WHAT YOUR DEFINITION OF A POINT GUARD
People seem to have strong feeling about point guards,make your case
that makes their teammates better, and is a winner
In my mind, my Point Guard has to be able to handle the Rock, Create for his teammates, shoot a good 3 Point Percentage as well as have the ability to penetrate as well as finish. I didn't put much thought into this one. I'd prefer him to shoot around 45% for the field, 40% from 3, 88% from the FT, and average around 7 assist. He's got to be my coach on the floor and be a vocal leader. Once again, not that much thought put into this, I'm more interested in others opinions for this topic.
A distributor that can knock down an open shot.
I really think the basic definition of a point guard is the guy who sets up your offense, whatever offense that is.
For example, Iverson was a point guard at one time, when he was good enough to basically be the offense for the Sixers.
ill put it simple..the pg who can get the job done..he doesnt have to be the best shooter( kidd,parker)..doesnt have to be the best defender (nash).or score a bunch of points(kidd again)..he has to get my team wins while keeping the other players happy with passes and not turning the ball over alot...im happy with that
ill also take iverson in his prime as my pg over whatever ya'lls definition of a pg is
Iverson was a team unto himself. I would watch the sixers just to see Iverson keep his ragtag group in a game.
whole 2001 season
lol...yeah watching him was a treat..very special player..im still wondering how he got them to the finals..how come tmac couldnt at least get his rag tag goup in orlando past the first round
how come tmac couldnt at least get his rag tag goup in orlando past the first round
dont start that conversation again
Iverson was that dude,but the same problem he had then is the same problem he has now which ball domination he also does this thing when he forces assists that ain't good
The guy that brings up the ball and sets up your offense. That usually is the case, though some teams rely on this system more than others. The point is usually the first guy with the ball in his hands, though at the end of the game it is usually just your best creator or best player depending on skill set or position. I would say Chris Paul's numbers are ideal for a PG, but a median PG would be a guy like Mike Bibby, who has been holding it down. Percentages are a strange thing, as Chauncey Billups shoots incredibly poorly from the field, but makes up for it in so many ways. But, I would say the PG is your main ball handler up the court, and many teams have won with having this be a player who might not be considered one of the best at the position.
Billups shoots over 40 percent from 3 every year and is always among the best in Offensive Rating statistics that measure point output created by a player's presence on the court.
I just said he shot a bad FG%, not to be confused 3FG%, where he is excellent. He is also an incredible FT shooter (though he missed some weird ones against LA in the play-offs) and is very good in a number of categories. His overall FG% is just surpisingly low, at .416 career. He was compared to Iverson coming out of Colorado, but I would say he would be considered more of a PG and team leader, as Iverson would often play off the ball even though he would create a lot off the dribble.
lol......basically it all depends on the team and what they need a pg to be..some need a chris paul some just need a derrick fisher...some need a toney parker some a jason kidd