Do you need a PF to win in today's NBA

[KG Living Legend]

 The Warrior's don't. The only guy that resembles and old school PF on the Warrior's is Macadoo and he hardly plays.

 Draymond Green is a SF playing PF he's great at it he's also just short of 6'6" without shoes. Looney is also a combo forward but hes hurt.

 They have four centers Bogut, Ezili, Speights, Anderson V.

 And Green, Iggy, Barnes, and Rush are all natural SF's that play anywhere needed. It appears they have no want or need for a Sullinger or David West type of Power Forward.

 Also they have a good sized point in Curry 6'3" and a big two guard in Thompson 6'7" and Livingston off the bench  at 6'7"

 That's 8 players right around the 6'7" mark, so they go small without being very small at all. What a roster.

[Monkhouse]

 The Warrior's don't. The only guy that resembles and old school PF on the Warrior's is Macadoo and he hardly plays.

 Draymond Green is a SF playing PF he's great at it he's also just short of 6'6" without shoes. Looney is also a combo forward but hes hurt.

 They have four centers Bogut, Ezili, Speights, Anderson V.

 And Green, Iggy, Barnes, and Rush are all natural SF's that play anywhere needed. It appears they have no want or need for a Sullinger or David West type of Power Forward.

 Also they have a good sized point in Curry 6'3" and a big two guard in Thompson 6'7" and Livingston off the bench  at 6'7"

 That's 8 players right around the 6'7" mark, so they go small without being very small at all. What a roster.

I don't get why everyone keeps thinking Draymond Green is a SF. I mean no offense KG, I just personally think from my opinion that Green was the perfect SF/PF type of tweener that can play 3 for certain matchups or lineups.

Green can guard 1-5 for short spurts, but he isn't a SF. His inability to stretch the floor, and space the floor despite being completely open hinders his ability to hone that position. I think PF is is natural position, especially because hes very intelligent, and capable of taking advantage of slower 4's.

Plus while he leads the league in hockey assists, and is a great passer for his position, I don't think his ball handling is solid enough to feature himself as a 3 consistently.

[Ilikesports17]

Why don't you think green is a 4?

Cus he's short? I think he's more of a 4 than 3. Hell he might be more of a 5 than a 3.

[Monkhouse]

To answer the original question, I would say SG/SF/PF are the three most important positions.

[alldaboston]

To answer the original question, I would say SG/SF/PF are the three most important positions.

You gotta have a good point guard

[Monkhouse]

To answer the original question, I would say SG/SF/PF are the three most important positions.

You gotta have a good point guard

Eh, not really.

You just need a decent one.

[chambers]

I think the question is more..do you need a center?
The Cavs with Thompson don't really have one. We don't really have one. The Warriors have Bogut, but their finals line up will feature Green at the 5 mostly (if they ay the Cavs).

So yeah, you need at least one 'big' that can switch in the pick and roll and guard the perimeter well, but other than that it's not as crucial.

[KG Living Legend]

 You need a real center, The Warrior's certainly do. They have the great luxury of not going big.
 Bogut, Ezil, and Speights are a big part of there team.

 That's what I love about the Warrior's, They have three talented 7 footers, then you can play two or three if those 6'7" combo fowards with them. Best if both worlds.

[KG Living Legend]

 The Warrior's don't. The only guy that resembles and old school PF on the Warrior's is Macadoo and he hardly plays.

 Draymond Green is a SF playing PF he's great at it he's also just short of 6'6" without shoes. Looney is also a combo forward but hes hurt.

 They have four centers Bogut, Ezili, Speights, Anderson V.

 And Green, Iggy, Barnes, and Rush are all natural SF's that play anywhere needed. It appears they have no want or need for a Sullinger or David West type of Power Forward.

 Also they have a good sized point in Curry 6'3" and a big two guard in Thompson 6'7" and Livingston off the bench  at 6'7"

 That's 8 players right around the 6'7" mark, so they go small without being very small at all. What a roster.

I don't get why everyone keeps thinking Draymond Green is a SF. I mean no offense KG, I just personally think from my opinion that Green was the perfect SF/PF type of tweener that can play 3 for certain matchups or lineups.

Green can guard 1-5 for short spurts, but he isn't a SF. His inability to stretch the floor, and space the floor despite being completely open hinders his ability to hone that position. I think PF is is natural position, especially because hes very intelligent, and capable of taking advantage of slower 4's.

Plus while he leads the league in hockey assists, and is a great passer for his position, I don't think his ball handling is solid enough to feature himself as a 3 consistently.

 Well he was a SF in college because of his size. He was like a Bruce Bowen in college with better playmaking skills, and scoring didn't come easy to him, everything else did.

 It's incredible the people Ice seen him defend in the NBA, covering Anthony Davis in the playoff's at 6'5.75"! Ridiculous, I was a huge fan of his and never saw that coming.

 This comes back to the original point that it just doesn't matter, you don't need the PF that most of us dreamed about Karl Malone, or McHale.

 He's almost perfect as the "new style" PF.

[Celtics4ever]

Most C today are really PF.

[Ed Hollison]

Most C today are really PF.

Beat me to it. You need a good power forward in today's NBA. You just tend to play him at center.

[Ed Hollison]

With the rule changes put in several years ago and the way teams have exploited them, you really need "switchability" more than anything. That's what makes Green so effective. He can basically guard all 5 positions, he can handle the ball, he can rebound, he can shoot the 3, whatever. It's not like positions have vanished, but the centers and point guards have kind of converged towards the middle. So you can play a couple of interchangeable guards without a pure point guard, and you can play a couple of below-7-footers in the frontcourt without a traditional center.

This is one reason that I think a pure "rim protector" is overrated. Look at Timofey Mozgov, a guy that many of us here on this forum were pining for for years. The Cavs often times choose to play without him, even though he's one of the best pure shot blockers in the league (whom they gave up two 1st-round picks for). Why? Because on defense, you can expose the hell out of him in the pick and roll as a guy who's slow footed, can't switch onto smaller players, can't hedge on the perimeter and run back to the paint, etc. And on offense, he can't shoot long jumpers and isn't a greaet ballhandler and passer.

Food for thought as we think about centers we might draft in this upoming draft. Mickey already does a lot of the things you need in a modern NBA center, perhaps better than a lot of the guys coming into the league right now.

[chilidawg]

I like BS's breakdown of Bigs, wings, swings and ball handlers.  I think that's a much better description of today's nba than the traditional C/PF/SF/SG/PG breakdown.  I'd actually simplify even more, to Bigs/Wings/Handlers.

[celticmania]

I don't think any specific positions matter as much as overall talent.

[guava_wrench]

Green at PF isn't something new. Look at Barkley, who was probably smaller than Green. Was Barkley "really a SF"?

Using Green at center though, that is pretty novel.

You don't need any particular type of player. What you need is to be able to score against the teams you face and to be able to defend the teams you face. If you face the Spurs with Duncan and LMA, you might need a different lineup than if you are playing the Celtics.