Does anyone else hate the term "pure" PG?

[game3524]

Seriously, WTF does that even mean?

There seems to be some belief that a PG job is to just set up teammates and that is wrong. The job is simply to run the offense and to get the best shot available, either for himself or his teammates.

Hell, Westbrook plays the PG position much more effectively then Rondo, yet Rondo still is consider a pure PG.

[UK2K]

I like it.

I consider myself a pure point guard.

This last weekend, we played ball for about 2 hours. 5 on 5 full court. We played maybe 6 or 7 games, we lost one.

I shot one shot the whole time. But I assisted on 90% of our made baskets (I'm a wizard on the entry pass).

Because I sacrificed shots (aka I can't shoot) I developed the ability to pass the ball with English, back spins, lobs that are on point, full court passes that land in peoples hands.

For big guys who can't dribble, I make their job really easy.

I could get to the rim if I want, but its less effort for me to create an opportunity and allow my teammates to score.

[KnicksFan11]

Everytime i think or hear of "pure" PG . I also think of Rondo..

I'm guessing its because "pure" PG are players who mostly pass , just like Rubio

[imdaman99]

I like it.

I consider myself a pure point guard.

This last weekend, we played ball for about 2 hours. 5 on 5 full court. We played maybe 6 or 7 games, we lost one.

I shot one shot the whole time. But I assisted on 90% of our made baskets (I'm a wizard on the entry pass).

Because I sacrificed shots (aka I can't shoot) I developed the ability to pass the ball with English, back spins, lobs that are on point, full court passes that land in peoples hands.

For big guys who can't dribble, I make their job really easy.

I could get to the rim if I want, but its less effort for me to create an opportunity and allow my teammates to score.

Do you play against idiots? If you're telling me a guy shoots once a whole day, I am not even covering that guy and helping off you every play. Oh wait let me guess, if they didn't cover you than you would score more right? Not buyin it.

[Harison]

Why would anyone hate a term which depicts a playstyle and mentality?

Yes, there are "shoot first" and "pass first" PGs, is that ground breaking for some?

[bobopenguin]

deron. at his prime he can do everything that u asked from a PG, and he still got that in him.

[Flower_]

Everytime i think or hear of "pure" PG . I also think of Rondo..

Yeap, me too. When you are not good offensive player people calling you "pure" point guard, Rondo is Pure PG because he can't shoot basketball for sh*t.

[Harison]

Yeap, me too. When you are not good offensive player people calling you "pure" point guard, Rondo is Pure PG because he can't shoot basketball for sh*t.

Not really, Stockton and Nash were sharpshooters, and they were pure PGs.

[ILLsmak]

pure PG is extremely hard to play.

Shoot first PG is hard, too, but not as hard as pure PG because you always have to keep in mind that you are creating. You should only shoot when it makes life easier for your teammates.

It, of course, can 'make it easier' for them if you shoot, but that's a different playstyle. I love Iverson, but to play a 'pure PG' is probably the hardest position, no doubt.

Think about it: not only are you responsible for getting the ball in the right spot and not turning it over, but you have to be able to make huge shots time after time.

So, there are 4 guys and you have to know what each one can do, where they want the ball, when they want the ball... at what situation they are capable of making a play, when they'd try to make a play and fail... etc.

A pure PG could average 10 points and 6 assists per game and be the greatest PG of all time.

Edit:

Do you play against idiots? If you're telling me a guy shoots once a whole day, I am not even covering that guy and helping off you every play. Oh wait let me guess, if they didn't cover you than you would score more right? Not buyin it.

This is said a lot. Where are you going to help? Can you really keep the ball from 4 people? Seems like you would be doing a lot of running around for no reason and it would make his life so much easier. He could just stand there, yawning, and dribble while he watched the players move to the spot where he wanted them to be... and you would be either standing 10 feet from him with your hands up or trying to deny where you thought he was gonna pass it.

The idea of not guarding someone, in theory, sounds good, but it only works if it gets in the head of the person who is not being guarded... or his team doubts him. If everything goes as normal, then you're actually doing him a favor.

-Smak

[UK2K]

Do you play against idiots? If you're telling me a guy shoots once a whole day, I am not even covering that guy and helping off you every play. Oh wait let me guess, if they didn't cover you than you would score more right? Not buyin it.

Yes. Sometimes guys will stand 5 feet off me, which is the stupidest thing you could do (which is probably why you suggested it) because now I have a clear vision and am in no hurry to throw the ball. There's no shot clock in pick up games, I'll let my team set screens for each other until someone gets open, because eventually someone will get open.

I have no interest in shooting 3s because when I came up, we didn't need to shoot 3s. If you can't get a lay up every possession in a pick up game with no shot clock, you're doing something wrong.

That's like saying 'Tom Brady is the best QB in the game, so instead of blitzing him, we'll drop 8 into coverage."

Good plan.

[UK2K]

pure PG is extremely hard to play.

Shoot first PG is hard, too, but not as hard as pure PG because you always have to keep in mind that you are creating. You should only shoot when it makes life easier for your teammates.

It, of course, can 'make it easier' for them if you shoot, but that's a different playstyle. I love Iverson, but to play a 'pure PG' is probably the hardest position, no doubt.

Think about it: not only are you responsible for getting the ball in the right spot and not turning it over, but you have to be able to make huge shots time after time.

So, there are 4 guys and you have to know what each one can do, where they want the ball, when they want the ball... at what situation they are capable of making a play, when they'd try to make a play and fail... etc.

A pure PG could average 10 points and 6 assists per game and be the greatest PG of all time.

Edit:




This is said a lot. Where are you going to help? Can you really keep the ball from 4 people? Seems like you would be doing a lot of running around for no reason and it would make his life so much easier. He could just stand there, yawning, and dribble while he watched the players move to the spot where he wanted them to be... and you would be either standing 10 feet from him with your hands up or trying to deny where you thought he was gonna pass it.

The idea of not guarding someone, in theory, sounds good, but it only works if it gets in the head of the person who is not being guarded... or his team doubts him. If everything goes as normal, then you're actually doing him a favor.

-Smak

****ing nailed it.

Yeah back off and let me see the whole court. I already stated I make a living off throwing passes, so go on and back up and let me work my magic.

If anything you should pressure a good passer, not give him space (ala, the Tom Brady metaphor, pressure an accurate QB, not give him time).

One of these days, I'll host an ISH pick up game weekend, and have everyone drive into Indy. I'll provide the booze, and marijuana, and places to crash, and we can all run 5 on 5 on the courts by my place. Then we can all come back here and shit talk later.

[game3524]

Why would anyone hate a term which depicts a playstyle and mentality?

Yes, there are "shoot first" and "pass first" PGs, is that ground breaking for some?

I hate it because it is a stupid term that makes guys like Russ, Rose etc. seem like lesser PG because they aren't "pure", but they generally do their job just as effectively as a Chris Paul or Nash in his prime.

PG is the only position in the NBA that still clings to these define roles, you never hear anyone say Kobe Bryant isn't a "pure" SG like a Rip Hamilton in his prime.

[sd3035]

pure PG means you suck at scoring

[Dasher]

I've never really been a fan of the term because "pure" makes it sound like that is the "proper" way to play the position. PGs like every other position should be concerned not with being "pure", but with making good decisions with the ball. Often times it is a smarter decision to go for yours instead of trying to squeeze blood from players with stone hands.

[UK2K]

I hate it because it is a stupid term that makes guys like Russ, Rose etc. seem like lesser PG because they aren't "pure", but they generally do their job just as effectively as a Chris Paul or Nash in his prime.

PG is the only position in the NBA that still clings to these define roles, you never hear anyone say Kobe Bryant isn't a "pure" SG like a Rip Hamilton in his prime.

Not at all. Rondo/Rubio/Nash/Stockton are pure PG's. I wouldn't even use the word pure, I'd use the word 'traditional'.

Westbrook, Wall, Rose, they are just point guards. New age PG's.

It's not a knock on anyone, AFAIAC. Just different styles of play.