Jimmy Bulter SG or SF

[Bear Pride]

For me it's simple. With JB at SG, we're a bigger team. With JB at SF, we're a smaller team. 6'7" at the 2G would give us a tough back court to match up with for teams! Jimmy's length and defense alongside DRose's quickness will be a nitemare for teams. Meanwhile, let's bring in another big body at the SF spot that can score and play defense! Josh Smith anyone? I'd keep Deng as our 6th man.

 

[Raskolnikov]

For me it's simple. With JB at SG, we're a bigger team. With JB at SF, we're a smaller team. 6'7" at the 2G would give us a tough back court to match up with for teams! Jimmy's length and defense alongside DRose's quickness will be a nitemare for teams. Meanwhile, let's bring in another big body at the SF spot that can score and play defense! Josh Smith anyone? I'd keep Deng as our 6th man.

And we don't have to overthink it. The game is long and today's teams like to go back and forth from big to small. The versatility and all around ability of Deng/Butler as scorers, shooters, passers, penetrators and multiple position defenders with good help defense allows us to match up against a range of attacks and teams.

For Miami I think you go big, for the Thunder you might go small, etc.

Butler is a good SG/SF.....end of story. We needed one. It doens't mean we don't try to find a shooter, or an eventual SF 6'7" to 6'9" replacement for Deng.

 

[czman]

I think your post is a good one, but these two spots seem to be all over the place. In one hand you're saying the traditional positions are based on defensive assignments, and later you use Butler's scoring to make the argument that he should be playing the SG.

I think I missed a step in my thought process. I was trying to say that players are defined by who they defend.

Then I was trying to add to that and say that Butler fills a needed role. The Bulls don't have a stretch 4 so they need to have 2 3-point shooters out there and if Butler can do shoot the 3 well he can be one of them. The other think I was trying to say is that he is a better miss-match at the SG. Meaning SGs will have a harder time stopping him then SF because of his ability post them up and get offensive boards.

It was suppose to be comment against those that say the Butler does not have the offensive game that is needed by the Bulls.

Sorry I did not make that clear. I hope does clarify what I was driving at though.

Also: much like clone, I'm going to give you props on the Eddie Jones reference.

There use to be a lot of SGs like Eddie Jones in the league. That type of player is starting to disappear a bit.

 

[Raskolnikov]

And perhaps most importantly.....Butler is Deng's "compliment", not his "replacement."

Tough to compare a veteran Sudanese national with 6'8" height and seemingly 7'6" wingspan with a young buck at 6'5" and a short stocky quick powerful frame based on hops and quick twitch shadowing just getting his first seasoned minutes in the playoffs.

No comparison, two very different players with different roles in different situations. A revolver and a 9mm.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Deng's 3-point ability is seemingly being underestimated based on the wrist injury the last two years. He might bounce back strong.

 

[czman]

No comparison, two very different players with different roles in different situations. A revolver and a 9mm.

A Revolver is a type of pistol where a 9mm is a type of ammo. I think you mean revolver and semi-automatic.

 

[czman]

Deng's 3-point ability is seemingly being underestimated based on the wrist injury the last two years. He might bounce back strong.

I am going to put together something about Deng at some point when I get the chance. I am not sure if it will make anyone think any different about him or not.

 

[Bear Pride]

And we don't have to overthink it. The game is long and today's teams like to go back and forth from big to small. The versatility and all around ability of Deng/Butler as scorers, shooters, passers, penetrators and multiple position defenders with good help defense allows us to match up against a range of attacks and teams.

For Miami I think you go big, for the Thunder you might go small, etc.

Butler is a good SG/SF.....end of story. We needed one. It doens't mean we don't try to find a shooter, or an eventual SF 6'7" to 6'9" replacement for Deng.

You mean like Josh Smith? WTF was your point again?

 

[Freakyslow15]

...yes. What's your point? I never questioned why he used stats in the first place.

I thought you were being sarcastic. I didn't realize you were just being obvious,

 

[Scoot26]

Deng's 3-point ability is seemingly being underestimated based on the wrist injury the last two years. He might bounce back strong.

Unless Deng gets surgery, I wouldn't count on it.

Sent from the interwebz using ancient technology

 

[clonetrooper264]

I thought you were being sarcastic. I didn't realize you were just being obvious,

I was being sarcastically obvious

 

[2323]

Two things I would want to know... How many minutes was he playing at each position and who he was playing against. If he spent like 80% of the time playing SF and 20% of the time playing SG, the SG stats don't mean that much and vice versa.

Also, if most of the time while playing SF he was guarding guys like LBJ, KD, Melo, Gay, etc. of course his defensive stats won't be as good since those guys will make any defender look bad.

BNB nailed it. Also, just because Butler is defending a 3, that doesn't mean he isn't being guarded by a 2. Also, as a subset of what BNB said about sample size, some teams like to go small. This might put Butler up against a player who is classified as a two put is playing against Butler as a 3.

 

[Bear Pride]

Some of you are still missing the point. Of course versatility is a good thing, and matchups is a huge part of the game. Jimmy offers the ability to play, and defend, multiple positions! However, you still have to put out a starting lineup. And I say Jimmy at SG is better for the Bulls. Look at it this way......

If we call Jimmy's main Position SF, then we'll be looking for another SG still, right? This makes us SMALLER as a team. Even though Jimmy has length and a crazy vertical, he's still only 6'7". I'd rather have that size at SG!!!!

Then, I'd like a 6'9" or 6'10" scoring machine that can defend at SF. This makes us BIGGER. WE NEED TO GET BIGGER AS A TEAM. Attacking the Heat with smaller guys does NOT give us an advantage. We need to attack them with SIZE!!!

We don't need more smaller G's, we need big men that can score and defend the rim. We will STILL be able to run small linups out there for matchup purposes with Jimmy at the SF position, but he would be a nitemare matchup at SG for other teams!!!!

It makes much much more sense to me to go with a Jimmy Butler/Josh Smith type of duo rather then a Jimmy Butler/JR Smith duo.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Some of you are still missing the point. Of course versatility is a good thing, and matchups is a huge part of the game. Jimmy offers the ability to play, and defend, multiple positions! However, you still have to put out a starting lineup. And I say Jimmy at SG is better for the Bulls. Look at it this way......

If we call Jimmy's main Position SF, then we'll be looking for another SG still, right? This makes us SMALLER as a team. Even though Jimmy has length and a crazy vertical, he's still only 6'7". I'd rather have that size at SG!!!!

Then, I'd like a 6'9" or 6'10" scoring machine that can defend at SF. This makes us BIGGER. WE NEED TO GET BIGGER AS A TEAM. Attacking the Heat with smaller guys does NOT give us an advantage. We need to attack them with SIZE!!!

We don't need more smaller G's, we need big men that can score and defend the rim. We will STILL be able to run small linups out there for matchup purposes with Jimmy at the SF position, but he would be a nitemare matchup at SG for other teams!!!!

It makes much much more sense to me to go with a Jimmy Butler/Josh Smith type of duo rather then a Jimmy Butler/JR Smith duo.

Let's break out the time machine and get Magic at PG, TMac at SG, young Dirk at SF then run Manute Bol and Gheorghe Muresan in the front court. Probably would be the tallest team in history.

Seriously though, I understand the wanting for height, but realistically, a JR/Jimmy lineup is far more likely than a Jimmy/JSmoove lineup.

 

[Raskolnikov]

This man was measured at the combine.

6'6.25" 216 lbs

SG!! with the ability to defend SF's in a pinch. I don't know what about him doesn't scream SG? The distinction is not that important between the two, he is a tweener? can we just settle on that.

 

[Crystallas]

Basing position on height? This is the NBA, not some Y pickup game.

 

[clonetrooper264]

This man was measured at the combine.

6'6.25" 216 lbs

SG!! with the ability to defend SF's in a pinch. I don't know what about him doesn't scream SG? The distinction is not that important between the two, he is a tweener? can we just settle on that.

Well his position here is listed at SF: http://www.nbadraft.net/players/jimmy-butler
As well as here: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jimmy-Butler-6315/
Basketball reference also lists him at both positions: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/butleji01.html
Heck, if you google "Jimmy Butler position" you get small forward.

Despite that, I only put those there to support the "tweener" argument. I think he can play both positions fine and have success at either one and thus it doesn't necessarily matter which one he plays so long as we have the right player next to him on the opposite wing. Clearly everyone believes he can play SG...no need to go further there. NBA scouts and analysts called him a small forward. Wikipedia and NBA.com just list him as a G/F. I think that's the accurate way to do it.

Once again, like Prope and Crystallas said many posts ago, the NBA has evolved beyond pure PG, SG, SF, PF, and C positions. Players can play more than one...

 

[clonetrooper264]

Basing position on height? This is the NBA, not some Y pickup game.

Even in pickup games people don't force me to play PG even though I'm the shortest guy usually. You could say even the pickup game has evolved beyond that. xD

 

[Crystallas]

Even in pickup games people don't force me to play PG even though I'm the shortest guy usually. You could say even the pickup game has evolved beyond that. xD

I get the same thing. When I play with people I don't know, they expect me to sit in the paint because I'm one of the tallest guys. When I play with people I do know, they expect me to be the point guard. Neither are my position, but whatever, you play. In the NBA, you have a lot of people in prototypical positions in height groups, but it's unfair to use that as the litmus test of what position a player actually falls into. In college, Jimmy was a PF just as often, as he was SF, if not more often. And he also played center match-ups.

 

[Bear Pride]

You guys still don't get it. You keep going on and on about height and versatility. It's about their game dudes. Bringing in a SG that can score instead of a SF that can score won't be as effective for the Bulls especially against the Heat. A bigger body, who can score and attack the basket, would force the Heat to check LJ on the SF, instead of neutralizing our smaller G's!

We need big men that can attack the fuckin basket. That's our weakness dudes! Moving Jimmy to SF does NOT address our bigs getting more production in the scoring game. It surprises the fuck out of me that Jimmy's versatility, and these height responses are even brought to the table. They are pretty much obvious points.

We do NOT have any real offensive bigs on our roster!!!! Tell me witch big is a REAL offensive player. Boozer, Noah, Taj, Deng are NOT offensive guys!!!!!! Moving Jimmy to SF ONLY GIVES US ANOTHER BIG THAT'S NOT A TRUE OFFENSIVE PLAYER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We need to bring in bigs that can score. Plain and fuckin simple! With Mirotic coming in two years and Deng in his last year, we NEED to address the SF position!!!!! Moving Butler there does NOT do this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!