I'm not that ardent one way or another about the Penny v. JJ thing, but I do think he is serviceable, a solid defender, and could be part of a winning team. One thing though that gnaws at me that I began asking during last year's playoffs. Who would we rather have playing the 2 for us, JJ or Stephen Jackson. Another longterm mistake saddled up by Ainge? Or was it unwise for BC to not make some kind of deal for Jackson after his stock fell so much as an FA? Right now, in any event, Jackson is the more dangerous player.
Game Thread: Suns vs. Hawks
- Thread starter arthurracoon
- Start date
Chaz
observationist
I watched the start of the game again and JJ was that guy making things happen.
JJ Had several steals, a couple assists, a couple baskets, was feeding the post, and taking it to the basket off screens. I don't think Penny would have started much better.
Guys, we are not going to win the championship in November. We need to see if JJ can develop.
In his three years nobody has stuck with him as starter. He is here for a couple more years. He needs months not weeks on the job to see if he can get it done long term.
JJ Had several steals, a couple assists, a couple baskets, was feeding the post, and taking it to the basket off screens. I don't think Penny would have started much better.
Guys, we are not going to win the championship in November. We need to see if JJ can develop.
In his three years nobody has stuck with him as starter. He is here for a couple more years. He needs months not weeks on the job to see if he can get it done long term.
Chaz
observationist
This is also his 4th year in the NBA after being drafted 6 years ago.
Chaz
observationist
Originally posted by haverford
Yeah but I can't forget that it was the Suns who drafted him.
Well if there was a developmental league we might still have him. He didn't sign in the NBA untill 2000 after being drafted in 97.
We didn't have room to carry him.
We drafted Steve Kerr and Jayson Williams also.
elindholm
edited for content
It seems that the majority would agree on a short-time fix of the offensive game by inserting Penny into the starting lineup.
Maybe, but that majority wouldn't include me. Hardaway's defense is so bad that he gets torched even by the other team's bench players; if he went up regularly against starters, the results would likely be tragic. But also, someone has to lead the bench unit offensively, and Hardaway is better suited to that role than Johnson is.
It's better for the team overall if Johnson starts. That may not please Hardaway or his ardent admirers, but it's true anyway.
Maybe, but that majority wouldn't include me. Hardaway's defense is so bad that he gets torched even by the other team's bench players; if he went up regularly against starters, the results would likely be tragic. But also, someone has to lead the bench unit offensively, and Hardaway is better suited to that role than Johnson is.
It's better for the team overall if Johnson starts. That may not please Hardaway or his ardent admirers, but it's true anyway.
Similar threads
