It's time to start Watson

[NAOS]

I think this debate is embedded in our desires to see more flexibility in the backcourt, in general. For example, I hope Ty experiments with putting both Watson and Harris out there at the same time (provided that Harris is a good matchup to defend the opposing SG); I hope there is more P&R with Hayward, Burks, and CJ, letting them create and make plays; I hope we try posting Hayward when he's playing SG; etc. Harris is a good basketball player, but he doesn't fit the mold of a Sloan-styled PG so all the jazz fans are worried. They should be, because he's not what they're used to, and there hasn't been much to show that the system has changed to capitalize on his strengths.

The minute I get a glimmer the jazz are working these angles is the minute I become excited about Harris being a jazzman. Until then, it's a mix of pessimism and cautious optimism.

 

[orangello]

Before everyone starts killing this idea think about this. The Jazz seem to have a deeper team than most this year. If Harris is better than Watson then it canny be by much.

If Millsap really is willing to come off the bench then start Watson and have the second unit could be something like Harris, Miles, Millsap etc. That is a great bench to have because you can start Watson, Hayward, Favors and Jefferson. Switching things up like that would actually help this team.

For those of you who are more about winning than developing the young players, then the line up I just suggested would be perfect for accomplishing what you want, which is wins.

 

[jazzfan1971]

To the folks saying that Harris just needs time to learn the system: Tinsley looked better than Harris also.

Sure, we need some more games to know for sure. Meaningful games. But, the other day Harris looked like the 3rd best PG on the team to my eyes. If he continues to look like that I see no reason we shouldn't be pulling for Watson to start.

 

[Justys]

I would love to see Burks and Hayward control the ball and tempo a little more. And I'd agree with Jazzfanz1971 Tinsley/Watson looked better then Harris. I just dont see Utah letting Harris or his trade Value decline with coming off the bench.

 

[The Midnight]

I just think it is laughable you want to start a career backup PG over a career starting PG. Watson is good because he comes off the bench. That is where he excels.

Still sticking to your view on this?

Watson's gutsy plays are the reason we're winning these close/hard-fought games.

/thread

 

[Zombie]

I think this debate is embedded in our desires to see more flexibility in the backcourt, in general. For example, I hope Ty experiments with putting both Watson and Harris out there at the same time (provided that Harris is a good matchup to defend the opposing SG); I hope there is more P&R with Hayward, Burks, and CJ, letting them create and make plays; I hope we try posting Hayward when he's playing SG; etc. Harris is a good basketball player, but he doesn't fit the mold of a Sloan-styled PG so all the jazz fans are worried. They should be, because he's not what they're used to, and there hasn't been much to show that the system has changed to capitalize on his strengths.

The minute I get a glimmer the jazz are working these angles is the minute I become excited about Harris being a jazzman. Until then, it's a mix of pessimism and cautious optimism.

This sums up how I feel about this pretty well. PnR's in particular I would like to see more of, that is playing to Harris' strengths more effectively.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Still sticking to your view on this?

Watson's gutsy plays are the reason we're winning these close/hard-fought games.

/thread

Yes. I don't overreact to things. Harris is in a funk right now. Give him time to get through it.

 

[Zombie]

Before everyone starts killing this idea think about this. The Jazz seem to have a deeper team than most this year. If Harris is better than Watson then it canny be by much.

If Millsap really is willing to come off the bench then start Watson and have the second unit could be something like Harris, Miles, Millsap etc. That is a great bench to have because you can start Watson, Hayward, Favors and Jefferson. Switching things up like that would actually help this team.

For those of you who are more about winning than developing the young players, then the line up I just suggested would be perfect for accomplishing what you want, which is wins.

I used to prefer Paul coming off the bench as he could just dominate other team's backup pf's, but he has been playing at such a high level that there is absolutely no way he should come off the bench. I do wish to see more of Favors though so it's a bit of a tough situation.

 

[Archie Moses]

+1. The Harris Haters here are ridiculous.

Devin Harris sucks. He's like Eric Snow in his later years, but worse. It's sad that you're even worse than Sloanfeld and his Boozer love. Keep sipping that Kentucky yellower, guy.

 

[Zombie]

Still sticking to your view on this?

Watson's gutsy plays are the reason we're winning these close/hard-fought games.

/thread

Watsons gutsy play is responsible in large part to our success, and it will be responsible for our success in the future if he can instill it in our youngsters coming off the bench. Which is why I am cool with him in a backup role.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Watsons gutsy play is responsible in large part to our success, and it will be responsible for our success in the future if he can instill it in our youngsters coming off the bench. Which is why I am cool with him in a backup role.

I also don't think he can sustain the level of play as a starter. Keep Harris starting.

 

[JazzHand]

Let Harris start, let Watson finish.