Who plays what position in basketball?
Options
Darius
Members Posts: 22,649 ✭✭✭✭
I know the traditional meaning of the positions and their roles.
But now in the NBA alot of the players are taller, want to be ball-handlers, and can have multiple skill-sets. It redefines what the positions are, almost to the point where it is almost meaningless to assign them a position. Some guys still fill the traditional roles like Rondo, Nash, Andre Miller, etc...but they are becoming the exception
I don't think someone would be wrong if they called kobe a SF, PG, or SG considering he performs the role of each of those spots. Just because Derek Fisher is the smallest on the court and sometimes brings the ball up the court makes him a point guard?
Dwight Howard. Center or Power Forward? It makes no difference. he's tall dude who plays the paint and blocks shots and tries to post people up.
Steph Curry. A guard who can shoot lights out, who can come off screens and may happen to bring the ball up the court unless Monta Ellis steals it.
And why does a team and fans even have to acknowledge a PG, SG, SF, PF, and C? it aint like baseball or football where the rules state those positions must be met.
But now in the NBA alot of the players are taller, want to be ball-handlers, and can have multiple skill-sets. It redefines what the positions are, almost to the point where it is almost meaningless to assign them a position. Some guys still fill the traditional roles like Rondo, Nash, Andre Miller, etc...but they are becoming the exception
I don't think someone would be wrong if they called kobe a SF, PG, or SG considering he performs the role of each of those spots. Just because Derek Fisher is the smallest on the court and sometimes brings the ball up the court makes him a point guard?
Dwight Howard. Center or Power Forward? It makes no difference. he's tall dude who plays the paint and blocks shots and tries to post people up.
Steph Curry. A guard who can shoot lights out, who can come off screens and may happen to bring the ball up the court unless Monta Ellis steals it.
And why does a team and fans even have to acknowledge a PG, SG, SF, PF, and C? it aint like baseball or football where the rules state those positions must be met.
Comments
-
interesting point of view on this Matthew.... I prefer big men to take their ? down low and be physical, nh.... but nowadays, you see a lot of em jacking up 3s and bringing the ball up the court....
Another thing that irks me is announcers calling guys 6'8 or 6'9 undersized PFs... you serious??? -
this will flop because most of these 'tards can't wrap their underdeveloped mind around this concept. Arguing over who plays what position is one less thing they'll have to talk about when they are supposed to be doing something important.
and dude, nh doesn't save you from that ? you typed. -
this will flop because most of these 'tards can't wrap their underdeveloped mind around this concept. Arguing over who plays what position is one less thing they'll have to talk about when they are supposed to be doing something important.
and dude, nh doesn't save you from that ? you typed.
well nh to you caring about what "position" dudes are in..... -
interesting. good point on kobe and fisher, bc with star players you often dont need "traditional roles". lebron could play 1-4, and probably some 5 in a pinch so he just needs guys around him than can shoot and rebound, position be damned.
take orlando for example. last year after jameer got hurt, pops johnson, rafer alston and courtney got minutes at "pg" but they would pretty much bring the ball to half court and pass to hedo turkoglu and wait for him to set something up. -
well nh to you caring about what "position" dudes are in.....
nh @ you caring about what Woody can do -
-
idk what you're exact question is...but just based on assigning roles, if I were a coach
I'd want a "pass 1st" point guard, like a Steve Nash
a scoring 2 guard, like a Ben Gordon (not as short in height as Gordon, but just with his ability to score)
a Versatile 3, that can defend, score, and rebound.
I'd want my Power Forward to have a faceup/midrange game
and then I'd want my Center to be the Defensive force, protecting the rim by blockin shots and grabbin rebounds
But with the point you're makin about the Lakers, it isnt always about who plays what position traditionally, just who plays what role in that coaches offensive scheme.
Like in LA, Fisher isnt a "traditional, pass 1st" point guard but he fits the LA Triangle offense...or When Rafer Alston was the PG for the Houston Rockets, he's not a "traditional, pass 1st" pg either, but he was perfect for the offense that Rick Adleman runs over there. -
A guy who has an established position and then have secondary positions is easier to build around because you know what your team needs.
i.e. The Warriors have a bunch of guys who can play SF,PF and C. Now they dont know what the ? to do when it comes to Free Agency and the Draft. However... they do know what position NOT to draft.. PG, because they have a PG -
well usually each position has something its suppose to do like the pg is the distributor and manages the game shooting guard well shoots and the small forward is usually the defender of the group and is extra scoring help for the sg and the pf usually plays above the rim and rebounds and can step out side and make a mid range jumper and the C stays down low and is the inside scorer and usually the defensive anchor but now you have some many guys that can play so many different positions its hard to label payers
-
-
millz_flybridge wrote: »
But with the point you're makin about the Lakers, it isnt always about who plays what position traditionally, just who plays what role in that coaches offensive scheme.
.
thats pretty much what i'm saying. I know what the responsibilities are for each position, but that seems pretty outdated considering how much the game and players have changed. But i think with Phil's offense, it is designed around players and their skills as opposed to each player simply playing the tradional role of their given position. -
millz_flybridge wrote: »lol
. .
no radaman @ your child wonderin where babydaddybe -
-
da europeans changed da game wit da influx of big guys who can shoot like crazy...............
-
thats pretty much what i'm saying.
i'm unclear are you asking what the posters position they play, or what positions you prefer your guys to play....
and i agree with "radaman" i would like my big man (no brokeback) to play down low, i dont mind him playing the mid range game either i.e. tim duncan..just when it's time to get down low...get ur ass down low...in fact i would like players to be more versitale as long as they can play and understand their main position...i.e. point guard...i want assists first, then bring your other offense to the game after...and i want ALL PLAYERS to play dee..... -
I'm saying it's pointless to label players with q positio
-
I'm saying it's pointless to label players with q positio
well...it is what it is...they play a position and their position is part of the game and how they are identified...per basketball reasonings
ps:
in terms of the lakers...kobe he's a shooting guard, but he's big enough and skill enough to play small forward
derek fisher..his skills are that of a shooting guard but hi's size is that of a point guard cuz he can't guard most shooting guard in the nba size wise...
lamar odom is a small forward BUT ONCE HAD THE SKILL...scratch that...he has the skillz (but dont play up to his skillz) to play 1-3 -
The problem with the NBA nowadays is that EVERYBODY FEELS THEY SHOULD HAVE THE BALL. So they forget the basic's of their positions. The problem with basketball in general is that players are given positions based on their height. How many times in high school did ppl you know make the team based solely off of their height. The same logic is used in the college game. Then it moves to the nba (see Milicic, Darko and Brown, Kwame)
It is not "pointless" to label a player with a position. Because at the end of the day, you may have size like a PF but you play like a ? , I mean sg (see Frye, Channing). The reason why you HAVE to classify a player by position is because it helps your team scheme wise. The problem with the cavs was not that Lebron could play the 1-4 but because they ran a scheme that did not utilize the skills of their players. Coaches don't friggin understand that concept. Hence why Omare is JUST NOW LEARNING HOW TO SHOOT JUMPERS. It's about your skill set. Develop a skill set and then you can brag about playing multiple positions.
Yes Lebron has the size to play 2-4, but he has the skill set to play point, come off screens as a 2, play shut down defense as a 3, and has the strength/ball instincts for a 4. Stop defining players solely off of their height (see Baby, Big).
Now another reason why it is necessary to label players is because it covers up for their weaknesses. Notice how throughout this thread all anybody has really talked about is the qualities players exhibit on the offensive side of the ball. But what about on defense. This is where players get exposed the most. See Pau Gasol has the height of a Center, but has the defensive strength of a PF. That's what it is mean to be "undersized." Undersized = ? . So this is where the covering up part appears. If I say yo player X plays center you're going to automatically assume the traits of a center (tough in the zone, rebounding ability, lack of a jumper, slow feet but agile with power moves to the bucket). But if what if I tell you player X is 6'9. You're gonna be like o ? that dude is crazy ill in the paint. To only be 6'9 and be a center. He must be ill.
Now what if I reverse that and say there is a 7'0-7'1 pf. You're first thought, "he's soft." That's my point. Position assignments create an illusion. -
I'll just say I'm disgusted with the lack of traditionally talented centers.
And players like Lebron need a point guard who can fulfill the traditional role (heavy ball handling/distribution) whether people wanna believe that or not. Rose will do that and score. -
2010 NBA Positions (Not every team, but many)
1. Ball hog/Marquis Player/Point guard
2. ? who moves w/o the ball and has a nice jumper (no defense)
3. Slasher/ Guy who tries to draw fouls
4. Tall soft ? who shoots three's
5. Tall guy with a few post moves/or maybe not if he's good enough with rebounding and defense -
-
Yea I been thinking for a while that the positions given to a certain player were useless. But the more I think about it, it still serves them correctly it just the names meanings have changed. Instead of determining a players abilities now its more or less a judgment of that players height mixed with a little bit of their skill.
For the most part guys do stay within their zone. Guys like Wade, Kobe, and Lebron are exceptions because they can do multiple things. The average player fits their roll though.
For defensive reasons they still serve their purpose also. Every now and then youll see the guards and possibly SF rotate onto different positions, but for the most part they defend their matchup. -
mostvigorousone wrote: »2010 NBA Positions (Not every team, but many)
1. Ball hog/Marquis Player/Point guard
2. ? who moves w/o the ball and has a nice jumper (no defense)
3. Slasher/ Guy who tries to draw fouls
4. Tall soft ? who shoots three's
5. Tall guy with a few post moves/or maybe not if he's good enough with rebounding and defense
quoted for emphasis the alternative is
1. too small to play anything else, fast/agile, lacks a jumper, no defensive skill just fast
2. too big/not fast enough to play the 1, ok jumper, no defensive skill just athletic
3. swingman (see failure)
4. not big enough to play the 5 but too tall to play the 3
5. Tallest person on court -
radaman's daughter wrote: »sumfin funnee?
*flatlines* -
Radaman's daughter wrote: »sumfin funnee?
Lol Wtf???????
