Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Hawks (20-27), Fri 2/2/24

[JeremyG]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg.

Because no team wins a championship without a point guard.

[ShelC]

Considering Book, Beal and KD are at 37mpg we could maybe try and pull back on them a bit. Jones was just a name to throw out there. I'd feel uneasy relying on him but if Memphis is in firesale mode, could we try and snag Derrick Rose for one of our minimum guys and some 2nds?

[TOO]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg.

Because no team wins a championship without a point guard.

Suns have a PG, just need a backup one.

[Split T]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg.

Because no team wins a championship without a point guard.

Who was the pg for the nuggets? Warriors? Lakers?

[Mori Chu]

Suns have a PG, just need a backup one.

Well then, our starting PG can't seem to get across the midcourt line in under 7-8 seconds, and he can't seem to stop from being double-teamed right across halfcourt, and when he does, he throws these lazy side passes that get picked off and lead to layups for the other team. So maybe our starting PG is not that great at being a starting PG?

[TOO]

Suns have a PG, just need a backup one.

Well then, our starting PG can't seem to get across the midcourt line in under 7-8 seconds, and he can't seem to stop from being double-teamed right across halfcourt, and when he does, he throws these lazy side passes that get picked off and lead to layups for the other team. So maybe our starting PG is not that great at being a starting PG?

The numbers say otherwise.

You sir are stuck in the old ways.

[TOO]

Boggles my mind that the idea that Booker brings the ball up for a highly efficient offense is the reason that this team doesn't defend or rebound well.

Make it make sense.

[Superbone]

Boggles my mind that the idea that Booker brings the ball up for a highly efficient offense is the reason that this team doesn't defend or rebound well.

Make it make sense.

You can't put a square peg into a round hole.

[TOO]

Boggles my mind that the idea that Booker brings the ball up for a highly efficient offense is the reason that this team doesn't defend or rebound well.

Make it make sense.

You can't put a square peg into a round hole.

Are there any PG that can rebound at a high rate and defend the perimeter? Is Jokic available?

[Split T]

Boggles my mind that the idea that Booker brings the ball up for a highly efficient offense is the reason that this team doesn't defend or rebound well.

Make it make sense.

You can't put a square peg into a round hole.

Are there any PG that can rebound at a high rate and defend the perimeter? Is Jokic available?

Ben Simmons? Haha

[Split T]

Suns have a PG, just need a backup one.

Well then, our starting PG can't seem to get across the midcourt line in under 7-8 seconds, and he can't seem to stop from being double-teamed right across halfcourt, and when he does, he throws these lazy side passes that get picked off and lead to layups for the other team. So maybe our starting PG is not that great at being a starting PG?

Sounds like you are letting a couple plays cloud your mind. Booker at pg is the least of our problems. He’s literally orchestrating the best offense in the history of the game when he’s in.

[TOO]

Boggles my mind that the idea that Booker brings the ball up for a highly efficient offense is the reason that this team doesn't defend or rebound well.

Make it make sense.

You can't put a square peg into a round hole.

Are there any PG that can rebound at a high rate and defend the perimeter? Is Jokic available?

Ben Simmons? Haha

That'd be hilarious.

[JeremyG]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg.

Because no team wins a championship without a point guard.

Who was the pg for the nuggets? Warriors? Lakers?

They all had point guards. Who had been point guards their entire careers. How is that in dispute?

[Superbone]

Murray and Curry are no more point guards than Booker.

[Split T]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg.

Because no team wins a championship without a point guard.

Who was the pg for the nuggets? Warriors? Lakers?

They all had point guards. Who had been point guards their entire careers. How is that in dispute?

Like Bone said, Curry and Murray do not play like traditional point guards. The primary playmakers of those 3 teams were LeBron, Jokic, and Draymond.

[INFORMER]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg. Again we have a 130 offensive rating with our starting lineup…Do we realize how good that is? It’s best offense of all time good and it’s not close.

I mean that's great if that lineup could play 48 minutes every night. It would also be great if that lineup could execute in the 4th quarter consistently.

I also don't know how much weight I want to put on five-man lineup stats in a season where offensives are scoring at historic level.

Booker at pg is the least of our problems. He’s literally orchestrating the best offense in the history of the game when he’s in.

I don't know how much "orchestrating" he is doing. Most (not all) of his point guarding is coming down the court and looking for his shot, or dumping it off to KG to let KG iso, or passing it off to Nurk to let Nurk facilitate. I wouldn't call that orchestrating.

Like Bone said, Curry and Murray do not play like traditional point guards. The primary playmakers of those 3 teams were LeBron, Jokic, and Draymond.

I think this is muddying the discussion; we don't need to get into traditional vs. non-traditional (i.e. scoring) point guards. We're not debating John Stockton vs. Isiah Thomas.

I think Steph has superior ball-handling and court vision than Booker does. But it is correct that he isn't the primary playmaker; Draymond is. But if Draymond wasn't there, no one would be saying that the Warriors need a point guard, because Steph Curry is a point guard. But having Draymond there does help to free up Steph; he is amazing moving without the ball and catching/shooting, or catching, taking a couple of dribbles, and then shooting. And that dynamic is why I would leave Book at the 2. He benefits from the freedom of being able to operate off the ball. Why do you think the Bulls ran Ron Harper at the point when they had Jordan and Pippen?! Phil Jackson saw the value of having his best scorers operate off the ball. Harper could be tasked with bringing the ball up and initiating sets, and Jordan/Pippen could still be primary playmakers.

I would agree that Jamal Murray isn't really a point guard. He was a combo guard at Kentucky, and was drafted as one. He isn't that skilled at running an offense. But I don't think that is an example you can point to advocate for Point Book; Jokic makes that dynamic work, and there is no one like him in the league.

I get the Lakers example because they ran LeBron at the point, with KCP and Danny Green at the other perimeter spots. I think LeBron is more equipped to be a team's full-time point guard than Book, but let's also remember that Miami and Cleveland ran LeBron off the ball with a point guard; the Lakers won playing that way in the Bubble, not over the course of the full season. And I think that's an important distinction when trying to use that to support running Book at the point: the Suns are trying to do it over the course of a full season, which is a waste of Booker's energy within a single game and over the course of the season.

Of course, Point Book is not the Suns' biggest problem currently. So I get why some don't see the need to change it. But I think Booker and the team would benefit from getting him off the ball.

[TOO]

Glad you're alive.

[Split T]

I think there’s value in getting him off ball as well, but I don’t see the value in bringing in another point guard. Unless that pg has significant size or we’re just talking about a bench pg. Beal probably needs to be the guy that lets Book get off the ball more. Tyus Jones just doesn’t make sense to me. Sure if you could get him for Little and a vet min, but it would take Grayson to match salaries. And that makes us so small. Get me a big wing and then maybe Detroit will buyout Monte Morris. That’s a pg I could get behind adding.

[JeremyG]

I'm curious why so many still think we need a pg.

Because no team wins a championship without a point guard.

Who was the pg for the nuggets? Warriors? Lakers?

They all had point guards. Who had been point guards their entire careers. How is that in dispute?

Like Bone said, Curry and Murray do not play like traditional point guards. The primary playmakers of those 3 teams were LeBron, Jokic, and Draymond.

Rondo played heavy minutes in the Finals, despite not starting. And Curry and Murray have always played the PG position. Booker is best as a SG.

I agree with INF. And it wasn’t just the Bulls, look at the old Lakers teams, too, with Derek Fisher. It doesn’t have to be an elite point guard, just a point guard.

What we’re trying to do would be akin to the Heat using Wade as their PG, instead of Payton/J-Will/Chalmers.

[Split T]

We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I don’t understand that thought process at all.