Marshall or Lillard?

yes they do and we are seeing in the playoffs just how important PG's that can score are, unless you have LBJ and Wade, look at Parker-Westy and even Rodno scoring when the team needs him

 

I prefer Marshall overall, for the type of team I'd want to build, but really, with the makeup of the rest of our team, I don't think it matters much. We don't have wings who can create their own offense and as such are reliant on a PG. So you can continue on that path, and build around a PG who either CAN create his own offense(lillard), but might set up your wings less, thus making you reliant on your PG too much for scoring, or you can build with a PG who CAN set up your wings great, but you are again, over reliant on him creating offense. So you get to a point where you either are desperate for your PG to score, or you're desperate for him to be the only way your wings can score. Both are a recipe for disaster, IMO. We NEED a wing who can create offense, for himself and others. And they aren't the easiest pieces to find, regardless of some here saying you can find wings anywhere. If we had that, Personally, I'd prefer Marshall to set up the other 3 players for shots, and the wing to do the rest of the playmaking.

 

I picked Lillard but I also LOVE Marshall. I hope we can get one of them. As others have mentioned, I think Lillard may have a higher ceiling, but I love the idea of Marshall's passing and court vision opening up opportunities for other players to play at a higher level. I think Marshall has the potential to improve others more than Lillard does, but Lillard does have the scoring punch that we need. Either way, you get a guy who will help us out in a big way.

 

Must've changed since Jason Kidd was the PG on last year's title team.

 

Lillard's comp is Rodney Stuckey. Right down to the superstar in a small school. The rules don't seem to have made him into a star, despite all the opportunities he's been given.

It's funny: scoring guards are supposed to be more "take charge" and pass-first are seen as passive. But there's nobody less "take charge" than Rajon Rondo, and Lillard has been knocked as too passive.

 

Magically gaining a lights-out three point shot after 15 years of being iffy helps too.

 

I know everybody's already given up on Nolan Smith (and maybe rightly so) but exactly how different is Lillard from him?

 

lol, your problem when discussing NBA players and prospective NBA players is that you're misguided by ignorance. Everyone sucks in the NBA except your Euro-boys and Rondo. After that, the league is just in shambles.

 

Is being misguided by ignorance better or worse than being guided by it?

They're MY Euro-boys? Do they include Pau Gasol, Tony Parker and Dirk Nowitzki?

But yes, Rondo is God.

That LeBron guy is okay. (I'm curious: how does this relate to the Lillard v. Marshall debate? Is Marshall a secret furriner?)

Oh, and lol.

 

You're implying that Lillard's ceiling is Stuckey because they both came from a small conference.

 

Your conference is small

 

Coincidentally, Sergio has a three point shot now.

Yes, the skills Sergio has are a lot rarer than the skills Lillard has. Does that mean that Sergio is a good NBA player? Of course not, if he has other deficiencies that cancel them out. Magic Johnson is still a far better passer than probably every current NBA player, but he won't make a roster any time soon.

 

Actually if you read what I wrote you might see that that was the last and least significant reason.

Code:

              Height     Wingspan  ppg final yr college  assists/gm
Stuckey:     6'3.75"     6'7.25"      24.6 (soph)            5.5
Lillard:     6'1.75"     6'7.75"      24.5 (snr)              4.0

You're right: Stuckey was better. And younger. And more of a point guard.

(Stats from DraftExpress (who has George Hill as Lillard's "best case") and CBS. Height is w/o shoes, because, y'know, that's what height means.)

 

He's his 18 of 23 three pointers over 9 games.

http://www.acb.com/stsacumjug.php?cod_jugador=B68

But look at his 11/12 stats for the other league: 30%.

So he's had a good 9-game run. Congrats.

 

One of Lillard's biggest strengths is his jumpshot. That's always been one of Stuckey's weaknesses. That's big, especially when comparing players.

 

a) Those 9 games were the playoffs.
b) This coincided with him getting more consistent PT. Real Madrid's "star" is (Rockets' draftee) "The other" Sergio Llull. Who is much more of a scoring guard, which seems to work okay in certain situations, but they've been playing them together a bit more which has given Rodriguez more court time.

I'm happy to see Sergio doing well. It looked like he wasn't even top-ACB quality his first year back in Real Madrid, but now he might even make the Spanish National team for the first time since he was a teenager. (He never made it while he was with Portland.)

 

Wish he'd done that for us against Houston... maybe he did. I'll go check.

Nope. But again, the minutes. I'm glad he's getting paid to play basketball. He seems like a good guy.

 

A fair point. However, my main point is that Stuckey has turned out not to be a PG, despite better assist numbers in college. Lillard's PG ranking is one of the worst in Draft Express's rating of draft-worthy PGs this year. We already have short SGs who were stars in college. We need a FUCKING POINT GUARD.

 

Well than fuck it. Lets draft Thomas Strofnosky.

 

Westbrook wasn't a PG coming out of college

I agree a true PG could make Aldridge/Wes/Batum all better players than they currently are.

That said, the Blazers also badly need someone that can create their own shot and make plays.