RondOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Only if Rondo is playing in a system that requires him to give up the ball rather than just penetrating into and through the sagging defense.

 

You are delusional if you think Paul's ability to score the ball is what makes him a great playmaker rather than just a good playmaker.

Rondo already closed a championship. And Rubio has regularly closed for the Spanish National team, which is one of the few to be able to compete with the U.S. It's nonsense to say those boys can't close games. It is nonsense to put them on the wing and ask them to close with a spot-up three. Just like it's nonsense to ask Harden to defend the point of attack to close the game. Just because the player has a weakness doesn't mean he can't close.

A PG not being able to defend his position requires special teammates around him too.

In fact every championship that's been won has been one by a superstar or superstars that have special teammates around them. Even the king couldn't get it done with the slop they were throwing on the floor with him in his first Cleveland stint. Not to mention MJ couldn't get it done until he got the right guys around him. So lay off that stupid stuff about a PG that isn't a scorer has to have special teammates around him. James Harden has proven it doesn't matter how good you are. He's put up gargantuan numbers. But no rings. Has consistently fallen apart in crunch time. For Harden to win he's got to have his own special teammates around him. So tell us something we don't know here, kay? Because every player that wins a championship has to be in the right system with the right teammates.

Ummmmmmm,

What I said was there simply wasn't dominant post players in the NBA anymore and until we get those kinds of dominant post players back the post game is out of vogue.

I dare you to say that Hakeem's post game wouldn't work in today's NBA. Quite the contrary, Hakeem in his prime would dominate today's game even more than he dominated his era.

Study the post up offenses. Even in their hayday, there were only a handful of post players that were efficient. Today everybody wants to shoot the three. But realistically there's only a handful of teams that can do it efficiently in high volume. The past up game is no different. It's out of vogue for the moment. But Hakeem and Shaq would wreck the Association with their post games if they were playing today.

 

The only thing that has changed over the last 5+ years or so is the league has finally figured out the true value of a three-point shot attempt. And that value has mushroomed with the rule changes allowing zone defenses. Everything else you mentioned (multiple creators, versatile defenders) is a staple of championship teams. Those aren't recent developments. That are always beens.

Hakeem and Shaq aren't straw men. They are hall-of-fame players. And they would dominate today's game with all the defensive attention given to shooters.

I've been watching for 40+ years too. Clear back to Kareem, Dr. J, MCGinnis, Marvin Webster, Don Buse, Tiny Archibald, etc. And I've spent a considerable amount of time studying championship teams. So concerning your point that you think I dance around let me be very clear.

Consistent post play has NEVER been needed or required to win a championship.

The evidence of that is simply an examination of teams in the pre-three-point-era prior to 1980. Some of those teams won championships without a dominant offensive post presence when everybody was running their offense through the post. Just off the top of my head Willis Reed and Wes Unseld come to mind.

So I don't believe that a dominant offensive post presence is necessary. I do believe you have to have either a dominant offensive advantage inside the paint or you have to have dominant defense inside the paint.

The argument isn't weak. The players skill sets are weak right now. What has happened with the defensive rule changes in the NBA is that the coaches at the junior levels no longer teach and coach the post game. Therefore we aren't producing any dominant post players.

But even that will finally change once again as players adjust and the three point advantage is watered down because we've produced so many great shooters that it will be difficult to have a distinguished advantage and we've countered with so many great defenders at the point on the PnR that the effectiveness of great PnR players is watered down. That's going to happen. And when it does, coaches will be looking for the next innovation. What will it be?

It will be taking the host of smaller defenders who are out there to shoot threes, set picks, catch lobs, and defend the PnR into the post and working them over one-on-one because the other defenders cannot leave the other 4 guys who are 40+% three point shooters from the parking lot. That's coming. In just a few more years. Then everybody will be scrambling to find the next Hakeem, the big man that can post up, handle the dribble, make a plethora of moves with the ball and if he gets fouled he goes to the line and turns an efficient possession into an ultra-efficient possession because he can shoot free throws.

Basketball is always evolving and re-evolving. Post play is out of vogue because teams are running PnR because it's simple and they don't have to worry about finding a great post man. They can go pick off a great athlete and teach him to jump straight up, rotate defensively, and set good picks. These guys, the Capelas of basketball, are quickly becoming a dime a dozen. They're easier to produce. And because they're not a primary part of the offense their free throw shooting has been neglected. That compounds their poor results if they do post up. And makes it easy for teams to say.....post up basketball doesn't work. It's not needed in today's game.

The only reason it's not needed is because we are still shy of great shooters. But they're coming. Trae Young and a host of shooters/playmakers and shooters/defenders are coming. And when they finally reach saturation, well the great post player will once more be in vogue.

::::::::::::::

And for the record, the idea that if you took shooting away from Paul that he would be greatly diminished is ridiculous. Paul's greatest basketball attribute is his mind. Take shooting away from him and he'd still average 15 ppg with about 14 assists. He's too smart. He'd get it back at the FT line and by creating even more looks for others. And his own offense and the teens offense works be just as potent, just as efficient.

Paul's shooting is a convenience. It makes things simpler and short circuits the shot clock. His shooting by no means makes him great. He would be great without it.