The obsession with PG's?

[apalisoc_9]

Where is this coming from?

When's the last time a PG led team won anything relevant...?

This 90's players analyst infested Media is full of Monkey brains.....

If the all-star wasn't position based, there would be 10 PG's and 2 frontcourt players..

[spurraider21]

where does your obsession with the "+ New Thread" button come from?

[Mr Bones]

The only people who seem "obsessed" with PGs are Apa_9 and Malik Hairston.

[Mr Bones]

When's the last time a PG led team won anything relevant...?



Classic dumb thread from Apa_9.

Every team that has won a championship since the Harper/Jordan Bulls (2 SGs) has had a PG. You're the one who obsesses over PGs-- stop trying to say it's everyone else who obsesses... it's not. It's you.

[Mr Bones]

Btw, Apa_9, the apostrophes in "PG's" and "90's" are incorrect. It's PGs and 90s. I know you're really busy telling everyone how dumb they are and how smart you are, so I thought I'd help you out there.

[Clipper Nation]

Classic dumb thread from Apa_9.

Every team that has won a championship since the Harper/Jordan Bulls (2 SGs) has had a PG. You're the one who obsesses over PGs-- stop trying to say it's everyone else who obsesses... it's not. It's you.

They've "had" a PG in the same way that the Clippers "have" a small forward, the Cavs "have" a real big man, etc. Merely "having" a PG doesn't make them a team leader, a focal point or even any good. And the teams that build their offenses around point guards as the first option never win anything significant.

[Mr Bones]

They've "had" a PG in the same way that the Clippers "have" a small forward, the Cavs "have" a real big man, etc. Merely "having" a PG doesn't make them a team leader, a focal point or even any good.

If it's good enough to win an NBA championship, then it's good enough to show stupid player fans that their obsessions are misguided.

[Jenks]

http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200706/r151985_542621.jpg

[daslicer]

Apalisoc proving to be a brain dead retard again. During the 90's the media was not obsessed with PG's. Outside of MJ the talk back then was about bigmen. Considering the league was loaded with all-star centers and PF's.

[hater]

where does your obsession with the "+ New Thread" button come from?

:lol

[Malik Hairston]

PGs are the easiest to relate to for the average fan, for size reasons, tbh..most fans/young players grow up wanting to be PGs, you always have the ball in your hands, and it's just a more fun position to play IMO..

Not only for that reason, but they also produce the most highlights and aesthetically pleasing style of play..

[Chris]

PGs are the easiest to relate to for the average fan, for size reasons, tbh

Absolutely true. In answer to the OP, the obsession started with Magic and the showtime Lakers.

[DisAsTerBot]

^ lol no. no one wants to be the guy passing to everyone else.
lol most highlights!!

another dumb take

[lefty]

http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200706/r151985_542621.jpg
Not PG led that year

[DisAsTerBot]

that's why when you play pickup there are soooo many guys that play like point guards. lol

[Malik Hairston]

^ lol no. no one wants to be the guy passing to everyone else.
lol most highlights!!

another dumb take

Uh, what? I didn't say anything about passing the ball, I said "having the ball in your hands"

Virtually all of the star PGs in this era are ball-dominant..

And ya, PGs are the most aesthetically pleasing to watch and easiest to relate to..the average American male is 5'10..

[lefty]

Uh, what? I didn't say anything about passing the ball, I said "having the ball in your hands"

Virtually all of the star PGs in this era are ball-dominant..

And ya, PGs are the most aesthetically pleasing to watch and easiest to relate to..the average American male is 5'10..
and 350 pounds

[Malik Hairston]

If you don't think there's an obsession with PGs, then you clearly haven't been following the NBA for the past 5 years:lol..all we hear about is that "it's a PG league"..

[CitizenDwayne]

I would say SG is the easiest position to relate to, and the one most people attempt to emulate, but yeah I mostly agree.

Don't see too many guys at the local gym trying to bang in the post

[hater]

Parker won it all in 2007

smh rookies

[Mr Bones]

Absolutely true. In answer to the OP, the obsession started with Magic and the showtime Lakers.

Bob Cousy was the first to be flashy and catch the attention of fans with behind the back & no look passes-- these plays were nicknamed "French Pastry" by Al McGuire, and the term caught on... long before Magic, who has said himself that he modeled parts of his game on Earl Monroe, who carried on the tradition form the 60s into the 70s.

[sook]

what are you like the new koolaid man? shit threads left and right.

[Chris]

Bob Cousy was the first to be flashy and catch the attention of fans with behind the back & no look passes-- these plays were nicknamed "French Pastry" by Al McGuire, and the term caught on... long before Magic, who has said himself that he modeled parts of his game on Earl Monroe, who carried on the tradition form the 60s into the 70s.

You're going way before my time there :lol Thanks for the history lesson though tbh. I've seen footage of "Pistol" Pete Maravich doing insane things with the basketball; I will have to look up those players you mentioned

[Clipper Nation]

If you don't think there's an obsession with PGs, then you clearly haven't been following the NBA for the past 5 years:lol..all we hear about is that "it's a PG league"..
:lol Exactly... that chucking, flopping faggot Curry is the darling of the league right now, for example.

[DisAsTerBot]

those are guards masquerading as pgs. tbh. Everyone wants to be a SG

[lefty]

Parker won it all in 2007

smh rookies
:lol

[ambchang]

Acting like Lebron wasn't the de facto PG for every team he ever played for.

Focusing on PG when the new NBA is all about position less basketball and that multiple players are running the role of a PG.

[Mr Bones]

Acting like Lebron wasn't the de facto PG for every team he ever played for.

Focusing on PG when the new NBA is all about position less basketball and that multiple players are running the role of a PG.

:tu

[Clipper Nation]

Acting like Lebron wasn't the de facto PG for every team he ever played for.

LeBron is 6'8". You can win with him facilitating the offense because unlike a six-foot-nothing traditional point guard, opposing defenses can't just put a far bigger defender on him and cause the entire offense to stagnate. It's the same reason why Magic was able to win rings as a first-option PG. Unless you have an absolute freak of nature running point who's way oversized for the position, you're not winning shit with them as the first option just based on physical anatomy alone without even considering basketball-related reasons.

[Mr Bones]

LeBron is 6'8". You can win with him facilitating the offense because unlike a six-foot-nothing traditional point guard, opposing defenses can't just put a far bigger defender on him and cause the entire offense to stagnate. It's the same reason why Magic was able to win rings as a first-option PG. Unless you have an absolute freak of nature running point who's way oversized for the position, you're not winning shit with them as the first option just based on physical anatomy alone without even considering basketball-related reasons.

The Spurs just won the finals last year with Parker leading the team in mpg, usage rate, and ppg. He wasn't their best player on the floor and they did have a uniquely wide distribution of scoring, but he still handled the ball more on offense than anyone else.

[ambchang]

LeBron is 6'8". You can win with him facilitating the offense because unlike a six-foot-nothing traditional point guard, opposing defenses can't just put a far bigger defender on him and cause the entire offense to stagnate. It's the same reason why Magic was able to win rings as a first-option PG. Unless you have an absolute freak of nature running point who's way oversized for the position, you're not winning shit with them as the first option just based on physical anatomy alone without even considering basketball-related reasons.

So Magic was what? A PF?

I know he's a queer PG, but I don't think that's what you mean by traditional.

[Clipper Nation]

The Spurs just won the finals last year with Parker leading the team in mpg, usage rate, and ppg. He wasn't their best player on the floor and they did have a uniquely wide distribution of scoring, but he still handled the ball more on offense than anyone else.

Finally, you're starting to get it. Also, the Spurs were just fine without Enrique in crucial playoff games against Portland and OKC.

[Clipper Nation]

So Magic was what? A PF?
An extreme outlier.

[ambchang]

An extreme outlier.

He was still a traditional PG though, wasn't he?

And that essentially disproves the OPs assertion, no?

[Clipper Nation]

He was still a traditional PG though, wasn't he?

And that essentially disproves the OPs assertion, no?

A 6'9" forward running point is about as far from "traditional" as it gets, especially at a position where the average height is somewhere between 6'0" and 6'3".

[Mr Bones]

Finally, you're starting to get it. Also, the Spurs were just fine without Enrique in crucial playoff games against Portland and OKC.

I've never made the argument he was their best player, so I'm not sure where that's coming from. I thinking you're just lumping people together who have different takes.

[Clipper Nation]

I've never made the argument he was their best player, so I'm not sure where that's coming from. I thinking you're just lumping people together who have different takes.

The original post stated that PG-led teams don't win championships (which is what made you butthurt in the first place). Nobody in their right mind would suggest that Enrique "led" the Spurs last year, ergo, it's not an example of a PG-led team winning a championship no matter how much you'd like it to be.

[ambchang]

A 6'9" forward running point is about as far from "traditional" as it gets, especially at a position where the average height is somewhere between 6'0" and 6'3".

Why are PGs confined by height? Who came up with this definition?

Magic handled the ball like a PG, ran an offense like PG, ran the break like a PG, and does everything a PG does.

If the point is, teams led by players under 6'3" can no longer win in the NBA because that hasn't been observed since Isiah Thomas leading the Pistons to b2b, then there maybe a point. But then you still would have to show that Billups wasn't the leader in that 04 squad despite leading the team in many advanced stats.

Magic's not a forward, he played PG in college and HS. He just happens to be a tall PG.

[Malik Hairston]

1. Lebron isn't a PG, he's a SF/PF, find me a position listing that has him at PG
2. The OP's thread is about PG hype, which isn't arguable, they receive more hype than any other types of players, despite the constant failures
3. Magic was listed at PG, he's the outlier, it's not the same as Lebron
4. The examples of PGs leading teams to titles as the clear best player are scarce
5. You can make the argument that Billups was the most important/best player in 2004, but there's absolutely no argument that he was the "clear" best or most important player

[Mr Bones]

The traditional role of the PG is to handle the ball, to bring it up court, to get the team ready for their offensive set... so whether your PG is your all around best player or not doesn't matter in the discussion. It's just like having a great lockdown defender on the wing, like Bruce Bowen. Bowen was never the best player on his teams, but he was still extremely valuable because he did his job. In the finals last year, Parker did his job. The discussion isn't about who's better, it's about all the components working together to win, and you can't deny that's what happened in the finals-- they won, in historic fashion, and Parker had the highest usage rate on the team.

[Mr Bones]

1. Lebron isn't a PG, he's a SF/PF, find me a position listing that has him at PG


LeBron defies a simple and pat description. You can't always argue that mainstream fans are wrong about everything, but then say LeBron's not a PG because no mainstream sources identify him as such. If he's bringing the ball up court and initiating the offense and leading the team in assists, then he's the de facto PG. And the same goes for Ginobili when he's on the court with Mills.

[Clipper Nation]

Why are PGs confined by height? Who came up with this definition?

Magic handled the ball like a PG, ran an offense like PG, ran the break like a PG, and does everything a PG does.
Again, he only got away with it because he was an extreme physical outlier at the position. If Choke Paul, Nash, or Stockton were 6'9" athletic freaks, they'd probably have multiple rings on their fingers too. The reality is, the vast majority of point guards are short by NBA standards and therefore can be easily taken out of the game (with their offenses immediately becoming stagnant) by putting bigger defenders on them. That's why having a point guard be the alpha of your team is not a smart strategy regardless of how good of an individual player they are, unless they're a once-in-a-generation outlier like Magic or LeBron.


If the point is, teams led by players under 6'3" can no longer win in the NBA because that hasn't been observed since Isiah Thomas leading the Pistons to b2b, then there maybe a point. But then you still would have to show that Billups wasn't the leader in that 04 squad despite leading the team in many advanced stats.
Even with the Bad Boy Pistons, I'd argue that they don't ring without Dumars. Isiah was individually great, but he couldn't win shit until they drafted Dumars.

I'd also argue that Ben Wallace was the most important player on the '04 Pistons because of his dominant defensive impact, followed by Sheed because trading for him was what put that team over the top.

[Malik Hairston]

LeBron defies a simple and pat description. You can't always argue that mainstream fans are wrong about everything, but then say LeBron's not a PG because no mainstream sources identify him as such. If he's bringing the ball up court and initiating the offense and leading the team in assists, then he's the de facto PG. And the same goes for Ginobili when he's on the court with Mills.

He's not a PG, though, he's a SF/PF..

When the PA announcer calls his name, he says he's the SF:lol..

[ambchang]

1. Lebron isn't a PG, he's a SF/PF, find me a position listing that has him at PG

Doesn't know what de facto means.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/12/lebron-james-cleveland-cavaliers-david-blatt-rift


“There’s a growing tension… between the players and coach David Blatt. There’s been a disconnect there that has been increasing. It may be something the organization has to deal with either giving David Blatt a vote of confidence, or maybe looking at the position again… They have completely abandoned his offensive system. LeBron has taken over point guard without even consulting David Blatt.”


2. The OP's thread is about PG hype, which isn't arguable, they receive more hype than any other types of players, despite the constant failures

If I didn't know any better, I would have thought the league has been talking about Lebron, Durant, Harden, Curry and Davis non-stop, with Curry being the o


3. Magic was listed at PG, he's the outlier, it's not the same as Lebron

Now is Isiah Thomas an outlier too? Walt Frazier?

Is Lebron not an outlier at SF? How many SF led teams to championships, historically? Bird, Lebron, who else?


4. The examples of PGs leading teams to titles as the clear best player are scarce

Same with SG, so? In fact, it has traditionally been centers doing the best in leading teams to championships. Again, so?


5. You can make the argument that Billups was the most important/best player in 2004, but there's absolutely no argument that he was the "clear" best or most important player

He wasn't?

[ambchang]

Again, he only got away with it because he was an extreme physical outlier at the position. If Choke Paul, Nash, or Stockton were 6'9" athletic freaks, they'd probably have multiple rings on their fingers too. The reality is, the vast majority of point guards are short by NBA standards and therefore can be easily taken out of the game (with their offenses immediately becoming stagnant) by putting bigger defenders on them. That's why having a point guard be the alpha of your team is not a smart strategy regardless of how good of an individual player they are, unless they're a once-in-a-generation outlier like Magic or LeBron.

So the great insight from you, apalisoc_9 and Malik Hairston is that it is tougher for short guys to dominate a league when the objective is to put a ball in a basket 10 feet off the ground more than the other team does it? No kidding. Really profound stuff.


Even with the Bad Boy Pistons, I'd argue that they don't ring without Dumars. Isiah was individually great, but he couldn't win shit until they drafted Dumars.

And I swear, Magic would have won without Kareem or Worthy, and Lebron would have won without the superfriends. I mean, Isiah isn't really the clear cut best player on the Pistons. Or ... wait, he's an outlier. Anything that doesn't jive with your assertion is an outlier.

Jordan was an outlier too. How many SG led their teams to championships? What about Lebron and Bird? How many SF led their teams to championships? And Duncan is definitely an outlier, how many PF led their teams to championships? Any non-center who led their team to a championship is an outlier.


I'd also argue that Ben Wallace was the most important player on the '04 Pistons because of his dominant defensive impact, followed by Sheed because trading for him was what put that team over the top.

You can argue that, but Billups was the engine that drove the Pistons. The entire offense runs around BIllups.

[Malik Hairston]

1. That's weak, but anyways, you're bringing up an article from 2014 about Lebron being the PG in Blatt's system..The Cavs haven't won anything this year..do you have any actual player files that have Lebron listed as PG? What about anything from the official NBA directory? Preferably from when Lebron was winning championships

2. The "pg league" narrative has been generating massive hype for a long time now, you would have to have never watched any ESPN show or any Draft to not agree with that..it has been widely discussed here, too, for years

3. This thread is about PGs, not SFs..I have said SF is a very difficult position to build around, too, I wouldn't build my team around a SF..regardless, PGs haven't led teams to titles since the 80s..it's ancient history..the SF position in today's era has led teams to a title 3 times in the past 6 years, and if you include Kawhi in 2014, that's 4..if you include Pierce in 2010 and Durant in 2012, along with Lebron in 2011/2014, that's 8 Finals appearances from a team led by a SF in the past 6 NBA seasons..ridiculous dominance from the SF position, tbh..

4. SGs have led teams to 9 NBA titles and 11 Finals appearances in just the past 20 years..not to mention Ginobili and Kobe being 1a/1b in 2001/2002/2005..it was a very dominant position in more recent NBA basketball in the 90s/2000s..

5. Hamilton and especially Wallace are in the same ballpark as Billups(better or worse) in most of the numbers..definitely wasn't the clear best/most important player

[Mr Bones]

LeBron defies a simple and pat description. You can't always argue that mainstream fans are wrong about everything, but then say LeBron's not a PG because no mainstream sources identify him as such. If he's bringing the ball up court and initiating the offense and leading the team in assists, then he's the de facto PG. And the same goes for Ginobili when he's on the court with Mills.


He's not a PG, though, he's a SF/PF..

When the PA announcer calls his name, he says he's the SF:lol..


Doesn't know what de facto means.

[ambchang]

1. That's weak, but anyways, you're bringing up an article from 2014 about Lebron being the PG in Blatt's system..The Cavs haven't won anything this year

The season's not over, so no, it's not possible.

But feel free to ignore the obvious.

:cry the game has advanced, but a PG is a PG who does PG things PGs traditionally do.



2. The "pg league" narrative has been generating massive hype for a long time now, you would have to have never watched any ESPN show or any Draft to not agree with that

I don't agree with that. Who has been hyped more than Lebron and Durant? Oh wait, Lebron IS a de facto point guard.


3. This thread is about PGs, not SFs..I have said SF is a very difficult position to build around, too

Well, duh, every position is very difficult to build around. In fact, you know what? There are 400+ players in the league every year, and only one of those players can have a championship built around him in a given year.


4. SGs have led teams to 9 NBA titles and 11 Finals appearances in just the past 20 years

And Jordan accounted for 6 of those (but you'd have to go back 23 years. It's just that Jordan was the greatest to play the game, nothing to do with him being a SG. Those repeat Laker teams were really co-led by MVPau and Kobe. Metrics backed it up.

There are 5 centre led championship teams, 6 PF led championship teams, 2 SF led championship teams and 1 PG led championship team.


5. Hamilton and especially Wallace are in the same ballpark as Billups(better or worse) in most of the numbers..definitely wasn't the clear best/most important player

What numbers?

[Clipper Nation]

So the great insight from you, apalisoc_9 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=11260) and Malik Hairston (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18403) is that it is tougher for short guys to dominate a league when the objective is to put a ball in a basket 10 feet off the ground more than the other team does it? No kidding. Really profound stuff.
If it's just a given, then why do you and other point guard apologists get so butthurt whenever anyone brings it up?


Billups was the engine that drove the Pistons. The entire offense runs around BIllups.
Really? Because Rip Hamilton led the team in usage rate in both the regular season and playoffs that year (not counting Darko in his extremely limited sample size). Seems kind of odd that the "engine" that the entire offense supposedly ran around didn't even lead his own team in usage rate.

[ambchang]

If it's just a given, then why do you and other point guard apologists get so butthurt whenever anyone brings it up?

Because it's been incorrectly stated when what you meant was short players, not PG.

And no, I don't care whether PG, SG, SF, PF or C leads a team to a championship, as long as the Spurs win, I don't care if it's Parker, Mills, Kawhi, Duncan, Ginobili, Green, Bonner, or the Coyote leading the team.


Really? Because Rip Hamilton led the team in usage rate in both the regular season and playoffs that year (not counting Darko in his extremely limited sample size). Seems kind of odd that the "engine" that the entire offense supposedly ran around didn't even lead his own team in usage rate.

Kobe led the league in usage rates multiple times, would you say he led the Lakers?

Do you actually know what usage rate is? It is a horrible estimation of a player's usage on a team, and is highly skewed by the FINISHER of the team, not the creator. Read up.

[Clipper Nation]

Kobe led the league in usage rates multiple times, would you say he led the Lakers?

He certainly led them to early playoff exits and the lottery when he was first in usage rate.

[ambchang]

He certainly led them to early playoff exits and the lottery when he was first in usage rate.

He led the lakers in usage rates in a few championship runs as well. What do you think of that?

[apalisoc_9]

The PG's can't lead a team to a ring theory is largely based on the fact that PG's are generally physically inferior...The easiest to neutralize defensively via a wing defender....So magic and a point forward lebron shouldn't even be in this conversation...

[ambchang]

The PG's can't lead a team to a ring theory is largely based on the fact that PG's are generally physically inferior...The easiest to neutralize defensively via a wing defender....So magic and a point forward lebron shouldn't even be in this conversation...

So Magic is not a point guard?

[JohnnyMax]

562484782463209472

[Killakobe81]

562484782463209472

I like Teague. Says more about the beast Davis is then anything Teague did wrong ..

[DD]

Fucking gooks

[KL2]

So Magic is not a point guard?

Magic wasn't 6'0, understand? It all comes down to size. Pack the paint, stick a long defender on your PG, it's the same formula teams have been using to stop them for years.

The fact that you have to go back to the 80's should tell you something.

The only recent PG's that were Finals MVP's were Parker/Billups.

Parker's was against one of the worst Finals teams of all times, with his offense created primarily off of Duncan pick and rolls, purely a system player. If you don't believe me watch the highlights, Duncan was involved in about 90% of Parker's scoring plays. While Gibson was a 2 year player, inexperienced, the Cavs as a whole were terrible. Even with his offensive performance he still didn't out play Duncan lmao.

Before that you have to go back to '04, LA was clearly the superior team, problem was Kobe chucking them out. His selfish play neutralized the entire offense, pretty much gave the Pistons the championship.

Look at what happened in order for 2 PG's to win the title, the odds are slim to none.

[ambchang]

Magic wasn't 6'0, understand? It all comes down to size. Pack the paint, stick a long defender on your PG, it's the same formula teams have been using to stop them for years.

That's not the original premise of this thread, understand?

Go read the OP and the title.


Where is this coming from?

When's the last time a PG led team won anything relevant...?

This 90's players analyst infested Media is full of Monkey brains.....

If the all-star wasn't position based, there would be 10 PG's and 2 frontcourt players..

Oh, and Isiah Thomas was 6'1", so he was an inch too tall for your suddenly new found criteria. It's just moving goal posts until something sticks.


The fact that you have to go back to the 80's should tell you something.

No it doesn't.


The only recent PG's that were Finals MVP's were Parker/Billups.

The only recent PF Finals MVP was Tim Duncan and Dirk
Center? Shaq
SG? Kobe and Wade
SF? Pierce, Lebron and Kawhi

In the last 2 decades, we have the following FMVPs:
Jordan
Hakeem
Duncan
Shaq
Billups
Parker
Pierce
Kobe
Lebron
Kawhi

10 different individuals, 5 positions, so it should average to about 2 a position. And we have *drum roll* TWO point guards! OMG PG suc


Parker's was against one of the worst Finals teams of all times, with his offense created primarily off of Duncan pick and rolls, purely a system player. If you don't believe me watch the highlights, Duncan was involved in about 90% of Parker's scoring plays. While Gibson was a 2 year player, inexperienced, the Cavs as a whole were terrible. Even with his offensive performance he still didn't out play Duncan lmao.

Thanks for the history lesson, I mean, this is such phenomenal insight that nobody ever talked about this before. But then again, you randomly came up with the FMVP argument, which blew up in your face before it even started.


Before that you have to go back to '04, LA was clearly the superior team, problem was Kobe chucking them out. His selfish play neutralized the entire offense, pretty much gave the Pistons the championship.

Look at what happened in order for 2 PG's to win the title, the odds are slim to none.

And yet it happened twice, and they represent 20% of all the FMVPs of the last 23 years! Go back a little further?

Dumars, who was an imposing 6'3"
Isiah Thomas, who was 6'1"
Worthy, a PF
Magic, who was a PG

I mean, why the magical cut off point at 1991? Oh, right, it doesn't support this amazing insight that short guys can't dominate a tall man sport and those guys have to be treated as aberrations.

Look, there's only one center in the freaking FMVP list since Hakeem won it in 95! And look at the competition man. Shaq went through some soft Dutch dude in the first, an ancient Mutombo in 01, and Keny:loln Martin in 02! Look at how bad the competition is! Look at what happened in order for 1 C to win the title, the odds are slim to none.

I can play this game both ways.

[KL2]

That's not the original premise of this thread, understand?

Go read the OP and the title.



Oh, and Isiah Thomas was 6'1", so he was an inch too tall for your suddenly new found criteria. It's just moving goal posts until something sticks.


Go ahead and play stupid you want, you chose a once in a generation player, that's 6'8 with a unique skill set, in order to prove your point. Then you chose guys from 24 years ago lmao. Everyone in here knows it has more to do with size than anything.




The only recent PF Finals MVP was Tim Duncan and Dirk
Center? Shaq
SG? Kobe and Wade
SF? Pierce, Lebron and Kawhi

In the last 2 decades, we have the following FMVPs:
Jordan
Hakeem
Duncan
Shaq
Billups
Parker
Pierce
Kobe
Lebron
Kawhi

10 different individuals, 5 positions, so it should average to about 2 a position. And we have *drum roll* TWO point guards! OMG PG suc



Thanks for the history lesson, I mean, this is such phenomenal insight that nobody ever talked about this before. But then again, you randomly came up with the FMVP argument, which blew up in your face before it even started.



And yet it happened twice, and they represent 20% of all the FMVPs of the last 23 years! Go back a little further?

Dumars, who was an imposing 6'3"
Isiah Thomas, who was 6'1"
Worthy, a PF
Magic, who was a PG

I mean, why the magical cut off point at 1991? Oh, right, it doesn't support this amazing insight that short guys can't dominate a tall man sport and those guys have to be treated as aberrations.

Look, there's only one center in the freaking FMVP list since Hakeem won it in 95! And look at the competition man. Shaq went through some soft Dutch dude in the first, an ancient Mutombo in 01, and Keny:loln Martin in 02! Look at how bad the competition is! Look at what happened in order for 1 C to win the title, the odds are slim to none.

I can play this game both ways.


Uh you do realize the game evolves right? It is not the same as it was 20 or even 10 years ago lmao. Positions evolve as well, we have new technology that has also affected player development physically which in turn affects the way the game is played. There were also new rule changes which affected the game and advantages/disadvantages players have. C's in general have lost their effectiveness since the 90's, why? The game is evolving, and it is now being taken over by Forwards like Leonard/Lebron.

Parker wasn't truly the '07 Finals MVP lol, Billups was the result of a player putting up some of the worst finals stats in the history of the NBA.
Then you look at Wade, who had how many FT's that series? The amount of defensive attention Shaq drew was huge as well. Bring up Shaq's competition all you want, he played against double/triple teams and still dominated and made his entire team better the same way Duncan, Dirk, etc. did.

[apalisoc_9]

Wade is an SG...

[Nathan89]

Curry will be fmvp this year.

[ambchang]

Go ahead and play stupid you want, you chose a once in a generation player, that's 6'8 with a unique skill set, in order to prove your point. Then you chose guys from 24 years ago lmao. Everyone in here knows it has more to do with size than anything.

If I didn't know any better, I thought you were playing stupid, BECAUSE THE TITLE AND THE OP SPECIFICALLY SAID POINT GUARD AND NOT 6'0" TALL PLAYERS.

Do you not get it? Read it, now read it again, and read it again, and read it again, and again, and again, and again. IT SAID PG, do you not get it. PG. Not short players.

PG means PG, it doesn't mean a short player. Those are two different things.

Iverson is 6'0", but he's not a PG. Magic is 6'9", but he was a PG.

And why does choosing a guy from 24 ago dismiss anything? Was Isiah Thomas not a PG?

Is Billups not a PG?


Uh you do realize the game evolves right? It is not the same as it was 20 or even 10 years ago lmao. Positions evolve as well, we have new technology that has also affected player development physically which in turn affects the way the game is played. There were also new rule changes which affected the game and advantages/disadvantages players have. C's in general have lost their effectiveness since the 90's, why? The game is evolving, and it is now being taken over by Forwards like Leonard/Lebron.

OMG! I didn't know that. I thought the game is played the same way it was played when James Naismith invented the game! I swear they are still using peach baskets and climb ladders to retrieve the balls after a made basket. Of course I know the game evolved you idiot, of course I know the rules changed. But this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic here, other than the fact that rule changes benefit perimeter players, and PGs are perimeter players!


Parker wasn't truly the '07 Finals MVP lol, Billups was the result of a player putting up some of the worst finals stats in the history of the NBA.
Then you look at Wade, who had how many FT's that series? The amount of defensive attention Shaq drew was huge as well. Bring up Shaq's competition all you want, he played against double/triple teams and still dominated and made his entire team better the same way Duncan, Dirk, etc. did.

Oh, and now Wade has to be dismissed because he shot FTs.

Lebron, as a small forward, could only have won because Allen and Miller threw in some miraculous shots for the Heat to win, or else they wouldn't have won, and Lebron would not be given the FMVP.

Kawhi didn't put up some of the worst finals stats for a FMVP ever? Really? Oh crap, he's a small forward, there goes your theory.

And Pierce won FMVP but Garnett, a PF, enabled it, and is really a co-lead.

It's a two way game, you try to dismiss the accomplishments of certain players by making it sound like it's some kind of unusual circumstances, I am here to tell you you are full of shit.

[JohnnyMax]

Wade is 6'4 and has a 6'11 wingspan

[ambchang]

Wade is an SG...


Wade is 6'4 and has a 6'11 wingspan

Tell that to your ally KL2, I don't even know why he would suddenly start talking about Wade, possibly because a PG is now upgraded to someone 6'4" or shorter.

And it's amusing wingspan is now coming into conversation.

Let's put it out in the open, shall we.

When these highly intelligent individuals who proposed this radical theory that short people will have less success dominating a big man's game, they created a new definition for point guard. Point guard no longer means a player who plays point guards, it actually means players who are 6'4" or shorter, with a wingspan 6'6" or shorter, wear Nike shoes, has an angular jaw, cannot bench press over 250lbs, and has a bald head. Any other descriptions and specs you guys want to put in?

How about some new amazing insights?

I got one:
- people who weights 200lb can never be great jockeys
- People who are 150 lbs of lighter are unlikely to be dominant sumo wrestlers
- I can't see a man winning an MVP in the WNBA

What else is there?

[KL2]

If I didn't know any better, I thought you were playing stupid, BECAUSE THE TITLE AND THE OP SPECIFICALLY SAID POINT GUARD AND NOT 6'0" TALL PLAYERS.

Do you not get it? Read it, now read it again, and read it again, and read it again, and again, and again, and again. IT SAID PG, do you not get it. PG. Not short players.

PG means PG, it doesn't mean a short player. Those are two different things.

Iverson is 6'0", but he's not a PG. Magic is 6'9", but he was a PG.

And why does choosing a guy from 24 ago dismiss anything? Was Isiah Thomas not a PG?

Is Billups not a PG?

The PG position has always been dominated by 5'10-6'2 guys, if they aren't that size they're generally a converted SG (Wade, Manu) or forward playing PG, it is then logical to assume the OP is talking about the majority and not the very few rare individuals with unique size that have played the PG position.




OMG! I didn't know that. I thought the game is played the same way it was played when James Naismith invented the game! I swear they are still using peach baskets and climb ladders to retrieve the balls after a made basket. Of course I know the game evolved you idiot, of course I know the rules changed. But this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic here, other than the fact that rule changes benefit perimeter players, and PGs are perimeter players!


The PG position didn't evolve until very recently, it's only now that you're starting to see more point forwards and 6'4 200+lb guys playing the PG position. Every other position evolved pretty dramatically. Would you like examples?

The PF position is now being dominated by hyper athletic 6'9 guys. Guys like Thomas were able to expose slow big men which were a dime a dozen back then, no longer now, PF's are now able to move much faster laterally, they can jump higher which affects the availability of shots for a PG as well. They can check a PG on the perimeter or in the pick and roll much better than they used to. They can set harder screens as well since they're much bigger, they can run the floor better which also affects transition play.

The same goes for the SF/SG position. Guys are much bigger/stronger/athletic. Guys like Green/Leonard are shot blocking threats which adds a whole new dimension to the game, practically everybody is because they jump so high. Since they're stronger this heavily affects a PG's ability to get off his shot because PG's rely on separation via body contact. Guys like Thomas went up against sticks, 190lb SF's like Adrian Dantley, even Pippen was pretty small, same with Jordan/Rodman, etc. Now you've got guys like Leonard who is near 240lbs playing the SF position. Average weight is around 220-230lbs of muscle for the SF position, that was RARE back then.

Meanwhile no more hand checking has pretty much neutralized most PG's defensively, unless you're super athletic like a Westbrook/Bledsoe.


Oh, and now Wade has to be dismissed because he shot FTs.

Lebron, as a small forward, could only have won because Allen and Miller threw in some miraculous shots for the Heat to win, or else they wouldn't have won, and Lebron would not be given the FMVP.

Kawhi didn't put up some of the worst finals stats for a FMVP ever? Really? Oh crap, he's a small forward, there goes your theory.

And Pierce won FMVP but Garnett, a PF, enabled it, and is really a co-lead.

It's a two way game, you try to dismiss the accomplishments of certain players by making it sound like it's some kind of unusual circumstances, I am here to tell you you are full of shit.

I don't know why you're bringing up Wade, he was a SG converted to PG, with ridiculous length and size, he was 220+lbs at 6'4, that's huge. He also needed a shit load of help from the refs too. Garnett/Pierce, doesn't really matter, the point is they were both big.

Leonard put up great numbers lmao, he was insanely efficient on offense, or would it have pleased you if he averaged 25ppg on a much lower shooting %? Sometimes less is more. Meanwhile defensively he guarded Lebron 1 on 1 practically the whole series, a guy they were running their entire offense through, trying to get going with all sorts screens and plays. Lebron was pretty much a non factor with Leonard out there, making incredibly difficult shots.

[Franklin]

It seems to me like Amchink is trying to bite his own tail here tbh. So let me sum it up here... PG may refer to 1) one's natural position or 2) a position one plays, either permanently or temporarily. Amchink insists that if someone plays, or has played PG then he is a PG regardless of his size and strength, and such players (like Magic) could lead their teams to championships.

But I think when you're speaking of PG in general, you're referring more to one's natural positions rather than a position he plays. SG/SFs have evolved into much bigger and stronger shape compared to the 90s and early 00s, while PFs have become smaller yet more athletic, which means PGs nowadays are not just facing the block threats from bigs but also most SGs and SFs as well, and PFs are also hard to beat with your speed because they're almost just as quick.

[ambchang]

The PG position has always been dominated by 5'10-6'2 guys, if they aren't that size they're generally a converted SG (Wade, Manu) or forward playing PG, it is then logical to assume the OP is talking about the majority and not the very few rare individuals with unique size that have played the PG position.


Hmm .. let see, greatest PG of all time:

Magic - 6'9"
Big O - 6'5"
Isiah - 6'1"
Payton - 6'4"
Kidd - 6'4"
Stockton - 6'1"
Nash - 6'3"
Frazier - 6'4"
West - 6'2"
Cousy - 6'1"


Only 2 of the 10 were 6'2" or under, 4 of the ten were 6'4" and over. So ... no.

The PG position didn't evolve until very recently, it's only now that you're starting to see more point forwards and 6'4 200+lb guys playing the PG position. Every other position evolved pretty dramatically. Would you like examples?
Pippen was a point forward, he came in the league in 1987.
Maurice Stokes was a point forward back in the 50s before he was permanently injured (he would have been an all time great.
Bill Walton played the point center position pretty well
There was a glut of tall PG after Magic (Steve Smith and Walt Williams comes to mind)
Larry Bird did that in the 80s
Don Nelson used point forwards all the time (Paul Pressey and Marques Johnson comes to mind)
Jon Johnson did that in the 70s

So the point forward position has actually been around for a while, but I would like you to give me a history lesson of how Point Forwards evolved.

The PF position is now being dominated by hyper athletic 6'9 guys. Guys like Thomas were able to expose slow big men which were a dime a dozen back then, no longer now, PF's are now able to move much faster laterally, they can jump higher which affects the availability of shots for a PG as well. They can check a PG on the perimeter or in the pick and roll much better than they used to. They can set harder screens as well since they're much bigger, they can run the floor better which also affects transition play.
Where is this coming from? I mean, did you hear me talking about PF? Is this why ultra quick PF like Kevin Love and Zach Randolph has been making all star teams and all-nba teams?

The same goes for the SF/SG position. Guys are much bigger/stronger/athletic. Guys like Green/Leonard are shot blocking threats which adds a whole new dimension to the game, practically everybody is because they jump so high. Since they're stronger this heavily affects a PG's ability to get off his shot because PG's rely on separation via body contact. Guys like Thomas went up against sticks, 190lb SF's like Adrian Dantley, even Pippen was pretty small, same with Jordan/Rodman, etc. Now you've got guys like Leonard who is near 240lbs playing the SF position. Average weight is around 220-230lbs of muscle for the SF position, that was RARE back then.
Adrian Dantley was 190lbs? Really? Where did you get your stats? Why would weight be good for jumping high?

Pippen was 6'8" 210lbs, and he blocked as many shots as Durant and Lebron.

Jordan holds the record for block shots by a SG followed by Wade, who is 6'4". I am not sure where in the world you got your views, but they are horrible. Blocked shots is more about reach and timing. I think Leonard and Lebron are phenomenal defensive players and their physiques certainly had something to do with it, but to say that good shot blocking is based on weight is about as misguided as it gets. There is no correlation between the two.

One of the best shot blockers in NBA history is Hakeem, who really is about 6'10" (listed at 7'), not particularly big. The other is Manute Bol, who is as thin as a pole. Larry Sanders is 6'11" 235lbs and was a phenomenal shot blocker before he went crazy.

Meanwhile no more hand checking has pretty much neutralized most PG's defensively, unless you're super athletic like a Westbrook/Bledsoe.
No more handchecking allows PGs to drive into the lane more easily, whether they are guarded by other PG or bigger players. It goes both ways.


I don't know why you're bringing up Wade, he was a SG converted to PG, with ridiculous length and size, he was 220+lbs at 6'4, that's huge. He also needed a shit load of help from the refs too. Garnett/Pierce, doesn't really matter, the point is they were both big.
Do you have dementia? You brought up Wade. Wade is 6'4" 212 lbs. Did measurement systems changed over the last 30 years. Why are players who are 212lbs now 220+, while players in the 80s that were 210 lbs 190lbs? What happened in the last 30 years?

Garnett at 6'11" (more like 7'0 or even 7'1") 220lbs is huge? And Pippen at 6'8" 210lbs was a stick?

Buddy, let me explain something:
- I post on Spurstalk, I have internet access
- I live in Canada, they do not block out google
- Therefore, I have google
- Therefore, I look things up easily
- I assume you are in the same situation
- Therefore, look up your shit before you post, please?

Paul Pierce is 6'7" 235lbs, plays small forward for the Celtics
Larry Bird was 6'9" 220lbs, plays small forward for the Celtics
Mark Aguirre was 6'6", 232lbs, plays small forward

I agree players are generally stronger in today's games because of better nutrition and such, but they don't just apply to SF, they also are available to PGs.

Leonard put up great numbers lmao, he was insanely efficient on offense, or would it have pleased you if he averaged 25ppg on a much lower shooting %? Sometimes less is more. Meanwhile defensively he guarded Lebron 1 on 1 practically the whole series, a guy they were running their entire offense through, trying to get going with all sorts screens and plays. Lebron was pretty much a non factor with Leonard out there, making incredibly difficult shots.
You talk numbers, I give you numbers.

Kawhi was 5th worst in ppg for all FMVP, 14th worst in total rebounds, dead last in assists, right in the middle in steals (21st, not tracked for five of those FMVP), 15th in blocks (the ones above him are all centers, with the exception of Kobe), first in FG%, 5th in 3p% (actually more like 3rd because the first two were Hakeem in 94 and 95, who only made like 1 3 pter), 26th in FT% out of 46 FMVP. He is in the 50th percentile or below in everything except blocks, FG% and 3p%. Did he have a huge impact on Lebron? Sure, but which FMVP didn't have a huge impact? That's why they are FMVPs.

[ambchang]

It seems to me like Amchink is trying to bite his own tail here tbh. So let me sum it up here... PG may refer to 1) one's natural position or 2) a position one plays, either permanently or temporarily. Amchink insists that if someone plays, or has played PG then he is a PG regardless of his size and strength, and such players (like Magic) could lead their teams to championships.

But I think when you're speaking of PG in general, you're referring more to one's natural positions rather than a position he plays. SG/SFs have evolved into much bigger and stronger shape compared to the 90s and early 00s, while PFs have become smaller yet more athletic, which means PGs nowadays are not just facing the block threats from bigs but also most SGs and SFs as well, and PFs are also hard to beat with your speed because they're almost just as quick.

Lebron's natural position is clearly PG, but yet he's a SF because he is listed as one.

Magic's natural position is clearly PG, and he is listed as PG, but he's not because he is tall.

You guys have no standards in what a PG is, and just likes to randomly come up with definitions to fit the "insightful" comment that small guys can't dominate a big men's game that was incorrectly stated as PG can't lead teams to championships in the 2010s because of rule changes and the evolution of more athletic players.

And you state that despite the fact that a guy like Tony Parker, Dwyane Wade, Allen Iverson, and Westbrook would finish tops in the points in the game category. Sure some of them are ultra athletic, and some of them are SG, but this has been the same since the dawn of time, and it dismisses both the notion of PG can't lead a team to championships, or short guys get blocked a lot more than before.

[Aztecfan03]

Even with the Bad Boy Pistons, I'd argue that they don't ring without Dumars. Isiah was individually great, but he couldn't win shit until they drafted Dumars.

you can say that for multiple people on any team that has ever won.

[apalisoc_9]

It seems to me like Amchink is trying to bite his own tail here tbh. So let me sum it up here... PG may refer to 1) one's natural position or 2) a position one plays, either permanently or temporarily. Amchink insists that if someone plays, or has played PG then he is a PG regardless of his size and strength, and such players (like Magic) could lead their teams to championships.

But I think when you're speaking of PG in general, you're referring more to one's natural positions rather than a position he plays. SG/SFs have evolved into much bigger and stronger shape compared to the 90s and early 00s, while PFs have become smaller yet more athletic, which means PGs nowadays are not just facing the block threats from bigs but also most SGs and SFs as well, and PFs are also hard to beat with your speed because they're almost just as quick.

:lmao

[KL2]

Hmm .. let see, greatest PG of all time:

Magic - 6'9"
Big O - 6'5"
Isiah - 6'1"
Payton - 6'4"
Kidd - 6'4"
Stockton - 6'1"
Nash - 6'3"
Frazier - 6'4"
West - 6'2"
Cousy - 6'1"


Only 2 of the 10 were 6'2" or under, 4 of the ten were 6'4" and over. So ... no.


You chose a handful of guys from throughout the decades lmao, you're reaching. Do I really have to bring up a list of all the NBA PG's 6'2 and under that have played the PG position? I guarantee you they'll heavily outnumber guys 6'4 200+lbs and up.



Pippen was a point forward, he came in the league in 1987.
Maurice Stokes was a point forward back in the 50s before he was permanently injured (he would have been an all time great.
Bill Walton played the point center position pretty well
There was a glut of tall PG after Magic (Steve Smith and Walt Williams comes to mind)
Larry Bird did that in the 80s
Don Nelson used point forwards all the time (Paul Pressey and Marques Johnson comes to mind)
Jon Johnson did that in the 70s

So the point forward position has actually been around for a while, but I would like you to give me a history lesson of how Point Forwards evolved.



Where is this coming from? I mean, did you hear me talking about PF? Is this why ultra quick PF like Kevin Love and Zach Randolph has been making all star teams and all-nba teams?


Of course I know point forwards have always existed lmao. Z-Bo and Love are big and strong as shit, they're strong and know how to gain optimal position which I'll explain to you later. Funnily they are both terrible defensively because they lack lateral speed, most guys built like them do, even Duncan has struggled heavily guarding the pick and roll for years.



Adrian Dantley was 190lbs? Really? Where did you get your stats? Why would weight be good for jumping high?

Pippen was 6'8" 210lbs, and he blocked as many shots as Durant and Lebron.

Jordan holds the record for block shots by a SG followed by Wade, who is 6'4". I am not sure where in the world you got your views, but they are horrible. Blocked shots is more about reach and timing. I think Leonard and Lebron are phenomenal defensive players and their physiques certainly had something to do with it, but to say that good shot blocking is based on weight is about as misguided as it gets. There is no correlation between the two.

One of the best shot blockers in NBA history is Hakeem, who really is about 6'10" (listed at 7'), not particularly big. The other is Manute Bol, who is as thin as a pole. Larry Sanders is 6'11" 235lbs and was a phenomenal shot blocker before he went crazy.



No more handchecking allows PGs to drive into the lane more easily, whether they are guarded by other PG or bigger players. It goes both ways.



Do you have dementia? You brought up Wade. Wade is 6'4" 212 lbs. Did measurement systems changed over the last 30 years. Why are players who are 212lbs now 220+, while players in the 80s that were 210 lbs 190lbs? What happened in the last 30 years?

Garnett at 6'11" (more like 7'0 or even 7'1") 220lbs is huge? And Pippen at 6'8" 210lbs was a stick?

Wow, I can tell you do not play basketball or physical sports in general. Where did I say weight helps shot blocking?

Being more athletic helps shot blocking, being able to jump higher has made every single position able to swat shots unlike the old NBA. Having a shot blocking SG like Green over your shoulder forces you to change the angle of your shots even if they are not jumping because their mere presence. Being able to move faster laterally also adds yet another shot blocking threat for big men because they are much more mobile around the rim and out on the perimeter. Less high % shots for PG's and that is why you always see them choke.

Weight gain, holy shit you are clueless. Weight gain has to do with creating separation, getting enough space to get your shot off, is everything in the NBA! Why do you think Leonard/Love/Lebron etc. are so dominant? They're big as shit. They bump off their defender with ease, they get to the basket, prime position in the post/paint for rebounds and easy shots. When you're able to bump your defender off you neutralize their shot blocking ability, create space and score easy points. Parker uses his speed to create separation, others use dribbling on the perimeter, but the most efficient by far is using your body because it is so hard to stop. It's also why Leonard was able to stop Lebron, he was near 240lbs, the 2nd biggest SF in the league outside of Lebron. Many of Lebron's drives were neutralized because he couldn't create enough separation, Leonard was too strong.

If you've ever played basketball you'd know what it feels like to play with a guy that is just physically superior to everyone on the court, they get great position in the post, easy rebounds/points because of their size, bump you off on drives to the basket for easy layups, draw all sorts of defensive attention, etc. Sometimes they are just too big to guard.

Bigger SG's/SF's also affect a PG's ability to get off their shots, because as I said earlier, more weight=more stability, less likely to get knocked off balance, allowing you to challenge the PG's shot. Thomas would get destroyed throwing his body into these monsters. Leonard would probably be near unstoppable back then, very few guys with his size to guard him. This also affects a PG's defense

Dantley was 190 as a rook, 207 at the end of his career, Pippen 200 as a rook, 220 at the end of his career, took both guys years to develop. But it's not like it matters because their competition wasn't today's, understand? Things that worked in the 90s, no longer work today. Guys with Jordan/Pippen's athleticism/size were rare, these days they're a dime a dozen. Btw, Wade was 220+, 212 as a rook, he was a ball of muscle with unique size/length, unlike players of the past. Able to create bodily separation because he was 220+, you starting to understand?

There were a lot of great big men in the 90's but a lot of terrible slow players as well, guys that'd get killed in today's NBA. Imagine Duncan guarding the pick and roll, that's what most teams bigs used to look like on the perimeter, horrible and slow, easy for PG's to expose. That's why you're getting more streamlined versions, super athletic forwards. Making things harder for PG's.



Buddy, let me explain something:
- I post on Spurstalk, I have internet access
- I live in Canada, they do not block out google
- Therefore, I have google
- Therefore, I look things up easily
- I assume you are in the same situation
- Therefore, look up your shit before you post, please?

Paul Pierce is 6'7" 235lbs, plays small forward for the Celtics
Larry Bird was 6'9" 220lbs, plays small forward for the Celtics
Mark Aguirre was 6'6", 232lbs, plays small forward

I agree players are generally stronger in today's games because of better nutrition and such, but they don't just apply to SF, they also are available to PGs.

You talk numbers, I give you numbers.

Kawhi was 5th worst in ppg for all FMVP, 14th worst in total rebounds, dead last in assists, right in the middle in steals (21st, not tracked for five of those FMVP), 15th in blocks (the ones above him are all centers, with the exception of Kobe), first in FG%, 5th in 3p% (actually more like 3rd because the first two were Hakeem in 94 and 95, who only made like 1 3 pter), 26th in FT% out of 46 FMVP. He is in the 50th percentile or below in everything except blocks, FG% and 3p%. Did he have a huge impact on Lebron? Sure, but which FMVP didn't have a huge impact? That's why they are FMVPs.

Aguirre is an example of a guy just being too big, you don't even have to be good, if you can create enough separation you can get easy shot after shot. He was one of the few with elite size back then and bowled through everyone, that wouldn't happen in today's NBA though, because there are tons of guys like him.

Just how many of those Finals MVP's played against an ATG of quality like Lebron 1v1? People glorify the shit out of scoring but defense is what wins championships, Leonard did it against Lebron. The Spurs didn't have to break their defense to guard him. Anything from Leonard offensively was a bonus and that sort of production in combination with his defense made his performance incredibly difficult and impressive than many FMVP's. His offense was rock solid, missed shots means you're giving the opponent more opportunities to score, I'd take efficiency all day.

[ambchang]

You chose a handful of guys from throughout the decades lmao, you're reaching. Do I really have to bring up a list of all the NBA PG's 6'2 and under that have played the PG position? I guarantee you they'll heavily outnumber guys 6'4 200+lbs and up.


The PG position has always been dominated by 5'10-6'2 guys, if they aren't that size they're generally a converted SG (Wade, Manu) or forward playing PG, it is then logical to assume the OP is talking about the majority and not the very few rare individuals with unique size that have played the PG position.

Do you know how to use the scroll button? Scroll back to what you wrote. Read it.

Do you know what always means? Do you know what dominated means?

It comes down to a real issue with you guys having zero ability to write what you mean to write, or to change the goal post when you see fit to weasel out of a stance. I don't know which one it is, but both makes you look like a retard.


Of course I know point forwards have always existed lmao. Z-Bo and Love are big and strong as shit, they're strong and know how to gain optimal position which I'll explain to you later. Funnily they are both terrible defensively because they lack lateral speed, most guys built like them do, even Duncan has struggled heavily guarding the pick and roll for years.
WTF (with regards to the bolded part? I responded with a huge list of point forward, and your response is that you knew they have always existed? It’s not about them existed, it’s about refuting your claim that it’s only recently you see more of them.

The PG position didn't evolve until very recently, it's only now that you're starting to see more point forwards and 6'4 200+lb guys playing the PG position. Every other position evolved pretty dramatically. Would you like examples?
And they didn’t have strong PF in the past? Like Buck Williams, Terry Cummings and the like? You are arguing out of your ass. One minute you say PF are ultra quick and can block shots like crazy is the reason they are better, the next one you are talking about Z-Bo and K-Love being big and strong so they can help gain position. Which one is it? Are the current players today better because they are bigger and stronger (untrue), or longer and quicker, or both? If so, start talking about all the big and strong players in today’s game.




Wow, I can tell you do not play basketball or physical sports in general. Where did I say weight helps shot blocking?
Here:

The same goes for the SF/SG position. Guys are much bigger/stronger/athletic. Guys like Green/Leonard are shot blocking threats which adds a whole new dimension to the game, practically everybody is because they jump so high. Since they're stronger this heavily affects a PG's ability to get off his shot because PG's rely on separation via body contact. Guys like Thomas went up against sticks, 190lb SF's like Adrian Dantley, even Pippen was pretty small, same with Jordan/Rodman, etc. Now you've got guys like Leonard who is near 240lbs playing the SF position. Average weight is around 220-230lbs of muscle for the SF position, that was RARE back then.
And how can you tell I don’t play basketball? Because I said Adrian Dantley wasn’t 190lbs? I can tell you can’t read though.

Being more athletic helps shot blocking, being able to jump higher has made every single position able to swat shots unlike the old NBA. Having a shot blocking SG like Green over your shoulder forces you to change the angle of your shots even if they are not jumping because their mere presence. Being able to move faster laterally also adds yet another shot blocking threat for big men because they are much more mobile around the rim and out on the perimeter. Less high % shots for PG's and that is why you always see them choke.

Is it why leaders in blocks in the 80s and 90s averages around 4 or so blocks a game, while nobody averaged more than 4 blocks a game since Mutombo did in 96? Is it why teams in 2014 averaged 386blks for the year, while teams in 1994 averaged 429 and teams in 1984 averaged 435?


Weight gain, holy shit you are clueless. Weight gain has to do with creating separation, getting enough space to get your shot off, is everything in the NBA! Why do you think Leonard/Love/Lebron etc. are so dominant? They're big as shit. They bump off their defender with ease, they get to the basket, prime position in the post/paint for rebounds and easy shots. When you're able to bump your defender off you neutralize their shot blocking ability, create space and score easy points. Parker uses his speed to create separation, others use dribbling on the perimeter, but the most efficient by far is using your body because it is so hard to stop. It's also why Leonard was able to stop Lebron, he was near 240lbs, the 2nd biggest SF in the league outside of Lebron. Many of Lebron's drives were neutralized because he couldn't create enough separation, Leonard was too strong.

I am clueless when we are talking about blocking shots and you suddenly are talking about creating shots? You got the two arguments mixed up.

Does it explain why Parker was top 10 in points in paint for a few years? Allen Iverson?

And no, Lebron wasn’t neutralized, he averaged 28.2 ppg on 57% shooting, 51.9% from 3, with 8 rebounds, 4 assists and 2 steals a game. He had a true shooting % of 67.9%. He had an offensive rating of 120. His problem is that Kawhi was quick enough to play him one on one, and the Spurs can stay home to the other Heat players. His problem is, despite his huge size and quickness, couldn’t defend the Spurs passing. Fire up the tape, and stop regurgitating what the report says. Lebron played well in the series, he was clearly the best player on the court, the Spurs were just the better team.


If you've ever played basketball you'd know what it feels like to play with a guy that is just physically superior to everyone on the court, they get great position in the post, easy rebounds/points because of their size, bump you off on drives to the basket for easy layups, draw all sorts of defensive attention, etc. Sometimes they are just too big to guard.

If you ever played basketball you’d know what it feels like to play against a quick guy who is just physically superior to everyone on the court, they slash through the lane and score easy baskets, whip the ball around the court and create opportunities for their teammates, pick off the ball on defense and cover the passing lanes, etc … Sometimes they are just too quick to guard.


Bigger SG's/SF's also affect a PG's ability to get off their shots, because as I said earlier, more weight=more stability, less likely to get knocked off balance, allowing you to challenge the PG's shot. Thomas would get destroyed throwing his body into these monsters. Leonard would probably be near unstoppable back then, very few guys with his size to guard him. This also affects a PG's defense
WOULD YOU MAKE UP YOUR GODDAMN MIND? Do they block shots while they challenge the shot? Or are current players only good at challenging the shot? Is it because they are bigger stronger and/or quicker? Which combination is it? Write it out and REMEMBER YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS, PLEASE!

Wow, I can tell you do not play basketball or physical sports in general. Where did I say weight helps shot blocking?

You are explaining spot on why Stromile Swift, Benoit Benjamin and Joe Barry Carroll were so dominant back in the day. Total top 10 players of all time status because they were so big and strong.


Dantley was 190 as a rook, 207 at the end of his career, Pippen 200 as a rook, 220 at the end of his career, took both guys years to develop. But it's not like it matters because their competition wasn't today's, understand? Things that worked in the 90s, no longer work today. Guys with Jordan/Pippen's athleticism/size were rare, these days they're a dime a dozen. Btw, Wade was 220+, 212 as a rook, he was a ball of muscle with unique size/length, unlike players of the past. Able to create bodily separation because he was 220+, you starting to understand?

Your stats are full of shit. Quote them.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/dantlad01.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/dantley_bio.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/pippen_bio.html
Ever heard of Harold Minor? 6’5” 210lb SG who could jump out of the gym? Successful career eh?


There were a lot of great big men in the 90's but a lot of terrible slow players as well, guys that'd get killed in today's NBA. Imagine Duncan guarding the pick and roll, that's what most teams bigs used to look like on the perimeter, horrible and slow, easy for PG's to expose. That's why you're getting more streamlined versions, super athletic forwards. Making things harder for PG's.

Yes, only big men got quicker, the same training and nutrition never trickled to PGs. That genetic mutation of those really big and strong people in the last 20 years was surely something, eh? But they ONLY apply to people 6’4” and taller, and left people 6’3” and shorter out.

Aguirre is an example of a guy just being too big, you don't even have to be good, if you can create enough separation you can get easy shot after shot. He was one of the few with elite size back then and bowled through everyone, that wouldn't happen in today's NBA though, because there are tons of guys like him.

Based on what? We just talked about Z-BO, same with Al Jefferson. And implying Aguirre wasn’t that skillful is just idiotic. Have you ever even seen the guy play? The man’s got a sweet mid range jump shot, a great step back jumper from the post, up and under moves, spins, hooks, just great low post game.

RBQGvJhmHXs

This conversation is getting bizarre as it is getting more and more apparent that you have just never seen basketball in the early days.


Just how many of those Finals MVP's played against an ATG of quality like Lebron 1v1? People glorify the shit out of scoring but defense is what wins championships, Leonard did it against Lebron. The Spurs didn't have to break their defense to guard him. Anything from Leonard offensively was a bonus and that sort of production in combination with his defense made his performance incredibly difficult and impressive than many FMVP's. His offense was rock solid, missed shots means you're giving the opponent more opportunities to score, I'd take efficiency all day.

One? Because Lebron lost in three finals ever, and Tony Parker and Dirk won the other two and they don’t play Lebron’s position?

As for all time greats, they play in finals every year, and sometimes they lose, so year, that happens all the time.

Speaking of which, Bowen did a great job on Lebron in 2007, but he wasn’t huge and strong, he was 6’7” and 185lbs (getting ready to say that Bowen was actually 254 lbs when he was playing lebron). He was quick and got great technique, not to mention the Spurs had a great team defense around Lebron. So flush goes your theory.

[hater]

The PG position has always been dominated by 5'10-6'2 guys, if they aren't that size they're generally a converted SG (Wade, Manu)

:lmao you're a damn idiot :lol

[ChumpDumper]

PGs are usually 20% of the players on the court at any given time and receive attention because of that.

[KL2]

Do you know how to use the scroll button? Scroll back to what you wrote. Read it.

Do you know what always means? Do you know what dominated means?

It comes down to a real issue with you guys having zero ability to write what you mean to write, or to change the goal post when you see fit to weasel out of a stance. I don't know which one it is, but both makes you look like a retard.

WTF (with regards to the bolded part? I responded with a huge list of point forward, and your response is that you knew they have always existed? It’s not about them existed, it’s about refuting your claim that it’s only recently you see more of them.

A huge list? Lmao, you literally listed a handful of the span of 50+ years, that isn't shit. You do know what dominate means right? A position that has always been dominated 90% of the time by small guys with less than 10% of it being point forward. Would you say the Spurs dominated the Heat even though they lost 1 game? They won 90% of their games... As long as the majority far overrules the minority it fits within the definition of being dominated lmao.



And they didn’t have strong PF in the past? Like Buck Williams, Terry Cummings and the like? You are arguing out of your ass. One minute you say PF are ultra quick and can block shots like crazy is the reason they are better, the next one you are talking about Z-Bo and K-Love being big and strong so they can help gain position. Which one is it? Are the current players today better because they are bigger and stronger (untrue), or longer and quicker, or both? If so, start talking about all the big and strong players in today’s game.


Williams and Cummings are built like modern day SF's, they were light as hell for the PF position, they'd get bullied in today's NBA, they weren't strong lol. Most modern PF's are around 240lbs these days not 210-220 like those guys lmao. There were a handful of great big men and a shit load of shitty big men. What do you not understand? Z-Bo and Love are great offensive players because their size, but like many of the big men of the past they suck defensively. And that was the main problem, defense. Guys were slow as shit and would get picked apart by guards. That's why you're seeing new streamlined, powerful mobile versions. When they did have the size to actually guard them (Cummings, Dantley, Williams etc.) they were extremely light and body separation for shorter players was easy. Love is still a much better athlete than many old NBA players, I'm not sure why you're bringing him up, terrible comparison. He looks like a terrible athlete because he's surrounded by insanely athletic players, the same way a guy like Bonner can look like a great athlete if he's surrounded by crappy athletes.

You also fail to realize just because two guys are the same weight doesn't mean they have the same type of body. There are different types of body frames which affect the distribution of fat/muscle, different types of muscles which serve different purposes, different types of muscle which affect the way your muscles look, different genetics, etc. You obviously cannot judge these things because you're not an athlete. You keep comparing guys with terrible body frames to modern day players, it's laughable.

220lb rookie Ibaka (now 240) is not the same as 220lb Bird, are you starting to understand?

http://www.thelostogle.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/ibaka.jpg




Here:

And how can you tell I don’t play basketball? Because I said Adrian Dantley wasn’t 190lbs? I can tell you can’t read though.

I can tell you don't play basketball because you have no idea how important weight is, even 10lbs is a huge difference. You have absolutely no perspective. I can even give you a real life example of this from one of your very own Spurs lmao, can't make this shit up, you may actually remember this. Duncan once dropped around 15lbs during the off season, going from around 260 to 245 or so. That whole season he got his shit pushed in by almost every physical center he tried guarding, he acknowledged it himself and said it was a mistake, wound up gaining that weight back. Weight matters.


Is it why leaders in blocks in the 80s and 90s averages around 4 or so blocks a game, while nobody averaged more than 4 blocks a game since Mutombo did in 96? Is it why teams in 2014 averaged 386blks for the year, while teams in 1994 averaged 429 and teams in 1984 averaged 435?



I am clueless when we are talking about blocking shots and you suddenly are talking about creating shots? You got the two arguments mixed up.

Does it explain why Parker was top 10 in points in paint for a few years? Allen Iverson?


Jesus christ you are thick. What are you not understanding, modern NBA does=the old NBA.

The athletes/physical strength you see today did not exist back then, only in a handful of players. There were a handful of legit athletes in the 90's, even more in the 00's, now they're flooding every single position, the NBA isn't the same as it was even 5 years ago because positions are constantly evolving. Thomas taking advantage of undersized SG's, SF's, PF's, and extremely slow big men wouldn't fly today because they are so rare. You keep attempting to prove your point by using the success of past NBA players that played against the competition of the past, in an ever changing NBA!

If Thomas relies on his 180lb body to create separation in order to get his shot off, he's not going to get it against most modern PF's, SF's and SG's because they're much bigger and stronger than the ones he played against. This eliminates a large amount of scoring opportunities in itself because he cannot create separation, if you cannot create separation, you cannot get your shot off.

If Dantley was scoring and rebounding on SF's, guess who he was doing it against? The undersized SF's of the past, not the modern SF's of today. So of course he's going to be able to get away with being just 190-210.

Not only that but the act of fighting through numerous screens itself is pretty huge, and something I just realized. Guys like Parker are run off upwards of 3 screens in order for him to get separation, that's 3 massive players his defender is attempting to fighting through, that's much harder than fighting through the sticks of the past.

If Thomas relied on exposing slow, lightweight big men, they don't exist as much as they used to anymore. There goes a shit load of his scoring opportunities. Since bigs are capable of moving faster laterally and are much bigger and stronger, unlike the old NBA, they can now shut off many lanes to the basket, they are agile enough to check the guard and big enough to remain stabilized. You need to start asking yourself, what is a player NOT doing offensively, what shots are they NOT taking.

Then you factor in the fact that NBA players are much more athletic, this adds a shot blocking presence at every position. You don't realize you don't have to block a shot in order to alter it.

You'd know this if you played bball though. If someone is guarding you that can block shots, it's always in the back of your mind. Every layup and shot you take, you are forced to change the angle. Suddenly an easy layup because a highly angled, low % layup because there is a shot blocker within your vicinity. This neutralizes an extremely large amount of scoring opportunities for many shorter players. This is now at every position because guys are so athletic, unlike the past.
Certain shots players simply don't take because of this. Again, ask yourself, what shots are they not taking? Thomas didn't have to worry about every single guy out there swatting his shit, that's a pretty big deal.



Parker played with Duncan and used his speed to create separation, he also played in a transitional stage of the NBA, the NBA is much different than it was 10 years ago. Practically all of Parker's scoring used to come off Duncan screens picking lightweight guards off (an example of the benefits of added weight), allowing him to challenge defenders 1v1 at the rim. The NBA lacked the athletes that it now has as well.

It's not like Parker has been a great defender either, he's been pretty damn horrible, he's always had great perimeter players and big men to cover for him as well. Overrated horribly offensively, and that's why he chokes in the playoffs time and time again.

Iverson was the same, he created separation on the perimeter and with his dribbling, still an insane athlete, can't be compared to old players. Creating separation from your body is by far the most effective because you always have your size, you don't have to do anything special.

The '07 cavs team reminded me a lot of old NBA teams, Illgauskus/Varejao/Gooden, lots of terrible athletes and undersized players, Parker was able to run past these guys in the pick and roll, they were glued to the floor. No shot blocking threats, no agile big men to keep you in check etc. Lebron was the only real athlete on that squad. This is how many old NBA teams were.

The PG position will have suffered the most because it evolved the least, it is only now that we're seeing new 6'4 and up PGs, and even if they're short they're insanely athletic. In 10 years or so these guys will start to dominate the position. You're gonna start seeing all sorts of versatile teams like you're seeing now.

You keep failing to realize 6'2 180lbs was considered BIG back then, in sports in general, because athletes in general were very small. Modern NBA, it's pretty small and is just now evolving.





If you ever played basketball you’d know what it feels like to play against a quick guy who is just physically superior to everyone on the court, they slash through the lane and score easy baskets, whip the ball around the court and create opportunities for their teammates, pick off the ball on defense and cover the passing lanes, etc … Sometimes they are just too quick to guard.


WOULD YOU MAKE UP YOUR GODDAMN MIND? Do they block shots while they challenge the shot? Or are current players only good at challenging the shot? Is it because they are bigger stronger and/or quicker? Which combination is it? Write it out and REMEMBER YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS, PLEASE!

You don't have to block a shot to alter it, if you are within the vicinity of the player it affects their decision ESPECIALLY if you are a shot blocker, holy fuck, you haven't played basketball. If you have enough lateral speed you are able to stay in front of the dribbler, effectively neutralizing their driving lanes, if you have enough weight you are able to stabilize yourself when they throw their body into you. When they throw their body into you they are attempting to create separation, but if you're too big they can't get their shot off because you are too close or aren't off balance.

This shuts off all high % shots, and forces the player into a jump shooter, and that's how you beat teams, you force them into low % shots.

Stability, jumping ability, lateral speed, all these things affect the offensive player's ability to get their offense off.

Why do you think Parker has struggled so much? He's been primarily a jump shooter these past few years as his speed has declined and players have gotten more athletic. The only way he can really create separation now if off screens and play calling, which he's pretty much done his whole career since he's a system player, except he used to be much faster. Defensively he can't guard jack shit, everyone is way too athletic. The NBA is rapidly evolving.


You are explaining spot on why Stromile Swift, Benoit Benjamin and Joe Barry Carroll were so dominant back in the day. Total top 10 players of all time status because they were so big and strong.


Size can only do so much, size can get you in great position, just like Baynes gets in great position, scoring is a whole other story, same with rebounding the ball. Most athletes of the past were physical specimens, there were a handful of 6'6 210+lb guys in the world at that time. These days they're common, and from that large talent pool you get much more talented players, this isn't rocket science.



Your stats are full of shit. Quote them.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/dantlad01.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/dantley_bio.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/pippen_bio.html
Ever heard of Harold Minor? 6’5” 210lb SG who could jump out of the gym? Successful career eh?



Yes, only big men got quicker, the same training and nutrition never trickled to PGs. That genetic mutation of those really big and strong people in the last 20 years was surely something, eh? But they ONLY apply to people 6’4” and taller, and left people 6’3” and shorter out.

Keep bringing up players from the past that played among players of the past lmao, a 210lb body is going to seem unstoppable back then when you're playing against sticks. What don't you understand?

PG has largely remained unchanged, it's barely changing within these past few years, already covered this. Parker is apart of the old breed and it's why he is struggling so much in today's NBA.



Based on what? We just talked about Z-BO, same with Al Jefferson. And implying Aguirre wasn’t that skillful is just idiotic. Have you ever even seen the guy play? The man’s got a sweet mid range jump shot, a great step back jumper from the post, up and under moves, spins, hooks, just great low post game.

And how do you think Aguirre got those wide open jumpers, those lanes to the basket, those post moves etc.? Body contact, he knew how to use his body to create separation knocking his defender off balance against players of the past. He was throwing his body into guys half his size, knocking them off balance giving him easy high % shots. Pay attention to hip contact, body/shoulder contact, you have no idea what you're looking at smh. Start paying attention to post/rebound position, guys are always wrestling, trying to get into prime position to score/rebound.

Jefferson and Z-Bo are huge guys, they are much bigger and stronger than most NBA players of the past. And just like most big slow men of the past, they are horrible defenders, gifted offensive players. They're not exposed as much defensively because as I explained earlier, the athleticism of all other positions cover for guys like him, they're still pretty bad though.





This conversation is getting bizarre as it is getting more and more apparent that you have just never seen basketball in the early days.



One? Because Lebron lost in three finals ever, and Tony Parker and Dirk won the other two and they don’t play Lebron’s position?

As for all time greats, they play in finals every year, and sometimes they lose, so year, that happens all the time.

Speaking of which, Bowen did a great job on Lebron in 2007, but he wasn’t huge and strong, he was 6’7” and 185lbs (getting ready to say that Bowen was actually 254 lbs when he was playing lebron). He was quick and got great technique, not to mention the Spurs had a great team defense around Lebron. So flush goes your theory.

And no, Lebron wasn’t neutralized, he averaged 28.2 ppg on 57% shooting, 51.9% from 3, with 8 rebounds, 4 assists and 2 steals a game. He had a true shooting % of 67.9%. He had an offensive rating of 120. His problem is that Kawhi was quick enough to play him one on one, and the Spurs can stay home to the other Heat players. His problem is, despite his huge size and quickness, couldn’t defend the Spurs passing. Fire up the tape, and stop regurgitating what the report says. Lebron played well in the series, he was clearly the best player on the court, the Spurs were just the better team.

Lebron has also won numerous championships and he's been in 5 finals, his team has been successful year after year lmao. SF or PF, doesn't matter, if you're big you can create separation offensively and take away separation defensively and that is what is most important.

If you really want to bring up Parker's joke of an MVP go ahead, one of the worst FMVP's of all time. Duncan was involved in 90% of his scoring plays/assists, the true MVP. Go ahead and watch the highlights if you don't believe me. Terrible Cavs team.

You act as if Bowen (btw he filled out to 200lbs not 180) stopped him 1v1 lol. Lebron was very inexperienced, the Cavs in general were, they had no offensive weapons at all outside of Lebron, almost no 3pt shooters either, terrible spacing. The Cavs were fucking bad dude. Game planning was very easy defensively. The entire team's defense was focused on him and stopped him.

Btw Bowen used to get knocked off balance quite a bit, he used to get scored on a lot big bigger guys, against PG's and smaller players though is where he excelled.

Not only that but Lebron was very inexperienced, he weighed just 240lbs or so as well. He would later fill out to 270lbs these past few years, that's a pretty big damn difference. His supporting cast also heavily improved, levels, and I mean levels ahead of what it used to be on BOTH sides of the ball. Much better spacing, more offensive weapons so you have to guard him 1v1, coaching etc.


You can bring up Lebron's stats all you want, the guy was neutralized. The majority of his points came when Leonard was in foul trouble out of the game or when Diaw/Green were guarding him lmao, or when they were already down by 20 and his points didn't mean anything lmao. Those stats aren't shit considering they ran their entire offense through him too and he was being guarded 1v1.

Watch the damn game, how many easy points did Lebron score the entire series on Leonard, how many dunks/layups? Practically everything were extremely difficult jumpers or off TO's not from Leonard. He couldn't post up, drive, or, get in position because Leonard prevented him from doing so, damn you really don't know what you're watching. Leonard's weight allowed him to stabilize himself in the paint against Lebron, that's a HUGE part of Lebron's game.

Every other team has to send multiple guys against Lebron, he sucks in the defense, and guess who goes off? His teammates. By keeping Lebron from the paint guarding him 1v1 it also neutralized his teammates. Penetrate, draw in 2-3 guys, kick out to a wide open shooter, they pass the ball, break down the defense, Lebron doesn't get an assist, but MIA gets an easy wide open shot. This will not show up on the stat sheet, and this is what Leonard prevented Lebron from doing so many times.

[in2deep]

^ WTF

:wow :wow :wow :lol

[mavsfan1000]

Where is this coming from?

When's the last time a PG led team won anything relevant...?

This 90's players analyst infested Media is full of Monkey brains.....

If the all-star wasn't position based, there would be 10 PG's and 2 frontcourt players..
Tony Parker ring a bell?

[K...]

This is bizarre. I thought this thread ended when someone said point guards handle the ball on nearly every play. That makes them popular.

[Nathan89]

Most people haven't been picking pg led as the favorites to win championships tbh. This so called "obsession" hasn't really blinded people from who the favorites to win the ship is.

[KL2]

^ WTF

:wow :wow :wow :lol

I very very fast tbh.

[apalisoc_9]

KL2 going balls deep on amchink

:lol

[KL2]

KL2 going balls deep on amchink

:lol


Btw people, I didn't sit here and type all that shit out, used the auto save content shit lol.

[Mel_13]

Btw people, I didn't sit here and type all that shit out, used the auto save content shit lol.

Good, because ambchang was the only one who read it.

[KL2]

Good, because ambchang was the only one who read it.

Cool.

If you don't want to go into depth and find out just how and why the NBA has changed throughout the decades, ignore it. All these bball fans with their shitty takes, saddens me :lol

Antiquated bball fans don't like to go into depth tbh.

[ambchang]

A huge list? Lmao, you literally listed a handful of the span of 50+ years, that isn't shit. You do know what dominate means right? A position that has always been dominated 90% of the time by small guys with less than 10% of it being point forward. Would you say the Spurs dominated the Heat even though they lost 1 game? They won 90% of their games... As long as the majority far overrules the minority it fits within the definition of being dominated lmao.

List me all the point forwards in the last 10 years. What is that huge list?

So Magic won 5 championships in the span of 12 years, Isiah won another two in that same span, that is not dominating? Spurs winning 4 of 5 games is dominating, having a large number in a sports context generally not referred to as dominant, it's called prevalent.

And no, 6'0" to 6'2" guards do not far outnumber taller players.

In 1974, there are 32 players shorter 6'2" or shorter. With 62 players listed strictly as guards. That's about 52%
In 1984, it's 42 out of 93 (45%)
In 1994, it's 59 out of 126(46%)



Williams and Cummings are built like modern day SF's, they were light as hell for the PF position, they'd get bullied in today's NBA, they weren't strong lol. Most modern PF's are around 240lbs these days not 210-220 like those guys lmao. There were a handful of great big men and a shit load of shitty big men. What do you not understand? Z-Bo and Love are great offensive players because their size, but like many of the big men of the past they suck defensively. And that was the main problem, defense. Guys were slow as shit and would get picked apart by guards. That's why you're seeing new streamlined, powerful mobile versions. When they did have the size to actually guard them (Cummings, Dantley, Williams etc.) they were extremely light and body separation for shorter players was easy. Love is still a much better athlete than many old NBA players, I'm not sure why you're bringing him up, terrible comparison. He looks like a terrible athlete because he's surrounded by insanely athletic players, the same way a guy like Bonner can look like a great athlete if he's surrounded by crappy athletes.

Cummings was 6'9" 220lbs (and played some SF), Buck Williams was 6'8" 215lbs, Ibaka is 6'10" 220lbs. But I am not even arguing how much players weight, because I agree players are generally heavier and bigger in today's game due to better nuitrition and training. What I am arguing about is your earlier assertion that weight helps shot blocking, which it doesn't.

As for speed, aren't lighter guys generally quicker? Again, I agree guys now adays have better nutrition and training, but that applies to PG as well.

The assertion that Love and Bonner would be considered great athletes back in the day is insane. I would like to see either of them do what Larry Nance or Kenny Walker did as power forwards, or what Shawn Kemp did. Even ultra athletic PF in today's game like Blake Griffin and Serge Ibaka is about as athletic as those people, but we are talking about the creme of la crop players. In general, the athletic ability of the PF compared to PG is about the same in today's game as it was in the past.



You also fail to realize just because two guys are the same weight doesn't mean they have the same type of body. There are different types of body frames which affect the distribution of fat/muscle, different types of muscles which serve different purposes, different types of muscle which affect the way your muscles look, different genetics, etc. You obviously cannot judge these things because you're not an athlete. You keep comparing guys with terrible body frames to modern day players, it's laughable.

220lb rookie Ibaka (now 240) is not the same as 220lb Bird, are you starting to understand?

http://www.thelostogle.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/ibaka.jpg

Of course I understand, the problem is YOU brought up the entire weight argument, in fact, you are talking about that at the beginning of this post. I am just telling you are idiotic that is. Thanks for coming back to submarine your own earlier argument though.

I am having severe trouble with the genetics comment though. So what happened in the last 10 years? What happened to the genetics. Are we in the age of X-men now where there are random mutations?



I can tell you don't play basketball because you have no idea how important weight is, even 10lbs is a huge difference. You have absolutely no perspective. I can even give you a real life example of this from one of your very own Spurs lmao, can't make this shit up, you may actually remember this. Duncan once dropped around 15lbs during the off season, going from around 260 to 245 or so. That whole season he got his shit pushed in by almost every physical center he tried guarding, he acknowledged it himself and said it was a mistake, wound up gaining that weight back. Weight matters.

Since when did I say weight is not important? Quote me. I can tell you can't read though, because, well, you can't.




Jesus christ you are thick. What are you not understanding, modern NBA does=the old NBA.

When did I say that? What I am saying is, the game changed, but it changed for everyone, so changes in SF, PF and C would apply to PG and SG, therefore, there is not an innate advantage for big guys in today's game because of some magical transformation that only applied to non-PG, it applies to all PG. And since PGs have historically led their teams to championships (Magic, Isiah, Billups, Frazier, Dennis Johnson) or success (Kidd, Stockton, Payton), it is correct to say that PG can no longer lead the team to success in today's game.

The other point I made was that it is idiotic to think that it's some sort of revelation to say it's tougher for small guys to dominate a big men's game. It's common logic.


The athletes/physical strength you see today did not exist back then, only in a handful of players. There were a handful of legit athletes in the 90's, even more in the 00's, now they're flooding every single position, the NBA isn't the same as it was even 5 years ago because positions are constantly evolving. Thomas taking advantage of undersized SG's, SF's, PF's, and extremely slow big men wouldn't fly today because they are so rare. You keep attempting to prove your point by using the success of past NBA players that played against the competition of the past, in an ever changing NBA!

And that evolution never applied to PG? Is that what you are trying to say? What's so special about players 6'2" and bigger.



If Thomas relies on his 180lb body to create separation in order to get his shot off, he's not going to get it against most modern PF's, SF's and SG's because they're much bigger and stronger than the ones he played against. This eliminates a large amount of scoring opportunities in itself because he cannot create separation, if you cannot create separation, you cannot get your shot off.

Thomas relied on his quickness, just like Chris Paul, who's 6'0" and 175lbs, or Tony Parker, who's 6'2" 180lbs, or Steph Curry, who's 6'3" 185lbs does today.



If Dantley was scoring and rebounding on SF's, guess who he was doing it against? The undersized SF's of the past, not the modern SF's of today. So of course he's going to be able to get away with being just 190-210.

I said Dantley did so because of his low post skills, you see a contradiction somewhere? What point are you arguing with me? Did I say SF in today's game is as big as those in the past? Where did I say that?



Not only that but the act of fighting through numerous screens itself is pretty huge, and something I just realized. Guys like Parker are run off upwards of 3 screens in order for him to get separation, that's 3 massive players his defender is attempting to fighting through, that's much harder than fighting through the sticks of the past.

So that would lead to PG being able to score with bigs being role players who set screens? I mean, really, what are you arguing against? Did you hear me say PGs don't have to fight through screens?



If Thomas relied on exposing slow, lightweight big men, they don't exist as much as they used to anymore. There goes a shit load of his scoring opportunities. Since bigs are capable of moving faster laterally and are much bigger and stronger, unlike the old NBA, they can now shut off many lanes to the basket, they are agile enough to check the guard and big enough to remain stabilized. You need to start asking yourself, what is a player NOT doing offensively, what shots are they NOT taking.

But you JUST said bigs are setting tougher screens now. So which one is it? Is it tougher for teams to defend PG because they have a lot of quick mean big men setting screens for them, or is it easier for teams to defend PG because they have quicker meaner big men helping out?

You seem to have severe problems following your own arguments, and tend to look at things at a vacuum, without accounting for other factors as a whole.



Then you factor in the fact that NBA players are much more athletic, this adds a shot blocking presence at every position. You don't realize you don't have to block a shot in order to alter it.

And yet statistics showed teams are blocking less shots in today's game, because of a heavier reliance on outside shooter, and outside shots are more difficult to block.



You'd know this if you played bball though. If someone is guarding you that can block shots, it's always in the back of your mind. Every layup and shot you take, you are forced to change the angle. Suddenly an easy layup because a highly angled, low % layup because there is a shot blocker within your vicinity. This neutralizes an extremely large amount of scoring opportunities for many shorter players. This is now at every position because guys are so athletic, unlike the past.
Certain shots players simply don't take because of this. Again, ask yourself, what shots are they not taking? Thomas didn't have to worry about every single guy out there swatting his shit, that's a pretty big deal.

Did you hear me say otherwise? Quote me. You seem to have huge problems with chasing arguments that aren't there. Focus.



Parker played with Duncan and used his speed to create separation, he also played in a transitional stage of the NBA, the NBA is much different than it was 10 years ago. Practically all of Parker's scoring used to come off Duncan screens picking lightweight guards off (an example of the benefits of added weight), allowing him to challenge defenders 1v1 at the rim. The NBA lacked the athletes that it now has as well.

Is that why Parker had relatively stable scoring average throughout his career, with 4 of his last 7 seasons scoring above his career average and 4 of his last 7 seasons shooting a better % from the field compared to his career average?



It's not like Parker has been a great defender either, he's been pretty damn horrible, he's always had great perimeter players and big men to cover for him as well. Overrated horribly offensively, and that's why he chokes in the playoffs time and time again.

Are you now talking about his offense or defense? You just go all over the place.



Iverson was the same, he created separation on the perimeter and with his dribbling, still an insane athlete, can't be compared to old players. Creating separation from your body is by far the most effective because you always have your size, you don't have to do anything special.

He did it because he was quick.



The '07 cavs team reminded me a lot of old NBA teams, Illgauskus/Varejao/Gooden, lots of terrible athletes and undersized players, Parker was able to run past these guys in the pick and roll, they were glued to the floor. No shot blocking threats, no agile big men to keep you in check etc. Lebron was the only real athlete on that squad. This is how many old NBA teams were.

And Parker, a PG led them to a championship against those old style teams .... with that old style team making it to the Finals. Again, what is your point? You seem to be arguing against yourself. Are you schizophrenic?



The PG position will have suffered the most because it evolved the least, it is only now that we're seeing new 6'4 and up PGs, and even if they're short they're insanely athletic. In 10 years or so these guys will start to dominate the position. You're gonna start seeing all sorts of versatile teams like you're seeing now.

Magic, Kidd, Payton, Steve Smith, Walt Williams, Alvin Williams, Antonio Daniels, were all over 6'4".

Nowadays, we have MCW (great job leading the 6ers BTW), Westbrook (who's more of a SG), Arron Afflalo, Austin Rivers, Ricky Rubio, and John Wall.

Chris Paul is short and not insanely athletic, neither is Curry.

And no, I am not arguing the teams are not evolving, where are you seeing that?



You keep failing to realize 6'2 180lbs was considered BIG back then, in sports in general, because athletes in general were very small. Modern NBA, it's pretty small and is just now evolving.

No they are not, in 1974, 32 of the 62 guards are 6'2" or under. That's a little over half. 6'2" is pretty much the median height.
In 1984, it's 42 out of 93 (45%), 1994, 59 out of 126 (47%), 2004 61 out of 147 (42%)


You don't have to block a shot to alter it, if you are within the vicinity of the player it affects their decision ESPECIALLY if you are a shot blocker, holy fuck, you haven't played basketball. If you have enough lateral speed you are able to stay in front of the dribbler, effectively neutralizing their driving lanes, if you have enough weight you are able to stabilize yourself when they throw their body into you. When they throw their body into you they are attempting to create separation, but if you're too big they can't get their shot off because you are too close or aren't off balance.

This shuts off all high % shots, and forces the player into a jump shooter, and that's how you beat teams, you force them into low % shots.

Stability, jumping ability, lateral speed, all these things affect the offensive player's ability to get their offense off.

You heard me say otherwise? If this is what you meant, state it first, don't talk about how added weight help with shot blocking in your initial argument. Talk about how added weight help with stability and defense (despite all the big fat guys in today's game are horrible defenders). Athletic ability helps with shot blocking. Bruce Bowen and Michael Cooper are some of skinniest guys to play their positions, and yet they were fantastic defenders. Even in today's game, Serge Ibaka, who is one of the best shot blockers in the league, is skinny by your definition. Same with Larry Sanders. Statistics just do not back up what you said.

I never once said shot blockers do not help with defense, I never once said a shot blocker has to block a shot to have a successful defensive possession. I don't even have an idea where this came from. You are just creating arguments out of thin air to argue against.


Why do you think Parker has struggled so much? He's been primarily a jump shooter these past few years as his speed has declined and players have gotten more athletic. The only way he can really create separation now if off screens and play calling, which he's pretty much done his whole career since he's a system player, except he used to be much faster. Defensively he can't guard jack shit, everyone is way too athletic. The NBA is rapidly evolving.

He struggled when he was younger because he didn't have much of an outside shot. Teams collapsed the lane to defend him. Again, not sure how this is relevant to what we had been arguing over.



Size can only do so much, size can get you in great position, just like Baynes gets in great position, scoring is a whole other story, same with rebounding the ball. Most athletes of the past were physical specimens, there were a handful of 6'6 210+lb guys in the world at that time. These days they're common, and from that large talent pool you get much more talented players, this isn't rocket science.

Is that why players average 6'7" 214 lbs in 1986, and 6'7" 220 lbs today? Again, not sure what you are arguing against.



Keep bringing up players from the past that played among players of the past lmao, a 210lb body is going to seem unstoppable back then when you're playing against sticks. What don't you understand?

And PGs nowadays are playing against players in the future? Do you know what you are arguing against anymore?

Ibaka isn't 220lbs? Oh wait, he's actually 240lbs.
Rudy Gobert is 7'1" 220lbs. Wow, big thick guy.



PG has largely remained unchanged, it's barely changing within these past few years, already covered this. Parker is apart of the old breed and it's why he is struggling so much in today's NBA.

Why has it not changed? Any backup? PGs have shot more in today's game, they have assisted less. Their roles are less ball dominant in today's game, so why has it not changed as much?



And how do you think Aguirre got those wide open jumpers, those lanes to the basket, those post moves etc.? Body contact, he knew how to use his body to create separation knocking his defender off balance against players of the past. He was throwing his body into guys half his size, knocking them off balance giving him easy high % shots. Pay attention to hip contact, body/shoulder contact, you have no idea what you're looking at smh. Start paying attention to post/rebound position, guys are always wrestling, trying to get into prime position to score/rebound.

Jefferson and Z-Bo are huge guys, they are much bigger and stronger than most NBA players of the past. And just like most big slow men of the past, they are horrible defenders, gifted offensive players. They're not exposed as much defensively because as I explained earlier, the athleticism of all other positions cover for guys like him, they're still pretty bad though.

And? You said Aguirre isn't that skillful. Using his body to create separation is a skill, in case you haven't clued in on that one.
You said weight helps with defense, then you are now saying they are slow and big and can't defend. You are arguing against yourself. Pick a side.



Lebron has also won numerous championships and he's been in 5 finals, his team has been successful year after year lmao. SF or PF, doesn't matter, if you're big you can create separation offensively and take away separation defensively and that is what is most important.

2 is numerous now? He lost in 3 finals, not that great of a number. Once he was defended by skin pole Bowen, the other time by a geriatric Marion. And yet Leonard is the only guy who can defend him.



If you really want to bring up Parker's joke of an MVP go ahead, one of the worst FMVP's of all time. Duncan was involved in 90% of his scoring plays/assists, the true MVP. Go ahead and watch the highlights if you don't believe me. Terrible Cavs team.

I watched the entire series, and still have the DVDs. I didn't bring up the FMVP argument, you did with Leonard. You either think FMVP is a legit argument, or not. You can't pick and choose.



You act as if Bowen (btw he filled out to 200lbs not 180) stopped him 1v1 lol. Lebron was very inexperienced, the Cavs in general were, they had no offensive weapons at all outside of Lebron, almost no 3pt shooters either, terrible spacing. The Cavs were fucking bad dude. Game planning was very easy defensively. The entire team's defense was focused on him and stopped him.

Btw Bowen used to get knocked off balance quite a bit, he used to get scored on a lot big bigger guys, against PG's and smaller players though is where he excelled.

Not only that but Lebron was very inexperienced, he weighed just 240lbs or so as well. He would later fill out to 270lbs these past few years, that's a pretty big damn difference. His supporting cast also heavily improved, levels, and I mean levels ahead of what it used to be on BOTH sides of the ball. Much better spacing, more offensive weapons so you have to guard him 1v1, coaching etc.

So? And the 2014 Spurs were focused on stopping Chris Anderson? Both teams focused on stopping Lebron, with the 07 team having more resources and focus because the Cavs supporting cast sucked. That's why 2014 Lebron averaged 28ppg.

[ambchang]

You can bring up Lebron's stats all you want, the guy was neutralized. The majority of his points came when Leonard was in foul trouble out of the game or when Diaw/Green were guarding him lmao, or when they were already down by 20 and his points didn't mean anything lmao. Those stats aren't shit considering they ran their entire offense through him too and he was being guarded 1v1.

Watch the damn game, how many easy points did Lebron score the entire series on Leonard, how many dunks/layups? Practically everything were extremely difficult jumpers or off TO's not from Leonard. He couldn't post up, drive, or, get in position because Leonard prevented him from doing so, damn you really don't know what you're watching. Leonard's weight allowed him to stabilize himself in the paint against Lebron, that's a HUGE part of Lebron's game.

Every other team has to send multiple guys against Lebron, he sucks in the defense, and guess who goes off? His teammates. By keeping Lebron from the paint guarding him 1v1 it also neutralized his teammates. Penetrate, draw in 2-3 guys, kick out to a wide open shooter, they pass the ball, break down the defense, Lebron doesn't get an assist, but MIA gets an easy wide open shot. This will not show up on the stat sheet, and this is what Leonard prevented Lebron from doing so many times.

So now it is neutralizing his teammates, and not Lebron. Allowing a guy to average 28ppg on 57% is not neutralizing him, getting into foul trouble is not neutralizing him.

Clearly Kawhi defended Lebron as good as anybody ever did, but then again, we are talking about the weight of players helping them defend bigger players, and Bowen, being 50lbs lighter than Lebron, did an admirable job as well.

Does weight help? Sure. I am not entirely sure how you thought I ever argued otherwise, but technique is just as important. I would imagine someone who profess to play so much basketball would know that now.



KL2 going balls deep on amchink

:lol

I am not entirely sure which one is more embarrassing. Not having the guts to respond to me directly on your takes and requiring another account to do so, or having someone who you think is a foreigner that deserves a racial epithet to clarify your takes because you can't seem to have enough of an understanding of the English language to do so yourself.

[K...]

I'm going to bump this thread since I talked about it upstairs. Basically too many people are casually acting like the point guard argument is a settled thing when at best it's a partial predictor of team success.

Basically, among all positions point guard is the easiest to shut down.

But the better way to look at team success is overall talent levels, rather than this dumb and illogical rule that point guards can't win in the playoffs.

The point guard argument isn't without merit. But If you can shut down your opponents best player you can win most matchups regardless if the best player is a point guard or a center.

This whole argument is actually more about diversified offense being better than simple iso offense. Also tall is better than short.

So please, when you are considering mentioning the point guard rule , please also consider K's rule: the better talented team usually wins. I think that rule is better.

[Clipper Nation]

Tony Parker ring a bell?

Enrique has only ever led teams to playoff chokejobs. Getting carried through the playoffs by Duncan and then padding stats for one series while being "guarded" by Boobie Gibson doesn't count as leading your team to a ring.

[DMC]

Enrique has only ever led teams to playoff chokejobs. Getting carried through the playoffs by Duncan and then padding stats for one series while being "guarded" by Boobie Gibson doesn't count as leading your team to a ring.
Meanwhile you have Chris Paul who wrapped up the series nicely and bowtied it and handed it to the chimp. He's notorious for being an accident, fitting he's doing the Allstate thing.

[DMC]

I'm going to bump this thread since I talked about it upstairs. Basically too many people are casually acting like the point guard argument is a settled thing when at best it's a partial predictor of team success.

Basically, among all positions point guard is the easiest to shut down.

But the better way to look at team success is overall talent levels, rather than this dumb and illogical rule that point guards can't win in the playoffs.

The point guard argument isn't without merit. But If you can shut down your opponents best player you can win most matchups regardless if the best player is a point guard or a center.

This whole argument is actually more about diversified offense being better than simple iso offense. Also tall is better than short.

So please, when you are considering mentioning the point guard rule , please also consider K's rule: the better talented team usually wins. I think that rule is better.

K.. thx

[Mr Bones]

Basically, among all positions point guard is the easiest to shut down.

But the better way to look at team success is overall talent levels, rather than this dumb and illogical rule that point guards can't win in the playoffs.

The point guard argument isn't without merit. But If you can shut down your opponents best player you can win most matchups regardless if the best player is a point guard or a center.

This whole argument is actually more about diversified offense being better than simple iso offense. Also tall is better than short.



Agreed. Some people here have taken a vague generalization and tried to turn it into holy gospel. Defensive impact is the most important reason in my opinion that PGs are overrated: http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/sort/DRPM

The top ranked defender among PGs is John Wall, but he's only 24th in the league. Among the top 60 in the league there are only 2 PGs. They just don't have the same impact as bigger players.

[K...]

Bump, over In the main forum there's discussion on why Tony Parker never shows up in the playoffs.I think the answer is In this thread here. We should discuss more why point guards are so easy to shut down.

[Mr Bones]

Bump, over In the main forum there's discussion on why Tony Parker never shows up in the playoffs.I think the answer is In this thread here. We should discuss more why point guards are so easy to shut down.

Along these lines, I think the move the Bucks made-- trading a more expensive & soon to be free agent in Brandon Knight and bringing in a younger, longer, and more defensive-minded M. Carter-Williams is a really interesting gamble. Their backcourt defensive length is now ridiculous with a 6'6" Carter-Williams at PG, a 6'8" Khris Middleton at SG, and a 6'11" Giannis at SF. Carter-Williams isn't a great shooter but he has good court vision, and I bet Jason Kidd sees a bit of himself in him. Milwaukee was already a very good defensive team, and now they have the potential to be elite.

[Clipper Nation]

Bump, over In the main forum there's discussion on why Tony Parker never shows up in the playoffs.I think the answer is In this thread here. We should discuss more why point guards are so easy to shut down.

It's literally as simple as the traditional point guard just being too short for the modern game. It's more difficult for them to get their shot off and it's easy for teams with good wing defenders to switch them onto small ball-dominant point guards in winning time and shut them down.

Tbh, point guard is an antiquated position, and there will eventually be a time when that role just doesn't exist anymore in the sport.

[lefty]

Enrique has only ever led teams to playoff chokejobs. Getting carried through the playoffs by Duncan and then padding stats for one series while being "guarded" by Boobie Gibson doesn't count as leading your team to a ring.

Truth nukes

[K...]

Good, so we answered the question of why Parker sucks in the playoffs. He didn't play less hard. The game changes.



Regarding point guards being phased out, I'm not sure about that. I think the spurs got very lucky last year having the right players for the ultra motion offense.

You won't find an athletic player with size, court vision, and ball handling easily. If such players existed we'd see them already on every team.It really is going to be fun to see how pop builds the offense without a point guard if Tony isn't healthy and focused.

[ambchang]

So ... will a PG led team make it this year? CP3 and Curry?

[Malik Hairston]

So ... will a PG led team make it this year? CP3 and Curry?

Paul has no chance, but Curry looks like a historically good player, he's probably going to do it and finish as the #2 PG of all-time, ultimately..

[spurraider21]

Paul has no chance, but Curry looks like a historically good player, he's probably going to do it and finish as the #2 PG of all-time, ultimately..
nah he's just an overrated chucker/wannabe kobe

[ambchang]

Paul has no chance, but Curry looks like a historically good player, he's probably going to do it and finish as the #2 PG of all-time, ultimately..

That's pretty damn high.

Magic, Thomas, Stockton, Kidd, Payton, Cousy, West, CP3.

I know you love to laugh at the 80s/90s PG, but Curry is very much put in a system that really maximized his value. He was surrounded by competent offensive players (shooters) that teams cannot leave open, which means that you can't really double Curry without paying the price. As any superstar should, Curry produced. But to say that he looks like a historically good player is really stretching it.

He is in the 6th year in the league at 26, right at the beginning of the prime of most PGs. So basically, he may have a little more room to go, but he is getting about as good as he can get (which is still pretty good), but his numbers aren't really that staggering. Yes, he led the league in VORP, but that won't even crack top 40 all-time (Lebron has 8 seasons with a higher VORP, CP3s got two, even Wade had a couple), his OBPM ranked him top 6th of all time, but it's a deeply flawed metric as it is heavily opposition dependent, his ws/48 ranked number 20 all time, but then we all know you are not a fan of the metric. Besides, all the all-time greats have MULTIPLE seasons with better numbers in any of those metrics than Curry.

We will see, he may blossom into an all time great, or he may just end up being a Mark Price on steroids (which is still really good).

[lefty]

Price was awesome tbh