I’ve seen a lot of posts lately regarding point Sochan experiment and I wanted to try to explain both sides of the argument and explain why there is a fundamental difference in opinion. At the end of the day, we are all Spurs fans here. We all want what is best for the team. We just have different ideas about what it is best for the team. Let’s not antagonize the other side for having a differing opinion about what’s best for the team since both sides have valid arguments.

Arguments in Favor of Point Sochan:

Letting Jeremy work on his ball handling and passing will make him a well-rounded player. Jeremy was never meant to be a full-time starting PG on a championship-caliber team, but his experiences this year as the starting PG will help him develop into a Draymond Green-like player, which will be very useful for the Spurs in the future when they will hopefully contend for a title. I realize the experiment looks bad right now, but Sochan is only 20 years old and just 7 games into learning PG for the first time. It will be ugly at first, and that’s ok because the Spurs are not currently in win-now mode.

Arguments Against Point Sochan:

Jeremy being the starting PG is stunting everyone’s development, including Jeremy himself. Putting him in this position is setting him up for failure by overwhelming with too much on his plate. That is a surefire way to ruin any young player’s development. Instead of focusing on learning to be a PG, Jeremy should be focusing on improving his off-ball skills as a wing, especially his shooting. It would also make everyone else’s life in the starting lineup more easy if they had a competent PG to set them up. Playing pick-up street ball on offense is not a good habit for a team of young players to get used to. They need to operate within a team system. In order for that to happen, they need someone who can competently initiate the team system.