What's new
By:

2023 NBA Draft Megathread

HermanG said:
How are they proof that 6'7 is elite PG size, when neither one is a top tier player?

Im just asking. I dont know when PG standard was changed. The mark used to be 6'3 to 6'5 and more or less was considered a disadvantage.
Click to expand...
i'm just asking what you think. do you think their size is a disadvantage? they seem like great pgs even if they aren't mvp caliber players. i don't think either would be quite as good or impactful if they were 6'4". to answer your other question, pg standard changed when guys who were 6'6" and 6'7" started being able to play the position without it being a disadvantage. iow, you always want taller players at every position as long as they can still do the things that position requires.
 
HermanG said:
How are they proof that 6'7 is elite PG size, when neither one is a top tier player?

Im just asking. I dont know when PG standard was changed. The mark used to be 6'3 to 6'5 and more or less was considered a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

I think both are pretty ****ing good. I would gladly take either on our team.
 
New big board from The Box and One:

1. Wemby
2. Scoot
3. B. Miller
4. Amen
5. Black
6. Whitmore
7. Wallace
8. Hendricks
9. Walker
10. Ausar
11. Dick
12. George
13. Bufkin
14. Lively
15. Cissoko
16. L. Miller
17. JHS
18. Whitehead
19. NSJ
20. GG
 
If we move up into the 5-6 range to get Cam or a Thompson, then I hope it is for #9 and the 2025 Cavs pick instead of the 2025 Wolves pick. I think the Cavs should still be good for the next 2 seasons (then Mitchel tries to leave), but I have my doubts on Minnesota being any good by then.
 
seattlejazzfan said:
i'm just asking what you think. do you think their size is a disadvantage? they seem like great pgs even if they aren't mvp caliber players. i don't think either would be quite as good or impactful if they were 6'4". to answer your other question, pg standard changed when guys who were 6'6" and 6'7" started being able to play the position without it being a disadvantage. iow, you always want taller players at every position as long as they can still do the things that position requires.
Click to expand...
I hear you. The logic for "too tall" used to be about turnovers mostly I guess. I would always take the taller guy if they got the handle to protect the ball.

I wouldnt mind either one of those two in the Jazz, so I guess point taken.

Still its weird the gold standard is for PGs to be so tall these days.
 
HermanG said:
I hear you. The logic for "too tall" used to be about turnovers mostly I guess. I would always take the taller guy if they got the handle to protect the ball.

I wouldnt mind either one of those two in the Jazz, so I guess point taken.

Still its weird the gold standard is for PGs to be so tall these days.
Click to expand...
Height helps perimeter defense, to shoot over defenders, and to see the floor better to distribute the ball. As long as you don't turn it over, that is a huge advantage.
 
HermanG said:
I hear you. The logic for "too tall" used to be about turnovers mostly I guess. I would always take the taller guy if they got the handle to protect the ball.

I wouldnt mind either one of those two in the Jazz, so I guess point taken.

Still its weird the gold standard is for PGs to be so tall these days.
Click to expand...
I think the good tall pgs ended up being cut short by injuries... Exum, Livingston... Simmons.

I also think a lot of guys this size just end up skewing towards ball dominant SGs.

Black's handle is good. His biggest issue is the shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top