Is Vasquez the long term answer?

I've been contemplating this question for a while now, and I've come up blank. Can you guys give me a good reason to believe in either side? Whether your pro or anti Vasquez, leave your opinions below
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express

It completely depends on how Demps want to build the team. It's very hard to say right now as this team is very young and lacks a couple of key pieces like a starting caliber SF and a quality big man with low post ability.

I would gather all the pieces of need and see how Vasquez performs before getting rid of him. He's on a cheap contract and our resources could be used where we need them the most in the meantime.

Besides getting a quality PG isn't hard now and days. The league is starting to become saturated with good point guards and I expect this trend to continue. Finding a point guard to complete the team rather than build through a PG would be ideal for us.

I certainly think he could be. He has improved every season and even this season we have seen marked improvement. He offers a style complimentary to gordon and davis. If we get a decent starting 3 he could be the perfect starting PG. He can initiate the offense, his set shooting has become very good (alot of his missed 3s are late clock heaves) and he can get to the rack pretty well. Also his passion and leadership is great for a young team, I think he has as much to do with the teams effort as anyone. I certainly think he is a better option than Eric Bledsoe right now, even if his defense isn't comparable, still haven't seen any signs that Bledsoe can run an offense. Short of CP and Brandon Jennings, I'm happy with him. Having said that if the right deal to get a decent starting SF or low-post threat comes along at his expense, I would do it as I agree there are lots of serviceable point guards in this league.

If he is the long term answer it's at backup PG.

He has the talent to be a starting NBA point guard. He doesnt have the athletic ability to defend his position in the modern game. Put Vasquez on an 80's team and hes a guaranteed starter, modern game hes a liability defensively against ~20 teams.

He doesn't create the best angles on P&R, so many of our P&R game is wasted because Greivis isn't quite in the right spot to make a pass to the roller/popper, thats why every time down the court we have to have like 5 P&R's till one works. He also can't split P&R defense like elite/quick PG's do in this league.

There is a lot to like about him and I'm really happy hes playing at the level hes at, but until he starts guarding SG's (even then he'll be slow) I don't see how hes gonna last as a starting PG on a great team.

Could he start for a championship team? I guess if he's the worse starter. Jason Kidd started for the mavs when they beat the heat.

We'd have to ask Davis to be a defensive player of the year like Tyson and cover up his weakness, which Davis may or may not be (Davis will be much better offensively than Tyson but might never get as strong and good defensively)

So I'd pefer a more athletic option. I'm actually not sold on Anderson for some of the same reasons

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beastbowen40

Could he start for a championship team? I guess if he's the worse starter. Jason Kidd started for the mavs when they beat the heat.

We'd have to ask Davis to be a defensive player of the year like Tyson and cover up his weakness, which Davis may or may not be (Davis will be much better offensively than Tyson but might never get as strong and good defensively)

So I'd pefer a more athletic option. I'm actually not sold on Anderson for some of the same reasons

---

I've felt this way as well. McNamera always talks about how does a player translate in a 7 game playoff series and I think Anderson will suffer in that scenerio. He's a slow jump shooter that they'll take out of the game with a quicker player. There was a stretch where they did it to him this year. To answer the OP's question, I don't think GV is the long term solution. I disagree with some of the others that SF & C need upgrading. The Hornets guard play is not good and needs to be addressed. If you get a good PG, he'll cover up some of the deficeincies of the other spots by helping them get good looks. My $0.02

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beastbowen40

Could he start for a championship team? I guess if he's the worse starter. Jason Kidd started for the mavs when they beat the heat.

We'd have to ask Davis to be a defensive player of the year like Tyson and cover up his weakness, which Davis may or may not be (Davis will be much better offensively than Tyson but might never get as strong and good defensively)

So I'd pefer a more athletic option. I'm actually not sold on Anderson for some of the same reasons

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UptownFuz504

I've felt this way as well. McNamera always talks about how does a player translate in a 7 game playoff series and I think Anderson will suffer in that scenerio. He's a slow jump shooter that they'll take out of the game with a quicker player. There was a stretch where they did it to him this year. To answer the OP's question, I don't think GV is the long term solution. I disagree with some of the others that SF & C need upgrading. The Hornets guard play is not good and needs to be addressed. If you get a good PG, he'll cover up some of the deficeincies of the other spots by helping them get good looks. My $0.02

---

Huh? Anderson has one of the quickest releases in the NBA and he's so tall it only compounds player's inability to block his shot.

Not sold on a 17/7 guy who leads the league in made 3's and has a PER of 19 :hihi:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Haze

Not sold on a 17/7 guy who leads the league in made 3's and has a PER of 19 :hihi:

---

I'm guessing they aren't sold on the defensive side of the ball??? I'm not sure. But you don't need speed when you have a shot like him.

I guess so, but not really sure how you replace a fringe all star six man for an "athlete".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Haze

I guess so, but not really sure how you replace a fringe all star six man for an "athlete".

---

He's a fringe all-star to Hornets fans only. I'm not saying that Anderson is a bad player. I just agreed that a lot of the criticisms of Vasquez apply to Anderson. If they put a 3 on Anderson, he won't be as effective. Everyone has limitations. No need to get upset.

I'm not upset at all I just think you're wrong. :D

Even if he gets better in the next 2 years his value will never be higher than now or this offseason because his skills will not increase as much as his next contract will. Considering the number of decent to good PGs in the league he's a very replaceable player. Even if you view him as a backup long term you're probably better off trading him now and drafting the future backup if you haven't already with Rivers.

As far as GV I'd like to keep him to split time with a PG if we draft one, at least for a half season or so.

Demps said in a chalk talk "you don't need an all star point guard to win a championship". He pointed out The Heat winning with Chalmers and The Lakers winning with Fisher.
GV gets too much hate / blame on this site.
The guy has done nothing but improve since he got here. He went from a backup with barely any mins to 3rd in the league in assist. Yes he makes mistakes, yes he is a little slow for the position BUT he makes up for the slowness in size. Dude is bigger then pretty much every other PG he faces.
Hopefully Rivers develops into a true PG and we'll be fine.

I like Gravy but the offense seems to run better with EG runs the team. I would really like to see Austin get a shot to run with the 1's for some significant time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoDatPelican

Demps said in a chalk talk "you don't need an all star point guard to win a championship". He pointed out The Heat winning with Chalmers and The Lakers winning with Fisher.
GV gets too much hate / blame on this site.
The guy has done nothing but improve since he got here. He went from a backup with barely any mins to 3rd in the league in assist. Yes he makes mistakes, yes he is a little slow for the position BUT he makes up for the slowness in size. Dude is bigger then pretty much every other PG he faces.
Hopefully Rivers develops into a true PG and we'll be fine.

---

1 flaw in this logic. Those 2 teams have arguably 3 of the greatest players of all time on them. The Hornets do not. Also, LBJ plays like a point guard. He has better assist numbers than a lot of PG's. If you look at championship teams, they all have good to all-star pg's.

Champions from the 90's to the present

Spurs - Tony Parker
Celtics - Rajon Rondo
Mavs - Jason Kidd
Lakers - Derek Fisher/Magic Johnson
Pistons - Chauncey Billups/Isaiah Thomas
Bulls - John Paxon/BJ Armstrong (MJ see above logic)
Rockets - Kenny Smith
Heat - Chalmers/Gary Payton

That's all that I can remember without research but the point is all of these PG's are allstars. The ones that are not, played with legends. Paxon/Armstrong - Jordan, Fisher - Shaq/Kobe, and Chalmers - LBJ.

All things considered, if I had to keep one out of Vasquez or Aminu (the other guy people are constantly dogging to be replaced), I'd keep Aminu and he should be cheaper. I think Aminu gets more undeserved hate than Vasquez.

I would like to keep him as well but if we are going to draft a PG then we need to trade him and get a vet to teach our new PG. I agree with BP225, his trade value is at his highest and we could give more minutes to Davis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donato

All things considered, if I had to keep one out of Vasquez or Aminu (the other guy people are constantly dogging to be replaced), I'd keep Aminu and he should be cheaper. I think Aminu gets more undeserved hate than Vasquez.

---

I totally agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UptownFuz504

1 flaw in this logic. Those 2 teams have arguably 3 of the greatest players of all time on them. The Hornets do not. Also, LBJ plays like a point guard. He has better assist numbers than a lot of PG's. If you look at championship teams, they all have good to all-star pg's.

Champions from the 90's to the present

Spurs - Tony Parker
Celtics - Rajon Rondo
Mavs - Jason Kidd
Lakers - Derek Fisher/Magic Johnson
Pistons - Chauncey Billups/Isaiah Thomas
Bulls - John Paxon/BJ Armstrong (MJ see above logic)
Rockets - Kenny Smith
Heat - Chalmers/Gary Payton

That's all that I can remember without research but the point is all of these PG's are allstars. The ones that are not, played with legends. Paxon/Armstrong - Jordan, Fisher - Shaq/Kobe, and Chalmers - LBJ.

---

Imo Parker and Rondo were not as good as they are today when they won championships. Kidd on the mav's was serviceable (the lob to TC was the best thing he could do).
Fisher with the Lakers was also just serviceable. They won that championship with SIZE.

Quote:

---

GV gets too much hate / blame on this site.

---

Earlier in the year that was true, but he silenced most of the "he never will be more than a backup" criticism. Now most of the people wanting to trade him really are looking at it from a practical standpoint. How will Vasquez handle a demotion if Rivers lives up to expectations or you can sign a guy like Jennings in the offseason? If you have a way to get a future starting PG either via Rivers or Free Agency, wouldn't you be better off cashing in Vasquez towards a stud wing while Vasquez's value is that of a cheap starter? You don't have to trade Vasquez now, but there are a lot of things suggesting you should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BP225

Earlier in the year that was true, but he silenced most of the "he never will be more than a backup" criticism. Now most of the people wanting to trade him really are looking at it from a practical standpoint. How will Vasquez handle a demotion if Rivers lives up to expectations or you can sign a guy like Jennings in the offseason? If you have a way to get a future starting PG either via Rivers or Free Agency, wouldn't you be better off cashing in Vasquez towards a stud wing while Vasquez's value is that of a cheap starter? You don't have to trade Vasquez now, but there are a lot of things suggesting you should.

---

I never said i was against trading him. Everyone has a price.
Just saying I think he could start for a championship team with the right pieces and the right bench. He's only going to get better.
Just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donato

if I had to keep one out of Vasquez or Aminu (the other guy people are constantly dogging to be replaced), I'd keep Aminu

---

:help:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoDatPelican

I never said i was against trading him. Everyone has a price.
Just saying I think he could start for a championship team with the right pieces and the right bench. He's only going to get better.
Just my opinion.

---

I agree with this. He's a good pg on a good team. He's not the right pg for a team like the Hornets that are trying to find an identity and build to the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UptownFuz504

I agree with this. He's a good pg on a good team. He's not the right pg for a team like the Hornets that are trying to find an identity and build to the future.

---

Not sure i agree..at least not yet.
He's young and cheap so building for the future is fine.
Trying to find identity...so if we are trying to find it meaning we don't have one yet, how do we know he won't fit in when we do find it?

GV at least in my eyes seems like 1 of the only TRUE LEADERS on this team. He's vocal and his work ethic gets mentioned all the time by all the coaches. You get rid of GV who is your leader? Who is actually TALKING out there on the floor? Because i don't see many mouths moving besides Gravy's when i am watching...

I like Vasquez, but even the things about his game you can improve, you can't improve the fact that he's not athletic enough to not be a defensive liability. That's never going to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donato

I like Vasquez, but even the things about his game you can improve, you can't improve the fact that he's not athletic enough to not be a defensive liability. That's never going to change.

---

Help Defense is a real thing.
Honestly, imo, there aren't many players who are good enough on D to be 1 on 1 with the stars of this league without help.
90% of the players in this league need help D.
It's a team game.

I don't think he's the long-term answer as a starting point guard, but as a heavy-minutes third guard? I like him a lot in that role. I guess it depends what the market is, but I'd be willing to pay him a little less than the MLE to lead the second unit long-term. I especially like him if we go the rookie PG route as a temporary starter/steadying influence. If he wants to go somewhere else where he's the unquestioned starter and someone exceeds my budget for him, I let him go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhoDatPelican

Not sure i agree..at least not yet.
He's young and cheap so building for the future is fine.
Trying to find identity...so if we are trying to find it meaning we don't have one yet, how do we know he won't fit in when we do find it?

GV at least in my eyes seems like 1 of the only TRUE LEADERS on this team. He's vocal and his work ethic gets mentioned all the time by all the coaches. You get rid of GV who is your leader? Who is actually TALKING out there on the floor? Because i don't see many mouths moving besides Gravy's when i am watching...

---

Gordon is actually quite vocal on the defensive side of the ball. I've seen him pointing out rotations and assignments often. Offensively he is
far to quiet.

The question is whether or not he's a long term answer as a starter. With the amount of money he'll command for his next contract, he'll be earning too much money to play off the bench in my opinion.

I think he's capable of being our long-term option, but whether or not I want him to stay here depends on how much we'd have to pay to keep him. His trade value is probably at its peak, so waiting for his contract to run out before making that decision isn't ideal. Personally though I think I'd take the risk and wait to see what the market looks like unless a particularly enticing trade offer comes along.

Gravy is in his 3rd year and improves every year. He was a cousy award winner at Maryland. His intangibles ( attitude, public perceptions, consistent makes off of his drives, and good 3 pointer), endears him to me. who is the all around (top 10 O and D ) pg you envision? its all hope, I like what we have and to grow with the rest of the developmental build. You cant expect all stars at all 5 starting positions. we will have EG, and AD and whever is gonna step up. I cant see replacing Gravy for anyone at this point.

I would love him as a backup because I can't stand seeing him lose games in the final minute when he drives into a double team or puts up some horrible shot to try to win the game.

On the floor abilities / inabilities aside another thing i just thought of that i like about Gravy, he is extremely HONEST in interviews.
If he screws up he admits it, takes the blame, and usually comes back stronger the next game.
That's something i like from players and something i feel is the sign of a good leader.
Don't discount a strong leader especially on a young team.

His hero ball play does bother me sometimes but he's still learning. He'll be the 1st to admit that.

As GV would say "It's a process". :D

I've said this before, if you are a fan who is content with being a hard out in the first and maybe second round then yes, he's a long term option. But if you are a fan who wants to win a title, then no he is not a long term option.

What Monty said a few games back says it all to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AD23forMVP

I've said this before, if you are a fan who is content with being a hard out in the first and maybe second round then yes, he's a long term option. But if you are a fan who wants to win a title, then no he is not a long term option.

What Monty said a few games back says it all to me.

---

You mean like Steve Nash?

Triple double but yeh he is a backup


Hah


Sent via Tapatalk

The thing you must answer is, "Are we more likely to win or lose a championship with him being a major contributor?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

The thing you must answer is, "Are we more likely to win or lose a championship with him being a major contributor?"

---

As option 1, 2, or 3? No. Definitely as a 4 or 5th option. The point is.. you can compete with him until you find that perfect PG.

This team isn't going to win or lose a championship because of PG play. It's gonna be on Davis, Gordon, and Anderson (who is historically bad in the playoffs). Team needs a SF who can shoot and a big body center who can defend and rebound.

That isn't phrased the way I intend. What I mean is, can we become elite with him being someone we have to lean on or not.

Personally, I don't think so. Right now, Vasquez is called on to be our 2nd or 3rd best player. That's too much. The actual elite teams have guys like Wade, Westbrook, Parker/Ginobli, and the like to lean on.

Bottom line, we need more. More from the wing if Vasquez is here for the long haul. More from the point and...still from the wing anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

That isn't phrased the way I intend. What I mean is, can we become elite with him being someone we have to lean on or not.

Personally, I don't think so. Right now, Vasquez is called on to be our 2nd or 3rd best player. That's too much. The actual elite teams have guys like Wade, Westbrook, Parker/Ginobli, and the like to lean on.

Bottom line, we need more. More from the wing if Vasquez is here for the long haul. More from the point and...still from the wing anyway.

---

No matter who is playing the point, it's all up to Gordon in the perimeter and Davis in the paint. Gordon needs to be closer to D-Wade and Davis needs to be closer to Duncan than KG. Need a SF who can shoot and defend.

It's not the offense for me, it's about his defense. It just isn't good. He's constantly putting his teammates in bad position because he can't move his feet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicans78

No matter who is playing the point, it's all up to Gordon in the perimeter and Davis in the paint. Gordon needs to be closer to D-Wade and Davis needs to be closer to Duncan than KG. Need a SF who can shoot and defend.

---

I agree. An elite PG isn't necessary with an elite SG. He just needs to be competent. People are basing his value on the team as is... Which is extremely young, underdeveloped, and incomplete. Besides, Rivers can mask a lot of Vasquez flaws with some time and development.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicans78

No matter who is playing the point, it's all up to Gordon in the perimeter and Davis in the paint. Gordon needs to be closer to D-Wade and Davis needs to be closer to Duncan than KG. Need a SF who can shoot and defend.

---

Sounds like Luol Deng to me. Or if we wanna go younger, DeMar DeRozan if we could pry him away from the Raptors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AD23forMVP

It's not the offense for me, it's about his defense. It just isn't good. He's constantly putting his teammates in bad position because he can't move his feet.

---

His defense is bad but unfortunately so is everyone else outside of Davis and Aminu. Lopez and Anderson are below average in defense and rebounding and Gordon isn't playing well defensively either. Once Davis develops physically and Gordon regains his health, the team will make it easier for Vasquez.

I really don't think this team needs to spend a lot of money on a PG with Gordon at the SG. Seems to be it would be a bad investment long-term since Gordon demands the ball a ton. A guy like Vasquez seems to be a good fit since he can play off the ball as well as create. I do agree that Vasquez is a liability defensively, but Davis could erase that liability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

Sounds like Luol Deng to me. Or if we wanna go younger, DeMar DeRozan if we could pry him away from the Raptors.

---

Deng is ok, but he's a bit older for the current nucleus we have and not that great of a perimeter shooter. Honestly, we may have to draft a long-term SF or pray that Aminu improves his shooting or Miller develops.

It's just the little things with Vasquez.

Running for example, we have one of the best points per fast break averages in the league, but we can barely get out and actually do it. 25th in the league at 10 ppg. Vasquez tries, but he just doesn't move fast enough.

And I get that Davis could help erase his defensive liability, but I don't want to rely on him to do that. Who knows what could happen in that situation, fouls for one.

When I look at this team play I think of a slow pace Denver. We play a deep rotation, no-ones the "star" we try to attack from all angles on offense and only iso when we have to. For a small market thats actually a really good way to build.