Forget Plumbers: How 'bout Joe The Passer?

[lethalweapon3]

Get your Whack-a-mole mallets out. I'm wondering aloud about the positives and pitfalls of reviving Billy Knight's wet dream: a 6'8"+ guard named Johnson running the point for Showtime South.

Back around '06, Joe's options for receiving the ball (besides a wet-behind-the-ears Marvin, Zaza, and the Joshes) were cats like Al Harrington, John Edwards, and Esteban Batista. Copious turnovers plus a glut of small guards on the roster (T-Lue, Ivey, Salim, etc.) caused the grand plan to get scrapped. But now with greater talent upfront, and a more cohesive unit running the fastbreak, would Joe Johnson at point guard work in Larry Drew's offense?

Where I see the potential good is where a player predisposed to running down almost all of the 24-second clock for an iso-shot, now, may still get his shot... but only after getting the ball back once it's been sent inside and/or swung around the perimeter. Joe leading the play may very well force the ball movement that's so desired. In some respects, he becomes what Crawford is when he steps in to spell Bibby. Also, this alleviates the pressure for Teague to blossom into a starting ball-distributor role right away.

Where I see trouble is it puts great pressure on the wings (Childress we hope, Crawford, Marvin, maybe a rookie) to play strong defensively. And the defensive scheme will have to account for switching so Joe isn't chasing Jameer, Wall, and Rondo all over the place the whole game.

Would Drew go for this? Would Joe? Would you?

~lw3

[lethalweapon3]

Hope that's not Joe 'n Larry hitting that minus button over there! lol

Assuming it's not, anyone care to elaborate a bit? Anything beyond "Hell Naw!" is appreciated! :-)

~lw3

[Seano]

Hope that's not Joe 'n Larry hitting that minus button over there! lol

Assuming it's not, anyone care to elaborate a bit? Anything beyond "Hell Naw!" is appreciated! :-)

~lw3

I don't know. It's an interesting hypothesis though, and not one you ever really see discussed here anymore, so kudos for that. I remember back around the time we initially signed Joe, there being some discussion here about possibly putting him at point, but I haven't seen much of that line of thought since.

I liked your post, and don't know who would be giving it minuses or why they would do so (I mean really, what's the point?), but to me anyway it's pretty much impossible to answer. Would Drew go for it? I have no idea, but he seems flexible and open to change and he's obviously going to do whatever he thinks gives us the best shot at winning with or without Joe, and if that's with Joe, then if player and coach both think Joe can man the point and we'd be better off that way, then I think Drew would probably be willing to experiment a little with that. That said though, he does seem to be very committed to Jeff Teague.

Would Joe do it? Again, who knows? He's indicated in the past that he wouldn't exactly be opposed to playing a little point, but that was then and this is now, and where he's at regarding everything including his free agency status, who knows?

Would I do it if I were the coach? I might be inclined to fart around with it a bit, just to see what happens. I do believe that Joe can be a good distributor and a good facilitator and could theoretically run an effective offense as a starting point, but the proof of that lies in the pudding, and unfortunately we just don't have a whole lot of that proof-ful pudding lying around.

I think the reason your post is probably not getting many answers is because it is *so* extremely hypothetical and there are so many unknowns regarding Joe and his future and his intentions and his thoughts about staying here and what he wants to do, on top of all the questions about Larry Drew, and what he might do or be willing to do, that it makes it nearly impossible to answer, at least for me. I mean it's all a great, huge unknown.

[lethalweapon3]

Thanks Seano! I do believe that Joe as a free agent would have the most misgivings of anyone about it. I could hear him going, "Not THIS again!" (Phoenix also tried him as a PG around 2004).

But, if it was sold on the angle that, with Teague emerging, it will further limit his overall minutes during the regular season (a rumored issue he had with the Woodson regime), he may become amenable to it. He wouldn't have to be a 40-minute-man with Teague, Bibby, and Crawford in the backcourt.

Rotation-wise, either Craw or Childress would have to be the starting SG. Not ideal, but you could have worse problems. Flexibility allows multiple players to slide into the 2-spot during the game.

Joe/Teague/Bibby

Craw/Rookie

Childress/Marvin

Josh/Free Agent

Al/Zaza

~lw3

[TheNorthCydeRises]

His post is probably getting negatives for a number of reasons:

1) JJ can't effectively guard PGs. For short stretches, yes. For the whole game? NO.

2) He's essentially the PG already. He's led this team in assists 4 of his 5 years in Atlanta, and he's averaged over 5 assists while here.

3) Fans DESPERATELY want to see if Teague can run the team.

4) Having JJ play more PG may hurt the team, because it will see him passing the ball even more to guys who can consistently knock down open jumpers.

5) People need to be setting JJ up for more easy shots.

[MaceCase]

Part of the main issue with playing bigger guys at the point is not their ability to run it but to defend it. A lot of Joe's woes on defense came from him having to guard naturally quicker points who would shred him because Bibby had zero inclination to do so. I have no issue with him running the point some as he already does that but there has to be an offguard in the lineup that can take on the other team's point on defense, Chills for the love of God can't guard a ladder, Jamal's defensive woes are well chronicled and Teague's strength on offense would be negated because the ball would be out of his hands. We've had half the ability to run your idea it's just the lack of movement in the offense plus the inability of rookie combos to work offguard and finally the defensive liabilities of the vets that have made it not look as successful if not at all noticeable.

[lethalweapon3]

Thank y'all as well! I remember watching Nelson running circles around Joe in the playoffs and asking "Why is Joe guarding... oh, yeah, that's why." (Bibby, Craw) Thank goodness for Mario, I guess. LOL @ the ladder, I don't remember Chillz being that bad, but maybe he was so bad I've blacked it out from memory.

Not having anyone else in the backcourt with sound defensive skills pretty much glues Joe to the 2. Hopefully, Teague can develop quickly to become that guy for the PG position. If he's not...

~lw3

[AUhawksfan]

I wouldn't have a problem with Joe playing point maybe 10 min. a game. He brought the ball up a lot, but with Woodson's non-offense he usually got the ball right back. Maybe LD could make better use of it.

I think at this point though, I'd like to see what Teague can do as a full time point guard. All indications seem to be that that is what the case is going to be.