I've thought it in every season for the past three seasons. Would we be better off with T-Mac at PG? I think it could work. T-Mac is obviously still a great passer and given a little bit of time I think he could make the transition into a scoring PG. He's already close to that, especially in recent games. If he could shot just a little less and pick his shots a little better I think he could be a 18-8 PG. So how does this change things for everyone else. Well I think we then run Artest at SG (he can do it just not exactly ideal) with Battier at SF, Scola and Yao stay put at PF and C. This gives us a huge height advantage almost across the board and a lineup where someone always has a mismatch. This leaves us Landry, Brooks, Barry, Hayes and Von Wafer on the bench. No this obviously isn't the greatest bench ever but its one that compares to most teams in the league. Before anyone points it out no I didn't forget about Alston. With him no longer needed we can use him as trade bait. Everything would be open with him. We wouldn't really need anything for him player wise so we could go draft picks and cash if no great offer comes through. This does a lot of things, at least IMO. First with T-Mac at PG he would face as much wear and tear because he won't be driving quite as much or go down into the paint. Second it gives us probably the best starting lineup in the league with two can do anything guys, a spot up 3-pt shooter, a wiley scrapper in the paint, and perhaps the best center in the league. In the playoffs teams lean on their starters a lot more so why not have a starting lineup with all our best players in it? Finally, I'm not saying this better happen or should happen just that it could happen. Its a way the team could decide to go to shake things up but not really lose anything. The main issue with this lineup is if we play a team that has a super-fast PG and SG. If we ever run into one of those teams Brooks is good enough to play a lot of minutes and we can show flexibility and have him play more to limit those players speed. I don't see this happening at anytime but I think it could be a very successful change. Maybe if Rafer gets hurt we can test it out. I'm not rooting for that because I never root for a player to get injured no matter who it is.
If you think he's horribly lazy on defense now, imagine what a point guard would do to him. On offense, that's fine.
Negative. It wouldn't work that way. Remember how he said he didn't get enough touches? so he obviously wants to be the 1st or 2nd option, which he should be considering his talent. Unless u expect scola and shane not to attempt one single field goal then it might work ><
I he was healthy enough to be the old T-mac we want and know he could be I would like it. PG-Tmac SG-Ron Artest SF-Shane Battier PF- Scola C- Yao You would't need to run any plays with this group just take turns isolating and posting up. But at this point T-mac at any position is getting hard to watch.
I thought this myself. Maybe become a poor man's Magic Johnson? At PG, he would probably take less contact, wouldn't be expected to go to the rack, could shoot jumpers with impunity, etc. Might extend his career.
I actually think this is a reasonable idea. The only question mark about it is Tracy on defense. But the fact is that PG defense is somewhat overrated in this day and age with the no hand check rule on the perimeter. Almost any PG in the league can get past his defender. The best a defender can do is usually force a PG in one direction and get help defense from the interior to cut off penetration. As far as contesting outside shots, Tracy would have such a huge advantage in length that he could lay off the PG a couple more steps than say Alston or Brooks and it would still be difficult to shoot over him. So, Tracy's length would help compensate from some of his limited vertical movement. The biggest issue I see would be his lateral movement, especially on pick n rolls. Tracy's lateral movement is awful right now. I don't see him getting around picks quickly enough to keep up with the opposing PG. If we could find a way to compensate for that, which may be possible with Artest and Battier out there, I really don't think this is that bad of an idea. Offensively, it makes a lot of sense. It takes some of the scoring burden off Tracy since he is obviously struggling to be a scorer. Playing him at point emphasizes what he is doing best right now - creating for others. And even though this won't necessarily allow him to attack the basket more, at least he will be able to shoot over opposing PGs fairly uncontested. If the opposing team uses somebody other than their PG to cover Tracy, Artest or Battier will have a huge mismatch. The problem here is that Battier is an easy cover and wouldn't likely abuse this mismatch. I'm guessing all teams facing this lineup would stick their PG on Battier and nullify much of the advantage of Tracy at point. To really make this work, I think you need to replace Battier with Wafer. That way, their is no easy cover for the opposing PG.
When he first got here, I always envisioned the '87 Lakers as a model: Magic = T-Mac Byron Scott = Brooks Worthy = Artest AC Green = Scola Kareem = Yao Only trouble is, T-Mac never runs the fastbreak.
I like the idea. I've been juggling it myself but it could definitely work. His shooting may suck but his passing and assist total recently has been superb.
You think TMac wants to fight up court against a full court press and chase small speedy guards around pick and rolls and screens? Honestly, if tmac was the point guard, the opposing team would have a layup drill on the fast breaks because we all know its the point guards duty to get back on d.
That's another good point. We'd get abused in transition and Tracy wouldn't be able to put any pressure on the opposing PG bringing the ball up the court. I don't think Artest or Battier would be able to defend opposing PGs either. They can do it for a possession or two but not as a regular assignment.
No, negative. T mac could be only part-time ball handler. He can't handle ball well under pressure. He often made turnover and result in easy basket for opposite team. Most importantly, he's not a ground general on offense, although his very good to get his own shot (not fall very often) and can find open teammates. Actually his defense on other team pg will be big advantage for Rockets.
Tmac plays point guard when Brooks is in the game. Brooks brings up the ball, passes to Tmac, Tmac sets up, Brooks assumes SG role. It worked out great when Brooks was starting. Some of the best ball I had seen from this team for 3 or 4 games. Then Rafer came back =(
T-Mac and Brooks are not gonna work together. Because they both want the ball, and Aaron makes T-Mac a passer
