Jordan Woodard and the Faith 7 Game

[garyeb2]

Wasn't Kruger a scoring point guard? I'm guessing Kruger would be looking for some consistent scoring production from his point guard.

I've mentioned this before. Kruger will want his point guard to be able to break his defender down off the dribble. And then not give anything back on the defensive end. Between Woodard and Cousins, whichever one of them able to that the best and most often will be his point guard.

 

[WTSooner]

That is like saying Mark McGwire will be a terrible hitting coach b/c all he knew how to do was hit homeruns. Mark McGwire is actually a very good hitting coach, and from all accounts, is able to teach all aspects of hitting, even though as a player he was mostly a homerun hitter. They type of player LK was, what, 30+ years ago, has nothing to do with Woodard. It's basic math really. If Hield, and Hornbeak, and Booker, and Cam, and Spangler are all going to score as much as we think they will, we certainly won't need a bunch of points out of our pg's. Don't confuse "preferring a pass-first pg" with "wanting a pg that has no offensive skills." HUGE difference in those two things. I still want a pg that can score when left open, or when other guys are struggling. I just don't want a pg that has to score a bunch to contribute. Or a guy that wants to "get his".

 

[KBaden145]

Ignoring his attitude how was he a disappointment? I thought he was a very good player as far as skills. Gary is correct that he turned the ball over a bit too much but I personally think that is easier to fix than say a guy like Grooms that doesn't turn the ball over much but can not make his open shots.

I hope Woodard is better than TMG but I when just discussing skills, I have zero problem comparing a player to TMG.

Skill wise, he was far from a disappointment. I would be interested to see what a coach like LK would be able to do with him or if LK would even waste any time on him. He was certainly fun to watch at times but I'm not one to get all fired up about an individual player when the team stinks, especially when that player was the PG and an attitude problem like TMG. He was only here 1 year and obviously had some issues outside of parts of his considerable game skills. Terrible student athlete, a selfish PG (the worst thing I can imagine saying about the position), and, IMO one of the cancers on that awful basketball team. All very disappointing...but, yeah, he could play a little. So what.

 

[garyeb2]

That is like saying Mark McGwire will be a terrible hitting coach b/c all he knew how to do was hit homeruns. Mark McGwire is actually a very good hitting coach, and from all accounts, is able to teach all aspects of hitting, even though as a player he was mostly a homerun hitter. They type of player LK was, what, 30+ years ago, has nothing to do with Woodard. It's basic math really. If Hield, and Hornbeak, and Booker, and Cam, and Spangler are all going to score as much as we think they will, we certainly won't need a bunch of points out of our pg's. Don't confuse "preferring a pass-first pg" with "wanting a pg that has no offensive skills." HUGE difference in those two things. I still want a pg that can score when left open, or when other guys are struggling. I just don't want a pg that has to score a bunch to contribute. Or a guy that wants to "get his".

You are confused again. What I say hardly ever means what you think it means. We think on different levels and in a different context.

When I say that Kruger was a scoring point guard and he we likely look for a scoring point guard. That doesn't mean that Kruger only knows one thing and can only teach one thing. Only a superficial thinker like yourself would come to that interpretation. Kruger is an expert. He can approach problems and come to good solutions from a variety of different angles.