Yeah, and a pretty good sample size as well... But even though I won't yet call him a good shooter, I was very impressed with him tonight.
he kinda plays like a poor mans rajon rondo, down to the poor jumper and all. it'll be interesting to see if he can develop a jump shot. if not, he can get by with his quickness like players like rondo, and he did seem plenty quick getting the ball to the hoop.
Its not really necessary to be a long distance shooter as PG in todays NBA. Rondo, Wall, Miller and Kidd (up until last year) have got by without it. Johnson atleast has good form.
If we're talking about "today's NBA", you're correct. If you're talking about a PG playing extensive minutes with Roy, and in the offense we run, you absolutely need to be able to space the floor and make someone pay for sagging off of you to clog the middle.
Kidd has been an above average 3 point shooter for a few seasons now http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/k/kiddja01.html STOMP
You're right. It took him awhile to become a competent long range shooter. Looking at year by year though, he's kind of all over the map. The last couple years he's been consistently good though.
Pretty solid debut, or a better-than-expected performance from Armon. Loved seeing it, and I'm going to enjoy watching him develop. And really.. if he had a great outside shot, then he probably wouldn't have lasted until the second round and would've been a top 15-ish pick. He's a steal for a second-rounder, and I'm more than pleased with what he's shown.
Kingspeed, how did you get Shooter's log-in? LOL Armon looked good alright -- he looked like a good young point guard. It took Armon exactly one fast break to show me why the Blazers traded Bayless. Armon and Matthews definitely play "scrappy!"
We already had a PG. The problem isn't finding a PG, it's finding one that can play next to Brandon. Johnson hasn't shown he can do that yet, so let's hold off on proclaiming him the next Blazer PG
Really a thread like this because of last nights game? After last nights game I came away feeling he played a lot like Jarret Jack. For every good play there is one bonehead play. Hopefully he doesn't have Jack's knack for finding a way to make a turnover at a critical part of the game.
I think that just because of his superior defense he is a more promising fit next to Roy as a PG - simply because it helps mask Roy's indifference to playing good defense consistently.
For me it was more he showed he has PG skills and a PG mentality. He may never be more than a bench player, but watching him off the bench was like a breath of fresh air -- or maybe just a relief. I think your assessment might also apply to Matthews somewhat. He plays like a bull in a china shop -- like a more intelligent, better citizen, better shooting version of Ruben Patterson. With a player like that, you have to be ready to take the bad plays with the good. I like that Matthews and Johnson play fast and "scrappy" off the bench. Along with Rudy, those guys are going to push the ball, and Nate seemed to be OK with that.
Not seeing too many similarities due the difference in height. Green could not drive into the lane and get a shot off. On D he did not have the same wing span. Not even close.
Green could shoot the ball from deep, did not have size, was not explosive from the dribble and could not defend. Seems like the exact opposite of AJ.
