No PG
- Thread starter The_Architect
- Start date
Its been a fear of many, myself included, for along time now. It took one game to confirm the fears.
It's an issue, but I actually thought Scott did ok handling the ball. He's no DG.
It is also a concern that it takes him away from shooting.
We'll work on it. Its not something that will be solved by just saying McGee or Allen should do it. nobody freak out please.
It is also a concern that it takes him away from shooting.
We'll work on it. Its not something that will be solved by just saying McGee or Allen should do it. nobody freak out please.
I panicked when I heard Mcgee wasn't really point guard, but that was some time ago. Wasn't comforted when I heard Scott was our best option at "getting us into an offense".
However, I still think we will be a lot better than last year. It is still going to be an enjoyable year when our outside shots are falling.
Those who say it's clearly a problem after one exhibition game. We don't need some stud PG this year. We don't need DG on this team to be successful. Just someone who doesn't turn the ball over and can get the ball to our shooters. There is still plenty of time to find someone who will do that.
You didn't know that making a keen observation, that happens to be negative, is panicking? Silly boy.
Yeah... I love McGee, and think he provides a spark, but I wonder if he wasn't a "miss" on the recruiting front? I'd love to have him if we didn't already have Scotty, Chris Allen, Babb, etc, BUT we do have all those other guys.
We could have really used a great JUCO PG on this team. I don't know if Hoiberg thought McGee was that guy or not, but it turned out he wasn't a PG. Sledge is nowhere near ready to play PG yet, and Bubu is just serviceable to give someone a breather now and then.
McGee looks great at what he is... a two guard. But we desperately needed to replace DG with a JUCO PG IMO. McGee is not that most likely.
We'll see how it all turns out.
Problems can be fixed. But right now it's a problem. That's not panicking. That's making an obvious observation right now.
I will disagree with your thoughts on a PG. We don't need a stud PG but we do need at least a PG. We don't have 1 right now unless Sledge plays a lot.
I'd say that rebounding is a bigger concern to me than the point guard situation after the exhibition game. They point guard situation will work itself out I think, as we have many guys who can handle the ball (even if not as well as DG) but rebounding may need some work.
Speaking of which, where was Railey today? Just curious.
Speaking of which, where was Railey today? Just curious.
I would say that this could be a problem but we really don't know if it is yet. This could end up working out just fine we just don't know. Things aren't always going to be perfect in exhibition games.
Jon Scheyer wasn't a PG when Duke won. Obviously they had more talent than we do but it shows you don't need a pure PG to be successful. You need a facilitator.
I think PG is the most important position on the floor. (in the college game) Kinda like the QB is the most important position on the field.
I'd rather have a stud PG than a stud center.
I'd rather have a stud PG than a stud center.
I only listened to it. We have to remember Hoiberg was trying out different rotations and lineups today. This will probably happen the first month of the season. I do agree that SC is not a pg so lets hope this gets fixed. But does anyone think we will just do a 7-8 man rotation like last year?? Honestly I thought it was fun watching that last year, the guys got into a rhythm and knew they were not getting taken out.
