I've read people saying that we can't rely on Armon because he's a rookie. But the Celtics got important minutes from rookie Big Baby when they won the title (never mind the starting PG was only a second year player.) Sam Cassell hit the game winning shot in Game 3 of the 1994 NBA Finals as a rookie. As an undrafted rookie, Wesley Matthews was the starting shooting guard for a Jazz team that reached the second round last season. And remember rookie Boobie Gibson emerging as the Cavs' second best player when they reached the Finals in 2007? My point is... don't hold it against Armon Johnson that he's a rookie.
Evidently Nate agrees to some extent. I have no doubt if Armon does the basics he is asked to do and keeps working hard, he will find some meaningful minutes this season.
There are always some exceptions and even though I'm somewhat high on Armon, unless he's playing so well that he's seizing minutes by the short and curlies I hope he doesn't get any more than 5-10 minutes a night. 1) his jumper needs work 2) He looks solid most of the time, but there's going to be a learning curve 3) He's not going to get any resepect or benefit of the doubt from referees as an unheraled rookie 4) Point guard is the most demanding position on the floor and asking more than spot minutes probabaly isn't fair to him.
I don't think many people are worried about Johnson because he's a rookie. It's because he's not a good player....at least yet.
I wouldn't go as far as to say he isn't a good player. I'v watched him in 3 preseason games and he has looked solid with the playing time he got in everyone of them. Is he going to come out and look like Chris Paul? No but he should be able to give 10 to 15m of good play that starts with his defense. If we were relying on him I'd be more worried but unless our Iron Man goes down he probably won't even get 10 a night for awhile.
I would feel a whole lot more comfortable with Armon Johnson if he had proven he was a winner in college. He didn't even come close. I get that he is a hard worker though I suspect that you could say the same thing about 95% of the entire NBA. Maybe he is a good defender but I honestly haven't seen a ton of evidence of it. I know he can't shoot for shit. You know, the thing people got down on Bayless for. Right now Armon is a relative unknown quantity in a year where Portland really can't afford such things.
No they didn't. He barely played. It was 2nd year player Leon Powe who played those important minutes. Baby averaged 8 mpg in garbage time, and he didn't even play in the 6 closest games of the playoffs. Learn the game, then post.
I really like Johnson as a prospect, but he's an unpolished one. Hopefully (no offense to him) we can let him sit just outside the rotation all year because our guys stay healthy... then he can be that much more ready to step into the rotation with Andre Miller an older (or even ex-) Blazer. Ed O.
I haven't been impressed with Johnson so far, and all other comparisons to other players are moot. All that matters is how he plays, not how other players have played in the past. So far every game I have seen him in he looks like a rookie, overwhelmed by the speed of the NBA game. Some players take a while to get used to that, so give him some time, see if he turns out ok. Until he turns that corner, he shouldn't get minutes except in scrub time.
I have only seen him play twice and practice once. Good or bad, that's not enough for me to give an opinion. Hope he's ready to bring it.
WTF? I am agreeing with KingSpeed? It kills me that there are many that would be complaining that we are letting our young guys rot on the bench if we had no minutes for them. IT IS THE BACKUP PG POSITION!!!!! THE SKY IS NOT FALLING!!!!
Just like Batum, if he can play good D he'll get and keep some minutes, as long as he's not a turnover machine
I disagree. There are 2 guards who will eat up all his minutes easily. Even with injury Portland could go down to a 3 guard rotation and still not overplay each guard in minutes.
Nate loves the Armon. That really is enough to make me worried. After all, Taurean Green was going to win us some games.
After we drafted Armon, I spent some time looking around for Nevada games to watch online because I had the same concerns about why he and Babbitt won so little. When I did find a couple of archived games to watch it hit me like a brick; they might have the played in one of the least coached, least fundamentally sound systems I've ever seen. I mean their coach's sets make Nate's offense look like a Jerry Sloan team. All of their possessions were either Armon working off of non-existent picks in isolation or Babbitt working one-on-one from the perimeter or on the block and everybody else literally stood around watching. I don't know if that means Armon and Babbitt will be more successful or not as pros, but I'm fairly certain that Nevada is bad in the same way that Texas is bad under Rick Barnes. It was total rat ball.
