Five guys who can score a lot, and consistently—whether that's at the rim, in the post, or from long distance, I don't care, just get some guys who can put up points.
You'll get 5 guys with no defined NBA position who do lots of little things to help a team win without having the talent to actually score consistently or create matchup problems for opponents, and you'll like it!
LOL. TP.
I guess that's pretty much how it is with Danny, huh? "Combo" guards who really can't play the point, but they can't score much either. Or "bigs" who are only 6-9 but can't really score or rebound or block shots.
Five guys who can score a lot, and consistently—whether that's at the rim, in the post, or from long distance, I don't care, just get some guys who can put up points.
You'll get 5 guys with no defined NBA position who do lots of little things to help a team win without having the talent to actually score consistently or create matchup problems for opponents, and you'll like it!
Your idea about needing a defined NBA position is antiquated imo. Even our own coach doesn't use the traditional positions.
In today's NBA versatility is paramount not fitting into specific position archetypes. With defense that rely more fitting a specific mold for a position is getting less and less important.
There's nothing wrong with versatility—in fact, I like having guys who can play multiple positions on offense and/or defense; further, I think it's a must in today's NBA.
But I also don't see anything wrong with having a traditional post player—6-11, 7 feet, great with his back to the basket—or a traditional shooting guard—6-4 to 6-7, great long-range shooter—or a traditional anything else.
It's fine to be a "jack of all trades, master of none," but I think coaches and players sometimes overthink the whole "versatility" thing to the point where certain players aren't even "jack of all trades, master of none," but more like "jack of one thing, maybe two, less than average at everything else."
Like Avery Bradley, for example. He was initially really good at only one thing—defense; since then he's become a pretty good shooter, but he's still below average at dribbling, passing, driving, and rebounding, and I think it can even be reasonably argued that his defense has suffered somewhat from his increased focus on shooting.
Versatility is great if it's natural; otherwise, I think you get players who might be pretty athletic but are particularly good at only one or two things and a liability in many other areas.