters?

I'd like to formally welcome Statman to the team, this is the first of what I hope will be many posts.

Great job.

As you correctly point out, it is not necessary for Iggy to be a good jump shooter, so long as someone else on the roster is. But if they pick Turner, who will that person be? The responsibility will fall to JRue or Turner to develop an outside shot. Statman, can you tell how often a rookie or 2nd year PG or SG has developed an allstar-level outside shot when they didn't show one in college?

Jrue's starting point isn't college, in my mind, it's the 39% he shot last season. His numbers were very, very good in catch-and-shoot situations (45%, I think), and he should get a ton of those looks with Iguodala and Turner both having the ability to drive and kick (something that wasn't really a part of the Princeton Offense last season, or at least not a big enough part considering the personnel).

Some players never develop a consistent outside shot (Ron Harper, for example), but it's not unheard of. Going back to the 80's, Michael Cooper came into the league as a high-flyer with no jump shot (16 for 77 on 3's his first 5 years in the league). He eventually became a 3-point specialist (relatively speaking, for the 80's) later in his career. His teammate Magic Johnson was another example -- Magic had no jump shot to speak of when he first came into the league but became better and better over time.

Personally, I think it's premature to say that Turner will be a below-average jump-shooter. Do we know that for sure?

From everything I've read/seen, he's not a bad jump shooter, it's just that his range doesn't extend out to the three-point line. That's obviously something that could come. It looked like his shot had funky rotation on it to me.

He has a flat jumper (think Lou/Miller.) That can limit range.

Been arguing for longer than I can remember that which position he plays isn't important, it's the skillsets of who he plays with.

I just made this the topic of one of my posts earlier this month.


Welcome to DF. I always think a good resource needs differing opinions (or, at the very least, multiple opinions).

Yeah, I saw that article and complimented you on it. Your article and mine reached the same conclusion. In-between, though, I saw a zillion "Iguodala is not a shooting guard" statements, so I figured it wouldn't hurt to repeat the premise of your post, with a slightly different take.

The more people trying to convince others the better IMO. Sometimes I feel like Brian and I were the only ones pushing that. Agreed that "Iguodala can't play the 2" is still the common opinion.

Good article.

Mike P reply to Derek Bodner on May 25 at 19:58

Well technically he is a guard that can't shoot. So he is a Driving Guard Point Foward if we want to get silly with it.

Best move is to just draft Turner, who's jumper is fundamentally better then Dala's, and pair them together to let Iguodala do what he does best.

Hound people defensively, drive to the basket, dunk the hell out of the ball, and fill up the stat sheet.

If Jrue can keep developing that 3 point shot that got us all giddy near the end of the year that is a potentially nasty backcourt for years to come. Then we just have to fix our front court troubles.

Maybe Sammie will love his new "Camby" role under collins and resign for a smaller deal or something?

Your right in that Igoudala doesn't need to be a great outside shooter but between the SF and SG I think one of them should be a good outside shooter. If Turner is the pick then where is this outside shooting going to come from? Hopefully Turner can develop into a good outside shooter.

If Turner is the pick then where is this outside shooting going to come from?

As I said, a legitimate question. But I think Derek said it best: let's make the pick and see how Turner and Iguodala play together before deciding it won't work.

Their skillsets may overlap to a degree, but I think a lot of the overlap is positive. It can only help to have two wings who can (1) defend both SGs and SFs well man-to-man, (2) make plays off the dribble, and (3) rebound well. Will they get in each other's way on offense? Possibly, but I'm hopeful that Doug Collins will be able to design plays to maximize both of their games.

Good post Statman. Look forward to reading your contributions.

Like others, I'm of the belief that SG/Sf are somewhat artificially differentiated. When VC and RJ went to the finals who was the SG and who was the SF? Couldn't Kobe and JJ be just as effective at SF?

Some SG or SF can only guard certain players because of size or quickness. But when you are talking about players around 6'6/215 it really only matters how their skill set complements the other backcourt players.

To take that logic a step further, if you have two guys with similar (good) size at the two and three, it creates opportunities on the offensive end (if a team has an undersized two, there's nowhere to hide him), and advantages on the defensive end (switch everything). Assuming both guys can defend either position well.

shawn reply to Brian on May 25 at 14:15

this is exactly what I was saying in the last thread. And it works so well especially because iguodala is such a superior athlete that he could chase around the speedier 2's or 3's. Turner is well regarded as a premier perimeter defender as well.

I need to see how Turner handles guys at the pro level on the defensive end. Even if he's just average, though, Jrue is really capable of guarding PG, SG, SF and Iguodala PG, SG, SF, PF. That's a ton of flexibility and if Turner winds up guarding the third-best perimeter offensive player on the other team, he'll be just fine.

Defensively having that trio is almost an embarrassment of riches. You could argue that you are wasting the defensive ability of the guy that draws the weakest player... or you can let that guy gamble for more steals, help, crash the boards or leak out on the break.

It really comes down to the "bus driver."

You could use the "doberman" approach Phil Jackson used to love, having a designated rover who wrecks havoc on opposing offenses as a X-factor.

If you put Holiday on the ball & Iguodala on the best perimeter wing, Turner is left to guard the Matt Barnes of the world on many teams, which could enable you to let him be a sort of designated free safety of sorts that can ratchet on the pressure randomly.

If the lineup is Jrue, Turner, Iguodala, Thad, Brand, I'd put Iguodala on the other team's PF, Turner on the better wing and let Thad be the guy that roams. I'm just hoping that's not the lineup.

Oh definitely. I don't want to see Thad/Brand frontcourt combos unless you're playing GS or maybe NY. I'd actually set a rule that Thad can only play PF next to Sam.

I would not mind seeing a Jrue, Turner, Iguodala, Thad, Sam lineup for stretches. 4 plus rebounders with Sam as a plus-plus rebounder can minimize Thad's mediocrity on the glass.

It's kind of a problem that all of our PFs need to have that same rule applied, or at least the way they rebounded the ball last season, they do.

True, though I could better tolerate Speights & Brand together as long as there is a commitment to gang-rebounding.

I think with the Holiday/Turner/Iguodala lineup we would have alot of size advantages on opponents to exploit just as you mentioned. I think all three guys could create offense by being posted up on the block more. Jrue didn't have many opportunities last year, but when he did he looked pretty comfortable doing it(could he be the next Gary Payton perhaps?)

We don't have any bigs that can stretch the floor out to the 3 point line but Brand, Speights, and even Thad can make a mid range jumper well enough to were I think we could be pretty effective posting those guys. I'm hoping Doug explores this option.

AaronMcKie4MVP reply to DonH on May 26 at 6:44

sorry, don, i coined the gary payton comparison months ago. here to stake my claim on the salad

deepsixersuede on May 25 at 14:52

Statman, welcome; guys, look into your chrystal balls and tell what kind of off the ball player Turner will be. He and Iggy and Lou may have a great teacher in Doug.

Awesome to see you posting, Statman. I agree with most of above. I really get annoyed w/ people making statements that Turner and AI9 cannot play together do not know basketball! I am quite condident that the great teams in the past had perfect players for each position! I personally could see Wall/Holiday playing an awesome backcourt together!

Great Post Statman. I don't really disagree with any of your assessments here.

In terms of Jrue/Turner/Iguodala on offense, I'm interested to see how Collins maximizes their strengths. Few teams have ever had that combination of size, passing, ball handling and break down ability. But the shooting will be a problem until Jrue and Turner establish their jumpers to where teams fear them.

What X & O's do yoou suggest when the defense goes he route of pack it in zone?

High pick and roll, probably. The four (brand/speights/thad) is going to need to be able to knock down the 17-footer to open up the lane.

If you think about it, you've potentially got 4 guys on the floor at any time who can legitimately post up their men, maybe you try to incorporate some triangle-like sets too.

deepsixersuede reply to Brian on May 25 at 16:11

My biggest issue, as it has been the last 3 years, is screening and holding screens; can Collins teach these old dogs new tricks? Besides M.J., who else shot well on his bulls? I remember a lot of guard postups.

MJ couldn't shoot at all when Collins was coaching him. They had Paxson and Hodges who could hit threes, that's about it.

Actually, Jordan was a very solid mid-range shooter under Collins. He just didn't take many threes because he felt that doing that too much would let the defense off the hook. He preferred keeping the D on its heels by attacking.

Ironically, Turner expressed a very similar philosophy, saying that he wanted to be able to keep defenses "honest" but did not want to live & die by it, preferring to use his mid-range game.

smh1980 reply to rswknight on May 26 at 0:09

Jordan's last year with Collins was one of his best years statistically. His FG% was the highest of his career in 88 - 89' not to overlook his best RPG and APG were 8.0/8.0 too (6.9/6.3 were second best totals of his career.)Very impressive numbers.

Michael Jordan's stats for 88'-89'
.538 .276 .850 1.80 8.00 8.0 2.89 .80 3.58 32.5

Dutch reply to Brian on May 25 at 16:17

This is a change of topic, so I apologize... but who's gonna get the bulk of the minutes backing up Sammy at Center this year? Brand? Speights? Jason Smith (ughh)? Other, yet to be signed? If no one else is signed or traded for, it'd have to be Brand, right? You can't really play Speights and Thad together, so you'd have to bring in Speights at PF and slide Brand over to Center. Like you, Brian, I don't consider Jason Smith an option here.

Court_visioN reply to Dutch on May 25 at 16:22

i think the Sixers are looking at acquiring another big man either by getting back into the draft or via trade. So we won't really know who's going to back up Sammy until the offseason is over.

Right now, I'd say you're spot on. Brand most likely. I think this is an area they're likely to address in some way between now and October.

Your favorite RealGM insider has been saying they are aggressively pursuing a potential Sam replacement both in the draft and via trades, including looking at young bigs on the end of NBA benches(like BJ Mullens in OKC - former teammate of Turner@OSU, BTW).

Yeah, heard that. People love e-mailing me his "insider" info. Still waiting for his source to get something right.

Well, he did get Collins, as well as certain members of Collins staff leaking now.

From what I saw, he got Collins after Eskin and a couple others had reported it was a done deal.

If anything, it was simultaneous. Eskin and him were close to the same time.

bdownbear reply to rswknight on May 25 at 18:25

Could Eskin be the "insider"?

who knows at this stage. The one thing he has said is they coveted Evan Turner even before the lottery so there is almost no way they don't take Turner. Hope that's right

One of the combinations that I saw work well within the NBA this year was Stephen Jackson and Gerald Wallace. Gerald Wallace is listed as a forward at 6'7" and Stephen Jackson is listed as a guard-forward at 6'8". It is fair to say that neither of them are "elite" shooters, but they both did well with their mid-range game and slashing to the basket last year. It was not uncommon for both of them to score 20 per game with the type of offense they played. I'm not really certain exactly what position (2-3-4) they each played, but it seemed like jackson was a 2 and wallace was a 3 with Diaw playing 4 on that team. The combination of two athletic players with above average mid-range, slashing ability, and defensive presence led to a pretty decent combination that I think translate to a combination of Turner and Iggy at the 2 and 3 respectively.

Iguodala and Turner are much, much more skilled than those two IMO. Wallace is clearly the best rebounder of the group, though.

Jason Mess on May 25 at 18:30

I have to agree that we do not need a shooting guard that is a lights out shooter from beyond the arc. That being said, if we had the chance to trade #2 pick and Thad for the #4 pick along with another one of Minn. 1st round picks would you. My thinking if we did this trade, would be to pick Johnson at 4 and use the other 1st round pick for another PF or center. That being said I don't think we can go wrong with Turner, Favors or Johnson as long as the long term plan is solid.

Old School SixerFan reply to Jason Mess on May 25 at 18:38

I started out 100% for Favors as the pick, but am slowly being brought around to Turner. If Minn wants Turner and we want Favors, I'd draft Turner and trade him to Minn if they were able to draft Favors in the 4th spot. If not, we keep Turner and pretend it was what we planned all along.

Nice post. No one has pointed out today how effective AI9 is when shooting a catch & shoot compared to all those off-balance threes he hoisted off the dribble. They may all shoot well enough if the offense is designed to their strengths.

Nah, Johnson + Whiteside/Orton isn't worth as much as Turner or Favors IMO.

Mike P reply to Brian on May 25 at 20:12

Yeah, we should just take Turner, try the JIT experiment and then build our future front court by taking good hard looks at Speights/resigning Sammie/Thad.

Besides we took Sammie and M-16 in the mid to end of the first rounds anyway. Lets just take our time now and build on our potential great backcourt foundation.

Who do you think is most likely to be moved to keep us from going over the luxury tax? Lou? Kapono?

Tough call, but I'm going to say Lou. Listen to how Collins talks about the benefit of guys who can hit the three during tonight's game. He'll value that from Kapono, and if you get rid of Lou, it helps your cap number short and long term.

Alvin reply to Mike P on May 25 at 21:31

I'd hope Lou. His contract is longer and with Turner there are going to be less minutes for him anyway, and I think I've mentioned enough times how I don't like his attitude. Kapono can be deadly from 3 and he accepts his role.

Yeah. I'll take 1 superstar over 2 good players. Their #1 need is to find a superstar to build around. I'm not sure Turner or Favors is that man... but I'm sure Whiteside and Johnson are not.

And we should know by now that trying to build around a core of good players sans Superstar is a flawed approach.

Collins has always given heavy minutes to a bruiser/stiff/athlete like Reid, Ratliff, Thorpe and Oakley. I don't see that guy on the roster (thank heavens Evans woke up Canadian.) Any thoughts on who they might target? Maxiel?


Mike P reply to tk76 on May 25 at 20:52

I'd love to get Maxiell for the right price. All that guy does is play defense and knows that it's all he should be doing.

Brand is the closest thing to it, he could do a favorable Oakley impression in this finesse era. Add another 7 ft athletic bruiser and that would be ideal

Brand didn't play the solid defense you want from a toughness guy, but he was the one guy who made sure guys didn't get layups when he was in the paint. He definitely led the team in hard fouls.

I am really enjoying Colllins tonight on the TV. He is such a good teacher. What a change from last year! And he seems to get it. It will be so refreshing being at the Wach this year and not having to shake my head constantly.

Court_visioN reply to DeanH on May 25 at 23:38

can you imagine braceface being a color commentator? "The Lakers are shooting 65% from the field. That's how you win in this league. You make shots, and you play with effort and harmony"

Rich reply to DeanH on May 26 at 0:49

He's an excellent announcer no doubt, but now let's see him improve that coaching record. Matt Millen was thought of as a pretty good announcer at once too. Can you imagine EFJ calling a game though? Now that would be high comedy.

Hello "Statman," I'ts great to see you post on a website that I used to respect. First of all, thank you for comparing current SGs to ones from the 1980s. It provides a lot of direction in this discussion. Oh wait, it isn't 20 years ago. In case you didn't notice, players are bigger, faster, and stronger (oh and better shooters) than they were when most fans were half their age.

Also, thank you for pointing out stats that everyone already knows. I wasn't aware that basketball-reference qualified you as a "statman." And in case you didn't realize it, small fowards, by definition, do not shoot from the outside as well as shooting guards. That's why they are SFs. Because they are very similar positions, that IS the distinguishing characteristic. Oh, but of course it doesn't matter if you don't have a shooter in your starting lineup. Oh wait, every single team still in the post-season does have a good shooter in the starting 5.

I'm struggling to find the point of your article. Is it that shooting guards and small forwards are not that different? Is it that Andre Iguodala can be a SG even though he isn't a good outside shooter?

Let me answer your questions. Andre Iguodala can be a "shooting guard" if the SF and preferably the PG (thank god for Jrue) can actually shoot. It sucks that Iguodala can't, but if you want to force him into that role, you're going to need to have a shooter at SF (to be the real shooting guard). In terms of whether the SG and SF are actually different, semantics are pointless. Iguodala has a certain skill-set. He's a great defender, great passer, and a good rebounder. He's not a good outside shooter, he's not an advanced ball-handler, and he's not a good FT shooter. If you want to qualify him as a shooting guard, you need a small foward to play the classical shooting guard role, and if you want him to be a small forward (as Doug Collins thinks he is, and what most people would say his natural position is) then we need to get a real shooting guard.

For the record, I think that Iguodala is a very good player. But in order to use him effectively, you need to utilize his passing skills by having talented shooters and offensively-competent big men around him.

smh1980 reply to Danny J on May 26 at 0:24

Danny J. You talk to people like you are an asshole. Stick to a basketball argument and leave your other bullshit out.

There's no need for this. If you don't like something that's written here, find a civil way to disagree, or just stop visiting the site.

I don't know that Iguodala is much, much more skilled, offensively anyway, than Stephen Jackson. Surely he's a better passer and rebounder. But as scorers, they're equally skilled to me... Jackson's an unrefined shooter/slasher and Iguodala's an unrefined slasher/open-court finisher.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Stephen Jackson is the worst kind of gunner and really drags your entire offense down with his terrible shot selection. Iguodala may not be the best option in the half court, but he's rarely hurt the team by taking too many bad shots throughout his career. Taking too many bad shots is Jackson's MO.

Both legs should carry the same amount of your weight, so your body can be balanced properly. The lower part of the body should not be straight and tight, but bent so it can create a jump or just push upwards.

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment