If you are running a primarily inside attack with called plays, you don't have to have a floor general. The '86 Celtics (argueably the best team ever) didn't have a true point guard. Dennis Johnson was a shooter and so was Ainge. You need a true point guard when you put the ball is his hands and let the offense go through him. When you don't really call plays. I think that we can all agree that JVG has designed all the plays that we run and that we basically run a play every time down. Then JVG has determined where the players postion themselves, where the go to, who gets the ball, where they get it, how they get it, and what to do once they get it or if they can't get it. Where does the "Floor General" come into play? He's just one of the five players that the coach has told where to be and what to do. In the old days, coaches only called plays at critical junctures of the game so you needed the PG to run the offense and direct people and be the general on the floor so that people knew what to do. But if the coach is going to call a play every time down the court and the players then go to their determined spots on the floor, why do you need a floor general? You don't. That's why traditional, pass first point guards are becoming extinct. Because coaches now call all of the plays, they want five legitimate scoring options on the floor to maintain spacing. And any PG that can't score isn't going to have a future in the league any more. This isn't to gloss over SF's deficiencies because we all know what they are. But to say the Rockets can't win because they don't have a pass first PG is an oversimplification and goes against recent history as both Derek Fisher and Tony Parker are primarily scorers and shooters. What the Rockets need is a proven veteren that knows how to win in the league. They also need for all five guys on the floor to understand the offens and be willing to move the ball.
You said it right. The only problem with SF, our PG, is that he ignores JVG and he continues dribling and trying to create for himself instead of making one touch passes. His usual dribbling, just messes up the whole offence. That extra second or two allows the opponents deffense to position themselves. The theory on passing the ball fast is that you don't allow the defence to react fast enough.
I dont think that's true. First, it's not easy to run set plays. These days, defenses are good at taking you out of what you want to do. To have any chance of successfully running a set play, you need to do it accurately and crisply. A good passing point guard will facilitate that. You can't have inaccurate, slow or delayed passes b/c that permits the defense to recover. Second, frequently, you are taken out of your set plays and need to make something happen. That happens in crunch time in particular. Plays break down and you need to convert. Teams with true superstars rely on them to make the plays. Alternatively, you better have a point guard that can penetrate and set up open looks for the team. That's one of our problems. We don't have that true, go-to 4th quarter superstar, nor do we have that creator point guard. Personally, I think the extinction of the true pass first point guards is due to SportsCenter and the street basketball culture of dribbling, shaking, baking, etc. The entire concept of passing and team ball has been eroded and it's not only the true point guards that are being eliminated. For all positions, the ability to move without the ball, make the extra pass, screen, cut . . . everything that you'd find in the Utah Jazz, Sac Kings or Princeton Tiger offense is being sacrificed at the altar of street ball. it is overly simplistic to say that the Rox problems are due to Francis' inability to pass. It is due to everyone's inabiility to pass, move without the ball . . . etc. The only "natural" passers are Pike and Yao and maybe JJ. Our players are becoming more "willing" passers, but at the highest level of basketball, there is an enormoud difference between "natural" passers (ala the Kings) and willing passers. I think we need to bring in a Brent Barry, who would fall under the category of "natural" passer. However, before anyone thinks that Barry would cure all ills, we ahve to understand that a Barry Francis backcourt would be potentially the worst defensive backcourt in the league. Right now (I can't believe I'm saying this), Mobley is our most complete and consistent player. It would be tough to trade him, but his value is at an all tiem high.
Tony Parker has upped his assists per game a lot recently because Popavich told him to get his teammates involved. Rockets don't have Duncan. It's arguable Tony Parker shouldn't even be putting up assist numbers near Steve because Duncan dominates the ball so much. I think the point guard should be able to follow the orders of the coach on the court. He should be an extension of the coach. I think Steve intentionally blocks out Van Gundy's plays on his own at times and goes renegade. Spurs have been kicking butt, and I think Tony Parker's play has been a large factor. Tony is also a better passer than Steve.
