Clayton or Collier?

[bigmike]

Not to be mean, but I dont see how anyone with two working braincells and functioning eyes who has watched NBA basketball the last 5 years thinks Collier is better than Clayton.

You have to be able to shoot. If you cant, you have to be elite in several other areas.

Right now Collier cant shoot and his only skill that is potentially elite is his driving ability. The issue is he cant even make his FT's to capitalize on that driving ability.

He needs to become an elite defender, but he isnt. His really bulky and strong going downhill, but that same bulk seems to limit his lateral mobility defensively.

Clayton is basically better at everything at this point besides downhill driving/foul drawing.

I have only one working brain cell and can still see that WCJ is the superior player.

 

[sip]

My issue with Clayton Jr. is that his limited size and athleticism make it difficult for him to get where he wants to go on the floor without the use of multiple screens. (I guess we'll see if the Jazz can create enough spacing for him when he plays with the regular rotation guys.) Collier is better than WCJ at breaking the paint, pressuring the rim and creating off the dribble. So it becomes a question of what style of play Will Hardy wants to use. The problem with Collier is that he has little-to-no value when he's off the ball. Until Collier shoots well enough to be respected, he can't really be your starting point guard long term.

I think that in the bigger picture, the Jazz are probably planning to build a team that can run a lot of their offense from the wing, or they'll use multiple creators, while the guy they play at the 1 will spend considerable time playing off the ball. This is what the Celtics did recently when they played through Tatum and had Derrick White and Jrue Holiday spacing the floor. WCJ fits that blueprint. (Keyonte does as well...if he'll play defense.) WCJ is potentially a knock-down shooter with deep range, who can also use his high skill level as a secondary playmaker.

In the immediate term, I think the starting PG is Collier's to lose. I think he'll be the starter to open the season. If Collier can get his 3pt shooting up to 34% or so, then people will begin to look at him as starting-caliber.

It always comes down to the reliable jumper. If he doesn't develop a reliable jumper then he has an Elfrid Payton career trajectory. If he can develop that jump shot then a Kyle Lowry type is possible.

 

[NAOS_pt2]

Clayton is not limited athletically.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

It always comes down to the reliable jumper. If he doesn't develop a reliable jumper then he has an Elfrid Payton career trajectory. If he can develop that jump shot then a Kyle Lowry type is possible.

There's an ocean of difference between developing a reliable jumper and being Kyle Lowry.

 

[homeytennis]

Collier got benched in the 4th quarter. His attitude needs to get better.

 

[fishonjazz]

There's an ocean of difference between developing a reliable jumper and being Kyle Lowry.

He also didn't say developing a reliable shot = Lowry.
He said a reliable shot is required for a Lowry level player to even be a possibility. In other words, he needs that reliable shot first and foremost and then needs more stuff as well.

 

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

LOL at how a this topic has devolved into an insult-fest.

Personally, and based on limited info, I think Clayton will have the longer and better career than Collier, if not as starter, then as a quality bench/role player. Clayton isn't perfect, but he lacks a glaring flaw that (other than perhaps his small size) that threatens to derail him. Collier has that single flaw: he can't shoot. I think that non-shooting guards will have a very hard time thriving in in today's league, regardless of their other virtues. I suspect that by the end of the coming season or by sometime next season, Clayton will have supplanted Collier as our lead PG, barring the emergence of someone else.

I am rooting for Collier; I'd really like to see him succeed and become a quality starter. I like how he plays. I like his attitude. However, I'm more inclined to see his trajectory as a someone who's a fringe player in a few years, unless he can figure out how to shoot at a more reliable clip. I may well be wrong. I hope I'm wrong. We'll see.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

LOL at how a this topic has devolved into an insult-fest.

Personally, and based on limited info, I think Clayton will have the longer and better career than Collier, if not as starter, then as a quality bench/role player. Clayton isn't perfect, but he lacks a glaring flaw that (other than perhaps his small size) that threatens to derail him. Collier has that single flaw: he can't shoot. I think that non-shooting guards will have a very hard time thriving in in today's league, regardless of their other virtues. I suspect that by the end of the coming season or by sometime next season, Clayton will have supplanted Collier as our lead PG, barring the emergence of someone else.

I am rooting for Collier; I'd really like to see him succeed and become a quality starter. I like how he plays. I like his attitude. However, I'm more inclined to see his trajectory as a someone who's a fringe player in a few years, unless he can figure out how to shoot at a more reliable clip. I may well be wrong. I hope I'm wrong. We'll see.

FYI Collier and Clayton are essentially the exact same size.

 

[jazznik]

Brunson

It's actually kind of the norm for smaller guards who are good in the NBA. A lot of them tend to be 4 year players.

Correction: Brunson and VanVleet found their way to the starting PG position in the NBA not because they are small but because they are strong and hefty but still quick. Clayton does not seem to be built that way.

But, in general, getting drafted close to 20 at the age of 22 as a PG is just a proxy that after playing all this years of organized basketball the consensus of the NBA decision-makers is that you are unlikely to become a quality starter in this league. The GMs are often wrong evaluating 18/19 year olds but they are typically much more on the target looking at 22-yo prospects. Clayton can still prove them (and me!) wrong but the chances of that are what...10%? 20%?

The smart betting money would be on him being a career back up.

 

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

FYI Collier and Clayton are essentially the exact same size.

Collier has more acreage than Clayton, but point well taken.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Correction: Brunson and VanVleet found their way to the starting PG position in the NBA not because they are small but because they are strong and hefty but still quick. Clayton does not seem to be built that way.

But, in general, getting drafted close to 20 at the age of 22 as a PG is just a proxy that after playing all this years of organized basketball the consensus of the NBA decision-makers is that you are unlikely to become a quality starter in this league. The GMs are often wrong evaluating 18/19 year olds but they are typically much more on the target looking at 22-yo prospects. Clayton can still prove them (and me!) wrong but the chances of that are what...10%? 20%?

The smart betting money would be on him being a career back up.

Clayton is heavier than Brunson actually. Clayton has a decently strong build.

 

[jazznik]

Clayton is heavier than Brunson actually. Clayton has a decently strong build.

Then he needs to find a way to use it. Brunson bumps into people and dislodges them. While I saw relatively little of tape on Clayton I don't remember seeing him doing it. Clayton tends to run away/fake/screen defenders to create space instead of going into their body.

Walter seems to need a lot of empty space for his shots and the NBA defenders are unlikely to give it to him as readily as in college. It is actually Collier who plays more like Brunson on offense (minus his jump shot, of course).