Shaq Harrison


jom2003

Well-Known Member
Perimeter D just isn't the priority for this team because they play a drop big strategy which they want to funnel everything to Rudy. So allowing the opponent a free drive to the rim in many cases is encouraged because Rudy is there.

But it's a flawed system when the opponent can exploit it by drawing Rudy out of the paint with switches on the pick n roll, or simply making their long range shots without having to challenge Rudy.

Perimeter D isn't as important for us during the regular season because funneling it to Rudy works and it's a strategy good enough to win us a spot in the playoffs. But in playoffs where it's a small sample size and guys like Jamal Murray are going bunker and hitting shots after shot, every team will need options on the perimeter to slow these guys down.
 


jom2003

Well-Known Member
Shaq was good enough to meet the minimum roster requirements and if you just let him play his game when needed (playing in a real situation against real players while not relying on him to run your offense), he’d be a useful player. I think assuming he’d be anything more than a situational player was a mistake and judging him as such was also a mistake. Ultimately, if the Jazz replace him with someone better or it puts them below the LT, I get it and would endorse it. That isn’t what happened.

In any case, he’s better than *** ThomAss. Dude sucks ****ing ****. Going even deeper in the hole in assets to grab poor-man’s Jimmer ain’t great.
Take that one last defensive possession against the Lakers when Quin left Clarkson and Bojan in to defend against Schroder, for example. Surely we can use a guy like Shaq in that situation.
 

NUMBERICA

Well-Known Member
Take that one last defensive possession against the Lakers when Quin left Clarkson and Bojan in to defend against Schroder, for example. Surely we can use a guy like Shaq in that situation.
If you just sub him for those situations and he gets you a game-winning stop, then he’s worth every virtual penny of investment as a pinch-hitter on a minimum contract.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
Perimeter D just isn't the priority for this team because they play a drop big strategy which they want to funnel everything to Rudy. So allowing the opponent a free drive to the rim in many cases is encouraged because Rudy is there.

But it's a flawed system when the opponent can exploit it by drawing Rudy out of the paint with switches on the pick n roll, or simply making their long range shots without having to challenge Rudy.

Perimeter D isn't as important for us during the regular season because funneling it to Rudy works and it's a strategy good enough to win us a spot in the playoffs. But in playoffs where it's a small sample size and guys like Jamal Murray are going bunker and hitting shots after shot, every team will need options on the perimeter to slow these guys down.
If that is the case then wouldn't you want a bunch of guys on the outside that have active hands and are gambling for deflections? We are like last in the league in steals and forcing turnovers. Mike has been good at it... everyone else is no bueno.

I just think that is the low hanging fruit we should pursue... if our guys can't do it... then find a guy or two to mix in that can.

Bend but don't break works good as an every night strategy in the regular season... against playoff teams we will need more. Many of those teams are good at making the shots we allow and can make the other ones even when contested.

It also would help if we'd switch a little more... as @FAILED STATE has mentioned... a changeup would have some value... I watch how some teams screw our actions all to hell by switching things and think it might be something we could execute more often but might require more defenders like Shaq.
 

FAILED STATE

Well-Known Member
If that is the case then wouldn't you want a bunch of guys on the outside that have active hands and are gambling for deflections? We are like last in the league in steals and forcing turnovers. Mike has been good at it... everyone else is no bueno.

I just think that is the low hanging fruit we should pursue... if our guys can't do it... then find a guy or two to mix in that can.

Bend but don't break works good as an every night strategy in the regular season... against playoff teams we will need more. Many of those teams are good at making the shots we allow and can make the other ones even when contested.

It also would help if we'd switch a little more... as @FAILED STATE has mentioned... a changeup would have some value... I watch how some teams screw our actions all to hell by switching things and think it might be something we could execute more often but might require more defenders like Shaq.
I’ve been closely watching some PHX b-ball the last week or so. I have very little confidence that our defense can stop their offense.... particularly in a close game where every possession counts, and scoring a bucket is equivalent to landing a hard right hook to the head.

I’d say the exact same thing even if our perimeter defenders were 20% better across the board.... because we just don’t have enough variety in our defensive schematics. CP3 and Booker are figuring out pretty much everything right now, and if you give them only one or two things to solve, then you are going to lose the close games at a much higher rate than you win them. They’re definitely the team I fear the most right now. Their strengths play straight into our weaknesses... like a key into a lock.

Their perimeter defenders have really bought-in, too. So add that to the fear-mix.
 

hgb

Well-Known Member
Contributor
I have hated Thomas so far, but he at least has a potentially elite skill and there isnt anyone like him on the roster.
I like some parts of what I see from Thomas. He moves a lot, and cuts to the basket sometimes, where he looks pretty good. He also doesn't throw up every available shot, but waits for the (relatively) good ones. He has to hit them, though.
 

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
Take that one last defensive possession against the Lakers when Quin left Clarkson and Bojan in to defend against Schroder, for example. Surely we can use a guy like Shaq in that situation.
What team actually employs that strategy though? I'm not trying to be combative, but I don't think I've ever seen a team use that substitution style for a guy who isnt playing at all in regular minutes. I imagine it's more difficult said than done for a guy to just come off the bench after he's sat there the entire game then sub in for one play and be expected to perform.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
I like some parts of what I see from Thomas. He moves a lot, and cuts to the basket sometimes, where he looks pretty good. He also doesn't throw up every available shot, but waits for the (relatively) good ones. He has to hit them, though.
But if you move a lot and still can't get open enough to get a clean look that is a problem. He seems tiny and for a guy like him to survive he needs to hit contested threes. Teams can close out so hard to him because worst case scenario is he dribble in and takes a 15 footer... gets any closer to the rim and its almost a guaranteed turnover.

He's a much better shooter than he's shown, but unless he can get his shot off while contested or take the long threes then he's in trouble. I think best case he is a homeless man's Seth Curry. He really doesn't address what we need and he has some of the weaknesses we already have. I just have no idea what the thought process was here.
 

Eenie-Meenie

Well-Known Member
But if you move a lot and still can't get open enough to get a clean look that is a problem. He seems tiny and for a guy like him to survive he needs to hit contested threes. Teams can close out so hard to him because worst case scenario is he dribble in and takes a 15 footer... gets any closer to the rim and its almost a guaranteed turnover.

He's a much better shooter than he's shown, but unless he can get his shot off while contested or take the long threes then he's in trouble. I think best case he is a homeless man's Seth Curry. He really doesn't address what we need and he has some of the weaknesses we already have. I just have no idea what the thought process was here.
They read your take ... :)
 

hgb

Well-Known Member
Contributor
But if you move a lot and still can't get open enough to get a clean look that is a problem. He seems tiny and for a guy like him to survive he needs to hit contested threes. Teams can close out so hard to him because worst case scenario is he dribble in and takes a 15 footer... gets any closer to the rim and its almost a guaranteed turnover.

He's a much better shooter than he's shown, but unless he can get his shot off while contested or take the long threes then he's in trouble. I think best case he is a homeless man's Seth Curry. He really doesn't address what we need and he has some of the weaknesses we already have. I just have no idea what the thought process was here.
Certainly agree with this, I just felt that some of what I've seen seems a bit promising, but he definitely needs to a) get open enough to shoot and b) hit them. I'm not all that optimistic.
 

Top