The 10 college players I was most wrong about - Page 17

Assani Fisher · #**161** 06-18-2007, 03:24 PM

kidcolin,

I definitely enjoy debating, but I think I've shown many times that I'm willing to change my views. One example off the top of my head is that a while back I thought Nash was equal to Stockton career-wise and better than Gary Payton. I now put both of those players ahead of Nash after hearing arguments on this board.

I've been through a lot of arguments and I've changed my views a lot, as I'm searching for truth and not just trying to win an argument. And because of that I'm fairly adament about my views.

I don't let them "get to me" in the way you're thinking though- I'm not upset or angered, and I enjoy doing this. It is frustrating at times like these when I feel like he is completely missing the point.

"Besides, I still think you're wrong with regards to 'Melo. His offensive game isn't a typical 2s game. He thrives on the baseline, playing the midrange, and banging in the paint."

I'm not arguing what his style is. Some middle linebackers may be great at blitzing so they'll do that more than others, while some MLBs may have great recovery speed so they take more chances, and so on and so on. But that doesn't change the fact that they play the same position and that when the coach puts a play on the board, they look at the MLB position to see what they have to learn. Similarly some wings have different strengths and they use them more.

kidcolin · #**162** 06-18-2007, 03:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Similarly some wings have different strengths and they use them more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, the 2 guards have a long range game along with dribble penetration and small forwards play from the mid range to the rim.

Fallen Hero · #**163** 06-18-2007, 03:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
on offense there was no difference and that most knowledgable basketball people define players as PGs, wings, and bigs rather than the more common 5 positions that the everyday fan knows.

[/ QUOTE ]

not taking anyone's side but in portugal at least, there isn't even a translation for the terms sg, sf, pf, etc. The only three positions are the ones Assani mentioned: guard, wingman and post.

Assani Fisher · #**164** 06-18-2007, 03:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"So wtf are you disagreeing with me about? "

That Carmelo Anthony plays small forward, and that in fact the position of "small forward" exists and is not a term that casual fans invented for no particular reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with KC that we're now going in circles.

I noticed that you never responded to my challenge to find any play online in which Carmelo couldn't run it well from the 2 spot...why is that?

Yes I agree that technically the SF positions "exists" in that when you say SF people will know what you're referring to. What I'm telling you is that offensively 99.99% of plays can have the 3 run the play from the 2 spot and vise versa. I'm telling you this becaues I've been around basketball my entire life, and when I watch games I recognize plays and sets.

And I simply don't understand how you can argue with someone when you yourself will admit that I know what I'm talking about and you don't! I said earlier that if a former college football player came in here and told me something that I would shut up and listen. Suppose that we were having a discussion comparing WRs. And a former player came in here and started explaining to me the difference between X, Y, and Z WRs and that when we're comparing certain WR stats(like perhaps YPC) that we have to take that into account. Do you really think I'd just refuse to listen to him and say "No, they're all wide receivers! Go look it up...they're all listed as WRs and when I listen to the tv the announcers use the term wide receivers for all of them. So you must be wrong!" Because thats what you're doing here.

Assani Fisher · #**165** 06-18-2007, 03:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Similarly some wings have different strengths and they use them more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, the 2 guards have a long range game along with dribble penetration and small forwards play from the mid range to the rim.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a generalization. I could show some examples of otherwise(Wade is a SG without a lot of range, Reggie Miller was a SF with a ton of range) and I'm sure you could show examples that show your side...that would get us nowhere.

What you're not understanding is that I'm not talking about skillsets. Hell some PFs are great shooters(Dirk) and some PGs suck at it(Eric Snow).

I'm talking about roles in plays and sets. The 2 and 3 are interchangeable in most plays.

kidcolin · #**166** 06-18-2007, 03:47 PM

yeah I'm fine with that. To be honest I haven't read the whole back and forth because it'd be a waste of time. I just know this stemmed from you calling 'Melo a guard like it ain't no thang, and well, to any basketball fan, it is a thang. If you had said wingman like you later used to support your argument, no one would give a damn.

Assani Fisher · #**167** 06-18-2007, 03:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
on offense there was no difference and that most knowledgable basketball people define players as PGs, wings, and bigs rather than the more common 5 positions that the everyday fan knows.

[/ QUOTE ]

not taking anyone's side but in portugal at least, there isn't even a translation for the terms sg, sf, pf, etc. The only three positions are the ones Assani mentioned: guard, wingman and post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for posting that.

So jeez...how must the Portugeese coaches communicate to their players that they want one guy playing the 2 and one the 3? Or maybe like I've been saying all along, there is no difference.

Assani Fisher · #**168** 06-18-2007, 03:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
yeah I'm fine with that. To be honest I haven't read the whole back and forth because it'd be a waste of time. I just know this stemmed from you calling 'Melo a guard like it ain't no thang, and well, to any basketball fan, it is a thang. If you had said wingman like you later used to support your argument, no one would give a damn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll agree with that. If you re-read, you'll see that as soon as someone called me out on it, I instantly said something along the lines of "Ok sorry...just so you know for the future, I'll usually refer to players as guards and bigs or as PGs, wings, and bigs. I do this because this is how most coaching staffs talk and what I'm used to." But then people kept on about it.

And if you think about it, it is really silly. Tim Duncan is no different than Shaq offensively(from where he catches the ball and what hes asked to do...obviously his skillset means he does different things with the ball). So why label one a PF and one a C?

Furthermore go take a look at old All NBA Teams or All Defensive Teams...you'll see that they definitely don't follow the 5 positions but rather they do what I do.

kidcolin · #**169** 06-18-2007, 03:52 PM

Assani,

By FH's Portuguese player definition, Melo is still not a guard, which is what you called him, which is what started this whole thing. He'd be a wingman.

Unless I'm wrong in assuming that their guard is our point guard. If that's the case they have redundant names and it's pointless.

edit: OK it seems you've addressed this and get the point.

Assani Fisher · #**170** 06-18-2007, 03:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Assani,

By FH's Portuguese player definition, Melo is still not a guard, which is what you called him, which is what started this whole thing. He'd be a wingman.

Unless I'm wrong in assuming that their guard is our point guard. If that's the case they have redundant names and it's pointless.

edit: OK it seems you've addressed this and get the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. Basically you can break down players in two ways:

Guards and bigs...you do this a lot when you're doing shooting drills.

PG, wings, and bigs...you do this when you're explaining plays to each position.

I guess a third way would be PG, SG, SF, PF, and C but I've never heard or seen it done that way except by tv announcers and casual fans.