The label of the Point Guard position.

Can anyone answer me this?

Whats this obsession with the point guard label on a player?

Everyone on here states and claims Mason is a horrible back up point guard.

What exactly makes a player being labeled a point guard?

A point guard is a player who creates for others with his ball-handling ability. Correct?

So what does that make Manu when he has the ball on all pick and roll opportunities when he comes off the bench?

What does that make LeBron in Cleveland when hes setting up Mo Williams and Delonte West in the corners for 3? At the same time what does that make Mo Williams and Boobie Gibson who are labeled PG's but spend most of their time on the 3 point line?

What does that make Kobe Bryant in Los Angelas? What does that make Derek Fisher who has the same role as Mo Williams?

My point being is it gets annoying hearing how Mason is a terrible PG.
People should start saying Mason CAN'T CREATE FOR OTHERS WELL.

At certain times next year, I wouldn't mind a lineup of Mason Manu RJ Bonner Tim to give the Spurs a better spacing and top- notch 3 point threats around the creators on the floor.

Last year with Manu out the majority of the year, and Tony out in the beginning Mason was forced by Pop to create. Something he is not good at. But he had to because sadly he was our 3rd most talented player last year with Manu out.


To conclude on my rant I just believe that Mason has no business handling the ball on pick and roll opportunities. But I think Spurs should have a stint in games to where Mason is on the floor with Manu ( as the main P&R handler), Richard Jefferson, Tim, and Blair/ Dyess/ Bonner. This would make the defense be honest with themselves and gives the Spurs the best floor spacing lineup.

I just think people get confused with the term point guard. It doesn't take a great ball- handler to bring the ball up the court. There's only a handful of TRUE point guards that always have the ball. Spurs have their creators ( Manu, Tony, RJ in Pick and Roll opportunities) and Tim at the high post/ low post and being the recipient of the pick and pop.

An NBA Point Guard has to be a floor leader. On offense, the PG typically brings the ball up after COP or at least initiates the offense. He calls the plays to be run, or relays the play called from the bench to his teammates. He has ownership of dictating the tempo. He must see mismatches, particularly coming out of transition, where the cross-matches presented advantages for the offense and then get the ball to the player with the advantage. The advantage may be size but it can also be someone in position to score with his man out of position. The PG must know the game clock, shot clock and score at all times. He must direct traffic when needed and when he runs the break, he must be able to judge where the best scoring option is very quickly, and if there is one. He must make a passing decision on the break by the time he gets to the FT line.

Those are just a few of the key elements for an NBA PG on offense. Mason has some execution issues as a PG.

PG position is the easiest position to judge.

You can tell if a player is a good/bad PG on 1 game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

An NBA Point Guard has to be a floor leader. On offense, the PG typically brings the ball up after COP or at least initiates the offense. He calls the plays to be run, or relays the play called from the bench to his teammates. He has ownership of dictating the tempo. He must see mismatches, particularly coming out of transition, where the cross-matches presented advantages for the offense and then get the ball to the player with the advantage. The advantage may be size but it can also be someone in position to score with his man out of position. The PG must know the game clock, shot clock and score at all times. He must direct traffic when needed and when he runs the break, he must be able to judge where the best scoring option is very quickly, and if there is one. He must make a passing decision on the break by the time he gets to the FT line.

Those are just a few of the key elements for an NBA PG on offense. Mason has some execution issues as a PG.

---

I was meaning on the basis of a half court offense. Everyone on the floor is responsible for the ownership of the tempo starting from the rebounder to
the outlit man. Not just the point guard. Everyone is responsible for seeing mismatches too, not just the point guard.

Everyone must be aware of the shot clock and score at all times too. There's only a handful of point guard that have the ball the majority of the time to have the majority of the decision making as you are implying on their shoulders.

What I meant was that having Mason to be on the floor with RJ and Manu at times next year isn't a bad idea even if he is relegated to guarding the opposing point guard, due to the offensive spacing it will create. Especially with Manu or RJ being the creators on offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

I was meaning on the basis of a half court offense. Everyone on the floor is responsible for the ownership of the tempo starting from the rebounder to
the outlit man. Not just the point guard. Everyone is responsible for seeing mismatches too, not just the point guard.

Everyone must be aware of the shot clock and score at all times too. There's only a handful of point guard that have the ball the majority of the time to have the majority of the decision making as you are implying on their shoulders.

What I meant was that having Mason to be on the floor with RJ and Manu at times next year isn't a bad idea even if he is relegated to guarding the opposing point guard, due to the offensive spacing it will create. Especially with Manu or RJ being the creators on offense.

---

Suit youself and believe as you wish.

The PG is the QB on the court. Is that easy enough to understand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

The PG is the QB on the court. Is that easy enough to understand?

---

Not necessarily.

In Cleveland Lebron is.

In LA Kobe is.

In Boston Paul Pierce is.

In Orlando it will be Carter and Howard. Turkoglu was last year.

In San Antonio Manu, Tim, and Tony are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Not necessarily.

In Cleveland Lebron is.

In LA Kobe is.

In Boston Paul Pierce is.

In Orlando it will be Carter and Howard. Turkoglu was last year.

In San Antonio Manu, Tim, and Tony are.

---

if you have an answer already, why bother asking the question? it seems you had an answer for your question even before you started this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Not necessarily.

In Cleveland Lebron is.

In LA Kobe is.

In Boston Paul Pierce is.

In Orlando it will be Carter and Howard. Turkoglu was last year.

In San Antonio Manu, Tim, and Tony are.

---

Not quite. There's a difference between initiating the offense and quaterbacking the team. The PG's job is to get everyone into position, scan the court for mismatches and basically create for his teammates in the same way that a quarterback manages a football team's offense. And the PG has to make the right pass that gets the play going.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Not quite. There's a difference between initiating the offense and quaterbacking the team. The PG's job is to get everyone into position, scan the court for mismatches and basically create for his teammates in the same way that a quarterback manages a football team's offense. And the PG has to make the right pass that gets the play going.

---

Every player on the court is responsible for where they are on the floor and usually with the Spurs for example. Duncan is the one telling players to cut to the weak side most specifically when he has the ball on the strong side. Every player on the court goes through practices, film sessions, training camp to know the plays and to know the signs being called from the bench.

It's not like everyplayer but the PG has blindfolds on and has earplugs as the " PG" takes them through where they should be.

Every player makes the same passes. My point being is PG is more of just a label. Except for the few players in the past 20 years that have been TRUE Point guards that have the uncanny pass first attribute and creativity implemented in their game. ( Stockton, Nash, Magic, Kidd, Chris Paul, Mark Jackson).

And on another note all the good teams in the league have the BB IQ to where every player can see the mismatches as they develop. It doesn't take a 6'2 guard to point out the obvious to the team.

I just think it really depends on the personnel the team has on the floor. In terms of quarterbacking and creating.

Usually its the best offensive player doing the quarterbacking and creating. Whether it be from the post or the wing.

I guess thats why I don't agree with the way some of y'all label the point guard position.

And that's why I think we can get away with Mason playing the labeled PG position with Manu and RJ on the floor with him. With of course Manu and RJ creating and either Manu or Mason bringing the ball up the floor. But decision making wise in the half court offense, Mason doesn't have the tools to be successful for us to be efficient offensively ( referring to ballhandling in the P &R opportunities) . But I think he can play next to them due to Manu and RJ's playmaking ability.

If that makes any sense. I don't know it's just my opinion on the overrated point guard label in my eyes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Every player on the court is responsible for where they are on the floor and usually with the Spurs for example. Duncan is the one telling players to cut to the weak side most specifically when he has the ball on the strong side. Every player on the court goes through practices, film sessions, training camp to know the plays and to know the signs being called from the bench.

It's not like everyplayer but the PG has blindfolds on and has earplugs as the " PG" takes them through where they should be.

Every player makes the same passes. My point being is PG is more of just a label. Except for the few players in the past 20 years that have been TRUE Point guards that have the uncanny pass first attribute and creativity implemented in their game. ( Stockton, Nash, Magic, Kidd, Chris Paul, Mark Jackson).

And on another note all the good teams in the league have the BB IQ to where every player can see the mismatches as they develop. It doesn't take a 6'2 guard to point out the obvious to the team.

---

You could say the same thing in football. The center calls out the blocking assignments and tells the line what to do. The receivers, tight ends and running backs have to know which routes to run, what holes to hit, or what defenders to block.

But in the end, the QB is the one that runs the offense and makes sure that everyone is on the same page. The QB is the ultimate decider on the field. A great PG is the coach on the floor, just like the QB is the coach on the floor.

In his prime, J Kidd was like that, calling his own plays and running the team in the same way the Peyton Manning runs the Colts offense.

As much as Tim is an initiator on offense, he's no Peyton Manning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

You could say the same thing in football. The center calls out the blocking assignments and tells the line what to do. The receivers, tight ends and running backs have to know which routes to run, what holes to hit, or what defenders to block.

But in the end, the QB is the one that runs the offense and makes sure that everyone is on the same page. The QB is the ultimate decider on the field. A great PG is the coach on the floor, just like the QB is the coach on the floor.

In his prime, J Kidd was like that, calling his own plays and running the team in the same way the Peyton Manning runs the Colts offense.

As much as Tim is an initiator on offense, he's no Peyton Manning.

---

Basketball and football are two entirely different sports. I don't see through your analogy. Everyplayer on the court in basketball will handle the ball and make decisions. Football only one player can make decisions with the ball.

And usually the players best offensive player is making the decisions with the ball like your " quarterback" analogy.

Pop even has been quoted multiple times after games preaching about how well Duncan quarterbacked the team to the win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

And that's why I think we can get away with Mason playing the labeled PG position with Manu and RJ on the floor with him. With of course Manu and RJ creating and either Manu or Mason bringing the ball up the floor. But decision making wise in the half court offense, Mason doesn't have the tools to be successful for us to be efficient offensively ( referring to ballhandling in the P &R opportunities) . But I think he can play next to them due to Manu and RJ's playmaking ability.

If that makes any sense. I don't know it's just my opinion on the overrated point guard label in my eyes.

---

Gino is too careless with the ball at times. He makes bad decisions when trying to feed the ball to players. Not all the time, but more than enough times to see considerable playing time at PG. RJ is not that player plain and simple. And Mason failed at PG miserably last year.

I don't see why people think we need another PG. Hill was 10 games into his first NBA season and had to start at PG for the Spurs. He did a more than adequate job filling in for Parker and was actually thriving at the positon (as much as a SG learning the PG position can) before Pop changed his role.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Basketball and Football are two entirely different sports. I don't see through your analogy.

Pop has been quoted multiple times after games preaching about how well Duncan quarterbacked the team to the win.

---

Remember, we're talking more than just the Spurs here. Besides, while football is the ultimate team sport, the QB/PG analogy is actually a very valid one that many people make.

In fact, look at your Pop quote. He just compared a basketball player to a football player. Kind of shoots down your argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Gino is too careless with the ball at times. He makes bad decisions when trying to feed the ball to players. Not all the time, but more than enough times to see considerable playing time at PG. RJ is not that player plain and simple. And Mason failed at PG miserably last year.

I don't see why people think we need another PG. Hill was 10 games into his first NBA season and had to start at PG for the Spurs. He did a more than adequate job filling in for Parker and was actually thriving at the positon (as much as a SG learning the PG position can) before Pop changed his role.

---

I rather have Manu having the ball in P &R opportunities, creating for others when Tony is resting instead of George Hill. Nothing against Hill, I like him as a backup for Tony. I'm just stating that I think the Spurs should try the lineup of Mason/ Manu/ RJ for a stint during the game because of Mason's ability to spread the court better than Hill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Remember, we're talking more than just the Spurs here. Besides, while football is the ultimate team sport, the QB/PG analogy is actually a very valid one that many people make.

In fact, look at your Pop quote. He just compared a basketball player to a football player. Kind of shoots down your argument.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Basketball and football are two entirely different sports. I don't see through your analogy. Everyplayer on the court in basketball will handle the ball and make decisions. Football only one player can make decisions with the ball.

And usually the players best offensive player is making the decisions with the ball like your " quarterback" analogy.

Pop even has been quoted multiple times after games preaching about how well Duncan quarterbacked the team to the win.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

In fact, look at your Pop quote. He just compared a basketball player to a football player. Kind of shoots down your argument.

---

Um not really because Tim Duncan plays Power Forward.

Oh wait he was a center a month and a half before the all-star break last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

I rather have Manu having the ball in P &R opportunities, creating for others when Tony is resting instead of George Hill. Nothing against Hill, I like him as a backup for Tony. I'm just stating that I think the Spurs should try the lineup of Mason/ Manu/ RJ for a stint during the game because of Mason's ability to spread the court better than Hill.

---

Playing PG is more than just pick and roll and dish. Playing PG is about seeing the matchups, calling the plays, hitting the right guys and making sound decisions. The PG has to know when the push the tempo and when to slow it down. The PG has to account for the situation and adapt accordingly. The PG is the coach on the floor.

Gino isn't a good fit in this regard. The Spurs can get by playing Gino about 5 to 10 minutes a game at PG, but definitely not more than that. Plus, Hill is more athletic at this point than Gino, which gives the Spurs an added dimension.

While Tim does QB the team a lot, how many times have you seen Tony yelling at a player to go to the spot on the floor he wants them too before even starting the play? How many times have you seen Tony constantly probing the defense looking for holes for the offense to attack and adjusting accordingly? And how many times have you seen Tony have free reign with the team compared to his early years?

I've seen Parker bring the ball up for a timeout only to drive to the hoop and score when the defense relaxes. This is something a PG has to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Um not really because Tim Duncan plays Power Forward.

---

You want to know what a PG is, here's a website for you to start.

http://www.coachesclipboard.net/PointGuard.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Playing PG is more than just pick and roll and dish. Playing PG is about seeing the matchups, calling the plays, hitting the right guys and making sound decisions. The PG has to know when the push the tempo and when to slow it down. The PG has to account for the situation and adapt accordingly. The PG is the coach on the floor.

Gino isn't a good fit in this regard. The Spurs can get by playing Gino about 5 to 10 minutes a game at PG, but definitely not more than that. Plus, Hill is more athletic at this point than Gino, which gives the Spurs an added dimension.

While Tim does QB the team a lot, how many times have you seen Tony yelling at a player to go to the spot on the floor he wants them too before even starting the play? How many times have you seen Tony constantly probing the defense looking for holes for the offense to attack and adjusting accordingly? And how many times have you seen Tony have free reign with the team compared to his early years?

I've seen Parker bring the ball up for a timeout only to drive to the hoop and score when the defense relaxes. This is something a PG has to do.

---

Um because he's become our best guard/wing/point guard w/e u call it that we have. If you can scroll up you can notice that I've stated that usually the teams BEST players are the quarterbacks and decision makers. And I'm not one to believe that everyone other than the PG is clueless when it comes to noticing mismatches. As I've said before there's more factors involved that include other teammates that increase the tempo of a game. It also helps that Tony is the best guard that we have on our team now and not to mention that he is one of the fastests in the league.

And everyone on the court notices situations and " adapts accordingly". It's not just one player like the other players are clueless with whats going on.

What about for the Cavs/ Lakers? Who is the floor general for those teams?
That's my point. It's about the personnel the team has.

That is your prototype PG. ( Nash, Kidd, Stockton, Magic, Chris Paul, Mark Jackson). In the real world the labeled PG's don't have all those attributes.

The best offensive players on each team are the " floor generals and leaders". It's not the point guard on every team.

It's obvious you don't understand what I'm trying to say. But I respect your opinion I guess Mike Brown gives the keys to the team to Mo Williams and Boobie Gibson whenever Mo is sitting.

Roger hit a boatload of big shots for the Spurs last year. He was amazing, actually. He is an excellent shooting guard, especially off curls and flares.

Now, then, when Mace runs the pick & roll, he's fine if he rubs and pops off the ball screen. In fact, he's terrific. When he comes off the screen and drives, he struggles, finishing like a two-year old finishes a big plate of food.

He's okay in a pinch. Good thing Roger is working on his legs and handle in the off-season. He'll need them for the long haul...and he'll especially need that leg strength to improve his defensive intensity. He'll be guarding opposing 2s and 3s and not the JJ Barea's and Chris Paul's of the world, that's for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Um because he's become our best guard/wing/point guard w/e u call it that we have. If you can scroll up you can notice that I've stated that usually the teams BEST players are the quarterbacks and decision makers. And I'm not one to believe that everyone other than the PG is clueless when it comes to noticing mismatches. As I've said before there's more factors involved that include other teammates that increase the tempo of a game. It also helps that Tony is the best guard that we have on our team now and not to mention that he is one of the fastests in the league.

And everyone on the court notices situations and " adapts accordingly". It's not just one player like the other players are clueless with whats going on.

What about for the Cavs/ Lakers? Who is the floor general for those teams?
That's my point. It's about the personnel the team has.

---

Did you even read the website?

Quote:

---

The point guard is often thought of an extension of the coach on the floor, or the "quarterback", or floor general. So the point guard must have a close working relationship with the coaches and be very "coachable". He/she should have frequent discussions with the coach to know exactly what the coach expects of him/her, and what team strategies to use at a given time. The point guard must know his role on the team, whether he is expected to be a John Stockton type assist man, or a scorer like Allen Iverson. And this of course will depend not only on his own skills as a scorer, but also upon the talent of his teammates around him. If the team has some excellent scorers, he/she will want to be a good assist person and get the ball to those players. If no-one else on the team is a strong scoring threat, then the point guard may need to step up into that role.
You must also be able to communicate with your teammates both on and off the court. Learn to read the cuts your wing players make, whether they V-cut or back-cut. You might work out some hand signals so you know whether he/she is going back-door or not. At times, you may see the your team bunched up, with poor spacing, and you need to know how to back the ball out, direct them and get them to move and correct their spacing.

---

Your simplistic analysis of the PG position is either misguided or just plain ignorant. A PG does more than what you claim in the original post. Your lack of understanding of this shows your lack of knowledge in the area.

Every coach, GM, player and expert will tell you that the PG is the most difficult position to learn. The best offensive player isn't going to be the PG because he doesn't grasp all the intricacies of playing PG.

There's a reason why Lebron isn't a PG yet someone of similiar build, Magic, is the best PG the league's ever seen. And it has nothing to do with him being the best player on a team that featured Kareem on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

The best offensive players on each team are the " floor generals and leaders". It's not the point guard on every team.

---

That is just a ridiculous statement. PG is the hardest position to learn. That's not up for debate. Being the best offensive player doesn't make you a great PG. It's not even close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

That is just a ridiculous statement. PG is the hardest position to learn. That's not up for debate. Being the best offensive player doesn't make you a great PG. It's not even close.

---

I'm not saying being the best offensive player makes you a great PG. Your putting words in my mouth. You stated the PG is the decision maker in all phases of the game/ and is the vocal leader ect. I think the best offensive player these days has more of the responsibility of being the vocal leader and the ultimate decision maker during the game because they have the ball more.

I never said the best offensive player is the PG. Your wrong.

As I've said before and I'll say it again it all boils down to the personnel or the players you have on the team. Most typically the best offensive player on the team is the ultimate decision maker. Therefore hinders the responsibility of a point guard you are being so adament about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

Roger hit a boatload of big shots for the Spurs last year. He was amazing, actually. He is an excellent shooting guard, especially off curls and flares.

Now, then, when Mace runs the pick & roll, he's fine if he rubs and pops off the ball screen. In fact, he's terrific. When he comes off the screen and drives, he struggles, finishing like a two-year old finishes a big plate of food.

He's okay in a pinch. Good thing Roger is working on his legs and handle in the off-season. He'll need them for the long haul...and he'll especially need that leg strength to improve his defensive intensity. He'll be guarding opposing 2s and 3s and not the JJ Barea's and Chris Paul's of the world, that's for sure.

---

He was great whenever teams went under on the pick and roll. But as the season went on teams scouted him and started to hedge him or go over on the P &R which would make him put it on the floor, which would then be 2 the other way for the opposing team as he would lose the ball or get blocked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Can anyone answer me this?
What exactly makes a player being labeled a point guard?

A point guard is a player who creates for others with his ball-handling ability. Correct?

---

Quote:

---

People should start saying Mason CAN'T CREATE FOR OTHERS WELL.

---

You kind of answered your own question here, but digressing...

If we had Manu last season, Mason wouldn't have seen time as backup point guard.

Manu would've, because he can finish at the rim and create for other players. Things that, at this point, Mason has not excelled at doing. Thus his problems with handling the point.

Saying that Mason isn't a good One just because Manu wasn't there to do the job does not compute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

As I've said before and I'll say it again it all boils down to the personnel or the players you have on the team. Most typically the best offensive player on the team is the ultimate decision maker. Therefore hinders the responsibility of a point guard you are being so adament about.

---

Again, you're not understanding the nature of the PG position. You're trying to boil down the position to one aspect and that's not the case. Gino is arguably the most dynamic player on the Spurs with the ball in his hands, yet I wouldn't fully trust his decision making.

While he's shown the ability to make good decisions with the ball, he also makes too many mistakes, too many bad decisions for my liking.

The best offensive player isn't going to be the best decision maker. Again, you want your PG to be the best decision maker on the team. If the best offensive player on the team was the ultimate decision maker, then the best offensive player on the team would almost always be the PG of the team.

Obviously this isn't the case. A PG has a multitude of responsibilities that even the best players, such as Kobe and Lebron, couldn't handle full time. That's why Kobe and Lebron aren't deemed PGs.

Magic was of similar height, weight and build as Lebron, yet Magic was a PG and Lebron wasn't. Why is that?

You keep arguing a point that is faulty in logic. Jordan wasn't the PG on the Bulls, and he was unequivocally the best player on the team. He didn't even play backup, that was Pippen.

On the Lakers, Fisher plays PG followed by Odom. That has nothing to do with personnel and everything to do with the triangle offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Again, you're not understanding the nature of the PG position. You're trying to boil down the position to one aspect and that's not the case. Gino is arguably the most dynamic player on the Spurs with the ball in his hands, yet I wouldn't fully trust his decision making.

While he's shown the ability to make good decisions with the ball, he also makes too many mistakes, too many bad decisions for my liking.

The best offensive player isn't going to be the best decision maker. Again, you want your PG to be the best decision maker on the team. If the best offensive player on the team was the ultimate decision maker, then the best offensive player on the team would almost always be the PG of the team.

Obviously this isn't the case. A PG has a multitude of responsibilities that even the best players, such as Kobe and Lebron, couldn't handle full time. That's why Kobe and Lebron aren't deemed PGs.

Magic was of similar height, weight and build as Lebron, yet Magic was a PG and Lebron wasn't. Why is that?

You keep arguing a point that is faulty in logic. Jordan wasn't the PG on the Bulls, and he was unequivocally the best player on the team. He didn't even play backup, that was Pippen.

On the Lakers, Fisher plays PG followed by Odom. That has nothing to do with personnel and everything to do with the triangle offense.

---

I'm wasting my time. You obviously don't understand what I'm trying to say.

I guess when the 2nd unit comes on next year George Hill will be telling Manu Ginobili where to go and where to be and will be the leader of that group because your link said thats what PG's do. ( even though theres only been a handful of PG's in the last 20 years that were responsible for everyone of those responsibilities in that link).

You obviosly don't understand how the personnel that a team has effects the responsbiliites of your labeled PG.

Actually, to answer your question, the Point Guard is a position that developed when Dean Smith and other coaches started using defenses where they doubled the ball before the offense could get initiated and when the two guards were in the backcourt together, it was easier to double because of the spacing. With a single, lead guard initiating the offense from the middle and employing two wing players, it became more difficult to double with the other guard defensively because of the greater distance from the wings or corners. Offenses started being designed with a single playmaker, 2 wing players and 2 post players.

Maybe that answers your question better about why a Point Guard position or why the label.

There's a significant difference between players that can run the point, and those who are actually point-guard's.

Mason's actually does pretty well off the dribble rubbing his man off a screen for his shot or making the most basic of plays. But getting into the teeth of the defense and creating for others, is not something he excels in.

One of the biggest problems I saw with Mason running the point last year, was the responsibility of actually bringing up the ball with any decent pressure. It's just not something that comes to him second nature or that he's real comfortable with.

As a result, he would expend so much bringing it up, that by the time he needed to initiate/create offense, he looked like a boxer that just got done covering up after a flurry of punches; disoriented and trying to get his wits about him.

Mason's fine in the half-court and actually plays better when he gets a good amount of touches and a feel for the ball offensively -- as seen in Washington and earlier in the year with SA -- but he's not someone you want bringing up the ball and running the point consistently.

Initiating a Princeton offense like Washington or a motion-type like the Spurs, is something Mason can do. He can, at times, run the point.

But to say Mason can be, or is, a point-guard?

Well, if playing a position inevitably takes away from your individual game more than it helps the team?

I'd say that tells you all you need to know.

I admit I don't have a deep knowledge of the game and game history but this is my take on the subject:

I guess the problem is that the role of the PG has change.
Basically, the function of the PG is to organise the game (bring the ball, clock management, call the systems...). In Europe there are still a lot of PG doing essentially that. IMO this is the true role of a PG. In the NBA, I would say Steve Blake is an example of the traditional PG.

The second role is to create plays, to make nice pass, or to score after blowing by your opponent with your superior speed and ball-handling.
This role is more and more important because in a 5 players game, you can't afford to have a player that can't bring creation (think Vaughn) to the table when he handle the ball much of the time.
This is also what stars are supposed to do, this is probably why there is some confusion.

Quote:

---

A coach on the floor, who can handle and distribute the ball to teammates. It also states that the more speed a point guard has, the more likely he will be able to create separation and space off the dribble, which allows the point guard room to work. Point guards should also be vocal floor leaders, and should discuss rule interpretations with officials. A point guard must always know the time on both the shot clock and the game clock, the score, the number of timeouts for both teams, and whom to foul late in the game.

A true point guard's job is to create scoring opportunities for his/her team. The role includes passing and running the offense: setting up plays on the court, getting the ball to the teammate that he feels is in the best position to score, and dictating the tempo of the game. This also means knowing when and how to instigate a fast break and when and how to initiate the more deliberate sets.

After an opponent scores, it is typically the point guard who brings the ball down court to begin an offensive play. For this reason, passing skills, ball handling, and court vision are pivotal.

---

Basically everything Roger Mason isn't...

A point guard is a guy who controls the offense and sets up plays. I could not care less if that guy has Scottie Pippen's body, he was the real point guard for that Bulls squad. Roger Mason is definitely not a point guard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

I'm wasting my time. You obviously don't understand what I'm trying to say.

I guess when the 2nd unit comes on next year George Hill will be telling Manu Ginobili where to go and where to be and will be the leader of that group because your link said thats what PG's do. ( even though theres only been a handful of PG's in the last 20 years that were responsible for everyone of those responsibilities in that link).

You obviosly don't understand how the personnel that a team has effects the responsbiliites of your labeled PG.

---

What you're not getting is how difficult it is to be a PG. You're assuming the best offensive players make good PGs. Not true. Again, if that was the case, Kobe and Lebron would be PGs as well as Wade and guys like Vince Carter. But they're not.

The PG has much more responsibility than you're giving him credit for. You're trying to break down the PG position to a simple task in an effort to support your argument. However, in reality, the PG does much more than that.

I don't want Gino handling the PG position for an extended period of time. Parker has much more responsibility on this team than Gino (and know this isn't a Gino vs Parker point), and I'd trust him with that responsibility far more than I trust Gino.

You're either too ignorant of the PG position to see my point, or are just not willing to see it because it basically crushes your premise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Not quite. There's a difference between initiating the offense and quaterbacking the team. The PG's job is to get everyone into position, scan the court for mismatches and basically create for his teammates in the same way that a quarterback manages a football team's offense. And the PG has to make the right pass that gets the play going.

---

Thats funny cause when Duncan has a small 6-1 guy in the post Parker can't seem to get him the ball. I see Parker 99% of the time trying to beat his big man from the perimeter instead of feeding Tim and letting the double teams come and moving the ball. But I guess since Parker is the best point guard in the league all his decisions are right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoy1

Thats funny cause when Duncan has a small 6-1 guy in the post Parker can't seem to get him the ball. I see Parker 99% of the time trying to beat his big man from the perimeter instead of feeding Tim and letting the double teams come and moving the ball. But I guess since Parker is the best point guard in the league all his decisions are right.

---

Your handle on this forum should be 'broken record'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Playing PG is more than just pick and roll and dish. Playing PG is about seeing the matchups, calling the plays, hitting the right guys and making sound decisions. The PG has to know when the push the tempo and when to slow it down. The PG has to account for the situation and adapt accordingly. The PG is the coach on the floor.

Gino isn't a good fit in this regard. The Spurs can get by playing Gino about 5 to 10 minutes a game at PG, but definitely not more than that. Plus, Hill is more athletic at this point than Gino, which gives the Spurs an added dimension.

While Tim does QB the team a lot, how many times have you seen Tony yelling at a player to go to the spot on the floor he wants them too before even starting the play? How many times have you seen Tony constantly probing the defense looking for holes for the offense to attack and adjusting accordingly? And how many times have you seen Tony have free reign with the team compared to his early years?

I've seen Parker bring the ball up for a timeout only to drive to the hoop and score when the defense relaxes. This is something a PG has to do.

---

I see Parker probing probing probing and not giving up the rock. I been watching Espn Classics with John stockton greatest games. Yeah I know stockton racked up alot of assist. But its how he did it. He just made simple passes and used the Pick n roll in different ways. If he had a scoring opportunity he took it. Guys would run the floor and cut to the basket when he drove cause they knew they would get the ball. He made guys like Adam Keefe that SUCKED and had no offensive skill look good. Stockton didn't dribble alot either. Parker has the opportunity to score everytime he touches the ball, However you have to look around as well to make sure everyone gets a touch so they can have a chance to get in rythym. And then when you do that you end up finding a hot hand, which less'n your load. All the good point guards work very little to get things accomplished, and use their head ( BB IQ ).Parker unstoppable as he is, is known for having (Decent) court vision and not having good (PG) instints, not seeing cutters and stuff like that. (His Scouting Report ) I read it. FYI - I haven't seen him do that fake timeout thing for years. He Probably did that back then to make sure he got his share of shots since it was Duncan's team. Now he doesn't have too, he cant shoot it anytime he wants. Why sneak a FG attempt when you have 4 other guys at your beck n call ( Including Tim ).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoy1

Thats funny cause when Duncan has a small 6-1 guy in the post Parker can't seem to get him the ball. I see Parker 99% of the time trying to beat his big man from the perimeter instead of feeding Tim and letting the double teams come and moving the ball. But I guess since Parker is the best point guard in the league all his decisions are right.

---

you're finally getting it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonic21

you're finally getting it.

---

good one. Still nobody can explain that statement though especially if you have CP3/D-Will around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoy1

I see Parker probing probing probing and not giving up the rock. I been watching Espn Classics with John stockton greatest games. Yeah I know stockton racked up alot of assist. But its how he did it. He just made simple passes and used the Pick n roll in different ways. If he had a scoring opportunity he took it. Guys would run the floor and cut to the basket when he drove cause they knew they would get the ball. He made guys like Adam Keefe that SUCKED and had no offensive skill look good. Stockton didn't dribble alot either. Parker has the opportunity to score everytime he touches the ball, However you have to look around as well to make sure everyone gets a touch so they can have a chance to get in rythym. And then when you do that you end up finding a hot hand, which less'n your load. All the good point guards work very little to get things accomplished, and use their head ( BB IQ ).Parker unstoppable as he is, is known for having (Decent) court vision and not having good (PG) instints, not seeing cutters and stuff like that. (His Scouting Report ) I read it.

---

Yeah, you might want to address that concern to Pop instead of Parker, as Pop wants Parker to keep the defense honest. Parker's assists went up this year, so you can't claim he's not passing the ball.

It's hard to average double digit assists on the Spurs because of the extra passes made to keep the defense off balance. However, Parker constantly challenges the defense to make the D react to his speed. With Parker constantly challenging the big man, Duncan can now thrive on single coverage, and the shooters get their defenders rotating creating an open man.

This isn't Parker doing this on his own, but rather Parker taking Pop's game plan and putting it into action.

That's the difference between pure PG and scoring PG. The way to beat the Hornets is to make Chris Paul a scorer and not let him distribute. Letting Parker score will get you beat every time. That's why they're different types of PGs.

But in the end, they do share a lot of the same responsibilities, as I stated above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan Explosion

Yeah, you might want to address that concern to Pop instead of Parker, as Pop wants Parker to keep the defense honest. Parker's assists went up this year, so you can't claim he's not passing the ball.

It's hard to average double digit assists on the Spurs because of the extra passes made to keep the defense off balance. However, Parker constantly challenges the defense to make the D react to his speed. With Parker constantly challenging the big man, Duncan can now thrive on single coverage, and the shooters get their defenders rotating creating an open man.

This isn't Parker doing this on his own, but rather Parker taking Pop's game plan and putting it into action.

That's the difference between pure PG and scoring PG. The way to beat the Hornets is to make Chris Paul a scorer and not let him distribute. Letting Parker score will get you beat every time. That's why they're different types of PGs.

But in the end, they do share a lot of the same responsibilities, as I stated above.

---

thats cool , i have a ? If Parker were in Jerry Sloans system would he have significantly more assist? I'm talking 10+ with 20pts still.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoy1

Parker unstoppable as he is, is known for having (Decent) court vision and not having good (PG) instints, not seeing cutters and stuff like that. (His Scouting Report ) I read it. FYI - I haven't seen him do that fake timeout thing for years. He Probably did that back then to make sure he got his share of shots since it was Duncan's team.

---

He did it because it was smart to do. And it worked. But just like the Eagles onside kicking the opening kickoff of the first game of the season, it only works for so long before the scouting report catches on.

It was just one example of the PG knowing the situation and taking advantage of it. Just because you haven't seen the fake timeout thing work doesn't mean he doesn't try it. He still probes the defense before the time out, but usually the team is disciplined enough to watch for it, just like the Cowboys the following season resulting in the quickest kickoff return for a TD in NFL history.

There was a reason A.J.'s nickname was the "Little General". It's because he ran the floor and directed the players on the floor - and that's essentially what a Point Guard does. It takes a lot more than pure basketball skills to be a good point guard - and that's why LeBron and Wade don't play that position.

Too me a good point guard doesn't just rack up alot of assist. He does alot without the ball. Thats why I like Steve Nash, but he dribbles alot, although he is one of the better passing point guards around. Its all about how you get those assist. The top 2 get there assist in different ways. CP3/D-Will 1 - run pick n rolls 2 - look for cutters downlow or coming up top off screens / fast break / mismatches. Parker assist come off Pick n rolls only which means he is working very hard to get his teammates involved. Why not let them do half the work? If you see a mismatch, a dude coming off a screen dont dribble, give it up and then if nothing was there youll definitely get it back, cause the guys know that your looking for them.

The point guard position is basically a player who is performing as an extension of the coach on the floor. A point guard basic skill set would include setting up the offense, knowing which play to run and where his teammates need to be and moving them accordingly. Quickness and passing skills are essential. Ability to penetrate the lane is paramount. Floor vision is key. Clock management and leadership are also extremely important. Above all, intellect is the most important aspect of the point guard's game. One has to think quickly and make good decisions with the ball.

Is this what you are looking for or are just being contrary?

All of the " PG" explanations are all valid for the handful of TRUE Point guards there has been the past 20 years. Fact is there only has been not even 10 percent of the total point guards that actualy do all of which y'all claim.

Stockton, Kidd, Nash, Chris Paul, Magic, Mark Jackson, Avery Johnson to a degree...Most of the labeled PG's defend the oppositions point guards and have other players make the majority of the decisions on the floor offensively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Most of the labeled PG's defend the oppositions point guards and have other players make the majority of the decisions on the floor offensively.

---

I think it's unfair for you to give the opponenent's guards a label of "oppositions point guards", especially if 90% of them don't measure up to the standards of Spurstalk. Why do they have to have a label? Why can't the best player just defend the opponent's best player?

In fact, why do you people have to give a tall player a label of "Center". Most of the time a "Center" doesn't play in the center of the court. Sometimes labeled "Centers" don't even get to do a jump ball at center court because another player with better vert can jump higher. Why not just call a person labeled "Center" a Forward or a Big player? I think you people should lower your standards for people that are tall and not label people "Centers" when the most talented tall player may do what sterotyped true "Centers" are supposed to do. Coaches should reconsider this and get realistic about labels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

An NBA Point Guard has to be a floor leader. On offense, the PG typically brings the ball up after COP or at least initiates the offense. He calls the plays to be run, or relays the play called from the bench to his teammates. He has ownership of dictating the tempo. He must see mismatches, particularly coming out of transition, where the cross-matches presented advantages for the offense and then get the ball to the player with the advantage. The advantage may be size but it can also be someone in position to score with his man out of position. The PG must know the game clock, shot clock and score at all times. He must direct traffic when needed and when he runs the break, he must be able to judge where the best scoring option is very quickly, and if there is one. He must make a passing decision on the break by the time he gets to the FT line.

Those are just a few of the key elements for an NBA PG on offense. Mason has some execution issues as a PG.

---

[/thread]