Pre-post: Randy Foye's role on the team
by Mike Prada on Jun 30, 2009 7:32 AM EDT
in Player Analysis
Email
PrintFolks,
I've been working behind the scenes on a post exploring Randy Foye's potential role with this team and what he brings to the table. I feel like we have a pretty good handle on Mike Miller, but Foye's presence remains a bit of a mystery, at least to me. I was going to run it last night, but Rook beat me to the punch with his lingering thoughts on Ricky Rubio.
As a precursor to the later Foye post, I want to get the discussion going so it can potentially help frame my analysis. What are your thoughts on Randy Foye? Where do you think he fits into this roster?
59 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think it's his versatility that made him attractive to EG
First off I think he is Gilbert Insurance. The two are very similar in many respects and incase Gilbert doesn’t come back to what he was, he have his younger version waiting in the wings. Now I doubt that the team would re-sign Gilbert last off-season if they didn’t think he’d fully recover from his surgeries, but it’s still a just in case kind of thing.
Bringing in Foye also makes us the deepest team in our division at the point guard position. Our two guys both better than Chalmers, Bibby is a FA and Crawford has struggled at the 1 in the past, Jameer Nelson is solid but I’d prefer Foye’s all-around game to his and Charlotte has a nice young duo but again I don’t think either of them are better than our guys. This will let us swap guys during the game without hopefully seeing a drop in the offense, and a sustained attack with all our weapons should give our O a big boost.
Aspects of Foye’s game that sets him apart from Arenas is his ability to play multiple positions. Gil can gun it but he doesn’t have starting shooting guard experience, not that he couldn’t make that transition. Although Foye played his best while at the point, he has shown that he can be an effective 2 in this league. He is also a tenacious on ball defender. I havn’t watched him as much these past couple of years but I remember him being the guy who guarded the other team’s best player at Villanova, when they ran their 3 point guard offense. His speed and agility allows him to keep up with players smaller than him but he’s strong enough to body up with a shooting guard a couple of inches taller than him.
The more and more I think about this trade and getting these two guys, the more excited I get. I think they will both mesh well with the team we have and they give us depth that we desperately needed. As far as Foye’s role, I don’t think it will be designated but instead he will be called on to fill in where needed, whether it’s as Gil’s back up or back-court mate .
I agree with Spanky
First and foremost, I think Foye is insurance against another injury to Arenas. His game, although not as dynamic, is similar to Gilbbert’s. They are both shoot-first Points with scorer mentalities.
With Arenas, this team is probably a 50 win team….good enough for the 4th seed in the East… Without him, and with Foye playing the Point, they’re at least still in the Playoffs – although probably a 6th or 7th seed with 45 wins.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
Foyes game will ultimately cause Young Dmac Mcgee to fight for the 8th role on our most likely 7 to 8 man main rotation …. i think Mcgee will be needed more so he most likely will take that spot
Gilbert……Foye
Miller……..Foye
Caron…….Miller
Jamison…Blatche
Wood ……Blatche…Mcgee
if you think about we will always have 3 guys on the floor that can take on the role of scoring not bad
scoring
I think this has been an undersold point of the trade. In recent history, the Wizards have had three guys who you could reasonably envision getting 20 points in a night. That’s it. If two of them had off nights, we were done. Sure, occasionally you’d see Stevenson or Haywood get 20, but my eyes would pop out of my head when looking at the box score on those rare occasion.
Now, I think you can say that we have five guys who on any given night can net you 20. Think of the pressure that will take off the Big 3.
Are you counting
Young? I’m guessing not, figuring you’re probably talking about Arenas, Butler, and Jamison. I don’t think you can discount NY as a 20 point scorer. I actually think, aside from Gilbert, he is the best pure scorer on the team. (I’m not counting Foye either, because I haven’t seen enough of him)
fair point
Young can get his. Of course, the problem is if he’s scoring in bulk, that’s ALL he’s doing. It’s too often at the expense of other players.
I still think there’s a place for him in this league as an igniter off the bench, but a score only SG just isn’t a guy we can count on unfortunately. If we had the NY1 we had at the beginning of the season I’d feel more comfortable giving him major minutes, but it seemed like he really regressed as the season went along. Sad as it is to say, it may be time to move on.
I won't
dispute you on any of this. I go back and forth on Young all the time. One thing I do know though is that he has not gotten a completely fair shake. Yes, he has been immature, and has not been the hardest worker. But I grew extremely tired of seeing Eddie Jordan yank him after 1 or 2 bad shots, only to put in Stevenson, who in my opinion is a bad shot waiting to happen. Then last year Tapscott would keep Young on the bench even though he was clearly on a hot streak, and probably our best scoring option.
I just hope, whether we trade him or not, Young is given the chance to sink or swim on his own, not because of some stupid veteran bias.
I agree
The one thing I really hate about this trade is that we’ve swept the rug out from under Nick Young. After all of the trouble he’d had in his first year and a half, he was finally starting to get it together and become a smarter scorer and a better defender who you could always count on to at least contest each shot, plus he seemed to really fall in love with the idea of being a Jason Terry or Ben Gordon type sixth man. In a way, I almost want to see us make a second deal to trade Miller for a big, but that’s probably just because I’m too sentimental.
by pantslessyoda1 on Jun 30, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions
You really think we're going 7-8 the whole season?
That seems short to me. Has Flip said that?
I think both Dmac and Young will get some PT or at least fight for one backup spot. Critt seems to be odd man out to me. Plus I think we’ll get another big in the rotation.
and I don’t see a lot of DSteve in our future. Could be wrong, but I have a nagging thought that his back may continue to be a problem.
Yes... and when you look at it this way...
The need for a Big Wide Angry Guy (aka the BWAG) to round out the picture becomes that much clearer.
What remains to be seen is whether Foye winds up actually starting alongside Gil, with Miller as the 6th man. My sense is that this will be situational.
Still a Question Mark For Me
He could be an excellent chip to package with Mike James in a late August trade. Or he could be huge for our bench, providing much needed depth while being more consistent as a performer than Nick Young. He could have a breakout season and crack the starting lineup as the shooting guard. I’m just not sure about him either.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
Start him
I’m probably in the minority here, but I’d prefer Flip to start Foye and bring Miller off the bench. I like the potential dual combo guard with Arenas, and I think it will take some pressure off Arenas in terms of ball handling ability. Gil has always had someone else who could capably bring the ball up the floor, be it Hughes or Stevenson, and I think that dynamic would be lacking with an Arenas-Miller backcourt.
One thing that hasn’t really been discussed too much — has Arenas ever played with a guy like Foye, a guy who can really get the ball to the basket? I guess Hughes could some. But it seems like it could open up a new dynamic to his game, to have another slasher who can get into the paint and perhaps kick out to Gil for more spot up jumpers. Right now everything is off the dribble with him. I know Gil failed as a spot up shooter on the US National squad, but man, the guy is such a great shooter, I wonder if it could still work.
As for Miller, he’s obviously already shown he’s comfortable coming off the bench, and his ability to play almost four positions at times makes him the perfect sixth man.
I Agree!
Here would be my lineup
PG – FOYE
SG – ARENAS
SF – Butler
PF – Blatche or Taser
C – Haywood
I know we’ll never see it but hey… I’d like to see Antawn come off the bench…then he can heave it up as much as he wants.
by ucantstopbernard on Jul 1, 2009 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Since
Since the night the trade came out I’ve been saying he is Gilbert insurance. He’s also an upgrade coming off the bench. he can play alongside Crit too.
my hope
is that foye can be a bobby jackson, jason terry type for the team. Someone who can ignite energy, and put up points for the team. Nick young has turtled away from this role…
honestly
i don’t know either.
if he doesn’t get any better, he’ll provide scoring off the bench.
if he does, can you play him and gil together? that’ll be interesting.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Jun 30, 2009 10:16 AM EDT reply actions
Start Foye and let Miller return to role of 6th man...
Foye will be the closest thing to Huges the Zards have had since he left. Together Huges and Gil alternated their roles, in effect, creating a backcourt of combo guards. Huges, not a great shooter, but excellent at slashing to the rim, a very good rebounder and excellent in playing the passing lanes defensively. Foye’s scouting reports give him the same description. Gil then can spot up for shots more often.
Miller obviously has a mindset that allows him to be very effective as an off the bench scorer which was lost when R. Mason left.
by bozomoeman on Jun 30, 2009 11:15 AM EDT reply actions
I'm glad
I’m not the only one who thinks Foye should start. I was starting to feel lonely. I look at Foye as the meat of this trade, the part we gave up this pick for. Miller is a journeyman. I’m not saying he’s not a good player, but you don’t give up a lottery pick for someone who’s been to 4 teams and is almost 30 years old. So if Foye is the reason we made the trade, it would be disappointing to me if he is merely a bench player. Especially since we needed an upgrade at SG anyway. Furthermore, I would rather have Miller come off the bench at SF. I think he will have a better chance of defending at that spot, and it will put him closer to the basket more often, so that he can use his height for rebounding.
Miller was pretty pitiful as a sixth man this year
I don’t want to jump too much on my post, but from my conversations with Timberwolves fans and bloggers, the last thing that we should do is start Foye. Again, that’s mostly their read on the situation.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
teammates
Not for nothing, but I think it’s pretty tough to judge based on a season’s worth of observations of him playing with Sebastian Telfair.
And I can’t help but look at Miller’s 08-09 as a potential outlier for him. The PERs of the prior four years are outstanding.
That's a three-year trend, mfish, with Foye that you can't just attribute to Telfair
And while I agree with you on Miller, it’s still worth noting how poorly he flopped as a sixth man last year.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
But
that’s just one year. Now you’re making me nervous. Everytime I brought up how Miller’s coming off his worst year, all I heard was that it was because of the situation he was in (new team, bad fit for the system, etc.) So can’t that same argument be used in the 6th man discussion?
Anyway, the point is moot really. When I say I’d like to see Foye start, what I mean is I’d like to see him EARN the starting spot. I don’t want to see it handed to anyone. To tell you the truth, I’d just assume Young EARN the starting spot. But we all know that’s very unlikely to happen.
Also, I maintain that I’d rather see Miller play more at the 3, considering how deep we are in the guard department.
I'll just be interested
To see how he fares with some real talent in the backcourt. That’s all I’m saying. McCants, Telfair, Ricky Davis… he’s had to be “the man” in that backcourt seemingly every year he’s been there. I have not watched the Wolves a ton, I’ll admit, but he just hasn’t had real support in terms of backcourt help.
I just look at the numbers and see him as more than simply a gunner. Seemingly he’s got the reputation of a gunner, but he’s still shown he can pass the rock with an assist ratio of over 20% every year he’s been in the league (Stevenson has never cracked 20%, Hughes was at 21.9% in his big year here). Not to mention, if we’re looking for a guy to be a scorer off the bench, we already have one in NY1. I’d like to see if Foye can be more than that when surrounded by the right talent.
As for Miller, the one year he was primarily a sixth man, it was on a GOOD 49 win Grizzly team, and he obviously fit that role perfectly by winning the award. I would just like to see them experiment with him in that role again.
Good Question
When I heard about the trade, I immediately envisioned Miller starting with Foye as the third guard. He’s not a good option as a starting PG (especially with the crap the TWolves had on the floor with him), but against backups 1s, he should be fine. I could see him starting alongside Arenas in a sort of Hughes role, but I think his contributions will be more valuable as a combo guard who gets minutes backing up Gil at point and Miller at SG. This would have the added benefit of keeping Stevenson and Crittenton on the bench except in emergencies.
by TheSecretWeapon on Jun 30, 2009 11:51 AM EDT reply actions
Great
isn’t that Young’s role? If Foye comes off the bench all year, there will be a lot of redundancy on this team.
But
The 2nd team offense needs to get beyond the NY 1 on 5 offense. Thats why they have Nick working off screens this summer. That unit needs more scoring threats than just Nick. The 2nd unit should mimic the first in that there are 2 or 3 scoring threats that compliment each other. Nick doesn’t create for others the way Foye can.
i agree
i’ll go further and say i think it’s unlikely nick will ever be more than a one on one guy.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Jul 1, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s also a one on two guy, a one on three guy etc…
by MR on Jul 1, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm a Wolves fan
and I think you got two great locker room guys with these two, which I think are gonna help just as much as their on-the-court play. Foye is destined to be a 6th man, even on a bad Timberwolves team he was never a solid leader of the team at the PG spot. He’s the type of guy you bring off the bench in the fourth quarter and have him unload on the other team’s backup or even their starters…just dont expect him to be a good defender (which, no offense, the Wiz are kinda notorious for not being anyways, and Flip won’t help that too much). Miller has won ROY and 6th Man, now is his turn to win MVP…ok just kidding, but he is a better starter than Foye, especially at the SG spot. He gives size, 3pt shooting, and a tremendous ability to hustle and give his body to the team (I dont know how many times I watched him get up painfully off the floor…a little too much). He’s the perfect role player to start on a championship team (think James Posey without being able to take a charge as well, maybe Vujacic).
The best piece you got from the TWolves this season is undoubtedly your coach. Flip is a great guy who will be fired after 3 or 4 great seasons because he can no longer take the team to the next level without managements help. It happened in Minny and it happened in Detroit. Don’t let this guy go! He is a tremendous coach who gets the axe because management doesnt update its roster and its pieces keep getting older (KG, Cassel, and Spree without any draft picks…thanks McHale. And Detroit’s guys obviously got too old and lost Ben Wallace. Also, what happened to Jason Maxiell after Saunders left? They picked up AI and fired Saunders, both in desperation attempts to make the team better which in hindsight, and foresight to most people, had the opposite effect. But hey, now Chauncey (another MN guy) is finally getting the credit he deserves as a HOF candidate instead of just the finals MVP.)
Moral of this post, KEEP FLIP SAUNDERS and put Foye where he is destined to be. If nothing else, make him earn his starter spot, he has been given the lead role from day one and needs to learn that everything isnt free [when you dont play for McHale].
Wizards Fans Aren't Used to That
I dont know how many times I watched him get up painfully off the floor…a little too much
Cough… Antonio Daniels… Cough.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
Daniels would take some nasty falls though
after hurling himself through the air at the rim and getting fouled.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 30, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Did Not Mean to Imply AD Faked His Pain
And I also don’t think the OP meant to imply that about Miller either.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
I thought you just meant he was a little overdramatic
From what I hear Wolves fans saying about Miller though, he would play it up quite a bit. I really could care less, as long as he produces.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 30, 2009 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah
I wasn’t real excited when we signed AD, but I gained tons of respect for the guy after watching his reckless abandon. Short of Allen Iverson, I don’t think there’s a guard in the league who attacks the basket with such little regard for his own well being. AD is one tough SOB.
I'd still vote for AD in this respect
although Wade gets more attention for it.
by MR on Jun 30, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Are you comparing
who has more reckless abandon or who is better at it? Cuz then there is no competition…. at all. Plus, Wade does it for at least 40 minutes per game. I’m gonna have to go with popular consensus rather than homer opinion on this one. Sorry guys. He might throw everything on the line, but Wade has been a superstar because of it.
Question
Looking at Basketball-Reference.com, it appears that Flip consistently had average to really good defenses, both in Minnesota and Detroit. Why does he get such a bad rap for his defense? Could it be that his offense simply overshadows the work he does on defense?
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
does it hold up in the playoffs?
i have no idea i’m just making a guess.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Jun 30, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Without Looking at the Numbers
Here is who Saunders lost to during his four conference finals appearances:
2003-04 – Lakers led by Shaq, Kobe, and coached by Phil Jackson – lost championship to Pistons
2005-06 – Miami Heat led by Shaq and D-Wade, coached by Pat Riley – won championship over Mavericks
2006-07 – Cavs led by LeBron James – lost championship to Spurs
2007-08 – Celtics led by Boston Three Party – won championship over Lakers
I wouldn’t pin those losses on lack of defense. His team won at least two games in all four of those series. In three of those series, I believe that he simply lost to the more talented team. The only real let-down, IMO, was when he lost to LeBron James in 06-07. Keep in mind that he had to win two straight playoff series just to get to the conference finals in those four years.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
And I'd add
that in 06-07 the refs pulled a “Lakers/Kings” move that gave the Cavs the series. Travel after travel not called in the 4th quarter.
by MR on Jun 30, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Saunders is NOT a bad defensive coach
he just isnt known for it as much as his offense. Think of the players he had on his team: KG, Ben Wallace, Chauncey, Rip, Tayshaun… I’m just saying, he has had a ton of defensive players on his team and he was not the reason for that (see Larry Brown… and KG is just a defensive stud all by himself).
But My Point
and KG is just a defensive stud all by himself
IMO, so is Brendan Haywood. Flip got guys like Latrell Sprewell and Stephon Marbury to contribute to solid to spectacular defensive teams. If all he needs to do this is one defensive anchor, then all he needs to do is shake hands and introduce himself to a Mr. Haywood.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
I think Foye would've been a better pickup if Eddie Jordan was still here
He seems to fit the mold of what EJ looks for in a guard. Flip Saunders, if memory serves, seems to prefer more traditional point/2-guard profiles (Billups/Hamilton, Cassell/Sprewell, etc.) He’s had guys like Troy Hudson and Flip Murray, but I don’t think they ever really fit into the offensive structure.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
We like the weird ones...
CWeb and the Glove on Foye..
by ucantstopbernard on Jul 1, 2009 2:13 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Larry Bird would like to team with Kobe for the win, LeBron for the fun
- Will Ferrell will run the player intros at Wednesday’s Bulls/Hornets game
- Seattle is still working hard to get an NBA team, but at what cost to Sacramento?
- On Paul Pierce’s incredible, sometimes unlikely, run as a Boston Celtic
- Mark Jackson doesn’t want to hear your excuses/is totally making excuses
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
