Author Topic: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?  (Read 13034 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #30 on: July 10, 2008, 04:15:26 PM »

Offline ForexPirate

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 292
  • Tommy Points: 19
I would like to see Telfair back - he had some good nights for us before the gun incident and before we decided to compete for the top draft pick that year.  I think he will do very well given the chance.  but only if he would be happy with a back-up role to Rondo

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #31 on: July 10, 2008, 05:01:34 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
I'm only lukewarm on Eddie.  He plays hard and can knock down the trey, but that's about it.  He's only an so-so defender and is a liability running the point; much of the time he's out there Pierce or Allen handle the ball.  If they're going to handle the ball anyway, why sign House when you can sign a legit 6-5 or 6-6 shooting guard? 

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #32 on: July 11, 2008, 07:36:41 AM »

Offline Sweet17

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1806
  • Tommy Points: 107
I don't think he is a liability. The offense ran better with him in there then Sam Cassell. Yes he isn't a great ball handler but for 15 minutes a game PP and RA can help out fine. I don't like giving up our offensive flow, shooting and scrappy D of House just for better dribbler.

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #33 on: July 11, 2008, 08:03:46 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
I'm only lukewarm on Eddie.  He plays hard and can knock down the trey, but that's about it.  He's only an so-so defender and is a liability running the point; much of the time he's out there Pierce or Allen handle the ball.  If they're going to handle the ball anyway, why sign House when you can sign a legit 6-5 or 6-6 shooting guard? 

I thought Eddie did an excellent job defending Delonte in the Cleveland series when he got the chance.  He's a much better defender than people give him credit for.  He's made a few clutch defensive plays to help win games.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #34 on: July 11, 2008, 08:52:11 AM »

Offline capecodfrenzy

  • Neemias Queta
  • Posts: 13
  • Tommy Points: 3
Go with 5'11 Anthony Anderson at the backup point.  He's a former 4 yr starter at UMass who was named MVP of the ABA and MVP of the ABA All Star Game.  Dude's got some serious game and he's from nearby Lynn, Mass.  And he'd cost $412,000 which would help with the luxury tax issue.

He's an incredible three point shooter, ballhandler, and athlete.  He can shoot with or better than E. House but he can bring the ball up with ease. Also a natural playmaker.

I think the NBA needs to think outside the box sometimes - its hard for guys like this to get a shot.   I guarantee he is far superior to Telfair who can't buy a jumper sometimes and has moments of Marbury-ness in his game.  Ant's a great chemistry guy.

<<SORRY, DON'T KNOW WHY IT DID 2 OF EACH VIDEO>>

http://www.youtube.com/v/4oOrU6MUsXw&hl=en&fs=1

http://www.youtube.com/v/5MhPYUZqBwk&hl=en&fs=1

« Last Edit: July 11, 2008, 09:45:43 AM by Roy Hobbs »

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #35 on: July 11, 2008, 09:03:01 AM »

Offline CT34

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 719
  • Tommy Points: 38
The Cs will sign one back-up PG with the understanding that he will not get much playing time.  The two guys that would fit that bill is Lue and Hunter.  The Cs want to see what they have in Pruitt.  They feel that they got something in the kid.  So he will be the first Pg off the bench.  I don't see Eddie House coming back here only because he was upset about playing time last season.  The other wild-card here is Livingston.  But don't look for Livingston to sign with a team until the season starts.

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #36 on: July 11, 2008, 09:21:29 AM »

Offline RonJohn

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 136
  • Tommy Points: 7
I think the entire board agrees if there was a way to pry Lindsey Hunter away, everyone would do it. That being said, I think we keep Eddie House. The guy does whatever we want him to do. Not play for four straight playoff games and then come in and play great? Check. Be an emotional barometer for the Team. Check.
Bring your kid so that everyone knows him. Check..


Bring BACK EDDIE!

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #37 on: July 11, 2008, 09:36:56 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
I think the entire board agrees if there was a way to pry Lindsey Hunter away, everyone would do it. That being said, I think we keep Eddie House. The guy does whatever we want him to do. Not play for four straight playoff games and then come in and play great? Check. Be an emotional barometer for the Team. Check.
Bring your kid so that everyone knows him. Check..


Bring BACK EDDIE!

I disagree about signing Hunter.  He was absolutely horrible for Detroit, with the exception of a couple of minutes of decent defense.  The only positive thing he did was pressure the ball once or twice, which really didn't help Detroit all that much.  He was quickly benched when he kept turning the ball over.  No thanks.  Eddie House is a better option.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #38 on: July 11, 2008, 10:47:57 AM »

Offline DannyZ

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 882
  • Tommy Points: 76
I agree.  Bring back Eddie.

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #39 on: July 11, 2008, 11:07:57 AM »

Offline sk7326

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 453
  • Tommy Points: 24
... because there will be somebody of this caliber avaiable later in the offseason.  This is the easiest position on the floor to find cheap.  There is no need to panic that House has not been resigned.  He is not going to be forcing any team to spend its full MLE.  It is not that I don't love Eddie, it is that it is a low value roster position, as is the case on any ball club. 

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #40 on: July 11, 2008, 11:32:59 AM »

Offline incoherent

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1856
  • Tommy Points: 278
  • 7 + 11 = 18
Does Pierce want Marbury?

 
Quote
"He makes the biggest contract and he's one of the oldest players on the team," Pierce said yesterday while signing collectibles at Steiner Sports offices in New Rochelle. "That doesn't really fit into a rebuilding plan, just to be honest.

"I'd try to trade him or buy him out at this point," added Pierce, who still believes Marbury can be a starting point guard in the NBA. "I just think he needs a fresh start somewhere else. Marbury needs to be on a veteran team where he fits into what they're trying to do a little bit more." -- New York Daily News

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #41 on: July 11, 2008, 12:10:55 PM »

Offline jgod213

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2258
  • Tommy Points: 300
Go with 5'11 Anthony Anderson at the backup point.  He's a former 4 yr starter at UMass who was named MVP of the ABA and MVP of the ABA All Star Game.  Dude's got some serious game and he's from nearby Lynn, Mass.  And he'd cost $412,000 which would help with the luxury tax issue.

He's an incredible three point shooter, ballhandler, and athlete.  He can shoot with or better than E. House but he can bring the ball up with ease. Also a natural playmaker.

I think the NBA needs to think outside the box sometimes - its hard for guys like this to get a shot.   I guarantee he is far superior to Telfair who can't buy a jumper sometimes and has moments of Marbury-ness in his game.  Ant's a great chemistry guy.


I know a UMass alum when i hear one.  I graduated from UMass Amherst as well and agree that he had showed flashes of brilliance at times, but you are REALLY exaggerating his skill set and abilities.  The dude was supossed to be the next big thing after Monty Mack but never lived up to the hype.  Granted he never had a solid team around him, but he was only able to average 11 points, 4 rebounds, and 4 dimes over his career, and he started all 4 years.  Really his only true claim to fame in the A-10 record books is a rookie of the year award.

This guy has never proven anything at an elite level, so to say that Anderson can shoot the 3 ball at least as good as Eddie House is absurd, and to put his potnetial somewhere inbetween sebastian telfair and stephon marbury is even nuttier.  Sure bassy hasn't lived up to the hype, but this is a guy that is a legit NBA player, Anthony Anderson hasn't accomplished anything yet.

Now as far as the Marbury idea is concerned, this is a guy who has never gotten along with any coach or agreed with any role he's been assigned unless it's that of team star.  Simply put, he's a headcase who quits on his teams and is emotionally fragile.  How do you think Marbury would react if he's only playing 15 min/game and the team starts to struggle a little and/or Rondo puts together a streak of a few bad games? Personally, i don't want to be in that situation with a guy like Marbury on my team.

DKC Utah Jazz
http://tinyurl.com/kqjb3cv

Starters:   Bledsoe-Gordon-Hayward-Patterson-Favors  | 6th-Kanter
Reserves: Warren-Hardaway-Plumlee-Larkin-Evans-Mbakwe-Huestis-Hummel-Calathes

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #42 on: July 11, 2008, 12:43:35 PM »

Offline zerophase

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2394
  • Tommy Points: 334
  • Anything's Possible
i dont understand why we need such a great backup point guard. i think house i probably one of the better options. if rondo stays out of foul trouble for most of the game, pierce usually handles the ball at the end anyways.

Become Legendary.

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #43 on: July 11, 2008, 12:50:15 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
One thing I will say, for all the debates I've been having with some of you about Cassell and House, due to the improvements in Rondo, the backup point guard position is considerably less important this year than it was last year. 

While the argument could be made that we need someone in case Rondo gets hurt, let's not kid ourselves.  If he goes down for a week or two we can make due with anyone.  However, if he has a season ending injury, there's no one on the market who is going to take his place. 

Re: Why aren't we considering these guys at point?
« Reply #44 on: July 11, 2008, 01:14:32 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan06

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 733
  • Tommy Points: 42
I think IF we resign Eddie the next backcourt player signed will determine how he is used.   For instance if we sign say Bonzi Wells, those two play together but Bonzi brings up the ball.  But say its Shaun Livingston or another PG (especially a bigger one).  Eddie is SG on offense and PG on defense.  Like last year we just play to his strengths and compensate for his weaknesses.