Traditional basketball had the 1-5 positions. But I wonder if it really matters all that much. Perhaps it makes more sense to think in terms of front court/back court players. First of all it seems that the 5 is going away. A lot of teams seem to essentially play two PFs. It also seems like you could easily just mix and match PF/SF and still be effective. You could even mix and match some SF and SG. Also you can easily play two PGs a-la Isiah Thomas/Jose Dumars. I think that too many GMs and coaches are too rigid with positions rather than just mixing and matching. Thinking in terms of front court and backcourt players makes more sense to me than being so rigid with the traditional 5 positions.
No they don't really. This is why golden state was so good especially defensively. They gathered a lot of long and similarly sized players so they could always switch effectively and not be at such a mismatch. Defensively is where position is defined, not offensively. That is why someone like Avery Bradley is considered to be a 2guard by some and a pg by others, he defends both.
Of course. But again that just means you can distinguish between front court defenders and back court defenders and not be 1-5 rigid. For example, if you could clone two Draymond Greens to play on the same team or two Kawhi Leonards to play on the same team, I fail to see why that wouldn't form a tremendous front court even though that means having two PFs or two SFs on the same team.
Like what has already been pointed out, this is a large part of GSW's success. Youth basketball here in Aust. they largely use the position numbers 1-5 and not names and that's purely where they stand or move to using (for example) the flow offence. And players are expected to be able to interchange.
Positions may not matter, but functionality does. Three shooters would lead to ABA-style 220 point games every night, three rebounders would be Knicks-Heat slugfests. Do they specialize in hockey and soccer, or are defenders just a little slower and more willing to tackle and/or check than score?
I've been saying this for a long time. There are three types of players in today's NBA: Bigs: those who play close to the basket. Wings: those who play in the perimeter. Points: those who initiate the offense from the perimeter. How many of each of these players you want to put on the floor depends on your match ups and game plan. Many players can shift between types. The more versatile a player is on either or both sides of the floor, the more valuable he is to the team.
Nope. Like Jalen Rose said, positions are only created so a novice can follow the game. on offense, Harden is more of a Point Guard than Steph Curry, but he will always be referred to as a Shooting Guard.
They do still matter. Draymond can play spot minutes at the 5 but there's no way the "death lineup" works on a regular basis over the course of a whole season or playoff series unless it's the right opponent. It works in certain moments against certain oppositions. It worked against us because Dwight is too slow now and he's not used to defending 15+ ft out and our power forwards are too weak/sucky. A true Center that can still ball is very valuable. Even against Portland he wasn't that effective because Portland has a big/long front court. Especially against OKC's big front court Draymond struggled. In the regular season Hassan Whiteside got the better of him for all the trash Draymond talked. Whiteside being out was also very costly to Miami and I'm bummed we didn't get to witness a Lebron vs Wade showdown. Biyombo should personally give Whiteside a percentage of whatever contract he earns this year because he got to roam free and look like a star without any resistance in the paint once HW went down. Karl Anthony Towns is going to show just how valuable a truly skilled C is for many years to come. I think the league may shift towards being a big mans game again in the near future with all the talented big guys who can play the post and defend. It's a guard dominant league because there are so many of them and good ones at that but having any one of the following is a big advantage. KAT Cousins Anthony Davis Whiteside Drummond I'm very envious of the teams with those guys especially since we're now left with Capela looking to be out starting full time C going forward.
It only appears that way because Bev is so terrible (worst starting PG in the league). Harden led the league in turnovers in both the regular season and post season. His Assist to TO ratio is absolutely pathetic. If we're to go anywhere he needs to learn to play off the ball better and we need a real PG that knows how to dribble, create, distribute, protect the ball and make smart decisions. I hope D'Antoni realizes this and doesn't plan to play Harden as our "PG" because he's not and its a recipe for another disaster of a season.
The eradication of illegal defense rules allowed NBA coaches to unleash a plethora of defensive systems to match a wide-range of player combinations. They can all work, just like in college, because it is easier to guard the paint, which helps against motion, great post-up bigs, and ISO attacks from the perimeter. Match-ups are not as deadly, when you can guard the paint more easily. OKC just proved they were able to expose SAS with a big lineup and GSW with a small lineup, because there is more flexibility in what you can do on defense, finally, once again.
I think it's the fans and 'analysts' that are the rigid ones, not teams. Phil Jackson winning 11 championships without using a traditional point guard has done nothing to stop people from claiming they're essential.
I see what you're saying but to tbh none of those guys listed really have a true back to the basket game that they consistently use throughout the course of a game let alone season. For the most part, these guys are getting their points off p n r's, off rebounds, shooting 3s, or mid range jumpers. It's not nearly enough to shift the game to a big mans game because the guard position is so deep still and will be for years to come. The only true center that relies on a true post game at the moment is Jahil Okafor but hes stuck in Philly so his impact on the league is going to be limited so long as they continue to be terrible. KAT's development is going to be critical as far as being a dominant big because he certainly looks like he has the tools.
Roles matter but positions really don't and I think all NBA selections should just be based on a front court / back court type of grouping. But even then it's not perfect because of versatile SFs who can shoot the 3 but also post up defender inside and outside like LeBron and Kawhi.
They matter somewhat, but talent trumps all. Seems like whenever LeBron's team wins the title this topic comes up, but I'd say LeBron's "position-less" teams win because they have LeBron aka the best player in the world more than any other reason.
They do matter, that's why most teams play traditional lineups the majority of the time. If they didn't matter you'd see way more random lineups. Simple as that. It's easy to scrap positions when you have a ton of good players. The trend is, they matter less. But they still matter and y'all are gonna have to deal with it.
Positions don't matter but roles do. You always need perimeter shooting, playmaking, paint defense, rebounding etc. That's why positions were created in the first place, nowadays with the way globalization has happened and all the advances in technology you're seeing people with varying sizes and skillsets, for example traditionally SG are just meant to be closers and score 1-on-1 but in Harden's case he can actually be the main hub of the offense, or SFs are traditionally off the ball scorers but in Lebron and KD's case they get most of the touches etc. Positions are used now for convenience and just refer to their size rather than their actual role, so a guy like Harden is called an SG when he was really more of a pg and Tim Duncan is called a PF when he was really their center etc. Its not really due to novices but more of convenience, as analysts broadcasting on tv it'll waste too much time if you refer to the players by their specialized roles. Also the 5 positions are concepts that have been refined over the years, there is a lot of merit keeping the traditional line up unless you have a very specific goal in mind (like small ball) so most coaches stick to the 5 positions even if technically you could play any lineup you want.
