I Hate "True Pg" Apologists

[JohnMax]

FIBA team sucked without a true PG and needed James Harden to run the offense

[AirBourne92]

most of these true pg apologists are either

1) basketball purists

or

2) people who have no idea about basketball


you dont need a true pg to run sequences and plays that dissect defenses and help win games....


example:

derek fisher

[KirbyPls]

Modern-day positions are basically meaningless.

Back in the day, a true PF would have been someone like Karl Malone. Pick-and-Roll man, who can post up and hit the mid-range shot. Not a defensive anchor in any sense.

Duncan came along and brought PF skills on offense but he had the ability to anchor the defense like a C. Dirk came along with his insane shooting skills.

Jordan did what he did playing SG but it wouldn't have surprised anyone if he was listed as an SF (playing the exact same way). Nowadays you can find lineups with guys like Boris Diaw playing Center.

That said, the idea of a true PG has been around forever, and it still exists today. A true PG is someone whose job is to set-up his teammates.

I'm not saying a true PG is better than a scoring PG...but what a Point Guard should be (in the idea situation) has remained the same for decades...unlike other positions.

Nice

[Budadiiii]

What you feel has nothing to do with reality though. Scoring PGs run the league and with reason. Reason being is that a scoring PGs carries more of the O load than passing PGs whom are ultimately only as good as the poeple they are facilitating. That's why the clippers will never get past the 2nd round.. Cp3 over facilitates when the clippers would be better off with his offense as opposed to always deferring to others.

[Taller than CP3]

I consider Jason Kidd to be a true PG, although not as true as John Stockton because PG's aren't meant to rebound.

[bizil]

First of all greatness is greatness. A PG like Westbrook is a great player just like a PG like CP3 is a great player. The most premium asset in all of basketball is takeover scoring ability. Among PG's, I think Westbrook is the best in the world in that sense. So I'm fine with those who think Westbrook is the best PG in the world.

I think u have three kinds of PG's who can be great players:

- Pass first PG's with alpha dog level ability (players such as Magic, Isiah, Big O, Frazier, Tiny, Payton, CP3)

- Score first alpha dog PG's (players such as Westbrook, Rose, Arenas, Parker, Lillard. I think Curry is of this style too BUT has the best floor generalship for this style of PG)

- Pass first PG's who aren't alpha dog kind of players (players such as Stockton, Rondo, Kidd, Mark Jackson, Cousy, Mo Cheeks)

So it's not about dissing anybody. It's about the different styles they bring. Personally, I think the IDEAL PG are the ones in my first group. Guys who look to pass first and be a QB BUT can also dominate scoring. But u can STILL be a great player with the other styles I laid out as well. ULTIMATELY, its about the impact u have on the game. And guys get the job done differently. So if anything, it comes down to a matter of taste. Or what is good for a particular team.

[305Baller]

I hate "True PG" apologists. There is no such thing as a 'True PG". Why isn''t their a True SG, True SF, True PF, True C?... Here's why. There is more than 1 way to play every position. Success at a position is not contingent upon fitting a predetermined description, nor is it how that position ranked. A player's job no matter the position they play is to make their strengths an advantage for their team to use to win. Whether that be scoring, rebounding, passing or what have you. If you're the best scoring option on a team then be that! Don't go out of your way to defer the 25 points that you can average more consistently and efficiently to your second option. Don't pass pass pass because someone told you that "A Pg job is to facilitate" when your team can use your scoring more in the current situation to get the team over the hump. PG, SG, SF, PF, C is nothing but listings with basic requirements such as height and a skill minimum requirements. The rest is up to the player in what they bring to the table and how they utilize their skills to give their team to the best chance to win. If said team "doesn't have enough firepower" then why the f*** are you "facilitating the offense" and not trying to carry the offense and make plays for other players when they present themselves? ‪#‎ThinkOnThat‬

Fair enough. Who are you and what do you play or coach?

[RedBlackAttack]

FIBA team sucked without a true PG and needed James Harden to run the offense

Yeah, Harden didn't run the offense.

And, the FIBA team was completely dominant on a level that no one expected.

[bizil]

Modern-day positions are basically meaningless.

Back in the day, a true PF would have been someone like Karl Malone. Pick-and-Roll man, who can post up and hit the mid-range shot. Not a defensive anchor in any sense.

Duncan came along and brought PF skills on offense but he had the ability to anchor the defense like a C. Dirk came along with his insane shooting skills.

Jordan did what he did playing SG but it wouldn't have surprised anyone if he was listed as an SF (playing the exact same way). Nowadays you can find lineups with guys like Boris Diaw playing Center.

That said, the idea of a true PG has been around forever, and it still exists today. A true PG is someone whose job is to set-up his teammates.

I'm not saying a true PG is better than a scoring PG...but what a Point Guard should be (in the idea situation) has remained the same for decades...unlike other positions.

Well said! The most premium asset for a PG historically is dropping dimes and passing first. However, u can still be a great scorer along with being a pass first PG. Big O was really the first PG to prove that theory.

Other guys due to being undersized SG's find themselves at PG. They can certainly pass well enough and handle the rock well enough to be a great PG. But they do it from a score first mentality. Some of these kind of guys (like Iverson) eventually move to SG and are paired with a bigger PG.

I believe u can win rings with a pass first PG or a score first PG. I think it's a matter of taste or what a team needs. But ideally, give me a Magic, Big O, or Isiah kind of PG over the rest.

[Fire Colangelo]

Why does it have to be extreme...? All the PG has to do is to run an offense and make the right plays. The PG's job is to create the most efficient shot for the team, and you can only achieve that by playing smart. Being a "true PG" doesn't mean your deferring and forcing passes, it just means running the team's offense properly like the PG is supposed to do.

Your PG is usually the smallest guy on the court, in most cases it's just inefficient to have him chuck up most of your shots.

Most NBA wings can make a open jumper, I'll take the open jumper by the average player over a contested shot by the star player 9 times out of 10. That's what being a PG is about... Prime Nash could drop 30 on any given night, but he can find Stoudemire under the basket, he can find Marion in the corner, he can find Raja Bell for a wide open 3 so that he doesn't need to drop 30. That's not deferring, that's just playing smart.

[ImKobe]

positions were created so that a novice could follow the game

[RedBlackAttack]

You hear again and again, over and over, from people involved with the league that the conventional five positions are a thing of the past in the NBA. Centers who can step out and knock down shots on the perimeter. Forwards who are the teams' playmakers. Point guards as the best pure scorers.

Jalen Rose says it all the time... the 1-5 positions were originally just an easy way to explain how the game works to novices. It isn't a be-all, end-all model of how every team should be designed.

More and more, the NBA is becoming positionless. The more versatile a player is, the more positions they can defend/play, the better off the team is going to be. This is said again and again, yet people still expect 8-12 assists per game from their team's "point guard," or they're not doing their jobs.

Pure cognitive dissonance.

[Young X]

Why does it have to be extreme...? All the PG has to do is to run an offense and make the right plays. The PG's job is to create the most efficient shot for the team, and you can only achieve that by playing smart. Being a "true PG" doesn't mean your deferring and forcing passes, it just means running the team's offense properly like the PG is supposed to do.

Your PG is usually the smallest guy on the court, in most cases it's just inefficient to have him chuck up most of your shots.

Most NBA wings can make a open jumper, I'll take the open jumper by the average player over a contested shot by the star player 9 times out of 10. That's what being a PG is about... Prime Nash could drop 30 on any given night, but he can find Stoudemire under the basket, he can find Marion in the corner, he can find Raja Bell for a wide open 3 so that he doesn't need to drop 30. That's not deferring, that's just playing smart.

Exactly. Good post.

[Asukal]

Why does it have to be extreme...? All the PG has to do is to run an offense and make the right plays. The PG's job is to create the most efficient shot for the team, and you can only achieve that by playing smart. Being a "true PG" doesn't mean your deferring and forcing passes, it just means running the team's offense properly like the PG is supposed to do.

Your PG is usually the smallest guy on the court, in most cases it's just inefficient to have him chuck up most of your shots.

Most NBA wings can make a open jumper, I'll take the open jumper by the average player over a contested shot by the star player 9 times out of 10. That's what being a PG is about... Prime Nash could drop 30 on any given night, but he can find Stoudemire under the basket, he can find Marion in the corner, he can find Raja Bell for a wide open 3 so that he doesn't need to drop 30. That's not deferring, that's just playing smart.

^This guy gets it.

A true PG is someone who sets up the plays. Clueless fans who don't play basketball thinks a "true" pg is someone who just passes the ball.

Just try playing with a point guard who has zero court vision. They would either force a contested shot , pass to a guarded man, or turn the ball over coz he didn't see a double team coming.

[outbreak]

All that matters is if your team wins and you are contributing to your team winning by fitting the system. If your team is better off with you shooting more that's fine, if it's better off with your facilitating more that's fine too. Positions these days are meaningless so long as a team is working well as a unit , some rosters and systems will need a facilitator at the point others will need a scorer either way is fine if it works.