After missing out on Howard, Rockets to fight for playoffs [NBA.com]

Differentiating a player between "score-first" and "pass-first" is one of the dumber debates I have seen.

The intent of basketball is neither to score-first nor pass-first, but to simply make the right plays.

Calling Lin a "score-first" guard is simply ignorant to the game of basketball.

Lin is a play-maker, or in other words, a basketball player. It was no coincidence that he averaged 25 points a game while playing next to guys like Shumpert, Fields, Walker, Jefferies, while became much more of a "floor general" with Melo and Amare back.

That is called playing to what the defense gives you. Not "score first" or "pass first".

 

That's a really good question (the PG question) and if you ask X number of people, you might X number of answers. For me at least, it comes from having not only having watched, but also having played the game from that particular position (PG).

In regards to Rajon Rondo and Jeremy Lin, their games vary greatly. Chris Paul, Steve Nash, and Rajon Rondo are probably best examples of "pure" points in the game today, in that being a floor general and getting teammates involved in the flow of the game is their bread and butter and their main focus. While they are each capable of scoring points when need be, their main focus is controlling the tempo of the game and getting their teammates involved.

When I see Jeremy Lin play, more often than not, he's looking to get his own shot first, before he looks to get his teammates involved. This might be a result of the systems he's played in prior to entering the NBA. Even when Lin was with the Knicks, he was asked to carry on the scoring load and you can see that he is far more comfortable trying to score than trying to get his teammates involved. That isn't to say that Jeremy Lin doesn't have any point guard skills, but you can tell that the "being a floor general and looking for his teammates" doesn't exactly come as naturally to him as finding his own shot. He has a ways to go in that department. To me, Jeremy Lin is more of a scoring guard than he is a point guard a la Russell Westbrook (though I think Jeremy Lin has higher bball IQ than Westbrook).

As for Derrick Rose...you really don't consider him a top 5 PG in the league? What separates Derrick Rose from the a lot of the players (both pure points and scoring guards) is that he can do both well. While, he is more or less known for his scoring prowess, having watched a good number of Bulls games through the years and having followed him through his years at Simeon High, Rose is also a very capable floor general and underrated passer. If the Bulls quick first round exit isn't proof enough, the Bulls are heavily reliant on Rose's ability to not only put points up in heavy doses, but also to get his teammates involved. Derrick Rose isn't simply a Top 5 PG, he's a Top 5 player in the league today (barring injury) and there is no doubt about it. There aren't many 23 year old MVPs running around that have improved as fast as he has in such a short period of time.

 

This is a fine and dandy point, but the fact remains that there are still point guards who score 20 on 15 shots and point guards who score 8 on 5 shots. I suppose we could think of a new title?

 

Okay. For a second I was about to lose it because I thought you said Russ was a point guard, but I calmed down and re-read your post & understood where you are coming from. I like your definition of pure point guard I think it is pretty spot on.

I agree his BBIQ is higher than Russ & I think he has much more unselfish mindset & is a more willing passer.

I disagree with your characterization of Lin though. From the games I saw I thought he actually played his best when he was scoring less & facilitating more. Ideally, Lin shouldn't be the the first offensive option on a playoff team. That isn't a sustainable team in the NBA, although it did get Harvard far. I thought last season he was at his best as the third option behind Carmelo & Amare. In those last few games he played he averaged 18 & 8 per 36 on reduced minutes. That was 3rd in all PG's behind CP3 & Parker over that same stretch. In those games I mentioned, his TO's went down, his defense improved, his shooting got more consistent all because he was asked to do a lot less offensively. He generally played much better & more controlled. To be honest I liked that version of Lin a lot more than I did the Lin who was dropping 38 points. A good example of this is the Sacramento game where they wouldn't let him score. So he had like 10 points & 13 assists while playing only 3 quarters. Yes it is the Kings lol but you get my drift. So I do think being a floor general and getting his teammates involved does come naturally to him & his statistics when using the pnr back that up as well. He is a lot better at getting his teammates involved than he is at scoring when running the pnr & statistics back that up. In terms of scoring he is excellent in isolation.

No I don't think Rose is a top 5 PG in the NBA. He is a tremendous player but I disagree that he is a top 5 player & PG.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean the classification was dumb, just the preference of one over another.

Westbrook is a "shoot first" player. Rondo is a "pass first" player.

I like "basketball players" like Nash, CP3, Parker etc.

Lin is a "basketball player". Hopefully a pretty darn good one.

 

Lol. I do think that the delineation between a pure point guard & scoring guard is a little bit over the top. The first one has a positive connotation whereas the second has a negative connotation. The league has changed and more often than not, teams are taking SG's & turning them into PG's, Russell Westbrook, Austin Rivers I believe is an example & I think Damian Llilard is another. To me there isn't anything really wrong with that. In my opinion it has gotten to the point that pg's who flat out struggle to shoot call themselves pure point guards (Scott Machado) to fit the meme. The NBA has changed, it is now a point guard driven league. The delineation seems like a desperate hope to cling to what being a pg used to mean before.

 

Oh no haha, Russell Westbrook is probably the very definition of scoring guard if there ever was one. He's a scoring guard masquerading as a point guard. To be quite honest with you, I feel that the Thunder might be better off unloading Westbrook for a player like Rondo or Paul if they even want a legitimate shot at beating the Heat or the Lakers. I just feel that having Durant and Westbrook's duties sort of over lap and Durant should be getting more touches than he already does. This isn't to say Westbrook is devoid of talent, but the Thunder can really use a guy that can space the floor and utilize all the weapons they have (Durant, Harden, and Ibaka). There are just too many instances that I can remember where the team is just standing around waiting for Westbrook to launch an ill-advised shot.

Jeremy Lin has talent, but at this point in his career, I feel that he is far more adept at finding his own shot than finding spots for his teammates. He does have pretty good bball IQ and has a good understanding of the game so I don't doubt that he will improve as a point guard. However, I do feel that he has a ways to go before he catches a player with the caliber of talent of say a Rajon Rondo.

 

If he does reach Rondo level that is definitely not a guarantee. Took Rondo 6 years, Nash was a late bloomer as well & some players never even develop to be anything special. Only time will tell. And you definitely did hit the nail on the head in terms of saying "he is far more adept at finding his own shot than finding spots for his teammates". The bolded is key.

And you are right about Russ he is definitely a head scratcher. The weirdest thing about him is that he will grab a rebound run in transition & shoot (brick) a 3 before his team-mates have even caught up to catch the rebound or assist him. He does that a lot, what I like to call YOLO moments. But he is a great talent though & he is young so he can hopefully grow up some.

Anyway thanks for the discussion. Was very informative. Liked a lot of what you said and it is always nice to hear differing opinions.

 

You too man. It's always neat to see all the different perspectives on the forum and being able to bounce different ideas off of others. You definitely learn a few things and it's always good when it's a nice and civil conversation between a couple of enthusiasts without being antagonized for differing opinions.

 

*** Howard bytch @$$,how can I change my username to Parsons fan?

 

What are the odds of winning a championship using the floating strategy aka "rebuild and compete"?

Can anybody crunch those numbers for the curious?

 

Edit: What do the numbers look like for a smaller/medium market team trying to "rebuild and compete" (We already know the big market teams can do it, but we aren't them.)

 

Nice joke