The Scoring Point Guard

[guava_wrench]

Wesbrook made some crucial errors down the stretch in that game yesterday that contributed to the Thunder's loss.  He still dropped 30 on them though.

The 30 points is fool's gold.

The problem with Westbrook is that he takes so many bad shots. When they fall, people sing his praises, but when the same shots don't drop, he kills his team. Eventually with players like that you have to ask whether they do more harm than good, especially when a team is trying to become a contender.

[dtrader]

The TNT talked about it last night that Russell Westbrook basically ruined the Thunder's chances at completing the sweep.

Instead of getting his teammates involved, or even passing to the Thunder's best player in Durant in the final mintutes, Westbrook decided to shoot his team out of a win. A point guard shoots 30 shots? I think this is the reason why I say scoring point guards AREN'T point guards. They are shooting guards masquerading as point guards. They lack the court vision, passing skills, ability to control tempo, recognizing mismatches, etc.

Throughout history the only scoring point guards I could think of are Walt Frazier (my top 10 all time), Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald. The thing is their scoring skills were equal to their passing skills. Chris Paul is in that mold also

But that is why I can't root for Derrick Rose, Westbrook, Tyreke Evans, Deron Williams, or Jameer Nelson. They are not point guards. They look to "get theirs" instead of getting their teammates involved in the flow of the offense. I don't think that you can ever win with a player like that.


Just my two cents. Do you agree?

I don't agree, and I don't understand peoples preoccupation with position tags.  What does it really matter if someone has the PG or SG label?  It makes ballot voting easier, but in terms of playing basketball it means nothing.  You need 5 players. If your offense has good ball movement and is holding their own on defense with 5 "centers" you're good. 

There is no definitive set of skills that a PG must have to be labeled a "point guard" other than to be labeled "PG" by his team.  If you want to judge players according to their passing ability, then say you're rating "passers". If you want to be a judge of "court vision", say that.  Beyond that, a player (regardless of what position label they happen to carry), should be judged based on the total of their contributions to the team. 

Westbrook had an off shooting night last game, but he played decent defense, was huge on the boards, and still made some good passes (along with the highest +/- on the team).  He makes a fine scapegoat, but they lost the game as a team, to one that just played better.

[Prof. Clutch]

Wesbrook made some crucial errors down the stretch in that game yesterday that contributed to the Thunder's loss.  He still dropped 30 on them though.

The 30 points is fool's gold.

The problem with Westbrook is that he takes so many bad shots. When they fall, people sing his praises, but when the same shots don't drop, he kills his team. Eventually with players like that you have to ask whether they do more harm than good, especially when a team is trying to become a contender.

Agreed, I was trying to search for the right term and since he dropped 30 points I was reluctant to call it a "bad game" (since it can't be a bad game if you drop 30.)  But he and Durant must lead the league in field goal attempts by a duo, right?  (Unless the guards from Golden State own the title) 

He definitely took some ill-advised shots in that game where I was wondering why they weren't going to the far more effective Durant.  But it wasn't just the missed shots, it was the not getting back on D, it was trying to draw a foul rather than taking a good shot, it was the complaining to referees rather than hustling and trying to win the game.  It was a bad show by Westbrook yesterday.

[dtrader]

Wesbrook made some crucial errors down the stretch in that game yesterday that contributed to the Thunder's loss.  He still dropped 30 on them though.

The 30 points is fool's gold.

The problem with Westbrook is that he takes so many bad shots. When they fall, people sing his praises, but when the same shots don't drop, he kills his team. Eventually with players like that you have to ask whether they do more harm than good, especially when a team is trying to become a contender.

Agreed, I was trying to search for the right term and since he dropped 30 points I was reluctant to call it a "bad game."  But he and Durant must lead the league in field goal attempts by a duo, right?  (Unless the guards from Golden State own the title)  

He definitely took some ill-advised shots in that game where I was wondering why they weren't going to the far more effective Durant.  But it wasn't just the missed shots, it was the not getting back on D, it was trying to draw a foul rather than taking a good shot, it was the complaining to referees rather than hustling and trying to win the game.  It was a bad show by Westbrook yesterday.

I actually thought he played pretty good D for most of the game. And I think most shooters (when having an off shooting night) would be advised to try to drive, and see if they can get themselves jump started by hitting a couple at the line to get their confidence up.

[OsirusCeltics]

The TNT talked about it last night that Russell Westbrook basically ruined the Thunder's chances at completing the sweep.

Instead of getting his teammates involved, or even passing to the Thunder's best player in Durant in the final mintutes, Westbrook decided to shoot his team out of a win. A point guard shoots 30 shots? I think this is the reason why I say scoring point guards AREN'T point guards. They are shooting guards masquerading as point guards. They lack the court vision, passing skills, ability to control tempo, recognizing mismatches, etc.

Throughout history the only scoring point guards I could think of are Walt Frazier (my top 10 all time), Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald. The thing is their scoring skills were equal to their passing skills. Chris Paul is in that mold also

But that is why I can't root for Derrick Rose, Westbrook, Tyreke Evans, Deron Williams, or Jameer Nelson. They are not point guards. They look to "get theirs" instead of getting their teammates involved in the flow of the offense. I don't think that you can ever win with a player like that.


Just my two cents. Do you agree?

I don't agree, and I don't understand peoples preoccupation with position tags.  What does it really matter if someone has the PG or SG label? It makes ballot voting easier, but in terms of playing basketball it means nothing.  You need 5 players. If your offense has good ball movement and is holding their own on defense with 5 "centers" you're good.  

There is no definitive set of skills that a PG must have to be labeled a "point guard" other than to be labeled "PG" by his team.  If you want to judge players according to their passing ability, then say you're rating "passers". If you want to be a judge of "court vision", say that.  Beyond that, a player (regardless of what position label they happen to carry), should be judged based on the total of their contributions to the team.  

Westbrook had an off shooting night last game, but he played decent defense, was huge on the boards, and still made some good passes (along with the highest +/- on the team).  He makes a fine scapegoat, but they lost the game as a team, to one that just played better.

Because it destroys a team effectiveness
There are definitions into what every position are supposed to do, its how the game is played

I think the point you're trying to make is instead about versatility. Yes, if a small forward can play the power forward position correctly, then theres no problem with him playing that position

What my point is, when you play the position, play it correctly! A point guard is supposed to distribute to his teammates, have court vision, above average passing skills, etc. If he doesn't do those things, he isn't a point guard

I'm not saying the fact that you do score doesn't make you a point guard. Walt Frazier, Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald were all great scorers who played the position to perfection

[ManUp]

Chris Paul and Deron Williams aren't scoring point-guards. They give their teams the scoring boost they need when needed. The only difference between them and Rondo is that they are efficient scorers with great jumpers. They are unquestionably the one and two point guards in the league. The only thing to question is who do you put first.

Also for the most part point guards are near the bottom of the list when it comes to major pieces needed for a championship team. When Billups won MVP it was Rasheed and Wallace that were the backbone of the team. When Parker won the MVP it was still TD. Magic was a 6'9 point guard who could do just about anything so he is a special case as far as pointguards and even so he never won without Kareem.

[BballTim]

Chris Paul and Deron Williams aren't scoring point-guards. They give their teams the scoring boost they need when needed. The only difference between them and Rondo is that they are efficient scorers with great jumpers.

  Well, aside from defense, passing, ballhandling, rebounding and the like.

[dtrader]

The TNT talked about it last night that Russell Westbrook basically ruined the Thunder's chances at completing the sweep.

Instead of getting his teammates involved, or even passing to the Thunder's best player in Durant in the final mintutes, Westbrook decided to shoot his team out of a win. A point guard shoots 30 shots? I think this is the reason why I say scoring point guards AREN'T point guards. They are shooting guards masquerading as point guards. They lack the court vision, passing skills, ability to control tempo, recognizing mismatches, etc.

Throughout history the only scoring point guards I could think of are Walt Frazier (my top 10 all time), Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald. The thing is their scoring skills were equal to their passing skills. Chris Paul is in that mold also

But that is why I can't root for Derrick Rose, Westbrook, Tyreke Evans, Deron Williams, or Jameer Nelson. They are not point guards. They look to "get theirs" instead of getting their teammates involved in the flow of the offense. I don't think that you can ever win with a player like that.


Just my two cents. Do you agree?

I don't agree, and I don't understand peoples preoccupation with position tags.  What does it really matter if someone has the PG or SG label? It makes ballot voting easier, but in terms of playing basketball it means nothing.  You need 5 players. If your offense has good ball movement and is holding their own on defense with 5 "centers" you're good.  

There is no definitive set of skills that a PG must have to be labeled a "point guard" other than to be labeled "PG" by his team.  If you want to judge players according to their passing ability, then say you're rating "passers". If you want to be a judge of "court vision", say that.  Beyond that, a player (regardless of what position label they happen to carry), should be judged based on the total of their contributions to the team.  

Westbrook had an off shooting night last game, but he played decent defense, was huge on the boards, and still made some good passes (along with the highest +/- on the team).  He makes a fine scapegoat, but they lost the game as a team, to one that just played better.

Because it destroys a team effectiveness
There are definitions into what every position are supposed to do, its how the game is played

I think the point you're trying to make is instead about versatility. Yes, if a small forward can play the power forward position correctly, then theres no problem with him playing that position

What my point is, when you play the position, play it correctly! A point guard is supposed to distribute to his teammates, have court vision, above average passing skills, etc. If he doesn't do those things, he isn't a point guard

I'm not saying the fact that you do score doesn't make you a point guard. Walt Frazier, Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald were all great scorers who played the position to perfection

No. What I'm saying, is that there are NO definitions as to what players are supposed to do.  Maybe back in basketballs infancy (before 6'8" players with vision like lebron or 6'11" players who shot like dirk), players fit into neat boxes like that, but now those labels are becoming outdated. Thats why terms like "combo guard" and "point forward" are becoming increasingly prevalent.  Players dont play according to the tags they're given, they play according to their strengths.  People see teams of 5 players and assume that 1 has to be a "point guard", and fit into what they think that means, but more and more teams are going to be having players that simply dont fit those boxes anymore.  You have to judge players based on their contributions to their teams, rather than how they fit the labels placed on them.

[PosImpos]

Deron Williams is a really good passer and shouldn't be lumped into the "scoring point guard category."  I agree with you, however, that point guards like Rose, Westbrook, and Evans, though very talented and valuable, are essentially shooting guards who play at point guard.

[dtrader]

Deron Williams is a really good passer and shouldn't be lumped into the "scoring point guard category."  I agree with you, however, that point guards like Rose, Westbrook, and Evans, though very talented and valuable, are essentially shooting guards who play at point guard.

If those players were purposefully changing the way they play to TRY to think pass first etc. and fit into that "point guard" box, than maybe it would make sense to say that they were just "shooting guards who play at point guard", but if their game just is what it is, then I think it's more an issue of those labels coming up short in explaining their roles on the team, than it is an issue of them not fulfilling their roles. 

I mean, instead of looking at their lack of passing and saying "player X is a bad point guard", why not just say Player Xs team doesnt have a "point guard". It's not that their players aren't fulfilling their roles, just that those teams aren't built to include an increasingly outdated role.

[OsirusCeltics]

The TNT talked about it last night that Russell Westbrook basically ruined the Thunder's chances at completing the sweep.

Instead of getting his teammates involved, or even passing to the Thunder's best player in Durant in the final mintutes, Westbrook decided to shoot his team out of a win. A point guard shoots 30 shots? I think this is the reason why I say scoring point guards AREN'T point guards. They are shooting guards masquerading as point guards. They lack the court vision, passing skills, ability to control tempo, recognizing mismatches, etc.

Throughout history the only scoring point guards I could think of are Walt Frazier (my top 10 all time), Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald. The thing is their scoring skills were equal to their passing skills. Chris Paul is in that mold also

But that is why I can't root for Derrick Rose, Westbrook, Tyreke Evans, Deron Williams, or Jameer Nelson. They are not point guards. They look to "get theirs" instead of getting their teammates involved in the flow of the offense. I don't think that you can ever win with a player like that.


Just my two cents. Do you agree?

I don't agree, and I don't understand peoples preoccupation with position tags.  What does it really matter if someone has the PG or SG label? It makes ballot voting easier, but in terms of playing basketball it means nothing.  You need 5 players. If your offense has good ball movement and is holding their own on defense with 5 "centers" you're good.  

There is no definitive set of skills that a PG must have to be labeled a "point guard" other than to be labeled "PG" by his team.  If you want to judge players according to their passing ability, then say you're rating "passers". If you want to be a judge of "court vision", say that.  Beyond that, a player (regardless of what position label they happen to carry), should be judged based on the total of their contributions to the team.  

Westbrook had an off shooting night last game, but he played decent defense, was huge on the boards, and still made some good passes (along with the highest +/- on the team).  He makes a fine scapegoat, but they lost the game as a team, to one that just played better.

Because it destroys a team effectiveness
There are definitions into what every position are supposed to do, its how the game is played

I think the point you're trying to make is instead about versatility. Yes, if a small forward can play the power forward position correctly, then theres no problem with him playing that position

What my point is, when you play the position, play it correctly! A point guard is supposed to distribute to his teammates, have court vision, above average passing skills, etc. If he doesn't do those things, he isn't a point guard

I'm not saying the fact that you do score doesn't make you a point guard. Walt Frazier, Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald were all great scorers who played the position to perfection

No. What I'm saying, is that there are NO definitions as to what players are supposed to do.  Maybe back in basketballs infancy (before 6'8" players with vision like lebron or 6'11" players who shot like dirk), players fit into neat boxes like that, but now those labels are becoming outdated. Thats why terms like "combo guard" and "point forward" are becoming increasingly prevalent.  Players dont play according to the tags they're given, they play according to their strengths.  People see teams of 5 players and assume that 1 has to be a "point guard", and fit into what they think that means, but more and more teams are going to be having players that simply dont fit those boxes anymore.  You have to judge players based on their contributions to their teams, rather than how they fit the labels placed on them.

Yeah, that is a great point you made. But even in history, there have been players that didn't fit a particular position. Bill Russell even played like a point forward when he brought the ball up to start the fastbreak. Oscar Robertson is prob the first known combo-guard. And the of course Magic and Bird never quite fit any position

I understand that maybe the definition should not be so defined. But its the same with every sport. You can't have a quarterback playing the lineback position. When you play the 1, theres just some things you HAVE to do. There still has to be a player to initiate the offense and get others involved. Danny Ainge was never the prototypical point guard. But he had those point guard intangibles. You think he could play Derrick Rose style with Bird, Mchale and Parish on the floor? No. That's why I can't say those players are point guards

[Rondo_is_better]

you mean, "the type of point guard the media and general populace consider the best in the league?"

brb Westbrook is better than Rondo DURRRRR

(did not read thread.)

[soap07]

Chris Paul and Deron Williams aren't scoring point-guards. They give their teams the scoring boost they need when needed. The only difference between them and Rondo is that they are efficient scorers with great jumpers.

  Well, aside from defense, passing, ballhandling, rebounding and the like.

Paul and Williams are every bit, if not better, the passers and ball handlers that Rondo is.

[BballTim]

The TNT talked about it last night that Russell Westbrook basically ruined the Thunder's chances at completing the sweep.

Instead of getting his teammates involved, or even passing to the Thunder's best player in Durant in the final mintutes, Westbrook decided to shoot his team out of a win. A point guard shoots 30 shots? I think this is the reason why I say scoring point guards AREN'T point guards. They are shooting guards masquerading as point guards. They lack the court vision, passing skills, ability to control tempo, recognizing mismatches, etc.

Throughout history the only scoring point guards I could think of are Walt Frazier (my top 10 all time), Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald. The thing is their scoring skills were equal to their passing skills. Chris Paul is in that mold also

But that is why I can't root for Derrick Rose, Westbrook, Tyreke Evans, Deron Williams, or Jameer Nelson. They are not point guards. They look to "get theirs" instead of getting their teammates involved in the flow of the offense. I don't think that you can ever win with a player like that.


Just my two cents. Do you agree?

I don't agree, and I don't understand peoples preoccupation with position tags.  What does it really matter if someone has the PG or SG label? It makes ballot voting easier, but in terms of playing basketball it means nothing.  You need 5 players. If your offense has good ball movement and is holding their own on defense with 5 "centers" you're good.  

There is no definitive set of skills that a PG must have to be labeled a "point guard" other than to be labeled "PG" by his team.  If you want to judge players according to their passing ability, then say you're rating "passers". If you want to be a judge of "court vision", say that.  Beyond that, a player (regardless of what position label they happen to carry), should be judged based on the total of their contributions to the team.  

Westbrook had an off shooting night last game, but he played decent defense, was huge on the boards, and still made some good passes (along with the highest +/- on the team).  He makes a fine scapegoat, but they lost the game as a team, to one that just played better.

Because it destroys a team effectiveness
There are definitions into what every position are supposed to do, its how the game is played

I think the point you're trying to make is instead about versatility. Yes, if a small forward can play the power forward position correctly, then theres no problem with him playing that position

What my point is, when you play the position, play it correctly! A point guard is supposed to distribute to his teammates, have court vision, above average passing skills, etc. If he doesn't do those things, he isn't a point guard

I'm not saying the fact that you do score doesn't make you a point guard. Walt Frazier, Isiah Thomas, and Nate Archibald were all great scorers who played the position to perfection

No. What I'm saying, is that there are NO definitions as to what players are supposed to do.  Maybe back in basketballs infancy (before 6'8" players with vision like lebron or 6'11" players who shot like dirk), players fit into neat boxes like that, but now those labels are becoming outdated. Thats why terms like "combo guard" and "point forward" are becoming increasingly prevalent.  Players dont play according to the tags they're given, they play according to their strengths.  People see teams of 5 players and assume that 1 has to be a "point guard", and fit into what they think that means, but more and more teams are going to be having players that simply dont fit those boxes anymore.  You have to judge players based on their contributions to their teams, rather than how they fit the labels placed on them.

  Whether you want to label them point guards or not, how well your main ballhandler distributes the ball is important. OKC's offense scores less with Westbrook playing than with him on the bench. The Bulls are almost 10 points better with Rose playing than out, but Rondo's effect on the Celts offense is identical to Rose's on the Bulls. Durant scores less with Westbrook playing, Boozer, Deng, Noah and Korver all score less with Rose playing but the big three all score more with Rondo in the game.

[BballTim]

Chris Paul and Deron Williams aren't scoring point-guards. They give their teams the scoring boost they need when needed. The only difference between them and Rondo is that they are efficient scorers with great jumpers.

  Well, aside from defense, passing, ballhandling, rebounding and the like.

Paul and Williams are every bit, if not better, the passers and ball handlers that Rondo is.

  I would disagree, more with Williams than CP3. Deron isn't really that great a ballhandler from what I've seen over the years, and Rondo makes a lot of passes that Williams couldn't.