What's new

Could Alec Burks really be the backup point?

cctrackstar

Well-Known Member
Ok, I was shocked to hear Ty Corbin say when asked about the backup point that Alec Burks could fill in at the position. I like most people have looked at him as a 2 guard, though I had heard he could play some point (kind of like Kirilinko could, and did during the playoffs once).

But as things move on, and the Jazz seem to not be focusing on getting point guards. Only one of the camp ivitees so far, Scottie Reynolds is a point, the rest are forwards, and they haven't been in the running for any free agents. It makes me wonder if they feel that they already have the answer in house.

So back to the question. Alec Burks is pretty light for a 2, and has played point off and on, and showed that ability in workouts, and he's an athletic skilled lottery pick that will need time on the floor. Are the Jazz actually PLANNING to use him as either the second or third point guard on the team, thus opening up space for more size?

Here are a couple of interesting articles I hadn't read before on Alec Burks:

https://www.theutahjazzblog.com/2011-articles/july/inside-alec-burks.html

https://www.sactownroyalty.com/2011/6/21/2236046/alec-burks-sacramento-kings-nba-draft-2011
 
In regards to AK playing point, you are talking about the playoffs vs. The Warriors? If so the only reason he played point was due to foul trubles. That is the only reason I want to see Burks play point. We drafted him to play sg. I don't want to risk slowing his development at the sg position. Sg is more of a need then the backup pg spot. I'm afraid if we play him extended minutes at pg it will take away his aggressive nature on offense.
 
Burks reminds me a lot of Rodney Stuckey. I think he can play the 1.

I have actually never thought of that comparison. I can see it. I think Burks could beat Stuckey in explosiveness and finishing at the basket but I could see Burks being like Stuckey in that his main offensive skill is drawing contact. It's really hard to tell since we haven't even seen Burks yet but he probably will be not better than Stuckey at shooting the ball

[video=youtube_share;eZ8fXJ3FM7A]https://youtu.be/eZ8fXJ3FM7A

Isn't that how most of us are picturing Burks to play? I know that is what I was picturing
 
this isn't a direct answer to the OP, but I think that regardless of who is checked in as PG you'll see plenty of offense run thru Hayward. Burks should be able to handle some play-making, but I think he's a third-string PG right now. We need Watson.
 
I'd rather not have Burks play his rookie (condensed) season at PG. I want him to get accustomed to whatever system Corbin installs & be confident in that first.
 
Sg is more of a need then the backup pg spot

I don't get it, really?

Players who can play SG: CJ, Hayward, Raja.

Players who can play PG: Harris.

I remember what my teachers told me in math class in elementary school, they said that three was more than 1

(the interesting thing about this is that both CJ and Hayward have good enough court vision to play a little PG in a pinch. I know that goes against what I'm saying, but there are two sides to every coin.)
 
this isn't a direct answer to the OP, but I think that regardless of who is checked in as PG you'll see plenty of offense run thru Hayward. Burks should be able to handle some play-making, but I think he's a third-string PG right now. We need Watson.

KOC alluded to this in a recent interview. He said that Gordo was told to expect to be ready to have the ball in his hands a lot more. I think the team's best game by far (post DWill) was the Hayward show at the Staples Center. He basically painted his Mona Lisa on the court as the entire offense was ran through him. If he's capable of playing like that on a nightly basis, we could end up being scary good.

In case you don't want to fork out the dough to go to Le Louvre, here's some free art:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaiUkuSIVXM
 
Back
Top