Gino-Step
03-25-2014, 06:51 PM
As a result of many disagreeing with me about why today's NBA is not suited for traditional PGs or C's, I have written some history of the sport. Those that say I am wrong citing the combos of Bob Cousy and Bill Rusell, Magic and Kareem, West and Chamberlain etc, need to realise in a league where there is no 3 point line or few players that can nail 3 pointer, then small point guards and big centres are actually very helpful. But in today's NBA they are not.
Here's why. There is a hoop. If assuming no 3 point line, it is better to shoot as close to the hoop as possible. Therefore, it behooves you to have a few lumbering big guys who can dunk or put it in near the hoop as a most efficient way of getting 2 points. Since the other team is doing this also, it behooves you to have lumbering big guys who can block their shots and get the rebounds from these close range shots as they'll bounce somewhere near the rim.
But on change of possessions, these big guys can't get down the court very fast so the other type of players you need are super quick nimble fast guys with advanced dribbling skills. So your traditional 'guards'. Because there is not a line where suddenly points are worth 3 and not 2, basically your goal is to move as fast as possible to various open spots beyond the paint area which is very crowded by big men. These guards sometimes shot from 10 feet, sometimes 14, sometimes 18, sometimes 20 and could be anywhere on the court. Speed and quickness was important.
As a result, most teams then were comprised of 2 small guards, and 2 big guys and 1 biggest guy. This is where the positions of Guard + Guard + Forward + Forward + Center came from. All the champions therefore had the traditional players.
Look at how the league has changed though.... Michael Scottie Dennis. Wade LeBron Bosh. The wing positions became really important because there is this circle called the three point line where suddenly shooting from there is worth 3 points. And all the kids especially Europe (Dirk, Peja) learned to shoot these even as big men. Suddenly big guys had to guard under the hoop and this spot 23 feet away from the hoop that they didn't have to do before. And so we had the invention of the stretch four.
The three point line and the perfection of it created this desire by offences to drive and kick. Without a three point line, why the hell would I kick? for what purpose? To try to score 2 points from farther? And even if I did have to pass it out because Wilt or Russell was blocking me, why wouldn't I kick it for a 17 foot jumper? Why do I need to kick exactly 23 feet for a shot?
Most players shoot from the 3's near the 3 point line and not 10 feet farther back. Why? Cause 3 points is 3 points why would I make it more difficult. Apply the same logic with 2's. If a layup 2 feet from the rim is 2pts and so is a 20ft jumper, you should take the layup.
So now the sport of basketball has 2 hot zones. Right near the hoop and about 23 feet away from the hoop. You don't know which one I will pick and with which player. So you cannot have a big lumbering centre who can only defend the basket and if pulled out to the 3 to guard Steph Curry on a pick and roll, can't keep up. Likewise, you cannot have a guard that can only guard the perimeter and if taken to the hoop or posted up, gets destroyed. Because offences are going to be built to attack the rim and to shoot the 3, your defenders must be able to do both also.
The best way to cover both the hoop and the wing with all your players is to have all of them be the Kawhi Leonard types. This way you won't be exploited on cross-matches.
You have to look at the sport for what it is. At the hoop it's 2 points. 23 feet away, it's 3 points. Now the 3 pointer has been perfected by enough players that defensively you have to adjust your game plan.
This is why what has worked in the past in terms of a John Stockton or a Wilt Chamberlain doesn't work as well anymore.
The talent in the NBA has not been diluted as many have feared. The reason we had more superstars in the 80's and 90's was because the purpose of the game was different, it was who was the best at getting to the hoop because that was where the scoring zone was. Passing doesn't help you get to the hoop. One on one does. So the sport featured more individual players on each team. So you had Barkley, Malone, Bird, Magic, Kareem, AI, etc etc. Guards who dominate the ball and Posts who scored. The superstars of today's game don't take as many shots. Team strategies are much more balanced. Passing is much more important. Cause now I can either pass towards the hoop (pick and roll) or pass towards the corner three or the pick man popping out. This creates much more angles of attack because I can either score the 3 or the 2. Before, I can only rely on scoring at the rim so whether I drove to the rim or passed to the rim, it's similar so why not just go 1 on 1. This mistakenly made fans think back then stars were talented... and today's league is diluted.
The NBA has changed and not for the better. The sport is much more predictable and homogeneous. It is trending towards a future where every team will put on the court as many Kawhi Leonards as possible. Kids growing up who are fat and big won't be able to say 'hey i can be Greg Ostertag'. Kids growing up who are small and quick won't be able to say 'hey I can be John Stockton'. You either will be 'hey' I'm a freak I am 6'7 with 7'3 wingspan or .... 'hey' that doesn't look like a sport I can play. I'm not like them at all.
Football is popular because I can be a receiver, I can be a QB, I can be a kicker. The future of basketball will be am I that guy who is everything. Blame this on LeBron, blame this on the 3 point line but this is reality. And this is why Spurs win 17 years in a row. They see these trends and they know what to go for. George Hill for Kawhi. Nando de Colo for Austin Daye. Targeting Diaw, Kirilenko. Drafting Davis Bertans and Jean-Charles Livio. Having a mobile big who can defend the post and the P&R in Tiago.
If you have a Kevin Durant, you can be a bad coach, not realise you should never have a Derrick Fisher or Kendrick Perkins on the floor and still look pretty good. If you have a LeBron James, you can be a bad coach in Mike Brown, not realise you should never have an Ilgauskas or a Boobie Gibson on the floor and still look pretty good. Make no mistake. That is rare talent covering up misuses of talent and misidentification of how to play the sport given the rules.
For everyone else who do not have this luxury, welcome to the new reality. Positionless basketball.
Here's why. There is a hoop. If assuming no 3 point line, it is better to shoot as close to the hoop as possible. Therefore, it behooves you to have a few lumbering big guys who can dunk or put it in near the hoop as a most efficient way of getting 2 points. Since the other team is doing this also, it behooves you to have lumbering big guys who can block their shots and get the rebounds from these close range shots as they'll bounce somewhere near the rim.
But on change of possessions, these big guys can't get down the court very fast so the other type of players you need are super quick nimble fast guys with advanced dribbling skills. So your traditional 'guards'. Because there is not a line where suddenly points are worth 3 and not 2, basically your goal is to move as fast as possible to various open spots beyond the paint area which is very crowded by big men. These guards sometimes shot from 10 feet, sometimes 14, sometimes 18, sometimes 20 and could be anywhere on the court. Speed and quickness was important.
As a result, most teams then were comprised of 2 small guards, and 2 big guys and 1 biggest guy. This is where the positions of Guard + Guard + Forward + Forward + Center came from. All the champions therefore had the traditional players.
Look at how the league has changed though.... Michael Scottie Dennis. Wade LeBron Bosh. The wing positions became really important because there is this circle called the three point line where suddenly shooting from there is worth 3 points. And all the kids especially Europe (Dirk, Peja) learned to shoot these even as big men. Suddenly big guys had to guard under the hoop and this spot 23 feet away from the hoop that they didn't have to do before. And so we had the invention of the stretch four.
The three point line and the perfection of it created this desire by offences to drive and kick. Without a three point line, why the hell would I kick? for what purpose? To try to score 2 points from farther? And even if I did have to pass it out because Wilt or Russell was blocking me, why wouldn't I kick it for a 17 foot jumper? Why do I need to kick exactly 23 feet for a shot?
Most players shoot from the 3's near the 3 point line and not 10 feet farther back. Why? Cause 3 points is 3 points why would I make it more difficult. Apply the same logic with 2's. If a layup 2 feet from the rim is 2pts and so is a 20ft jumper, you should take the layup.
So now the sport of basketball has 2 hot zones. Right near the hoop and about 23 feet away from the hoop. You don't know which one I will pick and with which player. So you cannot have a big lumbering centre who can only defend the basket and if pulled out to the 3 to guard Steph Curry on a pick and roll, can't keep up. Likewise, you cannot have a guard that can only guard the perimeter and if taken to the hoop or posted up, gets destroyed. Because offences are going to be built to attack the rim and to shoot the 3, your defenders must be able to do both also.
The best way to cover both the hoop and the wing with all your players is to have all of them be the Kawhi Leonard types. This way you won't be exploited on cross-matches.
You have to look at the sport for what it is. At the hoop it's 2 points. 23 feet away, it's 3 points. Now the 3 pointer has been perfected by enough players that defensively you have to adjust your game plan.
This is why what has worked in the past in terms of a John Stockton or a Wilt Chamberlain doesn't work as well anymore.
The talent in the NBA has not been diluted as many have feared. The reason we had more superstars in the 80's and 90's was because the purpose of the game was different, it was who was the best at getting to the hoop because that was where the scoring zone was. Passing doesn't help you get to the hoop. One on one does. So the sport featured more individual players on each team. So you had Barkley, Malone, Bird, Magic, Kareem, AI, etc etc. Guards who dominate the ball and Posts who scored. The superstars of today's game don't take as many shots. Team strategies are much more balanced. Passing is much more important. Cause now I can either pass towards the hoop (pick and roll) or pass towards the corner three or the pick man popping out. This creates much more angles of attack because I can either score the 3 or the 2. Before, I can only rely on scoring at the rim so whether I drove to the rim or passed to the rim, it's similar so why not just go 1 on 1. This mistakenly made fans think back then stars were talented... and today's league is diluted.
The NBA has changed and not for the better. The sport is much more predictable and homogeneous. It is trending towards a future where every team will put on the court as many Kawhi Leonards as possible. Kids growing up who are fat and big won't be able to say 'hey i can be Greg Ostertag'. Kids growing up who are small and quick won't be able to say 'hey I can be John Stockton'. You either will be 'hey' I'm a freak I am 6'7 with 7'3 wingspan or .... 'hey' that doesn't look like a sport I can play. I'm not like them at all.
Football is popular because I can be a receiver, I can be a QB, I can be a kicker. The future of basketball will be am I that guy who is everything. Blame this on LeBron, blame this on the 3 point line but this is reality. And this is why Spurs win 17 years in a row. They see these trends and they know what to go for. George Hill for Kawhi. Nando de Colo for Austin Daye. Targeting Diaw, Kirilenko. Drafting Davis Bertans and Jean-Charles Livio. Having a mobile big who can defend the post and the P&R in Tiago.
If you have a Kevin Durant, you can be a bad coach, not realise you should never have a Derrick Fisher or Kendrick Perkins on the floor and still look pretty good. If you have a LeBron James, you can be a bad coach in Mike Brown, not realise you should never have an Ilgauskas or a Boobie Gibson on the floor and still look pretty good. Make no mistake. That is rare talent covering up misuses of talent and misidentification of how to play the sport given the rules.
For everyone else who do not have this luxury, welcome to the new reality. Positionless basketball.