Reply With Quote
^ WTF
A huge list? Lmao, you literally listed a handful of the span of 50+ years, that isn't . 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.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 re .
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.
Williams and mings are built like modern day SF's, they were light as 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 load of ty 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 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 ( mings, 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.And they didn’t have strong PF in the past? Like Buck Williams, Terry mings 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.
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?
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 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 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.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.
Jesus christ you are thick. What are you not understanding, modern NBA does=the old NBA.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?
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 compe ion 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 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 , 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.
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 , 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.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!
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 , everyone is way too athletic. The NBA is rapidly evolving.
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.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.
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?Your stats are full of . Quote them.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...dantlad01.html
http://www.nba.com/history/players/dantley_bio.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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 ing 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 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.
Last edited by KL2; 02-06-2015 at 03:26 PM.
^ WTF
Tony Parker ring a bell?
This is bizarre. I thought this thread ended when someone said point guards handle the ball on nearly every play. That makes them popular.
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.
I very very fast tbh.
KL2 going balls deep on am
KL2 going balls deep on am
Btw people, I didn't sit here and type all that out, used the auto save content lol.
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 ty takes, saddens me
Antiquated bball fans don't like to go into depth tbh.
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%)
mings 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.
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.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?
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?
Since when did I say weight is not important? Quote me. I can tell you can't read though, because, well, you can't.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
Did you hear me say otherwise? Quote me. You seem to have huge problems with chasing arguments that aren't there. Focus.
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?
Are you now talking about his offense or defense? You just go all over the place.
He did it because he was quick.
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?
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?
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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? 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.KL2 going balls deep on am
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.
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.
K.. thx
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.
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.
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.
Truth nukes
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.
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..
nah he's just an overrated chucker/wannabe kobe
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
