Sigz
06-29-2009, 09:22 PM
The hand-checking rules have been changed since 2001, but it has taken a few years for the rules to evolve into a different loooking game.
As of 2009, it's officially clear that super-fast guards can do serious damage in NBA defenses. Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Aaron Brooks ... the quick guys who can get into the lane at will have become little one-man wrecking crews at times.
The old way to guard them was to bump them off course with an arm or a body. The new way ... not sure there is a new way yet.
I had been assuming that every team would basically have to have a speedy defender to throw out there in those situations. (Somebody keeps blowing by Steve Blake? Bring in Jerryd Bayless!)
But assumptions are always dangerous, and Kurt from Forum Blue and Gold makes a great point: If nobody can stop those guys consistently without drawing a lot of fouls, why carry a player who specializes in trying?
And what's more, why play a tiny guy, when long ones are generally more effective?
The Lakers have had their best success not with small and quick but with bigger and longer. Look at it this way, under today's rules Tony Parker could not defend Tony Parker, Jameer Nelson could not stop Jameer Nelson. Defending these guards with bigger, longer players allows some room for mistakes with good recovery. They Lakers had some of their best success this season when Trevor Ariza was switched to cover a point guard. Just something to think about. http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-41-162/Who-Can-Guard-Tony-Parker-.html
As of 2009, it's officially clear that super-fast guards can do serious damage in NBA defenses. Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Aaron Brooks ... the quick guys who can get into the lane at will have become little one-man wrecking crews at times.
The old way to guard them was to bump them off course with an arm or a body. The new way ... not sure there is a new way yet.
I had been assuming that every team would basically have to have a speedy defender to throw out there in those situations. (Somebody keeps blowing by Steve Blake? Bring in Jerryd Bayless!)
But assumptions are always dangerous, and Kurt from Forum Blue and Gold makes a great point: If nobody can stop those guys consistently without drawing a lot of fouls, why carry a player who specializes in trying?
And what's more, why play a tiny guy, when long ones are generally more effective?
The Lakers have had their best success not with small and quick but with bigger and longer. Look at it this way, under today's rules Tony Parker could not defend Tony Parker, Jameer Nelson could not stop Jameer Nelson. Defending these guards with bigger, longer players allows some room for mistakes with good recovery. They Lakers had some of their best success this season when Trevor Ariza was switched to cover a point guard. Just something to think about. http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-41-162/Who-Can-Guard-Tony-Parker-.html