What's new
By:

It's time to start Watson

Hotttnickkk said:
Hey I listened to Phil Johnson too and what I got out of him the most was "The point guard's role is to run the offense". Going by that, so far Watson has been the better of the 2 at doing that. Now until Harris catches up, I don't think he has the RIGHT to start. I'm not gonna give him the benefit of the doubt just because he's stared in the most successful team in the history of the NBA - the New Jersey Nets.
Click to expand...
Last year when the trade was made for Harris, Corbin said the starting PG position was up for grabs. Watson then came out said he was more comfortable being a backup. Wish I had the link, but I remember that being the gist of it.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
The Great Phil Johnson just said the reason Watson probably looks more comfortable than Harris is because he has been in the offense/with the team longer. Just give Harris time and let Watson lead the young 2nd unit.
Click to expand...

Agreed here.
Just wait for Harris to adjust to the team, and the team to adjust to Harris.
I think it will all come along just fine.
He is a good point guard, and I think this will all work itself out...... well of course pending a trade.
Please Jazz brass, give these guys a little while to gel and don't jump the gun on trades like the rest of the league.
 
Harris has had time,he doesnt run an offense that creates shots for his teamates.The offense looks like a bunch of trees scooting around the floor in search of water.Then HARRIS gets hurt and Watson will end up cleaning up his mess and watering the thirsty trees out there .Heck Tinsley would run the O better too,because a points job is to run an offense that makes your teamates better.Harris hasnt done that since he has been here,he is one of the most overated players in the league,a step slower and two times worse than his hay days.that could be a good thing if the Jazz would trade him before he has no value by showing ev eryone that he is a hasbeen washup crip.Start TINSLEY or Watson and these old vets would lead this teamwith wise leadership that Harris doesnt possess.go jazz
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
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.
Click to expand...

Still sticking to your view on this?

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

/thread
 
NAOS said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
orangello said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
Still sticking to your view on this?

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

/thread
Click to expand...
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.
 
Zombie said:
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.
Click to expand...

I also don't think he can sustain the level of play as a starter. Keep Harris starting.
 
HeavenHarris said:
Um, the problem is the Jazz offense sucks. Who cares if Watson is better at running a crap offense? Bottom line.

Look at when the PG has the ball, they're always looking back in forth at TyCo, because he controls everything.
Devin is a leader. He needs to be allowed to call plays and control the offense and be free-flowing and creative.
If you're going to cage Harris, then you're not utilizing his talents properly.
Might as well trade Harris to a real contender that will utilize his skill if TyCo is going to play dictate-ball and tank for the lottery.
Click to expand...
I agree. Every contender wants a PG who goes 0-7 and has terrible range. Congrats, he rebounded with a 4-5 performance against the T-Pups. He still is just shooting 35%/32% and his percentage has shown a declining trend over the past several seasons. That shouldn't happen as he's only 28. If he has ANY value at all, I agree...trade him. Watson is his equal as a PG and can play half the game. Tinsley can be the back-up and a 3rd PG can be signed from the D-League.
 
fallenchicken said:
We need Watson in that second unit.


We just need a new starting PG.
Click to expand...

This. DH has had a few decent games, one being tonight. He played well offensively (minus that TO went he came in with 2 minutes left), but defensively was nothing special. I can't really crap on him for tonight's performance, but to only play well once out of every 4 or 5 games isn't going to cut it. Earl is great, but we need a new starting point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top