Roy... PG or Forward?

Well it's obvious he is a true SG, well I'm just saying it in here, cause you guys burn me at the stake if I say otherwise. And keep in mind, this is only about the future. Not NOW.

But I notice many think this 3-guard rotation is a joke for the most part. So if you had to choose, which would you rather him play? This is down the road, since we have blake and miller now, or Webster and Batum as well.

The reason I ask is because if Roy is this "point guard type" player, meaning he likes the ball in his hands and creates for others, etc. To me, a true point guard could not co-exist with Roy, unless Roy is playing the wing. And I just think players like Pippen or Grant Hill "point forward" come to mind. They could co-exist with a true point guard because the spacing on the floor is much easier to operate.

Now if you put Roy at PG, and I mean this with the inclination of possibly Fernandez or Bayless being the starting SG. At PG, you could use a Bayless or Fernandez to guard the other team's PG defensively.

 

Guard. In the same mold that DJ and Ainge played it in Boston. Have another guard, like Bayless, with him where both can bring the ball up, drive, pass, rebound, and defend a little.

 

So in your opinion, the a-typical definition of PG or SG doesn't apply. It's just two guards on the floor together? I can agree with that. So you are totally against him being a "point forward"?

 

I don't know what you call him. I guess he's a wing with some point guard abilities. I wasn't really old enough to watch him play, but my uncle swears he's like the second coming of Walt Frazier.

 

Think of a better Scottie Pippen with a much better attitude, although still kinda has a soft ego.

 

Roy is OK against the forwards that are either about as big as him or bigger but can not really handle the ball (like Rudy Gay). He is going to have trouble against bigger guys that can handle (Pierce, Melo, LBJ, Thanksgiving-adhesive).

 

Yeah I still don't get why many don't think he can play SF these days. Wasn't Kersey like 6'6" and Pippen only 6'7"? Who knows, maybe the game changed drastically since then. I kinda like him at Point Forward. And keep in mind Roy is a damn good rebounder too. Then if you can find a true PG, with a scoring 2, you have ball handlers and playmakers on both sides of the court.

 

When Brandon can play defense like Pippen then I can see the comparison, but until then "better" doesn't quite cut it.

 

i think the most natural rotation and the one that makes the most sense is Roy, Rudy, and Bayless getting the lions share of the minutes at the 1 and 2 spots. each guy can space the floor with their shot, they can all bring the ball up and they can all guard those spots. it makes so much sense that nate will never do it, but i can dream.

 

True. It;s so hard for me honestly because of the other talent we have on this roster. I mean seriously, Batum and Webster should be all we need at SF. Then you flip it over to the guard situation with Bayless and Fernandez. It's like what decision would you have to make in order to fully utilize the talent you have on your roster (In the future of course)?

Put him at SF, then you give a ton of time to bayless and Fernandez to be happy (Possibly starting Fernandez, Bayless and Roy together). But that sacrafices the playing time of Batum and Webster.

Now putting him at PG type, you can still start Fernandez or Bayless and have the other be the third player coming in at guard. This scenario gives ample playing time for Webster and Batum, since one of them will be giving you spot minutes at SG as well.

 

Well the great thing is we have 15 more games before we face one of those types (Our 16th game is against Cleveland). Maybe they get their timing down enough by then to figure each other out defensively.

 

Having Roy be point forward doesn't do a lot for me. I am thinking back, and probably missing some obvious players, but I can't think of a player of Roy's calliber that has played out of possition for more than a few minutes a game.

 

I would like to see those three on the floor actually:

PG: Bayless (Defense, eventually I know he will be a great shooter, slashing and over all athleticism)
SG: Rudy (BBIQ, exceptional shooting when on, exceptional passing, passing lane disruptor)
SF: Roy (Everything but defense baby, "god mode" release valve for late in the clock end of quarter/game situations, #3 option)
PF: LMA (decent defense and #1 scoring option.)
C: Oden (Defense, shot blocking, rebounding and #2 scoring option)

Those three at along with LMA and Oden is one lineup that intrigues me. It wouldn't work vs teams with stronger star SF's or SG's. It would destroy alot of teams though.

 

I have been beating the "Go big" drum for a long time here, akin to several arguments listed above who basically say the same thing. If you team Roy with Rudy or Bayless in the back court there is enough ball handling and PG guarding skills on the court to handle that load.

If you match up two equally talented team chances are the team with size is going to win out. Look at what happened with Cleveland and their midget lineup in the playoffs last year when they ran into a team with a lot of versatile size on the perimeter. Cleveland absolutely could not deal with the size. I see the same problem happening to Portland if they get to the playoffs. There are too many good coaches in the western conference who will see this and go right after it with whatever personnel they have to cause the mismatch issues.

 

Well for the most part, Cleveland never had a great PF or Center to anchor the defensive end. Also, Aldridge is WAY BETTER than Varejo and I believe Oden is much better than Z.

 

I agree our bigs are better. But if you go back and watch the tape of that series, you will note that many of Turkoglu and Courtney Lee's shots in that series were not even near the hoop where the smaller guards would be getting help. They just shot right over the top of them from out on the perimeter. It was nearly like taking a jumper with nobody on you. But I do agree that the damage Howard did on the boards also contributed to the loss, and that is we all got to watch them make a knee jerk reaction to get Shaq.

I guess my main point is, its better to be big and talented, than short and talented if all else said is equal.

 

I don't like Roy running PG for large portions of the game. We get caught up in playing the 1-4 set with everybody else standing around. This is getting easy for teams to defend.

Roy needs to learn how to move without the ball and get himself into scoring position. A good, real PG will get him the ball.

 

I hate to say this, but it occurs to me that Roy creates more for himself than for others.